[6:34] Heat. Heat.

[11:13] Heat. Heat.

[11:34] Heat. Heat.

[12:04] Heat. Heat.

[15:56] Heat.

[16:09] Heat.

[18:25] » [clears throat]

[18:32] » Good afternoon, City of Southport Board of Alderman,

[18:38] June 11th, 2026. Meeting is now called to order. Thank you for those in

[18:43] attendance and those watching remotely. We welcome you. Our invocation will be

[18:48] by Reverend Annette Clemens. She was born in Southport. She is pastor of

[18:53] Carver's Creek AM Zion Church and her home church is Brown's Chapel AM Zion

[18:59] Church of Southport. This invocation will be followed by the

[19:05] pledge of allegiance. Please stand.

[19:21] this afternoon, oh God, thanking you for your mercy and for your grace. For God,

[19:26] truly mercy suits our case. And Father, we thank you to be able to gather in

[19:30] places like this, oh God, to take care of the business of the city. We lift up

[19:33] the city of Southport before you right now in the mighty name of Jesus. We lift

[19:37] up the leadership, oh God, that they will serve with humility, oh God, with

[19:41] integrity and with love, oh God. For Father, we know that there comes a day

[19:44] when we're all going to have to give them account. So Father, we pray that

[19:48] all that is done here be pleasing in thine sight. This is your servant's

[19:51] prayer, and I pray it in the mighty name of Jesus, who is the Christ. Amen.

[19:55] » Amen. Amen.

[20:00] » I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the

[20:06] republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[20:14] justice for all.

[20:24] Thank you, Reverend Clemens, for those beautiful remarks. Our invocation will

[20:31] remember grace and mercy and humility. So, thank

[20:35] you as we do the people's work. Uh item D is um special recognition.

[20:43] First [snorts] will be the uh presentation by the um

[20:47] uh FPT FP tower incorporated.

[20:54] [laughter]

[21:03] They are they are not here. So, um, yeah, y'all may have seen this, uh, in

[21:07] the paper and, uh, we'll bring them back at a, uh, at a later meeting. Um, I'll

[21:15] read the two proclamations for this evening, the, uh, Gooni bird

[21:20] proclamation and the Junth proclamation.

[21:46] and if you're with the uh Goonberg um artist appreciation if you would like to

[21:51] come up and join me.

[21:56] Oh, great. Thank you. Hey.

[22:03] Okay, great. All righty. City of Southport Gooni Bird Artist

[22:09] Appreciation Proclamation. Whereas the anonymous artist behind

[22:14] Southport's beloved Goonirds has brightened our community one colorful

[22:19] creation at a time, proving that a little imagination, a splash of paint,

[22:24] and a generous heart can make a difference. And whereas though her

[22:28] whimsical and unmistakable Gooni birds, she has sparked smiles, inspired

[22:34] conversations, and occasionally sent people on delightful adventures to

[22:38] discover where the next Goonird might appear. And whereas, while she has

[22:43] chosen to remain anonymous, her artwork has become instantly recognizable and

[22:48] her kindness has become a cherished part of the Southport experience. and whereas

[22:54] her creativity has transformed simple pieces of art into symbols of joy,

[23:02] encouragement, and community spirit, reminding us that happiness is often

[23:06] found in the most unexpected places and things. and wears beyond spreading joy

[23:11] through her Gooni birds. She has generously shared her artwork in support

[23:15] of numerous charitable organizations and community causes, proving that kindness,

[23:20] like a Gooni bird, has a way of showing up wherever it is needed most. And

[23:26] whereas whenever a local cause has needed support, she has consistently

[23:30] answered the call, demonstrating that generosity, and community spirit have a

[23:34] way of spreading throughout a community, much like the excitement of spotting a

[23:40] Gooni bird. And whereas through her talent, compassion, and quiet dedication

[23:44] to making the world a little brighter, she has enriched the lives of residents

[23:48] and visitors alike and has become a treasured part of Southport's unique

[23:53] character. Now therefore, I, Dr. Joseph E. Hat, Mayor of the City of Southport,

[23:58] on behalf of the board of alderman, do hereby commend and extend the heartfelt

[24:03] appreciation of the city of Southport to the anonymous Goonird artist for her

[24:09] lasting contributions and thank her for making Southport a little brighter, a

[24:14] little kinder, and a lot more colorful through the joy, encouragement, and

[24:19] sense of connection inspired by her gooni birds.

[24:28] I can stand here. This is

[24:33] » okay.

[24:48] [laughter]

[24:51] » Thank you.

[25:00] artist who the heart of our group and then we have

[25:06] supporters and shout out artist and we also have

[25:14] that it's all a village

[25:29] this.

[25:33] It's a good resemblance of me, I think. Look at that.

[25:37] [clears throat]

[25:44] » [clears throat]

[25:48] » Next proclamation, city of Southport Junth Proclamation.

[25:53] Whereas on September 22nd, 1862, Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation

[25:59] Proclamation declaring that as of January 1st, 1863,

[26:05] all enslaved people in our nation will be vented forward and forever free. And

[26:11] where is it almost it took almost three more years of conflict to end the civil

[26:17] war. And whereas on June 19th 1865, General Gordon Granger arrived in

[26:22] Galveston, Texas and announced freedom to some of the last enslaved people in

[26:28] the United States. And whereas Junth is recognized as the oldest nationally

[26:33] celebrated commemoration of the ending of slavery in the United States and

[26:38] serves as an opportunity to reflect on our nation's history, honor the

[26:42] resilience and achievements of African-Americans, and celebrate the

[26:47] progress made toward equality and justice. And whereas Jean Teeth

[26:52] encourages all Americans to learn from the past, recognize the contributions of

[26:57] African-Americans to our communities and nation, and work together to foster

[27:02] understanding, respect, and opportunity for all people. And whereas the city of

[27:08] Southport joins communities across North Carolina and the nation in recognizing

[27:13] the significance of Junth and celebrating the diversity, strength, and

[27:17] unity that enrich our community. Now therefore, I Dr. Joseph P. Hayden, mayor

[27:23] of the city of Southport, on behalf of the board of alderman, do proclaim June

[27:27] 19th, 2026 as Junth day in the city of Southport and encourage all residents to

[27:33] observe this occasion through reflection, education, community

[27:38] involvement, and celebration of the enduring principles of freedom and

[27:43] equality.

[28:38] » [clears throat]

[28:45] » I have um opening remarks concerning the historic preservation

[28:51] commission and the local historic district overlay map amendment and

[28:55] standards. John Julius Doer, river pilot,

[29:02] Bonner Herring, Dr. Carter Charles, Travis Charles, his descendants. I hear

[29:08] you. Ephim Goss, river pilot. Katherine Huff, descendant. I hear you.

[29:18] Thomas Brinkman, river pilot. Tommy Harlson, descendant. I hear you.

[29:28] Families of Tontol Hickman Lachland Davis descendant Betsy Carol. I hear

[29:36] you. Citizens,

[29:40] Mr. Howard, a son of Southport, former mayor and his wife BJ. I hear you.

[29:47] Paul Swinsson, owner of Provision Company. I hear you,

[29:51] sir. Former mayor Sandy Spencer, a daughter

[29:55] of Southport, I hear you. As mayor, I heard from all of you, every

[30:02] citizen that wanted to comment on this issue.

[30:07] So for many against the historic district as currently proposed

[30:15] at the mayor's town hall and the public hearing, you the majority of citizens in

[30:21] the district have asked us to consider alternatives.

[30:27] And what was so good about both of the town hall and the public hearing that I

[30:36] believe everyone that wanted to speak publicly and make their wishes known

[30:41] were able to do so. I hear you and this board hears you.

[30:49] Moving forward, historic preservation will be a voluntary advisory committee.

[30:55] It will not be a quasi judicial board. It will be a committee, not a

[31:00] commission.

[31:05] I heard you. I saw the signs.

[31:14] Historic

[31:21] preservation is still a major focus for our city as it is for you.

[31:28] The method is what was not agreed upon. I believe we now have a compromise in

[31:33] which we can move forward and allow the city staff and historic preservation

[31:38] committee to revise the present document.

[31:43] So citizens will have guidelines to help them if they so choose with new

[31:49] buildings, homes, and major renovations. Historic preservation and property

[31:56] rights retained with the voluntary advisory committee and no quasi judicial

[32:02] elements. Now let us turn to how we prioritize the

[32:06] issues for this evening. We have five public hearings, including the most

[32:11] important public hearing on the city budget. That should be our main focus

[32:17] this evening. I want to reassure all citizens that historic preservation is

[32:23] important to our city, to the first lady, and to me as mayor.

[32:28] The evidence is obvious. We held a patriotic and inspiring first flag

[32:33] raising on the returned replica of the Southport Weather Tower. We can all

[32:39] agree on historic preservation and projects like this and I believe we now

[32:44] have a consensus and agreement as how we move forward in this endeavor.

[32:54] You may or may not know that there's a Senate bill 1047 of regulatory reform

[33:00] section 15. It states that 50% of the residents in a

[33:06] proposed historic district must request that designation and local government

[33:13] must adopt by three-fifths vote. I'm I'm estimating tonight that if that

[33:20] vote was taken today that under the new guidelines of a historic preservation

[33:27] committee, a voluntary uh committee

[33:32] voluntary aspect that it would pass by more than 50% easily. And so um that is

[33:41] where we are. Give us time to bring this forward. your input will be there and uh

[33:48] we'll move forward in this endeavor. So, thank you.

[34:11] » Thank you. Thank you so much. Um item E is uh public comment. You have three

[34:18] minutes, name, address, and a topic. And if you would save your comments that are

[34:24] specific to one of the public hearings uh for that time when we uh open it up.

[34:30] So, Madame Clerk,

[34:36] » Rich, are you wanting to speak on the public hearing for the budget?

[34:40] » Okay. Um Jody Wilma.

[34:52] » Yeah. Jody, she's going to get roll you to the uh closer to the microphone and

[34:57] bring it to you so we can hear you.

[35:03] I think that that as a kid when I was little, all my neighbors came to my

[35:09] porch in my neighborhood. And you don't see that at all in this town anymore.

[35:16] And I think that this town and the citizens of this town need to think

[35:21] about what we want to

[35:26] what we're providing for when it comes to a historical district. It should be

[35:33] the people out here that are in that area should be taking care of this

[35:38] problem. Not you as a board have to do it. I think the people that live in

[35:45] these districts and what you choose as a district should be the ones policing

[35:50] that district and making sure that the houses are built back as close to what

[35:57] they look like before they were tore apart. We have a lot outside that

[36:02] district that needs to be looked at also.

[36:06] So you see this is what the board needs to learn and this is what the citizens

[36:12] need. We need to work together to to figure out a common goat. And sitting at

[36:19] a bar and and and not taking care of this is not and expecting this six to do

[36:25] it. That ain't going to happen. I hate to say it to the ones out here, but we

[36:31] all need to come together for the common goal that we want to pro. And I don't

[36:36] think a building is necessarily what Old Southport's about. It's the people in

[36:42] the town. We can build any kind of building,

[36:46] but what is the people in the town doing to be nice to each other?

[36:53] » Does that not make sense? It >> does. Yes.

[37:14] Thank Thank you, Jody. Well said. Thank you. Uh, Madame Clerk,

[37:22] » I have a a letter I'm going to read to the city of Southport mayor, board of

[37:26] alderman, and staff. As a Southport voter, business operator, and resident

[37:30] at 504B West Brunswick Street, I am writing in regard to item O on the

[37:35] agenda for the June 11th, 2026 meeting of the Southport Board of Alderman,

[37:40] North Carolina case law resulting from Booney Publishers versus Burlington City

[37:45] Council requires that a municipal government must disclose certain

[37:49] material information before discussing a possible purchase of private property,

[37:54] specifically the address or specific location of the property. the names of

[37:58] the property owners and the proposed purpose for acquiring the property. I

[38:03] request that this information be made available to the public during tonight's

[38:07] meeting prior to close session to discuss this matter. Thank you. Jason

[38:11] Robbins. >> Thank you. Who's next? Madam Cler.

[38:16] » Uh Jeremy, did you want to speak at public comment? No. Okay.

[38:21] Um Kathy Cabron.

[38:32] » Good evening. My name is Kathy Cabraw and I live at 308 West Street. Um I had

[38:37] planned to speak about the Historic Preservation Commission and I want to

[38:40] thank the mayor for his comments. Um and I think that was um the right way to go.

[38:46] Uh, it's hard to say at this point whether or not more than 50% sorry

[38:53] whether more than 50% would be in favor of uh a historic district in Southport

[39:00] and I look forward to seeing the revised guidelines and how that will work on a

[39:07] voluntary basis. So, but I did want to thank you

[39:17] Madame Clark.

[39:21] » Katie Boyd.

[39:30] » It is welcome, Rose.

[39:33] » Thank you. [clears throat] I feel like this should be orange because I feel

[39:38] like the Lorax. I have warned everybody for 23 years. I

[39:43] do historic ghost tours. And my stories don't just come from a book that I've

[39:49] picked up for free, but it came from, like Jody was talking about, it came

[39:53] from going to people's house, listening to people's grandparents, going through

[39:57] addicts of stuff and newspaper records. And I have put together lovingly for 23

[40:05] years a magnificent product. And in that 23 years, I've had to be a good steward

[40:10] of this history, which speaks to the issue of historic preservation,

[40:14] which means that means you educate the children at the schools for free. It

[40:18] means you clean up graveyards for free. Means you clean up after storms in your

[40:23] neighbors houses for free for 23 years. And I've not asked one thing for 23

[40:28] years. But I'm asking you this, and this is what worries me about historic

[40:32] preservation. And Mayor Haydam, I really do appreciate your words cuz if one

[40:36] thing I think we can all agree on in this room is that in our own way, we

[40:40] love we love Southport and it's hard to stop progress. But with oral history in

[40:46] particular, it's especially pervasive. It would be akin to us taking a as I've

[40:51] said in like our state magazine, a chainsaw to the Indian Trail Tree.

[40:57] How many of you would be up in arms about that?

[41:00] What if I said somebody's going to put a Dollar General on Fort Johnston's lawn?

[41:06] How many of you would be upset about that? And we have a company that's come

[41:10] in that's not followed one iod of this tour ordinance that I've had to follow

[41:15] for years. Operate, take my business, take my individual

[41:21] stories that are my intellectual property and operate

[41:26] under your noses. And that is what worries me when we talk about historic

[41:31] preservation because these are just words

[41:34] unless you implement them. I can go down this ordinance and give you five reasons

[41:40] why we need to be worried about that. So, when it comes to historic

[41:44] preservation, it's not just I know I do the ghost walk and ironically speaking,

[41:50] walk the walk, but that's what I'm going to ask all of you to consider doing is

[41:55] taking a look with me at this ordinance as it speaks to historic preservation

[42:01] and putting some there's some caveats in here that are useful.

[42:06] Um, in in closing,

[42:11] we have a duty to not only respect our shared history, but you have a privilege

[42:17] and a duty to also share in protecting that. And it's not an easy one. But I'm

[42:24] asking you to take the opportunity to do what you are called to do, each and

[42:29] every one of us. And not only that, protect our local businesses. I will

[42:34] also say in closing because I probably don't look at time very well. My husband

[42:39] tells me I'm on late for everything. See?

[42:42] Oh, that's is that my timer?

[42:47] When it comes to our local businesses and especially we cannot allow vulture

[42:53] businesses to come in, view us as carcasses and be parasitic and feed. But

[42:59] the people that operate in this town give back to our town. Thank you.

[43:08] Thank you, Madam Clerk.

[43:12] » Steve Moore, did you want to speak at public comment or at a public hearing?

[43:15] » Public. Okay.

[43:23] » Good evening, mayor, members of the board of alderman, city manager,

[43:27] and residents. Tonight, I want to speak about public trust.

[43:35] Southport. I'm sorry I left. I will back up. I think I left out my address. My

[43:40] name is Steve Moore and I reside at 102 Park Avenue. Tonight I want to speak

[43:44] about public trust. Southport is a special place. We are fortunate to have

[43:50] engaged citizens, dedicated employees, and elected leaders willing to serve.

[43:55] Public trust is the foundation that allows all of that to work.

[44:01] Over the past year, there have been matters involving elected officials that

[44:06] generated public discussion and concern. The legal process has addressed those

[44:12] matters, and I totally respect that. My concern is not the legal outcome or

[44:18] outcomes. My concern is the silence. Several weeks ago, I emailed the mayor,

[44:25] city manager, and select members of this board

[44:29] regarding a matter that had received quite a significant amount of public

[44:32] attention. I did not ask anyone to agree with me. I did not ask anyone to take

[44:38] action. I simply asked for acknowledgment that my concerns as a

[44:43] citizen were had been received. I have not received a response from

[44:49] anyone and that was 14 days ago. To me, public trust is not about whether we

[44:56] agree. Public trust begins with listening. It begins with acknowledging

[45:00] citizens that take time to participate in their government. The same principle

[45:06] applies to decisions before this board, including issues such as historic

[45:10] preservation. Citizens deserve to know where issues

[45:15] stand and what decisions are being considered and when those decisions will

[45:20] be made. The same principle applies to the budget. I support adding police

[45:26] officers. Public safety is uber important and officers do an excellent

[45:30] job. Our officers do an excellent job of protecting our community. Good

[45:35] governance also means looking carefully at timing, priorities, and long-term

[45:39] planning. If the city can phase in the hiring of new officers over several

[45:44] months, creating savings in the upcoming budget, which I do have experience with

[45:48] state budgets, about 30 years of them, while still fully funding these

[45:53] positions in future budgets, that is responsible planning. It demonstrates

[45:57] that growth and fiscal stewardship can work together.

[46:03] I would also encourage the board to reflect on how your meetings are

[46:06] conducted. The purpose of public public comment is to be heard is for citizens

[46:12] to be heard. The purpose of the board during that time is to listen.

[46:18] Finally, public trust is shaped far beyond these walls. Social media, local

[46:23] news outlets, and online discussions have become the front door through which

[46:27] many people experience Southport. Facts disappear because they're un

[46:33] excuse me. Facts do not disappear because they're uncomfortable. What

[46:37] builds confidence is transparency, communication, and leadership. Citizens

[46:42] do not expect perfection from elected officials. We expect transparency. We

[46:46] expect accountability. We expect respectful discussion and we expect

[46:51] decisions to be made and explained. Trust is earned one decision, one

[46:57] conversation, and one response at a time. Thank you for your time.

[47:09] Madam clerk, >> Larry Cabraw,

[47:19] » Harry Cabraw, 308 West. Uh, Mayor Alderman, uh, I wanted to get

[47:26] up here because of my behavior during the last, uh, hearing. I um disregarded

[47:34] your uh request for decorum and for civility and I wanted to publicly

[47:39] apologize to Miss Bray um cuz I publicly made a comment about her defending her

[47:45] position which she had every right to do. So that was all I wanted to say.

[47:52] » Thank you,

[47:58] » Madam Clerk. Ed Dice, are you want to speak at public

[48:03] comment or public hearing

[48:07] or none? [clears throat]

[48:15] Um, thick braid the

[48:30] I wanted to do public. >> Yes.

[48:35] » Mayor Port of Alderman. Good evening. My name is Sik Smith, 319 West Brunswick

[48:41] Street. I had prepared um some words regarding the HPC, but uh mayor, you

[48:50] countered them uh extremely well for which um um thank you for what you uh

[48:57] what you said to us. So, I'm going to make this up on the fly now, but um I

[49:04] was going to talk about respect for the people that live in the historic

[49:08] district. Um and I would like to continue that

[49:13] thought for the words that I'm going to use right now.

[49:18] We heard you, mayor.

[49:23] We heard your words before the election. We heard them after the election. and we

[49:29] hear them tonight. But words without action

[49:35] are just hollow, empty words. And I don't think we are here to continue this

[49:43] discussion based on promises and on words.

[49:48] But I hope and I think I can speak for the red shirt here, but I hope that

[49:55] tonight we can put those words into action

[49:59] and have a discussion about what you just uh shared with us um mayor and have

[50:06] a vote. have a vote that you are dismantling, abandoning the Historic

[50:14] Preservation Commission and that you are replacing it by a

[50:19] voluntary group of people that care for Southport, and that will help anybody

[50:25] that plans to build or repair his home here, that we will be there with

[50:31] guidelines and support to ensure they do the right thing. But if you do not vote

[50:37] tonight for the promise that you made this evening to us, mayor, then it's

[50:43] just hollow words. And I hope that we all can agree that we are now moving

[50:48] beyond the phase of hollow words and promises, but we'll vote and make sure

[50:54] that this quasi judicial board is no longer in place when we all go home

[51:00] tonight. Thank you for your attention.

[51:16] Madam clerk, >> Jim Jericho, are you speaking for a

[51:20] public comment or public hearing?

[51:24] » Okay. Um, and then I believe everybody else that haven't called is for a public

[51:28] hearing. If not,

[51:31] » okay. Um, David Miller. Good

[51:40] evening, mayor and board. Hopefully, this person will not get too upset with

[51:45] me, but we have a individual in the crowd that has done something very, very

[51:51] special. She's a resident of Southport. Her husband's Captain Bullard of the

[51:56] fire department. And Mary Bullard has passed is she's a family nurse

[52:01] practitioner. And I think everybody should give her a hand for the cops that

[52:05] she's done.

[52:10] » Thank you.

[52:21] » Yes. Congratulations, U Mary, on that great achievement. Stand up, Mary, so

[52:26] everyone can see you. [laughter] I know you're I know you're mortified. There

[52:30] you go.

[52:39] » [clears throat]

[52:43] » Item F is the ethics statement. If any members know of any conflict of interest

[52:48] or the appearance of a conflict of interest concerning matters on the

[52:51] agenda, please so state at this time. >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, I have the appearance of

[52:56] a conflict on the um ABC board. My brother has applied for

[53:03] that board. >> All right. Thank you, Alderman Kelly.

[53:07] Anyone else? [clears throat] >> Okay. Thank you. So noted. Uh item G, uh

[53:14] approval of the agenda. >> Mr. Mayor, um I'd like for us to

[53:22] um add an item to the agenda

[53:28] based on what you said earlier about the HPC. I would love for us to add HPC as

[53:35] the first item to the agenda so we can formalize what you said and have a vote

[53:40] to send it back to staff for guidance and back to the HPC for the um new

[53:47] guidelines to come forward to us again.

[53:55] » Second. >> Okay, we we have a motion.

[53:57] » Second. >> We have a second. Uh any discussion on

[54:02] this before um

[54:07] I'll ask the uh city attorney is that necessary

[54:11] to do this in terms of uh moving forward or

[54:16] » sir it's up to the Okay. >> All right. We have a motion in a second.

[54:21] Any further discussion? Yeah. I'm asking for discussion.

[54:23] » Yeah. Um

[54:31] We have an ordinance that establishes the historic preservation commission

[54:36] that would require uh dismantling that which is you to do

[54:42] that. There's a process and then

[54:48] replacing it with what we would want to replace it with. At this point, I would

[54:55] be happy to support a uh a motion to ask staff to come back to us with

[55:02] information about what our uh paths forward can be to get to what we want to

[55:10] do. I mean, there there are processes. We can't just forget the fact that we

[55:15] have an ordinance establishing something. So, we have to get rid of the

[55:20] ordinance. and there's a process for that. Then if we're going to create

[55:24] something else, there's a process for that. So while this doesn't say we don't

[55:30] want to get there, we do need to do it the right way. So,

[55:36] would you be interested in amending your ordinance or altering your ordinance to

[55:41] » It's a motion motion. >> Your I'm sorry, your your your motion to

[55:46] ask staff to come back to us with the appropriate language for what we need to

[55:52] do to go forward with this, all the steps that we need to take.

[55:56] » She's just trying to get it. >> Well, I'm just getting it on the agenda

[55:59] so we can do that. >> The city manager to do exactly what

[56:02] you're talking about without any of this. So, with or without it being on

[56:05] the agenda, >> but we didn't we didn't have consensus

[56:08] to be [clears throat] able to have the city manager go in that direction. So, I

[56:13] just wanted to put it on the agenda so we could vote on it and get consensus.

[56:17] » So, the motion tonight is to add it to the agenda and I just say let's call the

[56:21] vote and then uh certainly bring this back at next month's uh meeting.

[56:26] » I don't think that's what the motion is. No, the

[56:30] no the see the motion was to add it to the agenda and and [clears throat] and

[56:35] then to vote to dismantle it.

[56:38] » Not dismant to give guidance to staff to figure out what next steps are to bring

[56:43] that back to us. >> Well, we can give them guidance without

[56:46] um you know a motion or putting it on the agenda. I mean, you don't want to

[56:50] shred your term paper if you're going to revise it. And so I don't think we need

[56:54] to do that and I think everyone in here would agree with that uh metaphor.

[57:00] » So just call the vote. >> So yeah just in in terms of whether or

[57:03] not uh the motion is to whether we put >> add it to the agenda. Um by showing

[57:10] hands >> may I speak?

[57:12] » Oh sure. Um, first we had a historic pro preservation committee that worked on

[57:19] this document of 103 pages for three and a half years.

[57:24] They they have sent that document to the board of alderman. The mayor has had a

[57:31] workshop which I attended and greatly appreciate. We've also had a public

[57:36] hearing and have heard the comments and I recorded all the comments on this

[57:42] page, 62 of them, and it was a 8020. No.

[57:48] Um I do think to formalize the process um that the board of alderman as Sig

[57:57] Freed mentioned should vote to reject the document that was sent to the board

[58:04] of alderman. We've had a workshop.

[58:08] We've had public comment and I appreciate the mayor's comments, but we

[58:12] should have a vote tonight to um end the document as it currently

[58:19] exists. Paul, do you remember the uh street sweeper hitting our agenda three

[58:23] times? We voted yes all three times, but just because we vote on something

[58:28] doesn't mean it's not coming back tomorrow. So, at the end of the day,

[58:31] we've got a lot on this agenda. The agenda was set last week, and I would

[58:35] just encourage that we call the vote. >> Yeah.

[58:39] That's what I was getting ready to do until I was uh No, not by you. He had

[58:44] comments, further discussion. All right. Uh all in favor of putting the uh

[58:50] Historic Preservation Commission on the agenda. Uh raise your hand.

[58:56] Okay. All opposed. And I also am opposed. So the motion

[59:01] does not carry. Thank you. We're going to give staff staff has been

[59:07] instructed and we're going to revise our term paper. We're not going to shred it.

[59:11] And if you can't if you can't believe me, then that's that's on you. That's

[59:17] that's not on us. We are going to move in the direction that I stated and give

[59:24] staff time to revise it and bring it back. It's not going to be quasy

[59:29] judicial. It's going to be voluntary, but there we have to be involved. There

[59:33] has to be structure uh for it. And so we'll move forward and we'll and we'll

[59:39] have historic preservation and it will be in the uh

[59:44] in a way that everyone will be pleased with.

[59:46] » Mr. Mayor, I'd like to mo make a motion to approve the agenda.

[59:53] » Motion to uh approve the agenda as written. And there's a by alderman Carol

[59:57] and a second by uh Alderman Meller. Any further discussion?

[1:00:03] Okay. All in favor? Any opposed?

[1:00:09] » So two opposed. So 42. All right. Thank you. Item H, approval of the consent

[1:00:16] agenda.

[1:00:21] » Okay. Good. We have uh uh approval of the uh consent agenda and

[1:00:29] a second. And quickly, there's uh support for the Brunswick County bond

[1:00:34] issue. We have two finance budget issues and we have the Bro Law Firm uh rate

[1:00:41] adjustment. All in favor? >> Uh Mr. Mayor, may I may I make a

[1:00:46] comment? >> Yes. Um

[1:00:50] the concern I have about the consent agenda is um the board of alderman have

[1:00:56] not had a discussion as a group about the school bond referendum. We did hear

[1:01:05] a presentation from the school board, a PowerPoint

[1:01:11] presentation. Um, but we as a board have not

[1:01:18] talked about the positives, the negatives, how it'll impact Southport.

[1:01:24] What are we what are we getting? What are we getting out of the school bond

[1:01:28] other than a new PA system at Southport Elementary School with the possibility

[1:01:34] of our county taxes going up 8 cents? So,

[1:01:39] my concern is is the process here. That's all.

[1:01:43] » So perhaps we just pull that from the consent agenda and add it to the agenda.

[1:01:48] » We can talk about it now. It's fine. What it I believe that you if I may mad,

[1:01:54] » this is this is simply a support for this to go to referendum at which we

[1:02:00] will all individually vote on this. I'd like to see this go to referendum. I

[1:02:05] mean, everybody should have the opportunity to be heard on what they

[1:02:09] want to spend on the uh on the schools. >> And this is not saying that we should

[1:02:14] vote for this. This should simply that the um

[1:02:18] » we support the referendum >> support putting it on referendum.

[1:02:22] » We support they already have the support for it. How

[1:02:25] » we support educating children. I mean, that's wherever they are in Brunswick

[1:02:29] County. And that's all this letter says. This letter says that I urge all

[1:02:32] eligible voters to join us in voting on this important measure. Um

[1:02:39] I >> doesn't say yes.

[1:02:41] » It doesn't say yes or no. I agree. I just am concerned that the appearance is

[1:02:46] that we're encouraging people to vote for and not look at it themselves.

[1:02:52] I will amend my motion uh to approve the consent agenda and just ask that we pull

[1:02:58] that item and place it on the regular agenda item as item 8 for discussion

[1:03:05] cuz my children will go to South Middle and High even though I live in

[1:03:12] Southport. Mr. Gross. >> Yeah, I I'm fine. I just like to hear it

[1:03:16] have a discussion before we go doing a consent on a document that we may or may

[1:03:22] not agree with. >> So we have a motion.

[1:03:27] » Okay. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda with the exception of

[1:03:31] item one and that will become uh item uh I8. Uh any further discussion?

[1:03:43] That was your motion, Alman Carol. There was a second. Okay. By Alder Marceller.

[1:03:48] All in favor? Any opposed? Okay. Motion carried. Thank

[1:03:53] you. So, consent agenda is approved. Thank you.

[1:04:00] Next will be um item I

[1:04:05] and that is um item I1 shoreline stabilization. This is a process that

[1:04:12] began under Mayor Robert Howard who appointed a committee under Chairman

[1:04:17] Tommy Harelson. They gave us an excellent report. Then we made continued

[1:04:23] progress in my first term as mayor with the assistance of our state legislator,

[1:04:26] Representative Charlie Miller and Senator Bill Rabin. $5 million for this

[1:04:31] project. And always I'm grateful to our engineers, the most underrated

[1:04:36] discipline there is. Without them, there will be no roads, no bridges, no

[1:04:41] electricity, no clean water, no skyscrapers, no NASA. So, it's lawyers,

[1:04:47] engineers, and money. And for this project, we have all three. Our

[1:04:51] waterfront has been eroding. The project is not only for Southport, Southport,

[1:04:55] but for our state and our country. So, I call on city engineer Bob Jarvis to lead

[1:05:02] the discussion on the contract. So, welcome, Mr. Jarvis.

[1:05:07] Thank you very much for those kind words. Um, we have a couple of related

[1:05:12] items here and I know that you do have a very long agenda so I will uh do my best

[1:05:16] to make them quick. Um, and again, good evening. Uh, with me tonight is Jeremy

[1:05:21] Packard. Jeremy's uh, a project manager with our consultant uh, who's been

[1:05:26] working with us on this project uh, FA Engineering. Uh, he's here to help me

[1:05:30] answer questions that you may have on the next two items. Um, as you're well

[1:05:35] aware, the Southport waterfront continues to experience erosion with

[1:05:38] storm generated waves, commercial vessel traffic, and rising water levels. Uh,

[1:05:43] the city's been working on a long-term solution for several years, as the mayor

[1:05:47] indicated, uh, in coordination with FA Olsen Associates, our engineering

[1:05:53] consultant. During that process, surveys, design work were completed and

[1:05:58] uh easements were obtained from affected property owners and all required permits

[1:06:03] have been secured. The project has been discussed with the board on numerous

[1:06:07] occasions and workshops were conducted to gather community input. The resulting

[1:06:12] design uses several shoreline stabilization techniques including

[1:06:17] offshore breakwaters, beach nourishment, dune restoration, native plantings, and

[1:06:22] rock revetment. The construction uh of the project was recently bid. We had

[1:06:28] four competitive bids ranging from the low bid of approximately $3.3 million to

[1:06:34] the high bid of approximately $4.3 million.

[1:06:40] Civil Works Contracting of Wilmington submitted the lowest responsive bid in

[1:06:45] the amount of 3,294,6747.

[1:06:52] There were two other bids that were within 4% of the low bid. Staff and our

[1:06:58] consultant reviewed the contractor's qualifications, references, and

[1:07:01] experience, and and determined that Civil Works is capable of successfully

[1:07:06] completing the project. We also had a pre-awward meeting with

[1:07:12] the contractor to confirm their understanding of the project's scope,

[1:07:16] schedule, permit requirements, and construction constraints.

[1:07:21] If the board approves, staff will issue a notice of award to the low bidder and

[1:07:25] proceed with the contract execution, bonding, and insurance requirements.

[1:07:32] Construction activities will not begin immediately. The notice to proceed with

[1:07:36] the project is expected to occur in phases over the coming months. The

[1:07:42] initial phase will allow the contractor to complete his various submitts and

[1:07:46] begin procuring and stockpiling materials offsite. The construction

[1:07:52] phase is expected to begin on or about October 1st, 2026. And this is in in

[1:07:58] accordance with the environmental permit restrictions.

[1:08:03] 100% of the funding for the project is being provided through a $5 million

[1:08:08] grant, as the mayor implied, from the state emergency response and disaster

[1:08:12] relief fund. Those funds must be obligated by June 30th, 2026.

[1:08:18] To that end, staff recommends award of the construction contract to Civil Works

[1:08:24] Contracting LLC in the amount of 3,294,6747.

[1:08:33] Um, and if you have any questions on that portion of our discussion, I'll be

[1:08:38] happy to answer them. >> Any questions for Mr. Jarvis?

[1:08:42] » Okay. Um, thank you. Uh, I was just curious if you had any understanding of

[1:08:48] the difference because 4.3 and 3.3 are way different. What that might have been

[1:08:55] the difference? You're comfortable with that? Um, I I'll ask Jeremy to speak in

[1:09:00] just a second, but we had four bids. The three lowest were 3.29 million, 3.31

[1:09:07] million, and 3.44 million. Okay, >> so those bids were extremely close. The

[1:09:12] difference between those three bids was 4% and the difference between the lowest

[1:09:17] two was 0.4% was $15,000. Um, and if I may elaborate just a little

[1:09:24] bit more, our consulting engineer will put together an engineer's estimate of

[1:09:28] the project cost uh be before uh advertising uh for construction bids. Uh

[1:09:34] their estimate was $3.3 million. So we had four entities that were right in the

[1:09:40] ballpark. The fourth one as an outlier uh generally in the business that firm

[1:09:47] has a lot of work to do. they threw a a a bid at it. If they got it, uh they're

[1:09:53] going to make some good money on it. So, we're we're confident that uh that the

[1:09:57] bid is uh is a qualified bid. >> I know that there's a lot of sand and

[1:10:02] rock involved. Does the has the contractor uh look to know what uh and

[1:10:07] where materials and equipment staging areas are going to be and how that

[1:10:11] construction how we can uh focus on mitigating the impacts for businesses

[1:10:15] and residents at the waterfront. Um Jeremy, you want to come up and speak?

[1:10:20] We we did define specific areas where the contractor was allowed to stage and

[1:10:25] he'll he'll be responsible for >> Yeah, thank you. So, uh Jeremy Packard

[1:10:29] with fourth infrastructure. Um uh so, uh Oliver's um the restaurant there, we're

[1:10:34] going to use that parking lot and they'll be able to um use that for a

[1:10:38] small staging area. And then we also have the area um next to the harbor walk

[1:10:42] um or next to the um the shorefront the the walkway along the along the park

[1:10:48] there. Um so they can use the first 20 ft of that for for staging and access.

[1:10:52] Everything else would be staged offsite. Um and we we talked to this contractor

[1:10:57] about this in a pre-awward u meeting and asked them what their plan was for that.

[1:11:01] It sounds like they have a layown area already established about 10 minutes

[1:11:05] away from the project site. Okay. Um, so we are not allowing them to uh bring in

[1:11:10] any stockpile materials. Only a day's worth of placement of materials is

[1:11:14] allowed at the site at any given time. Everything else will be staged offsite

[1:11:17] and uh delivered. >> That sounds great. Uh, in the past when

[1:11:20] we've done projects with large stones, uh, the roads and curbing can be damaged

[1:11:26] in the process. So, I don't know if the contract includes resurfacing and

[1:11:30] restoring areas. >> Yeah, it is very specific as to

[1:11:33] protection of existing facilities to remain. And we did bring up uh the

[1:11:37] pavement, especially at that pre-awward uh meeting, and asked them, are you

[1:11:41] going to use uh mats or rubber uh track tires? How are you planning to protect

[1:11:45] this? Um and they uh they said they may consider using mats. And they were going

[1:11:49] to be very, very careful. And we said, okay, that sounds great, but if you're

[1:11:53] not, then you'll resurface it. >> That doesn't answer the question,

[1:11:59] though. Will they repair and replace if in fact the worst happens?

[1:12:05] » Yes. they they are obligated or they will not be paid.

[1:12:08] » Correct. >> Very clearly,

[1:12:10] » excuse me, that's very clear in the contract.

[1:12:12] » Absolutely. >> Just a quick question for those um who

[1:12:17] haven't been following this project. Um it is a federal grant, is it not?

[1:12:22] » I I believe it is uh uh I believe it's a state grant.

[1:12:27] » State grant. >> State emergency response and disaster

[1:12:30] relief fund. And it certainly was a a grant that I think we all support up

[1:12:34] here and are there's very is needed. Um there is no match required by the city

[1:12:41] of Southport. So this is a state grant completely paid with non Southport

[1:12:47] taxpayer money. It's a grant that's u greatly needed our shoreline. And uh

[1:12:53] thank you Bob for working on this project for several years now.

[1:12:57] » Thank you sir. I have some additional questions. Um,

[1:13:04] in the Civil Works Contracting LLC bid, it says

[1:13:11] in a couple different places, inspection and vibration monitoring. How long does

[1:13:15] the vibration monitoring monitoring go for? Is that something that they do once

[1:13:19] and then it's done or they >> No, it's it's continuous. Okay. And uh

[1:13:22] there's performance standards for uh thresholds. Um and we just and it it's

[1:13:26] monitored continuously and there are um alerts sent if there are any exceedence

[1:13:30] we we get weekly reports that we review ourselves but obvious and and then also

[1:13:34] if there are um occurrences of exceedence of those thresholds um that

[1:13:39] we get immediate notices stop work we all figure out kind of what's going on

[1:13:43] » and then once the work is done the vibration monitoring stops how does that

[1:13:48] » correct yeah and so there's a there's a pre u pre-construction survey that

[1:13:51] happens um lots of photos from every different angle and uh you know cracks

[1:13:55] are measured, everything else. Then we monitor the vibrations during

[1:13:58] construction. Um and then there's a post construction inspection to make sure um

[1:14:02] that there was no uh damage uh facilities damage that the contractor is

[1:14:06] um obligated to uh to repair. Um and once everybody's good there um then you

[1:14:11] know we we issue the asbuilt. Is there something built in that at the six month

[1:14:16] or the one-year mark, it's inspected again and that the contractor would then

[1:14:21] come back and repair at that point if there's damage during that first year?

[1:14:25] » Uh there is a warranty period, a one-year warranty period.

[1:14:28] » Okay. So, do we have a something set up so that it would be inspected during

[1:14:32] that warranty period or do we need to go add that to say okay at the 9month mark

[1:14:37] we need to go in or 10-month mark to go look at that? There are monitoring

[1:14:41] requirements as part of the environmental permits that uh we have

[1:14:44] for the project. Um and so that while that work isn't contracted for and

[1:14:48] scoped yet, we do anticipate that there will be some observation that uh F is

[1:14:53] performing on behalf of the city of Southport post construction.

[1:14:56] » Okay. And that the price for that is already built in here somewhere.

[1:15:01] » No. Oh, it's not? >> No, the the moni the monitoring is not

[1:15:05] built in right now. Sorry. Apologies. Right. U right now the uh the item that

[1:15:08] we're talking about is just the construction budget for the contractor.

[1:15:12] » Okay. So I I I won't let that hold up what we need to have earmarked before

[1:15:18] the end of the month. Um but I would love to know what those numbers look

[1:15:21] like also. And I would hate for that to be the difference between the percentage

[1:15:25] of the awarded contract and one of the contracts that was not awarded.

[1:15:31] Just something to consider. And then um there are two options for um or option

[1:15:37] one for segment one revetment and option two for segment three revetment. Um

[1:15:44] the prices are significantly different. It those are the different sections of

[1:15:48] revetment. >> They're not actually different options.

[1:15:50] They're just different section sections. Correct.

[1:15:52] » So the way that it's it it just has option one and option two. It's just

[1:15:57] » the the bid was originally broken up into a base bid, which was the area down

[1:16:01] near uh South Caswell. >> Okay.

[1:16:04] » And two alternate bids, two options A and B. In the event that the bid prices

[1:16:10] came in and those prices exceeded the amount that we had, we had the choice of

[1:16:15] selecting one or two of the options. And since the bid prices did come in

[1:16:19] favorably, we selected both of the options.

[1:16:21] » Perfect. Thank you for that. And then um it shows that April 1st, 2027 is the

[1:16:27] expected completion date in this as well. Is there something built in

[1:16:32] somewhere where if they go beyond that, we have some sort of compensation or

[1:16:37] » We do have liquidated damages as part of this contract and the contractor is

[1:16:41] aware of those liquidated damages. $500 a day for every day after um the

[1:16:47] contract end date. >> Okay. because certainly by the time we

[1:16:49] get to April 2027, um that parking in that area is a premium and we would love

[1:16:55] to have that back. >> Yes,

[1:16:57] » I think that's all my questions on that. Thank you very much.

[1:16:59] » Do you know roughly how much of the parking spaces there we're going to lose

[1:17:05] » for the the jury? We would expect the entire parking lot

[1:17:11] uh with the exception of the of the spaces immediately adjacent to the

[1:17:14] building to be used for uh staging of the air of of the materials that are

[1:17:20] going to be used uh for the revetment. >> So it it check me if I'm wrong here

[1:17:27] Jeremy but it's not going to be used throughout the duration of the project.

[1:17:30] It will be a finite duration. uh once they complete the revetment in that area

[1:17:36] uh they won't require that access to that

[1:17:39] » and y'all are starting um in I believe the fall did you say like September or

[1:17:44] October >> that's correct we we still have yet to

[1:17:47] determine how the contractor is going to phase that which sections he's going to

[1:17:52] work on first and second uh and that will come up I assume when he submits

[1:17:57] his work plans >> yes

[1:18:00] » and then from that I actually had another question you mentioned that only

[1:18:02] one day of rock would be um positioned at the parking lot. That seems like not

[1:18:07] very much for the traffic that would be like the heavy equipment going back and

[1:18:12] forth in the road to move that it would is one day the optimum to do that.

[1:18:18] Is it a week's worth or is it like bringing rock in every day the best way

[1:18:22] to move that forward? I just >> bringing rock in every day is the best

[1:18:26] way to reduce your footprint for your stockpile materials. Um, and I think in

[1:18:31] working we we will be working with the contractor during construction and so we

[1:18:36] can kind of dial what the best amount of material to have in the most efficient

[1:18:40] amount at any given time is and you know maybe if it's two days or or a week's

[1:18:45] worth then we can we can dial that in a little bit. Right now we wanted to give

[1:18:49] the contractor kind of the worst case scenario. Assume you can only have one

[1:18:52] day at a time. >> Thank you. I appreciate that because

[1:18:55] certainly um the least amount of impact on our roads and our people every day.

[1:19:01] Um we already have noise ordinance in place for early morning things and

[1:19:06] certainly moving rock in would probably be loud enough that that would be uh a

[1:19:10] concern for people. So perhaps more than a day at a time would be

[1:19:16] a a good idea in this case. >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:19:19] » Thank you. your lay down yard. Is that the Willis

[1:19:23] Marine or the the river pilots land here on the water by any chance?

[1:19:28] » I I don't think it's coastal. I think it's I think it's um inland and it's the

[1:19:32] contractor's private yard where they didn't even they haven't told us yet

[1:19:35] where it is. They will as part of their work plan, but they just mentioned that

[1:19:39] they have a yard 10 minutes away. >> And this contractor is out of

[1:19:41] Wilmington, correct? Yes. >> So, it's a local contractor. I saw their

[1:19:45] truck today actually in downtown.

[1:19:49] » It seems like we're going to have to put up with a a good bit of inconvenience

[1:19:54] and things we don't like in order to get something that's really good.

[1:19:58] » Unfortunately, yes, you're correct. Construction.

[1:20:03] Um, I I don't know if y'all noticed, but there's a huge rock project that was

[1:20:07] done by the city uh on U West Bay Street and did a wonderful job and it wasn't

[1:20:13] that disruptive and I'm sure they'll be cognizant of that for our city and I I'm

[1:20:18] very confident of that. Any further questions?

[1:20:20] » And and since you mentioned that, mayor, that was supposed to be removed as part

[1:20:25] of this, right? >> That's correct.

[1:20:27] » Yeah.

[1:20:33] Should I make a motion? Are we Are we there? Does anybody have any with his

[1:20:37] presentation? >> Yeah. Does anything else you need

[1:20:40] » any anything other presentation? >> Uh I have I have one more uh two

[1:20:45] separate entities. I'm sorry. I was >> um the the first one is uh we're asking

[1:20:51] uh for the board's approval to award the contract. Uh my next uh uh item I will

[1:20:57] discuss the uh the consulting engineers construction administration and

[1:21:02] inspection uh proposal. >> So I I'll make the first motion um

[1:21:07] motion to authorize the awarding of a contract between the city and civil

[1:21:11] works contracting LLC for the work defined in the contract documents for

[1:21:16] Southport Shorefront Improvements and to authorize the city manager to execute

[1:21:21] any necessary contract documents. >> Second. Okay, we have a motion by

[1:21:25] Alderman Marceler, a second by Alderman Kelly. Any further discussion?

[1:21:30] All in favor? >> Any opposed? Motion carried unanimously.

[1:21:35] Thank you. Okay.

[1:21:39] Following the award of the construction contract. Um much appreciated. Uh the

[1:21:43] next step is to provide engineering and construction administrative

[1:21:47] administration services during construction. FA uh Olsen Associates,

[1:21:52] the city's design consultant, has submitted task order 7 for those

[1:21:56] services. Their responsibilities during construction and in the months leading

[1:22:00] up to construction will include full-time construction observation and

[1:22:04] administration, review of contractor submitts, requests

[1:22:08] for information and payment applications, attendance of progress

[1:22:12] meetings, project documentation, quality assurance, and project closeout.

[1:22:19] These services are intended to provide day-to-day oversight of the contractor's

[1:22:22] work and to help ensure that the project is constructed in accordance with the

[1:22:26] plans, specifications, permits, and other contract requirements.

[1:22:30] Consultant services will begin this summer with the review of the required

[1:22:34] contract submitts and material procurement activities.

[1:22:41] Sorry. Material sourcing and off-site stockpiling are expected to occur prior

[1:22:46] to the start of construction. As I mentioned, on-site construction

[1:22:50] activities along with the necessary consultant support are anticipated again

[1:22:54] to begin this fall as a condition of the project's environmental permits. Staff

[1:22:59] recommends approval of task order 7 with FA Olsen Associates for construction

[1:23:04] engineering and administration services associated with the shoreline

[1:23:08] stabilization project. And if I may add one item, uh what we will do, uh as the

[1:23:14] project draws to an end, uh we will uh secure uh F's services for additional uh

[1:23:21] monitoring in the in the months after construction. So that that would be a

[1:23:26] part of their contract and not the uh the construction.

[1:23:30] » Thank you. I appreciate it. >> You're welcome.

[1:23:34] » Uh thank you. I'll entertain a motion. Quick qu quick question. By the time

[1:23:39] it's all said and done, Bob, are we still within budget?

[1:23:43] » Yes. Thank you.

[1:23:48] Um, I'd like to make a motion to authorize the approval of FA Olsen

[1:23:52] Associates Task [clears throat] 07 to provide construction phase services for

[1:23:57] the shoreline protection project. >> Second.

[1:24:01] » Okay, we have a motion by Alderman Mustellar, second by Alderman Kelly. Any

[1:24:05] further discussion? All in favor? Any opposed?

[1:24:12] Excellent. Motion carried unanimously. Thank you.

[1:24:15] » Thank you very much for your patience. >> Thank you.

[1:24:32] Item I2 is the uh public hearing uh zoning text amendment standards for

[1:24:38] mobile food vendors or food trucks and this is reviewed by the planning board

[1:24:43] with their recommendation. So um as as you know a duly advertised

[1:24:49] public hearing is required for a text amendment to the UDO. So, I declare this

[1:24:54] public hearing open and I call on planning service director Moren Mian.

[1:25:01] » Thank you. Thank you, mayor, and good evening, board of alderman. This

[1:25:05] evening, um, we are going to be looking at a couple different public hearings,

[1:25:08] but this first one is an amendment to the section 3.8Y

[1:25:12] of the UDO and the standards for mobile vendors or food trucks. Um this

[1:25:17] amendment has been initiated due to some confusion with the existing process uh

[1:25:22] by vendors and property owners themselves. So staff has been working

[1:25:26] with those vendors. May I please?

[1:25:31] Thank you ma'am.

[1:25:36] Okay. So just to give you an idea. The uh the uh definition of a mobile vendor

[1:25:41] is a readily mobile movable trailer or motorized wheeled vehicle currently

[1:25:46] registered with the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles designed and

[1:25:50] equipped to serve food and/or sell merchandise. And the definition of a

[1:25:54] food truck is a motorized or trailered vehicle with power on board,

[1:25:58] refrigeration, food preparation facilities, and usually room for two to

[1:26:03] four employees. food trucks shall be considered a mobile vendor for purposes

[1:26:07] of this ordinance. So currently um we are not going to be

[1:26:12] changing any of these definitions. I just wanted to put them out there

[1:26:15] because we're going to be removing food truck from and it's just going to be

[1:26:18] mobile vendor as one that in it takes encompasses all of the vendors

[1:26:22] themselves. So currently mobile vendors are and food trucks are

[1:26:27] non-residentidential land uses. So that requires the property owner to come to

[1:26:32] zoning and get the zoning permit to host vendors. Then the vendor must go come to

[1:26:38] us and get an itinerate merchant permit so that they can um operate within the

[1:26:44] city. So it's a two-step process. Uh there became a lot of frustration by all

[1:26:48] parties u staff you know the vendors and we would communicate to the property

[1:26:54] owners please when you're hiring food trucks make sure they come to city hall

[1:26:58] and get their itinerate merchants but of course things fell through the cracks

[1:27:03] and then we also found out that there were fire inspections that were being

[1:27:06] missed as well. So there were a lot of things happening. So uh again we're

[1:27:11] proposing this amendment not to change the definition but we want to change

[1:27:16] mobile vendor from a non-residential land use to an accessory land use to the

[1:27:20] non-residential property. So the vendor, the food truck or vendor will apply and

[1:27:25] obtain a zoning permit and they will allow them to operate within the city

[1:27:30] for a year and they must submit the same information that's required now that the

[1:27:36] property owners must also submit for them. Um and then they would be

[1:27:41] uploading an agreement or a contract from the property owner which where they

[1:27:44] will be operating. There is an exception that we have put in here. Um, if you're

[1:27:50] only going to be operating at city hosted events, you do not have to have

[1:27:54] uh site plan or consent necessary. You just need to make sure that you come in

[1:27:58] and have your valid license and registration, any um state or county

[1:28:03] permits for food service and ensure you get your fire inspection. So, this new

[1:28:09] permit um will expedite the process. It'll be a lot cleaner and we were going

[1:28:15] to ensure that fire inspections are included in the workflow. So when the

[1:28:19] vendor comes to and applies for the permit itself that will be part of the

[1:28:25] process prior to issuance of the permit. So that is a overview of the amendment.

[1:28:32] I'm happy to answer any questions and the planning board did hear this in

[1:28:36] April um at their meeting and found it consistent with the UDIO and the

[1:28:40] comprehensive plan and do recommend approval of this change of amendment to

[1:28:44] the ordinance. >> I have questions. Yes, ma'am.

[1:28:49] » First, um, this is only on non-residential

[1:28:54] in non-residential zoning, correct? >> Yes, that's correct.

[1:28:58] » Okay. And this is a year-long permit. >> Yes, ma'am.

[1:29:01] » So, a vendor can set up and be there for a year.

[1:29:07] » No, they cannot. I mean, as as the ordin the ordinance written says that it can

[1:29:12] only be in they have to come and leave. They cannot stay on a property

[1:29:18] indefinitely and they can only operate for 120 days for the 12 months.

[1:29:23] » Okay. Can you describe for me what we're looking at? I mean, a a vendor comes on

[1:29:30] what property? >> Any property that they that

[1:29:34] non-residential property that hires them to serve

[1:29:38] their patrons on site. So any it it has to be 50 ft from an established

[1:29:44] restaurant front door. Um but otherwise any non-residential property owner can

[1:29:50] invite a food truck to come to their property

[1:29:53] » like the tap seller has uh the lobster guy come or the different ones trucks

[1:29:59] come there as an example as I'm sure other yes the brewery maybe and

[1:30:05] different things. So that yes, [clears throat] so most of the time if

[1:30:07] it's tap and seller, I know that there are some other establishments that do it

[1:30:11] and and for special occasions, I know that there have been some other

[1:30:14] establishments that aren't um a brewery or um you know a winery that they've

[1:30:19] invited the food vendors for special events that they're having as well. Is

[1:30:24] there any opportunity for other um restaurants or businesses in the

[1:30:29] immediate area to object to the permit?

[1:30:35] any permit can be you know can come anyone can come and um appeal a of

[1:30:41] permit that is as has been issued. Um we have not had any issues with any of the

[1:30:47] established restaurants or any other businesses with u any of the food trucks

[1:30:52] that have been operating currently. Well, you had me at lobster rolls.

[1:31:00] » Any other questions for Miss M? >> I do. um the a signed letter of consent

[1:31:06] between the property owner and business operator or mobile vendor operator. Does

[1:31:09] it have to be a formalized letter? Can they show you a text message that they

[1:31:13] accepted? Because I have been in situations where I text a food vendor

[1:31:16] because I was like, "Hey, can you guys come down?" "Yes, sure." I mean, and

[1:31:21] that was the extent of the contract. >> Yes, I think that that would be

[1:31:24] appropriate, especially since you can upload photos to the permit portal from

[1:31:29] your phone. So if it is a last moment thing that at least it that way we can

[1:31:33] track where these trucks are are operating

[1:31:36] » and if someone if at a private residence wants to have a food truck in front of

[1:31:41] their home for a birthday party or special event, this does not prevent

[1:31:45] them from doing that. It does not require anything of them for that.

[1:31:48] Correct. Okay. Thank you.

[1:31:53] » Okay. Alderman Davis, you can have a food truck now. [clears throat]

[1:31:57] [laughter] All right. Any other questions?

[1:32:00] All right. Um, madame clerk, who would like to speak in public comment uh

[1:32:04] concerning uh this issue of food trucks or I should say mobile?

[1:32:10] » I don't have anybody. Is there anybody out there?

[1:32:12] » Anyone here to speak on mobile food vendors?

[1:32:16] Okay. Um I I therefore will entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

[1:32:22] » So move. >> Second.

[1:32:23] » Okay. All in favor? >> I.

[1:32:26] » Okay. Motion carried. Thank you. All right. I will um I'll entertain a motion

[1:32:32] board. >> I'll make a motion to approve the zoning

[1:32:34] text amendment to table 3.1 table of uses and section 3.6 accessory use

[1:32:40] standards of the UDO and adopt the attached consistency statement.

[1:32:47] » I have a motion and a second to uh approve the zoning text amendment and

[1:32:52] also that it is consistent with the city of Southport 2050 comprehensive plan.

[1:32:58] Any further discussion? All in favor?

[1:33:02] » Any opposed? Motion carried unanimously. Thank you.

[1:33:08] Item I3 is the uh zoning text amendment. Uh and this is for the uh bed and

[1:33:17] breakfast. And um this was referred to the board of Aldron by the uh planning

[1:33:22] board. and this is their request to uh host larger events. So, I declare this

[1:33:29] public hearing open and I call on planning service director Moren Mi

[1:33:33] um to lead the discussion. >> Mr. Mayor, if I may, um I just want to

[1:33:37] remind the board that I uh brought this up and attempted to recuse myself before

[1:33:41] when we talked about in bed and breakfast. I just wanted to bring that

[1:33:44] up again that I do in fact own a small inn in town. It is not a bed and

[1:33:48] breakfast. We do not provide any food services at the property, but I did want

[1:33:52] to remind the board of that. >> Great. Thank you.

[1:33:56] » Thank you, sir. Um, this is a UDO text amendment to sections 3.8C, bed and

[1:34:03] breakfast. Um,

[1:34:07] thank you. I want So, existing bed and breakfast use standards. Um, bed and

[1:34:13] breakfasts are permitted by a special use permit with standards in all zoning

[1:34:18] districts except the open space. And the current language does not permit or

[1:34:23] prohibit events as it is written. It just it's very it's a very vague gray

[1:34:28] area. In the past, establishments that had hosted events had those events

[1:34:34] outlined in their management plans that were approved at the special use permit

[1:34:39] uh process. Um, currently the standards include that the in must meet state

[1:34:46] sanitation rules. They should include a management plan. And a management plan

[1:34:50] is essentially a business plan and how you're going to run your operation. And

[1:34:54] then there must be an on-site manager that resides on premises. So those are

[1:34:59] existing standards. Um, there was a bed and breakfast that came forward for a

[1:35:03] special use permit. And as that as part of that request wanted to host large

[1:35:08] events on site and that prompted um the board of alderman to ask that staff do

[1:35:15] some research uh to look at events at bed and breakfast. Is it appropriate?

[1:35:20] What if it is appropriate? What what is appropriate? So we have worked on this

[1:35:24] language multiple times and there have been several versions. Um and this

[1:35:28] version has been considered by the planning board. They uh formed a

[1:35:32] committee to work with staff and then brought it to the full planning board

[1:35:35] for discussion. So the new uh proposed language up

[1:35:40] updates the definition of a bed and breakfast to include that services may

[1:35:46] include hosting low impact gatherings or events. Um defines event which is solely

[1:35:53] only the definition for the UDO. It's not for any other areas within the city

[1:35:57] or ordinances of the city. It defines what a low impact gathering ends is and

[1:36:04] then it further updates the standards for bed and breakfast specifically

[1:36:08] section 3.8C2 which is the section on the management

[1:36:13] plan. So it requires the management plan now rather than suggesting that they

[1:36:18] should have one. Um it outlines the requirement elements to include in your

[1:36:23] management plan if you would like to propose events at your site. um those

[1:36:29] standards that in the residential zoning districts where a bed and breakfast

[1:36:34] exists, you may only have indoor um events and it cannot exceed the fire

[1:36:39] marshals occupancy numbers that are allowed. The next one um it only allows

[1:36:46] two events per month regardless of the zoning district where you are. You must

[1:36:51] notice your ab budding neighbors prior to having the this any event that you're

[1:36:56] having and it limits the hours that the events are allowed on site. Um that is

[1:37:03] the big broad and I'm happy to ask I know we've got a lot on the agenda so I

[1:37:06] just wanted to outline what it is and we've seen this a lot but I'm happy to

[1:37:09] answer questions. The planning board has um looked at this, proposed the

[1:37:14] amendments and finds that they're consistent with the UDO and the

[1:37:18] comprehensive plan and recommends approval of this amendment.

[1:37:22] I have questions. Um, I was part of the discussion uh

[1:37:27] urging that the um language go back to the planning board to look at the I was

[1:37:36] I obviously was not clear enough to look for language that specifically prohibits

[1:37:43] large gatherings, parties, weddings, and so forth. And since we got the agenda

[1:37:49] and I read through this so carefully, I looked at the requirements in some of

[1:37:55] our neighboring towns that have very popular BMBBS. Wilmington, Bowfort come

[1:38:02] to mind. And both of them spec have specific language that prohibit events,

[1:38:09] weddings, gatherings, and parties. Period. inside, outside, regardless,

[1:38:16] they're very cognizant that they are in residential areas and so they don't

[1:38:21] allow them. What we have here is language that seeks to create

[1:38:29] rules to allow events and I'm very much opposed to that.

[1:38:36] The other language that I I found that was universal was the number of bedrooms

[1:38:44] and the number of occupants. Now, uh Bowford, I mean, look at this one. Yeah,

[1:38:50] Bowfort [laughter] puts it at um 23 persons and 12 guest

[1:38:56] rooms. They got some pretty big uh uh B&B houses there.

[1:39:02] uh others are six, four, that sort of thing rooms. I think that we could do

[1:39:08] that that we could um establish the occup maximum occupancy that way. One of

[1:39:15] my many problems with allowing events is first it puts the onus of enforcement on

[1:39:24] our police department, on our code enforcement. We don't need to burden

[1:39:29] them with more duties and more things to do in the evenings especially.

[1:39:35] We also we we just do not need to have a

[1:39:42] business operating in a residential area. BMBBS have been long established

[1:39:50] over a hundred years of traditional BMBBS that um exist as

[1:39:58] a play as as accommodations. You know, bed, breakfast. The word event

[1:40:05] doesn't come in there. You check in, you sleep, you eat, you leave.

[1:40:11] There are also definitions in some of the BMBB regulations about the fact that

[1:40:17] no food can be served to the public

[1:40:23] for the public to pay for that um food service whether it's breakfast, lunch,

[1:40:30] dinner. Some of them allow all three meals, but this is paid for as part of

[1:40:36] the accommodations. And so having the public come in and have food,

[1:40:42] worshipped, have it catered, this goes against what a residential use is. So I

[1:40:52] would I would like to see us give this back to the planning board again. So

[1:40:57] sorry, but look for look at some of this other language and let's let's also look

[1:41:04] at what the other B&Bs are here. uh what their womb occupancy is and so on. We

[1:41:10] don't want to make them illegal uh retroactively in any way, but let's

[1:41:16] establish those kind of limits and make it very clear that we're not allowing

[1:41:22] events, a whole business operation as part of a

[1:41:27] B&B.

[1:41:30] I tend to agree with a lot of Lowe's comments. Um, it it scares me to have an

[1:41:37] event at a BNB. Um, and I guess one of our newest BNBs is the one across from

[1:41:43] the tennis courts on East Moore. I don't know what the maximum occupancy of that

[1:41:48] particular facility would be. Do you happen to know Mo? I

[1:41:54] » I don't know off the top of my head, but I apologize.

[1:41:56] » If it was 50 or 60, um, I'd be concerned about having an event that large. um in

[1:42:04] that location right next to a church and uh next to residential area. So um I

[1:42:12] think I I kind of agree with Love. I'd like to see it sent back to the planning

[1:42:15] board, see if we can come up with some more reasonable occupancy limits. But,

[1:42:23] uh, you know, if this passes and and there's, um, and the occupancy limits of

[1:42:29] that new, uh, B&B across from the tennis court is 60. Well, we now we've got

[1:42:36] competition for our weddings across the street at the community center. Uh,

[1:42:40] we're going to have traffic issues. We're going to have noise issues in a

[1:42:45] residential zoned area right next to a church. And I I'm just I'm not with this

[1:42:51] one right now. >> I mean, the occupant that this this

[1:42:54] current language that we're uh looking at um talks about occupancy, but that's

[1:43:01] fire marshall occupancy. And you know, we're looking at a budget where we don't

[1:43:06] want to see as much overtime as we see. So, we would be having to have the fire

[1:43:12] marshall come out and make sure that there are only 50 or 60 people under the

[1:43:19] roof. Again, we don't need events at BMBBS.

[1:43:26] I think the fire marshall guidelines are ones that I actually asked for. Um they

[1:43:33] allow us to put guard rails on in a way that takes it off of

[1:43:38] uh a business owner who says, "Oh, I have uh two two people can sleep in each

[1:43:45] of my six bedrooms, so that's 12 people here." That doesn't take into account

[1:43:50] the other spaces. I think the fire marshall um going in is not something

[1:43:56] where the fire marshall would necessarily go out and check during each

[1:43:59] event. it does put the guard rails on the um the owner of the the B&B to be

[1:44:07] able to do that. I know that for my in the fire marshall comes out and does

[1:44:12] inspections through each room already. That is part of the inspection process

[1:44:15] that I pay for yearly to have done. Um in addition to checking smoke detectors

[1:44:20] and carbon monoxide dete detectors, it's also looking for other fire hazards that

[1:44:25] could be found within the space. So, I think the the fire marshal is already

[1:44:31] going out to these B&Bs. It's not creating an additional uh

[1:44:37] an additional step for the fire marshall. It's part of their process

[1:44:41] already. I think it just if even in a building such as this, I think there's

[1:44:45] somewhere there's a placard that says the maximum occupancy inside the

[1:44:49] building. And I think that that translates into what the B&Bs are doing.

[1:44:53] And the the guardrails are in place in this. And I think that the planning

[1:44:56] board did a really nice job with a 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. which actually

[1:45:00] shortens the hours from our um noise ordinance. So if 900 p.m. is the end of

[1:45:07] the event, figure if it takes an hour for everybody to get back to their car

[1:45:11] and back home, they're out before that 10 the 10 p.m. um noise and then um not

[1:45:20] two events in less than 30 days. I've got people who live three houses down

[1:45:25] who have a party every Friday and Saturday night and the music is on very

[1:45:30] loud and there it's not a B&B, it's somebody's house. Um, so I think that we

[1:45:37] might be looking for a problem where a problem doesn't exist. And then outside

[1:45:42] of that mode, the only question I did have was notified um within 45 days um

[1:45:48] of an event. I just was concerned that there aren't further guard rails on that

[1:45:53] where it's okay, we're going to send it 40 within 45 days could mean, oh, the

[1:45:57] event's tomorrow. Just wanted to let you know it's happening tomorrow. Um, and

[1:46:01] that does occasionally happen with something last minute. I understand

[1:46:04] that, but I think that would be my my feedback for that is just

[1:46:10] » You want to go Mark? You've been [laughter] raising your hand

[1:46:14] » boy here. Yeah. >> I'm not sure quite sure you would go

[1:46:16] away with this. So, uh, so in terms of I'm sending Levi away to college. I got

[1:46:22] my downstairs. I'm going to turn it into a two apartments. What's the difference

[1:46:26] in a home stay in a air B&B? Is that the food?

[1:46:32] That's defined in our um ordinance about short-term stays. We we um short-term

[1:46:40] rentals. We um define home stays. We defined um

[1:46:46] » what else do >> what is the difference then? What is the

[1:46:49] difference here? I don't >> Well, I

[1:46:53] I you have to get licensed to be a B&B. Uh and to uh the health department comes

[1:47:00] where a health department doesn't come to a short-term rental or that. Uh and

[1:47:04] we do not allow uh events at short-term rentals. We don't allow events

[1:47:10] specifically. We have language that says no events at short-term rentals, no

[1:47:14] events at home stays. Uh, so we've and do you want to you have more? Okay. So,

[1:47:21] this is and I hear what you're saying, Rebecca, but um Alderman Kelly, sorry.

[1:47:28] And uh but the state North Carolina state statute defines bed and breakfast

[1:47:33] home as a business in a private home of not more than eight guest rooms that

[1:47:39] offers bed and breakfast accommodations for a period of less than one week and

[1:47:44] that it meets the following criteria and this is low reference this. It does not

[1:47:49] serve food or drink to the general public for pay. Uh and B is serves the

[1:47:56] breakfast meal, the lunch meal, the dinner meal, or any combination of all

[1:47:59] or some of these three meals only to overnight guests of the home. That's

[1:48:05] what state law says. Our UDO says uh bed and breakfast uh as defines it as a

[1:48:12] house um or portion thereof where a where short-term lodging rooms and meals

[1:48:17] are provided. And we've not even ever mentioned our code of ordinances. So I

[1:48:22] went through the code of ordinances and the bed breakfast uh uh the code of

[1:48:27] ordinances. It defines bed and breakfast as a private home offering bed and

[1:48:32] breakfast accommodations to eight or less persons per night for a period of

[1:48:37] less than one than a week. Uh and it goes on to say the term is intended to

[1:48:42] describe the offering of temporary lodging in a private home having

[1:48:47] architectural and historic interest rather than the provision of food

[1:48:51] service or offerings of facilities for long-term uh occupancy such as boarding

[1:48:56] houses ins and similar things. Um so all of this for me is to say that a bed and

[1:49:03] breakfast is supposed to provide convenient lodging. It's not supposed to

[1:49:06] be an events venue. And um because already in our small town because of the

[1:49:12] proximity of our businesses to our residential, we already have enough

[1:49:17] pressure and impact on our in town residentially zoned areas. So quite

[1:49:22] honestly, I'm not in favor of creating an ordinance that allows another type of

[1:49:27] business, which an events business is another type of business um use within

[1:49:33] our residential neighborhoods. And as for um to answer um Alderman

[1:49:40] Spencer's question, the um if you created two apartments,

[1:49:47] » I'm sorry. >> Okay. Then I I you know, you're creating

[1:49:52] a a two family home. And so that would be you'd have to go in another direction

[1:49:57] to change zoning. But if you had it as a homeay, a homeay is rooms in your house

[1:50:06] that you you rent out the rooms and you share kitchen, you share facilities and

[1:50:14] it can be, you know, for a long time. It's almost like a rooming. No, I guess

[1:50:19] not a rooming house, but other people stay in your house and pay you to stay

[1:50:24] in your house. the um the rowdy parties. I guess all of us have experienced those

[1:50:30] at one time, but those are in a private home. Private people are having a

[1:50:35] private party and it gets loud. That's a a noise ordinance issue, which we still

[1:50:41] have in front of us to uh to start revising. So, the issue is do we do we

[1:50:48] give it back to the planning board to come up with very specific uh language?

[1:50:54] Are we happy with what we have and just adding no events as a as a phrase as

[1:51:01] part of the uh the definition and regulations? I think we're going to give

[1:51:07] it back to the planning board to look at further language that strengthens and

[1:51:13] clarifies BMBBS and prohibits events. >> Is that a motion?

[1:51:19] » No, that's a motion. >> Well, not quite. Uh oh yeah we're still

[1:51:22] in this this is a public hearing. So is there madam clerk anyone from the public

[1:51:27] that wanted to speak uh concerning this? >> Yes I have John man.

[1:51:38] » Welcome sir.

[1:51:42] » Mics on. Okay good. All right. Good. John man at 209 East More Street own the

[1:51:46] carriage house bed and breakfast. um here also representing the Robert R.

[1:51:50] Kaepern Newton and they couldn't be here today. So um while we truly appreciate

[1:51:55] the adjustments uh that were made from the last iteration, I appreciate the

[1:51:59] intent behind the amendment and really uh strongly to preserve the neighborhood

[1:52:03] character of where the bed and breakfastes reside. However, there's a

[1:52:07] couple points in in the the agenda, the the change that I would like to bring up

[1:52:11] about the important principles of fairness along with reasonable standards

[1:52:14] and like even possibly downzoning. Um first while I understand basically

[1:52:20] managing outdoor activities should not be completely eliminated you know it

[1:52:23] states the B&Bs can only do interior events um a lot of our outdoor events

[1:52:28] even like um doing the stuff after hours the the Brunswick County thing of forgot

[1:52:34] what it's called everybody remembers what it's called where they just go and

[1:52:37] they meet and they bring a business after hours and doing something like

[1:52:40] that that would not be allowed there's lots of things that we do that don't

[1:52:44] have music don't have amplified don't have anything like that that you know

[1:52:48] just being now eliminated. No disrespect but I did completely disagree with

[1:52:53] Alderman Low Davis. Um and you know this is to saying that you just can't do

[1:52:58] anything outside your house is kind of overly broad and not reasonably tailored

[1:53:02] to the actual impacts that you're trying to address. Uh regulation should

[1:53:06] mitigate impact and not eliminate reasonable kind of historical permitted

[1:53:11] uses. Uh indoor events also should not be living in frequency indoor. Again,

[1:53:16] indoor totally agree with the outdoor limitations. Um this should be removed.

[1:53:20] We actually had several times where people come and just do a book club for

[1:53:24] an hour. Not allowed. I mean, I went through this last time. There's so many

[1:53:28] things that a birthday party, somebody used my parlor for a birthday party for

[1:53:32] eight people would not be allowed. Um, and I can go on and on of the small

[1:53:37] events that that support the community that, you know, the bed and breakfastes

[1:53:40] do support that would now not be allowed because you're only allowed to have two

[1:53:44] indoor events over every month. That just makes absolutely no sense when

[1:53:49] you're not um um bothering your neighbors or anything. There's actually

[1:53:53] no uh minimal or no impact or disruption on surrounding neighbors. uh placing a

[1:53:58] cap on indoor events that produces no disruption does not align with stated

[1:54:02] goals for the neighborhood protection and appears to be arbitrary, not

[1:54:05] reasonable or tied to any impact. Uh third, the definition of low impact

[1:54:09] gatherings about amplified sound um completely eliminates the uh opportunity

[1:54:14] of amplified sound. Not that I want, you know, amplified sound from a a a band,

[1:54:21] but you that also eliminates a microphone for uh anybody actually just

[1:54:25] doing a speech. um that's amplified sound or just having you know a you know

[1:54:29] a small speaker on your back patio. Um totally agree if you don't want you know

[1:54:34] live music and that's eliminated because it's the residential. I get that. Um but

[1:54:39] to eliminate it completely just doesn't seem to make sense while they're

[1:54:42] removing. Uh lastly I want to also point out that these restrictions only apply

[1:54:45] to one business type. similar situation properties uh uh in the same zoning

[1:54:50] district are not treated consistently and there are other businesses in the

[1:54:54] same mini area that regulate hosted gatherings and events without these same

[1:54:58] restrictions. While I understand zoning categories may differ with real world

[1:55:03] impacts on occupancy and activities are similar. This raised concerns about

[1:55:07] consistency whether these rules are being applied in fair balance way based

[1:55:10] upon the impact rather than the property type. Uh finally, I want to emphasize

[1:55:15] again, we're not asking to, you know, unlimited events or become a venue for

[1:55:19] events. It's a bed and breakfast that's just supporting, you know, the community

[1:55:23] for small things like that with our space that's available. I'm only asking

[1:55:27] for balanced practical standards with legal fairness included. Um just no

[1:55:32] limit to the indoor gatherings. You know, a reasonable allowance for outdoor

[1:55:35] events, two a month, three a month, something like that. No outdoor live

[1:55:39] music. I love the restrictions where it's only 9 to9. completely okay with

[1:55:42] all those things. Um, I have no problem with notifying my neighbors. I'm going

[1:55:46] to put them on an email list and make sure I send an email out saying, "Hey,

[1:55:49] in October, this weekend, this is going to happen and it's only for 3 hours. So,

[1:55:54] just let you know." I have no problem with doing that with my budding

[1:55:56] neighbors. Um, I actually talked to Paul and Jesse and tell them things already.

[1:56:00] So, that's something we're already doing. Um, and just use the same noise

[1:56:04] ordinances that every other business and residents have to abide by. I don't

[1:56:07] think you different need a different noise ordinance just for one specific

[1:56:10] property when everybody else has to follow the noise ordinances that are in

[1:56:13] the UDO already. Um remembering we're only trying to fill a need that exists

[1:56:19] in our our community to support Southport and we're not trying to

[1:56:22] compete against the community center. Been there open for a year and a half.

[1:56:27] We had one wedding besides my sons. Um and it was an older couple that was 68

[1:56:32] years old and was only like 25 people there and that was it. So, it's not

[1:56:36] we're not doing these type of weddings and doing these big parties that

[1:56:39] everybody keeps throwing out and we're just trying to solve a problem that

[1:56:41] really isn't existing. Um, I don't think there's any complaints that have

[1:56:45] happened since we've opened in any of the bed and breakfast because I've

[1:56:48] checked through. So, that was just my point of views um to to present to the

[1:56:52] board and hopefully you take those into consideration and I really appreciate

[1:56:54] your time and uh your cons your conducting your uh discussions.

[1:56:59] » Thank you. Um I I think um that was a very good discussion on his part and I

[1:57:06] think the board may the motion I believe was to do you have a motion now after

[1:57:11] hearing him and is there anyone else that wants to speak first? Okay, that's

[1:57:15] it. So I I will >> and I'll make a motion.

[1:57:19] » Yes. All right. I certainly will um motion to close the uh public hearing.

[1:57:27] All in favor? Okay. Motion carried. Thank you. All

[1:57:32] right. I'd like to just comment. This gentleman made some very good points.

[1:57:37] Below made some very good points. Uh I don't know if we could have a motion

[1:57:42] where this gentleman meets with our planning board and come up with some

[1:57:47] Maybe he's already done it. Maybe he's already done it. Let's come up with

[1:57:52] something reasonable. Have we already done that? Yeah,

[1:57:55] » we have. Why don't we let um Alderman Davis make her motion? Okay.

[1:58:00] My motion is that we return this um issue to the planning board yet again

[1:58:06] with instructions to look very closely at all of the restrictions and the um

[1:58:14] permissions for a B&B coinciding with what is state law, what

[1:58:23] is our existing ordinance and with an with an intention of finding a way to

[1:58:32] eliminate large gatherings and events or any gatherings and events as in the

[1:58:40] state law which simply says that BMBBS are for accommodations.

[1:58:46] In other words, my motion is that we give it back to you to come up with

[1:58:51] language that prevents um events and parties and weddings

[1:58:58] that limits what a B&B can do, that sets what the maximum occupancy can be

[1:59:05] related to the number of rooms. You can even set the number of rooms. We don't

[1:59:11] have that many VABs, but I don't mean to comment while I'm making my motion.

[1:59:17] Anyway, simplify. Send this back to the planning board

[1:59:22] seeking language that tightens up our definitions of bed and breakfast and

[1:59:27] eliminates allowing events, um, parties, etc.

[1:59:38] [clears throat] >> Mr. Mayor, I would interject. I think if

[1:59:40] it's the intent of the board not to have events at bed and breakfast, then you

[1:59:44] should deny this request. If there's no there's no current

[1:59:49] allowance for events in bed and breakfastes, so to send it back to

[1:59:52] planning board to come back to deny it. >> Well, part of the problem why why I

[1:59:58] think it has to go back to the planning board to for the language. The reason is

[2:00:03] that the reason this is here to begin with is there is no language in the bed

[2:00:09] and breakfast zoning that makes it clear about events. When the management plan

[2:00:16] went to the board of adjustment for that particular bed and breakfast they had

[2:00:23] they wanted to do 150 people in their management plan events and weddings and

[2:00:28] that sort of thing. So what the board of adjustment did was they said, "Well,

[2:00:32] there there's no zoning for that and we're not here to write zoning." So

[2:00:35] that's where this came from and that's how it got sent. So we need something in

[2:00:41] the ordinance that clarifies it. So um because it just needs to have something

[2:00:46] in the ordinance that clarifies uh regarding events

[2:00:50] » and that would be to prevent any type of events at bed and breakfast.

[2:00:55] » Is that correct? But we I I think that our ordinance needs a little further

[2:00:59] work too to establish room numbers. Uh how many rooms, how many uh occupants

[2:01:06] and try to coincide, you know, pick up the exact language of the state law. It

[2:01:12] it it has language in about number of rooms and stuff. What uh I would say is

[2:01:18] that we certainly understand if they're having events for their guests. This is

[2:01:23] not about events for their guests. This is about doing events for people who are

[2:01:29] not staying there that are it becomes an events venue. And the fact that we have

[2:01:34] a few bed and breakfast today may not prohibit us having 10 in five years. So

[2:01:42] I I just think that so I I tend to agree with Alderman

[2:01:47] Davis to send it back to the planning board. I understand what you say, ma

[2:01:50] manager, but um >> if the if the guest if someone is a

[2:01:57] guest, can they be allowed to have an event? That that's the clarification you

[2:02:01] want. So, one of you is saying no events and one of you saying have events for

[2:02:06] guests. >> Well, I think that anything with the

[2:02:09] number of guests that they're they're doing something for their guests, but

[2:02:13] like having dinner outside or something and they're the lodgers that are staying

[2:02:18] there. I think that if that needs to be clear, I don't know. I mean, I I would

[2:02:23] make that assumption, but not for >> and that's why it needs to go back to

[2:02:26] the planning board that to come up with this kind of language and to imagine

[2:02:31] different scenarios like, okay, we have a couple of guests who know people here

[2:02:36] who want to invite them over and have wine and cheese on the on the porch with

[2:02:41] them, whatever. But the actual organized events that's not appropriate in a board

[2:02:49] bed and breakfast. But again, this is the job of the planning board right now.

[2:02:54] So my motion is to now that we've had the public hearing is

[2:03:00] to vote to send the language back to the planning board for further work and to

[2:03:07] tighten up the language and come up with things come up with something that this

[2:03:14] board will accept. We >> have a motion. Do we have a second?

[2:03:18] Second by Alder Marcel. Alderman Kelly you had

[2:03:22] » I'd love to have discussion further on this. So um let's say for example I am

[2:03:28] staying at one of the local bed and breakfasts and it sleeps 12 people and I

[2:03:36] am there by myself because I'm getting married tomorrow and my future husband

[2:03:40] is not staying at the bed and breakfast. Can we then have a small wedding at the

[2:03:46] property for 12 people if the rest of the guests are not attending? Um they

[2:03:52] just happen to be out in town that day. So it's still 12 people. Um but it's not

[2:03:59] necessarily the guests of the hotel. Um another thing would be a book club. A

[2:04:05] book club has very small impact on the community. It is usually during the day.

[2:04:10] it is not necessarily inside. If it's a beautiful day and they want to bring

[2:04:13] their beach chairs and sit outside, more power to them. Um, but there's no

[2:04:17] amplified sound. That is already in this ordinance that there would be no

[2:04:20] amplified sound. Um, I hear you about live music. I think that we could

[2:04:26] potentially look at changing that. Um but I think at this point um we've got

[2:04:34] businesses that abut residential all through town that um have the noise

[2:04:42] ordinance that they get special permits for that go later than the traditional

[2:04:47] noise ordinance and it affects the neighbors in 11 11:00 at night. The

[2:04:52] music stops and then there are people leaving those establishments later than

[2:04:56] that. I think 900 pm is really not impactful on the neighbors if there's no

[2:05:03] amplified sound. Um, I don't want this to look like a taking of uh the ability

[2:05:10] for people who that they bought it without these guidelines in place and

[2:05:16] they were able to do this and now we're going to prevent them from being able to

[2:05:20] do so. the the things that you are suggesting are not in the language that

[2:05:26] we have in front of us, which is why I want to send it back to the planning

[2:05:29] board and get very Alderman Davis. There are um in the language it says all

[2:05:34] on-site events are scheduled to occur between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00

[2:05:38] p.m. Um Ben Breakfast and residentially zoned districts shall limit all on-site

[2:05:44] events to interior gatherings, which I actually disagree with. I think they

[2:05:48] should be allowed to have exterior gatherings as well. And then on-site

[2:05:51] events shall not exceed two occasions in 30 days. That's only two a month. I

[2:05:56] would love for my neighbors a few houses down to only have two parties a month

[2:06:01] and for them to let me know which nights they're going to be so that way I can

[2:06:04] plan to go do something else those nights. Um, I just think that we we need

[2:06:08] to be fair and um with the communication with the neighbors already happening, I

[2:06:14] think that's a wonderful thing that's happening that they're kind of becoming

[2:06:18] part of the fabric of the neighborhood and not being a thorn in the side. Um, I

[2:06:24] know certainly some of the neighbors um are very vocal and the fact that they

[2:06:28] weren't here for the public hearing uh tells us that they're okay with what the

[2:06:32] planning board has gone through over and over again at this point.

[2:06:40] » We have a motion. >> Yes, we do have a motion and a and a

[2:06:43] second. And um >> I go ahead. More discussion. Yeah,

[2:06:48] because I do um I'm struggling a little bit with this because some of this is

[2:06:52] business, right? Some of this is business in a residential neighborhood

[2:06:56] and you bought a home or you bought a B&B and it didn't tell you you could

[2:07:02] could run a business outside of a B&B. So, I'm struggling a little bit with

[2:07:07] that. Um, I can see to Rebecca's point why some of these some of these

[2:07:11] functions would make sense, but the reality is if we ended up putting 180

[2:07:16] people in the backyard of the subject property, uh, some people aren't going

[2:07:20] to be happy. And I'm pretty certain we're going to call for Mr. Mr. Paul is

[2:07:25] my guess. Um, so, you know, there's a fine line between allowing u uh

[2:07:31] businesses to conduct business in a residential neighborhood. Um, you know,

[2:07:37] so I I'm struggling and I don't know if sending it back I I I just don't know.

[2:07:42] But >> I think I think we demonstrated that we

[2:07:45] are not we are not the ones try to come up with this language. That's why we

[2:07:51] have a planning board. They are the experts at this. So, let's let them

[2:07:57] Well, Alderman Davis, I'm I'm confused by what you're asking then. Are you

[2:08:01] asking for no events at all? Are you asking for only inside events? Are you

[2:08:07] asking for a limit to the number of exterior events?

[2:08:11] I think that we could perhaps get a definition of it, but yes, if it comes

[2:08:17] down to it, I'm asking for no events, no gatherings that involve um people beyond

[2:08:26] the people staying in the um uh in the B&B. They can certainly have guests over

[2:08:33] to visit, but it's a it's a place to stay. It's an accommodation. It is not a

[2:08:39] party venue. And so that's what I'm asking the planning board to consider. I

[2:08:45] think planning board's perfectly capable of coming back with some optional

[2:08:49] language for us. Several different things to consider, but the motion on

[2:08:53] the floor is sending it back to the planning board to revise and consider

[2:09:00] this language and make suggestions to us.

[2:09:04] » Now, if that's the motion, then that's good. your earlier motion said and make

[2:09:08] sure there are no events. So, I think we >> that's what I'm hoping.

[2:09:12] » Well, okay. But let's I think to Alderman Kelly, let's we'll send it

[2:09:17] back, but let them look at what events would be like a book club or or

[2:09:22] whatever. U in that regard, just send it back to them and one more time or either

[2:09:28] that's the motion we have. >> Can't decide what code enforcement's

[2:09:32] going to be forced to do. you got to come over and make sure everybody's

[2:09:36] reading the book. >> I think if the neighbors complain just

[2:09:39] like anything else, then someone goes out to look at it, but other than that,

[2:09:43] it's not an a standing appointment for code enforcement or the fire marshall or

[2:09:48] the police to go by and check. I think that if it is an issue, then there are

[2:09:54] people in place to go check on that. U Mr. Mayor, it looks like our planning

[2:09:59] services director has something to add here. Okay, please.

[2:10:04] » Thank you, sir. Um um with all due respect, I need more

[2:10:10] direction. Um we have vetted other communities. The planning board has

[2:10:16] looked at what an event is, what size event. We looked at yes, we want a book

[2:10:20] club to come. Then it was well, no, we want, you know, and we have defined

[2:10:25] events. So, it's gone through so many different versions

[2:10:29] to make it very clean. Take a vote on this, deny it, approve it or not, and

[2:10:35] then say, okay, just to say, please bring back a couple options. I want to

[2:10:41] know what those options really are very firm so that we can hit the mark.

[2:10:46] Obviously, we are not hitting the mark and I want to I want to so that we can

[2:10:51] move forward with this because there are two very different um ideologies on what

[2:10:56] can happen or should happen at these that's that's my request. Thank you very

[2:11:00] much. Are you asking us then to uh change the

[2:11:06] motion to and my motion would be then to um vote no on this proposal and then we

[2:11:15] come back and um vote on whether we want to send it

[2:11:20] back to the planning board for other options. Is that

[2:11:24] » Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. I will withdraw my motion

[2:11:28] » and revise it to move to um uh vote no on this uh text amendment.

[2:11:39] » Is there a second?

[2:11:47] » Motion. The motion is to reject the proposed

[2:11:54] zoning agreement, a zoning amendment on bed and breakfast as on [clears throat]

[2:12:00] pages 2834. And

[2:12:05] that's it.

[2:12:10] Language from the attorney.

[2:12:15] Rob, Robert, I'm struggling too. Um I don't care if they have 30 book club

[2:12:19] meetings a month inside that don't bother anybody.

[2:12:23] » Um okay. I I don't want to have a party outside with 90 people in a six piece

[2:12:27] band. So I'm really struggling with this one and I think there's I think the more

[2:12:33] appropriate thing is for us to digest this. We've heard from this gentleman

[2:12:38] tonight and we can bring it back to our meeting our next meeting to vote on it.

[2:12:43] Um, generally speaking, we don't vote on public hearings, although we have

[2:12:47] already tonight. Um, but, um, you know, there's nothing wrong with us taking a

[2:12:53] moment to take a breath and digest what we've heard and and perhaps maybe we can

[2:12:59] come up with a clear motion in another month.

[2:13:03] » So, I did make a motion. I'm willing to withdraw that motion and um move to

[2:13:10] table for further u discussion. >> Well, we we've had the public hearing.

[2:13:16] It's it's it's closed. You've had your discussion and um we will um we can vote

[2:13:22] on it at a later meeting. >> And Mr. Mayor, I would uh encourage I

[2:13:27] think a good path would be an ad hoc committee of the board, maybe one two or

[2:13:31] three from each side so that y'all can come up with an appropriate amendment to

[2:13:35] digest both sides.

[2:13:41] » Okay. Who would like to serve on the committee?

[2:13:42] » I like that. Noah, good job. Who? >> Okay. Ald Alder Meller.

[2:13:49] » Alderman Kelly. Absolutely. And Alderman Davis, did you want to serve on that? Or

[2:13:55] anyone else want to serve on it? >> Alderman Gross. Okay, there we go. Y'all

[2:14:00] uh have a book club and um talk about it.

[2:14:05] » Yeah. >> Can we do that at one of the BNBs in

[2:14:09] town so we can see what that would look like?

[2:14:16] » Yes, definitely hold it. I'm sure this gentleman, Mr. Man, would love to host

[2:14:20] you. I think you said it's only 250 an hour. So, we'll be we'll be glad.

[2:14:33] Good discussion. All right. Item I4 for those still

[2:14:38] following it is a uh this one should go quickly board. Um this is a public

[2:14:43] hearing zoning map amendment yacht basin parking overlay district. I want to

[2:14:49] thank all the owners of the of land in Yacht Basin that have joined the parking

[2:14:53] overlay district, such a robust area for our local economy and where locals and

[2:14:58] visitors alike enjoy the festive atmosphere of the Yacht Basin and make

[2:15:03] in particular summer memories that last all year long. I want to thank the next

[2:15:08] property owner who is desiring to provide parking uh for visitors in the

[2:15:12] Yacht Basin and to and is joining this uh overlay district. So, I declare this

[2:15:18] public hearing open and I call on planning services director Moren Mi.

[2:15:25] » Thank you again, sir.

[2:15:30] » So, this is a zoning map amendment that is a request by the property owners uh

[2:15:35] to be included in the yacht basin overlay. The subject properties that are

[2:15:40] uh by the yellow dots on this map are are located are zoned R10 located on the

[2:15:46] corner of South Caswell and West Bay Street. The parcel ID numbers are 237

[2:15:52] LF00001 and 237 LF00002.

[2:15:57] The properties are located adjacent to business properties zoned business

[2:16:02] district and zoned R10 uh with the yacht basin overlay itself. Uh to remind you

[2:16:09] the yacht basin overlay allows um commercial parking lot with standards on

[2:16:16] the residential lots within this block itself. Uh the underlying zoning remains

[2:16:20] the same as R10. They still would be able to uh develop their properties uh

[2:16:26] following the residential standards and any uses they will um need to follow the

[2:16:32] standards for the yacht basin overlay which is sur uh surfacing. They must

[2:16:36] have pvious pavers or 57 driveway slate stone. The perimeters must be outlined

[2:16:41] bordered with uh wood um uh beams and the driveway entrance must include an

[2:16:48] apron and those are outlined in the ordinance itself and routine maintenance

[2:16:52] must be taken care of as well. Uh the planning board has uh looked at this map

[2:16:58] amendment and finds it consistent with the uh 2050 comp plan and recommends

[2:17:03] approval of this map amendment. >> Madame clerk, is there anyone here from

[2:17:08] the public that would like to speak? >> I do not have anybody known.

[2:17:12] » Okay. Anyone here that would like to speak concerning the parking overlay?

[2:17:16] Okay. Um uh need a motion to close public hearing.

[2:17:21] We have a motion and a second. Second by alderman Spencer. Thank you. Um all in

[2:17:27] favor? Okay, we're out of public uh hearing and board. Any questions for

[2:17:32] Miss Mian or any comments? >> Just one mo that these property owners

[2:17:37] are coming to us and petitioning to join the overlay. Correct.

[2:17:41] » Yes, ma'am. That's correct. >> Okay. Thank you.

[2:17:44] » Yeah, that's that's how we got here. They uh asked to do it. [clears throat]

[2:17:47] » Um any um any further discussion? This is a good thing. That's all I got to

[2:17:54] say. It's a good thing. Um, >> so now all of them, all of that those

[2:17:58] parcels will be in compliance. >> So, that's a good thing.

[2:18:01] » Um, and since there's no controversy with that, can I go ahead and make a

[2:18:05] motion? >> I was asking for a motion.

[2:18:07] » Uh, I would like to make a motion to approve the land use consistency

[2:18:11] statement and the statement of reasonleness

[2:18:14] and the zoning map amendment as presented.

[2:18:18] Second. Okay, we have a motion by Alderman Meller and a second by Alderman

[2:18:23] Davis to approve the land use consistency statement and statement of

[2:18:27] reasonableness and the zoning map amendment as presented. Um, any further

[2:18:32] discussion? Okay, all in favor? Any opposed? Okay,

[2:18:38] motion carried unanimously. Thank you.

[2:18:42] Okay. Um item I5

[2:18:48] and that is the uh the public hearing for fiscal year 2627 budget. The um

[2:18:55] special board of alderman meeting June 17th will be held for a vote. There will

[2:18:59] be no vote on this um tonight. Um for the public um and the budget I look at

[2:19:06] as four pillars for our city as we consider the budget. Pillar number one,

[2:19:11] public safety, our fire, police, our EMS, public health, emergency

[2:19:16] preparedness, and our environment. The second pillar is promoting and

[2:19:21] maintaining infrastructure. Storm water is our top priority right now. Um, it

[2:19:26] used to be uh water and sewer that's been regionalized and then waterfront

[2:19:30] stabilization. It is being uh successfully uh going to be completed.

[2:19:35] So our priority now storm water roads, our buildings, our parks, our

[2:19:39] cemeteries. Uh we want a robust and efficient budget. We want competitive

[2:19:44] salaries and benefits for employees. We want excellence and service from all

[2:19:48] city departments. We want to support our local businesses, our local economy, our

[2:19:53] nonprofits, and volunteers. The third pillar is preserving our

[2:20:00] historic heritage, our culture, including our unique neighborhoods and

[2:20:04] fishing village atmosphere. And the the fourth pillar is the enhancement of the

[2:20:09] quality of life, the preservation of the human spirit for all our citizens. I do

[2:20:14] not promote balancing a budget on cuts to employee salaries or benefits. I

[2:20:18] think we need competitive salaries and benefits. This leads to recruitment and

[2:20:23] retention of dedicated employees. This has value and overall cost savings. A

[2:20:29] healthier and happy employee population leads to higher performance and

[2:20:33] excellence in services and a better quality of work life. The city provides

[2:20:38] services. It is not a profit producing enterprise. And we should provide what

[2:20:42] our citizens need and what is requested the best way we can deliver. and when

[2:20:49] possible collaborate with our partner Brunswick County for example on

[2:20:53] financing our EMS. An advalor tax increase is not an

[2:20:59] unreasonable request when a city is planning for the future. We are

[2:21:04] susceptible to hurricanes and storms. We can also use these funds for potential

[2:21:10] smaller storm water projects such as on Atlantic Avenue and continue paving and

[2:21:14] repairing of roads. The overall storm water solution engineers estimate $30

[2:21:20] million to replace existing storm water and 60 million to build what is needed.

[2:21:26] We're looking to the legislature for assistance in fixing the storm water

[2:21:30] issue at More Street for Bonnets Creek and for the overall issue we would need

[2:21:36] bond financing uh and that needs to be evaluated. We have goals and challenges

[2:21:41] and we write a budget to accomplish these goals in serving the citizens of

[2:21:46] Southport. We also work on grant writing and asking the legislature for a larger

[2:21:52] amount of the sales taxport generates as we are the downtown of Brunswick County

[2:21:57] and a center of tourism. Of note, we are not Oak Island with

[2:22:02] respect to the tax base and it is not comparable nor is the tax rate.

[2:22:07] Southport is unique in so many ways. We should lead in excellence in everything

[2:22:11] we do, including this budget. I declare this public hearing open and I call on

[2:22:16] city manager Noah Salda. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the

[2:22:20] board, as everyone's aware, over the last several uh months and weeks, we've

[2:22:24] been working on the FY27 upcoming city budget. That started off with the

[2:22:29] board's uh budget workshop or strategic goal setting workshop in February. uh

[2:22:35] followed by our internal budget process of staff and department heads to present

[2:22:39] their proposals to me. Uh following that, I presented the board my

[2:22:42] recommended manager's budget at the end of May. And over the last several weeks,

[2:22:46] we've been working uh through two budget workshops with the board. Um following

[2:22:51] the last budget workshop, it was the desire of the majority of the board not

[2:22:54] to have the tax increase this coming year. Uh so staff has worked on that

[2:22:59] proposal and tonight uh I'm pleased to see say that we've been able to get to a

[2:23:04] balanced budget without raising taxes this coming year in the following ways.

[2:23:08] Um the most significant adjustment is coming from new um insurance premiums

[2:23:14] that comes from our North Carolina League of Municipalities insurance which

[2:23:18] covers all of our buildings, vehicles uh and other casualty and property

[2:23:22] insurance. uh after receiving a final quote from them over the last several

[2:23:27] days, we've been able to reduce that um by up to $200,000.

[2:23:32] Uh and the in the fire department is also moving to the um league's insurance

[2:23:40] which is saving approximately $70,000 as well. Um, we have also reduced some

[2:23:46] part-time line items of salary in the community relations department uh

[2:23:51] without affecting that department's operations. Um, we have also included

[2:23:56] the board's 7% community building revenue rate increase that you passed

[2:24:01] last week uh in last week's straw vote of that budget. Um, so finally, we will

[2:24:07] only need an additional $68,000 of general fund fund balance on top of

[2:24:12] that to balance the budget with no tax increase. Um, I will note as I have over

[2:24:16] past meetings that we anticipate appropriated fund balance uh to

[2:24:21] hopefully not be able to be utilized at the highest level that we will

[2:24:24] appropriate that as we are hopeful our legislators will pass the new fire fee

[2:24:30] uh legislation in the next few weeks to offset those costs in the budget. Uh the

[2:24:35] Southport Fire District fee committee met today uh and passed the rate the 25%

[2:24:40] rate increase subject to the approval of the legislature. Um so following the

[2:24:44] legislaturator's hopeful adoption of that in the coming weeks, uh the county

[2:24:48] will adopt a budget amendment for their budget. We will come back with a budget

[2:24:52] amendment to reduce the appropriated fund balance in the city's budget once

[2:24:55] that is adopted. So happy we can get to a balanced budget tonight uh without tax

[2:25:00] increases. I will caution us that using fund balance uh over overage is not

[2:25:08] necessarily the best practices. Uh but I think uh since we will not hopefully

[2:25:13] need to be utilizing the full appropriated amounts um one-time

[2:25:17] expenditures will be acceptable uh in this year's budget. Um, following

[2:25:22] today's discussion, happy to entertain any questions or ideas the board has

[2:25:25] tonight. Uh, incorporating that into the public hearing and then final

[2:25:29] adjustments and budget adoption next Wednesday, June 17th at 1:00 in Indian

[2:25:34] Trail. Happy to answer any questions. >> Any questions for city manager?

[2:25:38] » Um, well, I just want to clarify. So, there's a couple of things as an

[2:25:44] example. Um, line item 42,000.438

[2:25:49] inspection permits. I'm struggling a little bit there because that alone

[2:25:54] we're budgeting $220,000 less in this upcoming year than we've projected.

[2:26:00] That seems like that would help, right? >> Tell me that line item again.

[2:26:05] » Uh 4200.438.

[2:26:13] » Uh I'm sorry. I'm Hold on. >> What page number? Let me get there.

[2:26:21] Um,

[2:26:26] sorry about that.

[2:26:46] On page 55,

[2:26:50] permitting and inspections, um the proposed budget is 605,000.

[2:26:57] Uh 2025 actuals were 814. Year to date, we're at already 622,000.

[2:27:06] It just seems like we underbudgeted there.

[2:27:13] » So that is with anticipated what we anticipate growth to be over this next

[2:27:17] year. So though we have seen increase this year in consulting with the

[2:27:22] building and permanence department and most department we wanted to

[2:27:24] conservatively budget that and not over budget that line and I'll make sure

[2:27:29] finance director Joey is that correct? So we can always certainly budget higher

[2:27:35] revenues but making sure that we are you know conservative on revenue projections

[2:27:40] since we have lost revenue. >> I just think there's a couple of

[2:27:43] opportunities as a board. I just wanted to point out that there's a few

[2:27:46] opportunities where we might have been a little conservative but we might

[2:27:51] actually make it up. >> Right. Sure.

[2:27:57] » Anyone else? Any questions? >> Just a quick question for Noah. we see

[2:28:01] some significantly higher revenues come in on some line items you can make a

[2:28:06] budget amendment during the year and we can adjust those maybe reduce the amount

[2:28:11] being taken out of fund balance in lie of increased revenues

[2:28:15] » that's right for sure just like just like the fire fee we'll come back and

[2:28:18] reduce same concept as if we have other revenues that exceed our expectations

[2:28:23] we'll do that as well >> golf carts was another example correct

[2:28:27] golf carts we underbudget it I don't see golf carts

[2:28:30] » I don't see fewer golf carts on the roads next year than we have this year.

[2:28:34] So, I would have at least budgeted what we've brought in year to date.

[2:28:37] » For sure. >> Yeah.

[2:28:43] » Anyone else with questions for the city manager before we uh

[2:28:49] » Not a question. Well, I guess um in this new budget, do we have the four police

[2:28:56] officers? Is it two police officers that were pushed back the two months is what

[2:29:01] do we actually have in this meeting? >> That's correct. So the it's the four

[2:29:04] total officers but spread out at the board's direct direction at the last

[2:29:08] meeting. So two starting in September, two starting uh in in Mar January

[2:29:14] January. >> So spread out like the board had.

[2:29:17] » I would like to see two starting in September and two starting the following

[2:29:21] July. >> So that would be a next budget year.

[2:29:24] » Correct. So, two this year, two and 29. >> Yes.

[2:29:31] » I'm not I'm not in agreement with that. >> I I would stick with the J my my

[2:29:37] preference would be stick with the January for this second two.

[2:29:41] » I think at the workshop we agreed on January January start.

[2:29:47] » I don't think we came to consensus. I think we talked about it a bunch, but we

[2:29:51] never came to consensus. Um and I think that what was mentioned

[2:29:57] in the um the budget when during the last budget meeting was that while

[2:30:06] the January start we only have to budget for half a year this year, we still have

[2:30:10] to budget for them for a full year next year. So I think that if in the interest

[2:30:15] of the budget and our future planning, we need to look at

[2:30:22] stepping in with two this year and then have the plan for two the following year

[2:30:27] because we already are going to have to budget for an additional full year for

[2:30:31] those. So that that's not something that is a one-time deal. We're committing to

[2:30:37] these people, not that we're going to hire them for six months. We're hiring

[2:30:40] them for a career. Hopefully they'll stay here for that. So, I just when

[2:30:44] we're looking at trying to be fiscally responsible, it seems like a way that we

[2:30:49] can do that. >> Well, and I appreciate that. I think

[2:30:52] that's a that's our goal, right? That's what we're charged with. So, one of the

[2:30:56] things though, we have not raised taxes. We've gotten to that point. Um, we're

[2:31:02] only committing $68,000. Is that is that the number? I'm sorry.

[2:31:07] » In addition to the >> Right. In addition, I think we've

[2:31:11] already made that up with some of our un conservative calculations on revenue.

[2:31:15] Uh, as another example, Fort Johnston gift shop. Do we think that they're

[2:31:19] going to I mean, who are we employing that their revenues are going to go down

[2:31:23] 25%. So, I mean, why would we do that? I

[2:31:28] don't see Fort Johnson getting fewer visitors this year or next year than

[2:31:32] they did this year, right? So though I mean we're going to make up the deficit

[2:31:36] in my opinion based on the conservative uh figures on revenue from staff. I mean

[2:31:43] there so to further pick at that to what end is my question

[2:31:51] to just to limit that what we're taking out of fund balance or

[2:31:55] I I would really like for us to see to continue the 1 cent that go that had

[2:31:59] been earmarked for capital fund for rather than digging into our pockets.

[2:32:05] I'd really like for us to continue to build that. Um, and I think that was a

[2:32:09] great idea. I think, and Robert, I think you had that idea last year to to do

[2:32:13] that. Um, and I think that if we're looking towards the future, we have to

[2:32:17] figure out where we can uh make it make sense to continue that because we have

[2:32:24] big projects coming down the pipeline at us that aren't going away based on the

[2:32:28] number of employees we have. And the employees that we already have, we've

[2:32:33] committed to. and I want to give them all of the um bonuses that we can. I

[2:32:39] want to make sure that they have a full health package. I want to make sure that

[2:32:43] working for Southport makes uh the the best people want to come and work with

[2:32:47] us and stay with us. And in order to do that, I think that we need to make sure

[2:32:52] we're looking towards the future. And that 1 cent capital fund um is really

[2:32:59] looking at that. >> I will say something. So, are you

[2:33:02] advocating for a tax increase for 1 cent?

[2:33:04] » I am not. I am advocating for cutting the budget in other places so we can

[2:33:08] allocate that 1 cent. >> I'll say something something to think

[2:33:11] about that if you do the two officers as we talked, we'll have to add back

[2:33:15] significant part-time and overtime. So, there would be some savings, but it

[2:33:19] would not be two officers. >> I think we choose public safety over the

[2:33:23] fiscal responsibility here in that regard. I think that's important. I

[2:33:27] think we that those, you know, four officers, you've staggered them and I I

[2:33:31] think uh to Alderman Carol's point, we we may be better off uh as we move

[2:33:37] through the the season, but I I think it's um

[2:33:42] it's good. >> Alderman Kelly, I think this was part of

[2:33:45] our conversation. I think it was we take them out, we save 80, and we put them

[2:33:49] back and then we and then we have to put back in part-time and stuff and it's

[2:33:53] back to 70. So, the savings is 10 grand. doesn't make up the one cent we're

[2:33:57] trying to accomplish. >> So, the battle is

[2:33:59] » I think it comes close. >> Do we want to let our officers make

[2:34:03] extra money or do we want to protect them by making sure we don't overwork

[2:34:07] them? So, the overworking part is where I'm at is that they've got lives, too.

[2:34:13] I'm sure they like the overtime, but we don't need to wear them out. So, that's

[2:34:19] why I'm gonna stick with the four. >> And and I hear you, and I just want to

[2:34:23] bring this up. Um, part of the overtime is time going to court that I believe

[2:34:28] has to happen on days that are not patrol days, if I understand that

[2:34:32] correctly. Um, that that goes on the overtime rather than patrol. Can I No.

[2:34:38] Yes. >> I'm I'm looking for an answer.

[2:34:46] » Okay. >> All right. So, for those that didn't

[2:34:49] hear, the court date only applies for overtime for the night shift guys. So

[2:34:52] that way that's on record. Thank you. >> I'm actually uh pleased with the

[2:34:57] amendments that Noah has proposed. I'm comfortable with them. Um probably is

[2:35:03] the most conservative person on this boat fiscally. Um that should bode well.

[2:35:08] But um I think there are opportunities for revenues higher than what were

[2:35:14] budgeted. Robert, I tend to agree with you and uh certainly I would hope that

[2:35:19] would be the case. Um, and Noah will come back with some amendments during

[2:35:25] the year and maybe we can cut some of the cut some of the amount of money

[2:35:28] we're taking out of fund balance. I agree with it. I'm I'm in support of uh

[2:35:33] the budget as Noah uh revised it today. >> Noah, I have one question. You I think

[2:35:40] it's uh public works R&M facilities. It was 150,000 last year and we've got it

[2:35:46] at zero this year. So that that went to the capital fund. Um so that's where

[2:35:52] that will be this year to take pressure off the general fund. I will also note

[2:35:55] within the capital fund, we had some kind of convers we had conversations uh

[2:36:00] with the community building uh upfit. So I've added about $100,000 there as well

[2:36:05] to redo the railings on both sides as well as paint the exterior. So that's an

[2:36:09] additional change we've made there. But the capital you're or the line item

[2:36:13] you're referring to uh is in the capital fund. Um, but there is a corresponding

[2:36:17] line that has been updated to take care of that as well.

[2:36:20] » So, in their budget next year, we're going to see zero and expect to do zero

[2:36:25] again. >> No, it will be should be back in the

[2:36:27] general fund next year. I did that this year to avoid an

[2:36:32] additional tax increase in the general fund. But hopefully by next year when

[2:36:35] revenues stabilize, it'll be back in the general fund.

[2:36:38] » And ju just a reminder, we own three lots on 11th Street. Been sitting there

[2:36:43] for years. We should have sold them years ago. Opportunity cost lost there.

[2:36:47] We own We own land in BSL. We've been told recently,

[2:36:53] what we holding on to land we don't need for opportunity cost lost again. Let's

[2:36:58] let's get those three three parcels on 11 sold and let's get this parcel on BSL

[2:37:02] sold. Okay. Um is is there anyone from the

[2:37:06] public that would like to speak during the public hearing?

[2:37:11] » Uh Rich all I

[2:37:26] was asking reason why we don't have a clock and so we had one at the mayor's

[2:37:30] uh [snorts] meeting. That's a flashing thing. That's doesn't

[2:37:34] tell me what I'm doing here. Um so my name is Rich Al. I live at 6165 Cottage

[2:37:40] Creek Road and uh I've already had this conversation with the ma the manager and

[2:37:45] I respectfully disagree with the manager and we can do that without actually

[2:37:49] hating each other because we talk all the time. So the understanding is that

[2:37:55] the ma manager put out a a a budget back in May I believe it was and even as of

[2:38:02] tonight in front of us we had a workshop here on the budget. There is no way that

[2:38:07] anybody in the citizen group could have looked at the budget and come in here

[2:38:12] with fixed ideas of what was going to happen because you didn't come in here

[2:38:17] with a draft budget that you had all agreed to. You didn't even get your

[2:38:22] budget until noon today. So, I don't think you can have a public

[2:38:26] hearing on it. So, I'm just going on record to say that this was

[2:38:30] inappropriately done. Chief Coring,

[2:38:35] you and I have multiple conversations throughout the years, and I have the

[2:38:40] utmost respect for you, but I am going to question some things about the fire

[2:38:44] department, about the police department. And none of that means that you and I

[2:38:49] like should hate each other. Okay. The part about the police department is

[2:38:54] well, first of all, I have 30 years of police work. So, my heart is with the

[2:38:57] police department. I still teach law enforcement around the world for the

[2:39:01] State Department. So, I'm pretty used to this business. So, trying to trying to

[2:39:07] stick me in the eye and saying I don't know what I'm talking about. There was a

[2:39:11] number given and I asked the city several weeks ago to help me understand

[2:39:14] the number and that was the number of calls for service. It's been reported to

[2:39:18] in the meetings. There's a number. It's going up dramatically, but we don't know

[2:39:22] what those calls of service are. And you have, if you're going to be

[2:39:27] doing this professionally, you have to understand what those calls of service

[2:39:32] are and break them down. Is it a call for service cuz I talked to somebody? Is

[2:39:37] it call for service cuz I wrote a ticket? Is it a what is the call for

[2:39:42] service? And how they broken down? The ones that you're the key ones that

[2:39:45] you're really looking for is the call for services call for service that you

[2:39:51] would hope to have two officers to respond to it. We have no ma no dialogue

[2:39:58] on that whatsoever. Tom of day what they are and I've asked and unfortunately

[2:40:05] never got the response for that. So, I don't know if the police department

[2:40:09] needs four new people because there was no ability to actually do the

[2:40:14] professional overview of what was going on.

[2:40:18] We just say it because we feel good that we're going to give them four more

[2:40:21] people. If they need four more people, I'm willing to give it to them. And I

[2:40:25] certainly don't want to cut anybody's benefits in the fire department, the

[2:40:29] police department, or anybody else. I don't want to go that direction. And I

[2:40:33] think what was spoken today by the board that they're all in favor of making sure

[2:40:37] we keep the best people around. That's that's a given as far as I'm concerned.

[2:40:41] But I'm really concerned about the process that was done by the board in

[2:40:46] trying to have a public hearing when we do not know what the specifics are that

[2:40:52] what was the ask. I wouldn't be wouldn't be even

[2:40:58] amazed if what really was wanted was two. throw four in and hope for two but

[2:41:04] we don't know that because we don't know have any of the stats and with that uh

[2:41:08] the rest of the all the other issues that are here in three minutes you can't

[2:41:12] get it done I bring that is the biggest one up two things one I don't think this

[2:41:17] has been done correctly because we none of us here can talk about the budget

[2:41:21] because you just changed it and two we need to have a workforce analysis done

[2:41:28] every time a new person is asked for. That is the basic business model of all

[2:41:36] municipalities, state governments, federal governments,

[2:41:40] everybody does the same thing, but we are unique here in Southport and we're

[2:41:45] not doing it. And thank you very much.

[2:41:52] » Thank you, madam madam clerk. Uh, anyone else like to speak the public hearing?

[2:41:58] Yes, I have a few letters, too, but I'm going to alternate back and forth. Okay.

[2:42:01] Um, Mr. Mayor, alderman, I am unable to be there in person tonight. I do feel

[2:42:06] that I must say a few words concerning next year's budget. Our money and how it

[2:42:10] is spent is a concern to all Southport residents. In Southport, we have a few,

[2:42:15] we have few, if any, sources of income except taxes. This makes what we can ask

[2:42:20] for very limited. In my opinion, want to have what want to haves no longer exist.

[2:42:27] What exists is musthaves. I realized that everything must be looked at. In my

[2:42:31] many years in the business world, I came to realize that any organization's most

[2:42:37] important asset is their people. Without them, you have nothing. Unfortunately,

[2:42:41] people are the first thing everyone wants to attack when looking at cost

[2:42:45] cutting measures. Big mistake. Emergency services are always jumped on quickly.

[2:42:51] Police, fire, EMS, these are functions that save lives. Think long and hard

[2:42:56] before you consider any changes to these functions. We are an older community.

[2:43:01] Minutes matter when you are experiencing a health issue. My family had an issue

[2:43:06] last Tuesday. Help got to us in four minutes. We are lucky this time. My wife

[2:43:11] will be wearing a heart monitor for a month. 10 years ago, all my systems

[2:43:16] started shutting down. I was rushed to New H New Hanover Regional Medical

[2:43:21] Center where doctors spent six hours probing. What my family was told when

[2:43:26] the surgeon met with them is blunt. He has a 5050% chance. A few minutes longer

[2:43:33] getting him here and you would have been an entirely different conversation.

[2:43:38] You would be talking to Peacock or Andrews about a nice box to put him in

[2:43:44] and to Oakdale about bringing out the backhoe to section U lot 2S space 7 or

[2:43:50] 8. My point is simple. Seconds matter. The difference between 4 minutes and 10

[2:43:55] plus minutes can be life or death. Choose wisely when you make these

[2:43:59] decisions. Good luck. You will need it. Frank Lei.

[2:44:07] A [clears throat] very very nice letter from Mr. Le. Who's next, madam cler?

[2:44:10] » Uh, Miss Debbie Barnes.

[2:44:14] » Debbie Barnes.

[2:44:31] » Debbie Barnes, 425 West Street, Southport. Um

[2:44:37] I wanted to talk about the budget just a moment and it's two components. One is

[2:44:44] uh a department that I feel that has not grown like many others has over the over

[2:44:53] the years and it's one that's vital and I've heard you bring it up and everyone

[2:44:57] time and time again. That's our police department. Our police have been great,

[2:45:05] but they are few. We have a lot more people coming into this town. Not just

[2:45:12] those that live here, but those that come in every day. I think I've heard a

[2:45:16] number like something around 20,000 people come in a day.

[2:45:22] Well, they're dealing with that, too. And I agree

[2:45:27] um with what uh Rich Al said about things that we need to be doing, but

[2:45:33] they don't have the resources to even do it. So, at this point, I would like for

[2:45:39] you to please consider making sure our police department is not impacted and

[2:45:46] can begin to build the way they need to because there's more coming in. Okay.

[2:45:54] Um, so anyway, that's one. Two, you talked about your pillar on the

[2:46:00] historic side. So, I'm going to bring up the historic piece just a moment. And

[2:46:04] first, thank you for your comments. I did hear you and I understood what you

[2:46:09] were saying. Um, we do need to look at maybe reducing cost. That is one that

[2:46:18] you're not going to have when you vote to remove the ordinance, which you will

[2:46:23] be able to do as this form of government. You'll be you voted to put

[2:46:28] an ordinance in, you can now vote to remove that ordinance. That's our form

[2:46:33] of government we have here. So, I hope you will do that. And in doing so, I

[2:46:39] think we can do a voluntary group and using the great work that the commission

[2:46:45] has done and we'll be able to put in place an advisory group that can make a

[2:46:51] difference. And I'll be glad to talk with the planning board and any of you

[2:46:55] on some of the things we've already done out in the community that's helped to

[2:47:00] preserve homes. Okay. How'd they do?

[2:47:08] Thank you. Thank you. And thank you for your

[2:47:12] support of the police department. Uh madam clerk,

[2:47:19] to the mayor, board of alderman, and citizens of Southport, I am writing to

[2:47:23] express my strong support and appreciation for fire chief Charles Drew

[2:47:27] and the outstanding work he has done leading the Southport Fire Department.

[2:47:31] As a Southport resident, I have watched with admiration as Chief Drew has guided

[2:47:36] the department through a period of significant modernization

[2:47:40] and professional development of the personnel of the department. While many

[2:47:44] citizens may not see the countless hours devoted to training, equipment

[2:47:48] readiness, emergency planning, and personnel development, the results are

[2:47:52] evident through our community. One of the clearest measures of the

[2:47:56] department's success is its recent achievement of a class 2 fire insurance

[2:48:00] rating from the North Carolina Office of the State Fire Marshall. The scale is 1

[2:48:05] to 10 where one is the top rating. This rating is based on factors such as

[2:48:10] staffing, training, equipment, communications, and emergency response

[2:48:14] capability. Achieving a class 2 rating places Southport among the better

[2:48:19] performing fire districts in the state and reflects a department that is

[2:48:23] exceptionally wellprepared to protect lives and property. This is especially

[2:48:28] noteworthy given how difficult it is for small departments to achieve this

[2:48:32] status. Chief Drew has fostered a culture of professionalism,

[2:48:36] preparedness, and service. The Southport Fire Department's reputation for rapid

[2:48:41] response, community engagement, volunteer participation, and dedication

[2:48:46] to public safety is a direct reflection of his leadership. As an example, the

[2:48:51] Southport Fire and EMS response data are instructive. An outstanding average

[2:48:56] response time of less than 5 minutes for both. This is significantly better than

[2:49:00] the national benchmark of 8 minutes or less for the life-threatening events

[2:49:05] such as a cardiac arrest or stroke. Indeed, for these two, the last two, the

[2:49:10] department's response time is less than four minutes. For a small rural town,

[2:49:15] this is a remarkable performance. Southport is growing rapidly, as we all

[2:49:19] know. Managing that growth while maintaining high standards of emergency

[2:49:23] service is no easy task. Chief Drew has demonstrated the vision necessary to

[2:49:28] prepare the department not only for today's needs, but also for the

[2:49:31] challenges that lie ahead. Public servants often hear complaints when

[2:49:36] things go wrong, but they do not always receive the recognition they deserve

[2:49:40] when things go right. I believe Charles Drew deserves that recognition. His

[2:49:44] commitment to continuous improvement has strengthened the department, benefited

[2:49:48] our community, and enhanced the safety and quality of life of everyone who

[2:49:53] lives in and visits Southport. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to

[2:49:59] Chief Drew and to the dedicated men and women of the Southport Fire Department

[2:50:03] for their service. Respectfully, Edward Glenn, Southport, North Carolina.

[2:50:15] » And I have Mr. Sigfrieded Desm. >> Okay. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Yeah, Mr.

[2:50:22] Glenn and I are kindred spirits with our bow ties. [laughter]

[2:50:40] Okay, here we go. Good evening again, mayor, members of the board.

[2:50:47] So, now I can uh read my prepared speech. Thank you for that.

[2:50:52] My name is Sikfut Smith, 319 West Bronze Street. I respectfully request you uh to

[2:51:00] vote against the proposed 2027 budget. The city faces a systemic financial

[2:51:08] budgeting problem as evidenced by its own historical data and expenditure

[2:51:15] trends that we have analyzed and shared with you.

[2:51:20] These trends indicate a consistent misappropriation

[2:51:25] of taxpayer funds and a failure to allocate the necessary resources for

[2:51:32] infrastructure and storm water repairs. Instead, they all are directed to

[2:51:40] everinccreasing personnel costs. Let me summarize some

[2:51:44] of this data to make my point. Revenue opportunities are limited by

[2:51:52] state law or self-imposed restrictions. So, we won't talk too much about

[2:51:59] revenue. What we do control is expenses.

[2:52:04] The proposed general fund has increased by $4.6 million,

[2:52:12] representing a 43% increase since 2023. That's only three years ago. Increase of

[2:52:20] 43%. This entire increase was spent on

[2:52:26] personnel costs. This entire increase of 4.6 million over three years went to

[2:52:34] personnel costs. The fund balance, our saving account

[2:52:40] intended to assist the city in navigating and operating during extreme

[2:52:46] and damaging emergencies, is being depleted to balance the budget.

[2:52:53] Personnel costs constitute the largest portion of our general fund and now

[2:52:59] account for over 71% of Southport's operating budget.

[2:53:06] For every dollar, For every dollar the city spends, 71 cents goes to the

[2:53:13] compensation of our city workers. In 23 this was 59%.

[2:53:21] In 2016, it was 40%

[2:53:25] or only $2.6 6 million of our general fund against the $11 million for 2027.

[2:53:36] For 27, the total personnel cost is projected to increase by another

[2:53:42] $729,000 or a 7.2% increase.

[2:53:49] The number of full-time employees in 2027

[2:53:52] is 91, an increase of 19 FTEES or 26% increase

[2:54:00] since 2022. And this excludes the 24 part-time

[2:54:05] employees we currently have. The average base salary The average base

[2:54:12] salary per full-time employee has increased by 73%

[2:54:18] since 2023. These trends and practices are not

[2:54:24] sustainable and are not in the best interest of the taxpayers.

[2:54:30] We have offered you multiple ideas, solutions, and options over the past

[2:54:36] months to address the financial challenges, reorganize the city's

[2:54:41] operations, and become more fiscally responsible and effective stewards of

[2:54:48] the taxpayers's money. While I observed some tentative

[2:54:52] attempts, the overall common sense advice was largely ignored.

[2:55:00] myself and other seasoned retired professionals are available and willing

[2:55:08] to help or answer any questions you may have. Thank you.

[2:55:16] » Thank you. Thank you. Uh, Madame Clerk,

[2:55:24] » I am writing to express my concern about the proposed 26 to 27 budget. As my

[2:55:29] family, our taxpayers, and the owners of 210

[2:55:34] West Bay Street, I am deeply concerned about the potential impact of this

[2:55:37] budget affecting city employees, especially first responders.

[2:55:42] First responders play a crucial role in providing essential services to our

[2:55:46] residents during challenging times. The city's decision to fully staff EMS in

[2:55:51] the recent 2024 budget was made by the city who recognized the value of this

[2:55:56] service. As stated in the October 23rd, 2024 stateport pilot article by one of

[2:56:02] our aldermen. This decision was a decision our citizens are willing to

[2:56:06] invest in. Comparing Southport to our neighboring cities is unfair because of

[2:56:11] the exceptional emergency services provided by the Southport EMS,

[2:56:16] which our neighboring cities do not provide. The difference is a 3 minute 45

[2:56:20] second response time from the Southport EMS during a life-threatening event can

[2:56:25] save lives, while a 11 to 12 minute response time from the county can be

[2:56:29] fatal. Cutting their benefits demonstrates a lack of care and

[2:56:33] appreciation for the invaluable contribution to our city. While you have

[2:56:37] mentioned employee retention and morale, I believe this proposal will only have

[2:56:41] the opposite effect. Instead of contradicting yourselves, I urge you to

[2:56:45] consider this action and explore alternative cost-saving measures. For

[2:56:50] instance, you could eliminate unnecessary and unused contracted

[2:56:53] studies on city related issues. There are likely other areas where the board

[2:56:58] could tighten its spending without compensating the well-being of our

[2:57:02] city's heroes. Please take the time to carefully consider this decision before

[2:57:06] making a final choice. Sincerely, Heather Hamilton, 210 West Bay Street.

[2:57:19] » Who else? Madam Clerk,

[2:57:23] » Bonnie Bright.

[2:57:32] Hi, Bonnie Bray. Uh, my husband and I have lived at 515 Quartermaster Drive at

[2:57:39] the end of St. George for the last nine tax years. I'd like to use the property

[2:57:44] taxes of this house for the basis of my encouragement to the alderman to resist

[2:57:49] the current cries for lowering the property tax rate. Resist.

[2:57:54] We live in Southport for a variety of reasons. Top of the list is the fact

[2:57:58] that city government takes its duty to provide services seriously and we feel

[2:58:03] as though we who receive those services have a stake in the quality of life

[2:58:07] here. It takes money to provide those services and we don't mind paying our

[2:58:11] share because we also use our share of the services. I submit that the tax

[2:58:16] burden we share is not a burden at all. When we moved to our current house in

[2:58:21] tax year 2017, the tax rate was 29.56 cents per $100 value where it stayed for

[2:58:28] the next 5 years. And then the next two years were kind of up and down and until

[2:58:34] the elected officials in 2042 24 uh raised it to the current rate, which is

[2:58:40] 31.5 cents per 100 with one penny of that going to dedicated to fixing some

[2:58:46] long-term capital improvements. The total burden shared among us to fund

[2:58:52] government [clears throat] operations independent of these muchneeded capital

[2:58:56] improvements then is 30.5 cents per $100 value compared to 29.56

[2:59:04] per 100 9 years ago. So where we are literally a penny different in that

[2:59:10] 9-year span. Meanwhile, during the same nine years,

[2:59:15] the assessed value of my house doubled. I'm paying $984 more in taxes because of

[2:59:22] that fact, not because the tax rate is one penny higher,

[2:59:31] when you average, all right, in real terms, when you average the 984 increase

[2:59:37] in taxes over 9 years at 12 months a year, it's 108 months. The increased

[2:59:43] amount represents to us $9 difference per month for 108 months.

[2:59:50] But when you look at the increase in value of our home, that boils down to

[2:59:56] 2,800 every single month over the 9-year period that our house has increased in

[3:00:03] value. $9, $2,800. I think it's a no-brainer. People want to come live

[3:00:09] here. it increases the value of our property. Um, keeping the tax rate in

[3:00:14] where it is or increasing it incrementally even. I'm not suggesting

[3:00:18] that this this year, but it it is a win-win for us, my husband and I, other

[3:00:25] property owners, and all the people who enjoy living in Southport. Thank you.

[3:00:32] » Thank you, Madam Clerk.

[3:00:38] Dear mayor and board of aldermen, I have heard there is an attack on

[3:00:42] Southport EMS and talks have started about cutting these essential services.

[3:00:47] I have lived in Southport for over 25 years and I want to express my sincere

[3:00:52] gratitude for the help I have received from the Southport Fire Department. I am

[3:00:57] 93 years old and I live alone. I rely on the quick response and the compassionate

[3:01:02] care that I received from the Southport Ambulance Service. There are many times

[3:01:06] I have fallen and they are at my residence within 2 to three minutes to

[3:01:10] help me up. There have been times when I needed my smoke alarm batteries changed

[3:01:14] and they are just a phone call away. The Southport Fire Department and EMS have

[3:01:19] always been an exceptional service to the taxpayers of Southport. One of the

[3:01:24] main reasons that I moved to Southport was the reputation of a stellar

[3:01:27] emergency response system. I do not want to wait on a county EMS for 15 to 20

[3:01:32] minutes when I call 911. Nor do I want to wait on a Brunswick County Sheriff's

[3:01:37] deputy if I need the police. The Southport Police Department are

[3:01:40] wonderful, too. If I wanted the county service, I would live in the county. I

[3:01:44] came here for the excellent service. That is why I live in the city limits of

[3:01:48] Southport. In closing, I support the Southport Fire Department in continuence

[3:01:53] of their EMS service. They need to be funded and supported, not attacked, not

[3:01:58] underfunded, or their budget cut. This is a retirement community. Wait until

[3:02:03] you have a heart attack or a stroke. Then you will be glad to see the

[3:02:06] software EMS show up to save you. I may be 93, but I can rally up some

[3:02:12] senior citizens to stop this come election time. I love this lady.

[3:02:17] Thank you for your time. [laughter] Sincerely, Lily May Yates. I need to

[3:02:23] meet her.

[3:02:29] So, what a name. Lily May Gates. Yes. Beautiful. Thank you. Who's next, Madam

[3:02:34] Clerk? >> No, [clears throat] that was all I

[3:02:36] believe. If I have I missed anybody. >> Okay. Anyone else that had wanted to

[3:02:40] speak in the public hearing and concerning the budget and did not? Okay.

[3:02:46] Please, Chief.

[3:02:54] I'm Chief Corning, Southport Police Chief. Um, Mr. Al, I appreciate your

[3:02:59] comments and of course you used to be our mayor, so you should know my door is

[3:03:03] pretty much always open. I want all our citizens to know that. Um, and I thought

[3:03:07] about not even coming up here, but since you addressed me and you know, I've been

[3:03:10] staying off of social media. I have Facebook, but I don't read all these

[3:03:15] other platforms because it's not good for my

[3:03:20] health. I'm not saying this for no kind of pity party. I'm just telling you I

[3:03:24] don't take this job lightly. And I knew that asking for four people would be a

[3:03:28] lot. And I've been to a lot of training. This

[3:03:32] is 28 years this year. I've been a police officer. 35 years being a

[3:03:36] fireman. Been to a lot of training. But I know

[3:03:40] the critics don't. We're never going to be trained well enough. I'm not smart

[3:03:44] enough as everybody thinks they are. But when it comes to the Southport

[3:03:48] Police Department,

[3:03:52] I'm asking four officers because I need them,

[3:03:55] not because I might need them. You can come look at the numbers, Mr. Al. I

[3:04:00] presented a a budget to them. I also presented a workload analysis, that

[3:04:06] fancy word a lot of people like to use. And I do respect you for being in law

[3:04:09] enforcement, but but you called me out

[3:04:18] » and it's online. The answers to most of your questions, if not all of them,

[3:04:22] should be there, sir. Um, but you called me out. So, I'm just

[3:04:26] saying I'm an open book. Yes, sir. You can come. So, again, I hope I've

[3:04:31] answered all of your questions. uh any citizen they can come to my office and

[3:04:35] you know and the the numbers are there whether people think us getting out and

[3:04:40] getting a tree limb out the road. I've had citizens calling me asking me are we

[3:04:42] defunding the police um that we're inflating numbers. Not

[3:04:47] that I've read it but I've been told this. I don't read it. Um but I just

[3:04:52] want you to know and our citizens that are listening and here before me this is

[3:04:56] not I'm not making this stuff up. the numbers of the numbers, whether it's a

[3:04:59] service call where we are helping someone out of their vehicle, whether

[3:05:03] we're stopping a car. Um, I, you know, I wish I could get a lot of great

[3:05:07] comments. You know, we don't hear a lot of comments. Hey, I appreciate y'all

[3:05:10] stopping us. We ran that stop sign. We don't get a lot of that. And Charles

[3:05:14] is behind me. You know, we don't put fires out and we don't bring you back to

[3:05:18] life, unfortunately. We write you a ticket,

[3:05:21] you know. So, again, thank you for your comments. I do respect you. You know

[3:05:25] that. I'm not mad. I'm just I just felt like I needed to come up here because

[3:05:28] when people toss things out like that, if one person hears that and they start

[3:05:33] thinking, you know, what is the chief? Does he really need just two? So, he's

[3:05:37] asking for four. That was one of the first things I learned in leadership.

[3:05:41] When I became a lieutenant at our sheriff's office, they sent me to a

[3:05:45] leadership course, you know, and so that was one of the first things when we did

[3:05:49] a budget course. They told us, "Don't ask for anything that you don't need. If

[3:05:52] you need two, you ask for two. If you need three cars, ask for three. Don't

[3:05:56] ask for six. Hoping to get that. So again, thank you for your consideration.

[3:06:01] Uh I am very proud to be the police chief here in Southport.

[3:06:06] So thank you. >> Thank you, Chief.

[3:06:22] Please, please, Chief Drake. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Um, you

[3:06:27] know, September 27th, uh, is forever etched in our mind. The

[3:06:33] first responders that responded to American Fish Company, Southport Police,

[3:06:39] when my fireman got there, there was one police officer there.

[3:06:45] from Southport. She cleared the building because the other police officer that

[3:06:51] was on duty was transporting a prisoner. We need these police officers.

[3:06:58] We we can't afford to have another shooting and have one police officer. I

[3:07:04] mean, that that that speaks volumes. My guys could not even go in and begin to

[3:07:10] treat patients until a Bowling Spring officer got here

[3:07:16] to assist the police officer that was there and clear the scene. That's how

[3:07:21] important this stuff is. You know, everybody wants to make jokes. I was in

[3:07:26] a fire fee meeting today and it was said to me because I'm

[3:07:32] involved with historic preservation that people in the historic district are

[3:07:39] afraid that I would delay response

[3:07:45] and let someone's house burn down. This is how vicious and vile and evil

[3:07:52] Southport has become. that I would delay response

[3:07:58] in the historic district and let somebody's house burn down.

[3:08:02] » That's what was said to me today. Or that our fire marshall

[3:08:09] would find someone in the business district because they're against

[3:08:15] historic preservation. That disgusts me and it insults me. It

[3:08:23] insults my integrity and my professionalism.

[3:08:27] I would never for 35 years of my life, I have dedicated myself. I have crawled

[3:08:35] inside houses that were on fire and rescued trapped people that I did not

[3:08:40] even know. I would never

[3:08:45] compromise the integrity of the Southport Fire Department because I

[3:08:50] support what the red shirts don't support.

[3:08:55] You know, we have a democratic society and we're all allowed to have our own

[3:09:00] opinions. Just like Mr. Alt said, that doesn't

[3:09:04] mean I hate you because you have a different opinion than me. But don't be

[3:09:08] so vile and evil to try to come against us and say that we would compromise our

[3:09:14] professional integrity and risk someone's life. That's our job.

[3:09:20] That's what we do for a living. Not only have I spent 35 years of my life as a

[3:09:25] firefighter, I've spent the last 40 years of my life

[3:09:29] in the ministry. I pastor a church and I offer spiritual care to people in this

[3:09:36] community. For 40 years, I have dedicated my life in service to other

[3:09:41] people. And you know something, I was so

[3:09:46] insulted today by that comment in the fire fee meeting. And it it just it

[3:09:52] takes me back to know I don't live in the Southport

[3:09:57] that I used to live in. I don't live in the Southport that I grew up in. And for

[3:10:03] the first time in my life tonight, I can say I'm glad that my grandfather Billy

[3:10:10] Drew is dead. I've never said that before, but I'm

[3:10:15] glad he's not here to see the Southport that we've turned into.

[3:10:32] Um, thank you for your comments, Chief. And chief, I was at that meeting and as

[3:10:37] you know what I said immediately was that when some gentlemen, they didn't

[3:10:43] know him, I didn't know him, but Southport Fire and EMS went down to the

[3:10:50] river and one of the officers jumped in the water and rescued that man and and

[3:10:56] your group saved that man's life. You didn't know who he was. So, if you would

[3:11:02] do that, you're certainly not going to let anybody's house burn down. That's

[3:11:06] just ludicrous. And and I agree. And our the numbers uh that uh Chief Coring that

[3:11:14] you showed us, there's such a dramatic increase in calls, such a dramatic

[3:11:19] increase in the number of people that are in Southport every day. They say

[3:11:23] 20,000 a day. So, and then the dramatic story of the unfortunate shooting that

[3:11:29] night. one police officer down there. So we but public safety is crucial, our

[3:11:34] emergency services, our fire, our police, our EMS, our emergency

[3:11:37] preparedness so vital and we appreciate all that you do. So thank you. Um if

[3:11:44] there's no further comment, I'll entertain a motion to close the public

[3:11:49] hearing. >> Second.

[3:11:51] » Uh Alderman Marella and Alderman Kelly. All in favor?

[3:11:56] » Okay. The um public hearing concerning the um

[3:12:02] [clears throat and snorts] budget is closed and then we go to item uh I7 will

[3:12:06] be the electric uh rate adjustment. I declare the public uh hearing open and I

[3:12:12] call on alderman not alderman, excuse me, manager Noah.

[3:12:16] » I'd be happy to have a vote. [laughter]

[3:12:22] » You notice we we won't be voting until next week. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members

[3:12:27] of the board, a state law requires a separate public hearing for our

[3:12:31] electrical rates whenever we're adjusting those rates upwards. As we've

[3:12:35] been discussing through the budget process, there's an 7% include

[3:12:39] adjustment increase due to the passing of costs from Duke Energy to Electric

[3:12:44] City to the city. So, it'll be adopted. The 7% increase will be adopted in the

[3:12:49] city budget along with the fee schedule. Uh, but state law men mandates a

[3:12:53] separate public hearing. So, that's what we're doing tonight. Thank you.

[3:12:58] » Is there anyone that like to speak on the U?

[3:13:01] » I thought I thought I did. >> I did.

[3:13:04] » Okay. I think it's open, but if it's not open, I thought I said it initially. Um,

[3:13:09] is there anyone that would uh speak like to speak on the uh Come on. Someone the

[3:13:13] electric. >> Yes. De Barnes.

[3:13:16] » Okay.

[3:13:22] » I thought you only get one topic. Isn't that right, Clark?

[3:13:27] Just kidding. >> Debbie Barnes, 425 West Street. Uh, in

[3:13:33] regards to the electric rate, I know enough to be dangerous. I've done no

[3:13:39] research. Okay, I'm just going to throw something out.

[3:13:44] Um, we got involved with Electric Cities Co-op many, many years ago to bring

[3:13:53] electricity and stuff in. We have a grid. I think we still have

[3:14:01] the electric grid. Do we still own it? Yes, I thought so.

[3:14:07] Here's something I'd like you to consider.

[3:14:12] We're not in the business to be an electric company.

[3:14:16] I feel like maybe we should look at the options of selling our electric grid to

[3:14:21] one of the bigger groups, the real electric companies, and getting the

[3:14:26] money to pay off that debt with electricities.

[3:14:31] And in doing so, I think our electric rates would wind up being more

[3:14:37] comparable to what you see elsewhere. What's happened? I haven't seen or read

[3:14:44] anything about the other cities having a big issue coming from Duke that caused

[3:14:50] the electric rates to go up 7%. So, I'm only speculating. I have no

[3:14:58] proof. I said I didn't. I I put it out there, Karen.

[3:15:04] At the end of the day, what is the driver of that rate? It's

[3:15:10] going from Duke. That's what I read. Going from Duke to the electric cities

[3:15:16] and it's passing on to us. Why is Oak Island and everyone else not

[3:15:22] having a big issue about a 7% increase? So, you know, at the end of the day, the

[3:15:29] electric grid, whether it has anything to do with that or not, maybe that's a

[3:15:34] way to get some money back into our bucket and not have a debt. Anyway, and

[3:15:41] on another note, Charles, I respect you. I admire you. And I've

[3:15:49] told you that in person before, and I'm saying it again.

[3:15:55] I think the division that has occurred here in our city is between people

[3:16:04] having something being placed on them that they did not want the majority. I

[3:16:10] know you want to stop, but it it needs to be said just like I know Charles had

[3:16:16] to say what he said and I agree with him. But the people just because they

[3:16:21] wear a red shirt here, it's not being vile. They just wanted to be seen.

[3:16:26] » This is public hearing on the electric. Uh

[3:16:29] » yeah. Okay. And I said it and I thank you, mayor, and I thank you for

[3:16:32] tolerating it, but I felt like I needed to let Charles know we love him no

[3:16:38] matter what. >> So, Miss Deb,

[3:16:42] » thank you >> about the Can I Thank you.

[3:16:45] » I was next. [laughter]

[3:16:48] Is there anyone else in the public? Yeah, you can, but I'm going close the

[3:16:52] hearing and then the board. >> Yes, you.

[3:16:55] » Anyone else? >> No, that was all.

[3:16:57] » Okay, great. >> Um, motion to close the public hearing.

[3:17:02] » Oh, did Tyler do need you want to? Okay, motion to close the public hearing.

[3:17:06] » So moved. >> Okay, have a motion a second. All in

[3:17:09] favor? >> I

[3:17:10] » Okay, the public hearing is closed. Alderman Carol. So Noah, can you address

[3:17:17] Miss Debbie and some of her questions because we we did, Miss Debbie, have a

[3:17:20] conversation about the concept of selling the um so we've we've we've had

[3:17:25] that it was in an open uh meeting. Um some of that has to do with timeline. So

[3:17:30] in order to sell, we have to give them notice and we have to give them notice 5

[3:17:34] years in advance or something to that effect. And then the current contract

[3:17:38] lasts through 2040 if I'm not mistaken. And in order to get out of that

[3:17:42] contract, we got to give them 10 years notice that we'd like to get out of that

[3:17:45] contract. Am I I'm all on >> Okay. So, just I know I know I wasn't

[3:17:50] here then, but [laughter] >> then I probably

[3:17:56] but um so uh but also as it relates to competitive, how competitive competitive

[3:18:02] we are with our rates versus those offered by BEMC. Can you talk on that at

[3:18:08] all? Yeah, and Tyler Mike can jump in as well. So, the debt you're talking about

[3:18:12] specifically has already been paid off through electric city. So, we no longer

[3:18:16] pay for that. So, that it is >> That's right. Yeah. So, when talking

[3:18:22] with the other managers in other cities, they have steadily raised rates over

[3:18:26] time and have been able to absorb it as as cost where we have not raised rates

[3:18:30] and and we're not able to absorb the cost in this budget. Part of the reason

[3:18:34] is the underground project. So once our infrastructure projects are done like

[3:18:38] the underground projects then I think we will see a more stable rate. Certainly

[3:18:43] as Duke is in the process of a large rate at the utility commission now I

[3:18:47] believe it's 18%. So if that passes and we could see additional increases uh but

[3:18:53] a large portion of the budget this year is going toward the underground and our

[3:18:57] transformer project. So once that's done, I believe rates will stabilize and

[3:19:01] then we can start building the fund up so we don't have to raise rates large

[3:19:05] over time. >> And

[3:19:08] then the fac they sold some facilities in the eastern section of North Carolina

[3:19:13] which helped pay for these things help for it to get paid off. Is that correct?

[3:19:18] Isn't that what you we remember? the nuclear the nuclear plant our interest.

[3:19:24] » That's right. We got credit on that. >> And to to be clear, this is not a

[3:19:30] Southport uh rate increase per se. It is coming

[3:19:35] from it's a pass through that they are passing down to us, right? Um, so that's

[3:19:42] not >> you might want to talk to the utilities

[3:19:44] commission uh because that's who allows them to do their rates.

[3:19:49] » And also just keep in mind we have at least $20 million more of underground

[3:19:54] that need to be done.

[3:19:59] And that was just for the B&Bs, right? Back. [laughter] So

[3:20:05] that's why y'all had me here. All right. So this um will be adopted in the budget

[3:20:12] as part of the budget. Okay. Thank you. Uh any further questions for the

[3:20:15] manager. >> Okay. All right. That Okay. Great. Yes.

[3:20:21] » We certainly we certainly can. It was in >> right

[3:20:27] next meeting. >> Yeah, that would be fine. That'd be

[3:20:29] good. Okay. >> Well, the term start July one or at the

[3:20:34] end of the >> Do you want to add it to Okay. We

[3:20:37] we'll have to read notice it, but we can do that

[3:20:42] » to the budget meeting. Okay, that is a

[3:20:49] » clarify.

[3:21:00] » So, I'll go ahead and make a motion that we move item 8 to seven and push seven

[3:21:06] off until our June 17th meeting.

[3:21:12] motion to uh move item I8, the Brunswick County Schools uh bond referendum letter

[3:21:18] of support, and we'll move the board and committee appointments uh to our meeting

[3:21:24] on June 17th. Uh is there a second? >> Second, Baldwin Kelly.

[3:21:31] » So, you're not meeting today. Um >> correct. Correct.

[3:21:36] Correct. Yes, ma'am. Um, any further discussion?

[3:21:40] Okay. All in favor? >> Any oppose? Okay. Motion carried

[3:21:46] unanimously. Thank you. All right. Item seven will be the Brunswick County

[3:21:50] Schools bond referendum letter of support. you know, it's in the state

[3:21:54] constitution that we educate our our citizens and um you know, this bond

[3:22:00] issue is in is important and I believe um most will uh support it in Brunswick

[3:22:07] County, but uh whatever discussion you need to have forward on this before you

[3:22:11] vote, uh please go ahead. My uh request to move it to um the

[3:22:18] regular agenda was simply a process issue. Um

[3:22:25] the school bond um may or may not pass. We don't know.

[3:22:31] We don't know. Um and and certainly school bonds of any of any sort, school

[3:22:37] bond, whatever. Um they're needed from time to time to address um

[3:22:44] high dollar long-term infrastructure needs. Um to divide those payments out

[3:22:50] over time, obviously. And that obviously helps hold down uh it can actually hold

[3:22:56] down the tax rates as well. Um I'm not opposed to the letter. Uh colleagues

[3:23:02] just want I think we should make sure that it's sort of neutral. Um we endorse

[3:23:09] having the referendum. Um let the citizens, you know, do their

[3:23:15] research, find out the facts. Um, we've we've heard the facts because we've

[3:23:22] heard the the presentation from the school school board on a PowerPoint and

[3:23:29] as I recall, you know, we noticed some schools needing to be built. Um,

[3:23:35] uh, because we're approving 50,000 more units in Brunswick County. Uh, you know,

[3:23:42] who would have guessed that? Uh, that we need more schools. Um, we know that

[3:23:46] Southport Elementary is going to be getting a new PA system. Um, uh, we know

[3:23:53] there is the possibility that the county tax rate could go up 8%.

[3:23:59] However, by the time these schools get bonded and we start making payments,

[3:24:06] it's hopeful that the tax base in Brunswick County will have increased

[3:24:11] significantly. So maybe the 8% um will not be needed for a county tax

[3:24:18] hike. But I think you know those facts we all know about it, but I don't know

[3:24:22] if the the citizens and the voters know about it. And then it'll be up to them

[3:24:25] to learn about these facts between now and November when the um when the

[3:24:31] referendum is put before the voters. But again, I'm not saying I'm against the

[3:24:37] the school bond. I just think we should be careful to the way we word that

[3:24:44] letter, Mr. Mayor, just to make sure we're sort of neutral and um yes, it

[3:24:49] needs to be a referendum and the voters need to speak and uh and make the

[3:24:54] decision. >> I tend to agree with Alderman Gross on

[3:24:58] this. Um the verbiage I was actually looking for earlier is not the end at

[3:25:02] the end of the letter. It's the beginning of the letter. I am proud to

[3:25:04] voice our strong support for the Brunswick County Schools bond

[3:25:08] referendum. Um, so I agree that I would love to see the referendum on the

[3:25:13] ballot. I just don't necessarily want it to appear that we want everyone to vote

[3:25:19] yes for it. I would like for the public to make their own decision. Um, and

[3:25:23] during that presentation, um, I did bring up to the, uh, representative from

[3:25:30] the board of education, uh, I was asking questions about what Southport

[3:25:34] Elementary was getting. And yes, my children also attend South Brunswick

[3:25:37] Middle School. So, uh, I also asked about the bleachers at South Brunswick

[3:25:41] Middle School, if you remember that as well. Um, but I don't want this to be

[3:25:46] something that looks like we are all for this. I would like for it to look like

[3:25:50] yes, we would like for it to be a referendum, but for the citizens to make

[3:25:53] their own decisions when it comes to that.

[3:25:56] » Could Could we get a revised draft letter and vote on it on June the 17th?

[3:26:02] » Why don't we vote on the letter? Let's see how many board members support it

[3:26:06] and those don't.

[3:26:12] » Hello.

[3:26:17] Uh I I I'm I'm certainly receptive to us making it more neutral.

[3:26:24] » We support the referendum vote. Point blank. We support bringing it to a

[3:26:31] referendum vote.

[3:26:37] So the the motion is do you want to revise the letter? have the

[3:26:42] manager revise the letter to support the referendum vote, but uh that you would

[3:26:47] like to sign it your neutral Southport Board of Alder.

[3:26:53] A lot of lot of courage there. All right. So, there's a motion to revise

[3:26:57] the letter. Um no, we need a motion. It's it's time.

[3:27:04] » So, go ahead.

[3:27:11] I move to revise the letter to support placing the U bond issue on um

[3:27:18] referendum and that we put this on the June the 17th agenda.

[3:27:25] » So uh I'll say it's already going to be on the ballot.

[3:27:30] So we can say we support that which is fine but I don't think it materially

[3:27:35] does anything. So, we can do that if that's what the board's will is, but

[3:27:39] it's not going to materially support it being on the ballot because it's already

[3:27:43] going to be on the ballot by vote of the commissioner. So, um,

[3:27:47] » they're looking for our endorsement. >> That's correct.

[3:27:50] » Which I'm comfortable myself doing, but I might be a party of one of it.

[3:27:54] » Well, I know you're not a party one. I support I endorse it, too. I'm

[3:27:58] supportive of it. Yes,

[3:28:04] » I support the referendum as well. >> So, motion to approve the letter as

[3:28:09] written.

[3:28:12] » Yes, sir. >> I I mean, I made a motion, but it didn't

[3:28:15] get a second. So, that

[3:28:20] » I Sorry, y'all. I would make a motion to >> Oh, you made it then. I second it. Thank

[3:28:26] you, Mark. So, Alderman Spencer made a motion to

[3:28:31] portion

[3:28:35] second by Alder Marella. >> Well, I I'm not going to vote for it

[3:28:40] because I don't want to tell people how to vote on this because they haven't

[3:28:43] heard all of the sides of this. >> We're not telling them how to vote.

[3:28:46] We're just saying that we support it.

[3:28:50] » I am proud to voice our strong support of the Brunswick County Schools bond

[3:28:54] referendum. I don't know that that comes across as neutral.

[3:28:58] » The the school board is looking for this board's views to support the referendum.

[3:29:05] So whether you want to support it or you don't is they're just looking for the

[3:29:09] board's opinion either way. So that's what they're looking for.

[3:29:13] » Call the vote. >> Could you repeat that, Noah? So the

[3:29:17] school board is asking for municipalities, business owners,

[3:29:21] individuals to voice their support for adoption of the referendum of November.

[3:29:26] So that's the purpose of this. I think if the board is not comfortable in

[3:29:29] saying that that we support passage of the bond, I think it's a moot point and

[3:29:34] we should not do anything. >> So we we have a motion in a second. If

[3:29:39] you do not want to support it because what for whatever reason, then vote that

[3:29:43] way. If you support it, vote the other way. Was there any language other

[3:29:47] language in there, Rebecca, that I don't have it in front of me, but that you

[3:29:51] feel like was not neutral? >> I think that to the manager's point,

[3:29:57] it's either we say that we want people to vote for it is essentially what this

[3:30:02] is. Um, or we keep our mouth shut. >> I haven't seen the referendum language.

[3:30:11] » They made a presentation. made a presentation, but that wasn't on

[3:30:16] the ballot yet. So, what is the language on the ballot?

[3:30:28] » Yeah, it's it's on the ballot will be the school

[3:30:32] referendum bond for the school referendum. It'll be yes or no.

[3:30:36] » The bond it was like 340 million 340 some million. Is that not right?

[3:30:42] somewhere in that ballpark. >> Yeah.

[3:30:47] » Okay. So, all in favor of the letter. >> Is that three? All opposed.

[3:30:56] » Three. Nay. Voting with the uh those that are for the uh bond referendum

[3:31:03] letter. And the motion passes. Thank you.

[3:31:09] All right. So, we're at a point board where we uh we can um

[3:31:17] recess we and motion for recess till June 17th and we'll

[3:31:24] have a motion to go also into close session to consult with an attorney

[3:31:30] employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney client

[3:31:33] privilege between the attorney and the public body which privilege is hereby

[3:31:37] acknowledged and also to establish lish or instruct the public body staff or

[3:31:41] negotiating agents concerning the position to be taken by or on behalf of

[3:31:46] the public body in negotiating the price and other material terms of a contract

[3:31:51] or proposed contract for the acquisition of real property by purchase option

[3:31:56] contract or proposed employment contract.

[3:32:00] So a motion to uh recess to June 17th and

[3:32:06] » and then recess at the end and I Mayor, >> what

[3:32:10] » the disclosure? >> We also had to disclose for Jason

[3:32:12] Robbins for his request. >> Oh, yes. Yeah, the disclosure. So

[3:32:16] pursuant to the public comment disclosure request, the property portion

[3:32:19] of the closed session is related to an offer received by the city for request

[3:32:24] of the city to purchase a non-address parcel, which is parcel ID 238HG02705,

[3:32:33] a 2.16 acre parcel next to Low White Park owned by Craraver Properties LLC.

[3:32:43] And the purpose to

[3:32:45] » see if the board would like to purchase the property or not.

[3:32:51] » What would be our purpose in purchasing? >> We have not been we you have not

[3:32:56] identified that yet.

[3:33:02] [snorts] >> That's part of the reason why we have to

[3:33:03] go into close session to discuss >> what is we're going into recess. No,

[3:33:10] we're going to close session. >> I'm sorry.

[3:33:15] » Okay. >> Yes.

[3:34:24] Heat. Heat.

[3:38:26] Heat. Heat.

[3:39:22] Heat. Heat.

[3:43:28] Heat. Heat.

[3:44:12] Heat. Heat.

[3:48:33] Heat. Heat.

[3:52:51] All right. Uh motion to come out of close session.

[3:52:54] » So move >> we have

[3:52:57] » we have a motion and multiple seconds. Thank you. All in favor? Okay. We're out

[3:53:02] of close session. The the board took no action. Uh we'll be taking no action

[3:53:07] with respect to the close session and I'll ask uh city manager uh Salvo to uh

[3:53:15] wrap it up. >> I would request a motion to recess this

[3:53:18] meeting subject to reconvene Wednesday, June 17th at 1 p.m. in Indian Trail

[3:53:23] meeting hall and cancel the previously noted notice special meeting.

[3:53:28] » So move second. >> That was very good. Thank you, manager.

[3:53:34] All in favor? >> Motion carried.

Board of Aldermen Regular Meeting

Agenda

Transcript