MINUTES
STATE
OF
The Henderson County
Board of Commissioners met for a regularly scheduled meeting at 9:00 a.m. in
the Commissioners' Conference Room of the Historic Courthouse.
Those present were: Chairman Bill Moyer, Vice Chairman
Also present were: Deputy
Clerk Terry Wilson, Finance Director J.
CALL TO ORDER/WELCOME
Chairman Moyer called
the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Representatives from the
INVOCATION
County Manager
INFORMAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
1.
Richard
DeSimone – Mr. DeSimone has been a
2.
Tara
Ledbetter – Ms. Ledbetter spoke in regards to the need for more school
nurses. School personnel are not
equipped to handle the medical situations.
Ms. Ledbetter’s daughter Kaitlyn has been diagnosed with ITP (Idiopathic
Thrombocytopenic Purpura). Kaitlyn also
has Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Both meaning
that if she gets cut or injured she has the risk to bleed to death. Her blood platelets do not clot
properly. If she gets cut the Ehlers-Danlos
skin disorder causes her skin to rip or tear and she needs immediate
stitches. On the days that there is not
a school nurse at her school she drops off her daughter and worries how fast
she can make it from her work place to the school to see that Kaitlyns care is
handled.
3.
Isabel
W. Taylor – Ms. Taylor operates a child development center in Fletcher. She is concerned with the finding of the
United Agenda for Children. She asked that the Board make it a priority to
add more school nurses.
4.
Angie
Reid – Ms. Reid stated that in the last school year Bruce Drysdale was
fortunate enough to have a school nurse.
The grant monies that paid her to be there 5 days a week will run out at
the end of the school year. Without a
school nurse teachers will not only have to teach students but would have to
assume the responsibility for their physical needs as well. It has been documented that the Bruce
Drysdale school nurse treats an average of 30 students a day. She asked the Board to prioritize funding for
school nurses in our county.
DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA
Chairman Moyer stated
that two (2) items needed to be added.
Under Important Dates add item C – public hearing for economic
development and under Closed Session add 2 – for a personnel matter.
Commissioner McGrady made a motion that the Board adopts the
agenda as amended. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner McGrady had
not had time to read the draft minutes for March 6 and requested that they be
pulled from the consent agenda. He also
requested that Consent Agenda Item J – Agreement with Volunteer Fire
Departments and Consent Agenda Item K – Sale of Pardee Care Center be pulled
for further discussion.
Commissioner McGrady made the motion to adopt Items B – I on
the Consent Agenda. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
Agreement with Volunteer Fire Departments (J)
Commissioner McGrady
questioned what the statement meant on page 3 of 8 in the first paragraph when
it comes into the statement of agreement, “the county shall not adjust the
property rates within the fire departments based on the county’s election of
the ad valorem method”.
Chairman Moyer stated
that the concern here was that if the Board chose the ad valorem method they
would adjust the fire departments rate to reflect the amount of sales tax. It does not mean that they won’t be adjusted
based on their needs or based on what they prove to the Fire and Rescue
Advisory Committee. The statement was
that if we went to ad valorem there would be an immediate drop in their rates
based on the sales tax money they would get.
He stated that as a result of the work of Fire Marshal Rocky Hyder and
his department all of the fire departments have signed the agreements.
Commissioner McGrady made the motion that the Board enter
into the proposed agreement with
Commissioner McGrady
stated in just the last couple of days a meeting was held of the Pardee Board
and that they are recommending this to the Board of Commissioners
unanimously. From the newspaper he
received the impression that the Board of Commissioners had received an upset
bid from another party. He asked the
Chairman to explain just what had been received.
Chairman Moyer stated
that the Board had received a document within the time period from the Lutheran
Group. The Board had thorough discussion
of the document and the
Chairman Moyer said that
the Board was advised by council at the meeting that the Lutheran Group added
three conditions, two environmental ones, and one which was of concern stating
that their Board had not approved this letter that was sent, and any agreement
going forward would have to be approved by the Board. At most this is an agreement to agree. After considering this at great length, the
Board took advice of council and based on that advice said that the document
received did not qualify under law as an upset bid so they rejected the offer
from the Lutheran Group and authorized going forward with the Physicians
Group. This must be sold as a going
concern; you can’t separate the real estate, the beds and the people, etc.
Commissioner Young made the motion that the Board give final approval of the
bid and offer presented by the Trustees of Henderson County Hospital
Corporation for the sale of Pardee Care Canter.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Commissioner McGrady questioned
that the agreement has some notice provisions and with respect to notice to the
County itself, would we be allowed to substitute County Attorney Russ Burrell,
Chairman Moyer, and our address, and the
Chairman Moyer mentioned
that he had been involved as a non-voting member through this process and he
felt that the Hospital Board has tried to give this tremendous due
diligence. It is never an easy decision
when you are choosing between very qualified competing groups.
Tax Collector’s Report
Terry F. Lyda, Tax
Collector, provided the Tax Collector’s Report for information only dated May 9,
2008.
Tax Refunds
A list of three (3)
refund requests was presented for approval by the Board of Commissioners.
Tax Releases
A list of thirty-four (34)
release requests was presented for approval by the Board of Commissioners.
Tax Refund Denial
One (1) refund request
was submitted for like affirmation by the Henderson County Board of
Commissioners.
Western Highlands Area Authority – Quarterly Fiscal
Monitoring (FMR) for the period ended March 31, 2008
G.S. 122C-117(c)
requires the staff of the local area mental health authority to provide the
County Finance Officer with the quarterly Fiscal Monitoring Report (FMR) within
30 days of the end of the quarter. The
County Finance Officer is then required to provide the FMR to the Board of
Commissioners at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the board. The FMR for Western Highlands Area Authority
was presented for the Board’s information and consent approval. The report was received by the County Finance
Officer on April 30, 2008.
Suggested Motion: I
move that the Board approve the
Home and Community Care Block Grant for Older
Each year the Board of
Commissioners is required to adopt a Funding Plan for the Home and Community
Care Block Grant for Older Adults and identify the lead office or agency
responsible for coordinating the County Funding Plan. At this time, the Funding Plan for Fiscal
Year 2009 is estimated to be $699,215, which is an increase of $12,353 over the
amount received in FY 2008. This is a
State / Federal program administered at the local level. The proposed Funding Plan Supports the
service priorities identified for the current planning cycle.
Suggested Motion: I
move that the Board appoints the
Recombination Deed for
The
Suggested Motion: I
move that the Board of Commissioners approve the recombination of the four lots
as described in the
Review Special Intensity Allocation application
WS-2008-05-01 (Village Green at
LeRoy Brown, Buyer,
submitted an application on property owned by E K S Morley, for approval of a
proposed warehouse and office building (9,600 square feet) with associated
parking and driveway access (10,334 square feet) on February 13, 2008. The application has a proposed impervious
surface of 46.0 percent. This exceeds
the 24 percent allowed by right. A
Special Intensity Allocation permit would be required. The PIN for the property is 9631-31-8953 and
is approximately 1.00 acre in size. The
property is currently a vacant parcel of land.
This parcel of land is located in the Town of Mills River.
Normally these types of
application would be under staff review using category 1 allocation for
Category 3 has a total
of 30.736 acres, this application removes 1.00 acre from the total is
approved. This would leave 29.736 acres
for future projects located in the SW-III Balance of Watershed district.
Suggested Motion: I
move that the Board approve the application for
NOMINATIONS
Notification of Vacancies
The Board was notified
of the following vacancies which will appear on the next agenda for
nominations:
1.
2.
Community
Child Protection Team (CCPT) – 1 vac.
3.
Environmental
Advisory Committee – 5 vac.
4.
5.
6.
Historic
Resources Commission – 3 vac.
7.
Juvenile
Crime Prevention Council – 5 vac.
8.
Mountain
Area Workforce Development Board – 4 vac.
9.
Social
Services Board – 1 vac.
Nominations
Chairman Moyer reminded
the Board of the following vacancies and opened the floor to nominations:
There were no nominations at this time so this
item was rolled to the next meeting.
Commissioner McGrady nominated
for reappointment Larry Russell for position #19. Chairman Moyer made the
motion to accept Larry Russell to position #19 by acclamation. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
Chairman Moyer nominated
Stephen Teel for position #10. Chairman Moyer made the motion to accept
Stephen Teel to position #10 by acclamation.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Commissioner McGrady
nominated for reappointment Perry Robinson for position #5 and Joyce Mazzachi
for position #19. He further nominated Julianne
Kilcullen for position #2 and Dauna Donato for position #7. Chairman
Moyer made the motion to accept Perry Robinson, Joyce Mazzachi, Julianne
Kilcullen, and Dauna Donato by acclamation.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
County Manager
The Board is very aware
of the challenges in this budget. At the
retreat in January we were looking at about an additional $3.67 million in new
educational funding, most of which is in the public school sector; the debt
service for the construction for the coming year for Mills River, Hillandale,
and Dana Elementary Schools. There are
also new, ongoing operational costs per county costs associated with running
Sugarloaf Elementary, about $500,000 of new costs. Mr. Wyatt reminded the Board that Sugarloaf
does not replace the school or take a school off line, it is an additional
school. The
Since January things
have changed and fuel prices and grocery prices for tax paying families are
going through the roof. We use a lot of
fuel in the
Over the past year, the
Board of Commissioners has offered the voters opportunities to weigh in on tax
referendum; one was the land transfer tax and the other sales tax. Both were soundly defeated and the options
are off the table. Folks need to
understand that the Board of Commissioners can only implement funding that’s
approved by the State of
The Commissioners have
mandated a no tax increase budget and the consensus was to get to the target
there would be a 2.7% ceiling of budget growth for all departments. That was based on January CPI (Consumer Price
Index) projections. If we had that
meeting again we would have to raise that figure to probably 4.1% – 4.2%
depending on when the meeting was set.
The cost of living and the CPI are exceeding 2.7% at this time.
To meet the commands we
have postponed a number of initiatives.
We have a capital improvement plan and those capital projects (other
than the school projects) have basically been put on hold. We are drawing down reserves for operating
costs by about $1.2 million. We are
preserving the 12% fund balance policy the Board has and they did not authorize
going below 12%, so our projection is that we will be right down to that 12%.
School funding remains a
challenge. There is a $21.3 million
operating budget, which is 10% above the spending cap. Recommended budget to the schools is $19.1
million and is not earmarked. This money
can be used at their discretion. This is
the highest amount that the County has budgeted. When you look at the total school budget, it
exceeds $30 million for the first time in County history. Over the last several months the Board has
been approached by folks that he feels have questioned the County’s commitment
to education, therefore there are facts that the citizens need to be aware
of.
Since the fiscal year
2004/2005 the County has increased spending for school debt service, at the
request of the school system, for school construction and renovation by nearly
90%. When you look at the budget document
that was provided there are photographs on the front. (He held it up for the public to see) Shown were four (4) school buildings that are
under construction; multi-million dollar school facilities that are under
construction. The Board of Commissioners
is responsible for paying for those facilities.
When you look at over all commitment to education, there are 100
counties in
The projections received
from the schools systems show that school enrollment will actually be going
down. When we base those statistics on
school enrollment it is likely with the increase and about $1.75 million being
put into education, that the County will increase it’s standing relative to the
other counties.
Property taxes are
expected to generate about $57.7 million which represents about half of the
general fund revenue for the county.
Sales tax revenues are expected to decline significantly; we are
expecting a decline of about $3 million in sales tax. Sales tax is about 17% of the revenue stream
for the county, and the current sales tax (subject to the rejection of a ¼%
increase) remains at 6.75% in
Commissioner Williams
stated that one thing that all citizens can do to help the sales tax is to make
sure that any purchases made are made in
County Manager
This budget funds
priorities. This community is fortunate
to have a Board of Commissioners that is dedicated to doing what is in the best
interest of all the people of the County.
Chairman Moyer stated
that in respect to the budget he had one matter that he would like to
discuss. The County is in a very
challenging time. The efforts with
energy conservation are extremely commendable.
He believed that interjecting discussion of a four day work week would
be confusing during the budget process and it should be an entirely separate issue. The four day work week needs a very
thoughtful, planned discussion from the Board with the pros and cons of looking
at it; what the costs will be, and what actual departments will benefit. He suggested to the Board that they direct
the
Chairman Moyer made the motion that the Board defers
discussion of the four day work week until after the Board has completed the
budget, and that they are very much interested in reducing energy cost and that
they will take this matter up in a very thoughtful and deliberative matter
after the budget is finished. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
Commissioner Williams made the motion that the Board
schedules a public hearing on the FY 2008-2009 Budget for Thursday, May 29,
2008 at 7:00 pm. He further moved that
the Board schedule a budget workshop for Tuesday, May 27, 2008 at 8:00 am.
Chairman Moyer stated
that the Board would start at 8:00 am on the May 27, and the Board would be
meeting all day until they get through the budget. The
Commissioner McGrady
said that it was his understanding that it is more likely than not that these
two meetings followed by a meeting at which the Board approves the budget is
all that is now expected in terms of the Boards consideration of budget. His view is that the amount of time is
inadequate to the task. He understood
that an all day meeting would get the Board someplace but there is not much
time built in there for others to respond as it moves forward. He also felt that it suggested that the
budget “is what the budget is” and is going to be adopted very quickly without
a lot of consideration. Obviously
another meeting can be added if needed and he was supportive of that. This budget is somewhat difficult to
understand as a range of changes on the expense side; expenses have gone down
but you can’t tell from the budget documents how the numbers have changed and
why.
Chairman Moyer stated
that in terms of operating expenses, the Board would diffidently need to see
the detail of how they are reducing the operating expenses by seeing where they
are and where they are making the cuts.
Chairman Moyer reminded
the Board of the motion on the table. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
2008 TWENTY YEAR VISION PRESENTAION –
The County’s Strategic
Plan in Strategy 4.4 (Address solid waste management issues including recycling
and upcoming pertinent solid waste legislation) and under the leadership of
Katie Breckheimer, chairperson, the Solid Waste Advisory Committee and staff
have developed the twenty year plan for Henderson County Solid Waste. The plan details the importance of investing
and developing recycling in
Katie Breckheimer made
introductions of several members of the Solid Waste Advisory Committee
including Emily Anderson, Joe McGuth, and Stan Kumor. Members of the ECO recycling committee were
recognized. Ms. Breckheimer also
introduced
Ms. Breckheimer gave
overview of the following:
Solid Waste Team
Ms. Breckheimer stated
that we now have our own recycling process and we are making money on it. She shared pictures with the Board of the
current process at the landfill including recycling.
CURRENT PROCESS
Collections
We rely on our private
waste haulers to collect from our citizens.
Some citizens bring their refuse and recycling to our transfer station. It is an enterprise fund and no funds are
drawn from the general fund or add any taxes to our citizens. All monies are generated at the transfer
station and they pay for the solid waste programs.
Disposal
We are a transfer
station and we operate a closed land fill at our transfer station. All of our garbage is shipped to upstate
Recycling
We have one (not so
convenient) center. It is a dual stream
process and we collect mixed containers, mixed paper fiber, and several other
items.
(HHW) Household Hazard
Waste/Electronics
Last year we had our
very first single event of HHW collection and it was very successful. It was combined with our second electronics
recycling event and thanks to the Board, Marcus Jones is now working on a
permanent site at our transfer station where we can more than a yearly event,
possibly up to four per year.
Compliance
We have both an aluminum
ban and a cardboard ban and we need to make sure that we are trying to keep
those out of our waste stream. The State
of
Challenges
· Solid Waste Disposal Tax
· Significant Increase in
Permit Fees
· State Ban on Plastic
Bottles, Oil Filters, Electronics, etc.
Solutions
·
Currently
no “Silver Bullet”
- Landfill: expensive
& location
- Incinerator: expensive
& environmental challenges
·
Need
New Perspective on Current Processes: Recycling & Collections
Recycling Coordinator
Solution: Recycling –
(less transportation costs, no investment)
·
Solid
Waste Transfer Expense: $34/Ton
·
Recycling
Revenue: $100/Ton for Fiber - $30/Ton for Mixed Containers
Compliance
- Landfill Bans on
Aluminum, Cardboard, Plastic Bottles, Oil Filters and Pallets
- Implementation of Bans
· Internal Operations
· Permitted Partners
· Environmental
Stewardship
· Recycling Coordinator
- Maximize Recycling
Revenue
- Education/Outreach
- Operational Efficiencies
- Developing Markets
Solution: Collections
Expansion of Collections
for Solid Waste and Recycling
Solution: Details
- FY08 Hauler’s Forum
- FY09 Feasibility Study
Timeline
- Remain
- Finance Planned Site
Improvements
·
Recycling
Technology
·
Collection
Options
·
Develop
more Convenience Sites and/or
·
Develop
Partnership with Haulers
·
FY09
Implement HHW/Electronics Recycling Center
·
FY10
Implement Feasible Recycling Technology and Site Improvements
·
School
Bus Garage
·
Stoney
·
FY10
Rebid MSW Transportation/Disposal Contract for Transfer Station
Future:
- Waste to Energy
Technology
- C&D Reclamation
- Composting Operations
- Continue to Survey
industry for alternative technology for recycling and disposal
HENDERON
Twenty Year Vision for
Executive Summary
An effective Solid
Waster Department is essential to providing a quality standard of living to the
Citizens of Henderson County. Without
it, we risk health challenges, unmanageable costs, and harm to our environment. Effective Solid Waster Management is a very
important part of Growth Management.
Henderson County Solid Waste is providing this effectiveness through a
focus on the following: Value,
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship.
The 2008 Twenty Year Vision for Solid Waste outlines the solutions to
continue and improve on the Department’s focus.
The solution to moving
forward over the next twenty years is not a new revolutionary process, but is
our current process with a new perspective.
Our current operation needs to be refined to create greater efficiencies
and cost savings. There is no new
technology on the solid waste horizon that is both feasible and proven. Furthermore, the challenges grow every year. We face increasing costs in operation from
skyrocketing fuel costs to more aggressive regulation from the State. However, we must still provide excellent
customer service and value to our rate payers and the Citizens of Henderson
County. The two aspects of our Solid
Waste efforts that provide the most potential are the County’s private haulers
and recycling.
Henderson County Solid
Waste is an enterprise fund separate from the general fund and property
taxes. The Solid Waste Capital
Improvement Plan developed this year indicates that is possible to continue
into the future as a self-supported County function. This is not the case for many solid waste
operations and the significant difference between
In addition to the
private haulers, the most potential for overcoming increasing cost and
achieving compliance is recycling. Recycling is no longer just an environmental
stewardship opportunity, it is a process that removes material from our waste
stream, reduces disposal costs and generates revenue. While the recycling markets fluctuate, there
is notable indication recycling will continue to provide an effective means of
reducing disposal costs and generating revenue.
The recycling markets and number of end uses for recycled products
disposal have grown into a strong industry.
Furthermore, effective recycling efforts are continuing to be a
necessary tool in maintaining compliance with current and new State
regulations.
After lengthy discussion
by the Board, Commissioner McGrady made
the motion that the Board of Commissioners approves the 2008 Twenty Year Vision
for Solid Waste. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
OFFER TO PURCHASE FORMER DEPARTMENT OF
The appraised value as
of 27 December 2006 for the property was $1,457,000.00 (a copy was provided to
the Board). The tax value assessed for
the two parcels involved are $1,284,100.00 (parcel 9904885), which includes the
main building) and $521,600.00 (parcel 9904886, including parking lot and other
area), for a total of $1,805,700.00.
If the Board chooses to
accept this offer, the process is as follows:
1)
Offer
made, and prospective purchaser deposits 5% of the offer price with the
County. (This has been done).
2)
The
Board determines whether to give preliminary approval of the offer. If so, then
3)
Notice
of the offer, and of the right to make an upset bid is made in The
Times-News. If they wish to do so, any
person or entity can make an “upset bid” (higher bid) on the property, which
must be at least 10% of the first $1,000.00 and 5% of the remainder higher than
the existing bid, and must make a deposit of 5% of the new bid. The new bid must then be re-advertised for
further upset bids. At the expiration of
the last (or only) upset bid period without further upset bids, the offer is
then given
4)
Final
consideration and decision by the Board of Commissioners.
The Board may at any
time up until final approval reject any and all offers.
Commissioner Williams
stated that staff had been directed to do a feasibility study to see how the
building could be utilized for county use.
The results of the study have not been received in order to know what
recommendations there might be. He was
not inclined to sell property below the appraised value as this is unfair to
the
County Manager
SELECTION OF ENGINEERING FIRM FOR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT #06-C-1600 (SHUEY KNOLLS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS)
Planning Director
Anthony Starr stated the 2006 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Housing
Development project will assist Henderson County Habitat for Humanity in
increasing the amount of affordable housing available to county residents. The CDBG funds will provide for 1,200 linear
feet of water lines, road and drainage allowing for the construction of up to
fourteen (14) homes. As part of the
procurement requirements associated with the grant, a request for Proposals
(RFP) for Engineering Services was advertised.
After review of the engineering proposals received by the Project
Scoring Committee, it was determined that the proposal submitted by William
Lapsley & Associates, P.A. will most effectively meet the project
requirements. Lapsley & Associates
received the highest ranking and appears to be the most qualified firm to
complete the project. Their strong
reputation for quality work, extensive experience with civil engineering, CDBG
grant projects, and familiarity with the project area stand out among the other
firms.
The Board has previously
reviewed this project and approved the grant application. Staff is now implementing the grant. No County matching funds are associated with
the grant.
Planning Staff requested
that the Board accept the recommendation of the Project Scoring Committee and
authorize staff to contract with Lapsley & Associates, P.A., for
engineering services pursuant to CDBG #06-C-1600. No County matching funds are associated with
the grant.
Commissioner Messer made the motion that the Board select
Lapsley & Associates, P.A. for the project and authorize staff to enter
into a contract for engineering services with Lapsley & Associates, P.A.
regarding infrastructure improvements pursuant to CDBG #06-C-1600. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
SECONDARY ROAD PROGRAM RESOLUTION
Chairman Moyer stated
that during the 2007 Session, the NC General Assembly passed House Bill 1513,
which allow counties to voluntarily participate in the costs of transportation
projects. Additionally, the 21st
Century Transportation Committee and the Transportation Oversight Committee are
considering diverting all Secondary Road Program funding to the Primary Road
Program, which will leave no funding to pave or improve secondary road. During the joint meeting with the NCDOT, in
regards to secondary roads, NCDOT made it very clear that we are going to have
substantially reduced funding for secondary road paving and repair. If the State Legislature took money from the
highway trust fund or affected their budget, it might even be reduced; so you
take a completely inadequate amount, substantially reduced from previous years,
and take away even more and it becomes a completely unsatisfactory
situation. Chairman Moyer’s opinion was
that it was part of a program that NCDOT has had to pass secondary road responsibility
back to the Counties without any funding at all to help the local governments
take care of these roads. It became
clear in the hearing, along with other comments that this is the direction in
which things are moving. It is
important, in his opinion, that the local Governments (representing their
citizens) get on board and take a strong position that it is not fair or
appropriate for NCDOT to pass secondary road responsibilities back to the
counties without any funding or any help with respect to this area.
The Board is requested
to adopt the Resolution opposing House Bill 1513 which would allow counties to
voluntarily participate in the cost of transportation projects. A copy of the resolution is attached hereto
and incorporated as a part of the minutes.
The emphasis of the
resolution is to get the point across that there is a highway trust fund that
is supposed to fund programs like this.
The State Legislature and the Governor have regularly raided that fund
and used it for other purposes instead of highways and now they are claiming
they don’t have the money for roads.
This would be a major additional funding load on the county which would
drive up our local property taxes very significantly.
Chairman Moyer made the motion that the Board adopts the
resolution with the change in paragraph #5 of adding the word state
transportation program and take the ‘s’ off of programs. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
County Attorney Russ
Burrell requested that a public hearing be scheduled for an economic
development matter “ project performance plus”, for the June 2, 2008 regular
board meeting at 7:00 pm when the Board got to Important Dates.
There was nothing
further at this time.
IMPORTANT DATES
Chair Moyer noted that
the groundbreaking would be May 30, 2008 at 11:00 am. Chairman
Moyer made the motion that the Board set a special meeting for May 30, 2008 at
11:00 am for the
Set public hearing on
2008 Community Development Block Grant Application
Commissioner McGrady made the motion that the Board
schedules a public hearing for the 2008 Community Development Block Grant
presentation for Monday, June 2, 2008 at 7:00 pm. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Request for special
meeting regarding Henderson County Hospital Corporation revenue bond
refinancing
Chairman Moyer made the motion that the Board schedules a
special meeting for Wednesday, June 4, 2008 at 10:00 am to give final approval
of the revenue bond refinancing in connection with
Set public hearing for
economic development
Commissioner McGrady made the motion that the Board
schedules a public hearing on economic development incentive for project
performance plus for Monday, June 2, 2008 at 7:00 pm following the CDBG
application. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
CANE CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT - none
CLOSED SESSION
Commissioner McGrady made the motion for the Board to go
into closed session as allowed pursuant to NCGS 143-318.11 for the following
reasons:
1.
(a)(4) To discuss
matters relating to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses
in the area served by the public body.
2.
(a)(6) To consider the
qualifications, competence, performance, character, fitness, conditions of
appointment, or conditions of initial employment of an individual public
officer or employee or prospective public officer or employee; or to hear or
investigate a complaint, charge, or grievance by or against an individual
public officer or employee.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
ADJOURN
Commissioner McGrady made the motion to adjourn. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Attest:
______________________________________ ________________________
Teresa L. Wilson, Deputy Clerk to the Board William L. Moyer, Chairman