MINUTES
STATE
OF
The Henderson County
Board of Commissioners met for a regularly scheduled meeting at 5:30 p.m. in
the Commissioners' Meeting Room of the Historic Courthouse on
Those present were: Chairman William L. Moyer, Vice-Chairman
Also present were: Associate
County Attorney Sarah Zambon, Deputy Clerk to the Board Terry Wilson, Public
Information Officer Pam Brice, Sheriff Rick Davis, Captain Greg Cochran, Finance
Director J. Carey McLelland, County Engineer Marcus Jones, Planning Director
CALL TO ORDER/WELCOME
Chairman Moyer called
the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance
to the American Flag was led by Miss Naomi McIlvaine of the Mountain Lions 4-H
Club.
INVOCATION
Commissioner Mark
Williams gave the invocation.
SPECIAL RECOGNITION
Chairman Moyer
recognized our Public Information Officer, Pam Brice, who had received an award
for Excellence in Communications and Special Events for her work with respect
to the rededication of the Historic Courthouse.
She worked on the flyers, brochures, rack cards, etc. associated with
the rededication. She was recognized for
her work. On behalf of the Board
Chairman Moyer presented her with the award/trophy and thanked her for her hard
work.
Commissioner Chuck
McGrady explained that he attended an event the other day entitled “Are You
Smarter Than a Fifth Grader” which was held in connection with Blue Ridge
Community Health Services new Nursing Unit and Health Unit at
INFORMAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
4. Larry Rogers – Mr. Rogers represents
about 70 business and property owners in the community. He too, thanked the
Planning Board for all their hard work they have been doing, especially the
Land Development Code. He attended most of the meetings and this was long work
they did. In particular he asked the
Board to reappoint the three members that up for reappointment because they
have been part of this community for a long time and they do a good job.
5. Bill Harper – Mr. Harper reminded everyone of the
saying “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
He said there hasn’t been a problem with these board members so he
doesn’t see why the board would even consider thinking about changing them or
making any kind of changes. His
suggestion is to just keep what we’ve got.
“You’ve got all this much experience on there, why would you want to
change that?”
6. Andrew Bell – Mr. Bell wished to address amendment
#17 of the Land Development Code.
Chairman Moyer informed him that the Board would be holding a Public
Hearing on that issue at 7:00 p.m. and asked Mr. Bell if he could stay for that
part of the agenda. Mr. Bell said he
would.
7.
John Blatt – Mr. Blatt dittoed Mr.
Allison’s comments about the experience of the members who are currently on the
Planning Board as well as the three who are up for reappointment. He spoke from
experience as a City Planning Board member for many years. He stated it is very helpful to have folks who
are involved with real estate matters and zoning matters on a routine daily
basis. He stated the zoning ordinances are 300-400 pages long and you need
folks who are familiar with working with these things on a regular basis. From experience, he said they’ve had members
on the City Planning Board who after three years or six years have proudly
stood up and had questions about zoning allowances because these documents are
so tedious and so difficult. He stated
it is a great benefit to the county to keep folks on the board who do have
experience with these matters.
DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA
Chairman Moyer requested
the addition of “COPS Hiring Recovery
Application” as item “H” under Discussion Items.
Commissioner McGrady made the motion to approve the agenda
with the added item “H”. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA
Chairman Moyer requested
that consent agenda item “K – Transfer of Surplus Motorcycle to City of
Hendersonville” be pulled from the
Consent Agenda and have that discussion immediately following the remainder of
the Consent Agenda.
Commissioner McGrady made the motion to approve the Consent
Agenda with the exception of item K. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
The Consent Agenda
included the following:
Minutes
Draft minutes were
presented for board review and approval of the following meetings:
July 16, 2008 – Regularly Scheduled Meeting
March
2, 2009 Regular Scheduled Meeting
March 18, 2009 Regularly Scheduled Meeting
March 26, 2009 – Special Called Meeting
Tax Collector’s Report
Financial Report/Cash Balance Report – February 2009
Included for the
Board’s review and approval were the County Financial Report and Cash Balance
Report for February 2009.
The fiscal
YTD deficit in the Travel & Tourism Fund is due to the current economic
situation and less revenues being collected in a month that travel/lodging
business is typically slower resulting in less occupancy tax collections.
The fiscal YTD deficit
in the CDBG – Scattered Site Housing Fund, the Lewis Creek Restoration Project
Fund and the Public Transit Fund are temporary due to the timing of actual
expenditures and the subsequent reimbursement of the expenditures from grant
funds in succeeding months.
Suggested Motion:
I move that the Board of Commissioners
approve the February 2009
Henderson County Public Schools Financial Reports – February
2009
Provided were the
Henderson County Public Schools February 2009 Financial Reports for the Board’s
information.
Staff requested that the
Board consider approving the School System’s February 2009 Financial Reports as
presented.
The suggested motion was:
I move that the Board of Commissioners
approve the February 2009 Henderson County Public Schools Financial Reports as
presented.
Pawnshop license renewal – Etowah Pawn
Bruce Gosnell has
applied, pursuant to § 134-5 of the Henderson County Code, for a renewal of
this license to conduct the business of pawnbroker within
Under
Suggested motion:
I move that
the Board grants a renewal of a pawnshop license to Bruce Gosnell, as applied for.
Request for Public Hearing on new road names
The
Board is requested to set a public hearing for May 4, 2009 at 7 pm.
New Road Names
Suggested
Motion:
I move the Board set a public hearing on new road names for
May 4, 2009 at 7 pm.
Chateau on the Mountain, on-premises permit
A copy of the
application was provided on behalf of Chateau on the Mountain by Lee &
Jeanne Yudin.
Comment by the Board is
not required. If the Board does wish to
comment upon this, it should be done as a group.
Suggested motion:
Reappointment of Interim Tax Collector
As the Board has commenced a study of the
offices of the Tax Assessor and the Tax Collector, the results of which study
have still yet to be received (but are due to be received shortly), it is
suggested that Interim Tax Collector (and Tax Assessor)
Suggested
motion:
I move that the Board extend the appointment of
National
Suggested
Motion:
I move that the Board
adopt the attached Resolution proclaiming May 3 – 9, 2009 as
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Resolution
National
May 3-9, 2009
“Greening
Our Future”
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS, Many
Henderson County government initiatives and programs involve the protection of
valuable and vulnerable environmental resources in communities including the
county’s recycling program, the county’s energy reduction program and other
such programs; and
WHEREAS, The
National Association of Counties is the only national organization that
represents county governments in the
WHEREAS, The
National Association of Counties created National County Government Week in
1991 to raise public awareness and understanding about the roles and
responsibilities of the nation’s counties to meet the needs of the community;
and
WHEREAS, NACo
and
NOW,
THEREFORE,
be it resolved that we, the Henderson County Board of Commissioners, do hereby
proclaim May 3-9, 2009 as National County Government Week in
Spring 2009 Litter Sweep Resolution
The Spring 2009 LITTER SWEEP roadside cleanup,
organized by the NC Department of Transportation, will be taking place April 18th
through May 2nd, 2009.
Suggested Motion:
I move that the Board adopt the attached Resolution
designating April 18, 2009 – May 2, 2009 as LITTER SWEEP time in
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Resolution
Spring 2009 Litter Sweep
Whereas, the North Carolina Department of Transportation
organizes an annual spring statewide roadside cleanup to ensure clean and
beautiful roads in
Whereas, the Spring 2009 LITTER SWEEP roadside cleanup
will take place April 18 through May 2, 2009, and encourages local governments
and communities, civic and professional groups, businesses, churches, schools,
families and individual citizens to participate in the Department of
Transportation cleanup by sponsoring and organizing local roadside cleanups;
and
Whereas, Adopt-A-Highway volunteers, Department of
Transportation employees, Department of Correction inmates and community
service workers, local government agencies, community leaders, civic and
community organizations, businesses, churches, schools, and environmentally
concerned citizens conduct annual local cleanups during LITTER SWEEP and may
receive certificates of appreciation for their participation; and
Whereas, the great natural beauty of our state and a
clean environment are sources of great pride for all North Carolinians,
attracting tourists aid aiding in recruiting new industries; and
Whereas, the cleanup will increase awareness of the need
for cleaner roadsides, emphasize the importance of not littering, and encourage
recycling of solid wastes; and
Whereas, the 2009 LITTER SWEEP cleanup will celebrate the
21st anniversary of the North Carolina Adopt-A-Highway program and
its 6,000 volunteer groups that donate their labor and time year round to keep
our roadsides clean; and
Whereas, the LITTER SWEEP cleanup will be a part of
educating the children of this great state regarding the importance of a clean
environment to the quality of life in North Carolina;
NOW,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Henderson County, North Carolina Board of
Commissioners that April 18 through May 2, 2009 be LITTER SWEEP time in
Water Extension / Sewer Line Extension –
The City of
Suggested
Motion:
I move that the Board approve the
Item “K”
Transfer of Surplus Motorcycle to City of
Sheriff Rick Davis
requested authorization to declare one of the department’s current motorcycles
surplus and transfer it to the City of Hendersonville Police Department.
The Sheriff’s Office recently
received a large grant from the N.C. Governor’s Highway Safety Program (GHSP). This grant funds RADAR units, ALCO sensors
(portable breath test), 2 motorcycles and other pieces of equipment to help
address motor vehicle safety in our county.
Approximately 2 years
ago, in an effort to accomplish our traffic safety goals and reduce fuel
consumption, the Sheriff’s Office purchased two used motorcycles. This purchase
was made using Federal Asset Forfeitures (seized drug money).
Guidelines for using
Federal Asset Forfeiture money are very strict and comprehensive. When items are purchased they must be used
solely for law enforcement purposes.
Given this year’s grant
from GHSP, the Sheriff’s Office is requesting one motorcycle be declared
surplus by the Board of Commissioners and provided to the Hendersonville Police
Department at no charge. Miscellaneous costs such as transfer of title, tag,
etc. would be provided by the City of
The City of
Therefore, the Sheriff’s
Office is requesting one 2004, R1150RT-P bearing VIN#WB10499A74ZE95500 be
declared surplus and provided to the City of Hendersonville to help their
traffic safety programs which shall enhance the safety of all citizens of Henderson
County. Sheriff Davis respectfully
requested this item be placed on the Board of Commissioners’ consent agenda at
their next meeting (dated 24 March).
Sheriff Davis stated
that as part of the new grant
Chairman Moyer made the motion that the Board approve item
“K – Transfer of Surplus Motorcycle to the City of
NOMINATIONS
Chairman Moyer reminded
the Board of the following vacancies and opened the floor to nominations:
1. Child Fatality Prevention Team – 1 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
2. CJPP (Criminal Justice Partnership Program) – 2 vac.
There were no nominations
at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
3. Equalization and Review,
Chairman Moyer stated
that last time new members were appointed but the Board did not appoint the
Chair which the Board has to do. Commissioner
McGrady made the motion to appoint Don Dalton as Chair. Mr. Dalton has
indicated that he would be willing to serve in that capacity. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
4.
Chairman Moyer stated
there are three vacancies. The Board heard some public comments at the
beginning of the meeting regarding this Board.
Commissioner Young
nominated Boyce (Tommy) Laughter and Steve Dozier.
Commissioner Williams
nominated Mike Cooper.
Commissioner McGrady
nominated Ms. Guri Andermann and Jerry David.
There were no other
nominations.
Chairman Moyer explained that these nominations would be rolled to the next
meeting and the Board will be polled at that time. Currently we have five
nominees for three vacancies.
5.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
6. Juvenile Crime Prevention Council – 9 vac.
Chairman Moyer stated
there are a number of vacancies but position #2 must be filled by the Chief of
Police in the County or his designee.
Commissioner Messer nominated Eric Summey as the appointee of Fletcher
Chief of Police, position #2. There were no other nominations. Chairman Moyer made the motion to accept
Mr. Summey by acclamation. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
7. Nursing/Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee – 1
vac.
Chairman Moyer explained
that Mark Haines is currently serving in position #11 and is willing to be
reappointed. Commissioner McGrady nominated Mark Haines for reappointment. Chairman Moyer made the motion to accept Mr.
Haines by acclamation. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
8. Senior Volunteer Services Advisory Council – 1 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
9. Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) – 1 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
Chairman Moyer explained
that Richard Stewart is currently serving in position #1 and is unable to serve
another term. Commissioner McGrady nominated Robert Delwiche on recommendation
of the Chair of that committee. There were no other nominations. Chairman Moyer made the motion to accept Mr.
Delwiche by acclamation. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Commissioner McGrady
addressed the public comments concerning the Planning Board appointments.
He stated that he can
support all of the three that are up for reappointment. His problem is with the
entire composition of the Planning Board with seven of the nine members
affiliated in some way with development, whether as contractors, realtors,
surveyors, or whatever. The overall
composition of the Board is what his issue is. He wishes there was a way to
address that in some fashion – to deal with the perception issue that we have.
He thinks all the members are well qualified and he is comfortable with any one
of these people being reappointed.
COPS HIRING RECOVERY
PROGRAM APPLICATION
The Sheriff asked that
the Board of Commissioners approve the filing of the COPS Hiring Recovery
application as provided. If approved,
this grant will pay 100% for three years for seven positions. Six of these positions would be in the patrol
division and one would serve in the courthouse security division. Although the grant covers three full years
for these positions, the County is obligated to cover the fourth year for the
positions. However, the County is not
obligated to maintain the positions after the fourth year per the grant. This grant does not cover equipment, but the
Sheriff has planned to budget all related equipment within his regular
departmental budget or with forfeiture money.
Commissioner Young made the motion that the Board approves
and authorizes the Sheriff to submit this application for the COPS Hiring
Recovery Program application. All voted
in favor and the motion carried.
ADoption of financing
resolution
Carey McLelland explained that before the Board is the
issue of approving and authorizing the execution and delivery of the proposed
installment financing contract and certain related documents and instruments
under which the County would obtain financing pursuant to Section 160A‐20 of the North Carolina General Statutes, as amended,
for there financing of the acquisition, construction, installation and
equipping of the County detention facilities located at 375 First Avenue, East
in Hendersonville, North Carolina, including there funding of the outstanding
$9,065,000 Certificates of
Participation, Series1999 (Henderson County Project) Evidencing Proportionate
Undivided Interests in Rights to Receive Revenues Pursuant to an Installment
Financing Contract with the County, as described in the notice of public
hearing that was published on March 3, 2009 in the Times‐News and under which the County would secure there
payment by it of moneys advanced pursuant to such installment financing contract by granting a security interest
in the Detention Facilities and certain related property.
The final interest rate remains at 3.64%. Mr. McLelland tried on several occasions to get that lowered but the rate has moved a little bit upward with the bank. The amount we are refinancing is $5,092,000 and the estimated total net interest savings over the remaining ten years is $280,000. The Local Government Commission (LGC) will be approving this transaction tomorrow and we expect to try to close next week, either on Tuesday 14th or Thursday 16th. Mr. McLelland explained that there is one item in the resolution that needs to be changed and it has to do with a pubic hearing date, instead of March 3 it should say March 6.
Commissioner Williams made the motion
that the Board adopts the “Resolution Approving An Installment Refinancing of
Detention Facilities In Henderson County And Authorizing The Execution And
Delivery Of Documents In Connection Therewith” attached to the agenda with the
one change in the public hearing date from March 3 to March 6. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
CHILDREN AND FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER PRESENTATION
Maurean Adams, Executive Director of the
Children and
In October 2007 the United Agenda for Children hosted a community event called
Speak Out for Kids. At this event nearly 300 local residents who
demographically represented
· Henderson County Department of Public Health, Tom Bridges
·
·
· Dr. Charlotte Riddle, Local Pediatrician completing fellowship at Greenville Children’s Hospital
·
·
· United Agenda for Children, Elisha Freeman
·
Community
Foundation of
·
·
· Partnership for Health, Terry Wallace
We ask you to consider making
appointment to this team. We’ve applied
to participate in this academy and if accepted we will be able to send six of
these team members on behalf of
Our message tonight is first of all we want to thank you for the support of the school nurse program and encourage you to make sure we don’t lose ground this year. We need your support in holding onto our current number of school nurses while we can work together on a plan that makes sense for our community and best serves our children in the long run.”
Maureen Adams then brought up the fact that Commissioner Mark Williams was on the winning team at “Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?” She stated that one of the things she does in her spare time is she sits on the Board of the Blue Ridge Community Health Services. She was really interested in this because it launched one of the new community based health centers. As a spin-off from them all meeting together was a partnership between the schools and the community based health centers that allows better access to health care. In talking about this there is some confusion about the difference between a school nurse and a community based health center. She explained some of the similarities and some of the differences:
School Nursing School
Based
No Charge to Student Charges student for services
Provides services to all students Provides services to students who are signed up
Communicable Disease control & prevention Must have parent permission to
access
Oversees state immunization program health
records
for
all students Provides
physical exams
Maintains school health records Diagnoses
and treats illness and provides
Serves as member of interdisciplinary team written
prescription
for
learning problems and follows up Provides over the counter medication
admin.
on
referrals Provides
nutrition counseling on site
Oversees medication administration and Provides
mental health counseling on site
trains
staff HIPPA
Mass Screenings: vision, BMI and follows up
Case Management (IHP and
EAP)
Provides required
federal and state Only
overlapping services (both perform)
mandated training Triages
health problems
Home visits Provides emergency care
FERPA/HIPPA Reviews
and administers immunizations
Injury report follow up and risk
management Provides mental
health screening and referral
Community resource
referral
Ms. Adams explained that
school nurses are public health nurses. One of the main things they do is make
sure every child that comes into the school has their immunizations. Small Pox is creeping back into our public
school systems and that is part of what the school nurses do is to make sure
that public health issues are managed and handled within the school environment. In addition, they also provide liaison work
to the real Doctor.
The school based health
centers are a real Doctor. They are actually a medical practice. They are funded by the Federal Government so
we can draw down money from that aspect.
They are placed usually in the lowest income schools so children that go
to those schools can just leave class, walk down the hall, get the cold taken
care of, Mama comes to pick up and they get a charge.
Public Health Nursing
and Nurse Services are free. Community
based health centers come with a charge/fee but they do improve access to
health care for many students. They can
also get access to Federal dollars to provide Mental Health support and right
now that’s very limited to our public school system. There are lots of great
assets in having both but it’s really not a one or the other.
Chairman Moyer made the motion to designate Commissioner
Chuck McGrady as the Board of Commissioners’ member on the
FY 2009 THIRD QUARTER FINANCIAL UPDATE
Current Year Expenditures
Revenues
Sales Tax Revenues
Mr. Wyatt stated this
is one of our indicators of the economy. He reminded the Board that last year,
late in the budget process, we reduced our sales tax projections and that
decision has proven to be very sound. We are one of the few counties in NC that
is exceeding its budgeted amount, due to that projection. In our year-to-date
we’re about $400,000 ahead but he doesn’t have a lot of confidence in the
State’s numbers, especially when it comes to month to month numbers.
Mr. Wyatt explained
that these are state collected taxes.
They are county taxes by statute but the state collects and disperses
these revenues. The Commissioners are
aware of the fact that we have found discrepancies in the numbers. Temporarily
Sales Tax & Other Revenue Issues
Carey McLelland stated
there have been 2-3 issues so far related to sales tax distribution, snafus at
the state level and Department of Revenue.
We lost approximately $380,000 - $420,000 of our Article I 1% sales tax
back in August which raised a big red flag. He immediately talked with the
Department of Revenue and they confirmed that there was a mistake. Our money
went somewhere else and we got it back in the October distribution. Following that, a couple more issues cropped
up. One had to do with the November
distribution. It dipped very low as was anticipated, even with the holiday
shopping. We expected December to follow but we got a pleasant surprise. Our December distribution was $600,000 more
than November. The communication was that the Department of Revenue cut it off
at a certain point in November and possibly some of the receipts from November
didn’t get entered in that month and were rolled over into December which
artificially inflated December which makes it very difficult to plan from month
to month on what you’ll get. He stated that the third issue relates to the
Article #46 Sales Tax – eight counties got that Ľ cent passed and for the eight
months since May (when it was passed) the Department of Revenue was
distributing that to those eight counties and was doubling the money that was
being sent to them. Part of that money
was going into the wrong pot of money.
Some of that money was going into the Article #39 1% sales tax due to a
computer programming error. When it gets
into that pot of money it affects us, affecting our distribution. Those
counties are going to have to pay that money back over the next eight months
and it means that we, as a part of that distribution of the Article #39, are
going to lose a bit of our money over those next eight months. Our first month is $3,900 and it will then
decrease over the next seven months. Mr. McLelland explained that we’ve had a
lot of difficulty this year with distributions and in trying to plan and see
where we’re gonna be by the end of the year.
Fortunately we are up. The latest
information Mr. McLelland has from the association is that the next
distribution we get, next week, is gonna go back down. He’s expecting some of
that $400,000 to disappear.
Carey McLelland
explained the following:
|
|
FY
2009 Budget |
Revenue
Lost Feb.
2009 |
FY
2009 Received (as of 4/1/09) |
Needed
to Make
Budget |
|
ADM |
$750,000 |
$51,444 |
$502,142 |
$247,858 |
|
Lottery |
$900,000 |
$285,599 |
$560,683 |
$339,317 |
The first column is
the approved budget for this year for both of these revenue sources. The second
column is due to the Governor taking away the February distribution to help
cash flow issues at the State level. We get these distributions on a quarterly
basis. What we have received in the third column is where the Board recently
approved us pulling down what balances we had in those accounts. Mr. McLelland stated that money is in the
bank, as of April 1. The last column is
what we need to make budget. The latest information Mr. McLelland has seen is
not to expect the final distribution in May for the ADM funds. He still hopes
we will see the lottery monies but we could have shortfalls in both these
revenue sources. Mr. Wyatt said that
under the Constitution the Governor has an obligation to balance the budget and
we are the low man on the totem pole. He
is not optimistic regarding ADM funds. We are also way off target with our
Register of Deed’s deed excise stamp tax revenue.
Recess
Chairman Moyer called
a brief recess
PUBLIC HEARING – PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
2008 ANNUAL TEXT AMENDMENT (TX-2008-05)
Commissioner Messer made the motion for the Board to go into
public hearing. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
Anthony Starr reminded
the Board that the Henderson County Land Development Code (LDC) was adopted
with the anticipation that it would be reviewed each year and amended as
needed. This is the first annual review
since the LDC’s adoption on September 19, 2007.
At the Board’s January
5, 2009 meeting, Staff provided a brief overview of the text amendments that
would be presented to the Board for its review.
On March 2, 2009 the Board scheduled a public hearing on the proposed
text amendments. A table listing all of
the proposed text amendments (See Attachment 1) and a detailed description of
all of the proposed text amendments to the LDC (See Attachment 2) has also been
provided for the Board’s review. The
proposed amendments address a range of issues including emergency vehicle access,
some community character and design standards, clarifications to portions of
the code text, and staff or Board concerns and/or suggestions,.
The Planning Board
reviewed the proposed LDC text amendments at its November 20, 2008 and December
18, 2008 meeting. The Planning Board
voted unanimously (5-0) to send forth a favorable recommendation on the
attached proposed LDC text amendments (See Attachment 2) excluding text
amendments 17 and 21. At its January 15,
2009 meeting, the Planning Board considered text amendments 17 and 21 and voted
(7-1) to send forth an unfavorable recommendation on these two amendments. The Environmental Advisory Committee reviewed
text amendments 16, 17, 18 and 21 at its meeting on February 5, 2009 and voted
unanimously to send forth a favorable recommendation on these four text
amendments.
Please refer to
attachment listing the text amendments.
PUBLIC
NOTICE:
Before
taking action on the request, the Board of Commissioners must hold a public
hearing. In accordance with §200A-314(B)
and 200A-338(A) of the Henderson County Land Development Code and State Law,
notices of the April 6, 2009, public hearing regarding text amendment
TX-2008-05, were published in the Hendersonville Times-News on March 18, 2009
and March 25, 2009 (See Attachment 3).
Planning Staff recommends that the Board of
Commissioners approve the proposed Land Development Code 2008 annual text
amendments (TX-2008-05). The following
motion has been provided if the Board supports the proposed text amendments to
the LDC.
Public Input
1. Andrew Bell – Mr. Bell lives on
2. Dave Lowles – Mr. Lowles represented
the Environmental Advisory Commission. He referenced the Strategic Plan; Goal
#2 is to responsibly manage growth and its impact. Strategy 2.1 is to take a
leadership role in sewer and water planning. Strategy 2.2 is to direct growth
to areas where essential services and infrastructure are present and to protect
sensitive natural areas. Further down in
that document is Goal #4 which is to protect and preserve the county historic
and natural resources and Strategy 1 is reduce farmland loss. Mr. Lowles stated
that sewer and water impacts both of those goals. He encouraged the Board to stick with their
goals developed in the strategic plan.
3. Angela Fernadini – Ms. Fernadini
suggested having a low cap number on the amount of housing units, currently there
are text amendments for at least 300 units or more and she feels that is
unfathomable to have a housing development of 300 units. She thinks a statement should be made in
favor of affordable housing by saying no to gated communities.
Chairman Moyer stopped
Ms. Fernadini here and explained that the only amendments being considered
today are the ones presented here today (these have been noticed). He stated
that the only relevant comments are those on the amendments before the Board
today.
Ms. Fernadini spoke to
amendment #17 requiring subdivisions to prove 60% of the lots have adequate
water, saying she supports that. She then addressed the limitation or
prevention of package plants for certain zoning districts; she feels instead
that more regulations should be put on package plants. She stated that the
package plants in themselves are not necessarily bad for the environment. It
deals more with how they are managed and monitored. She has a concern that if
we don’t have package plants then the other viable option would be to extend
sewer lines which negatively affects our rural character. She feels there
should be some kind of safeguard that master plan and development plan
approvals and vested rights would only occur if the applicant owns the land. She felt the Board should support text
amendment #4 which requires applicants to reapply for approvals after four
years and they have to go by the regulations in place at the time. She thinks
the Board should support allowing more solar panels and wind turbines in all
districts. She stated that a 6-8’ wind blade on a wind turbine is not big
enough to support power for a small house that’s only about 1,000 square feet;
however, allowing at least a 10’ wind turbine blade would provide 1500 watts of
power which is enough to run a small house of about 1,000 square feet.
4. Richard Freudenberger – Mr. Freudenberger
addressed amendment #17, encouraging the Board to support the 60% proposed
ruling, stating that the idea all along has been to control the sprawl and growth
in the county by limiting infrastructure. Also we are protecting not only the
buyers of the property but also the developers themselves. He thinks that if
water is not available perhaps they should not be building there. They may be
better serves by looking for another place to build. It may be within the county but it may not be
that particular spot. Mr. Freudenberger stated that we don’t encourage people
to build in swamps and we don’t encourage people to build on extremely steep
slopes and maybe we shouldn’t encourage them to build in places where there
isn’t water available.
Mr. Freudenberger
addressed amendments #11 and #12, stating he thinks with the energy situation
looming in the future that anything we can do to support small scale renewal electricity
generation should be encouraged as long as it’s safe. The situation with solar
infrastructure and “green” jobs in this area is a very promising one. He stated
there is a lot of misconception about wind turbines. He thinks people are
confusing some of the larger megawatt turbines with the small scale units. He
serves on the advisory board of Appalachian State University’s Tech.
Department. They have a very large and
successful wind initiative program where they identify sites, notify landowners
of their potential for wind energy, and advise people on their tax credits and
other financial incentives. These newer
machines are not noisy, not particularly unsafe; many of them do not need to be
more than 40 or 50, possibly 60 feet high.
Most of the recommendations that Anthony Starr mentioned were very
reasonable ones. A turbine of between 8 and 12 to 15 foot rotor is enough to
serve a household and should be encouraged, not discouraged. They are not
noisy. They are not unattractive, some of the older ones may have been but the
new ones are very sleek and streamlined and they can be painted any color you
want, I suppose. He thinks it is important not to dismiss that. He thinks the
Board needs some technical input before making a decision on that wind turbine
decision.
5. Rebecca Johnson – Ms. Johnson is new to
the area. She said that there is a
fabulous new school being built – Hillandale Elementary. She is concerned because there is no
full-time school nurse; she has a recently diagnosed diabetic child. With the
R-1 proposals for all these units and all these possible extra people along
I-26 and Hwy. #25, how is that going to affect our children in the school
system when we don’t have a full-time nurse as it is?
Chairman Moyer stated
that obviously any time there is building; the Board has to try to figure out
the ripple effect on schools, nurses, roads, and everything. That is a factor the Board will have to
consider.
Ms. Johnson stated that
the school teachers are responsible for a lot of things besides educating our
children. Her son has been given shots in the school district by the school
counselor who is on the diabetic care team. She asked with all these extra
children going into the school system and with possible special needs she wonders
how that will affect these decisions.
6. Stephanie Lowder – Ms. Lowder is a new
citizen of the area, having lived here for less than a year. She pleads for the
resurrection of two words as the Board considers the Land Development Code and
the specific amendments – activist (she suggested the use of “active citizen”)
and conserve, conservative, conservation.
She stated that conservation simply means that we keep whatever resource
we’re talking from being wasted, destroyed, or lost. She feels that there are good common goals
and objectives. She also believes that
smart growth and smart development and profitable businesses can all be
achieved if we keep these things in mind. She believes that the majority of
these amendments will help us to conserve this beautiful place.
7. David Weintraub – Mr. Weintraub
represents the Environmental Conservation Organization and the 500 members,
most of which live in
Commissioner McGrady made the motion for the Board to go out
of public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Chairman
Moyer
stated that he has no issue with amendments #1 - #11 and has heard no issues
raised regarding them from the Board nor the public. Regarding #12, wind turbine – he feels the
Board needs to look further into this issue before approving this amendment.
With respect to the remainder of the amendments, he has no issue except for #
22. He is not convinced nor understands
why we need to raise the density requirements from what we have. He has not seen any compelling reason to do
so or any real justification. It seems to him that it does substantially raise
the density though we can’t quantify exactly how much. He would have problems
with #22.
Commissioner
McGrady has
no issue with amendment #22. With the
discussion regarding the wind turbines he agreed that the Board should become
more educated on the issue. He addressed the different recommendations the
Board received from the Planning Board and our Environmental Advisory Committee
with respect to two of the amendments. It appears that the Etowah/Horse Shoe
folks’ recommendation is largely consistent with where the Environmental
Advisory Committee comes in.
His hope is that the Board will clear off
tonight those recommendations that are complexly non-controversial but he is
quite prepared to actually move on amendment #17 and #21, adopting the position
of the Environmental Advisory Committee.
Chairman
Moyer
clarified that as far as amendment #17 he would go further. To say that you’re going to have a community
well does not solve the problem.
Commissioner
Williams questioned
Anthony Starr regarding amendment #8 – in terms of designation of R2-MH and
going to R2R, while that’s really not a major issue are there many significant
differences between the R-2 and what is being proposed as R2R?
Anthony Starr stated that while they are similar
and are the same with regards to density, there are a number of uses that are
different between the two. The R2-MH
would still allow single-wide manufactured homes whereas the R2 only allows
double-wides. There are also a number of
office uses and rural business uses that are allowed in the R2-MH that are not
allowed in the R2. Commissioner Williams
stated this wasn’t a major issue.
Commissioner Williams addressed amendment #4 in
terms of development plans and the four year term. I can envision that we’re
probably going to see a large number of developments which have been through
one point in time will very likely come back through. He feels that is a relatively short period of
time, particularly given the fact that at this point there has been no cut off
point. He questioned if there had been discussion in terms of those years?
Anthony Starr answered that the Development Plan
approval currently allows automatic two years and then you’re eligible for some
extensions. The extensions may count also in terms of restarting the clock.
Discussion was about reasonable time to complete a development and then have a
minimum of two years following. Anthony stated that as long as they are moving
through the development plans, there won’t be a problem. Commissioner Williams
stated he is OK with that.
Commissioner Williams then addressed amendment
#12, stating he doesn’t oppose the use of wind turbines but stated there is a
lot to be gained and it is worth investigating this issue further as a special
use.
Commissioner Williams addressed amendment #17,
stating he opposes this. He feels that we still have a relatively new Land
Development Code. It has been in place
now for less than 2 years. A great deal
of time and input went into it. He feels
that a great number of restrictions have been imposed in comparison to where we
were before this process started. In his opinion, this is a major change for an
ordinance that is still relatively new and somewhat unproven, particularly
given the current environment we’re in with economic conditions. He feels that
if we require proof of 60% of the lots, it becomes a bit subjective of how that
is done. He stated that the developer
should be doing due diligence but if a developer is willing to take the risk of
not having done the due diligence, then that falls on that developer. “Whenever
those extensions have been granted, it has not been an expense to the
taxpayers. Those expenses have been
covered by the individuals doing the developments so I don’t want the public to
get the wrong idea that when we have approved extensions, I can’t think of a
single incidence whenever – since I’ve been on this Board that we’ve approved
those extensions, that it was paid for by taxpayers money. It was paid for by the money of the
developer. That, I just felt like needs
to be cleared up. I would favor something more along the lines of clauses and
conditions which it is my understanding that Polk County might be using
something of a similar nature that alerts potential buyers, it alerts
developers and buyers of individual lots if there is no guarantee of water
there that they understand going into it. Then let them assume that risk and
decide if they want to assume that risk or not assume that risk by going
forward with the purchase. To say that
anyone has to go to the point of drilling that number of wells in advance,
putting in whatever roads may be required to do that, is going to be very
costly on the front end and there are those who could care less about
that. I say let that be the choice of
those that are doing the development and those that are buying the lot and let
it be known that just because water may not be there, may not be available is
not an automatic guarantee that the county is gonna come to the rescue and
approve the granting or the extension of water lines even though it may be that
the developer is willing to pay for that extension. So I would oppose amendment
#17.”
Commissioner Williams addressed amendment #21 –
in terms of the package plants in lieu of septic. He would rather have a system
in place that has some controls and have a greater level of monitoring than
perhaps a multitude of septic tanks. He
is in favor of that option with greater controls. Commissioner Williams is in favor of allowing
that as a permitted use in R3 and R4.
Commissioner
Young addressed
amendment #12, agreeing that we need more information before voting on it. He stated he is not prepared to vote on the
60% of the lots having potable water, amendment #17. He also feels that a
package plant is as safe or more safe than septic tanks as far as groundwater
is concerned, amendment #21.
Commissioner
Messer addressed
the amendments, stating he is OK with going along with the Planning Board and
the other Board’s recommendations but he feels the Board should have another
workshop on these amendments.
Commissioner McGrady stated that it looked like
there was consensus to go forward with respect to a large block of
non-controversial ones. Then those that either need separate votes or more
discussion, then so be it. He suggested that the Board go ahead and pass the
amendments that they all agree upon.
Chairman
Moyer made the motion to approve text amendments #1 to #11 inclusive, #13 to #16 inclusive and #18 to
#20 inclusive. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Chairman Moyer suggested the Board ask staff to
get additional information with respect to item #12 regarding the wind
turbines. There was no further discussion.
Chairman
Moyer made the motion to ask for additional information on amendment #12 and
bring it back for discussion when that information is ready. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
Chairman
Moyer made the motion to set amendment #22 aside for more information and
discussion, get a better idea of how much of the county will be affected, and
look at the areas. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Chairman Moyer stated that leaves amendments #17
and #21 and there is a significant difference of opinion on these two
amendments. He suggested setting #17 and
#22 aside for further discussion when the Board deals with #12 and #22 and be
prepared to take a vote at that time. He stated that they will try to schedule
all these within 30 days.
Chairman
Moyer made the motion to set aside for further information and discussion
amendments #17 and #21 and to bring those back for discussion with items #12
and #22 within 30 days. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Recess
A short recess was called to change tapes.
TRANSPORTATION
STIMULUS FUNDING
Anthony Starr and Marcus Jones presented parts
of this item.
Planning Staff has researched possible grant sources for a
CNG fueling facility and transit vehicles for the
This proposed action will precede the County’s application
for Federal Transit Administration 5340 (stimulus) dollars for
Allocation of 5340 Capital Transit Dollars (FTA Stimulus)
· Local FTA stimulus
formula allocation to Asheville Metro Region is $2,590,439 for transit-related
uses (vehicles, equipment, facilities)
· Henderson County
Allocation is $585,841 based on existing agreement with
· No local match required
Federal 5340 Requirements
· All expenditures must be
transit related
· All funds must be
obligated (Construction or vehicle contract) within 180 days (clock started
March 6, 2009)
· No FTA regulations for
capital construction will be waived (Feasibility Study & Environmental
Assessment)
· FTA construction
requirements are considerable and time consuming
· Applications are due
July 1
· Most transit agencies
are focusing on using stimulus funds for vehicles and equipment due to time
constraints and FTA rules
Federal 5340 Program (Stimulus)
· Transit fleet has
serious replacements needs
· Can use funds to
purchase conventional fuel vehicles or CNG vehicles
· Decision on funding CNG
station is required prior to ordering CNG transit vehicles
·
STP-DA Stimulus Funds
· STP-DA = Surface
Transportation Program – Direct Attributable
· MPO’s can decide to
spend these funds on range of transportation projects
· French Broad MPO (FBMPO)
is accepting applications for the STP-DA funds
· Examples of types of
projects include sidewalks, bikeways, intersection improvements, and transit.
· $6 million in stimulus
funds available to French Broad MPO
· 20% local government
match required
· Applications due April
30, 2009 to FBMPO
· Could fund CNG station
and CNG transit vehicles with this program
CNG Station
· Could apply for STP-DA
funding with FBMPO
· Station cost estimated
at $310,000
· Need to convert transit
fleet to CNG as part of station construction for project eligibility
§ CNG Transit Bus costs
are $245,000 each
§ CNG Para-transit
vehicles are $65,000 each
§ Capital upfront costs
are more but operation expenses are up to 40% lower over life of vehicle
(example follows)
§ Future replacement
vehicles could be funded through traditional funding sources at a 10% local
match
§ Significant local fund
savings in the form of match requirements and lower fuel and maintenance costs
will be realized.
5311
Program Stimulus Funds
· Rural fixed route and
ROAP programs are contracted with WCCA also for operations
· 5311 Stimulus funds will
pay 100% of vehicle replacement costs
· Vehicle fleet is old and
several vehicles need replacement
· WCCA could apply for CNG
replacement vehicles
§ 8 Vehicles needed at a
cost of $65,000 each
§ Total cost of 8 CNG
vehicles is $520,000
§ Will reduce future local
match requests and operation match request to the County for this program
Transit
– CNG Project
Cost
Summary
|
CNG
Fueling Station |
$310,000 |
$62,000
local match for STP-DA funds (split
50/50 with |
|
Rural
NCG para-transit |
$520,000 |
No
local match for 5311 funds |
|
CNG
Fixed route buses (3) & urban
para-transit vehicle (1) |
$800,000 |
Use
5340 funds of $555,000 (no match) & STP-DA funds at
$196,000 with $49,000 local 20% match |
|
Total Cost |
$1,630,000 |
Total
county match of $80,000 or 4.9% match ($11K total local $ with |
Capital
and Fuel Cost Comparisons (3 buses)
Diesel CNG
· Annualized Capital Cost
(10 yr cycle) $ 66,000 $ 75,000
· Annual Fuel Costs $
68,000 $ 45,000
$134,000 $120,000
Notes
· Capital Costs do not
include depreciation
· Fuel Costs are based on
FY08 History of $2.70 per gallon and $1.8 per gallon equivalent for 25,000
gallons
· Costs do not include
cost of compression or station maintenance
· Some maintenance savings
will be realized with CNG models
· Reflects replacement of
diesel or gasoline vehicles every 4 years (LTV)
· Current vehicle models
are not good candidates for CNG conversion (range, warranty issues)
Recommendations
· Pursue STP-DA funds
which require a local match in the amount of $111,000 to replace one
fixed-route vehicle and build a CNG fueling facility; and
· Use 5340 funds to
purchase two CNG buses & one CNG para-transit vehicle; and
· Endorse WCCA efforts to
purchase eight CNG para-transit vehicles; and
· Pursue other sources of
funding for alternative fuel upgrade should they become available with no local
match
Benefits
· Replaces 12 needed
vehicles for far less local match than typically required
· Obtain a CNG fueling
station for use by County, City of
· Reduces County costs by
shifting expenditures from operations to capital where federal grant match is
better
· Total improvements
estimated at $1.6 million with a 6.8% local match ($111,000)
Commissioner Williams
made the motion that the Board approve the requested local match for STP-DA
funding, in the amount of $111,000, with the understanding that this money will
be used to supply a local match for a CNG fueling station and a 28-passenger
replacement CNG transit bus for the County’s transit fleet which will also
facilitate the conversion of the transit fleet to CNG, using other grant
sources. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
UPDATE OF HOUSEHOLD
HAZARDOUS WASTE CENTER,
TOWN OF
WNC BEEF CATTLE COMMISSION LIVESTOCK MARKET
RESOLUTION
At
the November 19, 2008 Board of Commissioners meeting, the Board passed
unanimously voted in favor of a motion to support a Resolution of Endorsement
adopted by the WNC Beef Cattle Commission of WNC Communities. This Resolution
reviewed the need for a livestock market in
Commissioner
Williams stated that this is planned to be in
Commissioner
Williams made the motion that the Board adopt the attached Resolution as
presented, and authorize a contribution of $10,000 to be made to the livestock
market.
Chairman
Moyer stated this is not specific to
All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, on
November 19, 2008 the Henderson County Board of Commissioners supported a
Resolution of Endorsement adopted by the
WNC Beef Cattle Commission of WNC Communities; and
WHEREAS, the Resolution stated that the members of the WNC Beef Cattle Commission of WNC
Communities, in their meeting on October 28, 2008 listened intently to a progress report on a project to re-open a viable, long-term
livestock market in Western North
Carolina project first introduced at our
meeting one year ago, at which time it was strongly supported with members
participating in a feasibility survey;
and
WHEREAS, many of the 3000
livestock producers in Western North Carolina consider themselves burdened,
both by cost and time, due to the absence of a quality livestock market in the region; and
WHEREAS, the Commission empowered a subcommittee to explore the feasibility of re-opening the local
market; and
WHEREAS, the Tobacco Trust Fund Commission funded the feasibility study; and
WHEREAS, the feasibility study clearly indicates the market is viable
and timely for the reopening; and
WHEREAS, the sub-committee had dutifully
responded with a proposed market
that meets the criteria of a
viable, long-term market, with a high probability of success; and
WHEREAS, the
proposed location in
WHEREAS, International
Paper, Inc. is cooperating to make the site available in a
long-term, low cost lease; and
WHEREAS, numerous producers have given written pledges to utilize the
facility stated in the proposal for this location, provided it is a
competitive, viable, long-term market; and
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS, this proposed market provides the region
a long-term solution to the chronic
lack of reliable and adequate sized local market;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that we, the Henderson County Board
of Commissioners, do hereby authorize the County to make contribution toward
the livestock market to be constructed in
COPS HIRING RECOVERY PROGRAM APPLICATION this was an add-on
Sheriff Rick Davis
requested the Board of Commissioners approve the filing of a COPS Hiring
Recovery Program application. If approved, the grant will pay 100% for three
years for seven positions. Six of the
positions would be in the patrol division and one would serve in the courthouse
security division. Although the grant covers three full years for these
positions, the County is obligated to cover the fourth year for the positions.
However, the County is not obligated to maintain the positions after the fourth
year per the grant. This grant does not cover equipment, but the Sheriff has
planned to cover all related equipment within his regular departmental budget
or with forfeiture money.
Sheriff Davis stated
that one of the patrol positions is for animal services and one of the patrol
positions is for a specialist in forensics evidence. The Sheriff requested the
Board of Commissioners approve this application and the subsequent hiring of
personnel as authorized in the grant.
Following some
discussion, Commissioner Young made the
motion that the Board approve and authorize the Sheriff to submit this
application for the COPS Hiring Recovery Program application. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
STAFF REPORTS
There was nothing
further at this time.
There was nothing
further at this time.
IMPORTANT DATES
Chairman Moyer stated
that at the next Commissioners’ Meeting, April 15, facilities will be a
discussion item. Carey will update us on the amount of money that will become
available through debt service that will be paid off, other monies in capital
reserve and any sources. The Board will
also look at all the capital projects plus all the work that has been done to
figure out what to do to solve the courthouse overcrowding issue, the old
health department building, the old Chamber of Commerce building, etc. The
Board can hopefully lay the framework and decide if we need a special workshop
but we will kick that off at the meeting on April 15.
Set
Public Hearing Date for the Etowah and Horse Shoe Communities Draft Plan
The Etowah and Horse Shoe Communities
Advisory Committee, formed by the Board of Commissioners on September 4, 2007,
was responsible for developing and recommending a community-specific
comprehensive plan for the Etowah and Horse Shoe Communities. After meeting monthly for 1 year, holding two
public input sessions, and utilizing available research provided by
The Board indicated that they would like
to set a public hearing or public input session at its first meeting in
April. A public hearing is necessary for
the Board of Commissioners to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
Etowah and Horse Shoe Plan.
Several dates had been suggested and the
Commissioners all checked their calendars.
Commissioner
McGrady made the motion that the
Chairman Moyer informed the Commissioners
that the next Water Supply and Distribution Task Force meeting is tomorrow
afternoon at 3:00 pm.
Commissioner McGrady informed the
Commissioners that he and Commissioner Young would be meeting with the City of
CANE CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT – no
business
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
reason(s):
1. Pursuant
All voted
in favor and the motion carried.
ADJOURN
Commissioner McGrady made the motion to adjourn the
meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Attest:
Teresa L. Wilson Deputy Clerk to the Board William
L. Moyer, Chairman