MINUTES

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

COUNTY OF HENDERSON FEBRUARY 4, 2002

The Henderson County Board of Commissioners met for a regularly scheduled meeting at 5:30 p.m. in the Commissioners' Conference Room of the Henderson County Office Building.

Those present were: Chairman Bill Moyer, Vice-Chair Marilyn Gordon, Commissioner Grady Hawkins, Commissioner Don Ward, Commissioner Charlie Messer, County Manager David E. Nicholson, County Attorney Angela S. Beeker, and Clerk to the Board Elizabeth W. Corn.

Also present were: Planning Director Karen C. Smith, Assistant County Attorney Jennifer O. Jackson, Finance Director J. Carey McLelland, Assistant to the County Manager/Budget Analyst Selena Coffey, Public Information Officer Chris S. Coulson, Fire Marshal/Emergency Management Coordinator Rocky Hyder, Tax Collector Terry Lyda, Deputy Tax Collector Darlene Burgess, and Deputy Clerk to the Board/Volunteer Coordinator Amy Brantley.

CALL TO ORDER/WELCOME

Chairman Moyer called the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Chairman Moyer recognized a group of boy scouts from Troop #613 from Etowah. They meet at the Etowah United Methodist Church. The Scout Leader and the Assistant Scout Leader were also present. The Scouts are currently working on their communication badge and are required to attend a meeting. The Scouts and their leaders came forward and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag.

INVOCATION

David Nicholson gave the invocation.

SCOTT HAMILTON - COMMITTEE OF 100/CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Chairman Moyer recognized Scott Hamilton from the Chamber of Commerce to make an announcement. Mr. Hamilton explained that after several months of some activity on behalf of the Committee of 100 working with their allies through the N.C. Department of Commerce, the Community College System, Utilities, the Board of Commissioners, and the Town of Fletcher in working with a local industry in trying to secure a new product line that would come to Henderson County. The sad news is that if/and when we were to succeed in getting this project that would mean the closing of a facility in another state. The plant is looking to consolidate its operations and trying to streamline some of their operations and in doing so they realized that they were going to need to close a facility in another state and move that operation either to here (in Henderson County) or to Michigan.

Mr. Hamilton reported to the Board that Borg Warner Cooling Systems, located in the Cane Creek Industrial Park, has agreed to (based on the approval of local and State incentives) locate a new division here in Henderson County. That division is going to be plastic injection molded fans for cooling systems. Those fans will be made for light trucks and commercial vehicles. The initial investment for this project is around $4.6 million. The project will initially create 50 -55 jobs. The wages of those jobs will be above the average wage here in Henderson County and it would need to be that to be eligible for any local or State incentives.

This is a new line and will be a new division within this plant. It will help Borg Warner in the Cane Creek Industrial Park to diversify. One of the reasons they chose this facility was it had some available space to facilitate the location of the new machinery and equipment. The other reason was the partnerships that were involved and the efforts presented by the local governments.

One of the criteria involved in this project is the approval of local incentives. Mr. Hamilton requested the Board of Commissioners to set a public hearing for incentives for Borg Warner for the next regularly meeting, Wednesday, February 20, 2002. Chairman Moyer stated that the Board would set that public hearing under IMPORTANT DATES later in the agenda.

CANCELLATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING

Chairman Moyer stated that there had been a rezoning application filed on behalf of Hollabrook Farms. William Alexander, the agent and attorney for the Hollamon family , was present and was recognized at this time.

William Alexander explained that the Hollamon family and the principals of Hollabrook Farms, in view of recent public comments and issues arising relative to their petition, have asked the Board to cancel the scheduled public hearing for tonight. The purpose of this is to give them an opportunity on the ground to look at some options that may satisfy some folks concerned. They need to get some surveying done to accomplish that. In an effort to bring back to the Board something that may be more palatable to everyone, he asked that the Board cancel the public hearing for this evening until renotice.

Chairman Moyer stated that the Board would take action on this at 7:00 p.m., at the time the public hearing is scheduled.

DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA

Chairman Moyer proposed that the Board move Discussion Item AA- Update on the Blue Ridge Bike Bash@ to just after the Consent Agenda. Many people in the audience are interested in that item. He proposed moving the item up on the agenda so that the Board and the people in the audience would get an update on it prior to the scheduled AInformal Public Comments@. His hope was that moving it up would answer some of the questions that might be raised.

Commissioner Hawkins requested that the Board withdraw #14 under Nominations - ACommissioners Serving on Boards/Committees.@

Chairman Moyer asked that AWestern North Carolina Caucus@ be substituted as #14 under Nominations. The Board needs to take action on that one.

David Nicholson asked the Board to pull Staff Report AB- EMS Station.@ We are going to get a proposal from Pardee Hospital and this will allow them some time to prepare the proposal. Mr. Nicholson asked the Board to roll this item to the next Board meeting.

Chairman Moyer made the motion to approve the revised agenda. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

CONSENT AGENDA

Commissioner Ward requested item AC - Audit Services Proposal@ be pulled for some discussion as well as item AE- Etowah-Horse Shoe Fire & Rescue Lease Purchase Agreement.@

Chairman Moyer requested item AB - State ADM Fund Application@ be pulled for some discussion.

Chairman Moyer made the motion for the Board to approve the consent agenda with the exception of items AB, C, and E@. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

The CONSENT AGENDA consisted of the following:

Minutes

Minutes were presented for the Board=s review and approval of the following meetings:

December 18, 2001, regular meeting

January 7, 2002, regular meeting

Amendment to Transportation Advisory Committee Bylaws

At the Board=s meeting on January 16, 2002, the Commissioners discussed increasing the membership on the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) to a total of 18 members. The Board directed Staff to make the appropriate amendments to the TAC Bylaws and bring them back to the Board. Those amendments, as well as a corresponding amendment to the TAC Charter, have been made and approved by the Transportation Advisory Committee on January 24, 2002. Both of these documents were reviewed.

The County Manager believed that the amendments were consistent with the Board=s discussion on January 16, 2002, and recommended approval.

Financial Report - December 2001

Cash Balance Report - December 2001

Non-departmental expenditures in the General Fund include the annual premiums paid to the NCACC Insurance Pools for the County=s Worker=s Compensation and Property/Liability insurance coverage. These costs will be distributed out to each of the departments budgets prior to fiscal year-end.

The negative position in the Schools Capital Reserve Fund was created from the appropriated transfer of $1.2 million in October to the School Capital Projects Fund for the Fletcher Elementary School Project. As of December 31^st, the Schools Capital Reserve Fund had a positive fund balance of $908,610.88 subsequent to this transfer.

The negative position in the Emergency Communications Fund was due to the November annual payment ($122,277.61) made to Motorola for the lease of emergency communications equipment. This fund had a positive fund balance of $6,649.98 at December 31^st subsequent to this payment.

These reports were presented for information and for consent approval.

Henderson County Public Schools Financing Report - December 2001

The December School Financing Report was presented for information and consent approval.

Request for Improvement Guarantee for Rock Creek, Phase I - Mark Searcy, Applicant

Mr. Luther E. Smith, on behalf of Southern Development, Inc., had submitted an application for a subdivision improvement guarantee. Southern Development, Inc., would like to post a surety performance bond to cover the cost of road improvements in Phase I of a subdivision known as Rock Creek. The Rock Creek subdivision is located off Green River Road. Gravel roads are proposed, except where the developer intends to pave sections that will exceed 15% in grade. The Planning Board granted approval of the Master Plan of the entire Rock Creek subdivision as well as conditional approval of the Development Plan for Phase I on October 16, 2001.

Pursuant to Section 170-38 of the Henderson County Code, a developer may, in lieu of completing all of the required improvements prior to Final Plat approval, post a performance guarantee to secure the County=s interest in seeing that satisfactory construction of incomplete improvements occurs. One type of permitted guarantee is a surety performance bond. The developer intends to secure such a performance bond from Builder=s Mutual in the amount of $72,118.78, which includes the cost of the road improvements as well as the required contingency amount of twenty-five percent (25%). The proposed completion date for the improvements is January 4, 2003.

A draft Performance Guarantee Agreement was presented for the Board=s consideration. If the application is approved, the developer must submit a performance bond in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. The Assistant County Attorney must review the performance bond and certify the Agreement as to form prior to its execution by the Chairman and the applicant.

The County Manager recommended that the Board approve the application for an improvement guarantee for Rock Creek, Phase I, subject to the developer submitting a surety performance bond in accordance with the terms of the draft Performance Guarantee Agreement and subject to the Assistant County Attorney reviewing the performance bond.

Request for Improvement Guarantee for High Vista Falls, Phase V - NC Four C=s, LLC, Applicant

Mr. Bob Duffy, on behalf of NC Four C=s, LLC, had submitted an application for a subdivision improvement guarantee. NC Four C=s, LLC, would like to post an irrevocable letter of credit to cover the cost of road, drainage, water and sewer improvements in Phase V of the High Vista Falls subdivision. On September 25, 2001, the Planning Board granted approval of a revised Master Plan for the entire High Vista Falls project and conditionally approved a revised Development Plan for Phase V.

Pursuant to Section 170-38 of the Henderson County Code, a developer may, in lieu of completing all of the required improvements prior to Final Plat approval, post a performance guarantee to secure the County=s interest in seeing that satisfactory construction of incomplete improvements occurs. One type of permitted guarantee is an irrevocable letter of credit. The developer intends to obtain a letter of credit from Macon Bank in the amount of $144,150.00, which includes the cost of the road, drainage, water and sewer improvements as well as the required contingency amount of twenty-five percent (25%). The proposed completion date for the improvements is November 22, 2002.

A draft Performance Guarantee Agreement was presented for the Board=s consideration. If the application is approved, the developer must submit a letter of credit in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. The Assistant County Attorney must review the letter of credit and certify the Agreement as to form prior to its execution by the Chairman and the applicant.

The County Manager recommended the Board approve the application for an improvement guarantee for High Vista Falls, Phase V, subject to the developer submitting an irrevocable letter of credit in accordance with the terms of the draft Performance Guarantee and subject to the Assistance County Attorney reviewing the letter of credit.

Disposition of Surplus Personal Property - Old Jail Kitchen Equipment

There are certain pieces of kitchen equipment that remain in the former Henderson County Jail Facility that are no longer being used. Staff believes that this equipment is worth approximately $10,000. The County Manager, based on staff input, is of the opinion that the County is not likely to need the kitchen equipment and therefore requests that it be considered surplus and sold.

NCGS 160A-266 allows the Board of Commissioners to appoint an officer to dispose of personal property by private negotiation and sale when the personal property is valued at less than $30,000. NCGS 160A-267 requires that the County adopt a resolution authorizing the County Manager to dispose of the personal property by private sale at a negotiated price. The sale can only be consummated 10 days after the contents of the resolution are summarized in a notice and the notice is published. Those statutes were presented for Board review.

The County Manager recommended that the Board declare this kitchen equipment remaining in the Old Jail as surplus and authorize him to sell it through private negotiation and sale by adopting the prepared resolution.

Employee Recognition/Award

Debra Stephens

Presented for Board review were recognitions and awards received by County departments and/or employees. The Board of Commissioners had asked that these be included on the agenda for special recognition of our departments= and employees= achievements.

Mark Edney had submitted a memo recognizing Debra Stephens, a Residential Appraiser with the Henderson County Assessor=s Office who was admitted to the designation of a North Carolina Certified Appraiser with the North Carolina Association of Assessing Officers. This designation requires that you have five years experience in the Assessor=s Office, three years in real property appraisal, and several courses with the Institute of Government and the International Association of Assessing Officers.

Ms. Stephens has been an Assessor=s Office employee for nine yers.

A copy of the following certificates were presented for review:

C Certified North Carolina Appraiser

C Certificate of Completion, IAAO 102, Income Approach to Valuation

C Certificate of Completion, IAAO Course 311, Residential Modeling Concepts

C Certificate of Completion, County Real Property Appraiser

C Certificate of Completion, Course 1, Fundamentals of Real Property Appraisal

C Certificate of Completion, Fundamentals of Property Tax Listing and Assessing

Paramedic Awards

Tom Edmundson had submitted a memo announcing that several Emergency Service personnel received awards during the annual EMS dinner in December, as follows:

Paramedic Larry Gaddard was selected AParamedic of the Year@. He received a plaque and a check from Brian Easler Ford or outstanding service in the EMS field.

APurple Hearts@ were awarded to Paramedics Curtis Doi, Becky Owen, and City of Hendersonville Firemen Marvin Lancaster and Joey Drake for serious injuries received while working a vehicle accident on Highway 176 on September 7, 2001. Terri Lanning, former paramedic, also received the APurple Heart@ for injuries she received in 1999.

Mr. Edmundson said this is the first year we have awarded the APurple Heart@ and he hopes it will be the last. We felt we should have some way to honor those who gave so much.

AC - Audit Services Proposal@ - pulled by Commissioner Ward

Commissioner Ward mentioned formerly the Board had a system where they rotated the audit services. He questioned if we were still doing that.

Mr. Nicholson stated that at the Board=s direction, Staff had gone out for a three year proposal. The Board asked that Staff also go back and get a five year proposal from the firm we currently use. Mr. Nicholson recommended to the Commissioners that at least this coming year and hopefully with the following year too, that the Board award the contract to the current firm. We are getting ready to undergo a massive change in our financial statements with GASB 34. It will require us to restate our entire financial statements. He felt it was imperative to continue with the same firm. With the five year bid we locked in the price we will pay for that five year term.

The original agenda item was as follows:

Provided for the Board=s consideration and approval was the standard Contract to Audit Accounts and Engagement Letter from Crisp Hughes Evans LLP for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2002. The initial proposal from this firm beginning with the June 30, 1999 audit was approved by the Board for a three-year term with an option to extend the contract for audit services for two additional years. The initial three-year term expired with the completion of the June 30, 2001 audit. Their proposed $44,000 fee for the June 30, 2002 audit is the same fee quoted for this fiscal year at the time the County first contracted with Crisp Hughes Evans.

Staff recommended that the Board consider approving the Contract to Audit Accounts with Crisp Hughes Evans LLP for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2002.

Fiscal Year 2003 will bring about a major change in the way the County=s financial statements are presented due to the required implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement #34. This firm=s familiarity with the County and the excellent working relationship established with their staff will provide for an easier transition during implementation of this major reporting change.

Staff would also recommend that the Board consider retaining this firm for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2003 audit. The annual audit fee for Fiscal Year 2003 would be $47,000, which is the same fee quoted three years prior.

Commissioner Ward moved the approval of the audit services proposal. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

AE - Etowah-Horse Shoe Fire & Rescue Lease Purchase Agreement - pulled

Commissioner Ward stated that this item said that Etowah is purchasing a new truck. He asked if they were replacing one or adding one to the fleet.

Rocky Hyder explained that Etowah-Horse Shoe is adding a truck to the fleet. This would be the third or a reserve pumper. This is necessary to maintain their fire rating in that area because of the growth in the community over the past several years.

Mr. Ward questioned whether this had been through the Fire Advisory Board for their budget procedures. Mr. Hyder explained that it was reviewed first by the Fire & Rescue Advisory Board last year when the budget was proposed. It was approved at that time. It was reviewed again at the last Fire & Rescue Advisory Board meeting in January. There doesn=t seem to be any financial problem. They put down over $100,000 as a down payment for the vehicle.

The original agenda item was as follows:

Etowah-Horse Shoe Fire & Rescue is planning to purchase an Engine to help improve their response capacity and insurance rating. Etowah-Horse Shoe informed the Fire and Rescue Advisory Committee of its intent to purchase a NFPA 1901 standard pumper at the May 16, 2001 budget meeting. The Fire and Rescue Advisory Committee reviewed the lease/purchase agreement again at their January 21, 2002 meeting. The request was then forwarded to County Commissioners with unanimous approval.

Commissioner Ward made the motion to approve the lease/purchase agreement. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

AB - State ADM Fund Application@ - pulled

Chairman Moyer asked for some help on how the budget amendment ties into the explanation.

David Nicholson stated that the basic discussion here is the ADM application. As part of our funding plan put together for the schools several years ago, at their request we were going to use the ADM funds for purposes of paying for the routine ongoing capital whether that would be painting the walls, doing the floors or whatever. They sent the application that the Board approved to the State and they sent it back asking if there wasn=t a big project the funds could be assigned to. County Staff and the School officials reviewed it once again and suggested we swap wherever we=re spending ADM money and pay it with the sales tax money. We had been using the sales tax money for paying debt service. ADM money can be used for debt service. Following discussion, Mr. Nicholson told the Board that there was some confusion about whether the school officials want this budget amendment or not.

Mr. Nicholson asked the Board to only approve the filing of the ADM fund application, not approve the budget amendment at this time.

Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to approve the filing of the ADM fund application and roll the budget amendment to a further meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

The original agenda item was as follows:

Staff presented to the Board at the December 3, 2001 regular meeting, an ADM Fund Application, which was approved and subsequently submitted to the Office of State Budget and Management (OSBM) for further approval. OSBM returned the application with no action for the reasons stated in the letter from the School System=s Business Manager. After discussing the application with OSBM Staff, it was recommended that a revised application be submitted requesting to use ADM Funds for the purpose of paying school debt service, which is an eligible expense under the guidelines. Filing the application for this purpose would remove any restrictions with respect to using the funds for ongoing repairs and maintenance.

As stated in the letter from Ms. Shannon, the County will now use restricted sales tax dollars to pay for recurring school repairs and maintenance and use ADM funds for school debt service. This reallocation will not change the projected revenues and expenditures as outlined in the schools-funding plan.

A total of $580,578 in ADM Fund revenues was budgeted in the previous fiscal year ended June 30, 2001. However, an application was not submitted to OSBM last year. Therefore, these funds still remain in the State ADM Fund Account available for allocation by Henderson County.

The County=s current fiscal year budget includes an appropriation of $627,981 in ADM Fund revenues and expenditures. If the Board approves the application, the budget amendment for $580,578 increasing the current fiscal year=s appropriation to $1,208,559 will need to be approved also.

The County Manager recommended that the Board approve the updated ADM Application. He has met with the school officials and believes that this approach does not affect the County=s funding formula for school capital outlay.

UPDATE ON BLUE RIDGE BIKE BASH

Angela Beeker was asked to address the Board on the event that is being organized for the July 4, 2002 weekend, the Blue Ridge Bike Bash, which we have been told could involve as many as 30,000 people over a 4-day period.

In anticipation of the many questions that the Board and Staff have been receiving, Ms. Beeker has prepared a memo for the Board and reviewed that information with them.

The regulation of this event appears to be under the jurisdiction of both the State and the County with the State regulating the entire event directly and the County regulating certain aspects or activities of the event.

Mass Gatherings

The North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS 130A-252) require that a permit be issued by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources for a mass gathering. A mass gathering is any gathering of more than 5,000 in an open space for a period of more than 24 hours. From the information she had received thus far, it appears that the Blue Ridge Bash would be considered a Amass gathering@ for the purposes of requiring a State permit.

An application must be filed with the State and must contain the following information:

1. Name of applicant, sponsors and organizers

2. Location of mass gathering

3. Estimated number of people to be in attendance at any one time

4. Dates and hours for the event

5. Total time period involved

6. Map of area to be used showing:

1. Location of toilets

2. Lavatory and bathing facilities

3. Water Supply Sources

4. Areas of assemblage

5. Camping areas

6. Food service areas

7. Garbage and refuse storage and disposal areas

8. Entrances and Exits to public highways

9. Emergency ingress and egress roads

10. Additional information as required by DENR

An application fee of $100.00 is charged plus a fee to cover the expense to the State and to the relevant units of local government which arises on account of the mass gathering. Within 15 days after receipt of the application, DENR will review the application and inspect the proposed site. If the application and site meet the State requirements, a provisional permit will be issued. The applicant must then post a bond and provide proof of insurance. Five days prior to the event, DENR will inspect the site and facilities to see if all of the requirements have actually been met. The fees, including the anticipated cost to County government, must be paid by the applicant at that time. If the requirements are met, the final permit will be issued.

The State requirements associated with mass gatherings are very stringent. Ms. Beeker summarized them as follows:

7. The activity area must be of sufficient size to accommodate the number of persons expected to be in attendance at any one time.

8. No part of the perimeter of the activity and camping areas can be within 1500 feet of a residence unless the residence owner signs a waiver.

9. No part of the perimeter of the activity area can be within 1 mile of class I or class II reservoir, or within 3 miles of a protected watershed which drains into an A-1 stream that is used as a public water supply.

10. The camping area must be large enough to provide for safe drinking water and sewage collection and disposal.

11. A command post must be provided for use by the State, law enforcement and other regulatory agencies having jurisdiction (this would include the County).

12. The entrances and exits to public highways must be kept open to traffic at all times.

13. Adequate parking must be provided (1 space for every 4 persons).

14. A written security plan which must be approved by the Sheriff must be provided.

15. A dust control plan must be provided.

16. A fire prevention and control plan must be provided.

17. An emergency plan, including rapid evacuation and use of emergency egress roads, must be provided.

18. A plan for the provision of medical care must be provided. This plan must be approved by the Health Director.

19. A water supply from an approved source must be provided. If water is to be provided for drinking, washing, and bathing, water must be supplied at a rate of 12 gallons per day per person and a peak hour demand of six pints per person.

20. Toilet facilities must be provided at a rate of 1 toilet seat per 100 persons.

21. Appropriate solid waste collection and disposal facilities must be provided.

22. Food dispensing facilities must be provided at accessible and convenient locations. Health rules regarding sanitation must be followed.

23. Measures must be taken to control flies, mosquitoes, rodents, or other vermin.

24. Within 1 week after the end of the event, the area must be cleaned.

25. The noise at the perimeter of the site cannot exceed 70 decibels.

26. A lighting plan must be provided.

27. Directional signage for all of the facilities must be provided, including the location of the toilets, water supplies, solid waste receptacles, food stands, first aid facilities, and the command post.

The applicant must demonstrate that he meets each of the requirements above in order to qualify for a State permit. Ms. Beeker was not sure whether that would be possible or not, for example, consider the requirement that the perimeter of the activity area be at least 1500 feet from any residence. She had provided a map for the Board=s information which indicated the parcels having a residence on them that are within 1500 feet of the property boundary. The exact location of the residence on the parcel is unknown, however several of the parcels fall entirely within the 1500 feet zone and could, at a minimum, reduce the size of the activity area.

County Ordinances

In addition to the State permit requirements, there are several County ordinances which will come into play:

The Noise Ordinance

The County=s noise ordinance limits amplified sound to 80 decibels at the property boundary during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.) And 60 decibels during nighttime hours (11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). As the County=s ordinance for nighttime hours is more stringent, the County=s ordinance would govern nighttime noise limits. As the State=s limit of 70 decibels is more stringent for daytime hours, the State=s limit would control daytime hours.

Ms. Beeker stated that there is a provision in our local ordinance that would allow the applicant to apply to the Board of Commissioners for permission to exceed the noise limits by 10 decibels. The Board would have to find that it is a significant cultural event for the community (standard of judgement).

The Solid Waste Ordinance

The County=s Solid Waste Ordinance is somewhat duplicative of the State=s requirements for appropriate solid waste disposal. However, the State=s regulations appear to be geared towards on site cleanup, and the County=s ordinance would cover the cleanup of surrounding areas as well, if litter or debris escaped onto neighboring properties.

The Fire Prevention Ordinance

The County=s Fire Prevention Ordinance could trigger some inspections by the Fire Marshal=s office; however, the State already has in place a requirement for a fire prevention plan, which arguably should be reviewed by the Fire Marshal.

Certain other County ordinances appear to have no bearing on the event. For instance, the Zoning Ordinance, in Ms. Beeker=s opinion, would not preclude the Blue Ridge Bash as the area is zoned Open Use. One might make an argument, as has been suggested, that there will be racing events that might trigger a requirement for a temporary use permit. Even if that were the case, at the most, the zoning might regulate only that one activity, not the entire event.

County Departments Administering State Laws

Certain other County departments or agencies administering State regulations will also have a role. For instance, the Health Department will inspect all of the food service vendors. The Inspections Department will inspect all of the electrical hookups. The Sheriff=s Department will be enforcing the State=s criminal laws.

Ms. Beeker had provided copies of the State permit statutes and regulations for the Board=s review.

A question was raised regarding bonding and liability. Ms. Beeker stated that when they submit their application they also must post a performance bond. The performance bond is a guarantee that they will comply with state requirements. A performance bond is issued depending on the number of participants. For 30,000 people the performance bond would be approx. $9,000. They also must provide proof of liability insurance up to $1,000,000.

A question was raised regarding an ABC permit or the sale of alcoholic beverages. Ms. Beeker responded that the ABC laws allow a one time permit could be issued, even in a dry county. It would be issued by the State ABC (Alcoholic Beverage Control) Commission. The local ABC Board would issue the transportation permit. It was her understanding that the applicant intends to request a non-profit permit where a non-profit can apply for a one-time permit if it=s associated with an event to raise money for that non-profit. The State ABC would have to judge their application and determine whether it fulfilled that particular statute. The fee is only $25.00 to get that type permit.

A question was raised about the State Noise regulations versus the County Noise Ordinance. Ms. Beeker stated that our noise ordinance and their noise limit overlap. The most stringent will govern. Their noise limit is 70 decibels at any time. The County has a noise ordinance that limits noise from amplified sound or from large gatherings at the perimeter of the property. The daytime limit under the county ordinance is 80 decibels but the nighttime county limit is 60 decibels. The remedy for violation of the State limit is revocation of the permit to hold the event. Any violation of the County Ordinance is a crime and civil penalties could be assessed.

A question was raised whether we knew if the permits had been applied for. Ms. Beeker stated that they have not yet.

TAX COLLECTOR=S REPORT of Unpaid Taxes that are Liens on Real Property

Pursuant to NCGS 105-369(a)

Terry Lyda informed the Board that on Friday, they added $330,878.31 in motor vehicle levies, which was their February allotment from DMV. At that time they had a percentage of 90.22%, as of January 30, 2002 (bills collected).

Tax Collector Terry F. Lyda submitted his AReport of Unpaid Taxes that are Liens on Real Property as required by NCGS 105-369(a)@. A copy of that report is attached as a part of these minutes. He recommended that the unpaid tax liens be advertised on May 20, 2002, one time only.

Chairman Moyer made the motion to approve the recommendation of advertising the liens on May 20 (once) which is the third Monday in May. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Deputy Tax Collector, Darlene Burgess, presented her report to the Board dated February 1, 2002. Her report covered the status of delinquent tax collections for years 1992 - 2000 and provided a summary of the steps that have been taken to collect unpaid property taxes. A copy of that report was attached as a part of these minutes.

Darlene also explained that on December 17, they mailed out 3,384 initial notices for the debt set-off collection. They had selected motor vehicle bills that were over $100 to start the debt set-off with. They have so far had 41 debts appealed. They=ve had 133 bills paid prior to the submission to the Department of Revenue, totaling about $15,000. They sent 643 debts to the Department of Revenue for income tax garnishment this past Monday totaling over $95,000. They were the fourth entity in the State to submit a list for debt set-off, only the second County. The third part administrator just sent the list today to the Department of Revenue.

Mr. Nicholson informed the Board that we collected about $95,000 through the electronic credit card program we put into effect this year. He expects that to grow over the years.

INFORMAL PUBLIC COMMENTS

Chairman Moyer explained that we have three public hearings scheduled for 7:00 p.m. We will hold those as close to 7:00 as possible because they have been advertised for 7:00 p.m. He stated that we will need to stop the informal public comment at 7:00. If there is a lot of additional comment, he will find another time later in the meeting to continue the comment period. He asked each person to limit their comments to 2 - 3 minutes each. He informed the speakers that this is not the time to ask questions of the Commissioners or Staff.

1. Howard Wiser - Mr. Wiser is a resident of Riverwind. He spoke of his concern about traffic in the area of the proposed bike bash.

2. Donna Tompkins - Ms. Tompkins is a resident of the Big Willow community, just outside Etowah. She stated that a lot of her questions were answered by the County Attorney=s presentation. She asked those who are opposed to this to call Mr. Pennington tomorrow. She spoke about the pollution, increased traffic, noise, and fire and police protection.

3. Jeff Myron - Mr. Myron is the promoter of the Blue Ridge Bike Bash. He is a businessman. He stated that this event will have a $3 million economic impact on Henderson County. He estimated that about $200,000 will be given to charities. He stated that numerous businessmen in the area have been hurt tremendously by the recession as well as the tragedy of September 11. He felt that this would generate tremendous economic impact and help some of those ailing businesses. He also stated that he would employ for approximately 12 to 2 weeks about 400 people with many jobs also being created on a year round basis.

4. Carla McKeun - Ms. McKeun continued Mr. Myron=s presentation because his time ran out.

She addressed some of the concerns some of the residents in the area had relative to their security staff, their planned toilet facilities for the event, avoiding Riverwind as they bring people into the event, etc. They do not intend to publish the address of the site on their website, only the address of the Holiday Inn. Vendors will be told about a week in advance where the site is. She stated that their plans far exceed what is required. Instead of 1 porta potty per 100 persons, they will have 14 per 100 person.

5. Tom Brogan - Mr. Brogan is President of the Mountain Valley Homeowners Association. He discussed the increase of traffic in the area for the event, especially on the narrow winding roads in the Etowah community. He also stated that many of his questions were answered by Ms. Beeker=s presentation and thanked her for that. He felt that a new location with a more easily controlled accessibility be selected for the event.

6. Allen McCrary - Mr. McCrary is a resident of the Pleasant Grove community. He spoke in favor of the event, stating it could be a great opportunity for our community. We need the revenue. He agreed that there would be some rough people that would come into the area for the event but he also stressed that the Christian Motorcycle Association will be very involved.

7. Bob Jones - Mr. Jones represented the Enchanted Forest Homeowners Association as well as himself. He expressed concerns about the traffic and the security.

8. Jeanine Davis - Ms. Davis is a property owner who lives at the corner of Etowah School Road and Misty Meadow Lane. She stated that she was not against the event. She did express concern about having the event at this location, primarily because of the access. She stated that this property is located in a floodplain and asked what would happen if it rains, stating that the road turns to mush when it rains.

9. Glen Davis - Mr. Davis resides at the same address as Jeanine Davis above. He spoke in opposition, stating it was not fair to the residents of the community as they have had no say so.

10. Mary Singleton - Ms. Singleton expressed that this will have a great impact, and not only on the Etowah community. She stated that we need procedures in a land use plan that would prevent this from happening and will protect the people.

Suspension of informal public comments

Chairman Moyer informed those in attendance that we would suspend the informal public comments at this time and go to the scheduled public hearings.

PUBLIC HEARING - Rezoning Application #R-04-01 (OU to I-1) Hollabrook Farms, A Partnership, Applicant - William Alexander, Agent

Chairman Moyer recognized Bill Alexander.

William Alexander asked, on behalf of the Hollamon family and Hollabrook farm, that the Board cancel this public hearing until renoticed for a later date. The purpose of their request was that given a lot of late comment they have received, the client would like to reconsider some of their issues on the ground. They intend to look at some survey issues and see if some accommodations can be made to suit everyone=s interest. They could not accomplish that by this evening.

Chairman Moyer made the motion to cancel the public hearing for this evening and reschedule it upon amendment of the applicant or reactivation of the current application by the applicant. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARING - Rezoning Application #R-06-01 (RC to R-20) Samuel Garland,

Applicant/Agent

Commissioner Hawkins made the motion for the Board to go into public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Josh Freeman reminded the Board that the public hearing for this date was on a Rezoning Application, #R-06-01. On November 12, 2001, Mr. Samuel R. Garland submitted Rezoning application R-06-01, requesting that the County rezone nine separate parcels of land from an RC (rural conservation) zoning district to an R-20 (low-density residential) zoning district. Generally speaking the boundary of the area includes properties on the southern side of Souther Road between the intersections of Candor Drive and Fairhaven Drive. The nine tracts of land total approximately 14.86 acres with the largest single parcel being 5.8 acres and the smallest being approximately 2 acre.

The Henderson County Planning Board reviewed the application on December 18, 2001, and voted unanimously to send a favorable recommendation to the Henderson County Board of Commissioners on the application as submitted.

In accordance with Section 200-76 of the Henderson County Zoning Ordinance and State Law, a notice of public hearing was published in the January 25, 2002 edition of the Hendersonville Times-News, and again in the February 1, 2002 edition. The Planning Department sent notices of the hearing via first class mail to the applicants and the owners of property adjacent to the Subject Property, and posted signs advertising the hearing on the subject property, on January 22, 2002.

Public Input

There was none.

Chairman Moyer made the motion for the Board to go out of public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Chairman Moyer made the motion to approve the application of Samuel Garland and others to rezone nine separate parcels of land from RC to R-20 zoning district. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARING - Rezoning Application #R-07-01 (RC to R-20) Gary Barnwell, Applicant

Commissioner Hawkins made the motion for the Board to go into public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Josh Freeman distributed two letters that Staff had received from concerned citizens on this issue, one from Lois Brown and one from John J. Drake. Josh also informed the Board that the applicant, Gary Barnwell was in attendance.

The Board of Commissioners had scheduled for this date a public hearing on Rezoning Application R-07-01. On November 14, 2001, Mr. Gary Barnwell submitted Rezoning Application R-07-01, requesting that the County rezone one parcel totaling approximately 11 acres of land from an R-40 (Estate Residential) zoning district to an R-20 (low-density residential) zoning district. Generally speaking the property is on the southern side of Willow Road between the intersection of Myrtle Hill Road and O=re Brae Lane. The property is located approximately 2 mile west of the intersection of Willow Road and Adger Drive.

The Henderson County Planning Board reviewed the application on December 18, 2001, and voted 5-3 to send a favorable recommendation to the Henderson County Board of Commissioners on the application as submitted.

Chairman Moyer stated for the record that the Commissioners had gotten letters from several people about this issue: William Jackson Drake, Leslie Keith, and Harold and Elsie McLean.

Public Input

1. Mark Brown - Mr. Brown owns property adjacent to the south side of this property. He has lived in the area since 1968. This was rezoned R-40 many years ago. He is opposed to the rezoning request.

Chairman Moyer made the motion for the Board to go out of public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Commissioner Hawkins explained that a Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning are two different things.

The natural divide of Willow Road was mentioned.

Commissioner Gordon stated that as the Board re-evaluates the Comprehensive Land Use Plan they would have to take a look at some of these areas. Things have changed in that area and one of the big things that has changed is that public water is available on that road. She could not see a compelling reason to rezone this at this point.

Following discussion, Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to deny rezoning application #R-07-01. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Continuation of Informal Public Comments

11. Eva Ritchey - Ms. Ritchey spoke about the Health & Human Services Building on the Spartanburg Highway. She had interviewed several people from the Health Department and those that she interviewed did not think this location was the best place for the Health Dept. She asked the Commissioners to each answer if they supported this project.

Chairman Moyer reminded her that he had indicated early in the meeting what the guidelines would be and part of them was that there would be no questions directed to the Commissioners and no dialogue.

Ms. Ritchey requested, as a citizen, for the Board to let the citizens know sometime through the public channels what the Board=s plans are regarding this building.

12. Larry Young - Mr. Young was not present when his name was called.

13. Roger Hill - Mr. Hill is the developer of Cummings Cove Golf and Country Club and President of the Community Association at Cummings Cove Golf and Country Club which is a 600 acre residential community on Cummings Road in the Horse Shoe/Etowah area. He stated that he was not opposed to a Biker Bash for the County but is opposed to the proposed location for the event. He distributed a written statement to the Board. He felt that the promoter needs to look harder for a better location.

14. Beverly Toth - Ms. Toth was not present when her name was called.

15. Jacquelyn Toth - Ms. Toth was not present when her name was called.

16. Paul Noe - Mr. Noe is the pastor of Etowah Baptist Church. He stated that his main concern is for the residents at Cummings Cove, Riverwind, and all over the area of Etowah. He asked the Board to keep the residents in mind.

17. Joyce Ramsey - Ms. Ramsey stated that she is not opposed to the Biker=s Bash. However, she is opposed to having it in her back yard. The roads in the proposed areas are narrow and already over-crowded.

18. Sarah Mallott - Ms. Mallott stated that no one has talked about River Road. Cummings Road comes in from Hwy. #64 on one side, Etowah School Road comes in on the other side but anyone coming in Cummings Road has to turn on River Road and go about 3/4 mile, turn over the bridge which goes over the river to get onto the Etowah School Road to get to Misty Meadow Road. The River Road is another narrow road with drop-offs on one side and absolutely no shoulders and no barriers.

19. Leon Allison - Mr. Allison stated that the people who are speaking should come up with solutions for the county instead of just lambasting the Commissioners.

20. David Samuelson - Mr. Samuelson stated that he is a biker and has been most of his life. His father was a biker. He is not pro or con for this event. He is for the American tradition. This is a free country. The owner of this land owns it and there is no zoning against such an event; therefore, why not have it?

CLOSED SESSION

Chairman Moyer 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)(1) To prevent disclosure of information that is privileged or confidential pursuant to the law of this State or of the United States, or not considered a public record within the meaning of Chapter 132 of the General Statutes, in accordance with and pursuant to NCGS 143-318.10(e) and Article II of Chapter 11 of the Henderson County Code.

2.(a)(3) To consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public body, which privilege is hereby acknowledged. To consult with an attorney with respect to the following claims:

Henderson County, NC v. Vivian Hill

(Henderson County File No. 99-CVS-310)

Village of Flat Rock et. al. V. Swing et al

(Henderson County File No. 00-CVS-1189)

3.(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.

BLUE RIDGE BIKE BASH

Chairman Moyer stated that the Board had a lengthy public comment session with respect to the Blue Ridge Bike Bash. A number of questions were raised. He asked if the Commissioners had any comments.

Commissioner Ward asked for Staff to research the liability regarding alcohol sales. He also wanted to know what input this Board would have to sue the ABC Board. He questioned whether the off-duty officers would be Henderson County officers, stating that we routinely utilize Henderson County off-duty officers during the July 4^th week-end for other activities. He asked Staff to have communication with the promoter, Mr. Myron, regarding poker runs, specifically how long are they and how many participants will be in the poker runs.

Just before the break Mr. Moyer had been asked whether the Board would be taking a position on the Bike Bash tonight. He answered that he did not think so. He felt that the Board did not have enough information. It appeared at the present time to be mainly a state matter.

Commissioner Gordon stated that there have been a number of questions about zoning and land use issues and she asked the County Attorney for her opinion about how she thought zoning would have impacted the ability to permit a one-time event.

Ms. Beeker stated that her opinion was that they could apply to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for a temporary use permit, if it were zoned. Nothing would stop them from asking for such a permit or the Zoning Board of Adjustment from granting such a permit under zoning. She didn=t think it would be possible to zone out such an event entirely. She thought that some of the activities association with the event could be zoned out.

Chairman Moyer stated that the Board was in agreement that it was not the appropriate time for the Board to take a position. The Board needs additional information. The Board is concerned about the matter and will continue to follow it and try to get their questions answered.

DISCRETIONARY RURAL GENERAL PUBLIC FUNDING APPLICATION

Staff had received a request from Apple Country Transportation to apply for a transportation grant to begin a fixed route system in Henderson County. The amount of this grant is $101,972. The local 10% match will be provided by a donation from Wal-Mart and by fees collected from the riders.

Javonni Burchett, Transportation Coordinator with Apple Country Transportation, made a presentation to the Board. She stated that monies are available for transportation projects. She made the Transportation Advisory Board aware in November that there are $1.6 million available in a discretionary fund, under the rural operating assistance program. Since that time she has met twice with the Transportation Advisory Board and discussed whether they wanted to make application for any of these funds. The application is due February 15. There has been a lot of discussion. The Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) called a special meeting to discuss this issue. They asked that Javonni go back to Western Carolina Community Action and her boss and her Advisory Board and put together a proposal. The TAC has looked at the proposal and made recommendations. The current proposal includes the recommendations of the TAC. The proposal requests $101,972 from the Department of Transportation to run a fixed route system in Henderson County for a period of three months. These funds have to be spent within three months. At that time an application will be made available to apply again for the project you are interested in continuing, until the year 2004.

Chairman Moyer stated that the TAC felt that it made sense to apply for the money if a number of criteria could be met:

28. That it was a reasonable trial period that had a chance of succeeding if it was done properly and could serve a legitimate need in the County. To do that it would have to cover the county, there had to be reasonable times for the system to run and there had to be some assurance that monies would continue for more than three months and that there would be fairly objective measures as to whether it was successful or not.

Chairman Moyer stated that there is a 10% match associated with this project and it is a three month trial. The State says that there will be money for next year, which must be applied for. Chairman Moyer stated that the TAC wanted to be very clear that we were only going into this trial on the basis that this would continue over the full following year or we did not even want to be considered for it. The TAC felt that if the whole amount was not going to be funded, they didn=t want any money for it. Wal-Mart has indicated they will put up $10,000 and McDonalds will do some signage for the van. The fares should help to provide the match. So the County should not have to provide any funding for this project. If some of the stores are interested in stops, they could contribute some additional monies. Chairman Moyer has talked with Fletcher and Hendersonville and they are both very interested in this project so they should contribute to the funding.

Much discussion followed. It was clear the Board had many concerns about future funding of this project. There was discussion about benchmarks to gauge the success or failure of the project. There was some discussion of the vehicles for public transportation being funded by State money.

The Board would like to have assurance that funds will be available to fully fund this project in future years. According to operational costs for one quarter, the State can expect a request for grant funds for an amount over $400,000 annually. Both the Transportation Advisory Committee and the Board of Commissioners do not wish to begin this important community program and not have funds to continue it past the initial grant funding.

Chairman Moyer made the motion to move forward with the trial of this project as presented by Javonni and as recommended unanimously by the Transportation Advisory Committee consistent with the terms as listed above. Part of the motion was to authorize execution of the application by the Chairman and filing of the application before February 15, 2002. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

NEW ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY VENDOR

In September, 2001, the Board approved a contract with Analytical Surveys, Inc. (ASI) for the completion of the digital orthophotography project. At that time, the first phase had been completed and paid for with the production of the digital orthophotos remaining.

Although staff had been diligently pursuing the matter, ASI had not executed the contract, and the first deadlines for the project have expired. Staff does not believe that ASI will be able to perform the contract based on conversations with counsel for ASI and considering recent headlines and stock prices for ASI. For this reason, it was Staff=s recommendation that the Board of Commissioners consider awarding the agreement to another vendor, Sanborn Colorado, LLC. Sanborn has purchased the division of ASI which actually performed the work on the County=s project. The same project manager and personnel which have performed the work to date will continue to perform the work if the County elects to award a contract to Sanborn.

At this point, the work left to be done is processing of the aerial photography film and the production of the digital orthophotos. It appears that this work is more in the nature of a service, and not a purchase, and therefore bidding is not required at this point.

Sanborn is willing to enter into the same agreement that the Board previously approved for ASI under the same terms and conditions. The revised project schedule was presented for the Board=s consideration.

A resolution was presented for the Board=s consideration. It would be appropriate for the Board to take action at today=s meeting to approve or deny entering into a contract with Sanborn Colorado, LLC for the production of digital orthophotos.

Ms. Beeker got the unsigned contracts back in the mail from ASI and therefore recommended that the Board go with the company that actually bought out the division of ASI that did our work, Sanborn. The same technical personnel will be working with the film that has done the work so far. Ms. Beeker stated that on the contract before the Board the same had been changed but that is about it. The attachments to the contract have been updated to reflect the work that will actually be done by Sanborn at this point. There is a new project schedule that has a completion date of six months later than the original completion date as proposed. Ms. Beeker briefly discussed the Resolution in the agenda packet that basically authorizes staff to formally terminate the contract with ASI, because they have requested the contract be terminated. The contract will also authorize the execution of this new contract and will authorize Mr. Mitchum=s technical people to have a chance to go through this technical proposal to make sure they got everything exactly right.

Mr. Mitchum stated that the technical specifications are unchanged. We still are able to quality control the work. Mr. Mitchum stated that his staff has met with the representative from Sanborn that was the project director that was involved with ASI and they feel comfortable with him.

Commissioner Hawkins moved adoption of the resolution as amended. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

OLD JAIL DEMOLITION - Bids and Contract

Mr. Nicholson informed the Board that on January 22, 2002, the County received bids for the demolition work that is to be done on the Old Jail. Eight bids were submitted, seven of which were opened and read. One bid was submitted by a company called Progressive Contracting that was not opened since the bid was not sealed and sealing of bids is required by State law.

Distributed to the Board was a letter from Freeman White, the County=s architect, containing the architect=s recommendations and the bid tabulation sheets. H&M Constructors submitted the lowest responsive bid in the amount of $235,900. Staff was pleased with this bid amount since the estimate on the project was $270,000.

The Assistant County Attorney had reviewed the bid submitted by H&M Constructors and, except for a minor irregularity that she will discuss with the Board, believes the bid to be the lowest responsive bid.

The architect also requested that the Board reject the bid that was submitted by Jones Grading & Fencing, Inc. This is an appropriate action since the bid did not contain a proper bid bond that is required by State law.

Based on the bids submitted and the lowest responsive bid of H&M Constructors, the architect had prepared a draft contract for the Board=s review. The draft contract was distributed.

Mr. Nicholson stated that there was a change on one of the attachments where they changed something from square feet to lineal feet, whited it out and then should have initialed it. They failed to initial it but he felt that wasn=t an issue. Mr. Nicholson stated that the recommended bid is within the budget that the Commissioners adopted in the budget process. Staff recommended the Board accept the bid from H&M Constructors.

A question was raised that the budget had only $150,000 listed for the demolition. Mr. Nicholson informed the Commissioners that this bid was for demolition and abatement. Staff decided to do one contract for both. He stated that $250,000 was in the budget for the two.

A question was raised again about the budgeted amount and there was a discrepancy in what some of the Commissioners had listed for these two items. The County Manager was asked to research the amount and bring it back to the Board. This item was rolled to the next meeting for Board action.

LOCAL TELEPHONE SERVICE

Mr. Nicholson had provided for the Board=s consideration information concerning the cost of local telephone service (Centrex and ESSX) available to Henderson County through the North Carolina Office of Information Technology Services (ITS). Henderson County=s current Centrex and ESSX contracts for local service with BellSouth end March 27, 2002.

Henderson County=s BellSouth Account Manager, Mona Brewton, stated that a new BellSouth contract would be available at a rate comparable to the current contract, so current BellSouth prices have been used in the comparison with ITS prices prepared by June Durham of ITS. Mrs. Brewton also gave assurance that service should not be affected by changing over to ITS for local telephone service. ITS has contracted with BellSouth for service within Henderson County; therefore, BellSouth will still be the service provider for the County.

The projected annual savings on local Centrex and ESSX service for Henderson County is approximately $87,000. No charges or interruptions in service should occur with the changeover. Additional savings not included in this estimate will result from there being no toll charges for any calls made to areas within the Asheville LATA.

Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to change to ITS for local Centrex and ESSX phone system upon expiration of the current contract. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

UPDATE ON PENDING ISSUES

Travel & Tourism and Historic Courthouse

Commissioner Gordon informed the Board that Attorney Jack Tate had offered free counsel to Travel & Tourism to draft an agreement between Travel & Tourism and Henderson County regarding a move of Travel & Tourism to the Historic Courthouse. The Travel & Tourism Board formed a subcommittee to try to work through some of the details. Ms. Gordon stated that she might enlist the County Attorney=s assistance on how such an agreement could be structured.

Redistricting Resolution

Mr. Nicholson reminded the Board that at the last Commissioners= Meeting the Board asked him to do some research on a proposed resolution that was put before the Board to encourage citizen participation in redistricting discussions that are going on in Raleigh now. Mr. Nicholson had prepared a draft resolution and it was in the agenda packet for the Board=s review.

Following some discussion on the resolution, it was suggested that some wording be deleted from the NOW, THEREFORE paragraph as follows: delete Awith appointments made by the Governor; the Lieutenant Governor; and the Speaker of the House and by the minority leadership within the General Assembly@. By consensus the Board agreed to the revision to the resolution listed and then to send the resolution out.

2002 SCATTERED SITE HOUSING PROGRAM

Mr. Nicholson updated the Board on the status of the 2002 CDBG Scattered Site Housing Project. Presented for the Board=s review was the following information associated with this grant:

29. Contract with Benchmark Henderson County accepted proposals from firms/agencies

interested in assisting us with the administration of this grant. Staff recommended Benchmark to the Board since they submitted their proposal by the required submission date and their experience in working with this program. Funding for the contract is an allowable reimbursable expense under the grant.

30. Application The Board received copies of the proposed application for these funds for review. No action was required on the application at this time.

31. Public Hearing Notice The Board was requested to set a Public Hearing on the application for February 20, 2002 at 11:00 a.m.

Mr. Nicholson informed the Board that we only received one favorable proposal on time. The proposal is to administer our 2002 Scattered Site Housing Program. This is a program operated under the Community Assistance Program of the Community Development Block Grant Program. The Grant Funds will pay for the administration. The County has no funds in this program.

Chairman Moyer made the motion to approve the contract with Benchmark as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

The Board will plan to set a public hearing on this issue under AImportant Dates@.

NOMINATIONS

Notification of Vacancies

The Board was notified of the following vacancies which will appear for nominations on the next agenda:

1. Juvenile Crime Prevention Council - 2 vacancies

Nominations

Chairman Moyer informed the Board of the following vacancies and opened the floor to nominations:

1. Equalization and Review - 5 vac.

The Board has received three letters from people who have indicated that they are willing to continue to serve: Mr. Harmon, Mr. Lamb, and Mr. Burdette.

Commissioner Ward nominated the three persons listed above for reappointment. Commissioner Ward made the motion to suspend the rules and appoint Mr. Harmon, Mr. Lamb, and Mr. Burdette.

All voted in favor and the motion carried.

2. Recreation Advisory Board - 4 vac.

Commissioner Messer nominated Terry Maybin, Ralph King, and Gary Eblen for reappointment. He also nominated James Schweitzer as a new member. Commissioner Messer made the motion to suspend the rules and appoint all four nominees. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.

3. Juvenile Crime Prevention Council - 3 vac.

There were no nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.

4. Community Child Protection Team - 3 vac.

Chairman Moyer nominated JoAnne Grimm, Jane Lindsey, and Thomas Hix. Chairman Moyer made the motion to suspend the rules and appoint these three. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

5. Henderson County Zoning Board of Adjustment - 1 vac.

Commissioner Gordon nominated Dean Bonessi. There was some discussion about the regular positions and the alternates. Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to move Robert Fleming up to a regular member from an alternate and appoint Mr. Bonessi to the alternate position (#10). Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to suspend the rules and appoint Mr. Bonessi at this time as well as move Mr. Fleming from an alternate position to a regular position. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

6. Fire and Rescue Advisory Committee - 1 vac.

There were no nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.

7. Henderson County Board of Health - 2 vac.

There were no nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.

8. Nursing/Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee - 8 vac.

There were no nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.

9. Transportation Advisory Committee - 14 vac.

The Board just recently increased the size of the Board to 18. Chairman Moyer stated that Ray Bryson would be willing to continue to serve. Greg Gosnell does not wish to continue to serve. Dr. Kohlan Flynn had been on the committee and serving as the head of the safety committee but had not actually been appointed.

Chairman Moyer nominated Paul Stepp, John Lynch, John B. Gould, Ray Bryson, Javonni Burchett, Tom Looby, Virgle McClure, Rodney Raines, Dr. Kohlan Flynn, and Rick Merrill.

Commissioner Hawkins nominated Bruce Benton, Tom Swanner, and Dean Bonessi.

Chairman Moyer nominated Anya Petersen-Frey.

There was discussion whether to continue having a Commissioner sit on this Board. After some discussion, it was decided by consensus that Commissioner Moyer would continue to serve on this committee for the time being. This is a very time consuming board.

It was the consensus of the Board to go ahead and fill these positions. The Clerk was asked to poll the Board for votes, each Commissioner will get 13 votes:

Commissioner Ward - Stepp, Lynch, Gould, Bryson, Burchett, Looby, McClure, Raines, Flynn, Merrill, Benton, Swanner, Bonessi.

Commissioner Messer - Stepp, Lynch, Gould, Bryson, Burchett, Looby, McClure, Raines, Flynn, Merrill, Benton, Swanner, Petersen-Frey.

Chairman Moyer - Stepp, Lynch, Gould, Bryson, Burchett, Looby, McClure, Raines, Flynn, Merrill, Benton, Swanner, Petersen-Frey.

Commissioner Hawkins - Lynch, Gould, Bryson, Looby, McClure, Raines, Flynn, Bonessi, Benton, Swanner.

Commissioner Gordon - Stepp, Lynch, Gould, Bryson, Burchett, Looby, McClure, Raines, Flynn, Merrill, Benton, Swanner, Petersen-Frey.

All the nominees were appointed except Dean Bonessi.

10. Agriculture Advisory Committee - 1 vac.

Commissioner Ward informed the Board that Kenneth Allison was interested in continuing to serve on this committee. He also reminded the Board that he serves on this committee personally as a member of the agriculture community, not as a Commissioner.

Commissioner Ward nominated Kenneth Allison for reappointment. Commissioner Ward made the motion to suspend the rules and appoint Mr. Allison. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

11. Industrial Facilities and Pollution Control Authority - 3 vac.

Commissioner Hawkins nominated Skip Shelton. Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to appoint Mr. Shelton by acclamation. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

12. Mountain Valley Resource Conservation and Development - 1 vac.

Chairman Moyer nominated Drew Brannon for reappointment. Chairman Moyer made the motion to suspend the rules and appoint Mr. Brannon. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

13. Planning Board, Hendersonville City - 2 vac.

Commissioner Hawkins nominated Nick Pryor and Jim Crafton for reappointment. Chairman Moyer made the motion to suspend the rules and appoint Mr. Pryor and Mr. Crafton. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

14. WNC Caucus

Chairman Moyer reminded the Board that there is going to be a meeting in Asheville and they would like to have a representative from us. Mr. Moyer stated that he would be willing to go to that meeting if it was the pleasure of the Board. He would report back to the Board what he learns and share the information he receives. The Board was in agreement.

IMPORTANT DATES

Set a Public Hearing for Economic Development Incentives for BorgWarner

Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to set this public hearing for February 20, 2002 at 11:00 a.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Set a Public Hearing on the 2002 CDBG Scattered Site Housing Application

Commissioner Messer made the motion to set this public hearing for February 20, 2002 at 11:00 a.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Set a Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing for Special Use Permit Application #SP-01-04

for a Baseball Complex and a Related Setback Variance Application

Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to set this public hearing for March 11 at 7:00 p.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Chairman Moyer made the motion to move the Workshop on the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite from February 8 to February 14 at 3:00 p.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried.

Set Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing on Application for Vested Rights for Lakewood RV Resort

Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to set this public hearing for February 20 at 11:00 a.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried.