Apr 22, 2025 Board of Aldermen

BOARD ITEM NUMBER THREE IS TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.

UH,

[3. Approve Agenda]

ARE THERE ANY CHANGES YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE? SO MOVED.

I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.

NEXT IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.

A AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? AGENDA IS APPROVED.

[Consent Agenda]

IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD ON ITEMS FOUR THROUGH FIVE.

MAYOR, MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SECOND, HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

NEXT STEP IS ITEM NUMBER SIX.

LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL STARTING WITH ALDERMAN PRILL.

[6. Conduct Public Hearing on the Proposed Budget for FY 2025- 2026]

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY 25 26.

MS. OSRAM BOARD AT THE APRIL 8TH BOARD OF ALDERMAN MEETING, THE BOARD ADOPTED A RESOLUTION TO CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON APRIL 22ND TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FFY 25 AND 26 NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL STATUTES 1 59 12 REQUIRES IN PART THAT A NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER.

UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO AN OVERSIGHT, THE NOTICE WAS NOT PUBLISHED.

THEREFORE, THE PUBLIC HEARING CANNOT BE CONDUCTED TODAY, BUT WILL BE NOTICED FOR MAY 13TH.

IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE BOARD ADOPT A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 13TH, 2025, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.

MR. COURT, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS? MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, UM, PLACE ON THE AGENDA FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE BUDGET FFY 25 26 FOR MAY 13TH.

MAY 13TH.

BOARD OTTOMAN MEETING.

WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND, SIR? I HAVE A SECOND.

UH, JUST A COMMENT.

UH, I'M NOT SURE IF ANYONE HERE IS PRESENT TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS TONIGHT, UH, BUT IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO, AFTER WE TAKE UP THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, UH, WE COULD OPEN UP IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK SINCE THERE WAS AN OVERSIGHT.

SO WE'LL TAKE A VOTE ON THIS AND THEN, UH, WE CAN DISCUSS THAT IF YOU WOULD LIKE.

SO, UH, CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, UH, I'D LIKE TO HAVE A ROLL CALL STARTING WITH ALDERMAN ROYAL, PLEASE.

ALDERMAN ROYAL? YES.

ALDERMAN ASTOR? YES.

ALDERMAN KENZIE? YES.

ALDERMAN BEST? YES.

ALDERMAN FRILL? YES.

MAYOR ODOM? YES.

SO THAT MOTION CARRIES, WE HAVE A NEW PUBLIC HEARING FOR SCHEDULE FOR OUR NEXT BOARD MEETING, BUT, UH, IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN PUBLIC COMMENT TONIGHT, IT'S NOT AN OFFICIAL PUBLIC HEARING, BUT THE BOARD COULD DO SO IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO.

IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WAS WANTING TO SPEAK? IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT'S PLANNING TO SPEAK ON THE BUDGET THIS EVENING? OKAY.

WE HAVE SOMEONE.

SO, UH, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TONIGHT, YOU CAN KEEP RAISING YOUR HAND.

IF NOT, YOU COULD COME BACK TO THE MAY MEETING.

IT'S COMPLETELY UP TO YOU.

I'LL COME BACK TO YOUR QUESTION.

WILL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

VERY GOOD.

SO WE

[7. Conduct a Public Hearing and Consider Adopting an Ordinance to Rezone Tax Parcel IDs 8- 240- 063, 8- 24020001 , and 8- 240- P- 00B from Industrial 1 ( I- 1), Residential 6 ( R- 6), Residential 10A ( R- 10A), and Agriculture 5F ( A- 5F) to Residential 6 ( R- 6), and Residential 10A ( R- 10A).]

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.

CONSIDER DOCUMENT OF ORDINANCE TO REZONE TAX PARCEL IDS 8 2 4 63 8 2 4 2 1, AND 8 2 4 P ZERO ZERO B FROM INDUSTRIAL I ONE RESIDENTIAL R SIX RESIDENTIAL 10 A AND AGRICULTURAL FIVE F TWO, ALL RESIDENTIAL R SIX AND RESIDENTIAL 10 A R 10.

THAT'S WHAT WE CAME UP WITH.

UH, MR. GO, GO AHEAD.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND THE BOARD.

SORRY FOR THE LONG TITLE, BUT, UH, THAT

[00:05:01]

UH, AGAIN, THIS REZONING IS, UH, ITEM NUMBER REZ 30 28 DASH 2025.

UH, THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST WAS MADE BY THE APPLICANT ERIC REMINGTON, AND THE OWNERS ARE, UH, PAUL CREIGHTON JR.

EASTERN LAND HOLDINGS, LLC AND PHOENIX DERBY PARK, LLC.

UH, THE LOCATION OF THIS REZONING IS ADJACENT TO, UH, DERBY PARK, UH, SPECIFICALLY ELIZABETH AVE, AND THE PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS WERE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED.

UH, THE CURRENT ZONING, UH, IS I IS INDUSTRIAL ONE, RESIDENTIAL SIX, RESIDENTIAL 10 A AND AGRICULTURAL FIVE.

UH, AS YOU'LL SEE IN, UH, FURTHER MAPS, WE HAVE A, A SITUATION OF SPLIT ZONING.

SO, UH, SINGLE PARCELS DO HAVE SEVERAL ZONING DISTRICTS.

UH, THE PROPOSED REZONING IS TWO R SIX R 10 A, UH, AND THAT FIXES ANY SORT OF SPLIT ZONING ON THESE PARCELS.

UH, IN TOTAL, THIS PROPERTY IS 49.61 ACRES, UH, AND THIS VICINITY MAP JUST DOES SHOW IT ADJACENT TO ELIZABETH AVE AND ALSO MEDINA SPIRIT STREET.

UH, THIS SIGN WAS POSTED APRIL 10TH, UH, TO MEET THE GENERAL STATUTE REQUIREMENTS FOR POSTING THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

UH, YOU'LL ALSO SEE THAT THE SITE IS FAIRLY CLEAR, UH, AND VACANT.

THE MAIL NOTICE WAS SENT OUT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF THE, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTIES.

AND THIS MAP SHOWS WHO WOULD'VE BEEN INCLUDED WITHIN THAT A HUNDRED FOOT BUFFER.

UH, AND THIS SUMMARIZATION OF INDUSTRIAL ONE.

UH, IT REALLY ACCOMMODATES, UH, BUSINESSES THAT COULD BE OBNOXIOUS TOWARDS RESIDENTIAL USES, UH, AND MAY DISRUPT THE AREA.

UH, THE R SIX IS MORE OF A MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

ONE OF THESE DISTRICTS NOT ONLY INCLUDE, UH, PERMITTED USES SUCH AS SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, BUT ALSO MULTI-FAMILY.

UH, THE R 10 IS A MEDIUM DENSITY ZONING DISTRICT, UH, TYPICALLY 10,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT SIZES, AND THEY DO PROMOTE, UM, IN GENERAL SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND OTHER RESIDENTIAL USES.

UH, THE R 10 A IS THE SAME AS THE R 10 ZONING DISTRICT, WITH THE EXCEPTION, UH, THAT THIS DOES NOT PROMOTE, UH, ANYTHING OTHER THAN SINGLE FAMILY.

TWO-FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS.

THE AGRICULTURAL FIVE F ZONING DISTRICT.

THIS PROMOTES AGRICULTURAL USES.

UH, SOME THINGS SUCH AS LANDFILLS, LIVESTOCK, AND OTHER USES THAT MAY NEGATIVELY IMPACT RESIDENTIAL USES ARE ALSO PERMITTED IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT.

AND THE USE COMPARISON CHARTS SHOW WHAT ARE PERMITTED BY WRIGHT, PERMITTED BY SPECIAL USE, UH, THINGS SUCH AS RESIDENTIAL USES AND NON-RESIDENTIAL UNITS USES THROUGHOUT ALL OF THESE ZONING DISTRICTS.

AND THIS IS THE EXISTING ZONING MAP.

YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT TRIANGLES IN THE, UH, HASHED AREA.

UH, THE YELLOW BEING R SIX, UH, THE DARKER YELLOW BEING R SIX, THE ORANGE BEING R 10 A.

AND TO THE TOP OF THAT, NEAR THE RAILROAD TRACKS IS ACTUALLY I, ONE, THE PROPOSED ZONING MAP CLEANS IT UP A LITTLE BIT.

UH, SO WE DO HAVE ONE PARCEL THAT IS GOING BACK TO THE ORANGE, UH, COMPLETELY.

AND THE OTHER TWO PARCELS, WHICH IS THE LARGE MAJORITY OF THE ACREAGE WILL BE AEX.

UH, THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY THAT THESE PROPERTIES ARE, UH, INDICATED AS DEVELOPED.

AND THIS IDENTIFIES AREAS THAT ARE RIGHT FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

UH, PARTICULARLY SINGLE FAMILY DINGS, MULTIFAMILY, UH, UNITS.

AND, UH, THIS IS AN AERIAL IMAGERY OF THE SITE.

LIKE I SAID, THIS, THIS, THESE PARCELS ARE LARGELY UNTOUCHED, ASIDE FROM BEING CLEARED.

UH, SO THEY ARE VACANT.

AND AGAIN, THIS JUST SHOWS THE, UH, CURRENT EXTENT OF WHAT'S GOING ON ON THAT PROPERTY.

SOME CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE BOARD, UH, WITH THIS REZONING.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDED APPROVAL UNANIMOUSLY AT THEIR MARCH 20TH, UH, MEETING.

AND THIS WAS BASED ON THE REQUEST BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN AS WELL AS THE UPDATE.

UH, THE PROPERTIES ARE ALSO ADJACENT TO EXISTING R SIX AND R 10, UH, TO THE WEST AND SOUTH, AND IT IS ALSO ADJACENT TO PROPERTY ZONED I ONE TO THE NORTH AND R EIGHT TO THE EAST.

THAT IS THE OTHER SHADE OF YELLOW.

AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF, IF THE BOARD HAS ANY BOARD HAVE QUESTIONS.

SO TONIGHT, UM, WE ARE GONNA HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.

WOULD, UH, YOU BE INTERESTED FOR US TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT? YES, SIR.

VERY GOOD.

DOES BOARD HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY, SCENE NONE AT THIS TIME.

I'LL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST.

PLEASE COME.

SO TO THE MICROPHONE.

[00:10:03]

GOOD EVENING.

I'M A NEW RESIDENT TO NEW BERN, MOVED IN DECEMBER.

UH, WE LIVE ON MEDINA SPIRIT STREET.

UM, WHEN WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE BACK IN DECEMBER, UM, WE WERE TOLD DIRECTLY RIGHT BEHIND US IN THE EIGHT DASH 24 0 DASH P DASH ZERO ZERO B WAS TOLD BY THE PEOPLE FROM ADAMS, UH, HOMES, THAT THAT WAS A WETLAND, THAT NOTHING COULD BE BUILT RIGHT BEHIND US IN THAT BUFFER.

WE ALL KNEW THAT WHERE THE WOODS AT, WHERE THE GENTLEMAN WAS SPEAKING ABOUT WAS GONNA BE HOMES.

WE WERE AWARE OF THAT, BUT IN THAT SECTION OF 8 2 4 0 P ZERO ZERO B, WE WERE TOLD NUMEROUS TIMES THAT NOTHING BE BEING BUILT BEHIND US.

NOW, WE GET THIS LETTER AND IT SAYS THAT THAT LAND CAN BE DEVELOPED INTO RESIDENTIAL, MAYBE EVEN MULTIPLE, UH, HOUSING.

UH, WE DEEPLY OBJECT TO WHAT, UM, WE SEE HERE OR WHATEVER IT'S WORTH.

BUT, UH, WE WERE TOLD THAT'S WHY WE BOUGHT OUR LOT, BOUGHT OUR HOUSE WAS BECAUSE NO ONE WAS GONNA BUILD RIGHT DIRECTLY BEHIND US.

WE KNEW ANOTHER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WETLANDS THAT THERE WAS GONNA BE MULTIPLE HOUSING DONE BY I BELIEVE DR. HORTON OR WHOEVER, UH, ON THAT ASPECT.

UM, JUST WANNA LET YOU GUYS KNOW HOW US AND A LOT OF THE OTHER NEIGHBORS, A COUPLE OTHER ONES ARE HERE THE SAME THING.

THEY LIVE OFF THE LITTLE CUL-DE-SAC.

THEY WERE TOLD THE SAME THING BY ADAM'S HOMES, THAT IT WAS GONNA BE A WETLAND AND YOU GUYS COULD NOT DESTROY IT FOR WHATEVER IT'S WORTH.

THERE, UM, THERE MAY BE SOMEONE HERE FROM THE APPLICANT THAT MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT.

JUST BECAUSE IT GETS REZONED DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT PARTICULAR PARCEL WOULD BE BUILT ON.

THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE MASTER PLAN.

SO IF SOMEBODY HERE FROM THE REQUESTER WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT, THEY CERTAINLY CAN.

I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT.

MY NAME'S JOHN KNOX AND I ALSO JUST MOVED INTO, UM, THE ADAMS HOME SITE.

I LIVE ON, UM, 1,004 DYNAMIC ONE DRIVE.

UM, I RETIRED IN NOVEMBER AND MOVED ON HERE THIS PAST MARCH AND KIND OF WANT TO BUILD MY RETIREMENT HOME.

AND AGAIN, I WAS TOLD THE SAME THING.

I, I BOUGHT THE HOUSE ON THIS CUL-DE-SAC BECAUSE OF THE BEAUTIFUL WOODS THAT WERE BEHIND IT.

AND I REALLY, I, I LIVE IN THE SAME AREA THAT OUR LAST SPEAKER TALKED ABOUT IN THAT ONE AREA THAT HE'S TALKED ABOUT.

UH, IT WAS JUST A BEAUTIFUL BUFFER ZONE AND, AND JUST BE REALLY DISAPPOINTED THAT THEY THROW THOSE BEAUTIFUL OR PINE TREES DOWN.

ANYONE ELSE? GOOD EVENING, MAYOR ALDERMAN.

MY NAME'S ERIC REMINGTON.

I'M WITH THE LAW FIRM OF WARDEN SMITH.

I'M THE APPLICANT IN THIS, UH, MATTER.

AND, UH, I CAN ADDRESS THIS GENTLEMAN'S QUESTION, UH, FAIRLY QUICKLY.

MY, THE ONLY REASON THAT THAT PARCEL WAS INCLUDED IN THIS WAS TO CLEAN UP THE ZONING BECAUSE THERE WAS A LITTLE TRIANGULAR PART OF THE ZONING THAT OVERLAPPED ON IT.

THAT PARCEL IS ACTUALLY ATTACHED TO THE OTHER SUBDIVISION ATHENS ACRES, I BELIEVE.

AND IT IS BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, ZONED AND, UH, I MEAN THE COVENANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT FOR THAT SUBDIVISION DEAL WITH THAT PARTICULAR PARCEL.

THERE'S NO INTENT, UH, TO DEVELOP THAT AREA THAT I'M AWARE OF.

UM, AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, IT WAS JUST SOLELY TO CLEAN UP THAT LITTLE TRIANGULAR PIECE OF THE, OF THE ZONING SINCE WE WERE DOING THE OTHER PART.

R 10 THAT ARE NEXT TO IT.

UM, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS APPLICATION.

OBVIOUSLY, WE, THE APPLICATION THAT WE SUBMITTED, WE TRIED TO BE VERY THOROUGH IN IT AND TRIED TO GIVE YOU ALL AS MUCH INFORMATION AS WE COULD TO SUPPORT THE FIVE CRITERIA.

AS YOU ALL KNOW, THOSE CRITERIA ARE THAT, UH, THAT THE PROPERTY BE SIMILARLY SITUATED, UH, IN AN AREA AND THAT ALL THE ZONING BE IN THE SAME CATEGORY.

WE THINK THAT ACCOMPLISHES THIS BECAUSE IT IS RESIDENTIAL ZONING ALL AROUND IT.

UH, THE PARTICULAR, UH, PART OF THE ZONING THAT DEALS WITH INDUSTRIAL IS A LEFTOVER REMNANT FROM ACROSS THE, THE RAILROAD TRACKS, UH, WHERE THE, YOU KNOW, THE BOSCH PLANT AND, UM, AND THE OTHER, UH, IN INDUSTRIAL AREAS ARE, UH, SO WE THINK THAT THE FIRST CRITERIA IS MET.

SECOND CRITERIA IS THAT THE USE IS PERMITTED OR IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF HOUSING, AND HOUSING IS NEEDED, AND THIS WILL, UH, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL HOUSING.

WE'VE, UH, ANSWERED THAT IN, IN ITEM NUMBER TWO.

NUMBER THREE IS THAT ALL USES ARE APPROPRIATE.

AND AGAIN, UH, THIS IS RIGHT NEXT TO A AREA THAT'S ALREADY ZONED R SIX.

AND SO THE, THE MAJORITY OF THIS, THAT WOULD BE ZONED R SIX WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THAT.

AND IT'S ALSO COMPATIBLE WITH THE OTHER ZONING, RESIDENTIAL ZONING AREAS, R EIGHT AND

[00:15:01]

UH, IS THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADVERSELY AFFECTED ENOUGH? IT'S NOT.

AND THEN THE ONE THAT I REALLY WANT TO ADDRESS IS THE LAST ONE, WHICH IS, IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN? UH, YES, IT IS.

UM, THESE THREE TRACKS ARE SUBJECT TO THIS APPLICATION ARE LOCATED IN THE NORTH CAROLINA 43 FOCUS AREA.

LIKE MR. GO SAID.

UM, THIS, UH, THAT 2,600 ACRE AREA ENCOMPASSES THE LAND AROUND THE NINE, THE NORTH CAROLINA 43 CONNECTOR, UH, AND THAT CORRIDOR FROM ITS INTERCHANGED HIGHWAY 70.

THERE'S MAJOR EMPLOYERS THAT ARE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAND USE PLAN, IT GIVES YOU CERTAIN CRITERIA THAT YOU ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO CHECK.

AND THIS CHECKS ALL THE BOXES, UH, IN THAT, UH, 43 FOCUS AREA.

AND WE INCLUDED THAT IN EXHIBIT F.

UM, YOU KNOW, SOME OTHER INFORMATION I DO HAVE, YOUR HONOR.

UM, SO WE BELIEVE THAT THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL THE FIVE CRITERIA, AND WE'D ASK YOU TO APPROVE IT.

I DO HAVE A STATEMENT FROM ONE OF THE OWNERS THAT, UH, HE ASKED ME TO READ.

HE HAD, UH, HE HAD A, A MEDICAL EMERGENCY THAT CAME UP THIS EVENING AND COULD NOT, UH, PARTICIPATE.

SO IF I CAN READ THAT TO THE BOARD.

UM, GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF THE TOWN BOARD.

MY NAME IS JESSE MCINERNEY.

I'M PRESIDENT OF PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS.

I WOULD LIKE TO FIRST APOLOGIZE FOR MY INABILITY TO ATTEND TONIGHT DUE TO A FAMILY EMERGENCY.

I HAD PLANNED TO BE THERE, BUT UNFORTUNATELY I COULD NOT MAKE IT.

ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SINCERELY THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER OUR REZONING REQUEST.

I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF THOUGHTFUL PLANNING AND THE RESPONSIBILITY YOU CARRY IN SHAPING THE FUTURE OF THE WONDERFUL CITY OF NEWBURGH.

WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT OUR PROPOSAL, AND WE'RE DEEPLY APPRECIATE THE ATTENTION AND CARE YOU'VE GIVEN TO THE DETAILS OF THIS REQUEST.

YOUR WILLINGNESS TO EVALUATE IT WITH FAIRNESS AND THOROUGHNESS, UH, DOES NOT GO UNNOTICED.

THIS, UH, REZONING REPRESENTS A MEANINGFUL STEP TOWARD CONSOLIDATING MULTIPLE NON CORRESPONDING ZONING DISTRICTS ON PROPERTY IN QUESTION AND CONVERTING THAT INTO A SINGULAR ZONING THAT HAS CONTINUITY WITH THE ADJOINING TIES.

WE ARE CONFIDENT THIS REZONING WILL CONTRIBUTE POSITIVELY TO THE TOWN'S CONTINUED PROGRESS.

AS YOU'RE LIKELY AWARE, THE REQUEST WILL ULTIMATELY RESULT IN THE PERMITTING OF DEVELOPMENT FOR AN ADDITIONAL 146 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, WHICH WOULD'VE JOINED THE NEW BERN WEST PROJECT TO THE ATHENS ACRE PROJECT, WHICH WAS RECENTLY COMPLETED THAT LAST YEAR.

AND YOU ALL SAW THE SIGNS FOR THAT IN THE, IN THE MATERIALS.

WE HAD PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT WHERE THE DEVELOPERS OF THE ATHENS PROJECT ACRES PROJECT, UH, CONTAINING 68 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.

AND WE THOROUGHLY ENJOYED WORKING WITH THE TOWN OF NEW BERN DURING THAT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

THE TIMING WAS DIFFICULT FOR ALL PARTIES, UH, INVOLVED.

AS THE PROCESS TOOK PLACE DURING THE COVID PANDEMIC, IT WAS REFRESHING TO SEE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC COMING TOGETHER TO RESOLVE ISSUES AS A TEAM, ALONG WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE 4,046 NEW SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.

WE WERE PROPOSING TO CONNECT THE EXISTING ELIZABETH STREET HUB THROUGH THE PROPERTY AND CONNECT IT TO CHARLES DRIVE ON NEW BERN WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS WOULD PROVIDE HEIGHTENED VEHICLE ACCESS AND CONNECTIVITY FROM NEW BERN WEST TO NEWS BOULEVARD SHOPPING AREAS.

REGARDLESS OF THE FINAL DECISION, I WANT TO EXTEND MY HEARTFELT THANKS FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE TOWN AND FOR ENGAGING IN THIS PROCESS WITH SUCH DILIGENCE.

WE LOOK FORWARD TO A POSITIVE DECISION AND A FEW MORE YEARS OF WORKING WITH THE WONDERFUL STAFF OF THE CITY.

ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK, MAYOR? YES, MA'AM.

BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, I JUST, SOMETIMES OUR AUDIENCE HAVE STATED THAT THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO HEAR CLEARLY, AND SO I JUST WANTED TO ASK THE TWO GENTLEMEN THAT CAME UP.

WERE YOU ABLE TO HEAR CLEARLY WHAT WAS PRESENTED? YES, MA'AM.

IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SECOND MOVE, MAYOR.

I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANY OPPOSED? PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? I'D LIKE TO, UM, SINCE WE HAVE CLEARED EVERYTHING THAT YOU GUYS UNDERSTAND NOW, THAT IT WILL NOT BE ANY DISRUPTION IN THAT, UH, AREA IN THE WETLANDS.

SO NOW WE'RE GONNA MOVE FORWARD.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

IN REZONING TAX PARTIAL ID 8 2 4 0 6 0 3.

[00:20:01]

UM, THAT ONE RIGHT THERE TOO.

OH, OH, I'M SORRY.

8 2 4 0.

PARTIAL, UH, LET'S SEE.

RESIDENTIAL SIX, R SIX.

RESIDENTIAL.

10 A R 10 A.

THAT'S IT.

YOU WANNA MOVE? YOU WANT TO MOVE THOSE TO R TO R SIX TO RESIDENTIAL.

AND I THINK THE, UH, 10 A IS RESIDENTIAL AS WELL.

CORRECT.

MR. ATTORNEY, ARE YOU GOOD WITH THAT? UH, YES.

THIS BOARD'S, UH, CLEAR.

THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE THE, THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED.

WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

NUMBER EIGHT IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTIONS.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? HEARING NONE UNLESS HAVE A ROLL CALL.

STARTING WITH ALDERMAN ASTOR.

[8. Conduct a Public Hearing and Consider Adopting an Ordinance to Amend Sections 15- 76, 15- 79, 15- 80, 15- 82, 15- 84, and 15- 85 of the Land Use Ordinance.]

15 76, 15 79, 15 80 15 82, 15 84 AND 1585 OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE, MR. GOFF EVENING AGAIN, MAYOR AND THE BOARD.

EVENING.

THE, UH, PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT, UH, IN THE LAND USE ORDINANCE COVERS SEVERAL SECTIONS THAT PRIMARILY DEAL WITH SUBDIVISIONS AND HOW THEY ARE APPROVED AND THE PROCESSES FOLLOWED FOR THAT.

UH, NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL STATUTE ONE 60 D DASH 8 0 1 COVERS THE AUTHORITY, AND THAT'S, UH, SPECIFICALLY THE DECISION ON APPROVAL OR DENIAL FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLATS, UH, MAY BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF STANDARDS EXPLICITLY SHOWN IN THE ORDINANCE.

UH, WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THIS IS, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE AND ANY APPROVAL HAS TO BE BASED OFF OF THE STANDARDS IN THE ORDINANCE.

UH, THE REVIEW PROCESS FILING AND RECORDATION OF SUBDIVISIONS IS COVERED IN A LATER SECTION OF THAT CHAPTER.

UH, IF THE FINAL DECISION ON A SUBDIVISION PLAT IS ADMINISTRATIVE, AS OUR ORDINANCE, UH, IDENTIFIES, UH, THIS DECISION MAY BE ASSIGNED TO SEVERAL DIFFERENT OPTIONS.

EITHER A STAFF PERSON, A COMMITTEE COMPRISED OF STAFF PERSONS, UH, OR IN OUR CURRENT SITUATION.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD.

UH, THE FOLLOWING SLIDES WERE SHOWN, UH, BOTH TO THE PLANNING BOARD AS WELL AS THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION OF THIS.

UH, THIS IS THE RED LINE VERSION SHOWING THE EXISTING TEXT BEING CROSSED OUT.

THE RED LINE BEING THE PROPOSED TEXT.

AND I'LL SCROLL THROUGH THAT.

A LOT OF THESE CHANGES CHANGE, UM, THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD FOR THE APPROVING AUTHORITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OR THEIR DESIGNEE.

SOME CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS TEXT AMENDMENT IS THAT STAFF HAS WORKED CLOSELY WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS, UH, TO REVIEW THIS PROCESS AS WELL AS THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND MEMBERS OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.

UM, THIS WAS ACTUALLY BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION BY THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, AND WE WORKED TOGETHER TO PROPOSE SOMETHING THAT WE THINK STAFF COULD SUPPORT.

UH, AT THE MARCH 20TH, 2025 HEARING FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD.

UH, AT THAT MEETING, THEY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FIVE TO ONE FOR THE PROPOSED TAX AMENDMENT.

IT SAYS REZONING THE FED IS TAX AMENDMENT, UH, PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BASIS RECOMMENDATION ON, UH, THE CONSISTENCY WITH THE LAND USE PLAN, AS WELL AS THE 2022 LAND USE PLAN UPDATE.

UH, FOR STAFF'S EVALUATION, WE WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS PROPOSED TAX FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.

UH, IT RETAINS ALL STANDARDS THAT ARE CURRENTLY SET FORTH IN THE ORDINANCE.

IT'S, IT DOES, HOWEVER, CHANGE THE APPROVING AUTHORITY FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD TO THE, THE DIRECTOR OR THEIR DESIGNEE.

THIS ALSO PROMOTES GREATER EFFICIENCY AND REDUCES RESOURCES SPENT BY THE CITY AS WELL AS APPLICANTS.

AND IT MAKES THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS MORE APPEALING AND CON FOR CONTINUED SMART GROWTH.

AND IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE WILLING TO ANSWER OR IF, UH, SCOTT CITY ATTORNEY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SOME STATEMENTS.

UH, YES.

UH, MAYOR MEMBERS THE BOARD.

I, I WANTED TO, UM, ADD A LITTLE MORE CONTEXT, UM, TO THE PRESENTATION.

AND I KNOW ALDERMAN PRILL, I PROMISED HIM THE LAST MEETING THAT I WOULD COME BACK WITH SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT SOME NOTICE ISSUES.

BEFORE I GET INTO THOSE, I, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE WITH RESPECT TO WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

'CAUSE IT HAS A GREAT POTENTIAL TO BE VERY CONFUSING, CERTAINLY TO YOU AND ABSOLUTELY TO THE PUBLIC.

UM, I'M GONNA START BIG PICTURE.

UM, THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE

[00:25:01]

IS A COMPONENT OF WHAT IN NEWBURN WE CALL OUR LAND USE ORDINANCE.

THE LAND USE ORDINANCE IS ABOUT A 500 PAGE DOCUMENT WITH VARIOUS SECTIONS THAT REGULATE ALL VARIATIONS OF LAND USE WITHIN THE CITY, FROM ZONING TO SUBDIVISIONS TO OTHER DEVELOPMENT ISSUES.

IT, IT IS A COMPREHENSIVE SET OF LAWS.

THE SUBDIVISION SECTION OF THAT IS A MINOR COMPONENT TO THE LAND USE ORDINANCE.

IN SOME CITIES AND TOWNS, THEY CALL THEIR LAND USE ORDINANCE A ZONING ORDINANCE.

AND WITHIN THAT ZONING ORDINANCE ARE SUBDIVISION SECTIONS AND OTHER LAND USE ISSUES.

SOME LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CALL THEIR LAND USE ORDINANCE, A SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, WHICH IS THEIR ENTIRE BODY OF LAND USE LAWS.

I I SHARE THAT WITH YOU SO THAT WE CAN GET ON THE SAME PAGE THAT FOR TONIGHT, WE ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SLIVER WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE BODY OF LAWS THAT REGULATES THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND.

THAT'S BIG 0.1.

WITHIN THIS SLIVER OF SUBDIVISIONS, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MOVING THAT TECHNICAL DECISION PROCESS FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD TO STAFF.

AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, WHAT HAPPENS IN REAL LIFE IS THAT A DEVELOPER GIVES STAFF THEIR PROPOSED SUBDIVISION PLANS.

AND THOSE PLANS CONTAIN ALL THE CRITERIA THAT ARE REQUIRED IN THE SUBDIVISION SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE.

STAFF DOES A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF THOSE 500 PAGES OF LAWS AND THEN ADVISES THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, WHETHER IN STAFF'S OPINION, THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION SATISFIES ALL THE REQUIREMENTS.

AND THEN PNC MAKES ITS DECISION.

SO CURRENTLY STAFF IS DOING ALL OF THIS WORK BECAUSE THEY ARE TECHNICAL EXPERTS IN KNOWING WHAT TO LOOK FOR.

THEY MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE P AND Z BOARD A, A GROUP OF LAY FOLKS, AND THEN THEY BLESS STAFF'S DECISION.

THIS PROPOSAL TONIGHT KEEPS THAT DECISION PROCESS AT THE STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL FOR THE TECHNICAL REVIEW.

UM, IT SHAVES OFF TWO TO THREE MONTHS, ROBERT, OF THE PROCESS ON AVERAGE.

UM, SO WE, WE WOULD TAKE OUR, OUR, OUR DECISION TIME DOWN FROM ROUGHLY THREE MONTHS DOWN TO A MATTER OF WEEKS.

I WOULD EXPECT, UH, IT WOULD BE ABOUT A MONTH.

UM, VARIATION OR OVERSIGHT, UM, THAT WOULD, THAT WHERE ONE COULD STOP THE, UH, APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION AS TO, UM, GIVING NOTICE TO THE ADJOINING OWNERS.

SO WE, WE, WE KNOCK OFF A LOT OF TIME FOR THE DEVELOPERS.

UM, THE ISSUE THAT CAME UP THAT OTTMAN PILL RAISED AT THE LAST MEETING IS RIGHT NOW ADJOINING OWNERS TO THIS VACANT TRACK OF LAND WILL GET A LETTER THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE, UM, A, UH, A DECISION, A RECOMMENDATION MADE AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING LEVEL, AND, UM, AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND, AND SPEAK.

WHEN THEY GET THERE, THEY FIGURE OUT THAT THIS IS A TECHNICAL REVIEW PROCESS, AND THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO ACCESS THOSE 500 PAGES OF LAWS AND SPECIFICATIONS THAT GOVERN THE SUBDIVISION.

SO THEY FIND AT THE END OF THE DAY THAT THEY REALLY CAN'T PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE IT'S GOVERNED BY LAW.

THE FIRST NOTE THAT ROBERT GAVE YOU WAS THE LAW REQUIRES THAT THIS BE AN OBJECTIVE STANDARDIZED PROCESS SO THAT A PROP OWNER KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO TO GET THEIR SUBDIVISION APPROVED.

THINK OF IT, UM, AS, UM, UH, A MORE COMMON EXPERIENCE FOR FOLKS IS, UM, UM, UH, A PERSON WHO OWNS A BUILDING LOT AND THEY WANT TO BUILD THEIR HOUSE.

IT IS THE EXACT SAME PROCESS.

THEY GO TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THEY FILL OUT THE FORMS, THEY GIVE STAFF A SITE PLAN, THEY FILL OUT ALL THE INFORMATION.

STAFF TAKES THAT INFORMATION, COMPARES IT TO THE LAND USE ORDINANCE, AND THEN ISSUES THEM A ZONING PERMIT AND A BUILDING PERMIT.

THAT'S ALL DONE.

IT'S ALL TECHNICAL AND IT'S REQUIRED AS A MATTER OF LAW.

IF YOU MEET THE REQUIREMENTS, STAFF MUST GIVE YOU YOUR ZONING PERMIT, AND THEY MUST GIVE YOU YOUR BUILDING PERMIT.

THIS IS THE EXACT SAME THING, EXCEPT ON A BIGGER SCALE.

INSTEAD OF 10 BOXES TO CHECK FOR YOUR BUILDING PERMIT, THERE'S 30 BOXES TO CHECK FOR THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE LOT SIZES AND THE SETBACKS AND THE SIDEWALKS IN THE STREET, WHICH ALL GOVERNED BY THE CODE.

SO ALL THAT'S TO SAY, AS I MENTIONED LAST TIME, THAT AS A MATTER OF LAW, THE ONLY OBJECTION A PERSON CAN HAVE TO THE PLAN IS A TECHNICAL,

[00:30:02]

UM, I DID A QUICK SURVEY IN THE LAST WEEK OR SO.

UM, I WILL TELL YOU ACROSS THE STATE, IT IS ABSOLUTELY THE MODERN TREND TO MOVE THESE DECISIONS FROM GOVERNING BOARDS AND PLANNING AND ZONING BOARDS TO WHAT ARE CALLED TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEES, WHICH IS STAFF THAT IS CLEARLY THE MODERN TREND EAST OF RALEIGH.

I, I TOOK A LOOK AT, UH, GREENVILLE, JACKSONVILLE, GOLDSBORO, WILMINGTON KINSTON.

OF THOSE FIVE, GREENVILLE USES THE SAME METHODOLOGY THAT THE CITY OF NEW BERN CURRENTLY USES.

KINSTON HAS THEIR DECISIONS MADE, UH, LIKE NEW BRU AT THE PNZ BOARD, BUT NONE OF THE OTHER FOUR CITIES PROVIDE ANY NOTICE.

SO GREENVILLE PROVIDES NOTICE AND HAS THE DECISION MADE AT THE PNZ LEVEL.

THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS PROVIDE NO NOTICE TO A JOINERS.

UM, AND ONLY KINSTON HAS IT AT THE PNC LEVEL.

AND AGAIN, THAT'S GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE MODERN TREND.

THE QUESTION OTTOMAN PRILL IS GONNA HAVE IS IF THE BOARD DECIDES TO REQUIRE THAT NOTICE.

IS THAT POSSIBLE? AND THE ANSWER IS YES, IT IS POSSIBLE.

UM, AND IF THE BOARD WERE INCLINED TO THINK THAT WAY, THEN WE WOULD, WE WOULD MODIFY THIS PROPOSED DRAFT TO ADD A PROVISION THAT THE DEVELOPER AS PART OF THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS, JUST LIKE THE CURRENT RULE, WOULD PROVIDE STAFF WITH THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE ADJOINING OWNERS FROM THE TAX RECORDS, THE COUNTY TAX RECORDS.

AND THEN STAFF WOULD MAIL OUT THAT NOTICE THE DIFFERENCE WOULD BE THAT NOTICE WOULD NOT LEAD THE CITIZEN TO BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO COME TO A PUBLIC HEARING AND HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEBATE THE MERITS OF WHETHER THE PROPERTY SHOULD BE SUB DIVIDED OR NOT.

THE NOTICE WILL PROVIDE THAT STAFF HAS THE PLANES, THEY'RE WELCOME TO COME REVIEW THE PLANES.

THE LAND USE ORDINANCE CAN BE FOUND ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE, AND THAT STAFF WOULD MAKE A DECISION IN A NUMBER OF DAYS, AND THEY'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT A JOINERS MIGHT HAVE.

THAT WOULD BE A WAY TO AT LEAST PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF NOTICE IN ADDITION TO THE POSTING OF SIGNS SO THAT AN A JOINER MIGHT UNDERSTAND, A, THAT SOMETHING'S HAPPENING, BUT B, ALSO HAVE CONTEXT FOR, FOR WHAT THEY'RE BEING NOTIFIED OF.

THEY'RE NOT BEING NOTIFIED THAT THEY'RE GONNA COME TO A LEGISLATIVE DEBATE, BUT THAT THEY DO HAVE ACCESS TO THESE DOCUMENTS IF THEY'D LIKE TO SEE THEM.

QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THAT QUESTIONS? SEE, NONE AT THIS TIME.

WE WILL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.

IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST IT, PLEASE DO SO AT THIS TIME.

SUPPRESSED OR WORRIED ABOUT, UM, IS, IS, UH, NOT A, A LEGITIMATE CONCERN.

COME ON UP.

DR.

HARSHMAN THREE ALLEN DRIVE.

UM, I'LL BE BRIEF.

I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, ADDRESS THE BOARD.

UM, I'M SURE THE IRONY IS NOT LOST, THAT THE DISCUSSION REALLY IS ABOUT ELIMINATING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE JUST WITNESSED.

UM, PUBLIC DISCLOSURE COMMENTS, DISCUSSION, DEBATES, HALLMARK OF THE TRANSPARENCY THAT THIS BOARD RIGHTLY VALUES, UM, THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT NOTIFYING THE PUBLIC OF ITS EXISTENCE, UM, CERTAINLY SEEMS LIKE A REASONABLE THING TO DO, PARTICULARLY THE ADJACENT LAND OWNERS WHO ARE AFFECTED BY A POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

UM, AS FAR AS THE DEVELOPERS ARE CONCERNED, UM, CERTAINLY WALLY IS DOING A GOOD JOB OF PROTECTING THEIR INTERESTS.

UM, AND I THINK THAT YOUR JOB SHOULD BE LOOKING OUT FOR INTERESTS OF OUR COMMUNITY, OUR NEIGHBORS, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, AND THAT PART OF THAT IS GIVING THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD OR THIS BOARD AND RAISE ANY CONCERNS THAT THEY MAY HAVE, WHETHER THEY BE TECHNICAL OR OTHERWISE.

UM, I THINK THAT THE IDEA THAT PUBLIC SCRUTINY SHOULD BE, UM, FEARED OR

[00:35:01]

I THINK THAT, THAT WHATEVER CONCERNS ARE RAISED CAN BE SIMPLY ADDRESSED.

UM, BUT IT ALLOWS BOTH PARTIES TO MOVE FORWARD.

UM, I I DON'T THINK THAT THE GOAL SHOULD BE TO SHORTEN, UM, THE TIMELINE FOR APPROVAL OR TO MAKE IT MORE CONVENIENT FOR DEVELOPERS AT THE EXPENSE OF THE PUBLIC THAT WE'RE HERE TO SERVE.

GO RIGHT AHEAD, SCOTT.

JUST NEAR IN THE CONVERSATION.

UM, WAS IT A STATEMENT THAT SHE MADE IN THERE SOMEWHERE THAT, UM, THE PUBLIC CAN'T COME IN AND ENTER BECAUSE OF THE STATE LAW? NO, NO, SIR.

UM, AGAIN, BIG PICTURE, UM, WHEN I STARTED WITH DESCRIBING NEW BERN'S LAND USE ORDINANCE MM-HMM .

AND, AND THIS SUBDIVISION IS A, IS A SMALLER SECTION OF THAT BROADER BODY.

I SAID THAT TO MAKE, TO MAKE A NUMBER OF POINTS.

ONE, WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT CHANGING ANYTHING REGARDING ZONING, PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT YOU JUST HAD.

THE LAW REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING, AND THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE THAT IS A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.

RIGHT? THAT THAT ZONING DECISION THAT YOU MAKE IS A THUMBS UP, THUMBS DOWN.

AND YOU HAVE THE POWER TO DO THAT FOR ANY REASON YOU WANT BASED ON ANYTHING YOU HEAR OR ANYTHING THAT YOU THINK.

UM, AND THERE ARE OTHER SECTIONS IN THE LAND USE ORDINANCE THAT, THAT ABSOLUTELY REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARINGS, PUBLIC INPUT AMENDMENTS TO THE LANDS ORDINANCE ITSELF REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING, JUST LIKE WE'RE HAVING TONIGHT.

THAT WILL NOT CHANGE.

SO I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT DEPRIVING THE PUBLIC OF PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY LAW.

THE DECISION? IF SOMEBODY HAS A TECHNICAL OBJECTION, HOW DO THEY KNOW THAT THEY CAN EVEN RAISE THAT OBJECTION IF THIS IS GONNA BE HAPPENING AT A STAFF LEVEL? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS BOARD OF ALDERMAN APPROVED FINAL PLATS IN 2016, AND IT WAS GIVEN, THE AUTHORITY WAS GIVEN TO PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD.

WHERE THEY'RE INVOLVED IN A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS WITH YOU.

THIS IS A DIFFERENT SUBSECTION THAT IS MORE TECHNICAL IN NATURE.

WHAT I WAS POINTING OUT ON MACKENZIE WAS THAT, UM, FOLKS ARE FREE TO COME CURRENTLY TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, AND, AND THEY'RE FREE TO SHARE WHATEVER THOUGHTS THEY HAVE, BUT THEY WILL GO UNANSWERED UNLESS THE QUESTION AND ISSUE THEY RAISE HAS TO DO WITH THE STREET WIDTH OR THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE, OR THE NUMBER OF TREES OR THE, THE AMOUNT OF GREEN SPACE.

IF THE ONLY OBJECTIONS ONE CAN RAISE ARE THE, ARE VIOLATIONS OF TECHNICAL VIOLATIONS OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE, IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH, I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING THESE HOUSES HERE, OR I WISH THE DRIVEWAYS WERE ON THE OTHER SIDE.

THOSE ISSUES AREN'T RELEVANT BECAUSE THOSE ARE MORE LEGISLATIVE TYPE ISSUES THAT ARE ADDRESSED WHEN YOU DRAFT AND MODIFY YOUR LAND USE ORDINANCE.

THOSE, THOSE ZONES THAT YOU SET UP THAT EXIST IN THE LAND USE ORDINANCE WITH ALL THOSE CRITERIA, THOSE ARE THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT.

ONCE THEY ARE SET, THOSE ARE THE RULES THAT APPLY UNTIL THOSE RULES ARE CHANGED.

SO EVEN IF A PERSON DOESN'T LIKE THEM AND THEY COME TO COMMENT, THERE'S THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD IS POWERLESS TO ACCOMMODATE ANY COMMENTS THAT ARE NON-TECHNICAL.

AND IN MY DECADES OF EXPERIENCE, I RARELY EVER HEAR A TECHNICAL ISSUE.

MOST FOLKS COME COMMONSENSICALLY, JUST LIKE TONIGHT, THINKING THAT IT'S MORE OF A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AND THEY WANT TO OFFER THEIR THOUGHTS ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE SHOULD BE A SUBDIVISION AND IF SO, WHAT IT SHOULD LOOK LIKE.

AND THAT'S NOT IN THEIR PURVIEW.

GOT, THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING THAT AGAIN.

ANYONE ELSE? GOOD EVENING.

BOARD OF ALDERMEN AND MAYOR, GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING PUBLIC COMMENT.

UH, IF THIS IS APPROVED, WILL THE DEVELOPER BE REQUIRED TO POST A SIGN ON THE PROPERTY THAT'S GONNA BE DEVELOPED? UM, IS THAT A REQUIREMENT OR THEY MAY PUT A SIGN ON THAT PROPERTY.

AND HOW MANY DAYS DOES A PERSON WITHSTANDING HAVE TO APPEAL

[00:40:01]

NOW THAT'S GONNA BE POSSIBLY TAKEN AWAY FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.

AND THEY KNOW, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT THINGS.

THE TERRAIN, THEY UNDERSTAND THAT'S THEIR JOB AS PLANNING AND ZONING.

SO THEY'RE KIND OF EXPERTS IN THEIR FIELD FOR REVIEWING TECHNICAL THINGS.

SO IF SOMEBODY HAS, UM, WANTS TO, YOU KNOW, RAISE QUESTIONS DURING A COMMENT PERIOD DURING THE PLANNING AND ZONING PERIOD, THE RULE SHOULD JUST BE LAID OUT IN THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AND SAYING, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE AND LET'S MOVE FORWARD.

RIGHT.

AND THEN GIVE PEOPLE AN AVENUE TO, UM, ADDRESS YOU ALL WITH LEGISLATIVE ISSUES.

BUT TAKING THE PUBLIC, UH, I DON'T SEE HOW TAKING THE PUBLIC OUT OF THE PROCESS, UM, IS APPEALING TO THE, TO THE OWNERS OF THE, THE PROPERTY THAT MAY BE MAJORLY IMPACTED BY THESE DECISIONS.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

UM, GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY.

UM, SO WHAT I'M COMING TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT IT'S REALLY A MOOT POINT TO INVITE PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER THE FACT.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN.

SO I THINK LIKE THE QUESTION ON EVERYBODY'S MIND IS LIKE, WHERE DOES THE PUBLIC HAVE A CHANCE TO BE ENGAGED WITH ONCE A, A DEVELOPING COMPANY COMES INTO THE, TO THE CITY OF NEW TO SAY, HEY, CAN WE BUILD SOMETHING? I THINK EVERYBODY WANTS TO KNOW, HOW DO WE ENGAGE THEN? BECAUSE WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS THAT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO CHANGE IS LIKE AN INAPPROPRIATE TIME FOR THE, FOR THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT.

SO LIKE, WHEN IS THE APPROPRIATE TIME? YES, MA'AM.

I, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL STEP IN.

UM, AND AGAIN, I I I GO BACK TO MORE OF A BIG PICTURE, WHICH IS NOT GONNA BE SATISFYING BECAUSE ONCE THE LAW IS SET, THE RIGHTS ARE ESTABLISHED.

SO THE, BY THE STATE OR LIKE OUR BOARD, THIS BOARD, OKAY.

SO, AND THAT, AND THOSE, THOSE RULES, THE, THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT ARE USED TO DESIGN A SUBDIVISION ARE SET BY THE BOARD IN THE LAND USE ORDINANCE.

AND THAT IS A LOCAL LAW.

AND IT'S THE LAW UNTIL THE BOARD CHANGES IT.

SO IF FOLKS ARE INTERESTED IN DESIGN TYPE ISSUES, THOSE, THOSE, THOSE ARE LEGISLATIVE ISSUES ABOUT WHAT THE LAW SHOULD BE.

THE BOARD CAN ALWAYS ENTERTAIN THOSE NOT DURING THE SUBDIVISION DESIGN PROCESS, RIGHT.

IN A LIVE ONE, BUT PRIOR TO, SO THAT WOULD BE A WAY TO, TO ENGAGE IN THE PROCESS SO THAT THE BOARD AND CITIZEN HAVE A BETTER SENSE OF WHAT THE, WHAT THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT ARE, BUT WHAT'S THEIR SET.

PROPERTY OWNERS ARE THEN LEGALLY ENTITLED TO RELY ON THOSE RULES WHEN THEY BUY THEIR PROPERTY AND START TO DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY.

SO THAT LEADS ME TO THE QUESTION OF LIKE, DOES THE BOARD LIKE REVIEW THESE ORDINANCES ON A SCHEDULE, UM, OR AS NEEDED BASIS? GREAT QUESTION.

THE BOARD IS ENTITLED TO DO THAT.

GENERALLY IT'S DONE BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD.

THAT'S KIND OF THEIR PURVIEW, IS TO STAY ABREAST OF MODERN TRENDS, ISSUES, CITIZEN INPUT ALONG WITH THE BOARD.

THE BOARD CAN DIRECT P AND Z TO GO STUDY SOMETHING.

AND IN THE MEANTIME, P AND Z SHOULD BE STUDYING THINGS LIKE THIS TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF OTTOMAN TO CHANGE THE LAW TO SOLVE PROBLEMS. VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU GUYS.

WE'RE, WE'RE ALSO IN THE MIDDLE OF A COMPLETE REWRITE OF OUR LAND USE ORDINANCE THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR SEVERAL MONTHS NOW.

AND THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES THEN FOR THE PUBLIC TO HAVE INPUT ALSO.

AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE ANYONE, AND I KNOW IT'S, IT'S NOT EXCITING STUFF, BUT, UM, THIS LA ASS ORDINANCE WILL BE IN, UH, IT, IT IS, THE PROJECT WILL LAST OVER THE COURSE OF AT LEAST ANOTHER YEAR.

SO THERE'LL BE PLENTY, PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR FOLKS TO, TO DIP INTO IT.

UM, GOING BACK TO MS CARD'S QUESTIONS.

UM, THE POSTED NOTICE IS A REQUIREMENT, UH, ON THE SITE.

UM, AND THAT'S JUST A CUT AND PASTE FROM THE STATE STATUTE.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT ANSWERS HER SECOND QUESTION, WHICH IS, HOW LONG DOES A PERSON WITHSTANDING HAVE TO APPEAL THAT DECISION? THE ANSWER IS 30 DAYS FROM NOTICE.

[00:45:01]

SO THE REASON WE ADDED THAT, THAT POSTING INTO THE CODE WAS SO THAT THE APPEAL TIME, A, THE PUBLIC WOULD BE NOTICED, AND B, THE APPEAL TIME WOULD START TO RUN.

'CAUSE IF THERE WERE NO SIGN, THEN THE APPEAL TIME OF 30 DAYS WOULD NOT RUN UNTIL WORK IS COMMENCED ON THE PROPERTY.

AND SOMEONE SAW TREES BEING CUT DOWN AND RAISED THEIR HAND AND SAID, WHAT'S GOING ON? AND THEY WOULD LEARN, OH MY GOSH, A SUBDIVISION WAS APPROVED A YEAR OR TWO AGO AND THERE WAS NO POSTING OF IT, AND I'M JUST LEARNING OF IT NOW.

SO I HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL.

SO THAT SIGN DOES TWO THINGS.

IT, IT HELPS THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND THAT SOMETHING'S HAPPENING.

IT ALSO HELPS THE LANDOWNER START THE APPEAL TIME RUNNING OF 30 DAYS SO THAT THEY KNOW ON THE 31ST DAY THEIR, THEIR LENDER CAN LOAN THEM MONEY, UM, TO BUILD THE PROJECT WITHOUT RISK OF FUTURE APPEALS.

ALDERMAN BEST, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO TIME.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? NAME MAYOR, UM, AL ALDERMAN.

AGAIN, MY NAME IS ERIC REMINGTON.

I'M WITH THE LAW FIRM OF GORDON SMITH.

I WORKED WITH THE STAFF ON THIS, UH, THIS PROPOSAL.

AND, UH, YOU KNOW, LIKE SCOTT WAS SAYING, BASICALLY THIS IS A CHECK THE BOX KIND OF SITUATION WHERE THERE ARE SPECIFIC CRITERIA THAT THE DEVELOPERS HAVE TO MEET.

AND I THINK THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW IS VERY FRUSTRATING FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED, BECAUSE WHEN THE PUBLIC COMES TO THE PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS, THE PLANNING BOARD ESSENTIALLY HAS TO HEAR WHAT THEY'RE SAYING AND THEN SAY, I'M SORRY, WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

IF THEY'VE MET THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS, WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT, AND THEY END UP APPROVING IT.

AND SO IT BASICALLY ADDS A LENGTHY TIME TO THE PROCESS THAT DOESN'T REALLY NEED TO BE THERE BECAUSE IT IS A TECHNICAL APPROVAL AND IT IS A SORT OF CHECK THE BOX SYSTEM.

SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE LET THE BOARD, UH, APPROVE THIS TEXT AMENDMENT.

I THINK IT'LL BE GOOD FOR THE CITY, AND I THINK IT'LL BE, UM, IT'LL ACTUALLY HELP THE PROCESS AND THAT WE MAKE IT BE MORE EFFICIENT.

GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS JOHN THOMAS.

I'M WITH THOMAS ENGINEER IN, IN BURY.

MY OFFICE IS LOCATED AT 1316 COMMERCE DRIVE.

WE'RE OVER SIDE, UNFORTUNATELY, A LOT OF THE TIME THESE DAYS, I WANNA SAY I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT.

UH, UM, I'VE BEEN APPEARING BEFORE BOARDS, UH, JUST A FEW YEARS SHORT OF 50 YEARS NOW, I BELIEVE.

AND, UH, I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE'VE HAD A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH A LOT OF BOARDS, EVEN THIS BOARD AND THE COUNTY BOARD.

THERE ARE COMMUNITIES THAT WE WORK IN OVER EASTERN NORTH CAROLINA THAT BEEN DOING THIS FOR, FOR YEARS.

UH, BASICALLY THE ONLY THING THAT GOES TO A PLANNING BOARD OR A COUNCIL OR THINGS THAT ALL LEGISLATIVE LIKE THE REZONINGS, UH, BUT ALL THE, THE SUBDIVISION STUFF AND THE SITE PLAN STUFF STAYS AT AT, AT THE STAFF LEVEL.

WHAT I'VE FOUND WITH BOARDS, INCLUDING YOUR OWN BOARD, WHEN WE GET BEFORE THE BOARD WITH A SUBDIVISION, LET'S SAY, UM, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING IN CASES, THE, UH, AND IN HERE IN NEW, THE PUBLIC'S ALLOWED TO SPEAK, I'M NOT REALLY AGAINST THAT, BUT I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF IT EITHER, BECAUSE LIKE SCOTT SAID, IT IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICAL PROCESS YOU GO THROUGH.

BUT WE OFTENTIMES FIND OURSELVES IN A COMPROMISING SITUATION IF, UH, IF OBJECTION PROPERTY ITEM WANTS SOMETHING.

AND SO, UH, WE TALK ABOUT IT AND WE MAY OR MAY NOT AGREE TO IT, BUT THE BOARD IS OF THE OPINION THEY MAKE AND TURN THE PROJECT DOWN BECAUSE OF THAT.

AND THEY REALLY CAN'T.

WE'VE INVOLVED, BEEN INVOLVED WITH NUMBER OF PLANNING BOARDS PARTICULARLY, AND SOME COUNCILS THAT, THAT KIND OF OVERREACH GO OUTSIDE OF THEIR BOUNDARIES OF WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.

I THINK SCOTT GAVE A REALLY GOOD PRESENTATION ABOUT WHAT THE STATUTES SAY AND, AND, UH, AND WHAT THE LAW IS.

AND I THINK IT'D JUST BE A GREAT THING TO NOT TO HAVE TO GO BEFORE A PLAN BOARD.

IT MAY SHORTEN THE PROCESS, BUT IT, IT DOES TAKE, UH, HAVING TO GO BEFORE A BOARD OUT OF IT.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT.

IS THERE FURTHER COMMENT? YES.

ANYONE ELSE? PUBLIC HEARING SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

[00:50:01]

I HAVE A COMMENT.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, SCOTT.

NOW MY UNDERSTANDING WAS ALMOND CREOLE HAS SOME RESERVATIONS ABOUT CITIZENS, JASON, PROPERTY OWNERS NOT HAVING THE RIGHT TO BE NOTIFIED.

AND THAT'S WHAT'S WE ARE HERE TONIGHT FOR IS WHETHER OR NOT WE FEEL THAT ONE QUARTER PART OF THIS IS THAT WE FEEL THAT THE CITIZEN SHOULD BE NOTIFIED BECAUSE I MAY LIVE OUTTA STATE AND HAVE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE, THE PARCEL, WHATEVER THAT WANTS TO BE.

AND THEN, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T RECEIVE A NOTIFICATION, SO I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT IT.

SO I THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS THE, THAT WAS ALDERMAN'S PRIS CONCERN THAT CITIZENS PROPERTY OWNERS SHOULD BE NOTIFIED.

SO WHAT THIS IS SAYING HERE TO, TO, TO ME TONIGHT IS THAT WE AS A BOARD HAVE TO APPROVE WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT THAT TO CONTINUE A PART OF THIS LAND USE ORDINANCE.

THAT WE DON'T NOTIFY THE, THE CITIZENS OR THAT WE SHOULD NOTIFY THE CITIZENS.

THAT'S THE WAY I'M FEELING.

WE SHOULD NOTIFY THE CITIZENS.

EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT GONNA HAVE A CONVERSATION IN THIS PART, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S BEEN BE APPROVED OR NOT.

UN UNDERSTOOD.

UM, THE VERSION BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS, IS THE VERSION THAT HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS WITH P AND Z MM-HMM .

AND, AND THIS CURRENT VERSION DOES NOT HAVE THE PROVISION THAT REQUIRES MAIL.

NO MAILED NOTICE TO ADJOINING OWNERS.

IF THE BOARD IS INCLINED TO DO THAT, WE WOULD PUT THIS SAME ORDINANCE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING WITH THAT NEW PROVISION.

IF THAT, IF THAT WAS WHAT WAS CAUSING THE BOARD HESITATION, UM, THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED NEXT MONTH.

WELL, THAT IS MY, THAT'S MY CONCERN.

I THINK THE CI, THE TAXPAYER CITIZEN THAT OWNED PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY SHOULD BE NOTIFIED.

UM, WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

UH, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? OKAY.

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT? MAYOR, IF YOU WOULD, I'D LIKE TO, UH, MAKE A COMMENT, UM, IN ADDITION TO WHAT ALDERMAN BEST JUST SPOKE, UM, ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, UM, DEFINITELY WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH HOMES AND DEVELOPMENT.

IT BRINGS ECONOMICS AND, UH, EMPOWERS OUR CITY.

HOWEVER, I WILL ALWAYS BE ON THE SIDE OF EVERY VOICE HAS VALUE ON THE SIDE OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.

AND I HEARD WHAT OUR ATTORNEY SAID ABOUT THE TECHNICAL PROCESS AND ALL THE BOXES BEING CHECKED BY, UH, THOSE WHO ARE EXPERTS IN THE FIELD.

I BELIEVE THAT ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE NOT ONLY THE RIGHT, BUT THEY DESERVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, IF NOTHING MORE THAN TO VENT THEIR VOICE.

IN LIGHT OF THAT, I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO SEE THIS DRAFT MODIFIED, THAT IT WOULD COME BACK TO US AS A BOARD, THAT THIS BOARD WOULD CONSIDER THE CITIZENS THAT ELECTED US AND THAT WE WOULD REPRESENT THEM WELL, AND THAT THEIR VOICE WOULD BE HEARD IN THIS FORUM.

AND THAT IS MY POSITION TONIGHT.

ANYONE ELSE? UM, I AGREE WITH YOU, SCOTT, THAT, UH, WE MODIFIED THE DOCUMENT AND BRING IT BACK.

MAY LIVE ADJACENT TO PARCEL OF A PROPERTY THAT ARE NOT YET DEVELOPED, UM, AND COULD BE DEVELOPED AT ANY TIME IN THE FUTURE, THE ABILITY OF THOSE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS TO HAVE ANY MEANINGFUL IMPACT ON WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN, UM, ON THE UNDEVELOPED PARCELS ADJACENT TO THEM HAS LARGELY BEEN, OR ESSENTIALLY HAS BEEN LEGISLATED AWAY.

ANYONE ELSE? UH, MAYOR, JUST A QUICK COMMENT.

UM, SCOTT, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

I THINK IT HAS, UH, ENLIGHTENED, UM, THOSE IN ATTENDANCE, UH, TONIGHT.

UM, I GUESS THE, THE BIGGER PICTURE ISSUE FOR ME, UM, IS, OR AT LEAST THE TAKE AWAY FROM THIS, IS THAT THE ABILITY OF INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHO

[00:55:01]

AND AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THERE REALLY ISN'T MUCH THAT CAN BE DONE TO CHANGE THAT UNLESS THERE IS AN OVERWHELMING EFFORT ON THE PART OF INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS IN THIS STATE TO GET THAT, GET THOSE LAWS CHANGED.

AND I, I DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT WILL HAPPEN.

SO I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO SEE AN ORDINANCE THAT MAINTAINS THE, THE NOTICE PROVISION IN ADDITION TO A SIGN BEING INSTALLED.

IF NOTHING ELSE, IT AT LEAST GIVES ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK WITH STAFF WHO ARE THE TECHNICAL EXPERTS.

AND THEY MAY NOT WALK AWAY WITH THE, THE ANSWERS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR, BUT AT LEAST IT, IT WILL GIVE THOSE INTERESTED PROPERTY OWNERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS AND, UM, WHETHER THEY LIKE IT OR NOT, UM, THEY, THEY, THEY NEED TO ACCEPT THAT.

UH, SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE BOARD, UM, TO, UM, REQUEST, IF YOU WILL, THAT THE, THE LANGUAGE OF THIS BE MODIFIED TO INCLUDE THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT, UM, AND CONSIDERED AT THE NEXT MEETING.

DO YOU HAVE YOUR DIRECTION? STAFF? YES, SIR.

ANYTHING ELSE? THANK YOU.

UH, DO WE NEED A MOTION TO TABLE THIS AND BRING THIS BACK TO THE NEXT MEETING? UM, LET'S DO THAT, MAYOR.

SO I'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THE DECISION ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, NOT THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION THAT WE JUST HAD, BUT JUST THE ACTION FOR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT TO NEXT MEETING TO OUR NEXT MEETING.

SO MOVED.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? HEARING NONE.

NEXT UP IS ITEM NUMBER NINE, AN UPDATE FROM THE NEWBURN HOUSING AUTHORITY, MR. BARN, OR, WELCOME SIR.

ANY OPPOSED? OKAY.

[9. Update from New Bern Housing Authority.]

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND, AND ALDERMAN AND STAFF.

UH, THANK YOU ALL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, GIVE YOU AN UPDATE, UH, FROM OUR LAST, UH, MEETING THAT WE HAD IN, IN MARCH, UH, THAT WAS HELD AT THE STANLEY WHITE CENTER.

UH, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, AND ALSO THANK THANKS TO, UH, TWO OF MY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.

I'M RET BARNER.

I'M THE INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, UH, FOR THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.

AND WE'LL BE GIVING YOU ALL AN UPDATE THIS EVENING.

I'D LIKE TO FIRST START WITH, DO I USE THIS FOR SURE? OKAY.

UH, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS START WITH JUST KIND OF A QUICK OVERVIEW OF, OF 2016, UH, PRIOR TO MY, MY EXISTENCE IN THE COMMUNITY.

BUT, UH, YOU ALL RECEIVED A, UH, CHOICE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING GRANT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.

AND DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME, UH, THE COMMUNITY WORKED TOGETHER.

THEY HAD SEVERAL DIFFERENT COMMITTEES, AND OUT OF THAT, UH, GRANT, UH, YOU ALL CAME UP WITH A GREATER FIVE POINT TRANSFORMATION PLAN THAT WAS PROVIDED.

I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE COME TO THE MEETINGS AND TALKED ABOUT EXPANDING THE TERRITORY.

UH, WE DON'T HAVE THE LIBERTY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT AT THIS TIME BECAUSE THE PLANNING GRANT, UH, IDENTIFIED A SPECIFIC AREA TO BE FOCUSED ON.

AND AS WE GO FORWARD, THAT IS THE AREA THAT WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON AS WE F MOVE FORWARD WITH AN IMPLEMENTATION GRANT.

SO AS PEOPLE HAVE CONVERSATION AROUND EXPANDING THAT, WE'RE, WE'RE JUST NOT AT LIBERTY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

SO WHAT IS REALLY, UH, CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS? UH, CHOICE NEIGHBORHOOD FOCUSES ON THREE AREAS IN PARTICULAR, PEOPLE, NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING.

AND, AND SO THE PEOPLE COMPONENT IS A VERY IMPORTANT, UH, COMPONENT OF WHAT WE'RE FOCUSED ON.

AND, AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CONSTANTLY, UH, COMES UP IN ALL OF OUR MEETINGS THAT I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU ALL.

AND THE GENERAL

[01:00:01]

PUBLIC IS WE, WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT WE KEEP, UH, THEIR THOUGHTS IN MIND AS WE MAKE DECISIONS.

AND I WANT TO START OUT BY SAYING, UH, TO REINFORCE THIS BECAUSE IT, IT GOES BACK AND FORTH CONSTANTLY.

AND EVEN WITH PEOPLE THAT COME TO THE MEETINGS, IS IT SEEMS TO GET LOST ONCE THEY LEAVE THE MEETING.

AND SO I WANT TO BE CLEAR, NO ONE THAT LIVES IN TRENT COURT NOW, OR AT THE TIME WHEN THE FLOOD OCCURRED, WILL BE DISPLACED AND NOT HOUSED IN ANYTHING THAT'S BEING REBUILT.

SO I WANNA REPEAT THAT AGAIN BECAUSE THAT'S CONSTANTLY A QUESTION AND WE ANSWER THAT EACH TIME AND IT SEEMS TO COME UP EVERY TIME.

AND THAT IS, AGAIN, NO ONE THAT LIVES IN TRENT COURT WILL BE DISPLACED.

NO ONE THAT LIVED IN TRENT COURT AT THE TIME OF THE FLOOD IN 2018.

THEY HAVE THE FIRST RIGHT TO BE ABLE TO COME BACK TO THE DEVELOPMENT WHEN WE REBUILD IT.

THE NEXT AREA IS NEIGHBORHOODS, INCREASED CONNECTIONS, TRAILS, PARKS, TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AMENITIES, UH, GOOD BATTERY INDIFFERENT.

UM, THE PUBLIC HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AS IT WAS BUILT IN THE FORTIES, UH, IT'S OLD, IT'S DILAPIDATED.

AND, AND JUST VERY QUICKLY, MOST PEOPLE DON'T EVEN REALIZE THAT UNTIL THE 1990S HUD DID NOT EVEN CONSIDER, UH, AIR CONDITIONED IN EUNICE AS A REQUIREMENT.

THEY LOOKED AT IT AS AN AMENITY.

SO PRIOR TO THE 1990S, PUBLIC HOUSING UNITS DIDN'T EVEN HAVE CENTRAL HEATING AND AIR.

AND SO, SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THOSE UNITS AND WE TALK ABOUT, UH, DISPLACING PEOPLE AND TEARING IT DOWN AND REBUILDING SOMETHING BETTER, THOSE BUILDINGS ARE OLD AND ANTIQUATED, AND IT'S TIME THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY DO GET REDEVELOPED AND, AND TORN DOWN TO PROVIDE BETTER QUALITY HOUSING FOR PEOPLE.

AND THEN THE NEXT COMPONENT IS HOUSING.

UH, HUD HAS NOT BUILT ANY NEW PUBLIC HOUSING IN THE UNITED STATES SINCE THE 1980S.

AND SO, UH, THE LARGEST HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT THAT EXISTS IN AMERICA TODAY IS THE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM, WHICH MOST PEOPLE DON'T EVEN REALIZE IS NOT EVEN A HOUSING PROGRAM.

IT'S SECTION 42 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE.

AND THAT HAS BEEN SINCE 1986, THE LARGEST PRODUCE IN THIS COUNTRY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, IN, IN THE UNITED STATES.

AND SO, SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, HUD HAS NOT BUILT ANY NEW PUBLIC HOUSING SINCE THE 1980S.

SO WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT WITH FLORENCE? UH, AND WHEN FLORENCE OCCURRED, 108 UNITS OF THE 218 UNITS THAT WERE DAMAGED, UH, AT TRENT COURT, UH, UH, AFFECTED THE ABILITY TO, FOR THOSE FAMILIES TO RESIDE, THERE'S FEMA MONEY THAT'S AVAILABLE.

UH, THE REASON THAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS TO BE CLEAR IS WE HAVE GOT IN ORDER FOR, UH, FEMA AND HUD TO ALLOW US TO DEMOLISH THOSE UNITS.

UH, AND SHIPPO, THEY'RE REQUIRING THAT WE DEVELOP A MASTER PLAN.

SO IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT TEARING THE UNITS DOWN, BUT IT'S ALSO FOCUSED ON WHAT ARE YOU PLANNING TO REBUILD.

SO IT'S NOT JUST GIVING YOU THE PERMISSION TO TEAR THE UNITS DOWN.

AND AS MUCH AS EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM IN THIS COMMUNITY WANTS THOSE, UH, BOARDED UP UNITS TO BE TORN DOWN, WE CAN'T DO THAT WITHOUT A PLAN OF WHAT WE PLAN TO PUT BACK.

SO THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW SERVES TWO PURPOSES.

ONE IS, IS TO DEVELOP A MASTER PLAN WHERE WE CAN BE ABLE TO SUBMIT THAT TO HUD, FEMA AND SHIPPO TO GET THE APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH THOSE UNITS AND BEGIN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING UNITS BACK.

UH, FEMA HAS APPROXIMATELY OVER $40 MILLION WAITING ON THIS COMMUNITY FOR THAT REDEVELOPMENT.

AND THAT'S THE PROCESS THAT I'M TRYING TO GO THROUGH TO GET US TO THAT LEVEL TO BE ABLE TO DO THE REDEVELOPMENT.

THE SECOND PART OF IT IS, UH, THE CNI PROCESS.

UH, DURHAM, RALEIGH, OTHER COMMUNITIES CLOSE TO YOU ALL WILMINGTON HAVE RECEIVED WINSTON-SALEM, HAVE RECEIVED THE CHOICE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UH, GRANT AGAIN, LET ME GO BACK.

YOU RECEIVED A PLANNING GRANT.

THE NEXT PHASE, THIS IMPLEMENTATION, UH, WE THINK THAT BY THE FALL FOR SURE, UH, BASED ON CONVERSATIONS I'M HEARING THAT A NOFA, A NOTICE OF FUND AVAILABILITY WILL BE ON THE STREET AND WE COULD POTENTIALLY, FOR THIS COMMUNITY APPLY FOR ANYWHERE BETWEEN 30 AND $50 MILLION GRANT TO GO ALONG WITH THE $40 MILLION THAT WHICH WE ALREADY ALLOCATED, UH, WITH FEMA.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT, WHAT WE'RE FOCUSED ON IS POTENTIALLY BRINGING CLOSE TO $90 MILLION IN GRANT FUNDS TO THIS COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO REDEVELOP, UH, THE, UH, TRENT COURT AREA AND OTHER PARTS OF THE FIVE POINT TRANSFORMATION PLAN, NOT JUST THE SITE WHERE TRENT COURT SITS, BUT THE TARGETED AREA THAT WAS A PART OF THAT 2016,

[01:05:01]

UH, PLAN.

WE'VE HAD LISTENING SESSIONS IN OCTOBER THROUGH DECEMBER.

WE RECENTLY HAD ANOTHER SECOND SESSION OF LISTENING SESSIONS IN MARCH.

AND AGAIN, UH, WE ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO PARTICIPATE AND PUT THESE DATES ON YOUR CALENDAR.

UH, WE WILL HAVE, UH, UPDATED LISTENING SESSIONS AND FINAL LISTENING SESSIONS AGAIN IN JUNE 2ND THROUGH JUNE 5TH, WHICH WILL BE OUR FINAL SESSIONS BEFORE WE COMPLETE THE MASTER PLAN.

WE HOPE TO HAVE READY AND DONE BY, UH, AUGUST AND READY TO SUBMIT TO HUD AND SHIP SHIPPO.

THESE ARE SOME PICTURES OF THE LISTENING SESSIONS.

THIS HAS BEEN A VERY MUCH A COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORT.

UH, WE'VE HAD PEOPLE FROM CROSS SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY PARTICIPATE WITH US FROM THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OR FIELDS FROM HIGHER ED, UH, MIDDLE SCHOOL, HIGH SCHOOL.

ONE OF THE THINGS THE CONSULTANTS HAVE SAID, AND I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THIS FOR NEWBURN AS A COMMUNITY, IS THAT THE CONSULTANTS THAT WE'RE USING, UH, HAVE HAD A 1000 BATTING AVERAGE ON RECEIVING THESE CNI GRANTS.

AND THEY HAVE INDICATED TO US THAT THE PARTICIPATION THAT WE'VE HAD IN THESE LISTENING SESSIONS HERE IN NEWBURN HAVE BEEN GREATER THAN THEY'VE SEEN IN LOS ANGELES, LAS VEGAS, NEW ORLEANS, AND OTHER COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

SO I WANT TO SAY TO YOU ALL THAT THE COMMUNITY SHOULD BE PROUD OF THE EFFORTS THAT PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY HAVE PUT FORTH.

WE'VE HAD ALL LEVELS OF INVOLVEMENT FROM THE COMMUNITY TO THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVING IN PUBLIC HOUSING TO ALL FIELDS AND, AND FROM THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, SMALL BUSINESS COMMUNITY, THE CHAMBER ET CETERA.

SO EVERYBODY'S BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS, AND THAT JUST GOES TO, TO, UH, HIGHLIGHT, UH, THE VALUE OF WHAT, UH, THIS MEANS TO THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.

SO, WHAT WE TALK ABOUT MIXED INCOME HOUSING, AND THIS IS VERY KEY.

WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT FOR THE 218 UNITS THAT EXIST AT TRENT COURT.

WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT OF A ONE FOR ONE REPLACEMENT.

WHAT THAT MEANS IS WE WILL REBUILD A TOTAL OF 218 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS BACK IN THIS COMMUNITY.

SO, WHAT DID I SAY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE DISCUSSION? NO ONE THAT RESIDES IN THE UNITS NOW, OR ANYONE THAT RESIDED IN THE UNITS WHEN THE FLOOD OCCURRED WILL BE DISPLACED.

SO WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT THOSE FAMILIES WHO ARE SUBSIDIZED IN HOUSING THAT PAY NO MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR GROSS ADJUSTED INCOME WILL BE PAYING NO MORE IN THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS THAN 30% OF THEIR GROSS ADJUSTED INCOME.

THE OTHER COMPONENT IS NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.

AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I ALWAYS TELL PEOPLE, AND PLEASE REMEMBER THIS, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS HOW WE FINANCE IT.

IT'S NOT WHAT WE BUILD.

LUMBER IS LUMBER.

BRICK IS BRICK.

AND SO THE SAME BRICK THAT GOES INTO YOUR HOUSE IS THE SAME BRICK THAT GOES INTO THESE HOUSES.

WHAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE IS HOW WE FINANCE IT.

AND THE SUBSIDY THAT GOES INTO IT IS WHAT MAKES THESE USE UNITS AFFORDABLE.

THE QUALITY OF THESE UNITS, WHETHER IT'S A MARKET RATE UNIT OR IT'S A FAMILY THAT'S PAYING NO MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR GROSS SUGGESTED INCOME, WILL ALL HAVE THE SAME IDENTICAL UNITS, IS HOW WE FINANCE THOSE UNITS.

THAT MAKES IT AFFORDABLE FOR THOSE FAMILIES THAT CURRENTLY LIVE IN PUBLIC HOUSING TO NOT PAY NO MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR GROSS SUGGESTED INCOME.

THERE'S ALSO THIS MISCONCEPTION IN MISNOMER OUT IN THE COMMUNITY THAT CONTINUES TO PERPETUATE ITSELF, THAT ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS DEMOLISH THE UNITS AT TRENT COURT AND BILL NOTHING BUT HIGH-END, UH, CONDOS, UH, FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE IN.

THAT IS THE FARTHEST THING FROM THE TRUTH.

IN ORDER TO EVEN GET THE 30 TO $50 MILLION THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT FROM HUT, HUT REQUIRES THAT NO MORE THAN 20% OF THE UNITS THAT WE'RE PLAN TO REBUILD WILL BE MARKET RATE UNITS.

SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, LOOK AT IT AS A THIRD OR THIRD OR THIRD, A THIRD OR REALLY MORE THAN 50% OF THOSE UNITS WILL TARGET THOSE PEOPLE AT 60%, 80% OF A MI IN THIS AREA BELOW.

AND THEN WE'LL TARGET THOSE AT 80 TO A HUNDRED PERCENT, AND THEN A HUNDRED TO 140%.

SO ONLY 20% OF THOSE WILL FOCUS ON THE MARKET RATE UNITS.

THE WORKING POOR.

THAT MISSING MIDDLE WILL ALSO BE ADDRESSED IN HERE.

THOSE ARE YOUR POLICE OFFICERS, THOSE ARE YOUR TEACHERS.

THOSE ARE THE WORKING PEOPLE THAT REALLY WORK AND LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY, WOULD ALSO BE A PART OF WHAT WE PLAN TO REBUILD IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, BECAUSE IT'S A FAILED EXPERIMENT TO WAREHOUSE A HUNDRED PERCENT OF POOR PEOPLE TOGETHER.

WE WANT TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT THAT HAS A MIXED INCOME OF ALL DIFFERENT LEVELS OF INCOME LEVELS LIVING IN A COMMUNITY TOGETHER.

SO AGAIN, I WANNA REINFORCE TO YOU ALL THAT NO MORE THAN 20% OF THE

[01:10:01]

UNITS THAT WE PLAN TO REBUILD, WHICH IS A ONE FOR ONE REPLACEMENT, AND I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.

BUT THOSE 218 UNITS WILL ALWAYS AND STILL REMAIN AFFORDABLE FOR THOSE FAMILIES.

EVERY BUILDING HAS A PHASE WITH MIXED INCOME IN IT.

AS I SAID, MARKET RATE, AFFORDABLE UNITS ARE IDENTICAL.

RESIDENTS SHARE THE SAME AMENITIES, SO IT'S NOT A SECOND CLASS CITIZEN ENVIRONMENT WHERE YOU LOOK AT LOW TO MARKET INCOME.

PEOPLE ARE GONNA HAVE LESS AMENS IN THEIR UNIT THAN THE PEOPLE THAT'S PAYING MARKET RATE IS ALL THE SAME.

AGAIN, IT'S HOW WE FINANCE IT, NOT NECESSARILY WHAT WE BUILD.

THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE NOW, AND THESE ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF WHEN THEY TOUR DOWN SIMILAR STYLE UNITS IN WINSTON-SALEM.

HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THEY BUILT BACK ON THAT SITE, UH, IN WINSTON-SALEM.

UH, WHO ARE WE PARTNERING WITH? UH, HRI COMMUNITIES IS BASED OUTTA NEW ORLEANS.

UH, WHEN KATRINA HAPPENED, THEY'RE ONE OF THE LARGEST, UH, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES, UH, IN THE COMMUNITY IN IN, IN THE NEW ORLEANS COMMUNITY.

THEY WERE VERY INSTRUMENTAL, UH, AND THEY, UH, RECOGNIZED NATIONWIDE.

UH, IT'S IN THEIR NAME.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT, UH, TRENT COURT IS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.

AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT HRI, THEIR NAME IS HISTORIC RESTORATION INCORPORATED.

THEY SHORTENED IT TO HRI, BUT THEY WERE FOUNDED AS A HISTORIC REDEVELOPMENT, UH, BUSINESS ENTITY.

AND SO THEY FOCUS ON THAT.

WE PUT AN RFP OUT ON THE STREET SEEKING A TOP DEVELOPER IN THE UNITED STATES THAT CAN WORK WITH US IN, IN HERE IN NEWBURN THAT HAD THE BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE OF WORKING WITH CHOICE NEIGHBORHOOD, AS WELL AS WORKING WITHIN, WITHIN HISTORIC, HIS HISTORIC DISTRICTS, UH, ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

AND THEY DID AN EXCELLENT JOB IN NEW ORLEANS, AND THEY HAVE BEEN CHOSEN AS OUR DEVELOPMENT PARTNER, FUTURE MIXED INCOME DEVELOPMENT.

SO GOING BACK TO WHAT I INDICATED, THE 218 UNITS ARE A ONE FOR ONE REPLACEMENT.

WE ARE GONNA BUILD NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AT 132 UNITS AND MARKET RATE UNITS.

AGAIN, GOING BACK TO WHAT PEOPLE KEEP SAYING IN THE COMMUNITY, THAT WE'RE ONLY FOCUSED ON THE WEALTHIEST OF THE WEALTHIEST OF WHAT WE PLAN TO REBUILD.

AS YOU SEE FROM THIS EXAMPLE, OUT OF 440 UNITS, ONLY 90 UNITS OUT OF THE 440 WILL BE MARKET RATE UNITS WE'RE CAPPED AT 20%.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, AS YOU ALL AS AMBASSADORS FOR THE CITY, ARE ALSO AMBASSADORS FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DISPEL THOSE MYTHS AMONG YOUR CONSTITUENCIES OF WHAT IS CORRECT AND WHAT IS WRONG.

AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE CLEAR UP THAT THIS EVENING.

THESE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES OF WHAT COULD BE DONE WITH THOSE HOUSING, UH, THAT WE PLAN TO REBUILD.

THESE ARE SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE, UH, EXAMPLES OF UNITS THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT IN OTHER COMMUNITIES USING THE CHOICE NEIGHBORHOOD FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO HELP FACILITATE THAT.

UH, HERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WHERE WE WANT TO PUT ON, UH, WALL BELLAMY AND, AND, AND, AND THOSE AREAS AS WELL AS SIMILAR UNITS, UH, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO BE OVER THE, THE, UH, BASE FLOOD ELEVATION LEVEL.

IF YOU LOOK AT THESE EXAMPLES THAT, UH, ON THE SCREEN, UH, AS YOU LOOK AT THESE, YOU WOULD NOT EVEN RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT THE FIRST FLOOR IS PARKING.

SO AS WE BUILD THOSE UNITS UP, WE'RE BUILDING THOSE UNITS WITH PARKING UNDER THE FIRST FLOOR, BUT IT'S MASKED BY A DESIGN FEATURE THAT GIVES YOU THE APPEARANCE THAT THOSE ARE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY PARKING.

SO ANY EVENT THAT A FLOOD OR SOMETHING OCCURS IS THE, THE AREA THAT GETS FLOODED IS THE PARKING LOT, NOT THE UNITS THEMSELVES.

AND SO THE WHOLE DESIGN FEATURE OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS TO ENSURE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE DESIGN SOMETHING THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENT THAT FEMA WOULD REQUIRE, BECAUSE HERE IS THE REALITY.

IF WE BUILD SOMETHING, UH, WITHOUT THESE REQUIREMENTS BUILT INTO IT, AND THEY FLOOD AGAIN, FEMA DOESN'T GIVE US NEW MONEY ALL OVER AGAIN.

SO WE'RE GOING TO PAINSTAKING EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DESIGN AND REDEVELOP, UH, THE COMMUNITY IN A WAY THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENT.

NEW HOUSING COULD, COULD GO ON THREE POTENTIAL SITES.

LET ME SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT.

AGAIN, MISINFORMATION, NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT OUR PLAN IS.

SO ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER CHOICE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A COMMUNITY, WE HAVE TO IDENTIFY NOT JUST PIECEMEAL INFIELD LIVES, BUT WE HAVE TO IDENTIFY THREE TO FOUR OR FIVE STRATEGIC AREAS THAT WE CAN DEVELOP THESE 440 UNITS THAT ARE CONCENTRATED.

AND SO WHAT WE ARE DOING IN THIS PLAN IS WE'VE IDENTIFIED, I CAME TO YOU ALL, UH, SEVERAL MONTHS BACK TO ASK YOU TO SET ASIDE THE DAYS IN LOT, UH, FOR US TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES.

AND THEN THE OTHER IS WE'VE BEEN IN DISCUSSION WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.

PEOPLE HAVE MADE THE AS ASSERTION, UH, THAT WE OWN THE WEST STREET SCHOOL.

WE DON'T, WE'RE WORKING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO IDENTIFY AS A POTENTIAL USE.

[01:15:01]

WE, LIKE YOU ALL DON'T WANT TO SEE, UH, UH, UH, SITES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY JUST SITTING THERE DECAYING.

AND WE KNOW THAT OVER A PERIOD OF TIME THAT OVER 20, 30, 40 YEARS, WHAT'S GONNA END UP HAPPENING? WE'LL, WE'LL BE SITTING HERE TALKING ABOUT DEMOLITION OF THOSE SITES IF NO REDEVELOPMENT IS DONE.

WE'RE NOT AGAINST A MUSEUM.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR.

WE, WE ARE SUPPORTIVE AND, AND I'LL SHOW YOU IN A FEW MINUTES OF HOW WE'RE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.

SO WHAT WE'VE DONE RIGHT NOW IS IDENTIFIED THREE MAJOR AREAS, UH, FOR REDEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS INITIAL PLAN.

ONE, THE EXISTING TRENT COURT SITE, TWO, THE DAYS IN SITE, AND THREE, THE WEST STREET SCHOOL.

WE DON'T OWN IT.

AND SO WE, WE, WE WANNA MAKE THAT CLEAR.

WE'VE NEVER SAID WE'VE DONE, WE, WE OWN IT.

WHAT WE'VE DONE IS USE IT AS A, AS A PLANNING TOOL OF WHAT POTENTIALLY, UH, CAN BE DONE.

HERE IS THE TRENT COURT SITE.

UH, WE, WE ARE GONNA HAVE GREEN SPACE.

UH, AS YOU LOOK AT IT, IT POTENTIALLY CAN HAVE, UH, BASKETBALL COURTS, TENNIS COURTS, PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT.

UH, WE'RE GONNA INCORPORATE HISTORIC MARKERS WITHIN THE, UH, AREA AND, UH, NEW STREET SIDEWALKS, LARGER BUILDINGS NEAR THE WATERFRONT, SMALLER BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.

AGAIN, AS WE GO CLOSER TO P*****K STREET, IT WILL CASCADE DOWN AND NOT BE AS HIGH.

SO WE WANT TO INCORPORATE EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE REQUIREMENT.

WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT FROM HPC TO KEEP ONE OF THE BUILDINGS, UH, AND THE DEVELOPER THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH HR, THEY HAVE EXPERIENCE TO KEEP ONE OF THOSE BUILDINGS THAT AS WE'VE AGREED TO, TO USE AS RESIDENTIAL.

SO AGAIN, WE'RE, WE'RE FOCUSED ON THAT.

HERE'S ANOTHER, UH, PICTURE OF THE TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL STREET, AND HERE'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, UH, THAT IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN WE REDEVELOP.

AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT, UH, THE, THE STREETS, IT'S WALKABILITY.

IT'S THE NEW URBANISM DESIGN WHERE IT'S CLOSER, UH, TO THE STREETS AND, AND, AND PEOPLE CAN RESIDE.

AND THESE NEW UNITS, UH, WOULD, WOULD GO ON TR COURT, WATER WATERFRONT TODAY.

THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

THIS IS WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR THE WATERFRONT AREA TO LOOK LIKE WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA.

AGAIN, USING THOSE EXAMPLES I SHARED BEFORE, THESE FIRST FLOOR UNITS WOULD BE BASICALLY OUR FIRST FLOOR DESIGNS WOULD BE PARKING WITH, UM, THREE STORIES ABOVE THAT FROM A RESIDENTIAL STANDPOINT.

YOU SEE THE WALKABILITY WITH COBBLESTONE TYPE STREETS AND, AND THE GREEN SPACE AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

UH, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DO A GOOD JOB THERE.

DAYS IN SIGHT, AGAIN FOR PLANNING PURPOSES.

MIXED USE BUILDINGS WITH STOREFRONTS FACING, UH, BROAD STREET AND QUEEN RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS FACING P*****K POTENTIAL SPACE FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION CENTERS, ET CETERA.

AGAIN, DEVELOPING A MASTER PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY, BROAD STREET AND QUEEN AS IT EXISTS NOW, AND WHAT BROAD STREET AND QUEEN COULD LOOK LIKE UNDER, WE HAD AN ILLUSTRATOR ON SITE.

SO THIS GENTLEMAN WAS TAKING IDEAS THAT PEOPLE WERE SAYING ON SITE, AND HE DREW THESE DESIGNS AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

SO THIS WAS LIVE AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF INCORPORATING THAT WEST STREET SCHOOL AGAIN, UH, THAT FROM EVERY INDICATION, THAT BUILDING NEEDS TO, UH, BE TORN DOWN BECAUSE OF THE MOLD AND OTHER THINGS.

UH, LET ME BE CLEAR, IT IS GONNA BE A VERY COSTLY ENDEAVOR TO REDO THAT SCHOOL, BUT IT'S WORTH IT.

AND WE'VE INCORPORATED INTO OUR PLAN, UH, BECAUSE WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT AS WELL.

BUT WE WANT TO PUT RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN OTHER COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

AND I'VE BEEN A PART OF THAT ACROSS THE COUNTRY OF TAKING OLD SCHOOLS AND, AND PUTTING, UH, RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UH, IN THERE, PRESERVATION OF EXISTING CLASSROOMS THAT TURNS INTO, UH, RESIDENTIAL UNITS, NEW CONSTRUCTION TOWN HOMES ALONG THE WEST STREET, AS YOU CAN SEE THERE.

UH, WE HAVE A DESIGN TO BUILD SOME TOWN HOMES ON THAT PROPERTY.

AGAIN, MAXIMIZING THE USE OF THE PROPERTY.

HISTORIC WEST STREET SCHOOL MUSEUM IN A HISTORIC, THE CAFETERIA BUILDING, AS YOU SEE FROM A, UH, FROM A DESIGN STANDPOINT, THE ARCHITECTS TOOK THAT AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION, LIKES AND DISLIKES, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING TO INCORPORATE IT AND RECOGNIZE THE HISTORY OF WHAT WE'VE FOCUSED ON.

UH, AGAIN, NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECTS, SIDEWALKS, RECREATION, RECREATE THE HISTORIC FOUNTAIN AT MCCARTHY SQUARE.

UH, FACADE GRANTS FOR HOMES AND BUSINESSES BECAUSE AGAIN, PART OF THE MONEY THAT WE WILL GET FROM HUD OF THAT 30 TO $50 MILLION IF WE'RE SUCCESSFUL, UH, WITH THE CNI GRANT, IT'S NOT JUST GOING FOR HOUSING.

IT ALSO CAN

[01:20:01]

HELP WITH FACADE AND BUSINESSES WITHIN THE DISTRICT THAT WE'RE FOCUSED ON AS WELL.

AND SO WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THOSE FUNDS AVAILABLE TO HELP REDEVELOP THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY THAT IS COMPLETELY ATTRACTIVE FOR EVERYONE.

UH, URBAN GARDENS FOREST, AGAIN, WE TALKED ABOUT THE, UH, HISTORIC WEST STREET SCHOOL, UH, EXPANSION OF THE LEAN OF MORGAN PARK AND RIVER WALK.

YOU GOT A BEAUTIFUL AREA THAT WE NEED TO EXPAND ON.

AND WITH THE DEMOLISHING OF THOSE UNITS, THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF GREEN SPACE THAT WE CAN REALLY ENHANCE AND RE AND REALLY REDO THAT AND MAKE THAT PARK SOMETHING THAT'S VIABLE, THAT THE COMMUNITY CAN REALLY BE PROUD OF.

AND SO WE WANT TO FOCUS ON THOSE THINGS.

AGAIN, THIS IS WHERE QUEEN AND P*****K STREET INTERSECT, AND THIS IS THE PROPOSAL TO BRING BACK THE, UH, THE MCCARTHY SQUARE IN THE FUTURE, IF THAT WAS A PART OF THE APPROVED PLAN.

AGAIN, HERE'S THE RETAIL AND THE FIVE POINTS RIGHT THERE AT BROAD.

UH, CREAMER BREW IS, IS OVER TO YOUR LEFT, AND THAT SHOWS YOU RESIDENTIAL WITH, WITH, UH, WITH RETAIL ON THE FIRST FLOOR RIGHT THERE ON BROAD STREET.

SO THAT GIVES YOU, UH, A KIND OF SENSE OF WHERE WE'RE FOCUSED ON.

THE OTHER THING THAT WE'RE FOCUSED ON MAKING SURE WE DO A GOOD JOB OF IS SIGNAGE AND PRESERVATION, AND RESTORATION OF, OF SIGNAGE IN THE AREA.

WE WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE HISTORY AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SIGNAGE THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY THAT PRESERVES THE HISTORY OF THE COMMUNITY AND WHAT WAS REPRESENTED THERE.

AGAIN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO TAKE AWAY FROM WHAT EXISTS.

WE WANT TO ENHANCE WHAT'S THERE AND USE THESE FUNDING THAT WE ARE TRYING TO GO AFTER TO BE ABLE TO HELP FACILITATE THAT.

THIS IS THE WEST STREET SCHOOL AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW.

AND THIS WAS THE PROPOSAL BASED ON THE DESIGN THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT TO HELP INCORPORATE, UH, A MUSEUM WITHIN THERE AND BRING AND LET CITIZENS BRING ARTIFACTS AND OTHER THINGS BACK THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE.

IS IT WHAT EVERYBODY DESIRES? BUT IT'S A BEGINNING POINT, AND IT DOESN'T, IT HELPS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP, UH, THE FACILITY THERE AND HAVE SOMETHING FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY.

ONCE AGAIN, IT'S TO INCORPORATE THE BUILDING, UH, THE CLASSROOMS AS RESIDENTIAL, BUT THEN BE ABLE TO TAKE THAT LARGER SPACE WHERE THE CAFETERIA IS AND CONVERT IT TO MORE OF A MUSEUM FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.

UH, SUPPORTING FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS.

UH, I'M GONNA STOP HERE BECAUSE THEY, THIS IS REALLY MORE THE SLIDES OF WHEN WE DID THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND THE INPUT, AND YOU ALL HAVE THAT FOR YOUR USE, AND IF, I'LL OPEN IT UP IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

AND MAYOR AND ALDERMAN, THANK YOU ALL FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE, AND I ENCOURAGE YOU ALL AS WE GO INTO JUNE TO FINALIZE THIS PLAN THAT YOU ALL PARTICIPATE, AND WE'LL MAKE SURE YOU GET PROPER NOTIFICATION.

MS. BOARD, HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I DO.

MR. BARNARD? UM, I'M ALL FOR MIXED INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS.

UM, BUT I JUST WANT TO ASK ONE QUESTION.

HA, WITHIN ANY OF YOUR PLANS OR TALKS OR WHATEVER WITH THE COMMUNITY OR WITH YOUR, WITH YOUR TEAM OR WHATEVER HAS ANY, WHAT IS GOING TO BE DONE? IS ANY OF THIS, UM, $90 MILLION BE ALLOCATED TOWARDS THE NEWBURN TOWERS? SO, NEWBURN TOWERS, UH, WHAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE IS NEWBURN TOWERS IS NOT, UH, CONSIDERED PUBLIC HOUSING.

UH, IT'S FINANCED UNDER THE HUD MULTI-FAMILY DIVISION.

UH, WE'RE CURRENTLY GOING THROUGH FOR NEWBURN TOWERS, A-P-C-N-A AND, AND ALDERMAN BEST THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP BECAUSE THAT IS A CONCERN OF OURS AS WELL.

UH, AND, BUT JUST LIKE ANYTHING ELSE, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE EATING AN ELEPHANT.

YOU, YOU GOTTA EAT IT ONE BITE AT A TIME.

AND SO WE'RE FOCUSED INITIALLY RIGHT NOW ON TRI COURT, BUT YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

UH, CURRENTLY THE BOARD IS, IS, HAS AUTHORIZED ME TO DO A, WHAT WE CALL A-P-C-N-A.

IT'S A PHYSICAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT.

SO WE ARE TAKING A LOOK AT THE WHOLE ENVELOPE OF NEW NEWIN TOWERS, AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT, UH, AS WE GET THROUGH THIS PROCESS, NEWIN TOWERS IS NEXT, UH, ON OUR LIST BECAUSE IT HAS SOME NEEDS AS WELL.

UH, IT'S OLD AND IT, AND IT HAS SOME DETERIORATION THAT WE ARE GONNA FOCUS ON THERE AS WELL.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

A NEW BUDGET IS PROPOSED AND, AND ALLOCATIONS IS THERE.

ANYONE ELSE? I'D ALSO LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION, UM, REGARDING EVERYTHING THAT'S HAPPENING NATIONALLY MM-HMM .

HAVE YOU SEEN ANY IMPACTS OR HEARD OF ANY IMPACTS AS FAR AS GRANT FUNDING REGARDING THE PROJECTS HERE? SO, GREAT, GREAT.

GREAT QUESTION.

UH, ALDERMAN RURAL, UM, CURRENTLY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AS YOU ALL KNOW, UH, IS OPERATING UNDER, UH, WHAT IS CALLED A, UM, UH, CONTINUED RESOLUTION IS EXPECTED TO CONTINUE TO THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR UNLESS

[01:25:01]

UH, HOWEVER, WITHIN THOSE CONTINUED RESOLUTION, THERE'S FUNDING THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ALLOCATED FOR THE CHOICE NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NOW.

UH, THAT IS IN THE TUNE OF ABOUT $130 MILLION POTENTIALLY WITHIN THAT POOL.

UH, OVER THE PREVIOUS YEARS, IT'S BEEN, UH, ABOUT 150 MILLION WHEN THEY PUT A NO FILE.

SO RIGHT NOW THEY HAD CUT THE BUDGET IN 2023 TO 75 MILLION.

SO WITH IT, WITH EACH YEAR, UH, THAT 75 MILLION HAS INCREASED, THEY DIDN'T PUT AN RFP OUT AT 75 MILLION.

SO WE EXPECTING THAT THEY WILL PUT A RFP OUT FOR FUNDING IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, UH, THIS COMING FALL, OR WE DON'T REALLY KNOW, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PREPARED.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

SO I THINK WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE WITH THE CNI.

UH, WE HAVE A PLANNED VISIT COMING UP TO MEET WITH, UH, THE STAFF IN WASHINGTON.

UH, SO WE'RE ON TOP OF IT AND WE ARE DOING EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO MAKE SURE THAT NEWBURN, UH, THE CITY OF NEWBURN IS FRONT AND CENTER, UH, WITH, UH, UH, THE HUD STAFF.

YOUR CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION FROM THE CONGRESSMAN AND SENATOR'S OFFICE ARE WORKING CLOSE HAND IN HAND WITH US.

SO WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO MAKE SURE THAT AS THIS COMES AND HITS THE STREET, THAT NEWBURN IS RECOGNIZED AND IS KNOWN, UH, IN THE HALLS OF HUD RELATED TO OUR PLAN FOR CNI.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

FINALLY, WE DID NOT GET A COPY OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

I'D LIKE A COPY OF IT.

PLEASE.

WE'LL, WE'LL GET IT TO YOU.

THEY, UH, THE S HAS IT AND, UH, AND I'M, I'M SURE FOSTER WILL WILL GET IT TO YOU ALL THE TIME.

WE, WE HAVE IT IN YOUR PACKET FOR YOU ON A HARD COPY.

ANYONE ELSE? MAYOR? YES, SIR.

UM, MR. BARN, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

I THINK IT, IT GOES A LONG WAYS TO ENTERING, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE OVERALL SCOPE OF THE PLAN IS.

UM, AND, AND AS YOU INDICATED AS BETWEEN JUST THE, THE BRIEF EMAIL MESSAGING THAT WE DID, UM, I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU CAN CONTINUE TO GET THIS MESSAGE OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO AVOID THE MISINFORMATION THAT THAT IS OUT THERE, BUT, UM, I WOULD URGE YOU TO FIGURE OUT ANY WAY POSSIBLE TO KEEP GETTING THIS MESSAGE OUT THERE TO TRY TO, UM, DISPEL THE RUMORS, THE, THE MISINFORMATION THAT'S OUT THERE.

UH, SO OUR GOAL, UH, ALDERMAN PRILL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE DEVELOP A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, THAT WE BUILD UNITS BACK AND BE ABLE TO MOVE THOSE FAMILIES INTO THOSE REPLACEMENT UNITS.

UM, COULD I GET YOU TO GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE THREE SITES THAT YEAH, THAT'S THE ONE.

UM, BEFORE, BEFORE I ADDRESS THE, THE QUESTION I HAD ON THIS AS, AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, UM, IF YOU ARE SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING THE, THE, UM, THE GRANT APPROVED, DOES HUD HAVE ANY REQUIREMENTS THAT AT, WHEN THE NEW UNITS, THE MIXED USE UNITS ARE CONSTRUCTED, THAT YOU HAVE TO FILL ALL OF THE, SAY, CATEGORY ONE UNITS BEFORE YOU CAN START TO FILL THE CATEGORY TWO AND CATEGORY THREE UNITS? THEY DON'T HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT.

UH, HOWEVER, PART OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING WITH THE DEMOLITION PLAN, AND THAT IS WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT ALTERNATE SITES TO BE ABLE TO BEGIN THE REDEVELOPMENT EFFORT, IS TO BUILD UNITS AT OTHER LOCATIONS WHERE WE CAN BEGIN THAT RELOCATION PROCESS.

UH, AS YOU ALL KNOW, AND, AND, AND I WANT TO BRING THIS POINT UP, WE'RE ALSO WORKING WITH TWIN RIVERS BECAUSE UNLIKE OTHER HOUSING AUTHORITIES OR LARGER HOUSING AUTHORITIES, UH, NEWBURN HOUSING AUTHORITY ONLY OPERATES THE, THE PUBLIC HOUSING UNDER MULTIFAMILY, WHICH IS NEWGEN TOWERS.

UH, ONCE THE VOUCHERS THAT ARE RECEIVED THAT WILL GO TO THE FAMILIES THAT WILL KEEP THESE UNITS AFFORDABLE, THAT GOES TO TWIN RIVERS OPPORTUNITIES INCORPORATED, THEY MANAGE THE SECTION EIGHT PROGRAM.

SO, SO WHEN PEOPLE TALK ABOUT WILL THESE REMAIN AFFORDABLE, WE WILL BE GETTING, UH, A 218 ALLOCATION.

THEY ALREADY HAVE 108 WILL GET 110.

SO WE WILL BE WORKING WITH TWIN RIVERS TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE VOUCHERS ARE PUT BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY OF WHAT WE REDEVELOP.

[01:30:01]

UH, NOW AGAIN, THAT'S GONNA BE BASED ON WHAT WE BUILD BACK AND THE ALLOCATION OF THOSE UNITS.

SO IT WON'T BE A HUNDRED PERCENT, AS I GAVE THE EXAMPLE OF THE PERCENTAGES THAT WE WILL DO.

SO WE WILL BUILD NEW UNITS AND THEN BEGIN TO TRANSFER THOSE FAMILIES INTO THOSE NEW UNITS AS WE BUILD NEW COMPLEXES, UH, WITH THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF BEING ABLE TO REPLACE ALL OF THOSE 100% BY THE TIME WE FINISH EACH PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT.

BUT YOU, YOU WON'T BE RESTRICTED TERMS. NO.

SO I DON'T HAVE, IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO FILL AND FORGIVE ME IN TERMS OF THE TERMINOLOGY THAT YOU USE FOR THE CATEGORY ONE, TWO, AND THREE UNIT.

RIGHT.

YOU WON'T BE RESTRICTED IN TERMS OF PUTTING PEOPLE INTO THE CATEGORY TWO AND THREE UNTIL YOU'RE A HUNDRED PERCENT FILLED.

WE'RE NOT IN CATEGORY ONE.

NO, SIR.

'CAUSE THE WHOLE INTENT IS MIXED INCOME AND MIXED USE.

RIGHT.

AND SO WE, WE WILL NOT HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PHASE THAT IS A HUNDRED PERCENT ONE OR THE OTHER.

SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WHY WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT.

AS PEOPLE HAVE ALLUDED TO, YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO TEAR DOWN TRENT COURT TO MOVE PEOPLE OUT AND MOVE THE PUBLIC HOUSING PEOPLE OUT AND THEN ONLY HAVE THE TRENT COURT SITE FOR HIGH-END CONDOS.

AND THAT IS THE FARTHEST THING FROM THE TRUTH.

IT'S A PERCENTAGE IN EACH ONE, BUT WE'RE NOT PRECLUDED TO, ONCE WE MOVE SO MANY PEOPLE, WE STILL HAVE IN 20% OF THE UNITS MARKET RATE, A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE AND CERTAIN PERCENTAGE TARGETED TO THOSE TRENT COURT RESIDENTS.

SO EVERY PHASE WILL BE A MIXED INCOME DEVELOPMENT WITH ALL OF THE SAME AMENITIES.

JUST JUMPING BACK TO THIS SLIDE, UM, SITE TWO, UM, YOU HAVE A RED COLORED, OR THERE'S A RED COLORED, UH, UM, I'M NOT SURE WHAT TO CALL IT, UH, AREA IN, IN SITE TWO.

UH, WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT RED COLORING REPRESENT THAT THAT BUILDING? UH, CURRENTLY WE, WE DON'T OWN, THAT'S THE ANTIQUE STORE.

UM, SO WE DON'T OWN THAT.

WE DON'T OWN THAT BUILDING, SO WE'VE NOT BUILT THAT INTO OUR PLANNING.

HOWEVER, WE HAVE, BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS, UH, WITH HABITAT ABOUT THEIR SITE, POTENTIALLY WE HAVE FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES AND PLANNING PURPOSES BUILT SOME UNITS OR DESIGNED SOME UNITS ON THAT SPOT.

UH, WE, WE WOULD LIKE TO GO TO THE OWNERS, UH, THAT OWN THE ANTIQUE STORE TO SEE IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO SELL AND HAVE SOME DISCUSSION THERE.

BUT WE DIDN'T INCLUDE ANY, UH, ADDITIONAL UNITS, UH, ON THIS PLAN AS OF YET UNTIL WE CAN HAVE SOME DISCUSSION WITH THE OWNERS.

AND WE HAVE NOT HAD THAT.

UH, OKAY.

UM, WELL, AND, AND I'M NOT SURE HOW TO ASK THIS, BUT SO LET ME JUST, JUST, JUST ASK IT AND IF YOU CAN ANSWER, GREAT.

IF YOU CAN'T SURE, THAT'S FINE.

UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ONE OF YOUR COMMISSIONERS IS NOW THE OWNER OF THAT OLD EMPTY STORE BUILDING.

UM, SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT IS A, UM, CHILD OF ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS AND THAT, AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW YEAH, THE BUSINESS IS STRUCTURED, BUT YEAH, IT, IT, IT, IT RAISES A CONCERN, UH, THAT YOU HAVE A COMMISSIONER THAT IS NOW, OR IT'S WITHIN THE FAMILY BUSINESS.

UM, WELL, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS IT IF I COULD.

SO I'M SORRY.

I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT IF YOU THAT'S FINE.

SO GO AHEAD.

WE, WE BECAME AWARE OF THAT, UH, THAT COMMISSIONER IN PARTICULAR MADE IT VERY CLEAR, UH, TO ME, UH, THAT, UH, THEY WOULD REFRAIN FROM ANY DISCUSSION OR INVOLVEMENT AS I, AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND OUR CONSULTANTS LOOK FOR SITES, BECAUSE OF THAT FAMILY INVOLVEMENT, THEY'VE MADE SURE THAT WE HAVE HAD NO INTERACTION, NO DISCUSSIONS, AND THEY WOULD NOT BE INVOLVED IN ANY CONVERSATIONS WE WOULD HAVE RELATED TO THAT, AND THEY WOULD ABSTAIN FROM ANY INVOLVEMENT COMPLETELY IN THAT PROCESS.

SO WE ARE AWARE OF THAT, BUT THEY'VE MADE IT CLEAR THAT THEY ARE, ARE, OR STAND COMPLETELY OUT OF THAT PROCESS.

LET ME BE CLEAR TO THIS BO BODY, UH, OUR INTEREST IN THAT SITE HELPS US TO, AS YOU CAN TELL ON NUMBER TWO, IT HELPS US TO CLOSE THE LOOP IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR

[01:35:01]

THAT.

UH, BUT WE WON'T COMPROMISE THE INTEGRITY OF THE AGENCY, THE GRANT IN THIS COMMUNITY BY NEGOTIATING ANYTHING THAT WOULD AFFECT THAT.

SO LET ME BE CLEAR.

I I DON'T, I DON'T DO THAT.

AND, AND SITE TWO, UM, THE OPPOSITE CORNER, IF YOU WILL, OF SITE TWO IS WHERE, UM, RESTORE MM-HMM .

IS, IS LOCATED.

UM, NOW THIS, I UNDERSTAND THIS IS JUST A, A CONCEPT PLANNED.

CORRECT.

HAVE YOU HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH RESTORE ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY? SO WE WERE AWARE THAT REQUIRING THAT PROPERTY, WE WERE AWARE THAT THE, UH, RESTORE HAD HAD COMMUNICATIONS FOR INTEREST IN SELLING IT.

UH, OUR CONSULTANTS HAD SOME COMMUNICATION WITH SOME INDIVIDUAL.

I'VE NOT PERSONALLY HAD THAT COMMUNICATION.

UH, I DO KNOW THAT, UH, THEY'VE OFFERED THAT POTENTIALLY UP TO THE CITY, UH, AS WELL.

AND THAT IS THE ONLY REASON THAT WE, WE MADE THE DECISION DURING THE, UH, MEETINGS TO TO, TO UTILIZE THAT SITE AS PART OF OUR DESIGN AND PLANNING PURPOSES.

AGAIN, THIS IS FOR PLANNING PURPOSES.

IT MAY FALL THROUGH JUST LIKE, LET'S GO TO NUMBER THREE.

WE DON'T OWN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.

WE HAVE NO LETTER, A FORMAL LETTER OF INTENT.

WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THEY'VE INDICATED THAT THE SITE IS AVAILABLE FOR SALE, AND WE'VE BEEN IN DISCUSSION AND THAT'S WHY WE USED IT.

SO THREE, ALSO JUST LIKE YOU ALL ON THE DAYS END, WE, WE SIMPLY ASK YOU ALL TO LEAVE IT OFF, BUT TECHNICALLY Y'ALL HAVE NOT ALLOCATED THAT TO US.

SO WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE, UH, FOR THE GOOD OF THE GROUP OUTSIDE OF NUMBER ONE, THAT IS THE ONLY SITE THAT WE HAVE FULL CONTROL OVER EVERYTHING ELSE ARE LARGE TRACKS WITHIN THAT FIVE POINTS AREA THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO TARGET AND HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH INDIVIDUALS AS WE'RE DOING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DURING OUR DUE DILIGENCE, UH, TO BE ABLE TO DESIGN SOMETHING THAT WE THINK MEETS THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WELL, THANK YOU MR. BARNER FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU ALL.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ON TO ITEM NUMBER 10, CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION APPROVING EXTENDED CONSTRUCTION HOURS FOR METRO NET AND DOWNTOWN NEWBURN.

MOVING

[10. Consider Adopting a Resolution Approving Extended Construction Hours for MetroNet in Downtown New Bern.]

MR. CHILES.

GOOD EVENING MAYOR BOARD.

AS YOU'RE AWARE, METRONET HAS BEEN WORKING THEIR WAY THROUGH THE CITY INSTALLING FIBER, AND NOW THEY'RE WORKING THEIR WAY TOWARDS THE DOWNTOWN AREA.

WE HAVE BEEN CONTACTED BY METRONET AND HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS REGARDING A, A REQUEST FOR AN OVERNIGHT WORK TIME, WHICH COULD ONLY BE APPROVED BY A REQUEST TO THE BOARD.

SO WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING IS A, JUST A CONFINED AREA OF THE TWO TO 300 BLOCK OF MIDDLE STREET, WHERE THERE'LL BE A DIRECTIONAL BORING WILL BE DOWN THE ACTUAL PARKING LOT, THE PARKING, UH, SPACE SIDE ON THE EAST SIDE, WHICH WOULD ACTUALLY BE THE CHRIST EPISCOPAL SIDE OF THE STREET.

THEY'RE GONNA BE INSTALLING, UH, TRAFFIC RATED BOXES SO THEY CAN RUN THEIR MAIN LINES.

SO TO KEEP THEM OUT OF THE, OUT OF THE SIDEWALK FOR AN IMPROVED PAVER SECTIONS DOWNTOWN, TRYING LESSEN THE IMPACT WITH ANY APPROVED NIGHT WORK.

UM, THERE WILL BE A NECESSARY BLOCK OF THE PARKING SPACES APPROXIMATELY AFTER FIVE O'CLOCK.

UM, WE HAVE HAD MEETINGS WITH WATER RESOURCES AND ELECTRIC, WHICH HAVE PROVIDED ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS REGARDING ON-CALL STAFF AND HOW THAT WOULD BE INVOICED TO METRONET SHOULD YOU APPROVE THIS OVERNIGHT WORK.

AND JOHN ELLI, WHO'S THE PROJECT MANAGERS HERE TONIGHT WITH METRONET, AND IF I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR JOHN CAN FOLLOW UP ON MEANS AND METHODS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OR CERTAINLY CAN ANSWER THIS FOR YOU, THE BOARD HAVE QUESTIONS.

WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE AWARD? ON ITEM NUMBER 10, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING EXTENDED CONSTRUCTION HOURS FOR METRO NET IN DOWNTOWN NEW BERN.

CONSIDER DOCUMENT A RESOLUTION.

LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL STARTING WITH ALDERMAN BEST? ALDERMAN BEST, YES.

[11 . Consider Adopting a Resolution Approving an Installment Purchase Contract for FY2025 Vehicle and Equipment Financing.]

NEXT IS ITEM NUMBER 11.

[01:40:01]

APPROVE AN INSTALLMENT PURCHASE CONTRACT FOR FY 2025 VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT FINANCING.

MS. SO AT THE APRIL 18TH BOARD OF ALDERMAN MEETING, DAVENPORT PRESENTED TO YOU FINANCING OPTIONS AND THE RESULTS OF THE, UM, REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, UM, THE BID, I'M SORRY, THE BOARD MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDATION FOR FINANCING WITH BANK OF AMERICA, I'M SORRY, BANK OF AMERICA PUBLIC CAPITAL CORP.

THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION APPROVES AND AUTHORIZES THE EXECUTION OF AN INSTALLMENT FINANCING AGREEMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS WITH BANK OF AMERICA PUBLIC CAPITAL CORP.

FOR THE PURCHASE OF VEHICLES AND THE EQUIPMENT, THE LOAN WILL NOT EXCEED 2.2 MILLION $450,000.

IT IS REQUESTED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION OF APPROVING THE INSTALLMENT PURCHASE CONTRACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025.

VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT FINANCING DO HAVE QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER 11? I DO, I KNOW THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN THE LAST MEETING.

I RECALL.

I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS AT THIS LATE, UH, STAGE OF THE YEAR, ALMOST AT THE FISCAL YEAR END, IS THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING THIS NOW DUE TO WE'RE JUST GETTING TO THIS PLACE TO LOOK AT THIS CAPITAL EQUIPMENT OR HOW, HOW DO WE GET THIS, THIS LATE IN 25? SO WHEN WE ADOPTED THE BUDGET, WE ALSO DO A, AN INTENT TO REIMBURSE.

SOME OF THESE VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT ARE ORDERED IN JULY, IN AUGUST AND THEN NOT RECEIVE UNTIL MUCH LATER.

WE DO NOT.

UM, WE HAVE THAT INTENT TO REIMBURSE IN PLACE SO THAT WHEN WE GET THEM IN AND WE PAY FOR THEM, AND THEN WE CAN GET REIMBURSED QUICKLY WITH THE LOAN RIGHT AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

SO THOSE HAVE BEEN COMING IN, SOME ARE STILL OUT.

UM, AND IT'S A TIMING THING BECAUSE IF YOU DO IT TOO EARLY, THEN YOU'RE SITTING ON THE MONEY TOO LONG.

YOU ONLY HAVE A CERTAIN TIMEFRAME WHERE YOU NEED TO TO SPEND THAT DOWN.

AND OURS IS ABOUT, UM, 18 MONTHS IS THE AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE.

SO, WE'LL, WE WON'T GET, FOR EXAMPLE, THE POLICE CARS HAVEN'T BEEN, UM, RECEIVED YET AND THOSE WERE ORDERED BACK IN JULY.

SO IF IT FALLS OVER INTO 2026 MM-HMM .

THEN IT'S STILL APPLICABLE.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD.

ON ITEM NUMBER 11, MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INSTALLMENT PURCHASE CONTRACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT FINANCING.

CONSIDERED ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE 2019 ELECTRIC IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT FUND MS. OSRAM A TRANSFER OF $198,000 FROM THE 2019 ELECTRIC IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT FUND TO THE ELECTRIC FUND IS REQUESTED TO COVER THE CAPITAL PURCHASE OF A WINDER PULLER.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.

LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL STARTING WITH ALDERMAN PRILL.

NEXT IS ITEM NUMBER 12.

[12. Consider Adopting an Ordinance to Amend the 2019 Electric Improvements Project Fund.]

THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT OWNS A 3-YEAR-OLD SINGLE PHASE WINDER PULLER, WHICH IS CURRENTLY BEING USED FOR PROJECT ALONG COUNTY LINE ROAD.

HAVING A SECOND CABLE PULLER ALLOWS THE DEPARTMENT TO SIMULTANEOUSLY INSTALL AERIAL CONDUCTORS AT TWO LOCATIONS.

THE NEW PIECE OF EQUIPMENT WILL BE UTILIZED IN THE NORTH N-C-D-O-T 70 RELOCATION PROJECT.

THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT ESTIMATES $65,657 IN REIMBURSABLE COSTS FOR 1,560 HOURS OF EQUIPMENT USAGE FOR THIS PROJECT.

ADDITIONALLY, STAFF ANTICIPATE RECOVERING COSTS WITH ONGOING AND FUTURE PROJECTS.

IF THE BOARD DOES NOT APPROVE THE EQUIPMENT, THE CITY WILL NEED TO RENT THE EQUIPMENT.

ESTIMATED RENTAL COSTS OF 120,000 TO $170,000 MAY BE REIMBURSABLE.

HOWEVER, THE RENTAL OF THE EQUIPMENT IS NOT A FAVORABLE OPTION FOR N-C-D-O-T OR THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT DUE TO THE INCREASED, UM, PROJECT COSTS, TIMELINES AND PROJECT INEFFICIENCIES, IT IS REQUESTED THE BOARD APPROVE THIS AMENDMENT BOARD.

HAVE QUESTIONS? YOU SAID YOUR RENTAL IS, HOW MUCH CAN YOU THE RENTAL RANGES BETWEEN $120,000 TO $170,000 DE DEPENDING ON IF THEY NEED TO, HOW MANY TIMES THEY NEED TO PICK UP AND DROP OFF OR IF IT'S GOING TO STAY.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, BETWEEN THE PHASES OF THE

[01:45:01]

PROJECT, IT WOULD BE ABOUT $120,000 TRYING TO COORDINATE THAT.

AND, AND I THINK MR. BOUCHARD'S HERE, HE COULD PROBABLY SPEAK MORE, BUT TRYING TO COORDINATE THAT WITH THE TIMING OF THE PROJECT IS DIFFICULT.

SO IF THEY KEPT IT ON, ON THE, UM, IN PLACE, YOU KNOW, KEPT IT ON SITE, THEN $170,000 IS WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT AND THAT ALL OF THAT WILL BE REIMBURSABLE.

SO YOU'RE SAYING PURCHASE ONE OR RENT IT FOR ONE YEAR? UH, IS JUST USING IT IN I'M, I'M RECOMMENDED WE PURCHASE IT.

THERE'S NO EQUITY IN RENTAL.

UM, AND WE'LL HAVE TO RENT IT FOR SEVERAL YEARS ON AND OFF.

AS THIS PROJECT EVOLVES, IT'S DIVIDED UP INTO THREE PHASES.

IT'S ABOUT SIX MILES, SEVEN MILES OF OF LINE.

THAT HAS TO BE RELOCATED FOR N-C-D-O-T AT THE SAME TIME TRYING TO EXTEND THAT EMERGENCY LINE EXTENSION FROM, UH, THE BRACES CREEK AREA OVER TO, UM, BLUE WATER RISE AREA.

SO MM-HMM .

I'M JUST, OUR EXISTING PULL IS OVER 30 YEARS OLD.

UM, I JUST, JUST NEED A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT.

SO THE BEST PAYING IS YOU TO PURCHASE THAT? YES.

AND WE WILL, WE'LL BUILD LONG TERM N-C-D-O-T FOR THE COST OF THAT EQUIPMENT.

LIKE WE DO EVERY OTHER PIECE OF EQUIPMENT THAT WE USE ON THEIR JOB.

SO MM-HMM .

WE'LL, WE'LL GET, WE'LL MAKE MONEY ON THIS AND BUILD EQUITY INTO AT THE SAME TIME.

IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, I MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE 2019 ELECTORATE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT FUND.

SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON ITEM NUMBER 12.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.

LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL STARTING WITH ALDERMAN ROYAL.

[13. Consider Adopting an Ordinance to Amend the Multi- Year Grants Fund.]

IS ITEM NUMBER 13.

CONSIDER ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MULTI-YEAR GRANTS FUND.

MS. OSTROM.

THIS AMENDMENT ACKNOWLEDGES THE, UM, GRANT FUNDS THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT RECEIVED FROM THE JUVENILE CRIME PREVENTION COUNCIL AND THE AMOUNT OF 900 THOU $900 FOR NATIONAL NIGHT OUT.

WITH NO MATCH REQUIREMENT, IT IS REQUESTED FOR THE BOARD TO ADOPT THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.

THIS BOARD HAVE QUESTIONS SO I HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

NUMBER 14, CONSIDER ADOPTING A BUDGET ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FOR FY 2025.

LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL STARTING WITH ALDERMAN ASTOR.

[14. Consider Adopting a Budget Ordinance Amendment for FY2025]

MS. OSTROM, THIS AMENDMENT APPROPRIATES $3,500 FROM FUND BALANCE FOR INCREASED UTILITY COSTS AT THE FIREMAN'S MUSEUM.

IT AMENDS THE ELECTRIC FUND BY 198,000 TO REFLECT THE TRANSFER FROM THE 2019 ELECTRIC IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT FUND FOR THE PURCHASE OF A WIND OR POLARIZED DETAILED.

IN ITEM NUMBER 12, IT ALSO APPROPRIATES 102,000 FOR FUND FROM FUND BALANCE FOR ADDITIONAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH EMPLOYEE AND RETIRE RATE HEALTH INSURANCE AND AMENDS THE POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND TO APPROPRIATE $10,000 FROM FUND BALANCE FOR NARCOTIC INVESTIGATIONS.

IT'S PLEASURE.

THE BOARD ON ITEM NUMBER 14, MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT THE BUDGET ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS FOR FY 2025.

HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.

LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL STARTING WITH ALDER MCKENZIE.

NEXT IS ITEM NUMBER 15.

UH, BOARD.

MY TABLET IS DOWN.

IT HAD IT TODAY.

UH, AND IT'S NOT WORKING RIGHT NOW, SO I'M HAVING TO DO THIS FROM MY PHONE, BUT IT DOESN'T APPEAR THERE ARE ANY APPOINTMENTS IN THE PACKAGE.

DID I MISS ANYTHING? NO.

NO.

MANAGER'S REPORT TWO ITEMS FOR YOU.

UH, ITEM NUMBER 16, ATTORNEY'S REPORT, UH, NOTHING REPORT.

NIGHTMARE CITY

[17. City Manager' s Report.]

AS A REMINDER, OUR BUDGET WORKSHOP WILL BE HELD ON MONDAY, APRIL 28TH AT 9:00 AM AT THE STANLEY WHITE RECREATION CENTER.

AS YOU ARE LOOKING THROUGH THE BUDGETS, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, FEEL FREE TO REACH OUT TO ME OR THE FINANCE DIRECTOR.

I KNOW SEVERAL OF YOU HAVE ALREADY REACHED OUT WITH SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME THINGS, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO A ROBUST DISCUSSION DURING THAT TIME.

ALSO, ONE OF THE THINGS, A REMINDER THAT, UM, UH, OUR MEETING SCHEDULES ARE GONNA BE ADJUSTED, STARTING WITH THE MAY MEETING.

THERE WILL BE ONE MEETING A MONTH, AND WE'LL PICK BACK UP WITH TWO MEETINGS IN SEPTEMBER.

THAT'S ALL WE HAVE TONIGHT, SIR.

MOVING ON TO NEW BUSINESS ALDERMAN FRILL.

[18. New Business.]

UH, NOTHING THIS EVENING, YOUR HONOR.

ALDERMAN ROYAL, NOTHING TONIGHT, PLEASE.

ALDERMAN STER.

NOTHING SIR.

[01:50:01]

ALDER MCKENZIE? YES, SIR.

IT IS TIME FROM THE MANAGER, UM, EVALUATION TIME.

SO WE NEED TO SET A TIME UP FOR THAT.

UM, MS. BRENDA, WOULD YOU MAYBE SEND AN EMAIL AND POLL THE BOARD? UH, CONSIDERING WHAT THE MANAGER JUST MENTIONED WITH US GOING TO ONE MEETING A MONTH, UM, WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHEN WE WOULD LIKE TO CONDUCT THAT EVALUATION AND, UM, THE PROCESS BOARD.

UM, AS IN THE PAST WE'VE DONE A SURVEY MONKEY, UM, WHERE THAT IS SENT OUT TO EACH MEMBER OF THE BOARD.

YOU'RE ABLE TO FILL THAT OUT.

THOSE RESULTS ARE SUMMARIZED AND TABULATED.

AND THEN, THEN WE HAVE THAT REVIEW.

IS THAT THE PROCESS THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO USE THIS TIME? OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT? IT'S PRETTY, IT'S PRETTY EASY.

YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GO RIGHT THROUGH THAT.

ALDERMAN, BETH, NOTHING TONIGHT.

I THINK I HEARD FROM FOUR, SO WE SHOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT.

ANYTHING ELSE, SIR? THAT'S IT.

DO WE NEED A CLOSE SESSION?

[19. Closed Session.]

WE TO BRIEFLY, UH, SO TO 1 43, 3 10, 11 A THREE TO MAINTAIN OUR ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE AND TO DISCUSS, UH, ROBERTS VERSUS THE SENIOR.

CAN I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PLEASE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION.

I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FROM ALDER MCKENZIE.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NO, SIR.

ANY OPPOSED? WE'RE ENC CLOSED SESSION.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS THIS EVENING? IF NOT, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

MAKE A MOTION.

WE ADJOURN.

HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.