PWBC Meeting Package 13 May 2015
13May2015
Meeting Minutes
Chairman Barbour called the meetingto order at 4:00and introductions were made by each;the
meeting’sattendance sheetisattached.The Aprilmeeting minutes were approved and the
current Port,Waterway and Beach Commission (PWBC)fund balance was noted at ~$3631.98.
The 13 May agenda items were moved tothe June PWBC meeting following an extended
discourse by the PWBC regarding the current Inter-local Agreement (ILA). The discussion
began withthe Carolina Beach(CB)and Kure Beach(KB)Mayors notingtheir previous
notification of cessation from the currentILAagreementas of 30 June 2015. The
aforementioned mayors focused their ILA consternation on the percentageof participation by the
beach towns if federal and/or state funding failed to reach a 17.5%fundinglevelforfuture
coastal storm damage reduction (CSDR) projects.
CB Mayor Wilcox initiated the discussion by emphasizing the need for a partnership agreement
first and then an equitable funding approach. Mayor Wilcox stated the beach communities
combine for ~51% of the incoming room occupancy tax(ROT), ~17% of New Hanover
County’s (NHC)property taxes and only~5% of the population. The mayor went on to describe
his perspective as a beach community where local taxes provide for the infrastructure/services
for ourseasonal visitors, the beach communities also pay county taxes and in the current ILA are
askedto pay up to 17.5% of a local CSDR project that benefits the entire county.The mayor
noted that all county residents should pay for the CSDR projects. The mayor statedthat NHC
only manages the ROT and pays nothing toward the CSDR projects and,as such,hinders the
local advocacy efforts in Raleigh and WashingtonDC.
KB Mayor Lambeth noted that NHC should have a general fund line item specificallybudgeted
for CSDR efforts. The mayor went on to support Mayor Wilcox’s comment that NHC staff has
not been supportive or helpful ameliorating thisissue. The mayorsreferencedseveral
alternatives that have been brought before staff for consideration.
CB Councilman Shuttleworth questioned future federal and state participation in the CB CSDR
project, specifically FY19 and the potential CB funding challenge. The Councilman went on to
support the Raleigh based advocate recently contracted and hoped continued state participation
would be a prioritygoalset by NHC.
Chairman Barbour succinctly reviewed the historical cost sharing formula of 65% federal and
35% non-federal. The 35% has historically been split 50/50 between the NC Division of Water
Resources and the ROT.
CB Mayor Wilcox emphasized that all should be at the table including the state, county, City of
Wilmington and the beach communities.
Chairman Barbour noted that a portion of the 17.5% provided by the ROT did originate from
within the county and the Cityof Wilmington (beyond the Convention Center District).
CB Councilman Shuttleworth noted the ROT is everybody’s participation and that NHC should
have a budgeted line item for CSDR.The Councilman further questioned the current life-cycle
of the ROT in the event the feds were to cease participation. Staff provided the answers and
reminded the PWBC thatthe same information had been previously providedin their 9 April
2014 meeting minutes.
KB Councilman Bloszinsky portendedsignificant ROT fees are notbeing collected and that
NHC needed to step up enforcing ROTreportingcompliance.
Chairman Barbour questioned other funding approaches across the nation.
Mr. Rogers of Sea Grant noted the application/generation of local CSDR funds nationwide varies
bylocality. Eachindividualapproach was specific to local conditions.
KB Councilwoman Swearingennoted efforts in Dare County to increase property taxes. She
went on to say Kure Beach residents can’t afford a tax increase to cover 17.5% participation.
KB Councilman Bloszinsky questioned the FY16 KB CSDR event and the local economic
participation. Staff noted that 17.5% of the project’s anticipated cost has been allocated in
federal/state budgetsresulting in no required local outlays.
Vice-chair Andrew supported a new assessment formula and that NC needs to take a more
holisticcoastalview of advocating and supporting our coastal infrastructure’sfundingand
maintenanceneeds.
Chairman Barbour questioned whether each beach community was saving for CSDR
participation. Each concurred.
Ms. Bulluck of Wrightsville Beach(WB)emphasized the need for private sector intervention,
specifically advocating in WashingtonDC.
PWBC member Mr. Loving requested that in future meetings, all referenced alternatives and
supporting data be provided prior to the PWBC meetings for discussion preparation.
PWBC member Mr. Wilson asked if there was a legal/urgent element to the expiration of the
ILA. Staff noted that FY16 maintenance funding for CB and KB was,for the most part,in place
and that the next potential funding challenge for CB and KB would beFY19. WB is scheduled
for a FY18 maintenance event; however, WBdid not remove itself from the current ILA. Both
WB and CB have had extensions granted to their static vegetation line exceptions. Chairman
Barbour asked if both CB and KB would be willing to except an interim extension of the current
ILA as editsare developed. Both concurred.
NHC Commissioner White noted the PWBC’s general concurrencethat there areissues to be
addressed within an updated ILA. Commissioner White supported the efforts by staff and
management, specifically Raleigh advocacy and a NC coast-wide approachtoward maintaining
and supporting coastal infrastructure. CommissionerWhitepresented himselfavailable to the
PWBC as needed to move the efforts forward.
Vice-chair Andrew introduced a motion requestingthatChairman Barbour drafta letter to the
NHC Board of Commissioners suggestingall partiespotentially involved in a revised ILA be
assembled with theprimaryintent of revising the ILA’s funding approach. The request would
also suggest an interim extension of the current ILA for an initial period of six months during the
ILA editing efforts. Chairman Barbour would provide the draft letter to PWBC members prior to
the June 10th PWBC meeting for their review and meetingpreparation. The motion was
seconded by PWBC member Mr. McIntosh and approved by the PWBC.
A second motion by PWBC member Ms. Major-Rhett was made and seconded to table the
current agenda until June. The motion passed.
Staff noted the job well done by each beach community regarding Anaformed scarps and the
natural resourceregulatory coordination that took place per the current project cooperation
agreements as well asthelocally held permit stipulations.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:15.
Agenda
13 May2015,4:00–5:00PM
New Hanover County, Government Center
Finance Conference Room #500
4:00Call to Order
Welcome/Introductions
Request approval of the Marchmeeting minutes (emailed 10April2015).
Port, Waterway & Beach Commission (PWBC)fundbalanceis~$3631.98.
Inter-local Agreement
Introductory Remarks, Mayor of Carolina Beach
PWBC Discussion and Direction
Current Efforts:
NHC WrightsvilleBeach (WB)Coastal Storm Damage Reduction (CSDR)Project
th
Inter-agencyregulatorymeeting scheduled for May 27.
Mason Inlet Relocation Project(MIRP)
Permit modifications, re-consultation and revised management planareunder development.
Shallow DraftInlet(SDI-5)Permitting
Formal consultationtriggeredwithUSFWS and NMFS
Shoreline Mapping Program (SMP) 2015
Field work ongoing.
CB15-YearExtension(Validation Report)
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Head Quarters (HQ)guidance not yet finalized.
FY17 feasibility study placeholder being considered by USACE.
Non-federal “plan for reducing risk to people and property during the life of the project.”Team
interviews are scheduled for 21 May.
WBCSDREconomic Update
Wilmington DistrictUSACEeconomic updateisunder way
Estimate
Cost : Total $333K (federal $216.5K, non-federal $116.5K)
WB Validation Report (Supporting Section 902)
Scope/fee/schedule yet to bedeveloped
CB InletMaintenance Dredging
Currituckhopper dredgingcomplete (April 6-15)
~20K cubic yards removed (~91% of the 8-foot template restored)
Public Comment:
Adjourn