Loading...
2000-05-10 Special Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING WITH WILMINGTON CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION, MAY 10,2000 BOOK 27 PAGE 964 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners held a special meeting with the Wilmington City Council to discuss consolidation on Wednesday, May 10, 2000, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 102 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Board Members present were: Chairman William A. Caster, presiding; Vice-Chairman Robert G. Greer; Commissioner Buzz Birzenieks; Commissioner Ted Davis, Jr; Commissioner Charles R. Howell; and County Manager, Allen O'Neal; County Attorney, Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board, Lucie F. Harrell. Council Members present were: Mayor David L. Jones, presiding; and Councilmembers Frank Conlon; 1. C. Hearne, II; Laura Padgett; and Sandra Spaulding-Hughes; and City Manager, Mary M. Gornto; City Attorney, Thomas C. Pollard; and City Clerk, Penelope Spicer-Sidbury. Council Members absent were: Mayor Pro- Tem Katherine B. Moore and Councilmember Charles H. Rivernbark, Jr. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Mayor Jones and Chairman Caster called their respective Boards to order. Deputy County Manager, Andrew 1. Atkinson, gave the invocation. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by County Manager Allen 0 'Neal. WELCOME Mayor Jones welcomed everyone to the Council Chambers and expressed appreciation to the facilitator, Dr. Becky Porterfield. He spoke on looking forward to having a productive meeting and he emphasized the importance of the governing boards looking into the possibility of merging departments without waiting for consolidation. Chairman Caster welcomed everyone present and stated that the County Commissioners were also eager to move forward with consideration of consolidation as well as functional consolidation. I. OPENING REMARKS Dr. Porterfield presented a packet of notes from the March 15, 2000 meeting reflecting what both governing bodies agreed upon by motion and vote, which was the concept of using an undefined outside agency to conduct a study of the feasibility of consolidation. She briefly reiterated her role as a facilitator and stated that her purpose was to keep the meeting moving forward. Mayor Jones announced that Mayor Pro- T em Moore had an emergency in her family and was out of state and that Councilmember Rivenbark had advised Councilmember Hearne that he had to go out of town. II APPROVAL OF PURPOSE, SCOPE AND EXPECTATIONS OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY Dr. Porterfield reviewed the purpose, scope and expectations of the feasibility study with the two governing boards. She requested both boards to discuss each portion of the statement. A. Purpose Councilmember Conlon suggested adding the word "selected" before City and County functions to be more specific about city/county department mergers. He also suggested assessing the option of no change in the existing governments as part of the purpose. Motion: After discussion, Mayor Jones MOVED, SECONDED by Councilmember Conlon, to accept the purpose as amended. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING WITH WILMINGTON CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION, MAY 10,2000 BOOK 27 PAGE 965 Chairman Caster called for a motion from the Board of County Commissioners to accept the purpose as amended. Motion: Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Greer, to accept the purpose as amended. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Amended Purpose: (1) To assess the overall desirability or feasibility ofthe governmental consolidation of New Hanover County and the City of Wilmington. (2) To assess the overall desirability or feasibility of the selected merger(s) of city and county functions. (3) To assess the option of no change in the governmental structure of the city and county. B. Scope of the Project Dr. Porterfield reviewed the proposed scope as follows: (1) Provide recommendation(s) to consolidate the city and county governments, or to merge certain city and county functions, or to make no change in the governmental structures of the city and the county. (2) Should consolidation or functional mergers be desirable and feasible, provide an implementation plan, including a conceptual framework of the merged entity's governmental, financial and organizational structure. After discussion by both governing bodies, the following action was taken: Motion: Councilmember Conlon, MOVED, SECONDED by Councilmember Hearne, to approve the scope as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Motion: Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Birzenieks, to accept the Scope as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. C. Tasks Dr. Porterfield requested the two governing boards to review the following task list: (1) Review relevant studies (e.g.) previous consolidation plans, reports (budgets and annual financial reports), and relevant strategic plans. (2) Interview key governmental officials and staff, and identify services most affected by consolidation or functional mergers. (3) Develop a profile of the affected government agencies, including revenues, expenditures, staffing levels and other key characteristics. (4) Conduct a literature scan of other city-county consolidations and functional mergers. (5) Identify consolidation or merger benefits, costs, risks, and opportunities. (6) Identify factors, which could facilitate or impair consolidation or functional mergers (e.g., salary and benefit structures), potential implementation barriers and any other opportunities, threats and issues requiring analysis or consideration. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING WITH WILMINGTON CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION, MAY 10,2000 BOOK 27 PAGE 966 (7) Develop a communications strategy to keep the elected boards and thereby citizens informed. (8) Present interim and final reports to the elected boards. Discussion of Task #4: With regard to the literature scan, Councilmember Hughes suggested recording dates on the literature from day one during the research period to know the time span so a strategic plan could be drawn. Commissioner Birzenieks suggested vlsltmg successful and unsuccessful consolidated governments or mergers with interviews so information will be available on what went right or wrong with the process. Both governing bodies agreed to the amendments suggested by Councilmember Hughes and Commissioner Birzenieks to read as follows: Amended Task #4: Conduct interviews, visits, and a literature scan of other city-county consolidations and functional mergers that shall include an historical analysis as to the success or failure of such consolidations or mergers. Discussion of Task #5 Councilmember Conlon requested Task #5 to be amended to include the "no change" option to read as follows: Amended Task #5: Identify consolidation, merger, and no change benefits, costs, risks, and opportunities. Discussion of Task #7: A lengthy discussion was held on how to keep the citizens informed and how to develop a communications strategy that will not prematurely influence public opinion. Suggestions were made to conduct public forums, provide periodic updates, call press conferences, televise meetings, and send letters in tax bills and/or water bills. Councilmember Conlon expressed concern about the following items: (1) public hearings not reaching all the citizenry; and (2) prevailing on the media the need to publish recommendations and statements of the study group instead of the reporter's interpretation of what occurred at a meeting. Both governing bodies agreed that public hearings should be conducted to receive citizenry input. Vice-Chairman Greer asked what information would be given to the public. Mayor Jones responded that once both governing bodies formulate the study team and its tasks, the people need to be made aware of the progress being made by the group. A lengthy discussion followed. Dr. Porterfield advised that a list of tasks is what the two governing boards will request from the group selected to conduct the feasibility study. The first item should be to request the group to develop a communications strategy that will incorporate periodic updates through the media and public forums. This strategy can be evaluated by both governing bodies. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING WITH WILMINGTON CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION, MAY 10,2000 BOOK 27 PAGE 967 After further discussion, both governing bodies agreed that the study team appointed would have the expertise to develop a communications strategy that will keep the public informed and at the same time be sensitive about prematurely influencing public opinion. Dr. Porterfield recapped the agreed upon issues for Task #7 as follows: Task #7 Develop a communications strategy to keep the elected boards, and thereby the citizens, informed. This should include the conduction of public forums and periodic updates to the public via such means as press conferences, televised meetings, letters in tax bills and/or water bills and should include city and county boards and commissions, civic and religious organizations. Communications should be developed with a sensitivity that does not prematurely influence public opinion. Both governing boards agreed that Task #7 as recapped by Dr. Porterfield addressed their concerns. Motion: Mayor Jones MOVED, SECONDED by Councilmember Conlon, to approve the scope and tasks as revised. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Motion: Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Birzenieks to approve the scope and task as revised. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Discussion of Task #8: Vice-Chairman Greer asked what process will be used to approve the report when the final report is presented to the elected boards. He asked whether the two governing bodies will vote to approve or disapprove the plan, whether a majority vote will rule, or whether each individual item will require a vote. He advised that from past experience, it had not been possible for everyone to agree on every item; therefore, he would suggest that the majority rule to avoid one issue defeating the plan. Mayor Jones responded that work sessions will have to be scheduled as the various phases of the plan are completed. Discussion was held on the appointment of a Charter Commission. City Attorney Tom Pollard explained that a Charter Commission would have to be appointed to develop the structure of the government. The purpose of the study is to determine if it is feasible to consolidate or consider the other alternatives. A lengthy discussion was held on the process to be used by the governing bodies when the recommendation is received from the study group. Numerous suggestions were made, and Dr. Porterfield recapped the discussion as follows: (1) Conduct city and county meetings after the recommendation comes from the study group. (2) Conduct city and county meetings to gather information and feed back. (3) Conduct Work Sessions between the Board of County Commissioners and City Council to attempt to reach resolution. (4) If the recommendation is to consolidate, a Charter Commission would be appointed to study the structure of the government. The governing bodies would vote separately on the structure and if approved, the charter would be placed before the voters. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING WITH WILMINGTON CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION, MAY 10,2000 BOOK 27 PAGE 968 (5) If the recommendation is to merge departments, interlocal agreements would be negotiated between the city and county with no vote by the citizens. If the recommendation is no change in the existing structures, nothing would be done. Both governing bodies agreed with the recap presented by Dr. Porterfield. Discussion was held on the benefits of including the beach communities in the consolidation process. There was a consensus between both governing bodies to ask the beach communities to participate in the consolidation discussion. Mayor Jones requested the City Manager and County Manager to draft a letter to the beach municipalities to see if they are interested in participating in the consolidation study. Additional discussion was followed on Item 1 under the Scope. Commissioner Davis recommended placing the word "non-binding" before recommendation in order to avoid criticism if the two governing bodies do not follow the exact recommendation presented from the study group. Both governing boards agreed to amend the Scope to include the word, non-binding before recommendation. III. REPORT ON THE INSTITUTE OF GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE AND CONSIDERATION OF OTHER OPTIONS FOR THE CONDUCTION OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY City Manager Mary Gornto reported at the last meeting, she and County Manager O'Neal were requested to contact the Institute of Government to see if this organization would be interested in undertaking the study. Contact was made with Mr. Michael Smith, Director of the Institute of Government, who indicated interest and requested time to discuss the request with the faculty. A few days later, Mr. Smith called and stated that Mr. Kurt Jenne, a member of the faculty for a number of years, was interested in undertaking the study. It was decided that once the purpose, scope, and tasks were approved by both governing bodies, the information would be faxed to Mr. Jenne. City Manager Gornto also reported that she and County Manager O'Neal had contacted the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners and North Carolina League of Municipalities to see if these organizations would be interested in conducting the study. The League has undertaken similar studies for merging two towns, but not a city and county. The League also noted that if staff was available, they would only be interested in conducting the study jointly with the N. C. Association of County Commissioners. County Manager O'Neal noted that he had received the same response from the N. C. Association of County Commissioners. City Manager Gornto advised that other contacts had been made as follows: (1) Mr. Dan Durning, University of Georgia and Institute of Government in Athens, Georgia, was contacted. He served as one of the panelists at the UNCW Forum for discussion of consolidating local governments. He is interested and has participated in similar projects in Georgia between counties and cities. Fundamentally, local governments are organized differently in Georgia from those in North Carolina; however, he could serve as a valuable resource. (2) Mr. Tom Barth, UNCW Political Science Department, and Director of the MPA Program, indicated that Dr. Milan DeLewey, who will arrive in July as the UNCW Chair of the Political Science Department, has an interest in the project. Dr. DeLewey has participated in similar efforts around the country, but primarily in Florida. Local governments in Florida are organized differently from those in North Carolina. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING WITH WILMINGTON CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION, MAY 10,2000 BOOK 27 PAGE 969 (3) Mr. Bill Carstarfen, was a panelist at the UNCW Forum, and a former City Manager of Greensboro, who is currently in private consulting work. His time is filled and his company lacks the necessary resources to undertake a large project. He indicated an interest in supporting the effort through analysis or research work that might need to be done. In summary, City Manager Gornto said the Institute of Government in Chapel Hill has the expertise to conduct the study and is willing to assume this responsibility. In response to questions regarding the cost of the study by the Institute of Government, City Manager Gornto explained that without having an opportunity to see the scope of work in order to have a clear understanding of the study, she did not discuss the cost with the Institute of Government. However, the Institute does have another faculty person staffing the City of Durham and Durham County consolidation effort. Based on this consolidation effort, which involves a number of citizen committees and is more intensive in terms of time being spent in Durham versus the analytical study being requested by the City Council and Board of County Commissioners, the cost should be less than $50,000. The Institute would not want to be held to this figure until more information has been received on the purpose, scope, and tasks of the study. Mayor Jones stated that since the Institute of Government is a taxpayer supported organization, the cost of service would be minimal compared to outside consulting firms. The Institute is a professional organization that would provide an unbiased opinion with no pressure from the outside; therefore, he would support the Institute of Government. Councilmember Conlon agreed and stated that he felt the Institute of Government would be the best choice because this organization is familiar with North Carolina and its local governments. Chairman Caster asked if the Commissioners had any comments. Discussion followed on clearly defining how the study would be approached. Commissioner Birzenieks and Chairman Caster stated they understood that a citizens group would be formed and the person from the Institute of Government would serve as the facilitator. Dr. Porterfield responded that Mr. Jenne would do the analysis. Mayor Jones stated that both governing bodies agreed at the last meeting that a single group or person was needed to study the feasibility of consolidation. However, the process would involve input from citizens. Vice-Chairman Greer stressed the importance of everyone understanding that the Institute of Government will conduct the study and provide facts on the feasibility of consolidating the local governments, but the Institute will not say whether the two governments should or should not be consolidated. This decision will have to be made by the City Council, the Board of County Commissioners, and ultimately by the voters. IV. AGREEMENT ON NEXT STEPS County Manager O'Neal explained that the Institute of Government would perform the role of analysis, research and education. The Institute is comprised of a faculty of experts in specialized areas of education, which serves as an advisory role to local governments. This advisory role is limited and it will provide only opinions on what is appropriate and legally feasible. He stated that, in his opinion, the next step would be to refine the information discussed tonight and forward it to Mr. Michael Smith, Director of the Institute of Government and Mr. Kurt Jenne for an evaluation and response. Councilmember Padgett referenced Task #7 and asked if it was the desire of both governing bodies to have the Institute of Government conduct public hearings as part of the information gathering, or to have the governing bodies conduct public hearings after the report has been developed in order to get reactions from the citizens. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING WITH WILMINGTON CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION, MAY 10,2000 BOOK 27 PAGE 970 Following further discussion, Dr. Porterfield clarified Task #7 as follows: "Develop a communication strategy to keep the elected boards, and thereby the citizens informed. This should include the conduction of public forums and periodic updates to the public via such means as press conferences, televised meetings, letters in tax bills and/or water bills, and should include city and county boards and commissions, civic and religious organizations. Communications should be developed with a sensitivity that does not prematurely influence public opinion." A lengthy discussion followed on the appointment of a citizens committee and holding public hearings. It was concluded that if the Institute of Government is selected to undertake the study, they have the expertise to develop a communications strategy to keep the elected boards and citizens informed. This information will be assimilated in the report presented to the City Council and Board of County Commissioners. It was also agreed that the Institute of Government should not be told how to perform their job. Motion: Following further consideration, Mayor Jones MOVED, SECONDED by Councilmember Conlon, to approve the purpose, scope, and expectations of a feasibility study of consolidation and/or functional mergers. Upon vote the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. Motion: Commissioner Davis MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Birzenieks to approve the purpose, scope, and expectations of a feasibility study of consolidation and/or functional mergers. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The two governing bodies took a brief recess. The meeting was reconvened. Dr. Porterfield inquired as to how the two governing boards would like for the results of the report of the Institute of Government to be presented to them. After a lengthy discussion, it was suggested that the report should be presented to the City Council and Board of County Commissioners jointly, and each governing body should review and study the report to form their own opinions. Motion: Following further discussion, Councilmember Conlon MOVED, SECONDED by Councilmember Hearne, to follow the suggested process as outlined by Dr. Porterfield. Upon vote, THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Motion: Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Birzenieks, to follow the suggested process as outlined by Dr. Porterfield. Upon vote, THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Discussion followed on how the expenses would be handled. Mayor Jones suggested that both governing bodies split the cost involved with the consolidation process. Vice-Chairman Greer agreed but pointed out that the County Commissioners are ready to commit to a plan that will move forward with consolidating the two governments. Motion: After further consideration, Mayor Jones MOVED, SECONDED by Councilmember Conlon, to split any expenses incurred during the consolidation process between both governing bodies. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. Motion: Commissioner Birzenieks, MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Greer, that any expenses incurred be split 50/50 by the governing boards. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Dr. Porterfield thanked everyone for their time. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING WITH WILMINGTON CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION, MAY 10,2000 BOOK 27 PAGE 971 V. ADDITIONAL ITEMS Discussion of Scheduling the Next Meeting After discussion of when to schedule the next meeting, the managers were requested to meet and obtain the information from the Institute of Government and to invite Mr. Michael Smith and Mr. Jenne to attend the meeting and present their proposal to the governing boards. Councilmember Hearne requested that Dr. Porterfield's final summary on the discussion tonight be sent to both governing boards so it can be reviewed prior to scheduling another meeting. Mayor Jones suggested that the two clerks work with the two managers and formulate the report with a copy provided to everyone and made available to the media. County Manager O'Neal suggested that the two public information officers establish a web site for agendas for the meetings and for minutes once they are approved. Both governing boards concurred with the recommendations made by Mayor Jones and County Manager 0 'Neal. Mayor Jones thanked Dr. Porterfield for the excellent manner in which she had facilitated the meeting. Discussion of Renaming Legion Stadium Mayor Jones reported that the City and County have undertaken a project to re-name Legion Stadium to the Legion Stadium Sports Complex because this is a facility that will become a showplace in Wilmington. The Legion Stadium Committee and others have been in the process of developing a Master Plan for this complex. One integral part of the plan is to include the National Guard Armory building as part of the complex. Mayor Jones advised that discussions and meetings have been held with local legislators, Congressman McIntyre, General Rudisill and others about state and federal funding for relocation of the National Guard operation to North Kerr Avenue. If funding can be secured, the Armory building will be vacant and can become a part of the complex. Mayor Jones presented a joint resolution of support for the acquisition of the National Guard Armory building and stated that the City Council will address this issue on Tuesday, May 16, 2000. He also expressed appreciation to Chairman Caster for his involvement in helping to develop the Master Plan for the complex. Chairman Caster advised that the resolution would be considered by the Board of County Commissioners on May 22,2000. Status Report on Monkey Junction Intersection Improvements Councilmember Padgett reported that the Long Range Transportation Plan for 2025 calls for an elevated overpass at the Monkey Junction intersection. Improvements for this intersection will not be a priority project on the Transportation Improvement Plan until funding is available, which will be in 15 to 20 years. With the number oflarge developments being planned for the Monkey Junction area, she had appeared before the Board of County Commissioners to request the Board to continue the B-2 Highway Business and Conditional Use zoning of56.45 acres north of Monkey Junction for 30 days to see if the developer would participate in funding of the intersection improvements. While the County cannot build roads in the unincorporated county, the City and County could enter into an interlocal agreement that will allow the City to build the road. Cost estimates are being studied and the Department of Transportation is looking into the possibility of securing funding from the developers of the property. There are three types of intersections that could be built at Monkey Junction: 1. The Standard Cloverleaf, which requires a large amount of space. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING WITH WILMINGTON CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION, MAY 10,2000 BOOK 27 PAGE 972 2. An urban diamond, which is simpler, but because of the support needed for the ramps, would probably be more expensive. 3. A new type of intersection called a Center Turn Lane Overpass. This is a web-site design that does not take more additional road space and is much cheaper to build. In closing, Councilmember Padgett said this was an opportunity that should not be missed because improvement of this intersection will greatly improve the traffic flow in this area. Mayor Jones expressed appreciation to Councilmember Padgett for her effort in trying to expedite this project. Councilmember Padgett gave credit to the Traffic Planning staff, John Ponder and Bill Austin, for bringing this matter to her attention. Mayor Jones reminded everyone of the legislative breakfast meeting to be held on Monday, May 22,2000, at 7:30 a.m. in Council Chambers. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the respective boards adjourned the meeting. Respectfully submitted, Lucie F. Harrell Clerk to the Board