Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-07-18 Consolidation WS NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSOLIDATION STUDY COMMISSION, JULY 18, 1995 BOOK 24 PAGE 1 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners and Wilmington City Council held a Consolidation Study Commission meeting on Tuesday, July 18, 1995, at 8:00 A.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 102 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present were: Commissioners Sandra Barone; WilliamA. Caster; William E. Sisson, Jr.; vice-Chairman E. L. Mathews, Jr.; Chairman Robert G. Greer; County Manager, Allen 0' Neal; County Attorney, Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board, Lucie F. Harrell. Members present from the Wilmington City Council were: Mayor Pro-Tern Katherine B. Moore; Councilmembers J. D. Causey; Hamilton E. Hicks, Jr.; Laura Padgett; Charlie Rivenbark; Michael Youngblood; City Manager, Mary Gornto; City Attorney, Tom Pollard; and City Clerk, Penelope Spicer-Sidbury. Mayor Don Betz was absent. Commissioner Sisson arrived late. Chairman Greer and Mayor Pro-Tern Moore called the respective boards to order. Councilmember Causey commented on recent events and read the following statement: "I would like to take this opportunity to make it clear that I do not have any intention to move to rescind the Council's resolution establishing the Consolidation Study Commission, and I do not believe that any other member of the City Council has any such intention. In statements that I have made, I have expressed concerns about some of the Study Commission's decisions relating to various aspects of consolidation. I will continue to raise concerns when I believe it is in the interest of the citizens of the City of Wilmington. It is important that the Study Commission present the best consolidation plan possible to the citizens of the City and New Hanover County. We also need to provide as accurate information as possible about the impact of consolidation on services and costs to residents of the City and County. We still have work to do to finalize the consolidation plan. I am committed to completing the work of the Study Commission so the referendum on consolidation can be held in October." Chairman Greer expressed appreciation to Councilmember Causey for the statement. Discussion was held on whether to vote on partisan and/or non- partisan elections. It was decided to postpone voting on this issue until all members were present. REPORT FROM THE UTILITIES COMMITTEE Councilmember Hicks requested each member of the Utilities Committee to comment on a certain section of the report. Stormwater Management: Commissioner Barone reported a maj or difference between the City and County was stormwater management. The City has an excellent Stormwater Management Program; whereas, the County does not have a program. After study and review, the Utilities Committee felt it was necessary to address stormwater management, and recommended adoption of the City's Stormwater Management Program for the consolidated government. Even though this program would be extremely costly, the Utilities Committee felt this issue had to be confronted. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSOLIDATION STUDY COMMISSION, JULY 18, 1995 BOOK 24 PAGE 2 Discussion was held on the costs involved with stormwater management. Chairman Greer inquired as to what group would receive the greatest impact from implementation of a Stormwater Management Ordinance? Commissioner Barone responded new construction would receive the most impact because the City's regulations for subdivisions were quite stringent. Also, homeowners developing over an acre of land would be impacted. Commissioner Caster commented on stormwater management for recently annexed areas, and inquired as to how this cost was absorbed? Councilmember Hicks responded the City spent over $2,000,000 in the pine Valley area for stormwater management. The City has identified approximately $8,000,000 of stormwater projects that are in need of implementation. In many of the projects, the stormwater run-off goes into unincorporated areas of the County. This was why the Utilities Committee recognized the need to have a Stormwater Management Program for the consolidated government. This $8,000,000 would be tripled or quadrupled for the unincorporated County. Councilmember Padgett inquired as to whether the Utilities Committee had addressed how the stormwater expansions would occur? Would people be allowed to vote on the services as they are extended? Councilmember Hicks reported discussion was held on the extension of services, but no decision was made. Water & Sewer Department: Councilmember Hicks reported the Utilities Committee has recommended a Water and Sewer Department to operate the combined City and County systems. The Water and Sewer operation is to be fully supported by user fees with no tax subsidy. As to water and sewer extensions to unserved areas, the Committee felt this was an administrative responsibility and should be reviewed by the Engineering Department because of costs involved with rights-of-way acquisitions, the lay of the land, and the cost of piping before the extensions were considered by the consolidated board. The forecast included a rate study from the City and expansion plans from the County. It assumed that water service in the unincorporated area would continue to be provided by private systems. The forecast did not anticipate any large scale acquisitions or expansions for water; however, from a practical point of view, it is felt the first demand for service will be water because of serious water quality problems in the County and the demand for increased fire protection. Solid Waste Management: Vice-Chairman Mathews reported the Utilities Committee recommends that solid waste services be provided as a unified operation throughout the service area on a self-supporting basis. A mandatory collection system would continue in the urban service district through the City and private haulers with a gradual phasing in of other areas throughout the consolidated government. Councilmember Padgett asked if this meant there will be districts in the Utility Plan as far as services are concerned? Also, at the beginning, there would be one urban service district, the incorporated City, with mandatory collection being phased in throughout the remainder of the County. Vice-Chairman Mathews responded this was correct. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSOLIDATION STUDY COMMISSION, JULY 18, 1995 BOOK 24 PAGE 3 Councilmember Youngblood commented on the tipping fee and the use of monies from the general fund, and he asked if solid waste services would be totally rate supported, or would funds be appropriated from the general fund? vice-Chairman Mathews responded solid waste serVlces would be rate supported. Councilmember Youngblood commented the $4,000,000 now being appropriated from the general fund for solid waste disposal, and asked if this means that $4,000,000 would not be appropriated from the general fund under the plan proposed? Councilmember Hicks responded there phase out of the tax supported structure. period has occurred, no monies would be general fund. would be a three-year Once this transition appropriated from the Chairman Greer responded he did not feel that solid waste disposal would ever stand on its own because incineration was much more costly than placing solid waste in the ground. Discussion was held on the possibility of Congress enacting flow control legislation. Commissioner Barone reported if federal legislation is enacted, the haulers will be required to dispose of waste in New Hanover County. Councilmember Padgett inquired as to when the vote on this legislation would occur? Commissioner Barone responded the County and other counties throughout the country have been waiting for the past year to receive some form of flow control legislation. Commissioner Sisson commented on deregulation of the electrical industry, which could increase the amount of revenue received from the sale of electricity, and reported other state and federal legislation could potentially impact the tipping fee. At the present time, there is no way to know what legislation will be enacted by the state and federal governments. Mayor Pro-Tern Moore commented on collection services provided in the City and inquired as to whether the County contracts with private haulers for solid waste disposal? If not, was there a policy that would require a mandatory collection system in the unincorporated county? Commissioner Barone responded the County does not contract with private haulers; however, a mandatory collection system would gradually be phased in over a three-year period. Mayor Pro-Tern Moore expressed concern for not immediately implementing a uniform policy for solid waste collection services. Commissioner Barone responded she had always been opposed to mandatory regulations; however, she felt a mandatory collection system for the entire county was necessary under a gradual phased in process under the consolidated government. Councilmember Hicks reported mandatory collection was discussed by the Utilities Committee with a majority of the members feeling this should be through a gradual process of three years. Personally, he felt a contract should be signed, and a mandatory collection system should be implemented without waiting three years. Councilmember Youngblood reported if a mandatory system was NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSOLIDATION STUDY COMMISSION, JULY 18, 1995 BOOK 24 PAGE 4 implemented immediately, the amount of general fund money gOlng into the incinerator would be reduced. Mayor Pro-Tern Moore inquired as to whether a large hauler was currently carrying waste to another area? Commissioner Barone responded effective July 1, 1995, Waste Management had restored the waste stream to the County. Also, the incinerator is running quite well and is operating over capacity at the current time. Chairman Greer commented on solid waste being a very complex issue and advised that without flow control an outside hauler could still perform the service for less money. Councilmember Padgett inquired as to how curbside recycling would be handled? vice-Chairman Mathews responded the consolidated government would consider a rate incentive for curbside recycling, as presently being done in the City. Councilmember Hicks inquired as to whether the Study Committee was satisfied with the report from the Utilities Committee? Councilmember Youngblood inquired as to how water extensions would be financed? Councilmember Hicks responded this was not discussed because there was a reluctance to discuss the financing of a water system. Councilmember Youngblood recommended developing a policy statement as to how extensions would be approached. Chairman Greer responded he did not feel the citizens of the County desired to have the same services as provided in the City. In his opinion, this would be the responsibility of future boards. Until there was a demand for the different services, there would no reason to provide a service. Councilmember Padgett expressed concern for implementing a consolidated government and eventually winding up with an annexation-like program in the future. She recommended clarifying how the extended services will be provided and at what cost? Councilmember Hicks advised this could be accomplished by assuming that everyone presently on the sewer system without municipal water would at some point demand municipal water. In his opinion, a projected cost could be calculated for providing water to the entire consolidated government. Mayor Pro-Tern Moore reported she felt that extensions would be handled as now being performed by the City. She did not anticipate that a service would be based upon an individual need. Professional Staff should develop the plan, and the consolidated board should determine when the services should be provided based upon the availability of funds. Commissioner Sisson responded the County has this type of policy with sewer extensions through a phased in process with no mandates; however, sewer is being extended on an as-needed basis. The County is providing the infrastructure that makes the policy possible, such as the construction of the Northside Wastewater Treatment Plant. If the demand is not present, there is no reason for expanding the sewer. Councilmember Padgett stressed the importance of people NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSOLIDATION STUDY COMMISSION, JULY 18, 1995 BOOK 24 PAGE 5 understanding that most, if not all, of these serVlces will eventually be provided to entire County. The enabling infrastructure costs will have to be borne by the consolidated government. At the present time, those costs are not known, nor are they part of the base tax rate. She, again, emphasized the importance of clarifying this point to general public when presenting the consolidated plan. Councilmember Hicks suggested that the Utilities Committee break down the rate structures and dollars into a matrix to show the costs and projected costs to each area instead of using a paragraph structure. REPORT FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE Mayor Pro-Tern Moore reported the Public Safety Committee will have to hold another meeting, and she presented the following report: (1) It lS understood that the Chief of the Wilmington Fire Department will serve as the initial administrative head of the consolidated department. The Administrator will have full authori ty over all departmental procedures and operations, and will make recommendations to the Manager concerning the appointment and promotion of all persons serving in the department. The recommended position of "Chief Deputy" will be responsible for coordinating the volunteer service program. Appointment to this position will be by the Manager upon the recommendation of the Administrator. (2) The general personnel policy of the consolidated government will include all employees of the department. Volunteers will have the first opportunity to fill additional paid staff positions. In summary, the Public Safety Committee is not comfortable with the concept of the Fire Districts, which will require another meeting. Attorney Pollard advised he thought the decision had been made to allow the Manager to appoint the Fire Chief? Mayor Pro-Tern Moore responded the Fire Chief would be appointed by the consolidated board, and that person would be fired by the Manager. Councilmember Hicks advised that currently the second in command was not hired by the City Manager, but was hired by the Fire Chief. In his opinion, the Fire Chief should be able to hire the second person in charge in order to run and operate the department. Commissioner Barone concurred with Councilmember Hicks. Commissioner Sisson responded in a few years this procedure would work; however, with current tensions between the paid and volunteer firemen, a Deputy Administrator must have the concurrence of the Manager. After the transition period, there should be no problem with the Fire Chief hiring the Chief Deputy. After a lengthy discussion, Mayor Pro-Tern Moore reported the key word was "initial" for the sake of transition. She recommended amending the paragraph to read as follows: "Appointment to this position will be by the Fire Chief with the recommendation of the Manager for the initial transition period. " NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSOLIDATION STUDY COMMISSION, JULY 18, 1995 BOOK 24 PAGE 6 After a lengthy discussion, it was agreed to accept this wording. NEXT MEETING SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 2, 1995 The Consolidation Study Commission agreed to schedule the next meeting on Wednesday, August, 2, 1995, at 8:00 A.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers. City Manager Gornto and City Attorney Pollard requested direction from the Consolidation Study Commission concerning the resolution calling for a referendum to be held in October as well as comments on the draft revisions to the draft charter. After discussion, it was agreed to discuss these items at the meeting scheduled for August 2, 1995. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Greer adjourned the meeting at 9:10 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Lucie F. Harrell Clerk to the Board