Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-03-11 Agenda Review NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 AGENDA REVIEW MEETING, MARCH 11, 2021 PAGE 24 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met for Agenda Review on Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 4:00 p.m. via in-person and remote in the Harrell Conference Room at the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Government Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present: Chair Julia Olson-Boseman; Vice-Chair Deb Hays; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr. (remote); Commissioner Bill Rivenbark; and Commissioner Rob Zapple. Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney Wanda Copley; and Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell. Chair Olson-Boseman called the Agenda Review meeting to order and announced that the purpose of the meeting is to review and discuss the agenda items for the March 15, 2021 Regular Meeting with discussions as noted: Consent Item 4. Adoption of a Budget Amendment for Stormwater Services. Discussion was held about the timing of the collection for the stormwater utility fee going out at the same time as this year’s property tax bills. County Manager Coudriet stated that if the Board so desired, staff could explore decoupling the property tax bill and the stormwater utility fee. It is important to note that people have already received their assessed value notice, but the Board has yet to decide what the property tax rate will be. It would be wrong for him to suggest that someone is going to pay more next year than in the current year because of their value. It does not necessarily mean that people are going to get an increase twice on their tax bill. However, if it is the Board’s will to decouple those there is time to figure out how to effectively bill people for it. There is currently no billing mechanism for that because the County is not in the utility business the way CFPUA is, and the County does not do curbside collection. The tax bills will likely be sent out in August and are payable up through January 6, 2022 without being considered late. The stormwater utility fee becomes effective July 1, 2021 and will show up on the tax bills to be due by January 6, 2022. People do have the ability to make quarterly payments to the Tax Department. In response to Board questions, County Manager Coudriet reconfirmed that property tax bills are typically sent out in August. He reiterated that what was recently sent out was the assessed value notices, not the tax bills. The stormwater utility fee will be on the bill. While the program became effective July 1, 2020, the Board directed that because of Covid-19, the fee assessment be held off for one year. This August will be the first time that someone sees the actual assessment of the stormwater fee and it is an annual fee. The fee is only for properties in the unincorporated County. County Engineer Jim Iannucci commented that if the fee is decoupled from the tax bills, the collection of it would be much more difficult and the collection rate may go down. That is why, from the County standpoint, it was felt collecting it via the tax bills was the best path to take. It is going to be designated as a fee, it is going to have an informational card, and there will be another round of public meetings to make that clear. In response to Board questions, County Manager Coudriet stated the Board can make the decision to delay the implementation of the fee for another year. As to if Covid-19 funds could be used to for the existing projects, he thinks it could be argued that it is revenue replacement on the stormwater utility because the new Covid-19 money that is coming does allow for lost revenue. It may not be an easy one for one to use Covid-19 relief money, but staff certainly can get creative and give the Board several options. The County does have projects through hazard mitigation looking at stormwater on a basin basis, but he does not know how many of those grants would allow for a substitution of revenue. Mr. Iannucci has worked hard to get more than $4 million in emergency watershed funding that is doing a lot of the stormwater work, so the success would be in doing the work not replacing the revenue with a potential exemption for the new Covid-19 relief funding. The cost for one full year of stormwater services is $4 million. Commissioner Barfield stated he was fine keeping this the way it is planned and to send out as a separate bill is more money being spent on such things as postage which he feels would be a waste of resources. The matter has been discussed and shared with the public for last couple of years. The public was also made aware last year that the program was starting up without a bill being sent for the first year. Due to the amount of development taking place in the Ogden area, he would not like for the County to delay or not have all the tools that it needs. Now is the right time to get those resources, reiterating that the fee is only for the unincorporated County. A brief discussion was held about how the property tax bills will go to the mortgage companies in most cases as there are escrow accounts tied to most mortgages. County Manager Coudriet stated that by the Board approving the request it does not affect what is being discussed today. Staff has the time to work on and to present several options to the Board. Regular Item 6. Public Hearing with Respect to Retirement Facilities Revenue Bonds to be Issued by the Public Finance Authority in an Amount Not to Exceed $65,000,000 for the Davis Community. Chief Financial Officer Lisa Wurtzbacher stated that this request is not necessarily related to the County’s bond rating. If approved, the Davis Community will be allowed to issue tax exempt bonds through the Public Finance Authority. The IRS requires that there be a public hearing where the facility will be located. The County must hold a public hearing as the Davis Community is in the unincorporated area. It really is just for tax purposes that the public hearing must be held. Again, the Davis Community will be borrowing through the Public Finance Authority and it will have no impact on the County’s debt or obligations. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 AGENDA REVIEW MEETING, MARCH 11, 2021 PAGE 25 Regular Item 7. Public Hearing - Memorandum of Understanding for Project Grace. Discussion was held th about the presentation for the March 15 meeting including the pros and cons of both the County funding the construction itself and entering a lease agreement with the developer. Commissioner Barfield commented that whatever is built should be large enough to accommodate future growth as there is and will be an increase in citizens living downtown with the new residential developments being built. There will be a different clientele starting to use the downtown library than what is seen now based on the population shift that is taking place in that area. Vice-Chair Hays commented on the need to thoroughly review the pros and cons of what the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) currently has in place. It is important for there to be clarity that this is a starting point to be able to move to the next steps of reviewing and understanding the space requirements and design phases before moving into the next phase, which is the development agreement. The MOU represents the developer and the County taking this step forward together, but there will be opportunities for public review and there will be a public hearing on the development agreement. She noted that everything needs to be brought forth and laid out to provide clarity for the public to fully understand what is or is not included from the prior time on this project. County Manager Coudriet stated that if the Board proceeds with the MOU, it begins anew in some ways and will be a fresh redesign and a complete reimagination of the block as the design team from 2018 has changed and the Board has contemplated different policy positions. The MOU will be the new trigger to restart the design to lead to a defined development agreement that would specify all the granular details, which also must be presented th to the Board for consideration along with holding a public hearing. During the March 15 meeting, the developer will be asking the Board to consider including in the MOU an additional 8,000 square feet of shared space and incorporating a 60-day discovery phase whereby the developers meet with the library and museum leaderships, those boards, and the community to get a sense of the desire for that block before it ever moves into a schematic design that begins to define what the buildings look like. If the MOU is approved, it will determine whether this will be a lease deal as proposed by the developer or if the County will issue the debt from day one and the balance is done through private money. Discussion was held on the importance of ensuring that library and museum experts are involved during the design phase as they are the ones who will be working in the space. Vice-Chair Hays and Commissioner Barfield reiterated that it is important that the space is allocated appropriately and to what the library and museum staff feel are the current needs and what they project future needs to be. Discussion was held about what point the Local Government Commission (LGC) should get involved in the project for them to have a greater understanding of it. County Manager Coudriet explained that staff consults with the LGC all along the way of a project, but that the LGC will not render an opinion until there is a design and final cost. The Government Center project is an example of this process. Staff worked with the LGC throughout that process and along the way, the LGC staff said it was something they could support until the deal was done. When the LGC looked at the final numbers and where the market was at that time, they stated that they could no longer accept it. He would not want any Commissioner or the community to think that staff goes to the LGC in the 11th hour. While not at the table, the LGC staff is a part of it. Ms. Wurtzbacher keeps them apprised on what the County is doing. However, the LGC will not weigh in with an opinion, a yes or no, until there is a completed design and a completed cost because all they are going to look at is what is the cost of money and is it fair to the taxpayers over the course of the deal. Ms. Wurtzbacher explained that staff spoke with the LGC about a year ago about the project. Also, staff has already had an initial conversation with the LGC specifically about a lease term to get them knowledgeable about what the County was trying to do, and those conversations will continue based on the Board’s decision on Monday. County Manager Coudriet stated an example of this is that this deal was originally presented as a 40-year lease and when provided to the LGC, its response was no. Again, while being informed all along the way there will never be an LGC action or presentation to it until there is a final design and final numbers. Therefore, today this project is proposed as a 20-year financing, because of an LGC staff discussion that said the best the County can ever do if the LGC is willing to approve a lease is going to be 20 years. In response to Board questions, County Manager Coudriet confirmed that there is a full commitment from the developers and the County to have this project looked at, preliminarily, and its stages along the way to the development agreement with the LGC process of review and approval. The County initially, when it imagined this project, did not have the authority to do downtown developments. As such it had to pursue special legislation, which is now null and void because the General Assembly determined to let everybody do it. That said, there was a piece of legislation secured and set an investment standard of not less than 25% of the total value and he thinks the other models are 50%. However, the general statute (GS) references an exemption from the public- private partnership. However, the public-private partnership says that, in fact, even though the private partner is involved, if there is going to be a lease agreement there must be consideration and approval from the LGC. There is no exemption or workaround. There must be LGC approval to enter into any agreement that is $500,000 or more and five years or more. There is no exemption from GS 159, which is the authority which units of local government must adhere to in lease agreements. A brief discussion was held about the north parcel reference in the MOU and there not being a decision made yet on whether it is a lease or sale. Commissioner Zapple commented that it would be helpful to know from the developer what they want to do as it will have an impact on the overall finances of the entire deal. County Manager Coudriet explained that the Board has the authority after the hearing to amend the agreement in whatever way it chooses. The hope is that the developer would agree and consent to proposed changes, just as they hope the Board will consent to the 8,000 square feet and the 60-day discovery period. If there are changes the Board wants, NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 AGENDA REVIEW MEETING, MARCH 11, 2021 PAGE 26 th staff cannot make them now, but the Board can do so after the hearing on March 15. In response to Board questions, he confirmed that there is a guarantee that there will be library services throughout the construction period and there will not be any discontinuation of service. His recollection is that it will remain if not on the block then within a three-block radius of the site. Commissioner Zapple commented on the involvement of City of Wilmington (City) in the MOU. There are mixed signals being received on the City’s involvement and whether it would be involved at all and that the 75,000 square feet for it is a major part of the MOU. He feels it would be cleaner and less confusing if the City were to go its own route with the developer and their own MOU and keep this MOU solely between the County and the developer. He feels that there not being a decision on that portion yet could possibly delay the process. Again, he would like to see this MOU be only between the County and the developer. Regular Item 8. Wilmington Quick Response Team Presentation. County Manager Coudriet stated that Tony McEwen with the City of Wilmington will be making the presentation. Regular Item 9. Consideration of Emergency Rental Assistance Program. Social Services Director Tonya Jackson provided a brief overview of the program and its funding through The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021. The County received a direct funding allocation grant in the amount of $7.7 million to administer the local emergency housing assistance program to assist eligible County residents with rent, utility bills and other housing needs. Any county or city with a population of 200,000 or more was eligible to receive direct funding and the County will be taking that option. This allows the County to have a bit more control over ensuring it can meet the needs of its residents. Some of the program specifics are still being worked out to ensure the County meets the standards of the federal and state governments. She provided a brief overview of who would be eligible to receive the assistance and for how long. She also noted that staff is also looking at providing internet access support for families as it is felt is it an eligible expense of housing. A brief discussion was held about the plans for a press release on the program. Chief Communications th Officer Jessica Loeper stated that the plan is to send out a press release on March 15 after the Board approves the matter. There will be a gap between when it is approved by the Board and when the program opens. Once the program opens to accept applications there will be a larger press event where there is either a press conference or a media roundtable for community awareness. She noted that Ms. Jackson is already working on the outreach to the County’s community partners to make sure stakeholders and their clients are aware of what is forthcoming. Regular Item 10. Consideration of Hazard Mitigation Plan. Emergency Management Assistant Director Anna McRay stated that she will make a brief statement then turn the presentation over to the consultant. Additional Discussions and Updates Update on Covid-19 Vaccinations. Health and Human Services (HHS) Director Donna Fayko reported that th as of March 10, the County’s total number of positive cases is 16,826 with 46% being male and 54% female. The presumed recovered is 15,103. There have been 156 deaths with 92 being male and 64 being female. The County’s daily percent positive rate is 4.9%, which is good. Vaccinations continue and 28,642 in total have been completed, with first doses being 17,253 and second doses being 11,389. That does not include the 1,000 being administered today. UNC-Wilmington has setup its testing site on campus. The County is partnering with the school system and has developed some alternatives to vaccinate teachers outside of their normal school hours. Notification has also been received that the County has been approved for an event to try to finish up the 65+ age group in the community and looks towards received an additional 1,170 doses of Pfizer next week to the baseline supply. In response to Board questions about other entities such as Walgreens being allowed to ask for insurance cards from citizens as part of administering vaccinations, Ms. Fayko explained that many of the providers are able and are taking advantage of the ability to charge an administrative fee. The vaccine itself is free, but insurance can be charged for the administrative fee. HHS has opted not to do that. In the case of Walgreens asking for insurance, it is contracted directly with the federal pharmacy program as vaccinator and as such it is not engaged in coordination with local public health efforts. However, HHS has been providing feedback to the NC Department of Public Health about some of the concerns that they have received about service failures. Update on the American Rescue Plan Funds: In response to Board questions, County Manager Coudriet confirmed that the County will be receiving approximately $46 million under the American Rescue Plan legislation. th Staff will not be ready to provide an update on March 15 but is working on a plan to provide the Board possibly a week from now. However, staff does not want to get ahead of whatever rules are set out by the Treasury. He thinks th by the April 5 meeting staff could share with the Board, based on what is understood to be the need, an outline of key areas. It is a lot of money to be spent between now and 2024, so there is a lot of detail for staff to work through and staff has already started its work. The law requires within 60 days of signature, that half of the money be directly transferred to a county’s account and that the second half not arrive less than 365 days thereafter. The transfer st would be by the end of May or June 1 and mid-calendar year of FY22. th A brief discussion was held about the March 10 joint meeting with the New Hanover County School Board. Chair Olson-Boseman reported that she has spoken with County Manager Coudriet about the amount of money the school system is receiving from the state through the CARES Act, approximately $20 million, and how much the school system holding in reserve. She noted that she is concerned, as are other Commissioners, at this point about NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 AGENDA REVIEW MEETING, MARCH 11, 2021 PAGE 27 not knowing where this is going. She did speak with Representative Miller, and Intergovernmental Affairs Director Tim Buckland was also on the call, and Representative Miller also wants to know where the money is going to. While yesterday’s meeting went well and progress was made moving forward, there is a need to know where all the money is going. A brief discussion was held about beach nourishment funding. County Manager Coudriet stated he was not sure he was in a position to brief the Board and asked Mr. Iannucci if he could provide any updates. Mr. Iannucci th reported that the Port, Waterway, and Beach Commission held a meeting with the towns on March 10 and there is still no update as to why the funding was cutoff nor an update on receiving additional funding. Vice-Chair Hays stated the local legislators are aware and are working on it but does not think there is anything definitive at this point, but it is paramount in their minds. This issue effects the whole state because there are many property owners that own property up and down the coast that live in other areas of the state. Chair Olson-Boseman reported, as the Commissioner representative on the Wilmington Regional Film Commission, that Senator Lee had introduced a bill to allocate an additional $34 million per year in nonrecurring funds to the Film and Entertainment Grant Fund. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Olson-Boseman adjourned the meeting at 4:57 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kymberleigh G. Crowell Clerk to the Board Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners meeting.