Loading...
2021-10-18 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 236 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on October 18, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present: Chair Julia Olson-Boseman; Vice-Chair Deb Hays; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr.; Commissioner Bill Rivenbark; and Commissioner Rob Zapple. Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pastor Jonathan P. Conrad of St. Paul’s Evangelical Lutheran Church provided the invocation and Commissioner Rivenbark led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Chair Olson-Boseman requested a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Commissioner Zapple requested to pull Consent Agenda Item #3 Adoption of a Resolution to Dispose of Surplus Property According to Procedures Outlined in North Carolina General Statute - Chapter 160A, Article 12 for further discussion and consideration. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Chair Olson-Boseman to approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes – Governing Body The Commissioners approved the minutes of the Regular Meeting held on October 4, 2021. Adoption of 2022 Schedule of Agenda Review and Regular Board of Commissioners Meetings – Governing Body The Commissioners adopted the 2022 Schedule of Agenda Review and Regular Board of Commissioners Meetings. A copy of the schedule is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLIII, Page 14.1. Adoption of Budget Amendment – Budget The Commissioners adopted the following budget amendment amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022:  Department of Social Services 22-016 A copy of the budget amendment is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLIII, Page 14.3. Discussion and Adoption of a Resolution to Dispose of Surplus Property According to Procedures Outlined in North Carolina General Statute - Chapter 160A, Article 12 – Finance Commissioner Zapple stated that non-profit organizations will have the opportunity to inspect and purchase certain property prior to being sold by auction to the general public. Additional information: The Commissioners adopted a resolution to dispose of surplus property according to procedures outlined in North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) Chapter 160A, Article 12. Nonprofit organizations will have the opportunity to inspect and purchase the property prior to being sold by auction. Afterwards, all remaining property will be disposed of according to the procedures prescribed in Chapter 160A-270(c) which authorizes the disposal of personal property electronically using an existing private or public electronic auction service. Any items not sold electronically will be disposed of by any other method authorized by the statutes including discarding. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Hays to approve Consent Agenda Item #3 as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLIII, Page 14.2. REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS PRESENTATION OF SERVICE AWARDS AND INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES County Manager Coudriet requested the following employees to step forward to receive service awards: Five Years: Nicholas Gadzekpo, Building Safety Rebekah Roth, Planning and Land Use NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 237 Fifteen Years: Gregg Sales, Engineering Twenty Years: Eric Peterson, Communications and Outreach Chair Olson-Boseman presented a service award to each person and the Commissioners expressed appreciation and thanked each one for their years of dedicated service. County Manager Coudriet requested the following new employees to stand and be introduced: Iriana Carlson, Social Services Julian Griffee, Planning and Land Use Emma Huber, Public Health Loralee Koltusky, Public Health Kaitlyn Pate, Public Health Alex Riley, Communications and Outreach Gretchen Willis, Public Health The Commissioners welcomed the employees to County Government and wished them success in their new positions. PRESENTATION ON CAPE FEAR CHANGE IN MOTION 2020 AND TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT ORIENTED SERVICES Nick Cannon, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Coordinator for the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) provided the update as follows:  Cape Fear Change in Motion 2020  Short-Range TDM Plan 2021-2025 - Purpose of Plan:  Identifies strategies that mitigate traffic congestion and diversify mode use in the WMPO region  Short-Range Strategies = 1 to 5 years  Overall goal to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) by 10% in five years  Mission Statement: To provide WMPO Area residents with the resources and offer motivation to choose healthy, sustainable, and effective multimodal transportation to reduce stress on the road network and increase alternative means of mobility.  Development Process:  Convening the Go Coast Committee and review of TDM element in Cape Fear Moving Forward 2045  Review of Cape Fear Moving Forward 2045 survey responses and additional public survey for Cape Fear Change in Motion 2020:  Specific questions about biking, walking, carpool, and public transit  How WMPO area residents get around now versus how they want to get around in the future  Public Comment  Prioritizing Strategies  Community Feedback:  Strategies:  Seven strategies were outlined as viable opportunities to decrease traffic congestion and diversify mode use in the next one to five years  Alternative Work Schedules:  A variety of work scheduling options including telecommuting, flextime, compressed work week, and staggered shifts  Benefits:  Reduced commuting trips  Mitigate traffic on the roadway during peak traffic hours  Challenges:  May discourage carpooling and vanpooling NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 238  Gathering accurate data  Application:  Driven through education, outreach, and promotion to area employers  Assist employers with the development of alternative work schedule policy  Bike Share Program:  A service in which bicycles are made available to rent on a short-term basis  Benefits:  Reduces the need for a single occupancy vehicle  Is healthy, environmentally friendly, and adds character to a city  Popular among tourists  Challenges: funding sources  Application: implement a bike share program in Wilmington that allows users to reach a variety of points of interest  Carpool and Vanpool:  Creates opportunities for people to share vehicles when traveling to and from nearby locations  Benefits: reduces traffic and demand for parking  Challenges:  Limits flexibility for arriving to and leaving work  Wilmington area has shorter commute times than American average by nine minutes  COVID-19  Application:  Market Share the Ride NC, promote park and ride lots, share Wave pool opportunities with major employers  Consulting for Telecommuting Opportunities:  A service provided by Go Coast to assist employers in developing and implementing telecommuting policies and programs  Benefits:  Free to businesses with no obligation  Reduces need for parking infrastructure  COVID-19  Challenges:  New program/service from scratch  Connecting with employers  Application:  Assist area employers with developing telecommuting policies  Fostering a Bicycle and Pedestrian Friendly Culture:  Increase safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, gives authority to bicycling and walking as legitimate modes of transportation  Benefits:  Reduce injuries and fatalities, promotes culture and public spaces, and provides opportunity for education  Challenges:  Speeding and distracted driving and  Lack of bicycle and pedestrian connectivity in some areas  Application:  Participate in programs like Be A Looker, Watch for Me NC, and Vision Zero  Hold successful bicycle-oriented events  TDM-Focused Collaboration:  Improves collaboration among Go Coast staff and member jurisdiction staff during developer review  Assist member jurisdictions in developing TDM-oriented ordinances  Benefits:  Increase applied TDM strategies  Increased advocation for multi modal infrastructure  Challenges: increased responsibilities of TDM Coordinator position  Application: improved coordination with the member jurisdictions staff to decrease traffic congestion  Personalized Commuter Plans:  Catered plans to provide recommended ways to incorporate alternative transportation in one’s commute  Benefits:  Personalized introductions into TDM strategies and alternative transportation options  Promotion of bike and pedestrian infrastructure and transit routes  Challenges:  Collecting personal information like home and work addresses NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 239  Application:  This service may be offered to anyone living or working in the WMPO planning boundary to provide suggestion of using alternative transportation when feasible  Other TDM-Oriented Services:  In addition to these seven strategies, Go Coast can assist with locally identified TDM- oriented initiatives:  Information/marketing, ordinances and development conditions, and other comprehensive programs  Scorecard:  Members of the Go Coast Committee created a Strategy Scorecard to grade each strategy on its ability to show the greatest success. The scorecard ranks each strategy’s feasibility and impact using the considerations of:  Ease of implementation, cost, existing conditions, demand, impact of traffic (benefit), and impact on VMT (benefit)  Primary Priority:  Alternative work schedules, consulting for telecommuting opportunities, and fostering a bicycle and pedestrian friendly culture  Secondary Priority:  Bike share program, carpool and vanpool, improved TDM focused collaboration, and personalized commuter plan  Plan Implementation:  Adoption by the WMPO Board  Present plan to WMPO member jurisdictions  Adherence to strategies work plan:  Marketing outreach, establish and maintain relationships with partners, Go Coast events, and data collection  Regular review by TDM Coordinator and the Go Coast Committee Commissioner Barfield thanked Mr. Cannon for the presentation. As WMPO meetings are not televised, much of the community does not understand the WMPO’s impact. It does have a strong focus on the walkability of the community as well as people being able to ride bikes throughout it. It is important to understand that there is a concerted effort by the WMPO to get people off the roads and to make this a healthier community. Vice-Chair Hays thanked Mr. Cannon for the presentation and noted that she sits on the WMPO Board along with Commissioner Barfield. She noted that fostering a bicycle and pedestrian friendly culture also requires connectivity. She thanked the Planning and Land Use staff for looking at this plan and trying to implement as much of it as possible. It is greatly needed throughout the community. Commissioner Zapple expressed appreciation to Mr. Cannon for the presentation. Putting a focus on things that can be done locally and how the County and City of Wilmington can be effective via the WMPO is wonderful. He thanked Mr. Cannon for not letting this plan get caught up in the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) financial issues. Chair Olson-Boseman thanked Mr. Cannon for the presentation. COMMUNITY VIOLENCE INTERVENTION UPDATE County Manager Coudriet asked that Judge Corpening make his remarks before he provided the update. Frankie Roberts with Leading Into New Communities (LINC) and others are participating remotely should the Board have any questions for them. Judge Corpening stated that community violence is a critically important issue that requires a comprehensive approach. It is not only a “Let’s make schools safer” issue, but it is bigger than that. Violence across this community is at an epidemic level. Recently, a mother called him out on what he was going to do to keep her child safe. Her child was shot twice in front of her, and then as her child lay there bleeding out, she was shot ten times. Somehow, they both survived, it was a miracle. Her question resonated with him, and he responded that he had been praying for them ever since he learned about what happened, but that he could not promise her yet that he could keep her child safe. There is a lot of work to do, and he is proud of what County staff has done in leading the response and the effort that has been put into meetings with officials and community leaders, such as Frankie Roberts, who have been doing good work for years while being woefully underfunded. It is time to act. He asked that the Board not blink. Others have blinked and it is not time to blink, it is time to respond. Children are killing children and it must stop. He thinks everyone is on the right track with the work that County Manager Coudriet and his staff have led. It is his hope that something can really be done to intervene, to change the trajectory of the community, so that he can tell a mom that her child is safe. County Manager Coudriet stated there are others in the room as well and the point of having them attend was to give the Board and the public the certainty to know that this is not a strategy that was built only in the county manager’s office. The meetings have not been open to the public and he understands the Board has faced some criticism for that, but he thinks that the path in hindsight will prove that to have been the right path. Extensive meetings have been held with the community members, people who work in the actual space of service delivery, NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 240 people who are impacted disproportionately by this issue daily, and work was also done with law enforcement and the school district. The group has heard directly from eight students that were party to the shooting at New Hanover High School (NHHS) as well as from parents and teachers. There have been not less than five coordinated and organized meetings where there have been more than 60 consistent participants, some focused on community services, and others focused on the school. There have also been countless discussions with other elected officials and other community leaders. The strategy being presented today is informed by the work of those people. What was promised to the Board on September 3, 2021 was that this would be a strategy that was led and worked from the community-forward approach rather than top-down. The Board set the top-down opportunity by saying that there is a policy to go out and solve this. Discussion can be held about the details if that is the Board’s desire, but some of it would be the equivalent of exposing the playbook before the game starts. What he plans to do is offer the Board the four corners of a three-year strategy that does have an outer limit cost of possibly up to $89 million. However, he would ask the Board and the community to think about that in the context that the $89 million would be if everything were in place and operating on day one at full speed, full capacity, which is not possible. There are $43 million of hardscape improvements that need to be built out over multiple years. There are $46 million of people-first investments, which must first have the programs built out. The team could not go out today and identify all the people that are necessary to step in and do the prevention and intervention work that the community wants, expects, and needs. It is going to take time to put the details together. However, the Board was promised to be given the outer limit cost and that is being done with the caveat that the cost is for the team being in full flight on day one, which is simply not possible. Beginning this afternoon, the County can work every aspect of the strategy:  Public Investments to Address Structural Violence and Direct Violence in the Community: Three Year Strategy and $89 million:  The charge of this work, as defined by those most directly affected and those working on community violence, is to address the variety and modes of interpersonal conflict that result in intentional injuries or deaths in the community; understanding these acts are not randomly distributed, and that racial and ethnic minorities bear a disproportionate burden as a consequence of historical racism and discrimination, access to poorer quality health care, housing, education, job opportunities, and persistent exposure to toxic stress across our community.  People-First Investments: $46 million:  Community communication and credible messenger supports ($3 million over three years):  Confidential, secure, and certain-action information sharing for threats and harm to individuals, groups, and the community at large  Capacity building and awareness in threat assessment, conflict resolution, and de- escalation  Wrap-around services to include case management, prevention, and intervention strategies ($15 million over three years):  Expansion of existing and effective evidence-based programs  Place-based support services and coordination  Non-profit capacity building and assistance based on community goals  Comprehensive, unified, and coordinated service delivery  Eliminate education barriers ($12 million over three years):  Double county-funded pre-k  At-risk education interventions  Cost of attendance support for career and technical certifications that align with market demands  Relationship building and enhanced school-oriented security and monitoring supports ($16 million over three years):  Ensuring not less than one traditional school resource officer (SRO) at every school and learning center to perform traditional SRO duties  Ensuring not less than one security officer at learning centers and all middle and high schools to focus on perimeter management and campus-based interventions  Ensuring at least two adults on every school bus for safe transportation, monitoring, and trust building with students  Hardscape and School Safety Investments: $43 million:  Perimeter and facility ingress/egress modifications across the entirety of the school district ($26.5 million)  Campus-based and district-wide communication, monitoring, and surveillance enhancements ($15 million)  Community-based and facility renovations for education, social, emotional, and life-skill enhancements ($1.5 million) County Manager Coudriet concluded the presentation stating that this is the strategy of how the team intends, driven by the community, to move forward over the next several years. While there have been community and school meetings, the team also knows that the community at-large wants to offer input into the strategy. A community survey will be launched later today that will be easy for citizens to access. The survey will also be in Spanish, which begins the defining by individuals of what is their perception, therefore their reality, of safety in the schools, safety in their neighborhoods, and the opportunities that they seek. The four corners of the strategy are worked out and he believes that this is directionally right. The details and content experts will flesh that out and there is a need to be informed by the community. There will be organized town hall meetings with one based on NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 241 school safety specifically and one on community safety at-large. This will give people the opportunity to engage and hear from content experts, but also offer perspectives based on their experiences. Chair Olson-Boseman thanked County Manager Coudriet for the presentation and opened the floor to Board discussion. Commissioner Rivenbark stated that he attended the community meeting where the strategies were being put together and there was a good cross-section of students present as well as a principle and they shared how they felt about the school. They are scared and kids should not have to go to school like that. He remembers it being said at a prior meeting that at any given time, 70% of the people in jail did not graduate from high school. If kids can reach graduation, they have been setup to succeed. There are programs at Cape Fear Community College where a student can finish in ten weeks and be making $50,000 a year, but the students must be high school graduates. Each student at the meeting commented that they were not aware of that opportunity. The kids need help to get through school and need to be protected while they are there. Commissioner Zapple stated that County Manager Coudriet and his staff have done a tremendous amount of work in a very compressed amount of time, and it is very impressive. What resonates with him, and in echoing Commissioner Rivenbark's comments, are the education positives in the strategy. It is a major part of the entire problem, that problem being community violence. As was stated earlier, this is not just a school problem but a community-wide problem. He would like to know about the City of Wilmington’s (City) involvement as it participated in the September 3, 2021 meeting. He would also like to know how the school district is participating as it has received a tremendous amount of money. While a majority of what has been identified affects the schools, it is not just a school problem, but a community-wide problem. He noted that County Manager Coudriet made an excellent point about looking at existing programs. He knows that the Too Good for Violence and Elements programs are two that were mentioned in the meetings, and he would like to know if there is any data on their successes as they are long-standing programs. Part of the strategy seems to be looking at a large expansion of the program to effectively reach into the 47 different schools. While that is a good idea, he wants to hear more about the effectiveness of the programs. Also, the Bull City United (BCU) program seems to offer a lot of good suggestions. Some of those suggestions are incredibly creative and some have not been thought of here. He knows there has been difficulty getting that plan to the Board, but he is hopeful that the Board can see it to benefit by hearing and learning what BCU is doing and what the team is thinking about incorporating into the strategy. Judge Corpening stated that on Monday, September 6, 2021 he met with Frankie Roberts with LINC, to discuss some of the successful programs that communities are doing to combat this problem. Mr. Roberts shared with him that Abdul Hafeedh bin Abdullah, who was previously with the Blue Ribbon Commission and now with Sokoto House, pitched the Cure Violence Global, the BCU program, to the City several years ago and they blinked. BCU is based on Cure Violence Global, and it was implemented several years ago in Durham, NC. Recently a good conversation was held between the County team and the Durham team about the program. Durham has been very successful with the program. Work started with three census tracks and was data-driven in looking at the most violent census tracks. Durham adopted the violence interruption program where they send trained people who are from the community and have credibility in the community, to go back into the community to try to interrupt violence and do conflict resolution. There is also a layer on top of that of people who do case management services to try to maintain stability in the families and community and then, build support within the community. In the three census tracks, gun violence was reduced by approximately half, which is a win. It has been so successful that in this past year, Durham has tripled the BCU effort and grown the staff to 18. Durham is now creating a new county department which includes BCU, including gang intervention and mentoring programs. He has also watched an online seminar about the work of Cure Violence, and it is fabulous work that is being done. County Manager Coudriet stated as it relates to BCU there is a version of it built into the strategy, but it is not the BCU model. He will go into as much detail as the Board wants, but what was heard in the discussion with Durham and other follow-up discussions was the need to build out a program and a system of focus and support that uniquely addresses what this community requires. Durham has gravitated themselves from the traditional Cure Violence Global model to what is now a Durham model. They have helped several other units in the state begin to build out their own systems. He noted that Commissioner Barfield was part of the conversation. Again, it is built into the strategy, which focuses first on the mediation that must happen when something has happened or as they know something is going to happen. Capacity, which is human interaction, is being built into that. There is also a need to ensure that when the individual is and/or the individual’s family are ready to take part in case management and outreach, the capacity is there for them. Not everybody is ready to jump into the support service arena, but when they make that decision, the ability must be there. There is also a need to use data. Chief Diversity and Equity Officer Linda Thompson and her team have begun to work on where the concentration of resources is and where the data initially demands it. As Durham expands its program, it is reducing gun violence in more census tracks. That is the concept, the County must go there, and there must be leadership in that. It is built into the strategy model. The exact amount and number of positions can be discussed, but it is in the model as part of the $46 million people-first investments. County Manager Coudriet further stated that he did not do a good job of delivering the update from the community if he conveyed that this is predominantly about schools. Certainly the $43 million in school safety investments is no question about that, but the preponderance of things in the $46 million is not to fund more activity within the school system. It must be acknowledged that people spend a lot of their time in the schools and that came out in the meeting with school personnel. They said, “…do more service in the school, but do not ask us to do the service; we are teachers and principals. Let us be administrators and educators, but certainly meet children where NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 242 they are, which is in the school setting.” There is a need to look at how more service delivery from Elements, Communities in Schools (CIS), or Voyage should be built in the safe setting that is the school. A majority of the $46 million is not about reinvesting in the public education system. It recognizes that is where most young persons are, for most of the time. Also, the programs are built to follow them when they leave the school, after hours, during summers, and on breaks to continue to meet families and individuals where they are. Commissioner Zapple asked if there was a written document about BCU that could be provided to the Board. County Manager Coudriet confirmed a copy could be provided to the Board as well as a description of what is viewed to be the County’s version. It was discussed in the private meetings last week with the Board that the finance and human resources departments and others have started work on what the job descriptions would look like and how to make an opportunity in the workforce for nontraditional persons to do the work. This is not a job for those coming out of MPA programs. Not only is there a need to have creditable messengers, but it also becomes a jobs opportunity. As to efficacy and the results of Elements and Too Good for Violence, which are both programs operated in Youth Empowerment Services, they are very effective. The problem, and it was identified in the gaps analysis, is that there is not nearly enough continuation in involvement with the kids when they move from middle school. Due to capacity, Elements has largely been focused on elementary and middle. That is exclusively where Youth Empowerment Services, which is a part of Community Justice Services, has done the work. The strategy expands them to provide the services of these evidence-based, proven models in the high school setting as well. It was clearly one of the Board's strategic priorities from the first iteration of the strategic plan, which was reducing juvenile recidivism. Around 2010 when the Board made the decision to initiate the Double the Impact (Elements) program, with the five-year success being recognized internationally as the only program that addressed juvenile recidivism at that scale anywhere in the world. However, there is currently not the capacity and resources to operate that program to continue with kids, everybody gets older, everybody needs to have human relationships, and there is a need to continue that forward. The data supports that the programs work. Vice-Chair Hays thanked everyone involved and stated that the focus to eradicate community violence is stronger than ever. She was impressed with Judge Corpening’s comments about the BCU program and how staff has just now increased to 18. She wants to know how they got so much done prior to increasing staff. She thinks it is a model the Board wants to see, look at, implement, and work with and understands it must be customized to this County. While she is familiar with CIS and Voyage, she is not familiar with Elements and the Too Good for Violence programs. Moving forward, she feels it would be very beneficial to have both programs present to the Board at an agenda review meeting to learn what they are doing, what the needs are, and where the benefits could be improved. While the desire is to address and target this issue, at the same time, there is the need to be data driven. There is also the need to be aware and concerned about the school district’s responsibilities in how to address this and to make sure that all community partners are involved. There are short, mid, and long-term solutions and it will not happen nor change overnight. She thanked law enforcement for stepping forward to address some things that could be done immediately to ensure that the schools are safe as possible right now. She also knows it is a challenge to find and hire more school bus drivers as well as law enforcement officers. When discussions start about having more monitors on the buses, more SROs, more security officers, she wants to understand if that is possible to do in the current environment. She would like to see more details on the funding requests behind all of them to be able to move forward with some proposals and bids. It important to understand that this is a huge investment, and she wants to make sure that investments are being made where needed and continue to be reviewed and refined over the course of not just three years, but five years to make sure investments are appropriately being made where needed. This is a community-wide issue that does not involve just the school district, the County, or the municipalities. It involves everyone and there is a need to coordinate and embrace all the community partners. She also thinks all funding options should be explored and that true engagement is had with everyone to be able to provide the best possible plan to eradicate community violence. County Manager Coudriet stated that the City has been party to all discussions, both school-based and community-based conversations. They are at the table but have not been asked to think about their participation in the financial terms. The ask of the City has been to think about its participation in terms of what it is currently doing and what it might see as opportunity to do differently and more. Again, the City is very much, both from a law enforcement perspective and from a service delivery perspective, part of all the discussions. As it relates to funding sources, staff is here to do the work of the Board. The charge given to staff was to examine, build a plan, and consider the availability of revenues from the escrow. However, where the money comes from is ultimately a decision of the Board. Staff has advanced the charge that they heard and have planned the strategy around the revenue source presented by Board action on September 3, 2021. Staff does think the strategy is directionally right, not because of what he or any of the other managers have said, but what Frankie Roberts, Judge Corpening, Voyage, CIS, and others have said that directionally, this is right. Students have said this is right as well as teachers and administrators. Commissioner Rivenbark stated that people hired to be school bus drivers must go through eight to ten weeks of training before being able to drive a school bus. As such, one idea was to let the person who wants to become a bus driver be the second adult on the bus in the interim, which solves that part. Also, the City pays County taxes just like anyone else, so they have a vested interest in this matter. Commissioner Barfield stated a lot has been heard today and during the joint meeting with the school board in relation to a community problem. The word “community” means different things to different people. He believes that when Judge Corpening referenced “community,” he was looking at one part of the County. For him when he says “community,” he is thinking about all the citizens that he represents in the County as a whole. Again, the word “community” is used so loosely, that it is hard to understand what people are saying when they use it. At the joint meeting with the school board, he thinks the conversation got off on the wrong foot around accessing the $350 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 243 million from the sale of the hospital. Every media outlet continues to reinforce and say that the County is spending $350 million on community violence when that is not the case. He reiterated the same at the next Board meeting to make it clear that the County is not spending $350 million, but that night on the news the media again said the County is spending $350 million. He does not know where the disconnect is in terms of what they heard and the facts that are there. The intent is not to spend $350 million. It is to leverage resources to help combat this challenge and problem that is throughout the entire County. He has no intention of giving staff or anyone a blank check to access all those funds and spend it until there is no more to spend without any accountability from the Board. Typically, when County dollars are spent, whether it is on school construction or anything, there is a budget amendment that the Board would typically approve, and staff makes sure that the Board knows how much is being spent. When the Board made a motion to access the resources, he would have appreciated it if the Board’s team had reminded the Board that at a prior meeting it voted to set aside the $350 million and authorized staff to invest it into sound investments that will bring income to the County and be used to help do other things, just like what is being done with the foundation with the hospital and as such cannot spent. He expects the County team to give him the information to be able to make an informed decision, and not just go along with what he asks. So many people will tell a person what they want to hear, just because of where they sit, but a few people will hold the person accountable to what they are supposed to be doing. He wants the County team to hold him accountable to what he said in the past to make sure that the County is not in the wrong place in the future. At that moment, someone had the ability to say, “Hold up, Commissioners, you voted to allocate these funds in another place. You need to rethink this.” He does not need people around him that will just ratify his thoughts but tell him the truth to help him make good, informed decisions and not just knee jerk decisions based on the moment. He is fully invested in what is being done. He appreciated the opportunity to be a part of the BCU conversation. He understands that Durham initially did not invest, but then saw the need and invested a good bit as well as increased the number of staff to 18, due to recognizing the efficacy of the program. He recognizes the need to invest these dollars, but his first call is not to pull money from the $350 million but look at the County’s fund balance as well as the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) dollars in the County and school district budgets to figure out what monies can be used from those sources. He understands that approximately $200 million of the $350 million has already been invested and cannot be withdrawn without possibly paying a penalty. He does not want to go down the road of doing that. He wishes this conversation had been done publicly so that the public was aware of what the County has already done so there is not any backtracking. Taking things step by step and getting buy in from this Board would be the right methodology to proceed with, which again means having access to resources is one thing, spending them is another thing. Every available line of funding that makes the County budget work needs to be looked at including the federal dollars received by the County, and the school district, to have the full picture and then choosing which funding lines to use to possibly not touch the escrow resources as much possible so the County can get a good return on investment in the future. As he does not think there was clarity in terms of how to access, spend, and bring forth a budget amendment, he would make a motion that the county manager and staff look at alternative funding first, that the County stay committed to the charge of what has been presented today but look at other federal dollars as well as the County’s fund balance to fund this strategy, and to figure out how to make those things work before accessing the other monies. Chair Olson-Boseman asked County Attorney Copley if the motion on the floor has to have a super majority to change direction. County Attorney Copley responded that she does not believe that the motion requires super majority to change direction. MOTION: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Hays to direct the County Manager and staff look at alternative funding first, that the County stay committed to the charge of what has been presented today, but look at other federal dollars as well as the County’s fund balance to fund this strategy, and to figure out how to make those things work before accessing the other monies. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 3 TO 2. Chair Olson- Boseman and Commissioner Rivenbark dissenting. Commissioner Barfield further stated that he appreciates County Manager Coudriet’s team and the community volunteers that have come out every week to have the discussions. Sometimes it is tough to hear the truth, but the truth will set a person free once they are able to understand what that truth is and the ability to embrace what makes them feel good or not. He knows as a community there is a long way to go, but with the people that are involved, and those that have invested their life’s work in preventing violence in the community and to cause healing, he thinks the community will get there. He is excited about the BCU/Cure Violence model and thinks it has a true place in the community. He has watched the BRC/Voyage Youth Council do something similar but not as detailed. He does not plan on blinking, both of his feet are in, and he is truly committed to solving the problem in the community. He thanked Judge Corpening for his leadership. Chair Olson-Boseman thanked Judge Corpening and County Manager Coudriet for their work on this matter. She wants to be clear that whatever the motion was that just occurred, there is still a 5 TO 0 vote to utilize a portion of the $350 million. She knew exactly what she was doing when she made the motion and voted. When she spoke with Spence Broadhurst, New Hanover Community Endowment (NHCE) Chair, after the joint meeting he said, “Y’all are the band-aid, and we are going to fix the problem.” This is everyone working together and the NHCE is very much behind the County and supports this. She just wants to make sure that it is known that she understands that Commissioner Barfield and the other Commissioners want the school district to pay something, but it does not change the 5 TO 0 vote. Commissioner Barfield stated that to bring clarity to the discussion, it takes a super majority to access the money, but it does not take a super majority to change the focus on where the money comes from. That takes three votes so one has nothing to do with the other. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 244 Commissioner Rivenbark asked about where the County goes from here. Commissioner Barfield responded that he thinks the County continues down the road it is on. The staff and county management team are going to proceed with looking at other funding options and there is a commitment to the process based on the vote. Commissioner Zapple stated that in the strategy County Manager Coudriet presented, one of the things being looked at is hiring 121 additional full-time employees. He would like for County Manager Coudriet to provide the Board an analysis that goes out beyond the three-year window to see the impact on the annual budget. He understands the 121 hires is an estimate and that there will be changes, but the Board needs to understand what that does to the budget. County Manager Coudriet responded that he would do so. Vice-Chair Hays stated that this has been a good discussion of the Board. She is excited to get the BCU information as she wants to learn more about how Durham implemented it. She also asked that in the future, the Board be made aware of any community meetings as well as town hall meetings as she feels it would be advantageous to attend to listen and hear what is being said from the experts, parents, and students. It would help her further understand what County Manager Coudriet hears and what staff has been working to put together. To add to Commissioner Barfield’s comments, the Commissioners are very strongly committed, their feet are moving forward, and their sights have not changed. They want to address the issue and eradicate community violence. There is a need to be fiscally responsible in how the County is approaching this while continuing to be responsible to the citizens as there are a lot of different opportunities for funding. County Manager Coudriet asked for a point of clarification from a staff perspective as staff does not want to leave the meeting moving in the wrong direction. The charge to staff is to explore a range of funding sources. However, unless otherwise directed by a majority of the Board, staff is going to begin implementing, not studying more, to build out now the planning for the County’s version of BCU, to begin planning out and building now Too Good for Violence and Elements in the high schools, working on the place-based resources for community coordination, and the data analytics. Staff views that the direction is to consider a multitude of funding sources but not to slow down or stop building out. Unless he is wrong, it would be helpful for the Board to say, “Stop what you're doing,” staff is going to begin working people such as Judge Corpening, Sheriff McMahon, and many others to allocate the resources to expand Elements, build out the plan and the people for the County’s version of BCU, etc. Commissioner Barfield stated that to be clear, the motion he made was that the Board sees budget amendments and sees how the resources are being spent. It is not just a blank check to go out and start doing x, y, and z, but that the Board is kept in the loop every step of way and stays informed. Again, with almost everything the Board does when resources are expended on the big things, the Board typically knows where it is. That was his expectation with the motion he made so that staff looks at additional funding alternatives, which may mean going into fund balance rather than first tapping into the $350 million. Additionally, it is the expectation that the Board is kept in the loop and understands what the implications to the budget will be by adding 121 employees. He feels those are things that the Board needs to know moving forward. County Manager Coudriet thanked Commissioner Barfield for the clarity as he would have left perhaps with a different understanding. As such, before staff proceeds with building out any of the systems of delivery, they will bring forward a budget amendment for Board consideration to include the revenue sources. Chair Olson-Boseman stated the Board is now hiccupping, blinking, stopping, and asked if it is correct that is what Commissioner Barfield wants to do. Commissioner Barfield stated as he said earlier, he has no intention of blinking or stopping, he just wants to be informed every step of the way of the resources that are being expended. It does not stop anything. Commissioner Zapple stated that he agrees with Commissioner Barfield and appreciates him putting the detail on it to give the county manager clear direction. The Board needs to know the costs, including receiving the information it has requested, so it can be held responsible for what it is doing. All the Commissioners would benefit by getting a chance to look at BCU and the other programs and then moving forward. No one here is blinking. The Commissioners are simply trying to do their jobs and be held accountable for it. Chair Olson-Boseman thanked County Manager Coudriet for the update. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR GAP FINANCING FOR AN AFFORDABLE WORKFORCE HOUSING PROJECT AND ADOPTION OF BUDGET AMENDMENT 22-017 Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth stated the Board is being asked to provide gap financing for a workforce housing project located at 2346 Carolina Beach Road within the City of Wilmington (City), just north of the intersection at Shipyard Boulevard. The Wilmington City Council (City Council) voted last month to approve the rezoning for the project and that zoning designation which is tied to the City's new land development code (LDC), goes into effect when the LDC does on December 1, 2021. The project will provide 278 units, 100% of which will be workforce housing. The developer is pursuing 4% tax credits from the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency (NCHFA) and that will also ensure that the units remain affordable. Unlike the tax credit projects that are generally seen in the County, the 4% projects receive less of a tax credit subsidy, which is one of the reasons why gap financing is generally associated with these projects. However, the projects can support more units than the traditional tax credit projects that the County sees. They also do not have to go through the same sort of competitive process and are largely assured to receiving the necessary funding. She then provided an overview of the request as follows:  Consideration of a Request for Gap Financing: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 245  Starway Village Affordable Workforce Housing Project:  City Council voted on September 21, 2021 to rezone the property to MD-17 (effective December 1, 2021)  278 units; 100% affordable workforce housing  Pursuing 4% Low Income Housing Tax Credits (less subsidy but not competitive and serves more units) The units are targeted to be affordable to residents making 60% or less of area median income (AMI). For reference, in this area the starting salary for police officers is about $39,000 per year, for teaching and nursing assistants it is about $28,000 per year, and for service industry workers it is somewhere between $20,000 and $30,000 per year: Household Size 60% Area Median Income Limit (NHC) 1 $32,040 2 $36,600 3 $41,160 4 $45,720 5 $49,390 The rent proposed for the project will provide a level of affordability, which is not generally seen by market rate proposals, which recently have run around $1,300 a month for one bedroom, $1,800 a month for two bedrooms, and $2,200 a month for three bedrooms: Unit Type AMI Unit Mix Rent* Utility Adjusted Rent 1 Bedroom/1 Bath 60% 34 $754 $699 2 Bedroom/2 Bath 60% 154 $900 $827 3 Bedroom/2 Bath 60% 90 $999 $900 Total 278 *Rent includes water/sewer and trash removal The request that has been received from the developer, Bradley Housing Developers/Kelley Development Company, and the City is: • Request: • $1,896,729 in County gap financing: • $53,941,985 in tax credit equity and financing • $3.5 million from City of Wilmington • Proposed to be allocated from ARP funds for water/sewer projects This type of gap financing is something that the City has specifically provided for in its ARPA framework. At this point, the developer has received the staff level approval for the allocation, and it will be formalized by the City Council at its November 3, 2021 meeting. In response to Board questions, Ms. Roth stated that the City provides gap financing regularly and structures it as a zero interest grant with no payment required if all the requirements of the project are met. In this case it is a bit different as there are additional requirements in the funding associated with the federal financing through ARPA, and that is one of the reasons why the funding mechanism must be specifically approved by the City Council. Normally, gap financing requests do not have to go through that process. Chief Financial Officer Lisa Wurtzbacher stated it was not staff’s intention to structure the funding as a loan to get the money back, rather the intent was to grant the money to the developer. The City typically does its grants a bit differently and she thinks that City staff is still working with their legal team to determine if they can structure it the same as other grants since ARPA funding is being used. Commissioner Barfield commented that the wording is potentially misleading because when there is financing, typically it is expected the funds would be paid back. In response to Board questions, Ms. Roth reconfirmed that the matter is scheduled for action by the City Council at its November 3, 2021 meeting. The information in the Board’s agenda packet is slightly different because City staff generally approves the funding for any kind of gap financing for projects. It is part of their regular budget and activities, but due to the APRA requirements and the way the funding mechanism must be structured differently to comply with the federal source of funds, it must go to the City Council. A brief discussion was held about the extension of Maryland Avenue as part of the project. Ted Heilbron with Kelley Development Company stated that the process of designing the site is intended to follow the requirements of the City’s development code. The project has not gone through full civil permitting and there is currently a subdivision application open with the City. The desire to make commitments about the extension of Maryland Avenue would be out ahead of the City's role in making decisions on the site planning for the project. A brief discussion was held about two different projects being combined and involving two different companies. Mr. Heilbron explained the unit cap within the state's qualified allocation plan, which governs all the LIHTC (low income housing tax credit) funding that gets allocated annually across the state, is 200 units. The NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 246 companies knew when they came to Wilmington that the housing gap was so large that a project greater than 200 units certainly would make sense. They reached out to the state and got approval to build up to 350 units on the site. While working through the site planning and development process, it was determined that 350 units was not something that could fit on the 15.6 acre property, which is why unit count is now at 278. The need for two LLCs is because his company receives funding from several different sources. In this case they are here before the Board to discuss gap funding. They also received a mortgage and equity funding by selling tax credits to tax credit investors. In speaking with those financing partners, it was clear that building two projects scaled smaller than 278 units would be more attractive to the funding partners than building one 278 unit project. As such, the project was split in half and has received permission from the NCHFA that this form of structuring works for them. In response to Board questions, Mr. Heilbron stated that it was never thought that only one part would be done, but theoretically it could occur. The NCHFA 4% tax credit program being applied for allows for projects of a slightly larger scale to be built. It is done by reducing the amount of tax credits that the project itself receives. The 9% projects, which have been most of the tax credit projects built in the County receive about 70% of their project costs in tax credits. This project will receive something closer to 40%, which creates the need for gap funding. As less tax credit is being received, it means that there are fewer applications across the state seeking the 4% credits. Thus, the application process itself is not competitive. If the project pencils, the necessary tax credits will be received as well as the tax-free bonds to build the project. Full application was made to the NCHFA in September and based on the NCHFA market study results received last week, there is a clear indication of the very substantial need for a project of this scale. A project demand is judged by a capture rate, which effectively says what percentage of the population that meets certain income requirements is there housing stock for. Both portions of this project, the 102- unit portion and the 176-unit portion, have capture rates below 5%. That means that for every 10 people that meet the income requirements in this County, half of a person in that analogy has access to a housing unit that works for them that is priced according to their income needs. The companies are quite confident that both portions will be funded because the 4% credit is being sought and there has never been a consideration of the possibility of only one portion being built. He further confirmed that the $1.9 million request of the County is for 278 units. The County will receive back a proportional amount for what is not built. He further explained that he thinks it is procedural as to why the City has not provided approval yet. It is a comprehensive vetting process for these types of gap funding requests and takes City staff a good amount of time to go through the submitted information. There are also outside costs consultants to help make sure that construction costs are in line with what they should be. The application was submitted the third week of August and is still in the vetting process. If the City Council does not approve the request, it will be a headwind given the level of staff support that has been received and it is not foreseen as a serious possibility. However, if the project does not get built in no way are they asking for dollars out of the County’s budget. A brief discussion was held regarding about people confusing workforce housing with public housing. Mr. Heilbron confirmed that the project is 100% workforce housing, and the intent is to have teachers, nurses, law enforcement officers, etc. in the community. The rents are 60% AMI rents and thus, it is that income level that is the project target. Further discussion was held regarding concerns expressed about residents using the adjacent neighborhoods as cut throughs. Mr. Heilbron explained that on Carolina Beach Road there is one egress and one egress-ingress. There are not two points of egress coming from Carolina Beach Road, the traffic study has been submitted to the City, because it is a state road, and NCDOT is a part of that process. The traffic study was released in May and NCDOT and the WMPO have been a part of the scoping process for the traffic study. At this point, the model for the site has been approved, which would include ingress and egress out the back of the property at Maryland Avenue. The AM peak trip count associated with the site and traffic coming and going from the southwest corner of the property along Maryland Avenue is 10 trips and 12 trips, respectively, in the PM peak hour. There are two points of egress on the Carolina Beach Road at the top and bottom of the site. They have been asked to make commitments about items in the site plan, but City has a process for that. They do not want to lead to congestion or have people cutting through the neighborhoods and do not believe the project provides that level of risk. In response to Board questions, Ms. Roth stated that the tax credit project on Gordon Road was awarded the 9% tax credit, which is the competitive process. The County benefitted this past year as there were additional awards due to the hurricanes experienced and two tax credits were received for 9%. One was awarded to a senior housing project off Middle Sound Loop Road and the other to the workforce housing project on Gordon Road. Those were the only two projects that were able to receive that level of funding. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman asked from direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Hays to approve the request for gap financing and adopt budget amendment 22-017 to provide $1,896,729 for an affordable workforce housing project located at 2346 Carolina Beach Road. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the budget amendment is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and are contained in Exhibit Book XLIII, Page 14.4. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Appointments to the New Hanover County Board of Mechanical Examiners Chair Olson-Boseman reported that two vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Board of Mechanical Examiners with one application available for consideration in the Mechanical Contractor category. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 18, 2021 PAGE 247 Commissioner Zapple nominated Donald Lewis for reappointment in the Mechanical Contractor category. Chair Olson-Boseman seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Olson-Boseman asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Donald Lewis to the New Hanover County Board of Mechanical Examiners in the Mechanical Contractor category with term to expire August 31, 2023. Appointments to the New Hanover County Health and Human Services Board Chair Olson-Boseman reported that three vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Health and Human Services Board with one application available for consideration in the Dentist category. Commissioner Zapple nominated Dr. Delma Kinlaw, DDS for appointment in the Dentist category. Chair Olson-Boseman seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Olson-Boseman asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Dr. Delma Kinlaw, DDS to the New Hanover County Health and Human Services Board in the Dentist category with the unexpired term to expire July 31, 2025. Appointment to the New Hanover County Jury Commission Chair Olson-Boseman reported that one vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Jury Commission with one application eligible for reappointment and one additional application available for consideration. Commissioner Zapple nominated Jennifer Flannery for reappointment. Chair Olson-Boseman seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Olson-Boseman asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Jennifer Flannery to the New Hanover County Jury Commission with the term to expire October 31, 2023. Appointment to the New Hanover County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council Chair Olson-Boseman reported that one vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council in the Under Age 21 category with one application available for consideration. Vice-Chair Hays nominated Joshua Barber for appointment in the Under Age 21 category. Commissioner Zapple seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Olson-Boseman asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Joshua Barber to the New Hanover County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council in the Under Age 21 category with the term to expire September 30, 2023. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Chair Olson-Boseman stated that no one signed up to speak on non-agenda items. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS There were no additional agenda items of business. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Olson-Boseman adjourned the meeting at 10:54 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Kymberleigh G. Crowell Clerk to the Board Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners meeting. The entire proceedings are available online at www.nhcgov.com.