Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-05-19 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 516 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met on May 19, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Regular Session in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present: Chair Bill Rivenbark; Vice-Chair LeAnn Pierce; Commissioner Dane Scalise; Commissioner Stephanie A.C. Walker; and Commissioner Rob Zapple. Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell; and County Attorney K. Jordan Smith. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Reverend Katie Harrington, St. Andrews Covenant Presbyterian Church, provided the invocation and Commissioner Scalise led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Chair Rivenbark requested a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Motion: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Walker to approve the items on the Consent Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes – Governing Body The Board approved the minutes of the May 1, 2025 Special Meeting and Agenda Review and the May 5, 2025 Regular Meeting. Second Reading: Approval of Solid Waste Franchise Agreement for Auteri Holding LLC Mobiledumps Wilmington – County Attorney The Board approved the solid waste franchise agreement for Auteri Holding LLC Mobiledumps Wilmington. Second Reading: Adoption of Amendments to Chapter 5 – Animals (Articles I & II) and Approval of Updates to the New Hanover County Sheriff's Office Animal Services Unit Fee Schedule – Strategy The Board adopted the ordinance amending the New Hanover County Code of Ordinances Chapter 5, Animals, and approved the updates to the New Hanover County Sheriff's Office Animal Services Unit Fee Schedule. A copy of the ordinance is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLVI, Page 10.1. Approval of March 2025 Tax Collection Reports – Tax The Board approved the March 2025 tax collection reports for New Hanover County, New Hanover County Debt Service, and the New Hanover County Fire District. Copies of the tax collection reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLVI, Page 10.2. Adoption of Budget Amendments – Budget The Board adopted the following budget amendments, amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2025:  Mason Inlet 25-049  Senior Resource Center 25-050 and 25-051  Fire Rescue 25-053 Copies of the budget amendments are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLVI, Page 10.3. Approval of Reallocation of Capital Fund Expenditures for New Hanover County Schools – Finance The Board approved the request to defer the $82,500 projector/screen replacement project to fund the replacement of the Art Center stage floor, with any remaining funds to be used for new audience and theatrical curtains. The Board also approved reallocating $92,944.22 in savings from various completed projects to help fund replacement of the aging data center. These funds will be combined with $363,339.78 from discounts and other funding sources. This includes $95,681.41 from the schools’ FY26 capital budget request, which staff recommends including in the total FY26 schools’ capital budget of $2,604,211. Approval was also given to reallocate an additional $322.21 in savings from completed projects to the New Hanover High School Repairs project. REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS PRESENTATION OF SERVICE AWARDS AND INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES County Manager Coudriet recognized the following employees to receive a retirement award: Donna Horne, Register of Deeds, retiring with 30 years of service NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 517 Joseph Jewell, Sheriff’s Office, retiring with 26 years of service Each retiree was provided with a retirement award from the Board in recognition of their dedicated service. County Manager Coudriet then recognized the following employees receiving service awards: Ten Years: Matthew Winkel, Facilities Management Fifteen Years: Yolanda Blount-Wood, Health and Human Services (HHS) – Health Department Twenty Years: Mark Lewis, Sheriff’s Office The Board presented each employee with a service award, thanked them personally, and expressed appreciation for their years of dedicated service. County Manager Coudriet requested the following new employees to stand for introductions: Brooke Claver, Public Health Paul Niggl, Strategy Chris Ferraioli, Information Technology Darian Roberts, HHS – Social Services The Board welcomed the employees to the organization and wished them success in their new positions. PRESENTATION OF FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 - FINANCIAL RESULTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2025 Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle presented the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-2025 financial results for the nine months ended March 31, 2025 as follows:  Finance report for the third quarter financial summary for FY 2025:  General Fund overview:  Property tax rate per $100 of assessed value:  FY 2022 = 47.5 cents  FY 2023 = 45.5 cents  FY 2024 = 45.0 cents  FY 2025 = 45.0 cents  Property tax bills mailed in late July:  Payable by citizens without interest until January 5, 2025  Tax receipt peak period is December–January  Sales Taxes Received on three month lag  Financial results dashboard:  General Fund revenues and expenditures:  General Fund revenues through 3/31/25:  General Fund expenditures: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 518  Environmental Management:  Fire Services:  Stormwater Services:  Debt Service Fund revenues and expenditures: In response to questions, County Engineer Tim Lowe explained that the Daniel Boone culvert project is currently in the design analysis phase. The construction phase is planned for the forthcoming fiscal year. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Credle for the presentation. PRESENTATION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 RECOMMENDED BUDGET AND FISCAL YEARS 2026-2030 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN County Manager Coudriet presented the FY 2025-2026 Recommended Budget and the FY 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for New Hanover County (NHC), highlighting the following:  FY25-26 Recommended Budget:  Revaluation snapshot since 2021:  Increase in sales prices from recorded deeds:  January 2021: $280,000 vs. December 2024: $450,000  Peak Sales Price: August 2024, at just over $475,000  67% average increase for residential and commercial market values in the County  Inflation and increased costs of construction  What the recommended 35 cents rate means for the average homeowner:  New average home value = $581,000:  Compare to 2021 = $358,685  County Tax = $170/month ($2,040/year)  Adds $39 per month compared with FY25  Cost of monthly homeowners’ insurance and utilities averages three to four times more than property taxes  Property tax is the largest revenue source: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 519  Breakdown of County services:  Tailwinds driving opportunity:  Headwinds to manage:  Governance pillars:  Budget priorities:  Public education is first among equals  Preserve open space  Preserve debt capacity for major county capital commitments  Refine what the County already does and do it better  Historical tax rate:  Sales tax – reliable growth, slower pace:  FY26 estimate: $117.4 million (1% increase over FY25)  Sales tax remains above pre-pandemic levels  Adds service capacity without raising property tax  Slower post-pandemic growth reflects economic shifts  Sales tax collection:  Revenues: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 520  General Fund expenditures:  FY25-26 Recommended Budget:  FY25-26 Recommended Budget, comparative cost savings and reductions:  FY25-26 Recommended Budget, unfunded enhancement requests:  Investing in Education:  New Hanover County Schools (NHCS):  Total operating investment: $105.5 million  Increases investment by $3.96 million  Includes $2 million for Pre-K  Funding rate of $3,872 per average daily membership (ADM)  Total capital investment: $2.6 million  $14.9 million continued funding of school nurses, therapists, deputies (SROs) and special programs  Total County investment in public education: $143.9 million*  *Inclusive of debt service and indirect support(s)  Operating Funding, Including Pre-K (Does not include nurses, therapists, deputies (SROs) and special programs):  Cape Fear Community College:  Total operating investment: $13.3 million  Increases investment by $1.3 million  Total capital investment: $2.1 million  Operating Budget – County funding:  The County also pays $9-10 million annually in debt service on the 2008 $164 million General Obligation Bonds NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 521  Key investments:  Committed continuation - $2.4 million and 22 full-time employees (FTE):  Libraries:  13 FTEs for Northchase Library staff  One-time funding for books and materials  Ongoing operating funds for the facility  Project Grace:  Six (6) FTEs to support the operations of the museum and planetarium  Point of Sale system for the museum  Three (3) FTEs to maintain the facility  Workforce and Economic Development - $462,000 and six (6) FTE:  Family Support Pilot, Education: six (6) FTEs to support truancy and mental health for students at NHCS  Community Safety and Well-being: $2.8 million and four (4) FTE:  Public Safety:  In-car camera for fleet vehicles  Detention facility upgrades  One (1) FTE for additional court security  Information Technology:  $2.3 million for the modernization of public safety software replacement to enhance 911 communications, emergency management, and dispatching  Building Safety – Inspections:  Code compliance program for historic commercial buildings  Sustainable Land Use and Environmental Stewardship - $600,000 and seven (7) FTE:  Planning and Land Use: Floodplain Management capacity software  Parks and Gardens:  One (1) FTE to enhance night and weekend facility care  One (1) Technician funded by Airlie Gardens  Funding for the continued replacement and repair of facilities  Good Governance: $5.2 million and 6.5 FTE:  General Administration:  Election Official management software  Education and Communication Coordinator Elections position and funding for additional staff  $638,000 of total enhanced support for the Board of Elections  One (1) FTE for IT Security  One (1) FTE Passport Agent  Cash used for capital outlay  Veterans: one (1) FTE for enhanced Veteran Services outreach  Planning and Land Use:  $1.7 million for water infrastructure for Scotts Hill  $3 million annual commitment for workforce housing (year 4 of 5)  Fire Services:  Fire Services tax rate: remain at 7.25 cents per $100 assessed value  Supports two new stations  Four-person crew in pilot operation at one station  Recycling and Solid Waste:  Tip Fee: no change, $52/ton  Enhancements detail:  Demo of old wastewater treatment plant and filter building  Replacement of C&D Wind Fence  Compost facility painting and repair  Stormwater Services:  Stormwater Fee: no change, $6.14/month  Enhancements/Capital Improvement: Stormwater Office renovation  Utilize a portion of the fund balance to support the Courtney Pines culvert replacement  Investing in New Hanover County employees:  Public Safety:  Average of 7.64% increase for identified public safety employees  Aims to remain competitive with surrounding employers  People:  3.5% market and merit NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 522  0.5% additional merit for outstanding performance  Strives to be an employer of choice for the region  Five-year Capital Improvement Plan:  General Characteristics:  Fixed asset with a useful life greater than five years  Cost of $100,000 or more  Requires more than 12 months to complete  Process: The CIP Committee evaluates capital improvement project requests:  FY26-30 Capital Improvement Projects: General Fund:  FY26-30 Capital Improvement Plan: Fire Fund:  FY26-30 Capital Improvement Plan – Environmental Management Fund:  Community engagement:  Brewing Budgets sessions:  May 21, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. (Senior Resource Center)  More to be announced  Balancing act and taxpayer receipt interactive tools are live at Finance.NHCgov.com  Budget timeline: County Manager Coudriet requested that New Hanover County Non-County Agency Funding Committee (NCAFC) member John Hinnant present the information on the NCAFC’s recommendation. Mr. Hinnant provided the following overview of the process and recommendations:  Non-County Agency Funding:  Process and recommendations for FY25-26:  NCAFC committee members: Gail Eddie, Shane Hartley, Candy Robbins, Clare Kiley, John Hinnant, and Tyler Braswell  Committee steps to improve processes:  Modify applications based on key learnings  Provide training to non-county agencies on the application and process  Survey non-county agencies  Non-County Agency Funding requests for FY-25-26: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 523  77 applications received from 61 agencies  Requested funding: $3,091,630  *Eligible funding: $2,869,439  *Eligible Funding – Items that are ineligible have been deducted from Requested Funding, which are salaries for positions and overhead expenses not directly tied to service delivery, marketing dollars, capital expenditures and pass throughs.  Recommended Funding: $1,600,000  Review Process: read/review applications, review of agency mid-year performance reports and funding history, discuss scoring rubric, individual scoring and questions to agencies, question responses and final aggregated scores, and discussion and allocation decisions  Scoring Rubric, six scoring categories:  Alignment with New Hanover County strategy and goals  Request aligned with agency mission  Request aligns with agency capability  Collaborative efforts associated with the program/service  Impact of program, multiplier  Service or program enhances the quality of life for residents of NHC  Evaluation:  Programs scored individually by committee members and aggregated  Discussion about areas of difference in scoring and key drivers  Approximately 100 hours of committee time spent on the process  Objective rating instrument/rubric: six pre-identified criteria, each criterion scored on a four-point scale, and equally weighted (max score 24)  Subjective Rating: overall rating that allows the committee to capture other attributes not easily quantifiable or that may not be broadly applicable and scored on a four-point scale (max score four)  Committee members allocated buckets based on multiplied Objective Rating (Rubric) score and Subjective Rating Score (max score of 96)  Funding tiers based on agencies that had the highest multiplied score:  Fund this: organizations that deliver a program or service, supplies, tools, contract services, and other materials for staff to deliver programs, and salaries for staff directly providing services to clients/patients/participants, etc.  Not that: intermediaries/pass through organizations (receive funding and then redistributing it to other organizations), marketing money, capital expenditures (existing buildings/existing vehicles), and administrative salaries/administrative overhead  Recommended programs/services categorized by buckets:  Comparison of FY Non-County Agency buckets and FY25 General Fund:  Next steps:  Survey non-county agencies regarding process; incorporate feedback into FY27 process  Modify the non-county agency application based on key learnings  Review scoring and consider changes to evaluation criteria  Continue providing training documents for non-county agencies on the application process and in-year reporting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 524  Set due dates and calendar for the FY27 process  Funding Recommendations: Mr. Hinnant commended the budget staff for working with the committee. Discussion ensued about the NCAFC recommendations. Commissioner Zapple thanked the NCAFC members for their work. In response to his concerns about the application submission period, Mr. Hinnant stated that submissions were accepted from November 4, 2024 to January 6, 2025. He noted that extending the deadline beyond the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday was an option. Regarding applications that received no funding, he explained that the quality of submissions varied and a key factor in the evaluations was the potential return on investment. For example, a request for $50,000 serving only two dozen individuals prompted a closer review. In one such case, although the number served was small, the organization provided treatment for victims of rape and sexual assault, where impact is not easily measured by numbers. In contrast, some requests for $5,000 proposed to directly benefit thousands of residents. The committee aimed to fund projects with the greatest return. Members were also instructed to evaluate each application based solely on the current submission and not consider the applicant’s previous funding history. Commissioner Scalise expressed appreciation for the committee’s work. He stated that the County should no longer fund non-county agencies. He noted that the hospital sale created an endowment with substantial resources and believes funding for these programs and initiatives should come from that endowment rather than the County. In his view, this type of funding does not fall within the proper role of county government. While he acknowledged that the committee has fulfilled its responsibilities well, he reiterated his policy preference to discontinue the committee’s role within county government. Mr. Hinnant responded that the committee has extended a standing invitation to the chief executive officer of the endowment to attend meetings. He noted that multiple agencies apply for funding to both the County and the endowment. He emphasized the importance of transparency and coordination, which he believes would lead to more efficient and impactful use of resources. In response to questions, Mr. Hinnant clarified that no final decisions have been made regarding potential changes to the overall process. He noted that state law requires any organization receiving $25,000 or more to submit an audit, which can cost approximately $15,000. The committee has discussed the possibility of increasing NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 525 the maximum request amount while limiting the number of applications an organization can submit. He pointed out that some organizations submitted multiple requests just below the $25,000 threshold to avoid the audit requirement, but, in total, requested nearly $75,000. He added that any adjustments would depend on the program’s budget and emphasized that the committee welcomes feedback from the Board. Also, the committee often questioned requests for funding oversight positions rather than direct service roles. The preference was to prioritize “boots on the ground” efforts to ensure funding for the actual service to the taxpayer, as opposed to supervision of a program. Vice-Chair Pierce thanked the committee for its work in reviewing the budget and acknowledged the complexity of making the recommendations. In response to Commissioner Scalise’s earlier remarks, she stated that she does not necessarily disagree but noted that community feedback often focuses on a different concern. Specifically, citizens have questioned how many organizations are funding the same nonprofits and whether any oversight exists over the total number of applications being submitted across various funding sources. She believes tracking how many entities fund each nonprofit would help improve coordination and transparency. In response to questions regarding the scoring rubric, Mr. Hinnant explained that the rubric was largely carried over from the previous year, with one duplicated criterion removed and a new subjective criterion added to capture committee members’ overall impressions of each program. The scores were averaged and used to rank applications. He noted that it was his first year implementing the process, but he believed the approach was consistent with past practices. He added that the application process includes visibility into each applicant’s total budget and the portion requested, providing helpful context during the evaluation process. In response to additional questions, Mr. Hinnant stated that his earlier comments were not to say he is philosophically opposed to the committee’s work. He supports the program. His response was to earlier comments that the committee works at the will of the Board. There is a standing invitation for the chief executive officer of the endowment to join the committee to speak, helping ensure both parties are on the same page. Discussion ensued about the recommended budget presentation. Commissioner Zapple thanked staff for their work in preparing the recommended budget. He noted that the initial recommendation in early March was for a tax rate of 36.9 cents per $100 of assessed property value, representing an 8.1-cent decrease from the current 45- cent rate. The data presented to the Board at this rate, considering the 23% inflation over the past four years, would generate sufficient revenue to maintain County services and meet commitments for capital improvement projects and debt obligations. After further discussions with the county manager, the proposed rate was reduced to 35.5 cents. Following additional analysis of how the County could better manage existing resources, it was further lowered to 35 cents per $100 of assessed property value. This is the recommendation presented today. He acknowledged the valid need to increase County revenues, citing inflation since the 2021 revaluation, which has driven up labor costs for the County’s 2,200 employees, NHCS teachers and staff, and CFCC, as well as the rising expenses of capital projects including two new fire stations, libraries, park expansions, a new museum, the STAR Center, and The Healing Place. He noted that all these items have brought value to the citizens. After hearing from the other Commissioners and citizen input, he is now requesting that the county manager and staff bring back a budget based on 33.9 cents per $100 of assessed property value, which equates to an 11.1 cent reduction from the current rate of 45 cents. He further requested that the county manager and staff reconsider the department enhancements list as well as the restoration of department funds cut from the last budget cycle. He asked the county manager to present the revised list, recommendations, and new budget proposal before the Board’s June 2nd meeting, allowing time for review in advance. Commissioner Scalise stated he would like the same task to be done at 29.1 cents and acknowledged he may not be voting in the majority on the budget. He believes more could have been done to reduce the number of items that are wants versus needs. While only 17% of the budget is classified as discretionary, many mandated services include elements of discretionary spending. For example, although only a sheriff and two deputies are required by statute, there are any number of options and permutations existing between where the budget lands and what is required to be done. He noted that this level of flexibility exists in multiple areas of the County budget. The approach to the budget should have started with a different evaluation of spending trends, particularly with the relatively flat sales tax revenues in recent years. He acknowledged that good arguments have been made for why the County needs to do what is being proposed in the recommended budget, however there are items he does not think the County should be funding. For example, the $3 million allocated over the next two years for the housing initiative, an initiative he did not vote for, should be removed from the budget. He is not opposed to housing or efforts to support affordable housing. However, in his opinion, it is a significant expenditure that could be eliminated from the budget. He believes there are enhancements that could be eliminated if they were assessed based on what the County is currently doing well and what is truly needed going forward. He acknowledged that his position on the recommended budget may differ from the majority but wanted his disagreement noted. As presented, he does not intend to support it. Vice-Chair Pierce stated that while she appreciates Commissioner Zapple’s request for a proposed tax rate at 33.9 cents, she agrees with Commissioner Scalise. She expressed concern that all three beach towns and the City of Wilmington have indicated that they will move forward with revenue-neutral tax rates, while the County has not. There are items in the proposed budget she disagrees with, particularly the creation of new positions and the number of unfilled positions that remain. If the $39 million increase was directed toward improving the school system, she might be able to understand it. However, it is not, but rather an expansion of government, which she does not support. She acknowledged prior approval of funding for initiatives such as fire stations and public safety, NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 526 which she does support. However, she does not agree with the new positions and feels many of the enhancements are unnecessary. While discussions have centered around small items not adding up enough to move the needle, small expenses do contribute significantly to overall spending. She challenged County Manager Coudriet to reconsider the impact of the proposed budget on residents, noting that while $40 more per month may seem manageable to some, it is a burden for many residents. She cited declining sales tax revenue, rising interest rates, and reduced consumer spending as indicators of financial strain in the community. She urged fiscal restraint and a focus on taxpayer relief, stating she would not support the recommended budget without compelling justification. Commissioner Zapple acknowledged and expressed appreciation for the perspectives of Vice-Chair Pierce and Commissioner Scalise. He stated he could not support a budget that, in his view, leaves behind the County’s teachers, deputy sheriffs, employees, firefighters, and emergency personnel. These are essential roles, and adopting a 29.2-cent tax rate would eliminate cost-of-living adjustments and merit pay, which he cannot support given the importance of these employees to County operations. He noted that unlike the County, the beach municipalities do not fund the school system, the Sheriff’s Office, or Health and Human Services, which are three major County responsibilities. This difference, he believes, makes it easier for municipalities to adopt revenue-neutral rates. While the published revenue-neutral rate may be technically correct, it is not reflective of the actual cost to run the County. He believes that the County’s revenue-neutral rate is higher, which is why he can support a 33.9-cent rate. Although that rate still requires some reductions, the severity of the cuts would not be what is required to achieve a 29.2-cent rate. He will not support a budget that cuts employees’ pay. Vice-Chair Pierce reiterated the beach towns as well as the City of Wilmington have indicated plans to adopt a revenue neutral tax rate. She noted that municipalities are responsible for funding their own police and fire departments, roads, and other infrastructure, such as water and sewer systems, often within much smaller budgets. Municipal residents pay both municipal and County taxes, contributing to County services like the Sheriff's Office while also funding their own local public safety and infrastructure. Municipalities are also facing reduced sales tax revenues and challenges due to how state funding is distributed, making it difficult to operate on limited budgets. Some municipalities are working with budgets of $40 million, while the County operates with a budget of $450 million. She acknowledged the challenges but expressed the view that if municipalities can adopt revenue neutral budgets under these constraints, the County should be able to as well. In response to questions, County Manager Coudriet stated that the City of Wilmington is statutorily required to do building inspections and provide streetlights, and he thinks its budget is approximately $350 million. County Manager Coudriet further stated he does understand where Vice-Chair Pierce and Commissioner Scalise are on the budget. He confirmed his and staff’s understanding that they are to provide a budget reflecting a property nd tax rate of 33.9 cents and a revised list of enhancements to the Board for review in advance of the June 2 public hearing. The information will be summarized at the public hearing and will reflect the proposed budget under consideration. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Appointment to the New Hanover County Commission for Women Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Commission for Women, with one applicant eligible for reappointment and seven applicants eligible for consideration. Commissioner Zapple nominated Hayley Jensen for reappointment. Commissioner Scalise seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark called for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted unanimously to appoint Hayley Jensen to the New Hanover County Commission for Women to serve a three-year term, with the term to expire May 31, 2028. Appointment to the New Hanover County Hispanic/Latino Commission Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Hispanic/Latino Commission, with six applications eligible for consideration. Commissioner Zapple nominated Whiyie Sang for appointment. Commissioner Walker seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted unanimously to appoint Whiyie Sang to the New Hanover County Hispanic/Latino Commission to fill an unexpired term, with the term to expire April 30, 2026. Appointment to the New Hanover County Library Advisory Board Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Library Advisory Board with five applications available for consideration. Commissioner Walker nominated Earl Sheridan for appointment. Vice-Chair Pierce seconded the nomination. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 527 Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted unanimously to appoint Earl Sheridan to the New Hanover County Library Advisory Board to fill an unexpired term, with the term to expire August 31, 2025. Appointment to the New Hanover County Special Board of Equalization and Review Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists for an alternate appointee on the New Hanover County Special Board of Equalization and Review with two applications available for consideration. Commissioner Zapple nominated Rachel Gillilan for appointment. Commissioner Walker seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted unanimously to appoint Rachel Gillilan to the New Hanover County Special Board of Equalization and Review as an alternate member for a one year term, with the term to expire March 31, 2026. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Rivenbark stated that six people signed up to speak under public comment and asked the person to step forward to provide remarks. Vivian Radecsky, a resident of Appomattox Drive in Wilmington, NC, and representative of the Battle Park subdivision, stated her opposition to the forthcoming Tarin Woods special use permit (SUP) r the next phase of development. She stated that the proposed density is nearly three times higher than a previous request the Board denied and is incompatible with nearby single-family neighborhoods, including Tarin Woods, Covington, Congleton Farms, and Sentry Oaks. She raised concerns about severe traffic congestion at Manassas Drive and Carolina Beach Road, the lack of sidewalks and crosswalks, and pedestrian safety, particularly for children. She argued that the project would worsen unsafe conditions, reduce property values, and increase noise, drainage issues, and overflow traffic. She urged the Board to deny the request and support development consistent with R-15 zoning and the surrounding neighborhood character. Adrianne Garber, a resident of Red Heart Drive, Wilmington, NC, spoke about the natural beauty of New Hanover County, highlighting locations such as Airlie Gardens, Greenfield Lake, and the Arboretum as key attractions. She emphasized that species like the heron, bald eagle, harrier hawk, osprey, and black skimmer depend on a continuous and connected natural environment rather than isolated parks. She stressed the importance of long term preservation and urged the County to adopt a rate of growth ordinance to protect natural areas over the next 50 years. She also requested an immediate moratorium on permits and rezonings for parcel R00900-001-001-000, advocating for the protection of Sledge Forest, which she stated floods regularly and serves as critical habitat. Richard McGowan, a resident of Sand Ridge Avenue in Wilmington, NC, stated his opposition to the forthcoming Tarin Woods SUP for the next phase of development. He stated that the proposed 444 dwellings, primarily apartments and townhomes, would increase density from R-15’s 2.5 units per acre to R-10’s 10 units per acre. He noted that the project is not compatible with Tarin Woods I and II, which consist entirely of single-family homes. He compared the proposal to nearby Motts Landing, which is adding 67 single-family homes consistent with the area’s character. He also expressed concerns about school capacity and the lack of direct access to the proposed development, which would route traffic through Tarin Woods, Congleton Farms, and Battle Park. He reminded the Board that a similar proposal for 338 homes was denied by both the Planning Board and the Commissioners in 2023 and questioned why a larger 444-unit project would now be considered appropriate. He urged the Board to maintain R-15 zoning and limit future development to single-family homes. Shawn Bungee, a resident of Tarin Road, Wilmington, NC, stated his opposition to the forthcoming Tarin Woods SUP for the next phase of development. He expressed concern about the project’s scale and density, stating that it is incompatible with surrounding single-family neighborhoods. He noted that both the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners had previously advised the developer that the scale was too large, yet the applicant continues to submit revised proposals using SUPs to bypass planning limits. He objected to the proposed 50-foot- tall structure and described the approach as piecemeal, intended to avoid full review processes such as the Technical Review Committee and traffic impact studies. He alleged that the developer has already built homes without proper approval and cited issues related to soil suitability, emergency access, and traffic constraints. He stated that the proposal would compromise public safety, reduce property values, and conflict with the County’s long-term plans. He urged the Board to uphold its previous position and deny the request. Stephen Axthelm, resident of Sweet Fern Row, Wilmington, NC, stated his opposition to the proposed development at Sledge Forest, describing it as an environmental catastrophe that would destroy 1,000 acres of old- growth forest and 3,000 acres of wetlands critical for wildlife habitat and flood protection. He noted that the Natural Heritage Program has designated the area as historically significant and identified it as the last large natural forest in the County. He expressed concern that development could disturb a nearby hazardous waste site, posing serious public health risks. He also cited projections of more than 30,000 additional daily vehicle trips on Castle Hayne Road, which he described as already overburdened. He raised concerns about the lack of infrastructure to support a large influx of new residents and criticized the limited public input in the process. He urged the Board to consider the voices of nearly 10,000 residents who have signed a petition to protect Sledge Forest. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 MAY 19, 2025 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 528 Kristin Randhare, resident of Big Cypress Loop, Wilmington, NC, and a member of the Congleton Farms Homeowners Association Board of Directors, stated her opposition to the proposed Tarin Woods SUP. She noted that Congleton Farms, a 170-home neighborhood, shares access with several nearby single-family communities and expressed concern about the project’s density, reliance on outdated 2020 traffic data, and the added strain on Lieutenant Congleton Road. She also cited ongoing drainage issues in her neighborhood and warned that redirecting additional runoff could worsen flooding. She urged the Board to require updated traffic and stormwater studies and stated that the project fails to meet the first SUP finding, as it would endanger public health and safety. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS County Manager Coudriet reported that there is an unfolding situation at the Senior Resource Center, where a suspicious package had been reported. The bomb squad was on site, and while the building remained open, the congregate meal site had been relocated and drive-up meals suspended. He noted that the decision to have staff and clients remain in place was based on the Sheriff’s Department’s assessment of the actual versus perceived threat. He added that on the capital portion of the budget recommendation, staff intend to recommend beginning in FY26-27 an annual $350,000 commitment for five years to support proposed improvements at the midtown YMCA. County Attorney Smith stated as a reminder to the Board that, considering the public comments regarding the forthcoming SUP, any decision must be based solely on the evidence presented during the upcoming quasi- judicial hearing. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Rivenbark adjourned the meeting at 11:24 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.