Town Council - Regular Meeting

[music] Heat. Heat.

[music]

Good evening and welcome to the regular town council meeting of the town of Garner for March 3rd, 2026. And you know it's a beautiful evening in Garner and you know Sunday is going to be an hour later when when it's light and on the 20th it'll officially be springtime and it's going to start feeling like spring this weekend. That's an official proclamation from Snook to Groundhog. We're good there. Uh welcome here. So we will start uh with a council roll call by our town clerk. Okay. Mayor Gupton here. Mayor Pro Tim Dillinger here. Council member Matthews here. Council member Singleton here. Council member Stallings here. And Council Member Vance here.

And if you will join me, please rise if you can for the pledge of allegiance. [clears throat] I

aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. be seated. We [clears throat] have a special guest to do the invocation this evening. And I'm not going to tell you who it is until I read his uh the motto on his coffee cup that he gave me some time ago. You may recognize him when you hear this description. It's like, "Call me pastor because hardcore devil stomping ninja isn't an official job title." Our good friend, Pastor Wolf Gang, if you would please lead us in an invocation this evening. Thank you, mayor, and good evening to you all. I'm pastor Wolf Gang from Lord of Life Lutheran Church here in beautiful Goro and all are welcome. No exception at our church. I wanted to share with you before I pray a quick quote. But I think it's a very helpful quote on the purpose and necessity of government that comes from Martin Luther who perhaps you know kicked off the Protestant Reformation 500 plus years ago and ended up founding the Lutheran church. This comes from his treaties entitled Temporal Authority to what extent it should be obeyed from 1523. Here's the quote. If there were no law or government, then seeing that all the world is evil and that scarcely one human being in a thousand is a true Christian, people would devour each other and no one would be able to support their spouse and children, feed themselves, and serve God. Well, Luther certainly wasn't one to

mince word, right? Today's election day, so prayers for our town council members and other government officials are especially appropriate. So let us pray. Gracious God, we lift up those in positions of authority across all levels of government. We ask that you grant them a spirit of wisdom and discernment so that they make decisions that promote the common good. Especially, we pray for our mayor and members of the Gono Town Council that they may receive honest encouragement that helps them lead with humility and integrity for the benefit of all citizens. Lord, we pray that you would protect our leaders from the temptations of pride, corruption, and selfish ambition. soften their hearts to hear and understand the needs of the most vulnerable in our community. May they govern with justice and righteousness, seeking to defend the needy and uphold the laws with a pure conscience. On this election day, we ask for your intervention to help us break down barriers built by political strife and ideological division. guide our leaders to work together in a spirit of cooperation and respect, focusing on the common good rather than on personal agendas. May their leadership result in a quiet and peaceful life for all people. This and all else you see we need, we ask in your name, Holy One, and the people of God said,

"Amen." Amen. [clears throat] Thank you very much, Pastor Wolf Gang. Always a super job. That brings us to uh item B on our agenda tonight, which is petitions and comments. And have we have do we have someone signed up to speak? Yes, sir. We have two individuals.

Okay. Well, I will read the disclaimer that we always read here at petitions and comments. This portion of the meeting is to receive comments from the public on items not included in this agenda regarding matters germanine to town policies or business or subjects within the town council's real or apparent jurisdiction. Individuals or group spokespersons must sign up with the town clerk prior to the start of the meeting. The council is interested in hearing your concerns, but will not take action or deliberate on subject matter brought up during the petitions and comment segments. Topics requiring further investigation will be referred to the appropriate town officials or staff and may be scheduled for a future agenda. Uh so who is the first person to speak?

Mr. Pierce.

Mr. Pierce, if you would come to the podium and introduce yourself, name and address, sir. I'm Ricky Pierce. I live at 1810 Vandor Springs Road here in Garner. I'm here again tonight to uh do what seems to be bad and that's air some dirty laundry that this board has. Put this picture up here. It reminds me why I'm here tonight. It's the air this dirty laundry. This is this is politics at its worst. Teamwork. I called this team Singleton Stalins and Dinger. Only thing missing here is Mr. Dingering in the victory kiss. I reckon you were a little late getting to the party. But anyway, I remember as a kid listening to stories. My dad would be hanging around the guys and there were stories always told. It was the dog and bear story. Dog story is they talk about the something would come up and they'd say, "Well, you know when you run old hound dog home and he runs up on his porch, he's getting ready to bite you." The other story is bear. Don't poke the sleeping bear cuz when you do, he's going to be mad as hell. Well, I'm the dog and I'm the bear. And you all know because I'm here. This is the fourth time. Looks like it's going to take me through probably spring and early summer to get said what needs to be said. I'm not here to attack anybody. I'm just here to expose to the people that are listening, to the people that are here, the people that come here to do business, what goes on in our town, the dirty politics. Now, we've got someone here that is um an outsider. Sorry, Mr. Towns. You're an outsider. You won't ever be Garner. But what you are is your plant. You're here because the Democratic Party wanted you here. And if you think that other people hadn't figured it out yet, you're wrong. Well, one day the party's going to call your chips in, and you three guys are going to pay. Comrade Ross was here two weeks ago talking about ICE, setting the stage for sanctuary city

like they're already doing in Wilson. Well, I'm going to tell you it will not work here. You can tell that to your party. These numbers look familiar, Mr. Stalins. 696 312. If I put Mr. Broadway's name up there, would that would that refresh you? I think that's how you lost in your election in your hometown up down here in Garner, we call that country butt whipping. What do the people of your hometown know about you that the people at Garner didn't? Credentials. Oh, you got credentials. I understand you got a master's degree. I I pulled you up on my on my truthfinders until your name suddenly disappeared. I know how that happened, too. Political science. Is that correct? 37 years old. Can't afford to buy a house in Garner, North Carolina. Do you know how much soil you own in Wake County? 3:30 this morning, this is what I pulled up on the Wake County records. You'd own a square foot of soil in Wake County. You want to sit on this board and make rulings that affect every citizen in here. That is the height of hypocrisy. You say you come here and you smile all you want to. You could say you come here with transparencies. You came here in a cloud of controversy. We had a gentleman running. Other than Mr. Matthews and Mr. Vance, how many of you ever put your life on the line of the counter corner? None. None. Well, it's getting close. I had said what I'm about to say. Didn't have a chance. Get a little bit emotional. Get a little bit fired up. But I'll be back. Still waiting for the phone call. Miss Still waiting for the phone call. still waiting for the apology for your disrespect to our dead and Greg. If you had written me the letter I wrote

you, we'd had to have a face to face conversation about it. Time back. Time's up, sir. Thank you. Thank you. I hate to leave, but I I'm hosting a dinner like I do every first Tuesday, but this requires me to be here. Thank you. Our next speaker, Katie Cardinus. Yes, Miss Cardinus. If you would approach the podium podium, introduce yourself, name and address, please.

Good evening. My name is Katie Cardinas, 1609 South Wade Avenue, Garner, North Carolina 27529. Okay, using my seconds for my address. I have to get a shorter address. Good evening. I come to you with a story of a person who's asked that I not identify them publicly, but who would like their story to be heard. 61 years from homeowner to homeless. Born at Rex Hospital in the 1960s, he said, "I've been I've spent 61 years calling Garner home. I watched Heather Hills be built when White Oak was still a dirt road. I worked 45 years in retail grocery starting at the Wind Dixie right here in town. My family owned two homes in Garner. The community was my life. Everything changed when I lost my mother. I was her sole caregiver until the day she died. After losing her, I was overcome by grief, but also by the responsibilities of taking care of two homes. The town of Garner, the place I'd paid taxes in for decades, turned into an adversary. The first big challenge was an electric bill in the thousands from the second house where I thought the power had been cut off. It was too much for Garner Area Ministries to help me with, and having given up everything to take care of my mom, I could not pay. I tried to take in roommates, but they could not help enough, and soon the power was cut off. Another challenge was due to an injury that put me in a wheelchair. Because I couldn't mow my grass, I was cited and charged. Bills accumulated. I eventually had no power or water. I tried the shelters, but it caused more health issues. Compounding the grief of losing my mom, I now had a partial amputation of my foot. I returned to my home, my own property for a roof and a locked door. The response, I was arrested for trespassing on my own land. Despite a judge dismissing the charges, the police told me, "The judge doesn't run Garner." They eventually

busted my door down with guns drawn, charging me with breaking and entering my own home. I was forced to sell at a great loss because the town promised to arrest me every time I stepped on my own grass. My first night homeless was spent in a cardboard box at Walmart. So in 90 days I Katie um sorry in 90 90 days he uh can finally start collecting social security. He says, "I am determined to get my feet back on my feet, but I will never forget how quickly a lifetime of roots in Garner can be uprooted by a system that chooses citations over compassion." I, Katie, in my advocacy work that I've dedicated myself to for at least the last six years focused on this, I've earned the trust and carried the stories of many dear members of our community. You all know that I don't stand still. Next Friday evening, Lord of Life Lutheran Church has generously agreed to allow me to host a listening session, inviting town council members from across Wake County to learn about the e learn from the experts about affordable housing strategies that work. Included in the lineup are leaders from Wake County Affordable Housing and Community Revitalization, the Faith Initiative at Southern Urbanism, NC Housing Finance Agency, HFA, DHIC, Raleigh Area Land Trust, Raleigh Housing and Neighborhoods, and a Voice of Lived Experience from our community. I'm grateful for those of you who have confirmed your participation and eager to see the progress our residents are longing for. Thank you for your time. Thank

Thank you very much. And that takes us along to item C on our agenda this evening, which is the adoption of the agenda. I think council members have had a chance to look this over and uh unless there's some discussion, I need a motion to adopt the agenda. So moved, second moved by Mr. Stalins and second by Mr. Matthews. Uh if no discussion, uh I will ask for a voice vote. All those in favor of adoption of the agenda, please signify by saying I. I

any opposed by nay hearing? None. That passes unanimously. And that brings us around to uh item D, which is a presentation from our in about our investments. I'm going to call on our finance director, Mr. David Beck, for an introduction and setting up the situation. Sir, um yes. So tonight we have uh Miss Karen Magnus with PFM uh investment advisors here to uh make an annual report to town council. So the town works closely with PFM. They've been a partner of ours for uh many years now. They help guide uh the town with their um idle dollars and investing those wisely and generating a return for the town on those dollars. Um Karen and I review uh everything at least on a quarterly basis. I obviously get monthly statements and reports as well, but she and I go over the portfolio every quarter. And um once a year we like to take the opportunity to also do that same type of review with council, which we will do tonight. Uh so Karen has a presentation she'll go through which kind of looks at um market conditions as well as um specifics to the town's investment portfolio. Um, I will say the presentation was for the quarter that ended December 31st. So quite a bit has changed in the world since then. Um, but uh, we did want to kind of bring you up to speed with where things stand with the town's investments um, that PFM helps us manage. And with that, I will turn it over to Karen.

Thank you.

Um, thank you, David. And, um, good evening everyone. Um again Cara Magnus I am an employee of PFM Asset Management um which is a division of US Bankorp Asset Management. PFM Asset Management has been serving public entities for over 40 years and continues to do so. Um to David's point, um things in the market have changed since December 31st geopolitically um for for example. But what hasn't changed is PFM's um approach as a fiduciary to managing public funds with a focus on safety um and then liquidity and then yield. And so I'm going to start David going to um slide three current market themes. Um some of the data in this slide has changed but the themes um have not and continue um through through just this week. Um on the second bullet where the Fed lowered the target rate by 50 basis points in the fourth quarter um at its meeting in January it continued to hold rates steady at 3 and a half um with a target between 3 and a half and 3.75%. Um the um one thing that is updated, the Fed's December dot plot indicated a 25 basis point cut in 2026 and 2027. Since the end of the year, that um indication for rate cuts has moved to two in 2026, but we don't anticipate it being before um July of this year. and we'll go to the next slide. Um again moving us forward on the um

consumer price index. Um couple of changes from what we saw in December where the CPI is indicated as 2.7 most recently as of the end of fe um as of the end of January excuse me it was 2.4. So, um, inflation kind of moving in line more in line with the Fed's target. And then the core CPI was 2.5. So, in line with where it was at the end of the year, but inching slightly, ever so slightly toward the Fed's um, target of 2%. Um, one of the themes that is going to be kind of controlling the commentary and PFM's approach is a focus on what what the Fed is what we anticipate the Fed will do. Um, and it does continue to be data dependent. And then we'll go to the next slide, please, David. Um, so again, moving forward with an update on the monthly change in non-farm payrolls. Um we do have data for January for January of 2026 there was an increase of 130,000 jobs primarily in the health care and education. So that's continuing to lead where the jobs are. Um we're continuing to see um unemployment in line with where it was at the end of the year. So again, moving forward to the end of January, um it notched down from 4.4% to 4.3%. We continue to see um the Fed focusing on its dual mandate of inflation um and then also um full employment. And we also see um firms where they're not doing a lot of hiring, they're also not doing having a lot of layoffs and stuff. So, some resiliency

there. Um, I'm not sure if you guys are familiar, going on to the next slide, please, David, with something called the K-shaped economy, which is really just an indication of um um the like kind of describes the the um discrepancy I guess between the top earners and then the lower um lower earning folks. And so the basically what this is indicating is that the US consume consumer continues to be resilient but where we're seeing that resiliency is in higher wage wage earners and so um so it's resilient. I guess the question that Fed Fed chair had at the end of the year and is still out there is um how sustainable um is is that where your top um top earners are kind of carrying carrying the um the economy. We'll go on to the next slide, please, David. And then um I'm going through this at a pretty good clip, but if you have questions as we go along, please please um just ask me to pause and I'll take your questions. Um me. So one of the things SPFM is has um is looking at is negative or factors that are impacting the economic outlook from a negative perspective, a positive perspective, and then neutral. Um, so in the negative perspective, um, we're seeing rising student loan delinquencies, planned federal spending cuts, at least I guess as it applies to, um, social safety net, and then increased retail credit card balance balances. On the positive side is the

easing Fed policy again. um um the potential for rates to continue to come down near the end of the year. Um resilient consumer spending and then also corporate fundamentals. So between the resilient consumer and then corporate fundamentals continue to um be positive in this environment. Um, with respect to tariffs within the neutral column, um, I'm sure you all heard the Supreme Court's ruling recently that the, um, policy under which the administration implemented tariffs um, was not um, I guess legal. And so we're still waiting to see some of the fallout from that and um some of the potential fallouts from whether or not companies will um attempt to claw back any any of the um tariffs that were claimed from from them. Um, one of the things in terms of tariffs or prices to the extent that prices rose as a result of tariffs, we typically don't see prices decline um that way. So, I'm going to speed up just a little bit. Um, looking at slide eight, please, David. Um um inflation is expected or inflation is projected to go lower over the next couple of years. The Fed fund rate is expected to also decline as we discussed later this year and into 2027. Um unemployment kind of in line with where it is, but we expect that to um to decrease. Um and then the change in real GDP um is expected to tap down a little bit lower um over the year. If we go to the next

slide, please David, slide nine, the um Fed dot plot. And so, um, just to to bring all of us forward, the Fed dot plot, each dot represents each Fed voting members, um, um, um, idea of where they would have rates um, the Fed fund target rate be. And so for 2025, you can see that they're all kind of bunched together. As we move out, um, their, um, I guess opinions start to vary a little bit more. And then we also know that Jerome Chair is expected to um to retire or his his chairmanship will will be coming to an end later this spring. Um and then again the reminder that in 2026 at as of the end of December they were anticipating one cut and that has [clears throat] gone to two two cuts this year. I'm going to fast forward a little bit so we can look at your portfolio um because that is what what we're here to talk about. But if you have any questions on the economic update, I'm happy to address those um separately with David. So if we go to slide 14, please, David. Um as of the end of December, the portfolio's value was just under $10.7 million. And again, we appreciate the opportunity to serve the town of Garner with respect to your idol funds um and then bring our fiduciary expertise to bear there. Um as of the end of the year, 100% of your portfolio was all allocated to US treasuries. We are um I guess we call um benchmark neutral. So our duration is in line with the the benchmark that your portfolio is um measured against. And then we'll go to the next slide. Um and you can see even

throughout 2025 um the holdings were all in treasuries. Um and that could just be an indication of the portfolio manager not finding relative value in other security types for example federal federal agencies. We'll go to the next slide please David. And then um so just the sector allocation for the funds um the town's total assets and so um and US treasury is a 10.6 um and then you also have money in the North Carolina investment pool, local government investment pool um which we appreciate as well. As you can see on slide 17, the portfolio was in compliance um as of the end of December, any trades um that are um implemented in the portfolio run through our Bloomberg AIM portfolio compliance um system and um throughout the day the portfolio is monitored for compliance. Slide um 18 is just another um view of the allocation. And then if we move to slide 19, we can see um the the um performance where I would just say like the proof is in the pudding. And so again um over all of the time periods listed out here, you can see that um the portfolio, the town's portfolio is um beating its benchmark. Um on slide 20 just shows the interest income that you've earned through um through the inception of the portfolio of PFM asset management. Um and then you can see um from September 22 and and beyond um where the interest earnings increased um significantly and that was

in line with the Fed funds um increasing um the target rate. And then lastly, we'll end on portfolio transactions and um which just lists the buys and then the maturities. And so there weren't any active sales that occurred um in the portfolio over the last quarter. And um um the the buys resulted from maturities and any residual cash resulting from from interest payments. I'll pause there um and see what questions do you all have. See, we'll call Mr. Vance questions.

Uh, just a slight one. In the early part of your briefing, you mentioned about the market changes in in December. Uh, this may be for Mr. Beck as well. So, are there any risks in the market conditions that we should watch watch out for in the coming year?

Um, from a from how your portfolio is allocated um on you with just US Treasury. So that's considered relatively risk-free um backed by the full faith um and power of the US government. So from that perspective um I would say your your the portfolio is invested as safely as it as as it could or as risk-free as it could be. And then we're continuing to um monitor um like keep our eye on what the Fed what the Fed does. Um we're seeing you you looking at if you're looking at volatility in the market whether it's the Dow or the S&P um a lot of that is driven by um the potential for energy prices to increase. Um and that's going to be data that the Fed then also considers in terms of what they may may um do with the Fed fund target rate. So I don't know Dave if you would add any.

Yeah just I'll just reiterate what Karen shared. Um like she said currently we're only invested in US treasuries which are considered the safest type of investment. The portfolio manager uh you know does look at other investment types from time to time but right now the the um increase in yield on those other investments is not worth the risk. So potentially we have it we have all the money sitting in the safest type of investment we can right now. So other than you know withdrawing from the market it's it's in the safest location it can be and safety is the number one priority to make sure that we don't lose money on anything we invest.

And I was going to go back to that. probably had too many words, but going back to my comments at the beginning, PFM Asset Management has been servicing or serving public entities in this capacity for over 40 years and we've seen um different geopolitical conflicts occur um the um great recession um and we've continued to um put clients first in terms of our investment approach. Um, one of the things that David mentioned, and I apologize for taking a little bit more time, but um, our investment team has a um, a list of approved issuers. Each of those issuers, none of which are in the portfolio because you only hold treasuries in this in this portfolio, but all of those issuers go through um, robust vetting process. And then talking to someone on our portfolio strategies team today, there's nothing on our list of approved issuers that has exposure to what's going on in the Middle East currently. So, I'm sorry for the long-winded answer.

Okay. Thank you, but it's important stuff. Thank Thanks for your attention to the details. Mr. Dinger. Yeah. A question for Mr. B. Um, what percentage of our fund balances does this $10 million represent? um it's roughly a third or so. And

I guess my other question is I guess my my memory of our investment portfolio is is short, but over the past five or six years, what have been some of the allocation changes that have been made in the portfolio to to market conditions to return uh to get a rate of return over just investing in treasuries? Um, I'll take a stab at that first, but Karen can fill in any gaps. We have been invested in things like commercial paper uh previously. Um, that was probably several years ago. Um, that was, you know, returning a pretty fair amount for the town. We also are invested in uh federal agencies from time to time. So Freddy Mack, Fanny May, those those types of um offerings. Um but it does shift and we do have you know guard rails in place with our investment policy that say we can only have a certain percentage of the total investment in in a particular sector and obviously treasuries it can be 100%. But some of these other um investments that are a little more risky we do have guard rails in place so that we can invest the the total funds in that. I mean, I think the allocation at the present time makes sense given what's going on, but I was just kind of curious as to how it's shifted over time and not all just kind of sitting at barely covering inflation. So,

right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you all. Karen, hang on. No questions. Mr. Singleton, thanks for coming again for Thanks for the coming and for the update. Absolutely. My pleasure. Same here. Thank you. Hey, Mr. Beck, back to you. Uh just appreciate it if if anyone has any questions as a followup. Mr. Vance. Yeah, just have one last question. Sure. Uh is there any particular reason why 100% of this this investment is placed in the treasuries?

No. So speaking with the portfolio manager, it really is the relative value that they're seeing. So um that they're seeing relative to other investments that they could be making for the duration of your portfolio. So by duration I mean like if if we go back to one of the slides the benchmark duration is 0.88 88, right? So just just under a year. And so as they're looking at maintaining the portfolio's duration in line with the benchmark and seeing what is available out there, the spreads meaning um if they could buy a treasury for 3.75 yielding 3.75 and then buy something with a higher risk profile for 3.76, they're just probably going to buy the Treasury. So they want to be benchmark neutral and then within being benchmark neutral, what are the available investments that they could make in line with the investment portfolio? And then if if the spread meaning the non-treasury security, if the spread isn't worth the additional um if the risk isn't worth that incremental spread, then they're they're likely to just stick with the treasuries. Does that make sense? I'm sorry. somewhat.

Okay. It Mr. Vance, it's it's really like Karen mentioned early on there there are three sort of u guiding principles with the investment. So safety is number one, liquidity is number two, making sure that we don't have money tied up in long-term investments where we can't access that money if we need it. And then yield or the rate of return is the third. So it falls further down the list than safety. And so that portfolio manager is always evaluating opportunities, but if they don't see something where the the the higher return is worth the the additional risk that the money that we're taking with the money, they're going to pass on that and they're going to stay with the safer investment, which currently is is all in treasuries.

Okay. Thank you. And that's why David is the finance director and I'm not [laughter] Thank you, David. Well, well, thank you, David, and thank you, Miss Magnus. It does take a team. It takes a group of people with their eyes on this from our town manager on down and oversight by our council member. It's it's serious stuff when we're talking about tens of millions of dollars that belong to other people than us. Absolutely. If if it was my personal thing and I weren't bet on bitcoins, that's the risk I can take. But we have a fiduciary responsibility. Number one, don't lose the money.

Absolutely. So, thank you very much for the work that you do. Thank you, Mr. Beck. Yes, sir. Thank you. And that brings us to uh section E of our agenda tonight, which is the consent agenda. And these are typically items that are of a more administrative nature. In fact, there's only one item on there this evening has to do with uh the bid award for the main street parking uh along the railroad where we inherited an unexpected 39 angle parking spots. And apparently the work has been done. I believe the council has looked at the information. Uh if if there's some if that needs to be pulled off for more discussion, we can do that. If not, I will be accepting a motion to approve the consent agenda.

So move a motion by Mr. Stalins. Second. Second by Mr. Matthews. Is there any other discussion on the consent agenda? By hearing none, I'll ask for a voice vote. All in favor of approving the consent agenda, please signify by saying I. I

all opposed by nay. Hearing none that passes unanimously. Thank you. And there are no public hearings scheduled for this evening. It moves us to section G, which is the new and old business. And the first item is the tier one conditional reszoning request related to the Rock Quarry assemblage. And our presenter tonight is our assistant planning director, Erin Joseph. If you could give us a quick update. We seem like we spent a good amount of time on this a couple weeks ago. We sure did. And now we're back after a continuation. If you want to bring us back up to speed, please.

Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you, mayor, members of council, and members of the public. Good evening. Good to see you all. Um, so I'll I'll be uh brief with this and just focus on the salient details since the 17th, the February 17th meeting. Um the case the reasonzoning tier one resoning case Rock Quarry Assemblage was before you uh for a decision on the 17th. Um this request just briefly um has been submitted by Daniel Smood of Madison Holdings. They are requesting to reszone 82.94 acres from residential uh agricultural rural agricultural to commercial mixeduse conditional. Um the site is located at Rock Quarry Road and East Carer Road. This is a tier one resoning, so it does not have a sightspecific master plan. Now, at the meeting on the 17th, there were uh concerns expressed about the written conditions and the potential for a worst case or I I [clears throat] say a uh lowest benefit [snorts] um opportunity uh for this development to potentially develop as um so there were questions surrounding that um which led to a motion to continue the meeting uh to tonight um to allow the applicant and the property owners to discuss one in particular condition um that relates to the nonresidential commitment within the site. Um and so since then the applicant has u modified the condition. You have that condition on the screen and in blue is where the uh excuse me brown is where the uh condition has changed. So they have committed to one vertical um at least one vertical

mixeduse building with a minimum of two stories in height. Um that will uh have uses such as complimentary uses such as food, beverage, retail, medical, recreational, entertainment, hospitality and residential uses uh within that vertical mixeduse building. Um and th this commitment um will be located within 400 feet of Rock Quarry Road and East Garner Road. And so that is the significant change from the February 17th meeting. I won't run through the uh changes since the public hearing but and fe as the applicants receive feedback from public hearing and planning commission they did make uh several changes to their conditions as well. And so overall with the analysis with our comprehensive land use plan uh they have an overall strong rating of support. Um there was one strong nonsup support but uh staff finds a consistency an overall finding of cons of consistency with our uh garner forward plan. And so for you tonight is to evaluate the reasonleness of this uh request uh based upon our six criteria as outlined in our unified development ordinance and the request before you is to uh consider uh adopting an ordinance to approve this request. [clears throat]

Thank you. A lot of work has gone into this. This has been in the process for some time. We had a very detailed uh meeting two weeks ago. Yes, we had a little confusion or lack of certainty on some of the words.

This quite frankly is probably the most complicated zoning issue that's come before us. Uh not only is it tier one, it has a lot of vagaries and lack of the simple master plan we're used to seeing. And it's that way for a reason. So that the developer and the tenants can can go with the economy. they can respond to the different market forces over the next year, two, five, seven, every what it takes to complete this out. Uh this gives them the groundwork. The council wants to make sure we're getting everything we we want and the developers trying their best to do that. They spent their time listening to all of us in small groups and in the council and to the staff, but it's a big complicated project. I'm we're all very excited about it. all very excited about the potential. We appreciate staff uh and the our development partners effort to get the words down that will back up the vision that we have and it's a complicated one. Uh so thanks for for everybody's efforts so far and we'll uh get questions and comments. We'll start with Mr. Matthews this time related to this.

Um no questions. We they met what we asked and I'm ready to move forward. Mr. Singleton. Yes. And since we're at this point, I'm assuming the property owners had no trouble making the changes on the conditions or the change on the condition. Everyone agreed. Okay. I'm sorry. Your question was did all the all the properties agreed basically, but what I saw here everything was 100% because we met on the 17th and they're dated the 19th. Everything sir. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Well, while you're up there, stick around in case there's another question. Okay, Mr. St. Questions, comments? No questions. Mr. Dinger?

Yeah, just a comment and a question. And the the comment is I think this project highlights the relative risk to the town on these large tier one projects that don't create enough clarity on the fiscal impact on the town's budget. So I think we need to as a town um do better on our process side of evaluating these large projects as they come to us so that we can better quantify their impacts on our revenue. I think the other question I have is um when you did this project and you it was been in the pipeline for a year and a half or so a year and you all re thoroughly reviewed our comprehensive plan in that process. Correct. At any time were you made aware by town staff on our interest in housing affordability and affordable housing? Were you just aware of it as a part of our comprehensive plan?

We are aware of it as a component for sure. And you were you aware of the council's affordable housing task force work that we were doing and I am somewhat familiar with it. Yes. And last question, what if any substantive and direct contributions to our stock of affordable housing will this project make without any reference to macro supply and demand? Uh, none. Okay, that's all my questions. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Vance, no questions.

Okay. Well, thank you very much. You can have a seat. I said we spent a lot of time on this. We're shooting high. There's uh less detail than we have on some, but a lot more detail about what we want than on others. Uh it's an exciting project. Uh we're shooting for the moon, and we've never done it quite this way, and that's where we are. So, that being said, if there's no further questions, uh I will ask if there's a motion to approve the statement of reasonableness and conditional reasoning by adopting ordinance 20265378. I move that the town council accept the planning commission's written statement regarding consistency of the zoning amendment request with the adopted land use plans detailed in section 3 of the staff report as our own. And I further move that the town council adopt ordinance number 20265378 approving reszoning of CZ24006 as the request is reasonable and the public interest because the subject property would be more suitable for the uses permitted by the proposed district versus the current district.

Second there's a motion by Mr. Vance and a second by Mr. Matthews. Uh, is there any other discussion? Mr. Dinger.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, I'd just like to go on the record saying that I think the town has spent a lot of time over the past several years in terms of volunteer resource, staff resource, and time resource dedicated toward mapping out a path forward for our um ability to contribute to solving portions of this affordable housing crisis that exists currently. Uh it disappointing to not see any elements of this in this project with over a thousand units there. Um it could could have been a really significant contributor to our affordable housing stock or made some other contribution. Uh on the other flip side of that in terms of the tier one I still have concerns over the forms laid out in the conditions and then it at its minimum buildout or even minimal viable buildout. I will say uh it is a sufficient uh end product for our tax base. Um, I hope that when this project is voted on and there is a commitment, there's a voiced commitment to contributing to the community, we can reach out, engage to you on some of our affordable housing initiatives and would love to have you partner with us on some of those. Um, not it's not an offer for a not trying to impose a condition. I would just like to see that we have applicants and developers coming to Garner who take the issue seriously enough to include it in their projects. And if they don't, they're at least serious enough to engage us with us on helping create solutions for the community. That's all.

Any other comments or discussion before we call for a vote? Uh hearing none, we'll take a a roll call vote. And let's start with Mr. Vance at this end. Uh if you're in favor of the motion that you made, please signify by saying I or nay if opposed. I Mr. Dinger, no. Mr. Stalins, I. Mr. Singleton. Hi, Mr. Matthews. Hi.

So, that passes by a vote of 4 to one. And I understand the concern. We we're meeting many many goals here. The the ray of sunshine that I see in this project given even though there could be some vague areas is that we're dealing with a local developer, a local land owner out there who has many more projects and many more acres ahead of them. And uh I believe there's a commitment from the land owners and the development partner to aim high to do the best we can and continue to work for the coming decade to for a key key part of our town [clears throat] that most people didn't even realize was part of our town. So thank you for the work you've done. Congratulations on getting us through. Uh we we look forward to continuing to work with you to be the best that we can possibly be. Thank you very much. Thank Thank you. Uh that brings us to item number two under uh under new and old business and this concerns the Bennett North Apartments. It's a resolution authorizing affordable housing bond issuance. Our presenter tonight is our town manager uh Jody Miller. Will you be standing at the p podium? I

I'm flying from the the dis today. So uh good evening mayor, members of council. Um this is just a refresher. Um council discussed this project and it was continued from your Janu January 20th meeting. Um attached for your continued discussion and consideration for this evening is additional information that council requested. Um some information gathered by the staff is included in your agenda packet as well as additional information uh by the developer. Um and then proposed resolution for tonight as well. So the action for tonight is adopt resolution 2026 2687 for your consideration. Uh my understanding is that a representative from the Wake County Housing Authority is here to answer any questions you have on the resolution for the bond issuance as well as the development team if there are any additional questions regarding the project.

Okay. Uh well I will just interject an editorial note here. If the if the previous rock quarry assembly project was one of the most complicated ones we've ever dealt with, this is one of the most unique and confusing. It's not complicated, but it's very confusing. Uh just a quick recap of of how this came about and why it was so confusing, at least to me. Uh for a couple years, uh Bennett North was working through the process, got a reasonzoning on this and some other related property and their assemblage there. uh and they I think the first time I was actually involved it was coming back for SUP for 171 I think it is housing uh units in a multiple in a multif family uh and it and it passed uh and it made they made some adjustments. had passed. It got approved the reasonzoning. Uh and then five, six months later, we fortunately one of our keen eyed council members looking at some correspondents said it looks like they're changing their funding on this thing. And long story short, the the same exact apartment buildings that we approve are are planning to be built by by the applicant, by the developer, but they changed their financing in a way that uh they felt was to their advantage and probably to the advantage of perhaps some folks who needed some affordable housing. But uh when it came before it and it didn't come before us to approve uh that they're financed any more than any other developer would come to get the council's approval for dealing with this bank or that bank or this investor. It it was not that way. And actually it wasn't even the developer who came back here. We thought it was but really it's the housing authority of the county of Wake who was asking for our authorization to issue these bonds. And I and I must go on record saying these

are not the kind of bonds that we vote for and the town issues which is just the ability to loan to borrow money and pay it back from taxpayers expense. These are not those kind of bonds. This is a bond that the housing authority of Wake County uh issues and it's bought by investors, retirement funds, other things. It's not a loan that's being given. So this, you know, does not have to come to the council for approval. It it comes to a council because it's another governmental entity. The housing authority is asking for uh our authorization to issue this bond which will help them uh build this particular project. Independent of that, apparently the developer also pursues some federal tax credit tools that will help make this project more affordable to them, affordability [clears throat] that they can pass along to the tenants. All pretty straightforward. They don't have to get our approval to get that federal tax credit. It's a whole another thing administered by HUD and enforced by IRS for the coming 10 to 30 years to make sure they're playing by the rules. So, this is not really coming back for our approval. Hasn't come back to our approval. Didn't come did not come for a public hearing. There was never a chance. There's been some frustration from land owners and council members. There was never a chance to have some input. But hey, it's just one of those times that you don't have to approve the bank they borrow the money from. The fact that this triggers their ability to choose to uh have an exemption for property tax is independent of that. It's not up to the council. These are rules made by the federal government, the state government, different agencies that this works. So it puts us in an awkward situation here or an unusual

situation where we're discussing u that the housing authority of county of Wake. So that that being said, I'm just laying the groundwork for how confusion it is. I'd be glad to accept some thoughts from other council members and let's start with Mr. Matthews this time.

Uh Mr. Mayor, um my there's a big concern. I've got 171 units out there and uh two things. If if it's affordable housing, the rates that they're proposing are the same as the rates right across the street all around as an average in Raleigh. I I'm not seeing nothing there. Uh which may increase housing affordability. Secondly, our police and our fire have got to go out there and take care of 171 units and it's a big cost to that. I think we figured it's close to what a half a million we would normally you had that figure I believe

that that you're talking the cost of services we provided to 171. It's somewhere in the $400,000 a year range. Maybe as low as 200 is there's a little lack of certainty, but to for the town of Garner to provide basic fire, police, and public works services to 171 units is over $200,000 a year. And I guess that's what part of what hurts our feelings, not to get ahead of you, that not only will the town spend up to $200,000, will also forego the approximately $177,000 of property tax they would have paid if it had continued as a market rate project. So that's part that's part of part of my personal frustration. in instead of coming close to breaking even uh we'll we'll get no tax revenue under this scenario and we'll still spend $200,000 providing service.

So basically the citizens of Garner has got to subsidize this and pay for this because we're not getting any revenue. Is that what we're hearing here?

I think that in my opinion that's safe to say. Now also federal taxpayers are making a contribution with the federal tax credit thing. I think the Wake County uh citizens and taxpayers are making a contribution by providing better than market rate financing. So, there's a lot of contributions being made here. And I I want to go on the record of saying that every member of this council is committed to affordable housing. We just are not sure this would have been our choice as the place or the facility to put it. Are our citizens or our residents really going to get any significant improvement here at the HUD rates versus walking across the street to the uh the similar very similar project who pays their property tax does not take an exemption. They right now they seem to be about the same rates. That's that's the confusing and frustrating part to us. So, excuse me, I interrupted you.

That's quite all right. Uh we need to get all this out on the table. And those those are some of my concerns with you know like I said we're all trying to housing affordability and we making some great strides there and going to do some good things but uh from what I'm seeing what the rents are uh you might as well go across the street and rent over there you you might even save a little bit maybe so and then the revenue for the town for providing all the services. So and bottom line the citizens of Garner are going to have to offset that one way or the other. So that's my big concern. That's why I've got problems with this project as it's being proposed right now. Originally, it was one way, but like it is now, I've got problems.

While while we're expressing our opinions, let's just come on down the road. Mr. Singleton, comments, questions?

First off, y'all I don't know if y'all realize there are about six or eight apartment complexes in Garner already that do this. Y'all do know that, right? You know, there's two off Feather Springs. There's one on Timber Drive. There's one on right down the road from this on Highway 401 on Small Pine Drive. I think there's eight projects in Garner that do this. So, I I understand the concern. It's it's we were told they were going to be market rate. They're not market rate. That's the concern. That's what that's what it was presented by presented on a couple years ago. So, that's that's the big concern. I understand that. So, I also have read the uh attorney's uh legal opinion uh multiple times and apparently since uh the federal government uh this falls under the federal government we can deny it but it's going to get a court order and say you have to you cannot uh deny uh for affordable housing for people. So that's what the law says. So, you know, we have to consider that also the Fair Housing Act. So, we're between a rock and a hard place in a way because she's told us that the what the law's going to what the law is and then our opinion is a little bit different than that. So, uh I think what you're looking at on the rates is that the rates are this is what happens on my rental property. the rates are this and the person there pays a certain portion and the other is subsidized by the federal government t tax program. So the rate's higher, but the but the person who lives there is not playing as much. And the one I own um so one I own is also much older, nowhere near as good a condition as these would be. So but they it's supplemented. They pay like 600 bucks, $629, and it's like $900 something dollars and that is made up for through a tax program. So the rate you see would be this, but the person living there only pays this. So I don't know if that

applies in this case. So I be I reckon the big concern is we thought these would be market rate apartments and they're not. But the also the concern is the attorney has advised us that the fair housing act says you know if we deny it or we don't take action either way they can the county andor the uh developer can take us to court. So that's the that's the issue there.

Thank you Mr. Singleton. Mr. Stalin comments questions. Um I I I just want to be clear what what we're talking about and I asked a couple of these questions during our last meeting. Um we're in a very unique situation with this project. Um definition and what they're using for AMI is Wake County's AMI. It's Riley MSA which is around $131,000. The affordable housing task force did a lot of work in defining what affordability looks like in Garner and Garner's AMI is around 77,000. So if you look at what's being proposed at 60% AMI of Wake County's Raleigh MSA's AMI, it will be roughly around $78,000. So $78,000 would mean that they are charging as the the developer said on the dis $1,600 which the property across the street as I on the dis looked up on apartments.com was650. It's the same rate. It's not affordable housing that we're talking about. I I want to make that clear. This it's it's not affordable. It's market rate for Garner. So, I don't really see, and this is Kelvin's opinion, the public benefit for having a a tax abatement for 30 years for market rate housing. If we were going the affordable housing task force route and what they define as affordable housing, that that 40 to 50%, then we would be talking about something else. But we're not even talking about that. We're talking about 60% of Raleigh MSA, which is about $78,000, which is market rate. I I I just can't support that.

Mr. Tellinger, comments, questions?

I have a list. Um, I think the first one that has been problematic for the council is is the process piece of this and that the public's input and the council's input has sort of been usurped in this process through not proper uh or in place notifications or awareness. I think the frustration is that the council and staff and the community went through a process on the resoning and the special use permit by which there was public notice engagement. This is what we're approving. this is what we got their feedback. We made our decision uh based on that feedback. I think the one that kind of also uh digs at me is that during the special use permit process, one of the criteria is impact on adjacent land adjacent land prop land values. And while that assessment is not just an appraisal of property, when you change the the makeup and expectation of the use of that property, incomes drive commercial development. So if you're changing the income profile of a development, you're also changing the commercial uh profile of an entire area and you're changing that. It's just true. you bring in a lower income uh group of housing that we already suffer from that in Garner and I can see you snickering and I I do I can see it and I'm going to call you out on it because we struggle here in Garner to get the high level highquality commercial development that we want because we don't have the incomes and housing stock in place to do it. You're not not asking your question. This is just a reality and part of the special use permit is to evaluate the impact of a project on surrounding property and their interest that they may have to develop their property or live next to that property. The other is the tax exemption is the uniform concern of this council sitting up here. We have nothing against affordable housing, housing

affordability, anything you want to call it. It's the tax exemption that is not necessary to build this project or get that financing because the town of Garner and its residents shouldn't have to pay for this development that way and we have to pay for the service delivery. That is just a fact. This is a net revenue losing project. It is a tax increase project for the residents of Gartner and there's not any way to tap dance around that. And the frustrating thing for the council is it's a voluntary ask for that exemption. I have a few other to piggyback on some others, but I think uh I think that tax exemption is really the thing that is is um the most troubling part of this, particularly when we've had years and years of tax increases and people don't want tax increases and this project will require in essence a tax increase.

Thank you. We'll we'll continue our discussion. Mr. Vance questions, comments.

Uh yes, I like to also say that uh I am not against affordable housing at all. uh and uh as as it's been reiterated that we were given one project two years ago and then a few months ago we got uh something that was not presented and the public was not allowed the opportunity to view and and uh take consideration what is being presented to us tonight uh or earlier. that that is a that is part of my concern is that public involvement piece uh because uh I believe it's not fair to the public at large those who uh have interests that are adjacent to this property who were planning and thinking based upon what happened two years ago and taking steps to move forward with uh plans and things of that nature to have this come in the way it did without getting that engagement uh is is concerning. uh to me and uh again I'm not against public housing. I'm not against affordable housing and uh it's the matter in which this was done and and exposure. We had we had a tremendous debate about this two years ago. I I remember specifically and and the public was engaged with that as well. However, the public has not been engaged with this particular process uh which is concerning particularly the adjacent property owners and that concerns me.

Okay. I think I'll take this opportunity just to reread to keep us on task here. Uh what we're looking at here. The housing authority of the county of Wake, the Wake Housing Authority is requesting a resolution to authorize issuance of multifamily housing revenue bonds to provide financing for the construction of Bennett Apartments North which will include 171 units. So actually the applicant here before us is the county of Wake. Is there a representative of the housing authority with us here this evening? Would would you like to make a statement or give us a little guidance? Help help us understand a very to us to us a confusing situation that that's a little bit unique. We we know your heart is in the right place. You are here to help people. If you would introduce yourself and

happy to do that. Um good evening council members, mayor. My name is Kristen Kirby. I'm with Magguire Woods um in Raleigh, North Carolina. We are bond council to the housing authority of Wake County. Um, as was mentioned, the resolution that we brought before you was a resolution specifically relating to the bond issuance. Um, because the project is located within the town limits of the town of Garner. state law requires that the housing authority come to the town for a resolution um before they proceed with issuing bonds to finance this project. Um the housing authority and this type of deal is acting as a conduit bond issuer. It's not the housing authorities's debt. It's not the housing authorities project. They've been asked to issue the bonds as part of the overall financing for the project. So, I'm not really sure what to tell you to address your concerns on behalf of the housing authority. They're not really involved in the permitting planning approval process with the developer. Um, the housing authority did previously adopt an inducement resolution saying that it was willing to issue the bonds. The housing authority held a public hearing about this project and about the bond issuance in December. No members of the public attended or made comments. Um, and so just as we continued through the process, I submitted the resolution to the town similar to what we did, you know, one other time before when there was a similar tax exempt bond LITC deal for another affordable housing um project, but we weren't really I guess I or the housing authority are not involved in the interim. So like in terms of that part of the process, I can't really speak to it. I'm happy to answer any

questions or um about the bonds, the financing, the process. But I think any questions related to the tax exemption, the design of the project would be better addressed to the developer because that's not something that's mandated by the housing authority. Of course, as was noted, you know, it the property tax exemption is a matter of, you know, state statute that allows for it. The housing authority doesn't have any skin in the game necessarily as to whether the project is exempt from property taxes. So, you know, that that's not something they would necessarily review as part of the bond issuance process.

Well, thank you very much for sharing that with us. Very, we're trying to learn. We're trying to be I'm happy to answer any questions about the process. I realize these aren't the types of deals that come before the council on a regular basis

and it's certainly not the kind of deals that come before this council on a regular basis either as well as your council. Uh the one question I'll have then we'll start over with Mr. Vance and run this way. Uh have you run across anything like this in other jurisdictions this the level of confusion or misunderstanding or or whatever that that we seem to be experiencing here. I mean there's all these aren't done every day in every jurisdiction. So of course there's always you know some explanation and overview of what is involved in one of these tax exempt bond deals with low-income housing tax credits. Um this particular situation is unique and I think I mentioned this at the prior meeting in the sense that most housing authorities across the state are located within a city. They're a city housing authority and so um they have the ability to do projects anywhere in the city and they don't have to go ask the city is it okay? Um here we're in a unique situation where because this project is um within the town of Garner, but the town of Garner does not itself have a housing authority and that we need the county housing authority to issue the bonds. But the the projects both within the jurisdiction of the county and the jurisdiction of the town, you come to the town for this approval, but perhaps after the process has gone along a little ways with the the housing authority and the bonds. Um, so I can't say I've had this exact experience, but I wouldn't necessarily have that because this is,

you know, if we're working with the Raleigh City Council, which we do frequently, we don't go to the city of Raleigh to say, I mean, there there is one approval we get from the city, but we're not necessarily going to them um with this exact type of resolution, if that makes sense. Well, thank you for your patience with the uninitiated. No, [laughter] we're trying to understand. I completely understand. I spend much of my day explaining these types of bonds to everyone. Well, thank you. And with that being said, I'll I'll ask our council members again, do you have questions for our our representative of the Wake Housing Authority, Mr. Mr. Bance? I don't have questions, Mr. Dinger.

Yeah. Just briefly and for the public's awareness, what's sort of the the timeline and time frame of this cycle and where are we in that cycle timeline wise?

Sure. So, um, in order to do these bonds, the developer applies to the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency for volume cap. They, um, have completed that application process. They've been awarded the bond volume cap. Um, so now we're moving through the rest of the approval process needed to get to closing. Um, we, like I mentioned, we've had the public hearing. We had to go to Wake County for an approval. That's been completed. This was, you know, the next step in the process coming to the town. Um, prior to closing, we'll go to the housing authorities board for a final approval at the point where, you know, bond documents are in final form and ready for them to approve them being signed. Um, and then there's typically also an approval from the North Carolina Local Government Commission. Um, in terms of timing, it will probably that whole set of approvals that usually takes us two to three months to get through. Of course, we are not moving forward currently until we know if this project's going to be approved by the town. Um because the next steps really get the entire financing team involved in all the lawyers involved in drafting the documents, you know, finalizing everything which of course involves time and expense that you can understand they may not want to move forward with quite yet.

Thank you. Mr. Stal's question. Question. Mr. Singleton questions. Is HUD is what I think Mr. Stalin said. HUD is what's behind setting u the area EMI that you use and we use the Wake County Raleigh EMI even though Wake County has very distinct income pockets. That's what has to be used because HUD says it has to be used. Correct. That's correct. HUD sets the rents every year and they're determined based on the MSA. I believe in this case it's the Raleigh Carry MSA which is Wake Johnston Franklin counties. Um but yes, that's right. Those rents are set annually by HUD. So, is it called the Raleigh Carry MSA? I believe that's the name of it.

How ironic. No, don't blame me. No, no, no. But [laughter] how ironic is Raleigh and Carrie when Garner and Windale and Zlin and Nightdale and Rolls have all and especially if it's John Johnson County and they have different income pockets. Anyway, that has no certainly fact check on that because I'm going off all top of my head. That's okay. But the HUD HUD sets the policies. That's correct. HUD sets the rent. Um, and then it's based on you the amount of affordable housing units that are necessary for the project to be able to be financed with the bonds is determined by the IRS because these are federally tax exempt bonds. So, all right. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Matthew. Uh just make sure I understood you correct because we've gone through a whole lot here and uh but taking Raleigh out of the equation. Uh you've not had to do this with any other towns in Wake County, this type of financing or anything like this. Is this Are we the first ones? No, we've done this um with other bond issuances for Wake County Housing Authority um in Holly Springs and in Apex. Holly Springs and Apex. Okay. Okay. Well, thank you very much for sharing your knowledge with us

and I think I'm going to go back to our presenter here to see if there's any other guidance or any other issues. We don't have a motion on the floor. We're still trying to do a little basic background information during the presentation. So, our town manager or our town attorney, any input, any ideas you have to help us understand and make a good decision, we're we're all ears. Uh there's no additional information to be provided unless council has any specific questions from staff or the developer. [clears throat] A reminder, the action before you this evening is approval of the resolution so that the housing authority can proceed with the bonds needed to be part of the financing package of the project. [clears throat]

I just have a question on the tax exemption and if there's going to be a request for that and if there if that can be taken back or not done that's my question is it should we be uh asking our developer partners to join our the development team yes sir if you wouldn't mind introduce yourself and join the discussion Good evening. Scott Copeland, RST development. I'm the developer. I'm sorry, what was the question?

Are you going to pursue the tax exemption with related to this project? The statutory the North Carolina tax exemption, the voluntary tax exemption. The statuto it's statutory. Yes. It's voluntary as well. I I understand that. I just want and I want the public I want everyone to understand that it's not mandatory. It's not required. it is voluntary and that it is a choice that you are taking in. That's all. Okay. May I May I respond? Yeah.

Okay. In response to that, in addition to that, the relationship to the activities and the nonprofit ownership of this project is what's is what's allows for those tax credits. And I think it's important to kind of go out with both sides. And if I may respond, there was never a commitment into how this project was going to be financed. Never. So, we can go back and look at the records wherever you want, but never was there a time where I said that this was going to definitively be market rate versus affordable. It was never in the SU. So, I resent that there's a there's a change that y'all keep referring to without acknowledging that that just wasn't the case. And staff, I think, can attest to that. There was never ever a commitment to how this was going to be financed. As a matter of fact, when this was approved, that's exactly why we didn't commit to it because we didn't know how it was going to be financed. So, there was never a change in our this wasn't we weren't trying to pull anything over on anybody. This was an opportunity to provide the community with 170 affordable housing units and it allowed us an opportunity to finance the project and move it forward. Further, we talk about the taxes and the negative impact that this project has on the community without any recognition of the other homes that are being built in that community. We have single family homes. We have town houses that are generating tax revenue and you guys keep comparing everything to my project across the street called the Taran and there are some missed statements and I understand that y'all are taking a a moment in time for the rent but we're in a lease up. We

just came off of a three weeks of snow. the rent is not this is a a picture of time and you're not recognizing that the Bennett project has a rent cap forever. It can never go higher. That's not the case at Taran. So if you look at it right now and say the rents are the same, why would I do that? because you're looking at it at at this moment in time during a lease up of that project and it's it's not a a continuum of what that project's going to do. But if we are talking about the taran then perhaps it's important to recognize the 800 homes that are in that project that I also developed didn't build but developed that are generating $5 million worth of taxes. So, I'm I'm good with the conversation, but I feel like it has to be balanced. You wanted retail, we gave you retail. We took

Don't I'm saying don't don't look at me cuz I wanted more retail. I understand that, but I didn't get

Okay, then I won't look at you. You guys wanted a non-residential use and retail. We reszoned 8 acres at the 401 assembly site, but that's going to become retail. In this instance, we've also voluntarily taken out a 100 units that have been approved by this body. You guys approved this site plan. So, so I'm not doing anything. I'm I'm being penalized for literally following the rules. Literally. I have nothing to do with HUD. I have nothing to do with who sets the rents. Zero. I I voluntarily am coming back to this board and saying even though you approved this for 271 apartments, I'm taking a hundred out to to provide a retail component as you saw in my memo. I hope you all saw that. I think there has to be a consideration of both sides of this of this. I understand that this is a a complicated or confusing issue for y'all because you don't see it all the time, but I'm just following the rules that are that are given to me. I I didn't write them. I I didn't I just followed them. The state offered an incentive to build this affordable housing. And with all due respect, when you all get into building affordable housing in your task force, you'll see how hard it is. You'll see that you need these incentives to do it. That's why the state did it. It doesn't just happen. This is really, really complicated, hard stuff as attested to by the complications of these bonds. Just that alone is complicated. And so, we're following every single rule. Are we taking advantage of opportunities that are available to us in order to pursue this and move forward with it? We are. We are. And one of them happens to be a tax abatement. if you provide this type of affordability in

the structure that we are. Okay, let's start back with Mr. Vance. So, let's let's go around with this is a good dialogue. M Mr. Vance, you were on the for you were the the co-chair of the affordable housing task force and you were the one that noticed uh suddenly this was getting a different type of funding. Uh and you of course you said you all along, Mr. Copeland, I thought you said all along your intention or your goal was to make this affordable housing. We we never heard that word in any of the planning we did.

We I never said when we got this approved this SUP, I never said that this was affordable, but I never said it was market. I had no idea what it was going to be. These were complicated times. And you you called me out for my smirk. I'm going to call you out for yours. Well, let me tell I'll say you're it's interesting he said that there was no mention of affordability. I believe we had to force affordability in that special use permit. So don't I understand that and so I let me finish let me finish my statement. So it it is obviously implied that it's market rate if we've got a that's that's just not that may be your implication but that's not true. Okay.

There was never there was never Mr. Mayor this is important. There was never ever in any document that we have agreed to that we got approved for that said I had to finance this one way or another. And if you can because you think it's not related to financing and and again of course it is because I'm financing it with low-income housing tax credits which make it affordable. And what you're saying is by by by denying this resolution, you're saying you don't want affordable housing there. You can spin it however you want. That's But this I am following the letter and the spirit of the law. So the spirit spirit keep the spirit of the law. Hang on. Hang on. Let me let me

the spirit of the law with the HUD definitions and taking it taking the opportunity that is presented that is legal and is whatever. The AMI in this county has escalated to such a point that you are going to build affordable housing by definition that is costbururdening people and yes there is a period of time over time over which there may be a benefit to us but in the short term by taking the tax exemption you are burdening the taxpayers of this town because it is a voluntary tax exemption we we are not against affordable housing we're not against LITC we've approved lose the litech project. We contributed $750,000 to that litech project.

So then why is that deal better than mine? Okay. Why does that Okay. Excuse me. Excuse me. We're we're going to interrupt the dialogue a little bit here to make this is an extremely important issue and it's also extremely important that every council member gets to have their time asking questions. We're going to take turns. We're going to ask a question with one followup and we'll keep going around. There's not a motion on the floor. We're still in our educational phase here, but we will not have a debate. We will have everybody take a turn. Mr. Vance,

well, yes, Mr. Mayor, you asked a question about I'm I'm thinking if I summarize I heard you correctly uh were we aware as the affordable housing task force that this would be a particular affordable housing project and the answer to that is no. and and uh and I would just say uh uh my initial impression of this was that it was not going to be affordable housing because we did debate about a percentage of of the uh dwellings being affordable uh and trying to work that out. I remember hammering it out during that period. Uh and I and I and I know that I know that some of the citizens have concerns adjacent property owners. Why? because uh they were under under the impression of one thing and now seeing another thing uh coming uh coming before uh us now now which uh is is something which goes to public notice and knowledge and understanding something that will come out in the initial process when we go through the uh public outreach piece. Uh, and I can understand uh the frustration that we have here because we're trying to uh trying to find the best fit, but we are we we still at a a stalemate. I know that we also received a uh a legal opinion from our attorney relative to what's going on now. So, we so we know the consequences of what of our of our decisions here. And with that being said, uh I'm thinking uh that possibly a little bit more dialogue with the public uh to let them know what's going on uh to make it clear there to to to allow uh to just that conversation to happen. That's my concern about the the public piece that the public being involved and all of a sudden this is before folks who were thinking one way going another way and that if we are able to uh think this through a little a little while longer uh knowing the consequences I think that uh we'll be

able to hopefully get come to a resolution on that.

Okay. So you you don't have a question for me at this moment. Let's let's jump back to this end and work our way back around for a round of questions. This is extremely important. We're trying to get educated, trying to respect our citizens and your neighbor neighboring land owners to work out for the benefit of everybody. It's just still confusing that we never somehow associated this with a project that was going to be taxexempt. Is that an important factor to us? Yes. We're we have a fiduciary responsibility to our citizens to use their money wisely. And while certainly there's at least eight other projects in town that do take advantage of the federal tax credit and perhaps some Wake County funding and other avenues and that's all good. But each one of those I believe when they came along before my time we we knew what the cost and the benefits were going through. we knew and and half of the uh half of the subsidized housing we have is also income restricted. And so I'm just guessing that councils before me said yes, it would be worth it to help Aunt Sadi or my uncle Maul, Uncle Bill over here to have a place to live. Even if it means paying out of our tax fund or even raising our taxes, the benefit is worth the cost. I don't think any of us ever stood understood the benefit of just affordable housing versus the cost and the tax exemption. That was never part of the dialogue that we need. So that's just my comment back to Mr. Matthew. You have a question.

Again, another comment. Um all of us are sitting up here when we approved that uh and the member quite well. We talked about uh maybe some of them being affordable. Elevators were brought in the equation if my memory holds me correct and you guys agreed to that. Uh but never was a conversation about we're not going to pay you any revenue for the cost of services brought up in that conversation. This is brand new and we can argue everything else till the sun comes up in one. But that was not part of that boat was it was never discussed cuz I'll be honest with you uh if we the taxpayers got to eat this and the fire people got to show up the police and everybody else. I would never have supported that project. This is brand new. It was not discussed because I was here and I think everybody else can bear that out. And that is still my concern is the taxpayers got to pay for this.

Mr. Singleton, comments, questions? Yes, you you talked about the fixed uh rate that you would charge monthly, but HUD allows those income limits to be adjusted. Correct. Yes. Okay. So 1,600 is not I'm just using because it's easy number even number that can that can be adjusted based off limits. I'm reading information. What is the cap for 2026? uh which won't come out till May the 1st according to this. So they can be adjusted but it doesn't have to be adjusted but it could be adjusted. You're allowed to go to increase it so much. Okay. Up and down. Oh yeah. And some of it can be some of it can be capped and it's controlled by the the rules that the federal government makes.

And they're estimating 5% of them will be capped this year but in the previous two years the average cap percentage cap was 27%. So it's dropped drastically how much you're going to cap. But anyway I just want to confirm that it can be adjusted. Yes. But it's based off the standards they put out and the economic indicators they use and and we can't do anything that doesn't comply with the rules that are in place that you know we're we're we're constrained by the rules that have been set up and the statutes that are at play

is we can't we can't go out and and make up our own numbers. Um, and I would also like to point out that, and I hear the discussion and understand the potential effects on neighboring property owners, but it seems to me that's somewhat internally inconsistent. If it doesn't rise to the level of what you consider to be affordable housing, well, then it can't be having that impact, that negative impact on the neighboring property owners. It has to be one way or the other. Uh, and I think that again to echo what Mr. Copeland said um looking at one moment in time is a bit shortsighted because this is going to be controlled by those statutes and rules moving forward. Uh and I think you'll find that the the Taran development across the street which is not constrained will outstrip rentwise these apartments and and the entire county struggles with affordable housing. It is a very difficult project. uh I've been in many many an approval process where the affordable housing is one of the more important components. The entire county needs an afford affordable housing but many times when I find myself in this situation I also see the communities pushing back against it. Um, as an example, the the BIES development that was planned for I40. Uh, in a county where the county says that they want salaries that are that have a livable wage, they were being offered a development that had livable wages. That's part of Bucky's uh that's what they do. That's part of how they sell themselves to communities. and that community voted against it. Uh because I think they just really didn't want what they were saying they wanted. Um and I would hate for Garner to sort of get that reputation. Also, I mean, I grew up in Smithfield and I I know that

people in Raleigh made more money than people in Smithfield, and I'm surprised Johnson County is in that same group where they're looking at this, but it is constrained moving forward. And I think it is a it's a bit shortsighted to miss that that point that this is going to be a nice project that does provide a lower moving forward rental rate that helps support your community and and the key to affordable housing is keeping the people who work and keep a community vibrant in the local area. And I think this is an opportunity and there is a lot of development that went with this development. the money that has been sunk into this development in total will help help offset these expenses. I mean, I I think you're separating this from the other developments that have been done and the increase in the tax base caused by those homes, the retail that's going to be there by the tearing apartments across the street. It's not an all or nothing. It's a, you know, that's going to contribute and this is going to contribute in a different way. Okay, thank you for your comments. I don't think I kept caught your name, sir.

I'm Brett Hannah. I'm a partner with Nelson Mullins in Raleigh. Okay, thank you. Well, while you're up, we'll keep going on a round of discussion. Mr. Stallins, um this is a learning experience for me. Um I have a quick question. Um since we're talking about the letter of the law, um is there a requirement that it has to be marketed as affordable housing? I'm not certain about that answer. I mean, I can find it for you, but from And just in general, is it is it required that it on your website it has to be listed that this is affordable housing? When it's when it if it is done with low-inccome housing tax credits? Yes. Yeah. Yeah. We'll advertise it as affordable housing. Yeah. Yeah. Could you have Is there a requirement that you have to

I'm not sure I understand the question. A requirement from from whom? Just in general, but or the statute? Yes. I I I don't know why we wouldn't market it as an affordable housing. Um I'm asking because the rents are almost identical as the

comp it will be marketed because you have to qualify to live there as as you know. So you have to you you can't earn over a certain amount. A household has to earn the 60% level. So they have to qualify to live there. So yes, it it would be marketed as an affordable housing project. I want to make clear um that I think we're oversimplifying this by saying that it's either one way or another. That if we deny this then we don't really care about affordable housing. I think I have different concerns than my council members on the board. I don't think it's what we're talking about is affordable enough. Um, I think that we're in a unique situation being in Garner that is right outside of Raleigh that we're being lumped into Raleigh carries MSA and now we're having to look at affordable housing projects by the letter of the law as you have mentioned which is as presented 60% of $131,000 which is literally Garner's AMI which if you brought out what the rents would be it would be market rate for Garner. I just don't see the public benefit in this if we're saying that affordability is literally the same thing as people are already paying in terms of rent in and Garner. Um this is a complex situation. I'm pretty sure it's very unique and complex for all of the members up here including the staff. Um I I just wanted to make it clear where I stand on on affordable housing and my thoughts around this this project.

Okay, Mr. Dallinger. Yeah, I think it is complicated, but there's a common thread between most of the council and that is the tax exemption and may where you may have a a right to do it, it is voluntary and I think we have a it's been said multiple times a fiduciary responsibility to ensure the long-term fiscal sustainability of our budget and a good stewardship of taxpayer dollars. Also want to echo Mr. Vance's notion that we probably need to spend a little more time having conversations around this project, engaging some of the adjacent property owners and making sure everyone understands what's going on. Um, and maybe we can get some momentum moving forward. Everyone would know that Mr. Matthews and I don't agree on a lot of things and when we do, we have a problem. [laughter] Um, so I I kind of echo what Mr. Vance has said and uh is maybe if we have a little bit more time to get some public input. We're apparently not on a a short super short time frame. I'm sure it's much longer than you ever wanted or hoped or anticipated by a long shot. But we have a also responsibility to our constituents when they reach out to other elected officials outside of any actual opportunity to participate in the process to listen to them and and hear their concerns. So, I I again I'm in favor of maybe a little bit more time to have some more conversations to uh just clarify certain things and let cooler heads prevail on certain matters if they can and educate folks on what the actual end product will be and what its value will be and what it will or won't do [clears throat] to the area. Um, so that that's kind of where I am.

Just give I think a little more time. That's a good observation. And in fact, Mr. Copelan, you referred to uh three supplemental accommodations from your end that in your opinion would make this more reasonable or more acceptable to us. the idea of doing some commercial on your other five acres uh some type of fee in lie of the the funds and uh making some of the apartments more affordable. So you you have some ideas of how to make this more attractive to the decision makers here that that you've laid out. Correct.

And I think we'd be willing to do that as far as taking more time and being able to engage with council. Yeah. Well, well, thank you for not we're not here to get into that tonight. Those are very relevant in a way, but they're not really key points about what we should be doing with the Wake Housing Authority, but but it does point to the fact there's more to this than meets the eye. There's more flexibility than meets the eye.

Yeah. So, it is important to know, as Mr. Del is alluding to maybe a little more time for a little more knowledge and discussion and understanding will produce a better product. And I've got to tip my hat to the adjacent land owners as well who have been here who have felt left out of the process. It's been a year or more since we've had any kind of public hearing related to this thing. This is not a public hearing. Uh but there's a lot of public interest. there's a lot of public interest and it could be u that maybe time maybe we need to take time and pay a little more attention but I'm not here to make that decision. So we don't even have a motion on the floor. I guess technically we've gathered a lot of information. We've had a lot of discussion but probably we should be making a motion on the floor that we can have some discussion about related to the housing authority of Wake requesting the resolution to authorize multif family housing revenue bonds. That's the issue before us. Uh is there a motion related to that?

Mayor Gupton, if I may, uh you know, seeing given the legal opinion that we received from our our attorney, uh I believe a short continuous uh would be beneficial to give us time to review everything uh carefully and make the best decision for the town. And when I say short, I'm saying 30 days allow us opportunity uh to re review it uh in more detail to have those further further coordinations uh so that we can make the best decision for the town. Okay. So, Mr. Vance is recommending we continue this discussion for up to 30 days to gather more information. Uh is there a second to that?

Second. Mr. Dinger uh has a second to that. Let's hear some more discussion from council about that motion. And we'll start with Mr. Matthews down here. You gentlemen can have your seat while we discuss this motion if that's okay. Uh if we're going to collect information or get the public involved, how how you going to do that? How we going to do that? I'd like to know. We can talk about it all we want to, but uh if the public now is aware of what's going changes are out there and we want to gather their input, what's that process going to be and how do we go about it?

That's a good question. Any Mr. Mr. Vance, you you made the motion. Mr. Dylan, you second the motion. I I would say that with the public invol the l with my my mind with the with the way that this happened and with the public thinking one thing and seeing another in such a quick fashion uh that the opportunity for the public property owners to engage possibly talk with uh communication with the developers if that property just if I'm if I'm off base let me know uh to just voice concerns or and considerations uh so that we will at least have that engagement piece similar to a public workshop or something or public conversations, the developer discussions with the property owners to to get their side of the of the situation uh to try to um to try to get a better understanding to clarify any concerns that the uh property or the public may have.

How would we notify them? I guess is my question.

I I think to Mr. I think maybe a a a noticed public meeting in that part of town somewhere um where anyone could come but then there could be other conversations as well. But I think some type like you're saying it need to be a notice some type of noticed event so that it's transparent. It doesn't be a council meeting per se but just some other type of noticed event. Mayor and council, if I could suggest um something similar to required neighborhood meetings we have from some of our other uh development decisions could be appropriate if that's something that council would be willing to ask of the development team for their consideration over the next 30 days.

Okay, thank you for that input. Uh Mr. Singleton, comments on the motion.

Clarification on the 30 days. 30 days is April 2nd. So, we're going to go to the first meeting in April. We need to have more than 30 days unless we're going to go to the work session on March 31st or the March 17th date. And 30 days is a Thursday. But I think by having we if we could do a sort of a neighborhood meeting as the town manager suggested within that 30 days and then you know bring it back at the first meeting if it's if it's ready and the conversation has been sufficient and you know we've gotten the feedback we want. So I think it keeps us a little bit out of the schedule of having to do it on a count council meeting calendar.

Well I know the attorneys used a stickler for specific dates when we do these things. That's why I brought it up. I was just waiting for her to bring it up. So, I was just beating to the punch. I'm assuming if we say the 30-day period is April 2nd through then, then we would next bring it up at our April 7th meeting. That would be the next meeting. Does that need to be specific? Uh, right. For clarity to the public and to the the interested parties present, I would suggest that you continue it to a date certain. So, that would be to a meeting on on the 7th. Uh, you can also suggest a neighborhood meeting or something in the interim to occur. I just want to clarify that so we so everybody knows what we're talking about. We keep Yeah. So, it would be specific amendment to the motion. Would you accept that amendment?

Accept amendment to to a date certain and that date being April 7th. April 7th. Is that the next meeting? The first meeting in April, I guess 30 days, but whatever. April 7th. Yes. Okay. And in the meantime, there could be neighborhood meetings. There could be other discussion. There could be other questions. There could be uh some type of written input from neighbors, from the development team, whatever.

Yes. based upon what we've heard from the town manager and how we can proceed with that. I I accept the recommendation that's been given by staff or some type of uh neighborhood meeting and the location to be determined somewhere in close pro well in the area of the project uh and uh take it from there. That's what I would say. They can have questions. They can they can do what what what is necessary for a neighborhood meeting to have that conversation about the project. Mr. town, did you have an observations on the motion on the motion? No, no comments.

I'm going to ask our town attorney and chief parliamentarian if you've got any input on on the discussion we're having about the possibility of continuing this to a date certain uh with some other neighborhood or similar type meetings in between. Any comments or observations? So my suggestion about the neighborhood meeting is to clarify whether that would that's a requirement your expectation of the developer to do that before they come back and then uh determining who pays the cost of that. Normally the developer has to pay the cost of the ones required by the UDO. This is an addition to that and primarily the costs are my understanding is renting the facility where it's held and the postage that it takes to notify everyone within 800 foot radius.

Mr. there the my color tan building is right over there where they have their big barbecues and it's right in that neighborhood and it would be convenient for those people want to come to go there versus coming down to Garner or somewhere else and the parking is there and then I think they're very reasonable and but Moll's Royan building right there on 1010 would be a great place to have this thing so those people want to come they'll be easy to come to if they don't they Well, those would be details that would need to be worked out uh if if we vote have a continuation. Would you like

a question for the attorney before? Is it required if we do a neighborhood public a public meeting to do the full public notice per the UDO? Uh no, because this is not a required neighborhood meeting. So, you can suggest the parameters that you'd like to see. uh whether that is just the adjacent property owners or a larger radius of public notification and we'd be willing to use the facilities at the Terran for the meeting place the Terran right across the street we'd be willing to use those facilities to solve that issue so you have a place available you're saying for neighborhood meeting

that's correct I'm just trying to the the cost associated with that not normal the postage and the timing and all that is there are there will pay the cost. We'll pay those costs. Not a problem. Okay. Thank you. Uh so I guess the Do you want the full 800, but 800 is our current standard, right? Yeah. Or do you want something less? That's I mean we should already have the mailing list available. Same mail from the special use permit. Yeah, that's fine.

Yeah, thank you. I think the word would get out to those interested including the property owners, etc. with with the basic notification kind of stuff. Uh [clears throat] I would also make the comment that during this uh extended time for review and more education would be a good time to have some dialogue with the developer about the other uh supplemental accommodations that have been discussed to learn more what could be done. I think you have some good ideas here and will give us time to kind of assimilate some another conversation with staff. Oh yes, that's a good place to start and they can translate that to us in the right way in in the next uh 30 days or

30day extension continuous 30-day continuous

that and input from the neighbors I think is what I'm hearing primarily input from the public there there has been confusion this has been unusual uh I I don't think we'll be be setting the precedent that we will always start over whenever neighbors feel strongly about it, but this has been a genuinely confusing situation to a number of us. It's it's rather unique. And if we can take another 30 days and get input from our neighbors and let you give us a good explanation of the rationale behind the supplemental accommodation, what else can we do to make this work? Input from the adjoining land owners. What can we do to make this more attractive, more acceptable to them? get if we can take a few days and and get this figured out, it could be a better project for everyone in the long run.

The one request that we would make is that is we shorten the time from 15 to 30 to prevent having problems with our bond issuance. Um, yeah, from 30 days to 15 days and do a date certain um that's closer in time so we don't start running into timeline issues with our bonds.

Mr. Vance made the motion uh and was not really m he's not really making a motion about an an amendment, but that's kind of what what he's asking. Would you consider a different period of time? And let me ask my parliamentarian, uh how do we go about considering an amendment that hasn't been made by a council member? Well, either a council member would have to take up that amendment or or with or withdraw that for further discussion. So, I think what I heard Mr. Hannah say is that they'd like it to be continued for 15 days, but they would be able to do the neighborhood meeting in the interim.

That's correct. During that 30 days. Oh, yeah. No, during the 15 days. That's their their proposal. Yes. You you're requesting 15 days extension to accomplish the same things. That's correct. Okay. Yes. Not to not to change the process would be to the meeting on the 17th. I guess my question becomes the of March. I guess my question becomes a notification and making sure that the the public is engaged and enough time to respond. Well, fortunately, we have the mailing list from the we have the mailing list required from the SU process. Yeah. But yet still I'm thinking about that time. that time. Yes, that's roughly two weeks for the public to receive.

Uh I'm open to discussion on that. Thoughts on that is if that's if that's thought to be enough time. I'm kind of I'm kind of I'm kind of thinking that's not enough time. Well, here's a suggestion. Let's make it March 31st and we'll discuss it in the work session. We can take a vote at the work session. There's no law rule saying we can't and that's 21 days and that'll cover and give it plenty of time and that cuts off 10 days from the uh from the uh actually it's two weeks it cuts 10 days off so be from 30 to 20. I think we say the March 31st work session and that gives you 21 minutes

and I think it gives the the public and staff and council a little more time as well to have those conversations and we don't want to throw too much on staff on short notice as well. Well, thank you for looking at the calendar, Mr. Singleton. [clears throat] We have we have three we have five Tuesdays in March, so just say Mr. Singleton, was that an amendment to the amendment to change it the continuence to March 31st? Yes, I'll make an amendment to the amendment that Mr. Vance made. I accept. And if I could just add, we had a few other items scheduled for your work session on the 31st. So if moving this to the 31st, we may need to move a few things around and I just wanted council to be aware of that before you make a final vote. Thank you.

A long meeting.

Okay. So there's an amendment to the motion accepted by the motion maker that we continue this to March 31st, have the neighborhood meeting in between, have more dialogue, more understanding of the big picture is help us all move ahead. And while this will allow some input for the neighboring land owners as well at the neighborhood meeting and they're free to contact staff between now and then too to express issues, questions, concerns. So, uh, I think it's important this this is a a very important project, not just 171 units, but everything related to it, the potential commercial. Uh, it's it's a big deal in a critical part of town and it's critical to the surrounding land owners of 80 plus acres. What goes in, how it looks, how it feels, how does it fit into the bigger plan, how does it fit in the Raleigh utility plan, water and sewer? There's a lot of loose ends here. And I can't help but think that uh three weeks will give us a big head start to start off in a better direction if we do this. So the motion's been made, it's been amended, it's been discussed. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Hannah. Uh is is there any further discussion on the motion? Town attorney, would you mind restating the motion for us? Make sure we understand exactly what we're saying. Um, I believe it's to continue this item to the work session on March 31st, 2026, which incorporates the having of a neighborhood meeting in the interim time.

Okay. Is that accurate Frank? Yes, sir. I would add just the word noticed neighborhood meeting, right? a neighborhood meeting with notice provided to the same 800 foot radius that was used for the special use permit. Okay, very good. Sounds like progress to me. So, the motion's been made, seconded, and discussed. Uh we'll we'll close the discussion at this point and let's take a a voice vote like we did before. And the person who made the motion signify I to be in favor of that motion or nay if opposed. Mr. Vance I. Mr. Ballinger. I Mr. Styles. I Mr. Singleton. I Mr. Matthews. Hi.

Okay. It's unanimous. Uh we will continue this this item until March 31st with the conditions that were outlined. Uh thanks for everybody's comments and input on this. Very important. It helps us move ahead. Case closed. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Hannah. Thank you. And that brings us down to approximately 2 minutes until 8:00 and a few minutes left. Uh is the feeling council to take a short break and resume with attention to these items or push on through? Push on. Say push on through. Push on through. We got that much left. So push push push on through.

Push on through. Oh w push on through but fast. Committee reports. Committee reports. Who's get Let's start with committee reports. Let's start with Mr. Matthew

committee. Uh we'll begin work in March to begin the recruitment process for vacant uh board and commission seats. So we're excited to get that process started uh in March and fill out vacancies and had someone actually at the polls today say how do I get involved in Gartner? And so we uh we've had some pretty preliminary conversations before about finding ways to better uh place folks who don't fit on any of our commissions because we have so many qualified folks. So we want to maybe try to do some more outreach to other nonprofits and organizations that could use volunteers and start directing people to all the great organizations we have in Garter. So that's all I've got. Thank you, Mr. Vance. No committee report.

No committee report. Manager reports.

Yes. Just a few reminders. U mayor and council. First, a reminder, our civic academy, we we are taking applications for the reboot of our civic academy. Uh this uh program will start next month. Um it's an 8-week class. Um it gives sort of an extensive behind thescenes look at town government and operations. Um information and the application are available on the town's website for those residents that are interested and they have uh everyone needs to apply by March 11th. Our special spring cleanup is uh for unprepared trash and yard waste starts March 16th. Residents can place unprepared yard waste and some bulk bulky waste items curbside to pick up by Monday morning for their assigned special collection week. This is always a very popular service that we provide in the springtime. Uh more information about um the service and the uh special assigned collection week is available on our website as well. And finally, just a reminder that the showcase of talent uh we will be hosting that again at GPAC this Saturday uh with free shows at 3 and 700 p.m. So encourage all to come out and see all the talent we have here in the town of Garner. Uh those are all the reports I have for this evening.

Okay. Attorney reports. Uh no report this evening. Okay. Uh let's start with council reports and let's start with Mr. Vance this time other than committee reports council report.

I would just say that uh they had a great event last week at essentials of municipal government. It was a great refresher for myself at the UNCC school of government at Chapel Hill. It was a great opportunity to just uh reflect and see other municipalities and how they operate and uh to really learn the staff better and a great exercise and I say in bonding and understanding and working together with the staff. It was a really good event. Uh it's been seven years I think seven it's been a long time since I've been and uh it was just a good refresher. Good. Mr. Dallinger.

Yeah. I just direct uh council and everyone to there was an article in News of Observer today talking about housing affordability just to speak to how important what we're doing is and it says Wake County carries the largest volume of housing stress in the triangle with 28,000 eviction filings and 76,000 cost burdened renters. That is the epicenter of the region's affordability crisis. And then it goes on to say that in Wake County, a construction worker would need to earn close to $33 an hour or $70,000 a year to afford their housing. So, there is still a problem. There continues to be a problem. And we can't let what is what are the rules that result in loopholes get in the way of us doing the work we know we need to do to provide at some level some affordable housing in Gardner. So, I appreciate the council's work um over the years and staff's work and we'll keep we'll keep fighting.

It won't be solved tonight, will it? But it's a step in the right direction. Mr. Stalls,

so I want to echo um what Councilman Vance has said um attending essentials for municipal government um for the first time. It was a great event. Learned a lot. It was great going through all of the scenarios and exercises they had and and I think one one great thing that I realized um going through all of those sessions were a lot of things that they talk about about what creates a a high functioning local government is things that we already implement here as a town. So it was great just seeing that. Great seeing that um Garner is pretty much the gold standard in a lot of of of the things and how we operate. Um, but it was it was just great going through through the program and and and just interfacing with with the staff and with everybody else. It was it was just overall a good experience.

Did you hear him say the gold standard? Garner is the gold standard for high functioning governments. And he he's telling the truth. I was there too. I went to that event uh that mandatory training for me two years ago. It was mandatory for you, but it was not mandatory for the town manager, the town attorney, the two assistant town managers, the mayor, and the other two council members in addition to yourself who went along. So, it was there to build the team, to build our communication, mission accomplished, and and I'll say it again, uh, and you said it said these people should come to Garner, see how it's done. You guys are the model. But we are the model for have a high functioning uh government and it's because we take the time to listen to get educated and to listen to each other. Thank you very much for your attendance there. By the way, he asked the best questions of the whole two. [laughter]

We were proud of it. They don't know nothing. Of course he asked good questions. Mr. safely

just on asking questions about policy [laughter] [snorts] two items and and based off been asking about one of these for some time but also off this project apparently there's there's nothing I'm just asking I'll see our planning director assistant director there the possible to add a line on a SCP application stating that their project the project that they are projecting to build will be market rate andor will it have any housing affordability components in that project? Can we ask that question? They can't say it never came up and staff either staff will talk to it. It's on the application then it that opens the door. Okay, you had to check yes or no.

You're asking can we right? So, so at the very beginning they can't say they never heard anybody say anything. Okay. Even though you probably mentioned it in conversation. It's that way they have to check a box. Okay. If there'll be if there'll be any afford housing affordability components to the project doesn't say it has to be the whole project is will there be any components of it.

So if I may um uh because you can get SUPs for a number of different projects. Um, I would suggest that if this is the concern with things that are for the residential ones that are over a certain number of units that uh perhaps not asking it on the application, but you can certainly ask questions during the hearing process as they relate to those eight factors that you are to consider and one is the um impact on adjacent property values.

Okay. So, we can't do anything on application just for residential project. Just ask that one line. Yeah, I would suggest that because because we have one application for all SUP projects that that that might that question might not be relevant to every use that comes before an SU. Okay. Of course, I guess they could answer that not applicable in some situations. Okay. I I just don't want to come in here and say, well, we never heard anything about because some of them will say that even though staff probably talked to him about it.

Yeah, I couldn't agree more with Mr. Singleton that somewhere along the line we have to ask a question we never asked before and that is do you intend to pay your property tax? Are you going to look for an exemption to your property tax? And whether we have to ask them that in in other venues or on the application, but we can't take for granted anymore that that any given project and may be residential or may be commercial. if it's owned by a nonprofit, they have the potential to ask for a property tax exemption. So, we we'll be addressing this in many ways, many times over the coming weeks, but this is just the way it is today. This is a change in the world. Things we used to take for granted that you'll pay your property tax. We can't take that for granted anymore.

Mr. Matthew, excuse me. Second question was and we talked about cost of services and we touched on it at the retreat and again this project shows the need for simple cost of service projection estimation for mainly public safety, police and fire, public works and parks and w estimated costs. We know that's just an estimation but we were told it's going to cost approximately between 200,000 and 400,000. Well, that's kind of a big wide gap. Can we get something more specific and can we not see those numbers based off a unit based off previous stats? And these are for all new projects. We know we can't go back and do them more on existing projects, but I'm going back to the nightown model just so we can see so we can see some estimate. I mean, we've always said if you're adding

two and a half people in a in a neighborhood and it's a thousand, that's 200 people. You're supposed to add approximately this many police officers and this many uh firemen for and first responders. So, that's just a start. But anyway, it'll be nice to have those numbers available because it came up here, but it says it's between 200 and 400. Well, we need to get a little more specific than between 200 and 400 and those estimation, but we need to that would be very helpful. Yes, we we heard council's discussion and interest in wanting to do more simplified version to at least give a range of what estimated core services are would cost. And so that's something we are working on. I'd hope to have it in the next 30 to 45 days for council. Okay. All right. Thank you. That's all. Mr. Mayor,

Mr. Mr. Matthews, uh, just want to second the school of government. It was, uh, been a long time since I'd been up there and and I still I still learned a lot. I learned a new word called hypothetical. There was one town that was having issues and they were doing a lot of hypotheticals asking a lot of new questions and uh, so that's the new What town was that, Mr. M?

Um, a nearby community, we'll say. They had a lot of hypothetical questions. It was cracking me and uh Kelvin up quite big time. So, but it was a very good well attended. We were well representative between staff and uh and Garner was the golden child. I know you stepped up. We're already doing this everything. We're already doing this. You need to communicate. We're already doing this by everything they come up with and and Mr. St. Right. We're pretty much already doing it. And so, and everybody's coming after how did y'all do that? how you do this. So, we were quite popular. I'd say Garner was at that meeting and uh well prepared for it. Uh congratulations on those that jumped in the cold water on Saturday. I know the town manager and two assistants and one certain young uh council member showed up out there and uh and jumped in the water and a lot of money was raised and well attended and uh so I appreciate the staff stepping up to the plate and fire department, the police department too. that were out there and uh and parks and recck was out there. So we were well represented and uh and the final thing uh this happened last year and I mentioned this to assistant manager pool uh North Garner Middle School they had contacted us about they needed flags for their flag poles. North Carolina flag and American flag was just shot to pieces. And and he and I had talked about this and uh and I told him I said, "Well, the if we can get the flags, we'll get the veterans committee to go out there and take the old ones down and properly dispose of them like you're supposed to do and we'll turn them over to the American Legion and the VFW and we'll put the new ones up." Well, they had a little bit of issue about us doing it. So, we Mr. Pool agreed. said, "What if we give y'all the flags and you let you guys put it up?" And I think, if I remember correctly, that's what they wound up doing. And uh

we got a similar situation at South Garner High School. Uh I'm I see it all the time because the church I'm a member of, we meet out there on uh on Sundays. We rent school out there for church service. Uh the North Carolina flag was in such tatters, I don't know what ever happened. And the American flag, it's looked like it was at Fort McHenry after the battle. that's torn to shreds. When I went by today and looked at it and got a picture of it and uh what I like to know if I think the board agree with us on this, you know, we are a patriotic community, very supportive of our military and we got the signs up to prove it and we got our memorial out there and the flags look good and they are at half mass like the ones out in front of the town here at half mass. The flag at school won't even at half mass. So, but if way we can contact that school and get two new flags put up because it does represent Garner and uh and and being a veteran and we make the pledge in here and you know and you got two old vets up here know what it's all about and especially with the war going on right now and and uh young men and women on on the line and you know you sign up knowing you could be in harm's way and that's just the way it is. that uh uh out of respect and courtesy to all those if there's a way we can get a North Carolina and a American flag to go out there, contact them and our group will be glad to put it up and take that one down, but I'll let you guys figure out the logistics if we could do that.

Certainly, we can follow up with them and see if they're interested in in receiving some flags from the town. Thank you, ma'am. And that's all I got. God bless America. And Yes, sir.

Yeah. I would just support Mr. Matthews and what he said, but I wanted to piggy back on um what Graeme was Mr. Single was talking about with regards to analysis and stuff and when I was looking at two things sort of came to mind when I was reading the consent agenda and one was the the engineering bids and things that were in there and the analysis by Kimley Horn on their engineers and it gives you sort of a the in-house work estimate of what this project should cost and I think also then looking at the level of transparency the LMG comes to us with on their analysis and their cost I think it'd be nice if we could involve into our planning process. Either our applicant provides that level or some level of analysis on what their rents are going to be or what their costs are going to be. Not that it's what we're going to base our decision on, but it helps us inform sort of the fiscal profile of a project and if they don't want to do it that we have some mechanism internally to do some of that sort of rough shape just roughly given the rough uh minimum maximum sort of thing. And that's kind of what came out of that bid process was what we think the bids came in. It was off here accurate here but pretty spot on to um kind of what the average is. So I think looking for us to do some of that analysis in in house as part of that revenue part so we have that bigger picture and we aren't relying on statements that are said by the time they get up here that oh we don't know how much we're going to charge and we don't know and uh Councilman Stallings is all about return on investment return on investment. We should be we should have insights onto some of that from our perspective to know um is this project feasible or not. they say, "Oh, we can't do this project unless you do X." And it's like, "Well, our in-house number said you can um or at least work on some compromise um and trade-offs because I

think that we all know we're not going to get everything we want with every project, but it's nice to know where those sort of uh tradeoffs can be made. So, it's not an immediate work order or anything or but it's kind of an evolution of the quality of information that's coming to council." And last comment on that, I thought that the information provided in this agenda packet with the questions and the answers was extremely thorough and transparent and clear and it was very helpful to have that right in front of me as I was preparing for the meeting and in the meeting. So I just commend staff on the clear extra effort that went into preparing the agenda particular on a very complicated issue. So that's all.

Thank you. you and my hats off to all of the council members, all the staff, everyone who participated in two challenging projects uh today. The complicated one and then the confusing one. Thanks for paying attention. Uh if there's no further business, I will accept a motion to adjourn. One more thing. One second. Okay. I apologize to Mr. Stalling for saying he didn't know anything bump because he knows plenty. He's a smart guy. I don't want to be too informal, but I respect it. I respect you, Mr. Stall. Totally fine. All [snorts] right, I'm done. So moved. Second. All in favor of adjourn signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed by nay. Meeting adjourned. Thank Thank you for your [music]