Commissioners - Regular Meeting

at this time. I'd like to call the November 13th Mon County Board of Commission to order. And it's hard to believe it's already November, but with this time change and the weather we had Tuesday, it sure made a believer out of me. Winner came quick. Um, we've got a full agenda. I think we'll get started with announcements. Miss Tammy, Mr. Kade.

So, I actually have a couple. The first one's going to be a deletion. Uh, on your announcements under 2A talks about a special meeting on December 1st. Um, usually we have our organizational meeting in December and you only have to do that the first Monday in December on evennumbered years. So oddnumbered years, you can actually defer that to your regular meeting in December. So unless the board is so inclined to have a special meeting to do your organizational review, we can [clears throat] tackle that at the regular meeting on December 9th. Um item 2A, uh obviously the board of health approved an early retirement for health director Kath McGah at their October 28th, 2025 regular meeting and HR director and safety director Tammy Keyser has been appointed as the interim health director and she started in that role on Monday. Um item 2C actually has been updated since we put this out. Obviously the federal government shut down is now over. Uh so some of those updates on those programs are no longer pertinent. Uh we did speak to the housing department today. [snorts] The uh weatherization funds are actually backed already in full function. Uh the heat funds for heat repairs are actually partially funded and he's working on some options on how to handle those and of course week and snap. We'll wait and see where those um couple updates on recreation [clears throat] uh things. Uh, we had some conversations with our engineer, Joe Allen, talked to them today, working out some final details on the restroom facility for the pickle ball courts to finally get that wrapped up. Uh, we were looking some utility lines, making sure we had all that together. Uh, so we're still on track with that to try and pull that off for a summer completion date. That's still our goal. Um, and then also

we had some some things we're really doing over at Tana Halere Rec Park. Uh we wanted to do some improvements to that multi-use court over there. We got to take some do some things with some trees, upgrade that facility a little. Uh we've sent some requests to Duke Energy. That's actually Duke Energy facility that we lease space on. So we've sent it to them to to to [clears throat] get their approval. We're waiting on that to come back and unfortunately because of cold weather, it may be spring before we can pave that court. But that that actually is in the process. Um, and then tonight is Lindsay Weber's first night as our punish director. So, I just want to welcome Lindsay. Welcome.

I believe Mr. [cough and clears throat] All right, Commissioner Braden, Commissioner Antoine, welcome to Lindsay and welcome to the new version of Eric. [laughter] My apologies. I should have

Commissioner Shields. I just want to say thank you to the county and Miss Maku and all of you who participated in the uh green light program that we had. Uh we announced last meeting and it ended on the uh November 11th. A lot of uh good participation and very well meaningful. And Jamie, I appreciate you taking care of all the convenience centers. And Bill, appreciate you being here tonight, my guy. I see you looking the other way. So, but that's all right. But I know you're better and appreciate you. Commissioner Shir,

Mr. Chairman, at this time I'd like uh it's hard to believe that three years have passed since I was first elected. I've [clears throat] enjoyed serving the taxpayers and citizens of Mon County. I have enjoyed working alongside my fellow commissioners. While not pretty at times and not easy, I feel we have made made great progress in the past three years. However, there is still a lot more work to do. I'm announcing tonight that my intentions are to seek re-election and hopefully serve the taxpayers and citizens of Mon County for four more years. Thank John, Miss Leopard, Mr. Goss. Yes,

sir. All right. At this time, I'd like to ask Commissioner Shields to lead us in a moment of silence in the pledge of allegiance. Please stand if able.

Amen. I pledge allegiance 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. Thank you. Thank you. [clears throat]

Thank you, Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. All right. No public hearings tonight. Uh, do we have any additions to the agenda? Mr. Cape says no. All right. The public comment period. M. Tammy. Thank you. All right. Miss Maryanne Ingram. Hi everyone. Thank you. I'm Maryanne Ingram. I've been living in Franklin, North Carolina since 200 20. No, 93. And I live at 245 Sloan Road. No, that's where I work. [laughter] Anyway, I just want to say I had a great experience today coming from a client's house and it involved two horses and the health um the animal control folks were there and they stopped everybody and I was way back and and saw the situation and don't need to bother horses whenever they're trying to be put in uh a carrier. And um as they finished getting the horses in and they did such a kind job in getting them in the carrier and so uh as I passed by I saw that it was animal control and I said that was a great job guys. And um they said, "Yeah, it was two horses that the people could no longer take care of."

And so um we had to come get them. And I said, "I hope you have somewhere for him to go." And he says, "Oh yeah, we already have a home for them." So I just want to let you know, great job with our animal control and getting horses. Those are big animals to take care of. So just saying just an experience that I had. Thank y'all. Thank you, Marian. All right, Betsy Bast.

Good evening. Thanks for having us. Thanks for giving us a snow day on Tuesday. That was kind of fun. I have two things that I want to talk about. One, um FRL was what I had put on the um agenda sheet there. And I just want to remind you that you had stated publicly um you the board you said that we would not leave the FRL. So I just want to remind you that you did say that and thank you for saying that and I hope you stick to that. Second thing is quarter cent sales tax. I said it before when you brought it up and I'm going to say it again. I will do whatever it takes to help you guys pass that. So you didn't ask last time. you didn't ask for our help and I I will personally go put out yard sign. I'll do whatever it takes, educate people, do forums, whatever to understand exactly what that means and how it will help rather than hurt us. So, please call on me to help cuz I'm happy to help. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Miss Bon. All right, that wraps up public comment. Any adjustments to the agenda?

Mr. Chairman, I have one for you to consider. Um, item number [clears throat] 13B, the planning board appointment. Um, we had only, by the time we closed applications, we had only gotten two applications for that. Uh, and I know they obviously need members because they struggle sometimes getting them. We actually had another application come in after the deadline. And in light of making sure [clears throat] that we have the right folks in the right places and to give everybody an opportunity for you to discuss that it it might be pertinent to go ahead and pull item 13B tonight. I don't think uh I [clears throat] don't think that will hurt anything for any kind of upcoming meeting and perhaps we can discuss that membership maybe at the December meeting.

All right board. All right, we'll scratch item 13B. Any other adjustments? All right, hearing none. Looking for a motion to approve the agenda. So move. Motion by Commissioner Breeden. Second.

Second by Commissioner Antoine. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please signify by raising your right arm, stating I. I. [clears throat] Any oppose? I 5. All right, moving on to old business. Item A, update and continue discussion regarding consolidation of Mon County Public Health. [clears throat] Commissioner Breeden, Commissioner Sher. [laughter] Well, I think it would be uh good if we brought Mr. Hen up here and let everyone know what actually transpired at the last health board meeting and and what the health board decided u at that meeting. [clears throat]

Good evening commissioners. Thanks for having me today. Um I don't know um you know what that needs to be said other than you know at our last meeting and um I'm sure that it was um the resolution is made publicly available but uh our board uh at the last meeting I know it was discussed about in the previous meeting when we had the presentation from uh Christy Nikki Odum from uh our uh the school of governance and there was some discussion had and I think there was an unofficial kind kind of nod to do the consolidation with um the current board still being the policym board uh while the county would take over the um there would be a consolidation of two public services. County would then take over uh HR. And so then in our last meeting we kind of made that an official resolution and passed um the board passed that uh to recommend consolidation to your board. So, um, is there anything else that I need to

No, I think touch on, John. Other than that, I think the most important was for you as the chairman to Yeah. state what the board as a whole and Yeah, our board as a whole um decided to vote to recommend or the consolidation um with animal services and um and then I uh with the the I guess the the middle option that was discussed at the previous meeting here of the us becoming a um the policym portion of the board and then the county um taking over all the HR stuff personnel and stuff.

So, I'll I'll kind of add on to that. In your packet, there is a resolution if you're so inclined to approve that consolidation. Um, it does specifically state that the current health board will the members will roll over into becoming the consolidated health board. There will be four vacancies because that board has to be a larger board. Um and then there's a tenative timeline that we would have to consider uh as far as how what kind of time frame that would take place. So you should one of the things you need to consider if you want to pass this resolution is a date that you would want to make this effective. Uh Miss Kezer and I have looked at some tenative timelines that we discussed with Eric to make sure that would happen. Um you do you want to talk about those now? So the you want to do that Tammy or

whichever you want to do. You you go ahead.

So the board of health it the current board of health will become the nominating committee for those vacant positions. And so um at their next meeting they could begin that process if the resolution is passed this evening. Um the December 9th meeting we felt like would be too soon to have the applications in to bring to this board for approval. So um thinking that the January 13th meeting um would be when those applications could come forward for approval and so that that would be the date of the consolidation that would go in the draft resolution that you have this evening if that is acceptable. And of course uh with the fact that the consolidation involves animal services there there's not a lot of structural change. Uh the implementation process will actually be fairly easy. Uh there's some policies that we'll have to look at we have to send to the state just to to verify that they meet the compliance but they will because that's what they're modeled after. Um so basically I guess at this point it's up for discussion for the board if you want to follow through with approval [clears throat] of that resolution. All right. Thanks, Garrett.

Oh, you're welcome. Thank you. [clears throat] Thank you. Um, I guess we can discuss it after this motion's made. So, at this time, I'd like to make a motion that we approve the resolution as presented uh for consolidation of Mon County Public Health with animal services. Hear a motion by Commissioner Breeden. Second.

Second by Commissioner Cheryl. Any further discussion? I'd like to briefly just state Mr. Hickden and the board of health um thank you for your time. I know all of you have spent an enormous amount of time, weekends, evenings, and uh this little piece of paper didn't come easy. So, thank you and uh and thanks to our two liaison. I know there's been a lot of a lot of time involved. Yeah, I'd like to echo that too and just say thanks to John Cheryl for all the hard work. I mean, we've put a lot of time in. Garrett, Angie Stones here, all the board of health members. It's been a

it's been a fun time um at those meetings and they've been long and um but we you know we've [clears throat] finally come to an agreement and I think it's going to be a good thing. So, thanks for your help and and yours as well. All right. Any further discussion, Mr. Chairman? Before you vote, we do need to know the date, the effective date that's going to be placed into that resolution. Thank you. January 13th. January 13th January 13, 2026.

Thank you, Mr. [clears throat] Goss. Um, Mr. manager, if you if you would um you would Miss Keyser explain what is actually happening with the consolidation, what is actually changing in the health department because I think there's some fear out there that something's going to go haywire at the health department and that's not at all the case. But if you would um

I can I can start and then I'll let Tammy add on. Um, as far as any administrative changes, there really won't be a lot. Uh, the new at this at that point, if the new person that comes in starts January 13th around that date, they will be a consolidated health and human services director over health and animal services instead of a uh quote health director on paper. Same duties essentially, different title. um that person upon hiring would be I would be in charge of the hiring but it would be with the consent of the the consolidated health board. So not that's probably the only major change and it does state in the resolution that I have to have consent of that board before we were to hire somebody. Um they would fall under the county personnel policies which are essentially identical to the state policies. All of our policies will meet the same standards. Um, Tammy, I don't know what else. Services will be the same. We're We're not looking at removing positions. We're not changing people. We're not taking duties away. We're not eliminating positions. It's an administrative change. Uh, mainly for HR purposes. And it's about it.

Thank you. All right. We have a motion on the floor in the second with the effective date of the 1st, I'm sorry, the 13th of January. Any further discussion hearing? None. All in favor, please signify by raising your right arm stating I. I. Any oppose? All right, Tammy, please let 50. Thank you. [clears throat] All right. Item B, continue discussion regarding solid waste operations and bid review. Manager Cab and solid waste director, Miss Jamie Paku.

So, I will kind of introduce where we're at. Uh, obviously the last meeting we talked about some bids we'd received. We talked about our our future for the solid waste program and there were some questions about our future and where we were going to going to head and options were available to us. Um, so Jamie has put together a presentation tonight that that covers, I think, most of those options and will be a good spot for some discussion. Uh, and when she finishes, obviously, we'll have time for questions. Uh, and then I have a recommendation on where I think we should go from there, uh, for the board's consideration, and then we'll kind of lay out a timeline on what this would look like depending on what options we have.

Okay. So, so we kind of looked at three options. Option one, build the new landfill cell. Um, transfer all waste out of county or and then we will discuss an incinerator. So, with the new landfill, we did receive new bids on November 6. We received bids for the smaller cell 2A and then the larger cell uh two. Um, when we trans to we did an RFP for transferring all waste out of county. uh proposals were due on October 28th. We didn't receive any. And then the incinerator, we'll just kind of discuss that a little bit. So, um phase three, sell two, the bid. So, just uh recap, the previous bid for construction came in at about 10.3 million. That was the lowest responsive bid. We received five bids on November 6. The lowest um for the full sale was 8.4. Again, that's the larger sale, which is about 12 and a half acres for 8 to 10 years of capacity. Um, the lowest bid for cell 2A, which is the smaller cell, is 4.6 million. Um, so that larger cell, the 8.4, that's about 207,000 per year over the current loan payment that we pay right now. Um, so there is a potential for an increase in fees. Um, here is just the detail of the cost for that new cell. So that preconstruction is something we've already paid for or are going to pay for. Um and then it just shows you the construction administration construction CQA and all that. So the um full the full amount is 10.3 million. Um here's the bid tab. Again, that first section is the base bid, which is the smaller cell, cell 2 A. And you can see the the five contractors at the top. So in the kind of towards the top there, that total bid section A plus B, that's

where your your total bid is. So that's the 4.6 right there. The next bidder came in at 5.77 million. So then the next one, the alternate bid is going to be your full um cell two. And so there you can see at the at the bottom of that there's your your uh full total. So there's [snorts] your 8.4 million. The next one came in at nine roughly about 9.9 a little under. Just stop me if I'm moving too fast. Um, so the RFP for transferring waste. So again, no proposals were received. Um, we did receive a letter from Republic Services saying they could not take our waste at Wide Oak Landfill. Um so after that we accepted informal quotes for hauling and then called all the private landfills within a 100 mile uh distance which is about four and then two of them said they could not accept our waste just due to to certain uh restrictions. So, the uh best quote for hauling came in with uh $600 per trip, which is about $30 a ton for Franklin. Highlands, it was $650 per trip, which is about 3250 per ton. For your landfill disposal, I got two quotes from one landfill. That was $69 per ton for uh hauling, disposal, and trailers. Or it was just $30 $33 per ton for disposal. So your cheapest option there would be about $63 per ton for Franklin, 65.50 per ton for Highlands. And again, that's just to transfer the waste out. So incineration um it it's hard to predict the cost of incineration just for um a small county like main county, but I'll go through the pros and cons of it. Um so it does reduce your waist stream by 95%. and all that energy can be recovered and reduce your fossil fuel dependency. Some of your cons is going to be more air

pollution. You'll still have some type of disposal with the ash and it may be hazardous just depending on the the makeup of that. Um it's an extremely high cost for building and operating. A high amount of tonnage is typically needed for operation more than we receive here. And then um you may not be able to get the air permit uh required for that just due to our proximity to the Great Smoky Mountain National Park. Um just some of the land value. Um in 1989 185 acres uh was purchased for 1.2 million that currently um has multiple county offices and also the landfill expansion. It was paid for by the general fund, not the enterprise fund because it was not established yet. And currently the land is valued at 9.3. That's just the land, not the the buildings on it. Um, an additional um purchase of property in 1996 to 1997 for about 450,000 was purchased and that's where the landfill office sits and part of the phase 2 um expansion. Currently the land and the office are valued at about 730 uh,000. Phase three uh property was purchased in 2015 um for 1.5 million. That was just to give uh better geometry for the landfill and um add some additional airspace. And currently that land is assessed at 1.3 million. So, and just so you know, if you did have to sell this property, you would have to put on the deed that it was used for a sanitary landfill. Um, this next slide just shows you those those uh pieces of property. So, that middle one is your large 185. Um, that currently contains all the landfills. The one at the bottom is where the landfill office is. And then the top is

that additional piece that was purchased in 2015. And like you see that just kind of rounded it out. So your land value going forward about 43 and a half acres could be available for some type of office if phase 3 cell 2 is not built. And again that's including that required landfill buffer. Um if phase 3 cell 2 is built 24 and a half acres would be available for offices and obviously that's if you don't go any further with the landfill after that. um it was not considered for residential um building just the buffer would be greater so you wouldn't have as much land. So uh cost to open infrastructure-wise. So phase three cell 2 like mentioned that would be your 10.3 million. Again all your fees are there that 673 has already been spent. The transfer station just going forward I'm just going to be comparing both of those um side by side. So your transfer station would be about 7.6 6 million for your infrastructure. Again, that 700 or 673 uh,00 million was added over here too because it's already money we've spent. So, that that quote would be a replacement of the recovery building, a need for a pit design for compaction, trailer storage pads for leech, and that estimate is based on just some of the transfer station projects that Miguel has done um recently. Um, so when we're talking about permitting a permit to operate a transfer station, you're looking about an 18 um, month time period from start to finish. So that's when you could actually operate your transfer station after 18 months. Um, just equipment needs. So for phase three cell 2, you know, you're looking at probably about $2 million, a compactor and a dozer. for a transfer station. Um you would need a loader to replace this in a bogan um just because

it would add that additional compaction and then you may need some additional walking floor trailers if the hauler does not provide. So we I estimated there about seven. So that gets you to that 1 million mark. Um so cost to operate phase three sell two. So um that estimate right there that that 4.7 million. So, our current budget is 5.8 million total. Um, we have an additional eight groundwater wells that are um going to have to be monitored for that new cell, which is about 16,000 per year. And then um that 4.7 is just the debt service is removed just because you're going to have to add [clears throat] in that additional 27,000. So, for the transfer station, um I was able to decrease that budget by a little over a million if we go to the transfer. So 3.6 just for operation. That's decreasing employees, decreasing operational supplies and equipment maintenance, removing the debt service, removing closure costs, and removing engineer fees. So that $63 per ton, like I said, that was the cheapest option I could find. So you'd have to multiply that by the 48,000 tons we landfilled last year to get that that estimate. So closure after your your cell is full, you have to close it. Um, so closure the the estimate is about 4.8 million. Um, and like I said, we currently um save for closure in our budget, but that would probably need to be increased um going forward. The transfer station has a closure cost estimate that's required by DEEQ. Um, that estimate is just the Highlands transfer station estimate. It would probably need to be a little larger um for the facility that we're talking about down here, but I just I went with the Highlands Transfer Station because that's unknown. Um something to

be considered if the phase 3 cell 2 is not considered and not pursued, you would have to close both phase 2 and phase 3 cell one um all at once, which may we may not have enough set aside for both closures at one time. So um you do have to continue to monitor your sale after you close it. So that's called postclosure. You have to fund it for 30 years. So that's a 1.8 um estimate there. Transfer station also is required to have some type of postclosure. And so that is again the transfer station estimate. So just to walk through very briefly environmental monitoring we monitor for four things. is groundwater leech storm water and landfill gas. So annually, this is for the whole facility. We um spend about 200,000 for groundwater testing. That's including POS, which is a a new emerging contaminant. I'm not sure where that's going to go in the future, but that's why it is kind of a little more inflated. And like I said, you would need those eight new groundwater wells for the new cell. So that would increase your groundwater cost. Leech eight. Um I'm not sure that the cost would be directly um related to the larger landfill footprint. We have an agreement with the wastewater treatment plant and so that's that cost. Um if the agreement was ever changed that could potentially um increase with the larger footprint, but as of right now it does not. Storm water, it's sampled and maintained by landfill staff. We have to send the samples off to be tested. So that's that cost. Um, again, that's dependent on property boundary, not necessarily your larger landfill footprint. Landfill gas is sampled by staff and so the more wells added would not necessarily um be reflected and cost by by more wells.

Um, just something to keep in mind when if you do continue to build out phase 3 cell 3 will trigger an air quality permit just by the the waste in place. Um, but is not needed for phase 3 cell 2. Again, when you're talking about environmental monitoring and the cost that comes with it, it's more about the contaminants you find rather than your larger footprint. So, after talking through all of those costs, I tried my best to consolidate it into this lovely table here where you're going to be comparing both the cell and the transfer station. So your cost to open, equipment needs, closure and postclosure are all divided by 10 through the life of the cell. So that's 10 years. So you're going to have your 1.3, you know, million dollar payment per year and then the infrastructure for the transfer station at 912,000. So in operation for the transfer station, you'll see um there's two numbers there. That 3.7 is just for operation and then the 3 million is just to transfer the waste. So you're looking at about an $800,000 difference there. And um McGill also did their own analysis um similar to this, but they pushed it out 10 years and their savings was about 600 million over a 10-year term for landfilling as opposed to transfer.

Say that again. 600 million.

6 million over a 10-year period. that landfill would be cheaper than the transfer station and again those are today's numbers it's hard to predict the future. So just um there are risks with both situations obviously. So phase three cell 2 is going to have your additional liability especially for the environmental monitoring. You know future costs can be hard to predict like we're seeing with this construction cost. Um some of your advantages are going to be more control over your cost. um you can maximize that permitted landfill space that we know we have and your money has potential to stay in Mon County. Your transfer station, your risk, you're going to have to have some waste handling decisions such like brush, sludge, and those materials useful. We charge a cheaper fee for you would have less control over those costs or the distances for for transfer. Something else we didn't talk about um an escalation clause. A lot of the um contracts we looked at do have those in there and that was not considered in in those um estimates. Some advantages you would have less liability and your cost is very transparent. So just to touch back on this um you know going forward uh I do think it would be helpful to look at some of our fees and changing some of those structures. you could reduce hours to save um additional cost and I think we need to seriously look at some different strategies to try to prevent some of that outofcount waste that I'm told is is coming in just to try to help both scenarios whichever way we go. So not all bad. Um currently DEEQ has a recycling grant out there. It's um I think a max of 25 million and it's for Hurricane Helen counties that were affected. Um, currently you have um a $5 million cap per project with no

[clears throat] match from the county. So, we are obviously going to pursue that. And that is a list of some of the items we are going to request. We're going to try to request the replacement of the back part of the RPC building, which is the recycling building that was torn down due to damage. And when that uh building was torn down, we also had to take out the balor. to request a new balor, replace a SIDS here for recycling operations, ask for an extra walking floor trailer for recycling operations whenever that balor is down for maintenance. Um, as to fully fund the new Carson Center, replace the rolloff truck that is roadworthy. Um, and then repair the recovery building, which was obviously damaged by fire. um DEEQ gave us the advice to just put everything [clears throat] in in our request and then they would pick out the projects that they would like to fund. Um and there's also another grant coming soon um the disaster debris grant which just basically um handles yard waste debris. Um so this these last couple slides are done by Davenport for the loan. Did you want to

Sure. I can I can talk a little bit about that. Obviously, there there's a lot of information in this in this proposal or in this uh presentation that Jamie has done and we don't anticipate that you're going to be able to process all of it tonight, but there's a few things we need to talk about and there's some urgency on a couple of things that we need to discuss. Um so, I guess basically it's a synopsis on on what Jamie has talked about. Um I based on the numbers that we're seeing and the information that we have, I still think we need to construct the sale at the landfill as we have now. Uh we're already permitted. We're we're already started the process years ago and there's not a lot we can do with it without. And the the one thing that concerned me over the RFP process for the hauling was immediately the closest facility to us said we don't have any space. So, that concerns me a little. Um, and I'm very conservative as far as I'm a I'm a fixed payment kind of guy. I'd rather rather know what I'm paying for long-term versus ups and downs on things. So, I think we still need to consider construction of that landfill sale. Uh, we were also pleasantly surprised on some of the hauling prices that we had. So, I think a a hybrid version is something we can consider. um particularly because you saw some expense in there for a uh a transfer station in Franklin. We already have a transfer station in Highlands. Uh it's already permitted. So that's an easy one to start moving stuff out of. Um so I think if we pursued a a hybrid look at this, we've already talked to you about having Davenport look at our financials and get us a really a true business plan for this, not just for this year, but for the next 10, 20 years to set us up where we need to be. we we can take that in consideration, work that into any changes that we may have on the fee structure, look at the

options that are available out there and come up with a solution that that for for the most part gives you some stability on the payments and the operating costs that you may have on stuff, but gives you some options to maybe extend the life on the sale if you were able to ship stuff somewhere. If for some reason we get to the point where we can't use the sale, then you you already have an agreement to take it somewhere. So in my opinion, I think looking at that hybrid model is is a good option to take. Now obviously that's going to take some time. Um the the urgency that we have is the existing sale is going to be full soon. So we have to make some decisions. Um, we actually had reached out to we put an RFP [clears throat] out for some bank financing back in June of 2025 uh to about they sent out some invitations about 50 different banks and we had four proposals back from from different banks um and pretty decent proposals. Uh obviously we've been through a long bid process uh and we've went back and talked to the what seemed to be the the choice bank which was Webster Bank. they they provided the the best terms uh for the financing package. Uh they've been very good to discuss options with us and payment plans and were basically stayed in the game through the end. Um for this process to work, basically you're issuing special obligation bonds and the way that process works is you we have to send that request to the local government commission. We we have a proposal put together. that we send at the local government commission. They have to approve the issuance of those and that financing for us. Then it comes back for you for final approval. Uh and then we would do a closing and do a process after that to close everything out. So it's actually a 60-day process somewhere in that neighborhood to get

everything done. Um so what I was going to discuss tonight, you see two options there. Um, option one at the bottom was if we just did sell 2A, we it would be a not to exceed amount. It would probably cost us about 6.2 million uh to do the smaller part of that sale. Uh, which would get you somewhere around a 5year lifespan. Um the more financially feasible in the long term is to look at option two which is to do the cell 2A uh 2B together which is the bigger cell uh which the numbers that we'd looked at based on the the CQA numbers engineer numbers and the the bid tabs that we had come in would be right around a not to exceed amount of 10.5 for a $10 million or 10ear maturity. Um, my recommendation was going to be tonight and I'll open it up. I'll go ahead and do it and then I'll open it up for questions for Jamie after that. My recommendation tonight would be to for you to approve a findings resolution which is in your packet to send a request to the local government commission to see if they will approve option two 10 not to exceed 10.5 million up for a 10-year maturity. Um, the reason I would really like to have that done tonight is they the local government commission meets on December the 2nd. Um, typically you have to have a 40day 45day application period. We we've already submitted some preliminary paperwork to make sure that we're in line. And we have talked to them and they have agreed that even though the meeting is on December 2nd, if we get that uh findings resolution approved tonight to see if they were okay with us obtaining that financing, they would put it on the agenda for December the 2nd, which would get it back to us by we we could consider it at our December [clears throat] 9th meeting. Uh the reason that's a little bit of an urgency is if we don't meet the December deadline for the December meeting of the

local government commission and we roll into next year, we have to have our 2025 audit back. There's a process that has to go through with that. So it would be at least a threemonth process for that to happen. So, probably the earliest that I could get a financing uh process on the table for the local government commission would probably be March or April of 2026, which means by the time we went through the process to bring it back to you again, get a closing date, choose a contractor, get everything together, it's probably going to be Mayish of 2026. And with us running out of time, I didn't really feel like that was something we wanted to entertain. Um, so tonight my recommendation was going to be let's let's put some serious thought into the hybrid model. Uh, let's go ahead and and approve that findings resolution to ask the local government commission to see if they would approve option two, which is up to the $10.5 million for 10-year maturity, which is reasonably close to the payment we're making now. It's we're already we're paying a million $95,000 and some change if I'm not mistaken, Lindsay, somewhere in that neighborhood now. So there's not a whole lot of difference in it. Uh that will get us started on the financial process. It buys us some time to go through the rest of this process without delaying a sale construction any longer while we process the other information, get a really good game plan together. Um, and you also need to understand that I just want to make it very clear that just approving that findings resolution tonight does not 100% obligate you. That resolution specifically states and it is a requirement that once LGC approves that, it has to come back to you and at that point you have the choice to either accept it or deny, you could still say, you know, appreciate the offer, but no, we we don't want to consider that. So that still gives you time to to process information, make the decision. Um, we

have bid tabs for the bids that came in, but we do not have to choose the bidder tonight. Uh, the bid tabs go with the LGC application, and that's all that's needed uh for that process. So essentially, you could you could go into the December meeting, you could have time to give us time to look at the bids to to make sure we're happy with everything, make sure everything meets the needs of what we need, look at the financing package, and you could do that at the December meeting. And honestly, you could probably even do that at the January meeting. Um, so that's a lot for me to talk about, but that was going to be my suggestion. I don't even know why I present. He presented Jamie did me a really good Jamie made me a really good slide. [laughter] [clears throat]

very good presentation. I think it was very informative. U I think it lets the the people, the citizens and the taxpayers of Mon County see this is where we are as far as the landfill. It's probably been years and years since this has actually been really looked into what the options are. Um and um so if we went with option two as you're recommending, what is the lifespan? Is that a 10year? It should be a 10year lifespan. It will depend on the volume coming in. If we basfill

Yeah. So it eight is the worst case scenario. 10 is the kind of where you want to be. I guess it's not the best case, but it if the waste from Highlands went somewhere else, um how long would that what what kind of time frame? So, uh the waste from Highlands is currently about a fourth of our total waste. So, save you two years if if you if you did it the entire time. Now, again, I don't know if you can afford that, but that would save you on space. So yeah, and that's hopefully something Davenport can look at and kind of kind of see how those things work out. But yeah,

and that's the other reason it's very important especially to have these numbers and to give Davenport time once we have solid numbers that gives us something to work off of and we can we can make that plan and we can we can make sure that we get to the 10-year mark if we ship so much. But this is what it's going to cost us and then obviously look at those fees. Are those fees still fair? Do we need to adjust them somewhere? Uh the tonnage is a little harder for me to calculate. I Jamie, she did really well doing the division. Obviously, Highlands pays a little more because the transfer station up there 7250 versus 66 7850.

Um that's a little harder to calculate. You got to know your tonnage coming in, which we can estimate and figure [clears throat] that out. And that the uh tipping fee obviously is is what she's talking about. availability fee is what goes out on the tax bills, which is currently said $120. Um, Lindsay can correct me if I'm wrong, but $120 uh, every dollar brings in about $28,000, I believe, if I do that correctly. So, you know, a $4 increase gives you $100,000. So, it sounds bad to talk about a change in that, but a $4 increase makes a lot of money on availability fee. The only thing is you can only do that when you do the tax when you set the budget and do the tax rate. So it's very important for us to have this started early to have this conversation and get Davenport involved so we can consider that during the budget process and that way you can make an educated decision on what we need to do with those fees and those availability fees or tipping fees going forward. And I will I will hit back on the Can you go back a couple of slides Jamie [clears throat] to the uh grant?

Can I come up to the computer?

Yes. So that that's a very positive thing for us. Um there are very few counties that have landfills. Um so we are a big target for folks particularly when they want to hand out money. Um it's also a terrible thing that Helen hit, but it's also been very beneficial to us because of availability that that has for us to apply for that money. Um, fortunately we have some projects that are almost shovel ready to go, which will look good for us. Southwestern Commission is helping us put that packet together. Um, we've had a lot of questions about Carson, and you see Carson on there. Um, obviously we may have to wait another little time period to make sure we get this back, but it would certainly be beneficial to the taxpayers if we were to be able to receive funding to pay for Carson completely from another source. Um, same thing with the the back of the RPC building or this equipment. uh because you saw that some of that equipment on the other slide back there, but if you can if you can pay for it out of this fund somehow that helps us so that we're not having to worry about the tipping fees and bailability fees. Um so I think that's a a wonderful thing that we're trying to explore that. Um and we'll just have to we're we're very close to getting some numbers finalized. Um that grant has to be in I think January 31st. like you can turn it in earlier and they can accept it earlier.

Yes, that that's the good thing is the sooner we get it in, the sooner we get in line and we we get some of those funds. So, we're going to do everything possible to try and pull those funds back in. Um the other thing I don't I don't want to talk too much about it, but obviously um if you go back to the very first couple slides, you don't have to go back, but we talked about some of the funds that we've already spent on the current process for the landfill, the fees, and other things. uh part of the financing package is to reimburse ourselves for those because that came out of our fund balance. Well, then that puts it back into our fund balance that we can address some of those equipment needs. Uh which again is part of the financial plan that we'll do with Davenport and McGill. We've actually talked to them about helping us work out a business plan for that to get where you need to be with those decisions, particularly when we come into budget time. [clears throat]

I talked a whole lot. You you do a great job. [laughter] Great job. Can you repeat all that? I learned a lot about trash. It's very interesting, by the way. [laughter] So, uh yes, my my recommendation would be tonight would to be approve that findings resolution to send it to the local government commission to request approval of a not to exceed $10.5 million [clears throat] funding package for a 10-year term. Can you go back to option two? I think that information what you're talking about there. Yes, sir. The finance and detail. Yeah.

So, I'd like to make a motion that uh the finance and detail the web Webster Bank proposal financing option 2- NTE 10.5 million comma 10-year term. Make that is a motion to approval of the findings res findings resolution to submit to the LGC. All right. [clears throat] I hear a motion by Commissioner Shields. I'll second that motion. Second by Commissioner Shur. Any further discussion? I don't want to get too far into this. I do have a couple questions. But first, um, [clears throat] do you mind if Miguel comes up just in case you need him? [laughter]

Yeah. A lot of these unfortunately are directed to you. Oh, okay. But it's okay. Come on now, Mr. McGill. So, why do we have postclosure fees on a transfer station? Um, that is something DEEQ requires. And

yeah, they came in a couple years ago when they made you have to do a full inspection of all the transfer stations and report any insufficiencies in any indefiencies in that at all. As well as we thought the same thing when we heard it. It's a building. But you I mean what they're saying is is you don't just leave and leave a building. You're going to tear it down or you're going to close it up or you're going to do something. So are you going what are you going to do with that building? Uh you don't want a vacant building just standing there once you're done with your solid waste process. So you know you they're suggesting you have to close it up and you have to you know seal up the septic tanks and the sewer system and all those things. So

it's not I don't think it's necessarily money you're going to be spending in postclosure. I think it's just a liability that they want you to fund essentially. So if you have that transfer station, they want you to have prove that you have $20,000. So if you close that transfer station, you could then take care of any postclosure cost that you may have. So would that be fair to say? It's not necessarily [clears throat] that's how much you're going to be paying. So big picture, right? The image you showed of the landfill itself the Tennessee [clears throat] River borders. Sure. On the northern side, like we're geographically isolated. Like what is the capacity? Like what's our duration long term on the landfill? Like the whole landfill.

Um so I pro what do we 30 years is where we're at. So that is the only place we can put a landfill. They did a study back whenever they first started phase three of development 12 13 and and there is no other place in Mon County for a landfill. So we're talking 30 years and I feel like we heard that before before CO hit and co you heard 50 to 60 years before CO hit. Okay. So now we're at 30 in five years. Correct.

I guess my concern is to Mr. Cape's point about the hybrid approach. The hole is only so big, right? So that's why I like the transfer thought because maybe we transfer, you know, a quarter, half, maybe 3/4 or all of our debris for 5, 10, 15 years and keep our capacity, right? But I understand you have to run a landfill and you have employees, but within your budget, is there a way to to to find a balance where we can prolong the life of our landfill and and transfer a set amount, you know, every [clears throat] year?

Not currently. Now, when Davenport looks at this, when we're talking about that hybrid model, that is something they're going to look at. And like when we looked at the transfer station and and having to halt, now I have all of those numbers. So, I can give Davenport those numbers. They're numbers we didn't have before. And so, now I have that $33 per ton for disposal and the $30 per ton for hauling. [clears throat] So those are numbers that Davenport can now take forward and and see if we do have the money for that going forward. Okay. So last question and I've talked about this for 5 years, but do you know what it costs to grind mulch in our landfill every year? Does that Uhhuh.

is that neutral? Um the tip is pretty it's pretty close and it's going to go [clears throat] up. I just feel like we shouldn't take Is there a statute that makes us take mulch at our landfill? Um, we there is not not that I'm aware of. I know Klay County does not take mulch. There's independent contractors out here that would that would repurpose that, sell it back to the community for mulch, and we don't have to touch it. We don't have to grind it. We don't have to store it. I mean, there's thousands, tens of thousands of yards sitting in the Highlands, sitting in Franklin, we don't need to touch and it's a fire hazard.

I would rather not touch it. But we do use it down here at the landfill for 50/50 cover. [clears throat] We mix it with dirt and we cover our landfill for it with it. We also use it on our slopes for stability. So, we do have a use for it down here. I don't know if it's worth the cost. We have an excessive surplus. We sure do, especially after that's the problem. Chris used to tell me that and I believed it the first couple of times, but the pile keeps getting bigger. So, my point is, is there a way to set up with a contractor if he were to put in certified scales that we can just say mulch goes over here? We're not taking stumps. I'm sorry. Brush, stumps, logs, organic debris. I don't know. Would they be able to do that on landfill property?

Not [clears throat] on landfill property. Completely different independent contractors. And I think we have one of those here, right? And so I'm not opposed to it. Okay. But it is just a service we have provided. I don't know how much they charge for it, but just just a few thoughts. So, I think that's really all I had for you. Jackson County, don't they sell that the I don't think we're allowed to sell it, but I think Well,

they I I'm not sure if they sell it. I know they at least give it away. So, in order to be able to do that, you have to not take bulk leaves. So, we would just have to say we don't accept leaves and then people could come take it. I'm not sure how much interest there would be, honestly, to to take that type of mulch. It's not great mulch, I'll say. to use it all the time in Highlands in the landscaping [clears throat] business until the landfill stopped us from using it. And um um but you know I see that mulch leaving Highlands um uh going to nurseries and places. Um, so it's my understanding that it's not supposed to.

Well, it is I know I'm just actually and so, um, I'm like, uh, the chairman, if there's a way to privatize that, it would it'd be a lot less expense on the landfill. It wouldn't I think all that would take would be the board basically stating that we don't accept that anymore and we would take that out of our fee schedule and we just wouldn't accept it. There's there's no Well, I mean obviously I think you have to have a plan for it before you before you do that or you're going to have problems.

No. And last comment, I just I worry about the equity and the leverage and the cost. If we're going to be, you know, leveraging 10 years pretty much at at at max budget, what are we going to do in 12 years, you know, in 15 years? I mean, it's like we're we're never going to get ahead. And and that's that's the the beauty of Davenport is hopefully they'll they'll shoot that out 10 years and and kind of kind of show you that scope. But

I I had that concern, too. Um, but I'm I guess I'm looking at it. It is a business. It's an enterprise budget. Um, we're not going to make any money. We're going to break even. But I would be okay if we could figure out how to break even over a 10-year period. Um, the thing that scares me is if we go with the smaller cell or we look at some other options, um, we're at the mercy 100% at some of these other companies. some of the rates that were proposed were astronomical, uh, which would be terrible for us to have to put on the table of our taxpayers. Um, I agree.

So, I think the educated approach that we're trying to ease into is a good plan for us. Um, we we may not hit all the answers, may not have all the solutions, but but we're sure going to point it in a direction to try and get you everything that you want.

Yeah. right now. I mean, and Jaime's presentation showed you that hauling today is more expensive than the landfill. Confident of that. Uh you don't know what that will be in the future. That that's the biggest thing. So, if you did go [clears throat] that route, you'd have to have a long-term contract. So building another thing uh there is some uh you know opportunity to gain some to get ahead or gain some on it. Once we get cell three and sell four, you're going to get a lot of bang for your buck for sale three and sell four. Yes, construction continues to go up, right? Uh but when you get three and four, you're instead of having this small cell and then we got another cell out here. Now you're going to have a cell that that geometrically is going to allow you to build on top of it. You're going to get a lot more airspace out of cell three and four than you did one and two. See what I'm saying?

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. No, Jamie, I think you did a great job. Thanks for being here tonight. Thank you. All right. [clears throat] We have a motion and a second on the floor. Any further discussion? All right. Hearing none. All in favor, please signify by raising your right arm, stating, "I I." Any oppose? All right. Tammy, please let the record reflect 50. [cough and clears throat] All right. New business. Discussion and consideration of resolution for a referendum concerning a quarter cent sales tax. Manager K.

So, Mr. Chairman, in your packet, you do have a draft resolution. The board has talked about this several times about the quarter cent sales tax. Uh, it's previously been voted on twice and it's been discussed here a couple of times. So, in your packet, if you do want to consider trying to put that on to the ballot for a third time, that resolution is there. Uh, it is the quarter cent sales tax increase. Um, one of the things that you would need to decide, uh, first of all, what election would you want to have that included in? Your choice would be the primary election in 2026 or the general election in 2026. Um the resolution that Eric drafted also has some u space there that you can either designate the funds for a certain purpose or you make that decision later on after it's after it's approved if it is approved uh put on the ballot. Um that could obviously change. I will caution the board that if you do uh were to decide to include what you wanted that purpose to be in that resolution, that doesn't necessarily hold future boards to that. They can they can obviously change that. Um and then the other question that that a lot of times folks will ask it it does not apply to to unprepared food and g which are groceries or gasoline purchases. It doesn't apply to that. Uh and the estimates that were done in 2024, and we can obviously rerun these, but uh the estimate at the time was that quarter centers local option sales tax would generate about $2.3 million annually uh in additional sales tax revenue. So, we just wanted to put that up for discussion tonight,

general discussion. 2.3 million was the estimate in 2024. Um there were some other figures run on a on a $25 purchase it would result in a six cent increase. Um on a $100 purchase it would in end up being a 25 cent increase just as some examples. Chairman, at this time I'd like to make a motion that um we place the uh resolution for ref referendum concerning quarter cent sales tax on the November 26 general election ballot. Second.

I hear a motion by Commissioner Sher and [clears throat] second by Commissioner Shields. Any further discussion? So, the discussion I would have is there is a blank on there that you can specify for a purpose or you can not fill that blank in. Uh, Mr. Gossip, I believe that's how it's written correctly. So, we would need to know, do you want a purpose on there for the resolution or do you want to leave it blank for now?

I I I think there's a point in time you have to put that purpose on there for the for the voters. Uh we the last time that we we uh voted on this we had it specified for the capital part of the school system and u but but I think what what that does it's needed but but it's singleton makes a singleton piece out of something like for the school system but you have the senior citizens you have a number of other uh and I think you probably mentioned some of those that we need to make sure that we we can spread this monies out to those some of those that you that you've talked about. Can you share some of that with

Well, obviously some of the space needs we have are the the senior center. Uh we we've looked at veteran services uh some space needs for them. Our our housing department has locations scattered in a lot of places. So obviously if I mean if you if you did not fill in that blank and you didn't specify a purpose, you could certainly talk about that in the budget process and and consecutive budget processes after that what you would use those funds for. So you could you could use that at your discretion and and we've obviously talked about one of the things we've talked about is the funding percentage for the schools. Um, we could we could obviously tie that back into a financial formula as we go into the budget process to meet the percentage if that's what you want to do coming up in the next couple budget years andor use those funds for other purposes.

I agree and I think that's a good point, Commissioner Shields. And also don't overlook phase two and phase three at the Robert C. Carpenter Center, you know, and correct. And there's a lot of lot of really We got a Hickden house, too. And a Hickden house. that we've got the center all kinds of stuff that's needed. So, we have a we have a motion and a second on the floor. Any other discussion? If you'll clarify that motion is to uh remove the the sections for the earmark. This is it sounds like there's a consensus of the board, but if we clarify that motion.

Yeah. Yes, sir. So, so to clarify the motion, um, we're going to select the referendum on the general 26 election at this time with no earmark of the phones. All right. Question. If we if we decided to change that between now and then, is that Are you talking about going to the primary? No, no, no. He's talking about ear marking the funds. I'm with I'm with you. I think somewhere along the line you have to earmark it or the voter won't be interested or they you know yeah I mean I mean you feel like there needs to be potentially some some direction for for folks to to know what what the plan is but I even if we don't

is it a possibility you know if we decide to change that in the ballot yeah there there are timeline requirements for the board of elections for publishing the ballot so based on your decision to go with the general election, you would have enough time. If we were looking at the primary, we would be we would have a time crunch, but uh based on the general election, you would have an opportunity. You would still have to consider that again in in the appropriate time to be able to have passed to go before the board election.

I think that you have potential for this face of this board to change drastically at the next general election. So therefore, if we did earmark it, then the as the manager said, that could certainly be changed by a future board. So that's good discussion. That's good.

All right. Any other discussion? All in favor, please raise your right arm or state I for the record. I Any oppose? All right, Miss Tammy. Uh 5 discussion and approval of resolution concerning potentially dangerous dogs. Manager Cape.

So, Mr. Chairman, uh we actually have a dangerous dog committee that reviews uh when animal control identifies or uh basically identifies a dog as being potentially dangerous. There's a committee that reviews that u decision that's made and that's the appeal process. uh and what happens is a person can appeal that to the dangerous dog committee and then depending on their decision they will then appeal it to the court system. Uh in that process of doing one of those recently uh we discovered that when that uh resolution was first drafted uh the three members on that committee were a were the sheriff u a designate from the board of commissioners and it had a person on there by name uh specific name and that's not real conducive when that person no longer works for Mon County anymore. So we we really needed to change that resolution. So it was a position instead of a person by name. So the recommendation that we had and we've we've obviously this will affect the the health board as well uh was to change that resolution to state it would be the Mon County Sheriff or his designate uh a member of the board of commissioners which you would appoint uh and then a member of the board of health or now the consolidated health services a health services agency designated by the chairman of the board of health or consolidated health services agency. Uh, and that'll take out the issue of having a person on there by name and then the the health board can appoint that person there.

All right. And being the leison on to the dangerous dog board, I'd like to go ahead and make a motion we approve the corrections or additions, the red lettering, I guess what I'm going to say that's within the dog ordinance here, dog, dangerous dog, potentially dangerous dog in Mon County, North the resolution there. Go ahead and adopt [clears throat] this as presented. I hear a motion by Commissioner Shields, second by Commissioner Breeden. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please signify by raising your right arm, stating I. Any opposed?

All right, Miss Tammy. 50. Thank you. All right. Discussion and consideration of contract for the recruitment of social services director uh DSS director, Mr. Patrick Bettincourt. Good evening, gentlemen. Good evening, Patrick. Reminded by Commissioner Breeden that uh I'm cutting into your Thursday night football, so I'll try to be brief as best I can.

Um I have the pleasure tonight of coming before you to talk a little bit about succession planning at the Department of Social Services. And I'll just kind of go through a few key points. uh you had a rather lengthy document in your packet uh that if you get a chance to take a look at and uh kind of lays out um what I'm going to be talking about a little bit more detail. Uh so transition uh planning for um my upcoming retirement in May of 2026 began in January of this year uh with the development of a budget that would allow and support the overlap of the the new director coming on board. um and myself for about four months. Um at the same time, the board of social services voted to engage uh the same firm that was used when um former director Jane Kinsey retired and I was appointed to that position. Uh so developmental associates is the organization that we're talking about. The board of social services voted to engage developmental associates in assisting in the selection process for the new director. We put forward a budget request uh with non-recurring funds to cover the engagement of that that that budget request was not approved at the time. Um but because we have uh some significant laps salary regrettably because we have significant laps salary at the department of social services and also through some conservative contract amending um contract management u we've been able to find the dollars to be able to support the engagement of developmental associates. Um, we'd like to go ahead and begin that process and once we engage developmental associates, we'll ask them to provide a a billing on a per uh step basis. You

saw in your packet that that is this is a multi-step process. And while the amount that they're asking for for this engagement is not insignificant, it's a fairly large sum of money. Um, I think there's plenty of support to um, plenty of reasons why I could justify using those funds to engage this firm for making such a momentous decision. Just a reminder that contracts uh, through the Department of Social Services, sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly, are reimbursed roughly on a 50% basis. Every time I use that figure, my business officer cringes a little bit, but that's generally around the amount of reimbursement we get on those types of contracts. Um, and you'll see in your um proposal packets that Development Associates has laid out a a fairly lengthy um time frame for engagement around 75 days. Um and so if we're looking at some multilap um multimonth overlap u we would want to go ahead and begin that process as quickly as possible. Um ideally would love to have um the next person named by February of 2026 so that there can be some planning and some um onboarding if you will between that individual and myself. Um, and I'm happy to answer any questions about the recommendation, about our process. I'm happy to kind of answer as many questions I possibly can about the engagement with developmental associates.

Patrick, I've never seen anything this indepth 75 hours to read it.

It is a fairly indepth proposal and I it covers a lot of different pieces. I think probably two of the pieces that I would really call your attention to I think is really important to focus in on is one it goes way beyond just an interview with an individual. It goes very indepth into both hard and soft skill analysis. Does this person understand what it takes to develop a budget? Does it do they understand what it means to present a budget? Do they have the ability to come up here and present a budget um to you guys? It looks at um it incorporates also what I like about this process, it also incorporates that local stakeholder um input. So it's not just one or two people in Mon County making this determination. The the assessment process actually looks at engaging several folks. Actually, the time I did it uh back in 2015, there was actually a commissioner on the uh during the uh assessment process. So, it looks at making sure that folks in the community have input into the assessment process and get a chance to kind of say what's important to them in their next social services director.

Patrick, I'd have to um um I don't know if you're aware of what the uh health board did with u Miss Keyser and some of the um [clears throat] county staff. Um, as a health board member, we voted to select a committee Mhm.

to start the process of hiring a new health director. Um, and through that process um I think um that committee and some of the county staff did a phenomenal job um with interviews and everything else. I won't go into details um but um we as health board members were actually um able to see all these interviews and to pay a firm where where did you come from? Came from originally came from Raleigh Braley area.

Okay. This firm where did they hire you from? Oh, I came before from Union County. So they found you in Union County to replace Jane Kim. Yes, sir. Okay. Um, and so Miss Kimzy is a native of of Mon County and and I I appreciate what they've presented and the work that they do, but I think we as a county have absolutely fantastic staff to um to be able to hire or at least go through the process. And if we can't,

then I think we should um then we could certainly go into them. But um I'm sure uh some of the committee members that did the interviews for the health board would like to have been paid what this company wanted. Sure. And so um I mean I appreciate it. I mean um you you know the department of social services is uh you know you guys do wonderful work and u but I just I can't I couldn't support paying that without seeing what's out there.

Sure. The beauty of this is that individuals in the who the individuals who are local who are interested in the uh process or interested in the position have just as much opportunity to be a part of that process apply for it just like anyone else that that this firm might actually go out and specifically target. There's there's it's multimodal. So they get to do it kind of both ways. And just just so I'm make sure I want to I want to be real clear about this. This firm does not actually do the hiring. That still falls to the board of social services. This firm just simply takes the candidates that do come in for the position, puts them through a series of assessment processes that again, incredibly indepth process and then provides that information to the board to make that determination. I'd like for your board to go through the same process as the health board and select a committee from the health board members, get with some of the county staff and u come up with a job description and put it out there and see who see if there are interest without costing the taxpayers any more money.

Yeah, the this proposal actually requires that the board has to engage in that kind of process where the the entire board has to provide job descriptions. They have to provide what they're looking for. So they'll have to engage in that process in order to make that happen. That's any other comments.

Well, I I guess where do we go from here? I feel like Patrick's a little bit of a in a time crunch. Um, do we look at this group here, give them a yes or no maybe, and and go ahead and try to assemble another group that what John's talking about and go ahead and uh that would certainly be the board of social services um request is that we that we be given the go ahead to engage this firm and and and begin working on that process. When does your board meet again? We meet again uh November 21st.

I would like some information back from the board to see if you guys can form a committee um um and include some county staff to u to put it out there. I we have time. I mean, we we were in a crunch for the director of the health department and um and that's going to work out um January 13th, right? Is that when

that's a tenative date? Yes. So I mean and um and that process was wonderful and I think um uh the applicants were very professional qualified u people and the folks here locally [clears throat] had the same opportunity if they had the qualifications to fill out the application. So they were not denied the access to move forward um to move up into the director's position. So to me I can't I I can't pay a firm for what we have professionals here in this county to do. So that's that's just Mr. Bettin Court, let me work this backwards.

Sure. What's your estimated time to retire? It would be May 30th, 2026. Okay. So I think I might even have that letter on me if you need it. [laughter] Is that negotiable? And you would like to have what? A mentor for 90 days. I'd like to have at least a threemonth overlap. Yes, sir. So that puts us somewhere in February.

I feel like would it be appropriate to go ahead and and open this up? Maybe this is a question for HR and and [clears throat] propose what Commissioner Cheryl's asking. You know, just just try it locally. you know, maybe we open it up for 60 days and if we don't have good engagement, good feedback, we engage with the firm. And uh can I can I say one thing to that? Um and we can't obviously don't want to get into too many details, but when we did that with the health board, it wasn't we weren't just targeting local people. I mean, we had applicants from the West Coast, Northeast. I mean, it was it wasn't just local folks. I mean, we can I feel like I'm kind of agreeing with John on that. You know, you it takes time. It takes, you know, an effort to do it, but but we put the time in and um we had some really good candidates from all over this country and some that even served outside of this country. So,

been all over the world actually. So, I think it I mean to me it would be worth, you know, I mean I know it's 24 $26,000 to do that, but it'd be worth to me to try to see what we could accomplish in in that month time frame or whatever it takes to to post that job and do some interviews. And I think um Mr. Kezer did a good job u giving us information on what we could propose to a a client uh questions and those type things. Um whether it was to Mr. Cab and and when that job opened up we were able to do that. I'm I'm going to plead ignorant. I don't know all your all this stuff that we need to be asking somebody. How do we come up with the questions? Uh, and you had those questions when we were interviewing for our county manager, but there's got to be some this this company here is very detailed in their questions. I don't know what they're asking. So, how do we get something [clears throat] that would give us so well where we could go over like we did for the county manager? Is is there a detailed thing and we could look at it?

We did a similar process with the health director um interview questions. The board of health reviewed those, discussed those. We have um guidelines from different national organizations that we can pull from and look at. So we can we can come up with that just like we did with the county manager position director. That's your that was real important for us. The interview process for the health director was absolutely topnotch. And guess what? It didn't cost taxpayers any money other than the hours and hours and hours that was put into it. But

um but um I think we I think we have staff here and with your board um and with your direction um that I believe we can handle this um without an outside agency. Sure. I I have no problem with taking the information back to my board and and act and and seeing what their preference would be. I'm at a little bit of a have to admit I'm a little bit of an uncomfortable spot because ultimately I don't get to make that determination. Respectfully, you guys don't get to make that determination that the social services board is the one who ultimately gets to make the determination of who they hire in this. And

that's correct. And and so I along with that, I think they also get a strong sense of how they want to go about that process. And so while I don't mind taking this back to them and and having that conversation with them, I I just want to point out this is the direction that they voted to go. I again, I think I we I'll make sure to link this meeting so that they can hear the conversation and they can take that under consideration. Um, I guess I'm just a little bit um I don't know that I'm here to ask permission to do this because I think that ultimately that's the social services board. Who's going to spend the money? The agency will

the agency. And where did the money come from? It it came from the the county taxpayers. Yes, sir.

So, the ultimately the county taxpayers has the upper hand on who and when we spend money. And it is wrong, Patrick, to have money spent in this county that we don't have to spend. I understand you can hire professionals, agencies, and everything else, but at least the DSS board ought to be willing to give us a chance to do this with their help, with your guidance, with HR, with the county manager. Ultimately, you guys are the ones that make the decision on who is hired. But my deal is we have to save money every chance we get. And and this is one of those opportunities that we can do the right thing. And and I may eat my words.

Sure. We may have to hire this firm, but I think it's worth the opportunity to let the county staff that we pay handle this.

And and you I have no argument against you're 100% correct, M. Commissioner Sher that ultimately it is this board's responsibility to be fiscally conservative and we can debate whether or not that's a a good use of that money. I I I will just just to give a counter proposal. I will say when hiring mistakes are made, they can be incredibly costly. I I think you can look down the road and look in Cherokee County where they were required to raise their millage rate by 11 cents to cover a 27 and a4 million lawsuit payout. That's county dollars. That's that's also very significant money. And a large part of why they had to pay that out was they made a wrong hiring decision based on the experience of an individual. So I don't disagree with what you're saying at all. I I I hear you that you're right. The taxpayers have ultimately the upper hand. And what I would counter your your statements with is this is our best attempt to make sure that we don't have to pay out a significantly larger sum.

And I respect that. Thank you. And I respect the professionalism of you and your career. Thank you. And the and the DSS board. There is nothing about me that wants to show any disrespect or not appreciation for that board. appreciate ultimately they are the ones that's going to vote, right? But this county has 600 employees, right? I mean, I think that's somewhere in that neighborhood. I didn't hire those people, right? The county manager and the county HR did. So, I think they have some type of professionalism to do this

without paying [clears throat] this amount of money. And and and don't take it the wrong way. I'm just looking at every every way possible to make sure that we are running the most effective and efficient government for the taxpayers and the citizens of this county and and so if we can save this amount of money, sure, I want to do it. I hear you and I and I understand and and I believe the board would agree with you and um and want to be responsible in that regard as well. So again, I'm I'm happy to take this back to them, let them have some conversation and and maybe even have an opportunity to speak

directly with this board about what their what their desire is. I was not on the committee to select and do the applicants um for the health board. I did watch it um and they did an outstanding job from what they did. It was amazing. Good. And I believe you and your board with the help of some of the other staff that worked through the health director process will be equally as professional. I'm happy to take that back to the board. Thank you. Sure. My pleasure. Let me let me [clears throat] recap. Go ahead. No, go ahead.

I was just going to say I want to recap. You know, this company has a good track record. Obviously yourself. Um, I think what uh Commissioner Shuryl is is proposing is we open it up, see what happens. If we don't get any good feedback, we engage with this firm. And uh, you have a wonderful board professionals. Let's let's see what they say to that. Yeah. I didn't even know there was a DSS board and a DSS director cuz we never hear from you. It's absolutely wonderful. I I don't not sure how to take that, Commissioner Sherlock. [laughter] I think I'm going to take that as a compliment, but uh we do exist. Just FYI. Well, Patrick, I appreciate everything you've done, you know, in this position. Thank you.

You've obviously done a really good job. I've had a chance to work with you. Um I do trust your recommendation on that. It makes sense. I get it. Um but we'll follow this way. Sounds like a plan. But I think your board has to give us the direction on what they're looking for. M [clears throat] in a director and all that other stuff. So I think you guys have to compile all this information for us to put it out there. So if you can do it at your next meeting and then maybe get with the county HR or whatever and so and or maybe the uh in her uh spare time she could probably

I understand she's got a lot of free time. [laughter] She could join in with you guys and and and get it together. We want the best of uh but I think our people can handle it better. Yeah. Patrick, let me say one thing. Since I've worked with you, we've been together and worked in a lot of situations. Uh they have an opportunity to have seen the best. That's you. Oh, I was going to pass that along to to Miss Kimy.

Okay. But, uh, you you've been a you've been a person that's really, u been an example to that department. And I think if they'll keep that perspective in mind, uh, I'm not sure we'll duplicate a Patrick, but it'll be close. I would hope not. [laughter] Well, but I I've been really enjoyed working with you. Thank you, Commissioner Shield. I appreciate it. Last comment. Yes, sir. You know, I think we really appreciate, you know, your thoughts and and all this uh effort into your succession plan. You know, that shows incredible leadership skills and we do appreciate that. You know, you didn't have to do all this. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Bring the champagne.

Uh May 20 30th. May 30th. 5:30. Thanks. Thank you. All right. Moving on. 11D [sighs] Fontana Regional Library Interlocal Agreement Manager Cade.

So, Mr. Chairman, uh I was presented with an amendment to the Fontana Regional Library uh agreement uh from Jackson County. One of the things that they had requested was to some things for this board to consider. Uh and I'll summarize the the changes to the agreement. Basically, they're basically three of them that are in your packet. Um the first change or change to the amendment that they wanted to consider changing uh had to do with the membership of the uh board of trustees of Fontana Regional Library System. Uh they had proposed that one of those members be a sitting member of the uh current board of commissioners, one from each of the counties. Uh the second change that was suggested [clears throat] uh and again this is a summary is that the regional director would devote full effort to the Fontana Regional Library System and not serve a dual role as a director in a a county library system or another comparable system. Uh and then the third uh change that was recommended in that amendment uh had to do with the financial aspect. at the end of the year, any any uh remaining funds in excess of operational costs uh that had been uh allocated by the county, if if those are left over, those would be returned back to the uh uh the counties. Uh any leftover funds. Um so that that's basic basically a [clears throat] summary of what Jackson County was asked that we consider. Uh Jackson County will actually hold a meeting on that. I believe it's next week for their consideration of that. Um, I would also like to remind the board, Mr. Goss and I have looked at the uh the interlocal agreement that you entered into and it's our interpretation that you can consider that tonight. You can discuss it if you want to. Uh, but the at least at the earliest that you could actually vote on that would be at least the December meeting uh to meet

the 30-day time frame that's in there. Um, so we just wanted to present that to you as information from the uh from Jackson County, a proposal from them for your consideration and for you to decide either whether you want to consider that further or not and discuss it.

I I'd like to say something on on this. Um, when you put three commissioners together, one from one county, one from another county, one from other, having been the high school principal, I'd like to know who the other principal or who the other commissioners are going to be cuz we know what Smoky Mountain Conference is and I don't want to go into a Fontana Regional Library and sit in there fight or the with the other coaches or whoever it may be and and verbally or physically, but but I think you're you're not getting anything. And you'd have to know when you say Smoky Mountain Conference, the interactions we've had, positive and negative. Uh, and if you've got people who are commissioners, I'm I'm a principal and and I can tell you that the interactions there's some people I would probably have a if they propose something, they were a commissioner and let's say they're a former coach, [clears throat] something comes into me saying I'm not buying into that. So I think when you have three commissioners there, remember Swain, Smoky Mountain, Franklin, we've been brothers and sisters forever uh in war and peace. And when you uh you you got a situation here, I'm going to pick on him, is that when we walk into a gymnasium somewhere, if if we're not doing what their commissioners want,

you can become a target. and he's got a young man that's a sophomore that he he doesn't need this. But but there there's some high anxiety of within me of knowing who the commissioners are at the other two counties. Gary Shields would not be a good commissioner to be on this board. uh 21 years of positive and negative interaction. It I have feelings and and they do too. And so, but when you you put three commissioners together, one from each county, I don't want us to be the be the conversation piece. I don't I don't want to talk about winning when Josh played back there 20 years ago or what the last night what we did over in in Smoky Mountain or Swain and basketball football. I don't want to get in that conversation. But it's a natural movement that way and then all of a sudden your your Fonttown Regional Library is the second piece of the conversation, not the first piece. I just want to put that out there because when I first read this, I said three commissioners from the Smoky Mountain Conference that are in the Smoky Mountain Conference, even two of the commissioners counting us and we're in the same conference now. And so I just want to just be aware that I I'm just I don't feel comfortable with with three commissioners being on the board because it's I know I know a former commissioner from Swain Swain County. Good person. Uh I know one that's from Jackson County that's a commissioner. Uh

[clears throat] all good people. But we've um we've had our days and I I just don't want it to start being a hindrance against the Fontana Regional Library, our our conversations and those type things like that. I'd like to have somebody there that's clearheaded, clear board and can see the whole thing and not get caught up in other conversations. Joe Allen like u uh I've seen you act up there and I've had within these type things it happens and it it hard it's it's it's a lasting thing especially if you're in the schools and uh in administration part of it and that I just when I read through that was my nervous piece that you're putting three people with a certain degree of power back in the same arena Uh, I can't swear it won't come out the same way as we've been in before. And y'all know what I'm talking about.

Well, um, I was going in a very different direction. [laughter] Yeah, but you you have to train. I mean, I would hope over with the library we don't have to go to war. [laughter] Apparently, we got to make sure at these meetings Mr. Joe Allen is not present. [laughter] Um, this one's close, too.

My uh my only concern in this was a lot of the times that we've had the meetings for the Lefont for the FRL, they've been on the same nights as our meetings and that that's a major conflict because especially when the meetings are all the way in Nan Hala, you know, I've done that a couple of times and there's no it's just not possible. You can't keep doing that. So my recommendation would be to first of all change the days of the meeting so where it doesn't conflict with ours. Um but I definitely didn't consider the piece that Mr. Shields just brought up. So you know we'll navigate through that I guess as peacefully as possible. And again um Mr. Joe Allen we need you to not be present during [laughter] these meetings. Would it be possible, Mr. Antoine, to have alternate commissioners to serve on that board? Because there will be I mean, if this is the path forward, it will be absolutely critical

that a commissioner from each county is at this at each one of the meetings. I think we absolutely need to have a voice there and I I hadn't considered that. It's a good idea to alternate that as we go. Um but again that would that be an issue about changing the time for the meetings or the days? No, we talked about that last night. Okay. We can change the bylaws that that state when the Awesome. I do like Commissioner Shaw's idea of rotating uh the commissioners. A lot of that's a lot of traveling and a lot of it's a lot commitment to

It is Mr. Goss. I think you're you're looking at an appointment to a board and so it's not it wouldn't be a seat that rotates. There would be one commissioner being appointed. There would certainly be terms to that and [clears throat] so you could th the this board could change who that person is on that rotation schedule, but it would be one individual appointed. It would be very difficult for the Fontana Regional Library Board to be able to conduct its business if it was every time had a new commissioner to get up to speed as to what the issue of the day was. That that would make it difficult. So, the intent certainly with their bylaws would be one appointment

and I'll be glad obviously uh Jackson County submitted this information to us and of course library folks are here as well. I'll be glad to take kind of take the comments that you've had tonight and if you have any more relay that back to them so they'll have that for consideration as well to make sure that information gets back to them for your concerns or any information that you've brought out tonight. Sounds good. All right. Any other comments?

All right. Library, you guys good? Mr. McGath, any comments? U up until 2006 uh we had a full-time director and it was budget that college become a librarian to serve in both positions supposedly full time which is impossible. Um so the funding for the additional cost of a full-time employee would be an issue for me and I think some others on the board. Uh we did not discuss anything last night other than the fact that the conflict in the scape of dates. Um I gave the information and we will discuss and vote on it at our next meeting which is January 13th.

Okay. Thank you sir. Thank [clears throat] you. All right. Moving on. Consent agenda. Motion to approve the consent agenda. Here a motion by Commissioner Breeden. Second. Second by Commissioner Antoine. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please signify by raising your right arm stating I.

I. Any oppose? I miss Tammy. The reckon plate 50, please. Um, appointments. We have a couple. Um, one seat the jury commission. Manager Cape. Yeah, I'll I'll introduce this one. Uh we were approached by Clark Spirior Court Shauna Lamb that she actually has a jury commission that looks over the the names and determines uh eligibility for jury duty. Uh she has requested an appointment to that committee uh for her, which is Miss Pam Edward, uh who's actually a current Megan County employee, but actually going to be retiring by the time this takes place. Uh we actually had a discussion. Normally we will advertise for appointments but she is an elected official so we felt like it was pertinent to present the name to you that that she had suggested and picked for that position for your consideration. [clears throat]

All right gentlemen motion to approve. Hear a motion by Commissioner Breeden. Second by Commissioner Shur. Any discussion? All in favor please raise your right arm. State I. Any oppose? All right. Five. Miss Tammy, where you scratched the planning board? Um item C, community advisory committee, two seats.

So I will um talk about that one. So this committee, the community advisory committee, um is a link to the long-term care facilities, nursing homes in the county. Um this is um positioned for folks who have to go through what I understand is a pretty rigorous state training and approval process. um they go into uh nursing homes quarterly. They visit with the residents there to look at um the living conditions there if they're satisfied with their care um any complaints, those kinds of things and work with the facility staff if needed um as well as the licensing entities that come in and um make those visits. So um they um these folks go through the training the once they pass the test and the training then the state makes a recommendation um back to the region that that's happened and it is a statutory requirement that the commissioners bless those appointments. Um so there are two individuals who have been going through that training. They've actually been going through that training I believe for over a year when they first reached out to us to give us a heads up that this was going to be coming. Um and um you have those applications in your packet. Um and that is the recommendation to go ahead and appoint those two people. And it is um Miss Sandra Hooper um and Richard Brady. Motion to approve.

Motion by Commissioner Breeden. Second. Second by Commissioner Antoine. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please raise your right arm. State I. I. Any oppose. All right, Miss Tammy. 5. All right, Mr. Goss, I do understand we have a brief close session. That is correct. So, the motion to enter close session uh pursuing North Carolina General Statute 143-31811 subsection 5 to establish or instruct the public body staff or negotiating agents concerning the position to be taken by or on behalf of the public body and negotiating the amount of compensation other material terms of an employment contract or proposed employment contract.

Thank you, sir. I need a motion. No, I'm sorry. I need I have a motion by Commissioner Breeden, a second by Commissioner Shuro. I'm sorry. Any further discussion? All in favor, please raise your right arm. State I I wonder. Thank you. Is there going to be any

All in favor raise your right arm say I thank you