City Council - Regular Meeting

Respect to the flags be led by Councilman Beatatric Thompson. Please rise. Let us pray. Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask for your wisdom and guidance as we begin the city council meeting. We thank you for the city and for the opportunity to serve as citizens. I ask that you please grant the mayor, my fellow council members and staff the discernment to understand the needs of this community and an ability to make righteous decisions for the common good. Help us to engage in meaningful and respectful discussion and to work together with a spirit of integrity and service. We ask that you guide our thoughts and actions so that we may govern justly and bring about order, stability, and prosperity for this community. In your name we pray. Amen.

Amen. ledge 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.

The minutes of our October 27th meeting have been distributed. Are there any corrections or additions to those meetings minutes? We approve those minutes. First by Mr. Steel. Second by Mr. John Roberts. All those in favor say I. Opposed. The minutes of October 27th pass unanimously. We have one item of old business and that item is request second reading of ordinance 25-17 to establish a special tax assessment for rehabilitated historical historic properties. Mr. Mchuan,

Mr. Strickland, thank you. Uh Mr. Mcuin, mayor and council, uh what you have before you is a request for second reading of an ordinance you considered uh at the last meeting, last city council meeting and passed unanimously. Uh we made a couple of tweaks to that ordinance um and I'll go over those here. Um uh this ordinance would adopt a special tax assessment for historic rehabs uh throughout the city. Um state law uh refers to this uh this process, this ability for local governments to do this as the Bailey bill. Uh several other communities around the state have used this successfully uh as kind of a lynch pin, a backbone to their uh historic rehab programs. Um, essentially what it does is it would freeze uh the assessed value of a project for a period uh and and I'll get to the tiers in just a second for a period for for a length of the incentive. Um, essentially what that does and how it differs from the normal process. Uh essentially when a a project is completed, a a certificate of occupancy is is issued, tax assessor comes out and reassesses the property at its current value. Um and then that undoubtedly rises and a lot of times that that provides a um a cash flow difficulty, an uncertainty for um commercial projects, for income producing projects for the first uh five years, 10 years, 15 years even um of uh of the life the lifespan of that project. And so essentially what the Bailey bill and what our proposed assessment would do would freeze that tax assessment for a period of time based on the level of investment that is undertaken. Um we had some some comments uh from council members. believe Council Martinez mentioned this uh previously that um we need to take a little closer look at the the the terms the the period

the the tiers the the period of investment um and so we we actually you'll notice that change in in your drafts you have in your packet. We increased those by two years to account for the the construction period two-year construction period. Uh so we moved instead of um a fiveyear period that the base tier we we increased it to seven and so on and so on. Uh but those tiers uh again I mentioned are based on level of investment. For any project under uh $2 million uh there'd be a seven-year uh freeze of the assessment. Uh for any project between two and $5 million there' be a 12-year assessment or 12-year freeze. And for any project uh over $5 million be a 17-year freeze. Happy to answer any questions. Um, I I will say I believe a couple council members have received a couple of emails from the public essentially requesting to um uh lengthen the period of time uh uh lengthen the term kind of change the the tiers uh essentially make the make the incentive a little bit richer. Um, our proposal uh based on on previous discussion has been to and it really hits that at how the city of Anderson approaches incentives um across the board for any project uh is we really don't want to over incentivize a project ever. Um anytime we're we we offer an incentive, the city of Anderson is dealing with taxpayer money. We're dealing with public funds and so we have to make sure we we account for that and and handle those appropriately. And so um our approach has always been and and very successfully I will say um has been to finally tune and tailor the incentive to the level of investment. So we want to make sure that we have the um the appropriate uh just enough incentive uh to spur capital investment. Um obviously if you don't put enough

incentive together sometimes that investment doesn't happen. Uh, so you have to put just enough to to make that u to make the to use a pajorative term, the the the rabbit bite the carrot, right? You have to have an attractive enough carrot in front of that rabbit to to have that project be successful. So, um, so we've chosen this tiered approach and I think it's going to be successful. um you know and and honestly the good the good thing too about having a a smaller incentive on the on the front end um is if say we're not getting the the pace of uh pace of projects the pace of redevelopment that we're expecting we can always add to that and and make that incentive a little bit richer if we need to in the future. Um however if you if you start high you can't it's hard to roll that back. You can't really roll that back. Um so uh happy to answer any questions again. Um but staff does recommend approval on the second read.

Great. I appreciate it. Um we had good discussion at our last meeting where we approved it on the the first um reading in regards to um the comments that we made and I'm appreciative of you council is appreciative of the team going back and changing those. But I'll open it up to an additional question. Mr. Do you

I just had clarification. I want to make sure I understood the end of what you said correctly. So if we determine, look, this isn't really helping these that redevelop these historic properties in the way that they want to spur that. We can revisit these tiers in the future. Of course. Yes.

Okay. Um well, with that, I you know, last time I asked some questions about timing. I I'm glad that we have this new guidance from this new administrative law opinion. Thank our council for working hard to find that and make sure that um this got before us. I'm thankful that staff has worked hard and again taking input from council and and the concerns that we have had uh to move this forward. I think um it is something that does provide that incentive as you said. I think we we have to be responsible with taxpayer money. We certainly want to encourage free market investment. Um right that that's our economic system. We want people to come in and say look I am going to put my capital here um because I think that it can work and I can make my money back in the long run. sometimes um particularly when we want to preserve these important historic uh landmarks that have been part of our community for a long time, preserve their historic integrity, um we do have to meet people in the middle. So, um with that and and knowing that we can revisit this if this doesn't provide the opportunities for investment um that that we need, uh I would um move that we pass this on Second reading with the amendments.

Second. I have a motion by Mr. Steel, second by Mr. Newton. Further discussion. Question. Mr. Stewart. I just want to make sure I understand the process that this would happen is David. Would they come to you first for preliminary certification or would they go to the bar first to get uh to make sure that it qualifies? I just want to make sure I understand what step comes first. Yeah, we we are designing an application online portal application for this and uh so we're putting that together now but um Andrew if you want to go through that process.

Yeah. No, absolutely. Um so uh the first step of the process would be um essentially like we do resoning referrals now city council to be an acknowledgement and approval by resolution of council uh that yes, this project qualifies. Uh and then it would go to the board of architectural review for preliminary certification. So, um, that's really essentially when the when the clock starts on the assessment freeze, uh, then, you know, assuming the board of architectural review approves the project and it qualifies, construction would then start, permits to be pulled, construction starts, uh, and then when construction is finished, uh, our staff and the board of architectural review performs that final certification um that essentially acknowledges, yes, you did what you said you were going to do and you spent the investment the way you said you would spend it.

So once the um uh once the bar board of architectural review approves it nothing comes back to us as done and contractor moves on our owner moves on rehabilitates. That's correct. That's correct. Yes sir. And I guess if there's any discrepancies as always we're dealing with V decision and approval they just follow the same judicial process to rectify those decisions. That's right. Mr. Roberts, Jeff, you mentioned that was a question you answered it actually. The clock starts when they apply, right? The clock starts on the preliminary certification.

All right. We historically have not extended incentives past 15 years. Why not start the clock or the five or the period of time after completion of the project and roll it back in 5, 10 or 15 years because the property hasn't acred any significant value during the construction period only after it's completely reassess completed?

Yeah, that's uh it's a good question. It's one that we asked last time. It's really and Mike and Brandon are here can answer any any detailed questions or pull me off stage if I answer this incorrectly, but um essentially it's just the way that the the state law was written that that preliminary certification starts or the the freeze starts at the preliminary certification. Um the the issue really is is us in in establishing this tiered approach. Um kind of creates an odd clock, if you will. Um uh we added council meeting last time, we added those two years to kind of account for that what would ultimately be that two-year flex time just to to lengthen that term to account for that, you know, the lag between the preliminary certification, the final certification. What financial gain would it be for the owner during those two years? Like Council Robert said, there's nothing that's really

meaningful that increase until the project's completed.

Yeah, it was a that's under construction. So the intent when we laid out the tiers the the 510 15 was to stabilize the cash flow of a a developer or building owner restoring a property that otherwise isn't cash flowing well or is projected not a cash flow for 5 10 15 years out. So, and then keeping in mind that they probably have a small business tenant coming in as well on the retail side. That also wouldn't put pressure from the landlord to that small business tenant on uh as much pressure for them to get stabilized as a upcoming new business. And so when you when you look at the construction period, so adding the additional two years on to the tiers, you say, well, there's no cash flow coming in there uh to stabilize for the tenants. And so the the goal is by and our intent from the beginning was really to for the person for the tenant to stabilize the cash flow period. So there's no cash flow period during that that that time of construction.

Yeah. They're not they're not receiving any revenue during that that construction period. So that was to to basically extend the effective five years that bottom tier 10 years to the middle and 15 to the and that's mainly on the commercial end of it. residential is the same. It it would it would fit the same tier system. Um however, practically speaking, the investment levels would be lower. Yeah. I don't know if that answer well somewhat, but I still have a little hesitation on the extending it two years. All relates to where you start the clock, right?

But Brandon and Mike, I maybe one of you can address that, but In accordance with state law, they're saying the clock starts then. Well, I guess we have to cure system, but they're saying the preliminary certification. That's an important piece of the front part of it for the freezing the task assessment value. Can you speak a little bit to that?

I can't. Mayor, members of council, get to be before you again. Yes, it's I guess part of the answer is just the way that's kind of the way the statute is written that there's a preliminary certification process and then the um value is set upon that preliminary certification and it's set for two years. Previously the the draft before y'all had the total duration of 5, 10, and 15 years which included that two-year preliminary period. And so we adjusted that I think at uh Councilman Martinez's suggestion that and I think we intended to try to address what you were saying there to have that two-year construction period not eat into the overall incentive period. So that I know that partially answers your question, but I think maybe the the better answer is that just the way the statute is crafted that preliminary preliminary certification is the date on which it's it's set the value is set and under the statute is also set for two years at that point. So, I think the property owner is going to get the benefit of the locked value for that two-year period anyway as opposed to starting at final certification.

Thank you. Other questions? How do we certify how much money they actually spend in the project? You know, so say I'm spending two million and they said, "Man, we just cut some shavings and we spent 1.8." Now, how but they could somebody could be getting you know who is checks the balance there. Mike, can you address that in the ordinance as well? I know he's that's specific in the ordinance as far as how that is and that there's actually a clawback.

That's right. the part of the board of architecturals review architectural reviews process at the final certification. They confirm verify that the amount that was actually spent on the project what was asserted was actually spent and if it was not then they the project gets descertified and any foregone taxes that should have been paid will come due and they lose the benefit going forward. So that would be planning and development right Mr. McKenzie would be on that process of collecting the amount of money that's been completed doing the project and handing it back over to the bar. Correct.

The funds would be go back to the taxing districts, but the board of architectural review would confirm that the expenditures were enough to get the incentive. Is that is that what Yeah. And eventually we've got to get it to the taxing authority. Correct. So the bar would actually hear it to begin with after get the preliminary certification. They say yes, it's done. And then the guy, the owner does the project. Then it goes back before the bar the second time to certify that they have spent the money that they actually said they were going to spend. And then that's when they that's where it goes. That's right. Then at that point, the the assessment continues on as originally implemented.

All right. Good question. Any other questions? Mr. Horin, then Mr. Martinez. Mr. Hinman and Mr. Martinez.

The the additional uh Thank you for the update. The additional two years I think you know if I was if I was developing a property and I had a fiveyear tax incentive and you know it was going to take me two year or a year and a half to renovate it or two years to renovate it. You know that's really just sort of a threeyear on a commercial property. of of revenue and adding the two years, I think it would incentivize me to get it done faster because the quicker I can get it, you know, generating revenue, the longer I'm going to be able to to have my taxes. And I might be wrong because if they wait four years to start the project and they get it done in year six, they're only going to get one year of, you know, retail unless there's some kind of provision about when the time frame has to start, which I don't think there is.

They do I'm I didn't mean to interrupt. No, go right ahead. That's all I had. The they do have to complete the project within two years of preliminary certification. So they there is a stopwatch that starts ticking on preliminary certification. Good. That's great. Miss Martinez.

Yeah. Just just to piggy back what uh Councilman Harvin was saying, then I have one comment. Yeah. I think the effective benefit is still the same. I mean, if the if the initial certification based on the way the statute is written, that value was going to remain the same for two years regardless. Now, to Councilman Robert's point, if for some reason that language was written to where we could just assess it when the project was completed, then I agree that would probably be the better method to do it. But I think we just basically baked in those first two years. So, they'd had five full years of benefits or 10 or 15. So, to me, I don't see the benefit changing. I think it was just semantics on how we had to write it. So, I I appreciate I appreciate us adding those two years because I would want the developers to to maximize those benefits since they're making that investment. And the the comment that I was going to add was I just want to appreciate the boldness of the city of Anderson. I mean, this is a this is a big step forward. Um especially when it comes to making investments and and preserving history. Um it's so easy right now to talk about new development, new growth, but talking about preserving something that's very and unique to the character of where we live. Um, you know, to me that's something worth incentivizing. At the end of the day adds true value to the longevity of where we live. So, appreciate the hard work on it.

Thank you. Any other comments, questions? I just wanted to clarify again to kind of put a bow on what Councilman Roberts concern was. The language of the statute itself prevents us from starting the clock at a later time for the preliminary certification. Correct. Prevents might be It doesn't prohibit specifically say you can't do this, but the framework of the statute doesn't make sense otherwise. So the statute is written that says, okay, this is going to start for it. It's presumed that it's going to start for That's a good way to put it. Correct. Okay. Thank you.

Anything else? I I would say too I mean the this council's and councils for I don't know Dr. Thompson the last three or four decades have always been very um proactive in establishing historic districts. Um I can't remember when we established the downtown historic district but it's been within the last 20 years. Um, and so we've always had a a history of making sure that we preserve our history. Once you tear it down, you can't build it back, so to speak, like it was. So, um, good job on everybody's part. So, we had a first and second. All those in favor say I.

I. Opposed? That passes unanimous. Thank you. On the second and final reading, we got three items of new business. And the first item is request consideration of an ordinance providing for the April 7th, 2026 general election. Mr. Mchuan.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um session 51550 of the South Carolina code of laws provides for the municipal council to establish by ordinance the time for conducting a general election. This ordinance before you does that. The next general election is scheduled for Tuesday, April the 7th, 2026 for the municipal council for mayor for the seats of mayor seats one, three, five, and at large seat seven. The final period for the candidates begins Thursday, January 15th, 2026 at 12 noon and following is Thursday, January the 29th, 2026 at 12:00 noon. The last day to register to vote in the April 7th, 2026 election is Saturday, March the 7th, 2026. This is on first reading and we'll need another reading um at our next meeting.

Thank you, sir. Any questions, comments, clarifications? Mayor, uh it just so happens this is my wedding anniversary date and assuming that seat re-election, it affects me as well. Seat three is in here. So therefore I move that we set April 7th as election day. So April 7th is the waiting anniversary. April 7th. All right. Cool. We remember. So first by the mayor pro Tim second by Mr. Harbin. Any Mr. Steel?

I just briefly want to comment. Um I you know I am grateful for these city elections. I I think there's a lot of people out there, individuals and organizations that spread false information about what the city does and how we conduct ourselves. But I am grateful that regardless of all the negative that is out there um that we have plenty of people who are willing to step up and run and participate in our democratic process. So um with that, I I hope that um this will be another great election and another opportunity for us to move our city forward. Thank you. Anything else? First and second. All those in favor say I. I.

Opposed. It passes unanimously on the first reading. Our next item on new business is request consideration of a resolution relating to declaration of intent by the city of Anderson to reimburse certain expenditures made prior to the execution and delivery of a tax federal tax exempt equipment lease purchase agreement or issuance of federal tax exempt bonds. Mr. as part of our capital improvement plan and also our budget this year. It included um or it did mention it actually won't be inspire raptoriatus which is your next item on the agenda that Chief King will go over. And this is uh this is necessary um to help us with the financing, provide the structure for that. And chief financial officer uh Miss Martin will go over the the remainder part of this.

Thank you. Yes, as the chief will go over um next I mean the next item on the agenda, he is requesting a purchase of a new fire truck and a rescue truck and the necessary related equipment. Due to the production delays that we have had in the The city is requesting approval of a resolution that would allow the city to reimburse itself for any cost incurred prior to the issuance of the capital lease or tax exempt bonds. Um the resolution was prepared by our bond attorney who happens to be here tonight, Mike Burns. Um the city last approved a capital reimbursement for um fire equipment in October of 2022 and received those trucks in January of 2025. Estimated annual debt service payments will be 285,571 based on 10-year borrowing at 4%. Um, of course, we will re-evaluate that at the time of the debt service. And so, we are requesting approval of a resolution 259 authorizing the city of Anderson to re reimburse certain expenditures made prior to the execution and delivery of the debt service not to exceed $2,350,000. Thank you. Questions, comments?

Just one just want to clarify that you know this we still haven't decided whether we're going to lease the vehicles or purchase them. Is that correct? Yeah. Either way, we don't lease the vehicles. It's just a terminology in government finance to lease purchase. And so the structure here is just providing um the lease purchase agreement if you will, but it's not leasing the vehicles. Uh it's just a it's a method of borrowing or if we do installment purchase revenue bond as we plan to do when we um actually go out for debt service for for fire station 4 and do we combine those? Do we roll it together or not? Is provide flexibility in that? This would be similar to the lease purchase we did when we purchased a bulk of city police cars in the previously.

Yes, sir. Garbage trucks, all those kind of things. Good. Anything else, guys? Make a motion to approve. First by Mr. Newton, second by Dr. Thompson. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Oppos? Resolution passes unanimously. The last item of new business is request consideration to purchase two fire apparatus. Miss McKuan. Okay. I'll call Chief King to go over the uh the requests for purchase.

Thank Thank you for the opportunity this evening. Uh as you're aware of the current fleet that our our Anderson Fire Department operates every day, uh three engine companies, a ladder, uh a heavy rescue truck, a shift battalion chief, uh uh and grateful for the opportunity to operate those trucks and serving our citizens. But uh as we continue to see growth in both uh land mass of the city and in citizens and visitors that come here every day uh so does the need to improve that fleet to to match that growth. Uh the first of the two requests tonight is for a a fleet addition to match the uh uh upcoming construction of fire station number four on the east west connector and to be able to have a fire apparatus to place uh into that station. Uh the second is for a replacement of the existing Rescue Company 3, a 1996 model uh E1 fire truck that's currently stationed at Fire Station 3 uh with two personnel on board it. Uh both of those trucks would be purchased from Spartan Fire Apparatus uh out of Spartanberg, manufactured by the Pierce Corporation uh out of Wisconsin with plants in Florida and Tennessee. Uh both trucks would would be constructed to match the engine, the specifications of the two uh trucks that were recently delivered uh back around Christmas time. Uh and then the rescue vehicle would be built uh custom to to the needs of our firefighters in service to the citizens. Uh both of those are the construction and purchase price of the truck as well as the equipment needs that both would have. uh when we recently purchased engine two and three uh we did so with a very light equipment load. We were able to move move existing uh equipment from that appar those two apparatus onto these. But with uh engine 4 being a new resource and a new station uh in a new

area of our city. It requires a complete uh equipment complement to go with that. and uh rescue 3 with it being 30 years old. While we have taken every opportunity we could in that 30-year time span to replace some of the equipment, uh there's very much the equipment uh of that truck as well that needs to be replaced. So, uh our ask tonight is for the purchase of an engine company for uh and a rescue truck uh from Spartan Fire Apparatus at uh two $2,300,50. Uh uh both of those would be constructed with a delivery time agreement of 12 months. So uh just shy Christmas 2026, we would see both of those trucks ready to go in service to serve our citizens.

Thank you, Chief. Questions, comments? Chief, can you briefly mention our ISO rating? Uh Anderson Fire Department continues to operate an ISO class one fire department. that that's a a fire department grade, a grade of our existing water system and our communications that exist in the county. Correct me if I'm wrong. That also helps people with homeowners insurance. Very much so. [clears throat] Good insurance question. Anybody else? Good. I'm just going to make a motion that we approve the uh purchase to request two fire apparatuses and rescue trucks. Second that. We have first by Mr. Stewart, second by Dr. Thompson. further discussion.

I think it's a good thing because once station 4 is up and ready, we're not going to be using equipment from other departments having to lease equipment or pick up used equipment as we've had to in the past. So, I think it's a good thing. Thank you, Chief. Thank you. Appreciate you stay on top of it. And that motion is to purchase that for a contract note $2,350,000. Thank you. Anything else, guys? Good job, Chief. Appreciate it. Thank you, sir.

All those in favor? I want to really notice that we have invitation on your guest about the groundbreaking ceremony of the Franklin development on M Avenue. Something that I've been working with, all of us have been working with for many, many years. And finally, it's going to happen. I hope I'll see you there on Monday, October, November 17th at 10 a.m. for the wonderful groundbreaking of the Franklin development. Thank you, Dr. Thompson. Mr. Mayor, I have a comment as well. Mr. Mchuan.

Okay. Uh, out of curiosity, if anybody noticed the the big eagle that's sitting in front of Mr. Strickland, let's tell you a little bit about that. So, the Eagle um was received by the city at a banquet in Charlotte and the city um due to y'all's vision and creativity and the project of Lenley Park is now an award-winning Linley Park. And so the city received the 2025 Eagle Award and the 10 million to $25 million category at the ABC Carolina's Excellence in Construction Awards banquet on November the 6th in Charlotte. This is an annual competition that recognizes outstanding projects by general and specialty contractors across the Carolas and the awards are judged by industry expert experts including engineers and architects. Uh it was our pleasure for the mayor, myself, and Andrew to go up and to uh receive the Eagle Award for Lley Park on behalf of the city and bring it back. And so uh I believe this might be one of many uh for our new award-winning park.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It was a good [applause] So I see some Leadership Anderson people in the back. So appreciate you guys doing your projects and and participating in our meetings. Thank you for coming. I would entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. First by Mr. Horin, second by Mr. Newton. All those in favor say I. Opposed. We stand adjourn.