Board of Commissioners - Regular Meeting

Any baby yet? We had a checkup today. Everything's good to go. We're moving along. Doctor's hoping stays in the oven for about another week. In the oven for another three weeks. Mom won't like that too much. Spicy curry. Yes. No, no spicy curry, no dates.

All righty. We'll go ahead and get this meeting started. Good evening, everybody. Welcome to this board of commissioners work session. I see we got a full house of staff as well as board members. We are missing John Janyani. He's traveling for work today and unable to make it, but we'll go ahead and get things going. So, any amendments or adjustments to the agenda as it's been presented? Uh, can I get a motion then to adopt the agenda? So, move. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

All righty. Well, let's go ahead and start up our open line discussion with the project advocacy legislative priorities. Bradley, did you have something to present on this one? I can if that is what is requested of me at this time. Actually, actually, I would say this. Bradley's here to answer any questions. He's the staff member who put it together. So,

got to use the mic. Sorry. Yeah. Sorry about that. Um, yeah, the the idea behind this is to give you the chance to have that discussion. Bradley's here to answer any questions about how it was put together, how it came to be. if you have any questions of them. But uh this is y'all's discussion, Mr. Mayor.

So, this is at the moment s the basically what we've had put together already from our 2425 or 25 26 uh legislative priorities and we're basically just repolishing it, repurposing it. So, the real question for the board is is there any shifts or adjustments we want to see in the priorities as presented on this list? I know we got some feedback regarding road funding and how that may not be a top priority. So, any comments or suggestions on how we should arrange this?

Uh, well, I would just say when when we spoke to um Todd Johnson and David Willis, um they had said that um they cannot fund roads, any road improvements at all. A stoplight. Yes. lighting, safety, that sort of thing. But um not to send them anything about roads because it would be a waste of time to advocate for that. Um did everybody did you understand that to be Yeah.

Okay. Okay. So I guess we can shift I mean obviously we'll advocate on our end to do what we can to to move these projects up, but let's not waste time asking them for money a they don't have and b they can't give us. So, also uh you know I think Deborah Conrad could have some good feedback on all of these items because you know big picture are are these items for us to send to the state legislature or are they items you know generally for us as a town it seems to be sort of a mix right so are we

the model is um the model is what happened with the wreck barn because we internally funed into the wreck barn and then ended up getting a state grant for the wreck barn. So for that loan that the town had gotten to purchase the wreck barn, we ended up covering that loan with a grant from the state. So it was kind of after the fact, but it's an example of how things can get funded by the state provided we got a plan for it. Right? So those things then that are considered as items to send to the state, you know, what what does the staff do with those? Um what you know, what's the action item for those?

Sure. If the board directs us to do something, send a letter, set up a meeting, do something like that, that's the kind of thing we would do with them, back up with information. Um it's really more for um uh Deborah to carry around with her and when she's in Raleigh and she has a leave behind with them. These are the priorities or the needs list of the town of Waxaw uh more than anything. Um so she has something to give them. So um how the priorities are set are the boards. We've recommended those things that have come out of our five-year CIP or master park plan or master downtown plan or SS4A or any other project that the board has dealt with before and we've moved these things up on your priority list and said these are the things that are current and if there was outside funding for it and they're not currently funded that'd be great. So, uh, that's how the project list. The legislative actions themselves are purely yours. You folks talked about 170, HB 170, uh, for example, or, uh, the ability to do recall or any other actionable item that would require legislation. We've given what you've done in the past um, and you guys can form it from there. And then she just takes it and uses that. Staff would use it. You can use it. uh in in talking to both citizen groups or u advocating for things. So it's that's what its use is intended for.

Right. Well, some of these things are very long term and um you know, one of the like like uh um Commissioner Wed was saying, you know, the feedback we got from Todd and David was uh you know, don't do the shotgun approach of you know, giving us a big list of everything all at the same priority. Um, and I think it would be valuable to just run this by Deborah and get some feedback from her initially. That would help us to prioritize. Um well and also when we were speaking to the representatives they were saying if you could make it linked to safety and kids obviously that's something that if money comes up because right now they said it's a tight budget and there's going to be very little to be had. Um so but then of course I said well there's always money somewhere so how do we get the money that might pop up? And so they they suggested that we focus on safety and um kids. So I would say the if we if we're looking at Nesbbit Park, what can we get out of that? I know we were looking at lighting and that sort of thing. Uh that might be something that there would be money for. um and maybe the police vehicle acquisitions. Now, I don't know that they would be able to get all of that, but sometimes there is money for that. Um although that wouldn't really be considered safety, per se. Um,

but I don't think it's I, you know, I don't think we should be having her ask for the Helms Road extension and that sort of stuff because it's just not going to happen.

I do concur. I think that it it's clear based off of our conversations with our legislative partners that uh we have to readjust our capital improvement projects and essentially the way we have positioned these currently. I know the intent was to essentially give them a menu selection and the first on the line of course would be something that would be our priority A. Um, with that retrospect of after those conversations, I think it's wise to adjust as the mayor has laid out how we can re-evaluate the scoring presented by staff. One of the things that I also picked up through that conversation is is what can be bite-size and what can be essentially uh obtainable short-term and long term. And so one of the things that I pulled out of the capital improvement projects that I still feel that might be worth leaving as a top five priority but not in its number one category would be the downtown pedestrian improvements but not in its entirety. One of my recommendations is to evaluate segregating out those capital improvement projects to something a little more core to pedestrian safety and also purely reflects our heart and then those downtown connections. I think it's worth leaving somewhere in the top five, but I believe that we have to bite-size these capital improvement projects for our current legislative situation. With that, I'm I'll be continuing to be more specific. I would also like to say that I think the Waxaw Learning Center would be also appropriate. It touches directly on essentially a second opportunity for that facility repurposing and putting a bow on that former Union County [snorts] Library, now our Wacksaw Learning Center. I think that that's worthwhile having somewhere in those priority lists where that is.

I' love to that additional discussion. And I would also like to agree 100% on that lighting and safety with that Nesbic Park safety upgrades. I know it's a big ticket item, but I still think that's a top three type of item that it doesn't just serve Waxaw, it serves our surrounding municipalities as a whole. How many folks come over from Marvin to have interactions in sports and recreation within Waxaw? I think that those are some great priorities to readjust and evaluate. I totally understood and it was a learning lesson to understand the way they define capital improvements and what is infrastructure. They do not classify roads as infrastructure. They classify infrastructure as your water and your sewer, not a road, not a bridge or a flyover. As much as I really want to continue to advocate for that Helms Road West extension, it's clearly not a legislative priority based off of the way they define it. Um, is there any way I'm sorry. Um, we can get an itemized list of costs for NESBIT. So then we can even prioritize within that because 1.3 is a big chunk. We may not get we probably won't get 1.3, right? So, let's take a look at how much is lighting, how much are cameras, and let's get an itemized list and go through it that way. Um, see what we could do there to start. Anyway,

it's hard to comment on some of these because it's very brief, like huge dollar amounts with a very brief description. Um, I mean, it's hard to for me to make a decision. I mean, I want to know how this impacts, you know, taxes in the future. Um, you've got the dollar amounts here, but how do we prioritize based on what we have, you know, what's coming in, what's going to come in for the next few years, that sort of a thing. Just long-term tax impact analysis. I think I think it's completely reasonable to evaluate those things, but let's not forget that these are our legislative action priorities. So, what are we wanting to partner with our our state as a whole and and what fits into their programs? So, in an effort not to just slow down, to overanalyze, I do think that it's worth moving forward to figuring out what do we want as our top five and let's sit down and let's put our heads together real quick to at least come up with a top five

along those lines. I'm sitting here carefully considering some of your comments and what I would have as a top five would be the Waxaw Learning Center is number one, the Nesbit Park safety upgrades is number two, the skate park is number three, downtown number four, and then the pedestrian improvements would be number five. And I think what would make sense is if all five of those were on the first sheet and then I think to the prior point uh made by Commissioner Daunt was to sort of weed out some of these numbers within the pedestrian plan. So at this point you'd call it a 5A, 5B, a 5C. Um but just to say it's all part of that and here's each little dollar amount within this total dollar amount of nine million. Um, how do folks feel about that priority?

I um I think that sounds good. And if we can um itemize the costs under those then they might not be able to find 1.3 million but if they find 500,000 then we can pinpoint well we need lighting this and this and then at least we can knock that off the list. Can I ask a question about the downtown? You have you say downtown twice. The first downtown is what? The second one was the safety and pedestrian improvements I assume. But what was the first one? Uh that was the downtown park. Downtown park. Okay. So yeah, those are very unique items there. Um yeah.

Well, number one was the learning center and then number four was the downtown park and five was the downtown pedestrian improvements. But I think it the way it's laid out here is isn't horrible. Um, in terms of the downtown pedestrian improvements, the way you have those three little buckets there. Um, I think you're going to get lighting for NES Park. I think you're going to get lighting and security things before you're going to get furniture.

I would probably concur. When I think of the learning center, I do think of it as a top five, but not a number one. You We're probably splitting hairs here, but I think it's a third and priority. I think Miss Dino, I I think you have a strong point, Commissioner Wedro, when you mention lights and safety items over furniture. Um, we are still trying to get the learning center up and going and finished and every little bit will help. Uh, but I agree when it comes to selling the priorities, I think safety would sell a little bit more than furniture. Yeah,

I I'd agree with that adjustment. and these downtown improvements. I mean, Howie Mine, I know that that's a neighborhood that has sort of expressed a desire for better connection, but um for these other ones, I'm sort of imagining a huge map of uh extra sidewalks everywhere. And, you know, do these people really want their yards dug up for sidewalks? you know, I don't know. [laughter] Probably not.

It wasn't something that we had heard from folks coming up and tugging at arms. Hey, we want sidewalks, especially at that at that price point. Um, as we talked about earlier from the meeting with Willis and Johnson, it was really about safety and children are going to get you some dollars and that's where our bang for our buck is probably best. So, I I would agree with the safety upgrades with NZE Park and the Waxall Learning Center. It's a lowhanging fruit. It's not a big amount of money. That's something that's been on the on the table for a while. That's something that that's a that's an easy win for $125,000. I would als I would also like to add consideration um police vehicle acquisition uh for a total of six. I I think that's totally worth asking for even though I know we had a long form conversation. I'd like to see it still remain on the list. Um I would like to put that over a sprinter van in my opinion. I think that's much more important at this time to keep keep our patrol officers moving in the right equipment over a command center van. Even though I know long-term perspective, we have to consider that in the future, but I think in a priority list, I would definitely move that to the back of the bus.

So, I I think that's fair. I think this is all really good feedback. So, if I'm to sort of far it out a conclusion from the feedback, Nesbbit Park safety upgrades would be priority one. Um, that would move the skate park to two, downtown park to three, the pedestrian improvements would become four. May I also make a recommendation of uh going back to into the bite-size portion. If I could figure out how to gold star just the downtown connection piece, it has not just safety and pedestrian improvements, but it has an economic impact. And I think that's worth actually finding out how to emphasize that within our legislative agenda might be worthwhile just pointing out. Would it make more sense to just pull that out as a single item then?

I would concur with that action. Okay. So, that would then be priority four. And then priority five, are we thinking the learning center or are we thinking the uh police vehicle acquisition is number five? in my mind, police vehicle acquisition, safety, then the learning center,

and then the learning center number six. So, if we can get all of those on the first page, that would make a a good impactful single page menu for for money. And then again, the second and third page will still exist. It'll still exist in the in the order that it's in. Um, as far as the road stuff, so are we thinking we will remove all three road items alto together? Just completely remove them from the legislative agenda list. Yeah, they can't do anything about it based on the feedback that's

unless staff has the ability to find a way out to call out maybe just the individual multi-use trail and segregate out what they actually could support us with within the Helms Road Extension West. It's um at [clears throat] this time I think it's probably worth removing if uh unless we can itemize it but in that manner. Stop turning it off.

I don't know if we were focusing only on capital improvements just now, but for me the number one would be the policy change of restoring down zone authority. Um I think we're all in agreement with that. So, is there any input um from staff regarding the transportation side of things and sort of farading or or sort of splitting out some of that pedestrian multimmodal transportation, greenway type aspects of those three particular projects that might still be worth funding? Is there any do we see any room there that that would make sense on those projects?

I think your transportation projects are still they can still be noted as a priority understanding that funding through the legislature for them is complicated. Um but that doesn't mean you can't take this legislative guide and not talk to your uh transportation uh representative from this region. uh talk to DOT officials, you know, about that. So, you can continue to advocate up different ways that DOT accepts those kinds of things as well as KARPO, you know, and and the other sources that you have uh to do that.

Yeah, Karpo is the whole other sort of facet of this discussion that I know that we're attacking on a fairly regular um with their call for projects and their discretionary funding projects that they do. So for these road construction items on a legislative side of things, is there a way to take the priorities as they're listed and highlight that nonvehicle transportation aspect of those projects and how there's opportunity to help fund and support some of those facets of those various projects. So we leave them on the list, move them down the priority, but we then highlight how it's multimodal transportation, how it's walking trails and so forth or lighting, uh things of that nature. One question for staff. Would it be beneficial on these road construction documents and and to come up with our own advocacy project list that's for Karpo for DOT and kind of its own essentially flyer or menu of of what we're we call infrastructure but then it's DOT and and Karpo specific and essentially and creating its own separate advocate Y

yeah that's a good question because I know that there is a process in getting things through Karpo and there's uh the last meeting on the consent agenda there was an item for the Kensington widening at 16 uh in terms of all those projects that we have on that list uh so we gave the traffic update at the last meeting um yeah is there any information around a priority on those or would you say James that we're just sort of or shotgunning those. We're just trying to get as much as we can wherever we can. [clears throat] Thank you.

I would say from a carpo perspective is a very datadriven process. So when you submit projects, you want to score, you want to make sure that you submit projects that are going to score well in accordance with the parameters that Karpo has outlined. So that that is always a continually evolving process. Um I think more discussion is absolutely needed and yeah you could definitely create a priority list and then we can look at that list to see okay are these projects going to be competitive.

I think you're touching on sort of the key point and and the big word of Karpo is data and that's how a lot of these things get prioritized um on their lists. We can prioritize it one way on our list, but if it doesn't score well, then and I know James does a really good job in in framing these things in a way that they score well at Karpo so they have a good chance of getting funded when they're available or when the money's there. James, do we have a master transportation plan? Yes. Just stay up here. Yes.

Okay. probably would be good then to bring that back to the board in a work session so that you can talk about your priorities in transportation as it's laid out in the plan how they relate to Karpo, how they relate to your legislative list. I think that would be a good idea.

I agree. I think that'd make great sense for the board to see that firsthand and kind of go through that and then James can talk to him individually and discuss maybe how they score so that we can then focus our efforts and prioritizing the good scoring projects. So, regarding our capital improvements and our legislative priorities, so I last read out uh Nesbit safety upgrades would be priority one. Waxaw skate park would be priority two. The downtown park phase three would be priority three. Priority four would be the downtown connection connectivity to downtown economic centers, downtown park, and Waxaw Learning Center. That $2.5 million item. Then priority five would be a new police vehicle. And then priority six would be the Waxaw Learning Center. Is the board good with those priorities as I've stated them? and then an asterisk by HB170 and and those we don't want to forget those off the list, but I think they heard us when they were here.

Have an out loud conversation. Is there anything else that needs to be on your list in regards to legislative legislative lawful legislative actions like laws, advocacy for other things? Is there anything else on your list? Nothing stood out for me other than the downing. So now

I don't have anything else. We kind of mentioned some things in the conversation with them, but they were sort of things they'd already been working on and struggling with. Um, so I don't know if we need to like, you know, for example, allowing the county to allocate uh wastewater capacity for different uses. They said they were working. Okay. So, is everybody then in agreement with the priorities and kind of the updates then to this legislative agenda?

Okay. So, we feel comfortable making those edits. Are we clear on what the edits are? And then we'll get that into the agenda at an upcoming board meeting. Great. All righty. So, we have a discussion about the amendments to the ordinance to establish the grant fund for the Helms Road. Um, this is just it was something that was presented as new business. I just want to make sure that everybody's clear on it. Um, we have our financial expert, our beloved Scott Datson here to explain if anybody has any other further questions on that. But um this one as well as the um there was the other one. Yeah, that was the only Yeah. So, I just want to make sure it's here basically to just to ask the question of the board. Are you good with it? Are we clear on it? Were there any other questions that didn't get answered in our last board meeting? Okay.

Sir, just to give the board an outline for discussion purposes, I'll have James kind of sit next to me.

You have Okay. So, the town was presented with a contract to enter into design and an agreement with um the DOT to move forward on that process to move Helms forward. In your current budget year, you have allocated 750,000 for design. In your reserves, you have designated or uh yeah, designated is the term of art. Um 2.5 give or take million for construction. That is half the construction amount. Okay. Now, that construction period is a couple of years out. And when I say a couple, we'll use DOT time to define that. But once design happens, there begins this process where things begin to move differently at a different speed. You go into rightway acquisition, which you have not designated in your reserves yet, and you're short on that, and you're short on the other 50% that you have to get to the table with for construction in reserves. That doesn't mean you don't have future funds coming in to cover certain things, but if I'm going to enter into a contract, which I have till October to technically do, but um you know, because I don't want to enter into that contract, I I want the board to be fully understanding you have made um commitments in previous iterations of the board towards the reserve position and commitment to the project, but those are policies. They're not ordinances that say we're going to reserve mount monies yet. So, um, you are short. I

just wanted to be really clear with you folks. You have a couple of years to get there, but once we're in, then the next amount of money we have to designate either in next year's budget and or in reserves. So allocate in the budget or designate in the reserves um uh will be right of way that would be the second phase. Then the third piece will be the other half of the construction. The total projects around 10 a.5 million in today's dollars. They've projected it out I think as well as they can given what they knew at the time that they put it together and they have but your construction I mean your design process will update those numbers even further and then you'll know the next number and how real or how close you are to things also set you up if there are other federal dollars or other state dollars you can possibly go for those things that's why keeping them on a priority list are important Um but you have not either designated in your reserves or allocated anything more than again I'll do it again designated 2.5 million allocated 750,000 for design missing other half of construction 2.5 million and 8 we estimate around 898,000 in right-of-way um allocation cost. So, you're you're you're throwing around some big fancy words here, and I'm going to I'm going to ask for a little bit of clarification. Um because it sounds like some of these words have a distinction as it relates to a timeline of project and budget. So, we have designate, appropriate, and allocate. I'm I'm trying not to wrap here, but

okay. Which one's which? What happens first? What has the board done already? Previous board and what we're trying to do now is is appropriate.

So the previous board has designated in your reserves 2.5 million. So that's there. We indicated that in the last financials. It shows up on there. We uh are recommending you pull this down into a separate fund 406 or 407. I can't remember which number. Uh so that it'll stand on its own like Kensington does now. um that'll give it autonomy in your reserves and it'll sit there. The board will have done that action. You allocated in your current budget $750,000 for design. So that is in the current budget year. Those are current dollars. That's not a pull down from reserve. That is current dollars. So that's an expenditure. You have not either allocated or designated the amount for right away at around84.

848. What's 50,000 between friends? Um you haven't allocated that or designated that yet and you haven't allocated or designated the other side. Now, the reason um I say you haven't done the designation yet is that you still don't have your audit. Uh the state made that that the audit isn't due until February. Um that's just what they did. Um in that process, um management will recommend a series of designations in reserve for the board to then make those. you'll get somewhere with that. We're not sure what the final numbers are yet because we, you know, we don't have those final adjusting um um journal entries yet to put into the the process, but the board will have a decision to make and we'll get closer and then in the budget process, if it's possible, I will probably recommend an allocation in the budget process towards the next phase at a minimum. So, so I don't get lost in the semantics. You designate funds to a project. You allocate funds from the budget. So, you're designating a certain amount of money is going to go to our rose float. And at some point in time, you're going to have to spend that. And then the budget gets done. And then you finally allocate. Okay, here are the funds to make your rose float. So in this case it would be Helm's Road. We've designated the funds. Now we just need to allocate the funds. When we're allocating funds, that's also us saying, "Yeah, we got it. Here it is. Check it out." Whereas when you're designating, you don't necessarily have that money on hand. Correct.

You have it if you both designate and you allocate. But the word allocate, it's the word allocate that means you have the money. Here it is. check out the account, but designating it doesn't necessarily mean the money is on hand as of today. Allocate means you're going to spend it. So, you've appropriated it into the budget and you're going to spend it. Yep. Okay. That that helps me clarify those three words and I know you're throwing them around a lot. Um so, thank you. I hope that's helpful to others as well.

I think moving forward we need to do that. we need to be putting money aside so this this doesn't hit us when all of a sudden DOT says hey we can start construction tomorrow and then we're like oh you know and our layaway period's over because that's kind of what this is right to oversimplify so let's I mean for me and the board can agree disagree but I think we should be putting some money aside every budget cycle to be prepared to just spend it when we need to spend it so it doesn't hold this up because if we can at DOT and CSX on the same page and ready to go and we should be ready when they are. So, we're not delaying anything.

Any Go ahead, Commissioner Harris. Thank you. Forgive me. I just trying to make sure I digest this well here and I'm just going to refer back to the buckets. So, we have reserved in a bucket 2.5. We have available within our budget to designate for construction another 750k. You've appropriated

we've appropriated it. Again, we're on DOT time. So, I'm just going to round up out of the roughly 900k million dollars we need to find a way to reserve or design for future designation. And then that still would leave us with a budgetary requirement for the future of another 2.5 million. Yes.

Okay. and and so the with so we actually to keep this split up into buckets um to keep up with it, we need to address a $1 million shortfall at this time to make sure that we have the correct funds available uh for rightway acquisition post design. You will need to appropriate designate and appropriate at the appropriate time. [laughter] Sorry, a lot of A's in there. Honamanopia, right? Um uh at the appropriate time, but you are short 2.3 million. Remember, you're adding construction money 843,000. So, actually, I'm off. uh it's three million, but you also will have an opportunity in the current fiscal year with the audit to designate. We just don't have that number right now. It'll get you closer and we'll recommend a designation towards those things. Uh and we'll recommend those things. Um uh we we we've done well. We just don't have the final adjusting journal entries to do that, but we'll do that. and prior boards, including members on this that have been part of council for the last couple of years, uh you have uh designated in your uh budget. So, what I showed you at the last financials were about $10 million worth of appropriate uh a designation of monies in your reserve position have been designated for various projects. So that has come from um um uh increases in tax revenues over time over budget over expenditure. It's come from fee in lie of that's the other place it's come from. Uh or it's come from

other sources. uh so other sort uh NC do uh a developer a developer pays into certain things too and we might have bits and pieces but most likely it's a fee in lie of in doing an improvement offsite. So uh something like that

wi with this essentially once we advance into the con essentially the design phase. Correct me if I I've misheard you. This also then uh allows us more opportunity uh not just with uh state grants but also federal grants to uh essentially signal that we have a shovelready project ready for support. Uh we are going through the design phase uh and we have essentially wisely appropriated

you you've already entered into an initial understanding with Karpo and the department of transportation on Helms Road. So that has happened a series of legislative actions have happened by this board and previous boards to en enact that. Uh so this project is moving forward and you have signaled through policy adopt adoption of a res resolution um supporting the project and then secondly designation of certain monies and then appropriation of monies this fiscal year to go ahead and start the design process. So that's the legal actions that the board has done with regards to Helms Road. um what's left is future designations, you know, future raisings of revenue to then meet your future obligations. So, I started this whole thing off by saying I have in front of me a contract from DOT to obligate those things moving forward. I did not want to enter into that contract until I was comfortable with you folks understanding how much you're short, how much you have in the bank, what you have appropriated, what you have designated, and just to be clear with that so that you know as we move forward and I come in and recommend in the budget you allocate uh monies for the next phase or I do those kinds of things, I'm doing that because you guys want this project to move forward. forward.

Sounds good. Uh, thank you very much. Um, that was a good discussion. Great explanations. Um, I feel a little clear and I think the rest of the board, you everybody's good and this will come for us at our next board meeting and it'll be on old business and ready for a vote. Uh, next up is the discussion about the tree amendment. There's a text amendment regarding tree preservation and clarification. Uh floor is open. Uh was there any cause for concern on this particular item or was everybody on the board fairly satisfied with what was presented in new business at our last meeting?

Well, the only thing which I had mentioned in the last meeting was uh keeping the species list on the LDC. Um, I notice in this agenda that the language hasn't been changed to reflect that, but um, if assuming that the rest of the board is okay with that, um, I'm going to assume that that's going to be reflected in the next agenda. Yeah. What we were considering doing was we were probably going to bring two different options to one agenda. Nope. One with

one with the agenda. One one with the uh the list on on it um on the agenda and then also u we're going to put when we uh put a um something at the bottom there that would allow us to go through and update it as the extension updates theirs and just make that administratively. Um, so if there's a tree that's diseased that they change out, we'll go through and just change that on there.

And and that addresses the concerns that were voiced during the board, meeting that the state keeps a list and then the LDC has a list. You know, it it makes more sense to just go by the state list. So the LDC should point to the state's list. But what it sounds like what we're doing is we're putting the list in the LDC, but we're changing the rules such that additions or edits to align with the state list becomes a simple administrative change and it's not a board action change. So it becomes easy then to keep our list and our LDC aligned with the states standards and lists and so forth. Yeah, you said it better.

Okay, thank you. It was the concern that we had. I mean, my concern was why should we have a list and why should the state have a list if the state's the one with the arborists and the scientists doing this work, state forestry and whatnot? Why do we have to sort of do our own little list? But this connects them. It keeps them connected and it makes it easy for us to update as the state changes. So, it becomes readily available on our side for our builders and people that want to know. it's accessible locally but it then becomes easy to maintain administratively uh if there's any changes right it's at the state level

um question uh that I raised how often does the state update um that tree species and and treb list did we ever find that out by chance uh we did talk with them there's not a um it's it's on an as needed basis um I don't think there's a it's not you know, quarterly or annual thing. Um, but sometimes there are multiple changes that are made in one year. Sometimes it can go for a year, two, three before they make any kind of changes to it. It's really um just as they find new things out about species that are out there um or as new diseases come out, things like that.

Got it. Yeah. I I know just using my industry within the trucking and logistics as an example, there's normally a supplemental to to the essentially the key list. The way I looked at it within the language of this ordinance is essentially we're establishing cornerstones. Um, and but it gives our staff essentially administrative authority and and essentially discretion to update that list in concert with the our state experts. And so I have no problem with this language as is.

Any other questions or comments around this item? All righty. Thank you, Kevin. We'll go ahead and move to the next one, which is the text amendment around the special use permits. Were there any questions or concerns regarding what was presented in the new business at our last board meeting on this item? Nothing. Okay. Yeah. If there's no discussion, we don't have to belabor it. We will just then skip to the next one. And that would be the rules and procedures. Uh there might be some discussion here. Uh there were some requests to make some edit edits to the rules and procedures. And I think we have those edits before us. I'm hoping the commissioners have had a chance to look these over. And Barbie, do you want to give us a little synopsis as to what we're looking at here and what's driving this and what we're fixing? Basically, what you're looking at is the track changes of your rules of procedure. Um, these rules have not been um reviewed uh by the attorney since 2021. So, there is a little bit of housekeeping there. some um alignment uh formatting uh corrections and uh whether or not you would like to um add some things. There are some added information based on your current practices and there's a narrative there that uh pulls out the work session um from the special meeting section and it's in as a work session narrative under your meeting types. So it allows you to meet in this format without having to call a special meeting.

And the first list, the the top list, which is the list of proposed revisions, these are just the major things. And then everything else is just housekeeping and updates, corrections based on how the information lays out. And and of course this is a time that you can change information, add information, revise what your current practices are and um change those as well.

[snorts]

Is there anything precluding board action during a work session? That's not necessarily the intent of the work session. I'm just thinking an emergency item comes up on, you know, a Thursday or a Friday and the retreat or the work session's on Tuesday and can we get it into the agenda and and board action is needed. A vote must be taken. Is there anything that eliminates or prevents a board action of any kind at a work session? No, you'll just need to make sure that we have that in the rules of procedure that allow you to to make those actions when necessary. And that's what I'm asking if if these rules and procedures allow for that at this point.

Currently, the way the narrative is written, I believe [clears throat] it has no action. That's just what we were envisioning. Um, however, we could um put that in as as a caveat in case you do have something that uh staff needs um immediate action um and you won't be meeting until uh another two weeks and they've missed a deadline of of some sort. So, we can write it to where you gives you the ability to have an action if you see that it's necessary for that. And we would we would prompt that if there is action there.

And then if action is needed, is that something that can be added at a edits and changes to the agenda the night of or if action is required, is there I think there was something about a 48 hour notice versus a oneweek notice of public meetings.

If you update your rules of procedure to include the work session as a standalone meeting, there is no 48 hour requirement for notice. If you do not add that, then the work session becomes a special meeting. So, we would need to um have a 48 hour notice. However, we do add those on your meeting schedule. So, those work sessions are already noticed and no other requirement is needed for us to publish for that meeting. Um yes, you can in this instance once you change it then you can make that change when you do the update um adoption of the agenda at the start of the meeting. If you have something that needs that staff needs to have that um we just need to be make sure that you have that authority in that narrative um that you can make actions when necessary and then if something comes a um before you then we will um ver uh notify you that we do have something that staff needs to needs an action on. So, as it as it's written now, there's nothing that prevents us from adding it to the agenda the night of the night of the work session.

Currently, the way they're written now, you would not be able to. Okay. If you change if you make the decision to change them, then you would be able to.

Okay. And that's kind of what I'd like to discuss. Commissioner Ferris, sounds like you have some comments. I support where you're going because I I do believe that you as the mayor should have that discretion to be able to add an action item. My polite request is that if there is an action item that does need to be taken, um we as a board at least get 24 hours prior notice so we can just have small being able to digest it for lack of better words. That's my polite request. Does it need to be codified? I don't think so. But I think you do have that ability to add an action item in a work session. And I think I do support where you're going uh in that. But with the spirit, I think just give us 24 hours to see that action item beforehand.

And that can be Yeah. I I just wanted to make it clear that we're not making it it would have to be something quick like a budget amendment, a text amend something like that. Not, you know, a public hearing or I like nothing that's going to drag out the work. I don't want to deflect from what we're doing here. These are this is the first one we're having. It's good conversation. It's one of the only times that we can get together and all be together and really bounce ideas off each other and learn from each other. So, I don't really want to deflect from that. So, if it's something quick and simple, then I have no problem with that. But I also don't want to make it a habit. Sorry.

I agree. The topics that I would think would we would probably bring to you is if we have an application uh that needs um board approval to submit that applications, you know, for for a grant of some sort or if we have a um a resolution or proclamation that comes before us that um meets a a different deadline than when you're going to meet, then we would bring that to you. I do um recommend if you would like to add a 24hour um caveat to that then yes, I would recommend putting that in there um so that we know as staff to be sure that any information that you you see you get a 24-hour notice. If we have something that is like a quick turnaround, we would definitely um communicate that with you to see whether or not uh since this is past the you know does it meet the 24 hours for you to review, are you comfortable with moving forward with that action. Um we want you to be able to be comfortable with whatever that action would be,

especially when it comes to resolutions. Resolutions. Yeah. Yeah,

I I think a big one I would be comfortable saying it's got to be in by Friday, end of day Friday. That way the board I know personally I like to have the weekend. Um I've had days where I wouldn't be able to get to something on a Monday afternoon or a Tuesday during the day. you get busy enough. And so I think it would be great if I and I'm perfectly acceptable to the idea of of codifying in the language that it's got to be in the Friday before the Tuesday of the meeting if it's any item of significance uh such as a resolution, a budget adjustment, um a grant application, things of that nature. And then maybe um to the previous concerns, I think it would be fair to list things specifically saying there's still this does not account for a public hearing. It doesn't account for a reasonzoning application or any of the big ticket items that tend to tend to take a lot of time and attention to go through in the meeting. Um things that require a lengthy presentation as an example.

Text amendment. Sometimes we need a little more time on a tax amendment. It could be quick, it could be long. That that's one that could be varied. Um, but I think your best example was the idea of a grant application if someone changes the date. And then the other thing I was thinking is, I mean, just tonight we're talking about allocating funds. And I think that that's one of those things where, okay, the builder is suddenly, oh my gosh, how did this ever happen? Ahead of schedule, and they need the funds allocated immediately. Just spitballing. I don't want to tie our hands to meeting and then not being able to take board action is kind of my point.

Well, we would go through the town manager and myself would um evaluate those situations and the town manager would make those that call whether or not he feels that the board needs to act on this immediately or could wait till the Tuesday meeting. So, we would we would assess that on a case-byase basis. I think that'd be great. And I think to wrap this up too, I think are we in agreement then that having it on having any item done by Friday end of day would be sort of the minimum requirement.

Yeah. [snorts] So, I think we should write that in. Um, and then whatever language you want to have to basically explain that it's a an item of minor consequence. Um, and something that isn't complicated. Uh, I think is the main idea. Urgent nature while [snorts] being urgent in nature. Thank you. I think that yes, and and perhaps that should be specific as well. It has to be an urgent item that can't wait till the next board meeting. And and maybe that's Yeah. And maybe that's the key language is items that are urgent that cannot wait till the next board meeting uh at the manager's discretion. Yeah.

But just keep in mind that we would not bring a public hearing to you because that's correct. That's a 10day public notice and that needs to be advertised. So that's the one I was thinking of the longer notice. Would not ever come on as a work session item.

Okay. Um, regarding the uh order of business for regular meeting, um, our attorney noticed that we aren't actually following uh, [laughter] because it said it used to say at the end general public comments and we never did general public comments at the end. But um what I wanted to say was, [snorts] you know, just looking at this section um and you know, this is an item for later in the agenda for this meeting, but um while we're updating this, can we add uh the board response line after public comments?

That would make need to make be a twothirds majority. Who would want to add that? If you if you all agree that you want to do that, then whatever the changes that you have will come to you on the 10th. If you like the the the language, the changes, don't have any others, then we'll um solidify those changes and then you'll ratify that for the 10th. So, the twothirds would be adjusting the that agenda item and having commissioner comment after public comment.

Yes. And to give you a little bit of history on that second public comment, um, probably about four years ago, the past board removed that comment from to have that second comment because we they felt that the um the public wasn't staying long enough at the meetings to give that second comment. So, we moved that the first comment and kept that where it is for all of those comments. However, if you would like to add that back in and we'll keep that on the agenda, we'll add that there. Um, we we're happy to do that.

No, I'm I'm good with everything really except that I I just wanted to add that um board response line um after the B public comment. we could if C could instead be, you know, between B and C here or a new C would be um board response

and that would only be it's not mandatory. Is that your Yeah, not mandatory. It's just like it's just an opportunity, a prompt for the mayor to say, "Does anyone want to respond?" And nobody's you know I'm just making it clear. So we got a gun to anyone's head. Yeah. [laughter] And is that a response for one of the public comments during the general public comment? Is that just because then the public don't have to wait for the whole rest of the meeting for commissioner? I mean, we would still do commissioner comments, right? But correct.

If there was something we could just quickly give a response to, that might be all that somebody wants, you know, and then they don't have to wait for the whole meeting because it it might not be addressed by somebody until the end. But if it's just a quick response, then immediately after public comment, the mayor can say board response. If there's something quickly that can be said, you know, it's an opportunity.

Would you want to add that in the general comments? Once they're finished, the mayor can do the same thing at that at the general comments if if you find something that um you might want to respond to based on what you just heard from the the comments rather than waiting till the close to the end of the meeting to to provide that response just in case that person happened to needed to leave before you respond. And so everybody will speak and then the commissioners can then speak. Yes. And then we'll do the consent agenda. Yeah. Yes, exactly. You would have that opportunity to make that response if necessary.

Um and then that that way the person will hear that response sooner than waiting till close to the end in case they had to leave.

Yeah. Um and everything else um you know everything else can stay the same. I'm just proposing to put in between B and C there the board response item. What I can do is I can share a draft agenda with those changes so that you all can see what it could look like before the meeting. Um and then you can kind of um if you have changes to that then we can move that around.

Yeah, this is something that I noticed when I watched Indian Trail meeting and I just thought it was a nice thing you know and I think at the time when he said board response the board didn't actually have anything to say but I just thought it was a nice opportunity in the to have that in the agenda you know. Certainly. Yeah. Any other questions or comments on this item? Are we clear then on moving forward? Did you get everything you need, Barbie? I got it. Yes. All right. Thank you.

We will go ahead and move to our next item, which is the OAB. So, we talked about maybe reviewing the OAB. Um, this is just sort of a again just a general discussion item. Uh, we've had some obviously some movements with one of our planning board. uh there's been some movement with the ABC board and so we're looking for candidates again and it just sort of the subject of the OAB came up and is this something we want to talk about and the nature of the discussion again is open-ended and the idea being are we happy with the OAB as it is or are there changes we want to make discuss [snorts]

um well I was thinking that we can um use the OAB process uh similarly but uh add a board member or two to that process. So when the OAB chair is interviewing uh one or two of us can be involved in that and then we can say okay we uh we would be the liaison right? So they yep, we heard the interview process. This is how we felt. We concur. And then the three people with the OAB, the the chair of that board can get together and say, "Yes, this is the list of people that we in this order." And then keep them on file and that way it's it's not um last time it was a very lengthy process. Um, and uh, I just I just think it would be better for either one or two of us to be available for that. And that could be done uh, in person, via Zoom, on the phone, you know, whatever that interview looks like, and just uh, do it together so that, you know, we don't have to drag it out. So, you're suggesting one or two commissioners serve uh on the OAB um being present in a manner that's convenient to them. Again, Zoom, in person, however the OAB is meeting.

Yeah, I guess whatever we're allowed to do is kind of

right. Currently, what what what the process is now is uh the clerk's office receives all the applications for all the boards. We put those in the prospective boards. We contact um all the OAB chairs, vice chairs or designate whoever's serving at the time provide the um the applications. We have an initial meeting. They get their parameters as to uh how long they have to interview. They review interview and then they recommend. Um, so what I was suggesting is that in including the chairs to have one or two commissioners to serve on that board as well. Uh, the interviews could either be the same way that we've always done it or we could do it all together. The clerk's office would set up all the interviews for each one of the candidates. We'd set up a Zoom meeting and then we we can um interview all of the candidates um at those p uh prospective times. They would fill out a matrix sheet which is a ranking one to five, five being uh the best, one being lower than than the best. Um and then based on that ranking is who gets recommended for appointment. Um and then we use that ranking sheet, the clerk's office uses that ranking sheet to fill any other vacancies that um come on those boards, you know, in the uh in in throughout the year. Um so I think that would be a very good process for us to to go moving forward. um everyone has um value into the process and then the commissioners can

report back saying yes we interviewed those candidates these are the ones that we recommend. I solidify that we um uh appoint these candidates as as presented. [snorts] Do we want to say two or do we want to say up to two? [snorts] Maybe you can say up to two. That way you're you're not um you know having to have two of of you

uh meeting and you know if you're only one can can do it that's fine. We just wanted to make sure that um the process was seamless and um that you were comfortable with that process. just reflecting back on my time uh as a resident looking to volunteer and get involved which for every applicant in this last process, thank you for your time and consideration for joining Waxaw and volunteering. Um I do concur up to two makes sense. Um for me I I went through a slightly different process because I applied during COVID to volunteer um and was interviewed v via Zoom. Um I I have also conducted the interviews as a member of the OAB in person. Um I think there's uh merit to have board of commissioners there part of the OAB process still letting room for the chairs to conduct the interviews. Um but yet I totally concur with Barbie's point in having that a little bit more formalized uh with partnership with our clerk's team um and how to go about that. I'm not 100% cert certain if it's in person or Zoom. Um, I'd love to hear your all feedback because my mind in person normally speaks more and you can tell more via uh via in person than compared to Zoom.

Well, I I always like doing it in person, but if someone's not available because they're working in Uptown, I don't want to discourage someone if that's how they can meet. I don't think it needs to be uniform across

No. they have the option to either do it by phone call, in person, or by Zoom. Um, lots of folks find it convenient for them to do it by by Zoom. Um, but they also like to do it in person. So, it it's just basically we give the applicant that option um during that that initial discussion with them in setting up those appointments. So the way I'm envisioning is be the chair up to two commissioners conducting the interviews together um so that we can come to consensus.

Correct. It would be the entire board um because there's only five basically there's so it wouldn't be a very big room but it would be everyone. So all the the members would hear all the candidates because sometimes sometimes um we find that some of these applicants may not fit that particular board but may be good for another board. So then that gives us the um the opportunity to ask that candidate you know would you consider serving on another board if you were asked. So that way we can do cross cross uh interviews based on that and then we can and then those chairs can write that information down and if need be we can always do a second interview for for that particular person for that particular board.

Sounds good. Got a question because this I'm new to the process here. So when you have a positional vacancy and you get let's say there's 10 applicants put in for this position. Is there a grid system to grid out the resumeumés or are they all interviewed all 10?

It depends on whether or not they're a statutory board. Um if they are statutory board then it's residency only. So that's one of the um processes that we go through and weeding that out. If it's just an advisory board, residency [snorts] is not required. So, we do have a little bit more um to figure out as to what um uh what the other uh qualifications they have. The clerk's office does not weed those applicants out. We allow the OAB to do that process. Um so based on what the rules of procedure are now is we interview all the applicants uh and we rank them based on what that that process is uh and how and how they answer the questions and what their qualifications are and then from there based on what's ranked on that sheet is how we put them in the slate um for uh for the board. There are sometimes we have midterm vacancies. So, one of those members could be filling a midterm vacancy um or it's um um a three-year term and um so we have to determine where we where we put them at that point. That

answer my question. Thank you. You're welcome. Anything else on this topic? All righty. It sounds like we have a plan. We all agree. We will add text that allows up to two board members to serve on the OAB. Uh otherwise, we're not really making any other changes. Um okay. So, what I'll do is I'll update the rules. I'll put those in track changes and they'll go before you on the 10th and you can decide if you want to change any of that language.

Sounds like a party. Okay, the last item on our list is the 2026 board priority list. Uh, Commissioner Dawn, would you like to um I guess lobby for one priority over another? I think we've all looked at these a little bit. Uh, some of them are good. Uh, I mean, they're all good. Uh, some of them we want to get done sooner than later. They're all great. What do you mean? Oh, fabulous. It's well written. A+. Um, yeah.

Yeah. Well, uh, the first one, I guess we've kind of addressed um already the board response. Um, the second, uh, bring the original option five parking configuration for the Red Oaks Trail offered by James before the BOC for a vote. I think that's going to happen anyway. Um, have have we worked on that one at all yet, James, or we targeting to get that on the agenda at some point? Scott, sorry.

We have not prioritized anything on this list until the board's made a discussion and and and let us know what it wants to do. I think it brings up uh just a point as Commissioner Don goes through through his list. If you guys go through this and you say, "Hey, these are some good priorities of the things we'd like to see in that order," then that allows staff and the mayor, myself and the mayor and the clerk, Barbie, to then put them on the agenda. Otherwise, you guys are amending your agenda at the beginning of the meeting to add items uh that aren't on there. So, uh, the agenda is really set by the mayor, um, and myself and Barbie. Uh, that's that's how we do that. I'm from the business perspective. Uh, Barbie from any legal things that need to be done and procedural things that need to be done and then the mayor from the political position. Right. So, uh, just wanted to make that clear as you guys are going through the process. So, no, we have not reacted to any of these yet until we hear from the board and then we'll begin to parse out things of what we can and can't do. So, some of them are lowhanging fruit, I think. You know, there's some just quick easy ones like number one, you know, that we could do in the uh short term and then there's some more medium and long term. Um, but are there any that anyone thinks couldn't be done this year?

The the only item that I was looking to change on this, a couple of them, is item four, adding the cost to county taxpayer and the cost to serve analysis. I think that's something we can do to move that up the priority list. We didn't quite have the cost to serve fully completed by the time we did the last budget goaround. So, I'd like to see that up the priority list so it's ready for us when we go through our next budget process. Yeah. Um, just to be clear, I didn't The numbering on here isn't a list of priorities. It's just Yeah, understood. And that's why we're talking.

I know for me, uh, the Red Oaks Trail, it was weather dependent, uh, was some of James comments. Um, so it's more of a spring action item. Um I appreciate it being listed as number two personally, but at the same time I also know that there are some layers to this and one of those layers is uh weather and essentially uh dependent and so that one I feel like could drop back. Um, one of my concerns during a review was number 11. Um, and the lame duck decision [clears throat]

uh item. And this is just me trying to apply my training and my time that I spent um which and learning some of what was based on the UNCC school government training and my understanding which I think this would and I would love to get our attorney's opinion on this be outside of our statutory ability. Um, I think that this is essentially putting limits on our duty to vote and I have some I I'm a little concerned that this was not be this action would not be grounded and would lead us down some troubling waters and possibly in the future. And I recommend that number 11 be removed from action items.

Did you have any thoughts on that one, Matt? Uh, sure. And I'm happy to talk further about it. Um, I do have some concerns about it. Uh, I think when you take office, you take an oath, right? Uh, and that oath is to fulfill the full term of your elected period. Um, and so it would be putting some kind of arbitrary u limits on fulfilling that duty. Uh there may also be unintended consequences where if you set a rule that you then need to um exceed, right, you've set yourself up for a predicament that you didn't intend. Um so I would suggest at a minimum this be further vetted before we discuss moving forward. Um and I'm happy to take a look at it, give you guys a memo, um and kind of unpack that a little more for you. I'm totally for uh receiving more additional information. Um I have no problem uh essentially keeping it on a discussion list. I just don't think it's a deserving of being on the current priority list.

How does the board feel about just setting this aside for now? Um removing it from the list or does the board think we should invest in a more thorough legal vetting of this idea? Sounds like we want to put a pause on it. I guess I'm I'm good with that. Yeah. Okay. I'm just concerned about the legality aspect of it. We just got back from training and that was something that came up as a concern. Fulfill your full obligation for your term

because it it sounds like at the very least it's going to require some legal time and effort to really vet this out to see if it actually has legs. So, I think we're all in agreement then that we can strike it from the list. Put a pin in it. Yeah, let's segregate it at at least. Down it goes. Any other comments, adjustments?

I'd like to um definitely take a look at uh doing the tree lighting downtown. I don't know. I mean, it we just finished Christmas, so it feels premature, but I feel like I feel like we have to plan because it's probably not as easy as it sounds, but I'd like to, you know, the overwhelmingly what I heard out there was that why is the tree lighting not on Main Street? um the business owners felt like they got more uh attention during that time and that you know they only have a few weeks to um make money before it dies down in January on Main Street. And so they felt like that that although it's beautiful in the park and the tree in the park is beautiful. Sorry, Dina. [laughter] But, um, once people are done with the tree lighting, they leave because we have a lot of activities and it's fun, but anybody with little kids that are out for three hours having a blast and eating cotton candy, they're sugared up and tired by the time their parents are ready to move on to the next thing. And uh, after three hours, everybody's crying, including the parents. So, they just put them in the car and they go home. So, if we can explore doing the tree lighting downtown, that would be great. [snorts]

Question, please.

So, I heard the tree lighting event downtown that includes the current Christmas tree to find a location for it in the downtown. Is that what I'm hearing? it. Well, I'd be okay with a real tree and planting it somewhere and Okay. So, that watching it grow. So, that that's so give options. Yeah, leave options. And um I just feel like, you know, we have kind of a little Hallmark town. Let's market it. You know, that's what we're marketing it as. Let's, you know, capitalize on that. And if we could get a real tree somewhere downtown. I know we did it downtown up until a few years a couple years ago.

Um, so we we moved the event. So when we do the tree lighting, it's we lit up all the trees. It wasn't focused around one tree, right? Um, but the event itself. The event itself. That's why I just that's that's what I was hearing. The majority of is the the actual event. They miss the event in the downtown. They do. Yeah, they do. [clears throat] That helps. Thank you.

So, let me just make sure I'm going to add on here. So, we're going to do a short-term plan utilizing the assets and resources that we currently have within our parks and wreck in the current tree and seeing if there's a viable place for it closer to our downtown. And then a longer term vision, seeing if there's a possibility for a permanent home of a evergreen tree. So, let's be a little more specific. I mean, I want I'd like to see the different options. If we can get an evergreen tree sooner rather than I mean, they do it in Times Square, we can probably do it in Waxaw, right? So, if we could get an evergreen tree, but planted in live permanent. Yeah. Okay. Why not? Cool.

Go for gold. Yeah, I I hear you. We have Todd has an idea. We have an expert opinion. Before Before you retiring, by the way, you're retiring, but Yeah, we're calling you. We have three live trees downtown in front of provisions. One of them is probably 22 maybe 20 feet right now. We planted them. We brought them out of Boone maybe 14 years ago. You get some miracle row on those guys. Yeah. So only thing they need is some decorations on them. The lights look good this year. They just need some decoration. But they're not movable. That's where they would No, they're live. They in the ground. Yeah. You're talking to a landscaper's kid. So he moved everything.

Yeah, you could move it, but it I don't want to kill it though. That's what I'd be afraid of. Okay. But there's three right downtown nativity scene and and the manura lighting. Okay. That's where we keep those in that area. Okay. Um but I also have to be that's reason why we give options because we work with CSX. Yes. And we can't we can't gather near the tracks where the current three trees are at. Mhm. So, I need to make sure that we are taking all that consideration. Okay.

Cuz it it sounds to me like we're sort of I I the thing that sprung to mind was basically a simultaneous event, a dual event. So, a park event [clears throat and snorts] with the tree and everything that we have there and then just doing basically the same thing at the same time, just bringing a little bit more attention and whatnot to the downtown as well. And maybe that just means, you know, we've got a second band stage with some music and some other entertainment that might be drawing people in. Um, I know. And at the same time, we talk about cutting events budgets and stuff, too. So, I know that this goes counter to that, but it sounds like that that might be a direction to consider as well because we do have live trees, we have the big oak tree, we have trees to light up, and they do turn on all of the sudden. It's just there's nobody there to really acknowledge it and hoop and holler about it.

Yeah. And that's what I was thinking. If we if there's an event in the park, there won't be an event on Main Street. You can't do both. I don't think I mean you you could try and I know Dina will do her best, but I think we need to centralize it. And if you know what I'm hearing and from the surveys as well and uh from the word on the street so to speak, everybody's kind of not everybody I'm sure but many people have uh said that they'd like it on Main Street. So if we can do that, that would be great.

If I could, since we're on trees, um Commissioner Daunt, uh number nine, can you expand on that just a little bit? I have not read Weddington's ordinance yet. Um, it's something that I think Matt and I can probably work on, but what um that could go a bunch of different ways. Are you looking at just no clear cutting specifically or is it trees that are on plans that they're removing before they develop? What What kind of is it the overall intent there? Uh, I forwarded a link to the exact ordinance to the town manager. So, um it's I know they spent a lot of time on it really crafting it and so um if we could just

for the most part it would probably be just copy and paste, you know. Um yeah, the nuts and bolts I' I've spoken with Jim Bell about this at length and the nuts and bolts is to save the big ones and the idea that a tree that extends a certain diameter starts to get cost prohibitive to remove, right? And that's that's what is built into there to sort of preserve the biggest trees whenever possible.

Just a little more nuanced, are we talking specifically about larger scale developments as opposed to single family lots, existing lots of record? All those sort of things are things I think Kevin and I would have to unpack as we develop this because there may be limitations depending on the authority that we would have for certain regulations that you might be desiring to do. So just keep that in mind as we

come into it too. Correct. There are other things we can do if they sorry if if they were to invoke you know it was a forestry operation or whatever then there are actually um I think you can delay development of that property for up or permitting for up to three years or something afterwards. So um we can codify that if we don't already have it know which direction to go. The main vision is on development. So it would be for developing new land. Um, but I know I've personally had a situation where a large tree becomes a hazard. Yeah. And it has to be removed and we don't want to burden the owner, property owners for stuff like that.

Um, and if it is a single family, single unit, you got a big tree, it's like we just really want the pool. Okay. You know, it's it's just one tree. You're probably surrounded by other vegetation. The goal is to really preserve the large trees that exist in that natural space that hasn't been touched in a while and try and make use of those trees and make it cost prohib cost prohibitive to just simply clear cut and remove everything. So it it is sort of a an approach to control the clear cutting whenever possible.

If I may expand on that a little bit. So yes, cottifying that language uh in that forestry operation that may may or may not occur prior to development.

Um and codifying that I think would be wise. Um I think what Commissioner Danton I just took a peek at that language trying to better understand it. I think what he might be because in our ordinance and I will lean on staff to confirm this that we already have some of those frameworks in place for major subdivisions. We have we incentivize it on major subdivisions, but it's also primarily in public spaces. Uh I would need to talk with Matt about on the residential side of things. Um uh there there may be some legal issues with preventing trees being removed once the lots are done and the houses are on them and everything. Yeah, we can check in. We can look at that.

So, I think I think that it's pre pre-development um and then to include minor subdivisions in in that aspect. So, not just major, but also minor subdivisions because I I do recall a project in the past history where there was possibly some trees that may or may not have been able to be saved, but it was a minor subdivision. So, it they got to kind of move it all along. Yeah. and not take that and not wait those tree preservation initiatives. Oh, sounds good. Also, just just bear in mind that there will be limits set by state law. Yes. That certain things we can't, you know, extend beyond what we're allowed to

100%. Yes. No, within our what perview we do have pre-existing. We'll take a look at Thank you. Thanks. And then um I guess the red oaks trail I know that James had said during the meeting it would probably be about April. You can't do anything now. The ground is frozen so you can't do anything but I guess um between now and March maybe or probably March would be okay to get that um somewhere going back to the board so folks can make a decision. That's what action. Right. So that's Yeah, that's what I'm asking for.

So number three,

um employee efficiency program. This was something that was passed by the board uh in 2024, but it was only in consent agenda. There wasn't any discussion about it. And then last year when I referred to it, nobody knew about it. So I just felt like it would be good to do a presentation on it, help staff to become aware that hey there's, you know, some reward out there for you if you come up with some ideas. We want to tap into their c creativity and um encourage them to help keep our town efficient. Um, is everyone okay with doing a presentation on that?

Yeah. Yeah. I think it never hurts to do a reminder on something like that every once in a while just so people know it's there

and there might be room for improvement, you know? I mean, uh, Commissioner Dulio, you work in the corporate uh area. Uh, that's kind of closely related to this, don't you? Yeah, we do positional um metrics for each position and everybody's aware of what the what the expectations are and they're scored out as such and then there's bonuses if there's money available to that EIC bonuses. So it just it makes everybody understand what that physician's accountable for, what the metrics are and what the expectations are and that's norm across the public sector, private sector. uh four was mentioned already and then five we had options for town campus cost mitigation. Um this is a really big building. I'm not sure we're using all of it really. Um you know what could we do to mitigate the cost? Um is is everyone in favor of

Yeah, this this has been a discussion for for a little bit since the campus opened

is that there is a lot of space here. Uh the space isn't utilized to the degree that it's utilized in the private sector and so there's some of us on the board are wondering is there a way to maybe lease out some of the space within the building a few offices up several offices adjoining offices and so forth. um to try and curtail some of the costs that were incurred actually buying this building and and maintaining the building. Uh we have what is it like a $1.5 million note every year and then we have what $300 to $500,000 in facilities and maintenance costs. And if there's anything we can do to get some of that money back by leasing out the space, that's something we'd like looked at. Just a point of clarification. Are we talking about

Yes, including your office. [laughter] Excuse me. I appreciate that. Um, are we talking about leasing and for clarificational purposes in partnership with other municipalities and or county uh county teams? uh possibly leasing or are we talking about just more broader scale?

I have spoken with the county manager about this and um a county commissioner as well. There is potentially some opportunity there. They've discussed the possibility maybe um I know that we have what is it three customer service bays right here and so I extended to them you know we can have a county person at one of those as well. Um, so ideally I think partnering with the county makes the most sense since we're all municipalities, we all kind of operate within that world. I think that makes the most sense. But if we can't get something like that to happen in the next year or two, then maybe we go a little bit broader and look for private sectors as well. And just one of the things that I'd like to point out um is just the infrastructure uh that would be tied with that. Uh sometimes the county has different infrastructure needs, IT needs, um separation needs, uh depending on services provided. So I I do agree that it's worthwhile exploring. I just would like to put a note of caution. Sometimes when you open that door, there are second and third order effects that could cost us short term for that long-term mitigation um in supporting those infrastructure needs. And I think the key is to keep the eye focused on the profitability of of any such endeavor because to your point if it's costing us more in IT support copy paper [laughter] things of that nature and that it becomes less valuable and less worthwhile. So I think we need to bear that in mind. Of course.

Um I would say a resolution for HP24 is probably pretty easy to do. Yeah, there's several bills out there and you know the list we were just looking at earlier today has a couple of bills. So I guess we maybe we need to pick one or do we choose all of them? Well, we probably have a better shot at HB1 170, House Bill 170, because it's local. Um 24 is a clean bill. It's actually one sentence. It's the simplest thing I've ever seen. But um

I think they said that one was like because you know I wrote this before we spoke to them and then after as we spoke to them I think they said that that one's not going to go anywhere. So no. So I think we need to focus on the local bill maybe uh 170.

Yeah. I think it would make sense to have maybe a single resolution that lists out HP24 H170.

And I think the language that we would want to encompass is HB H170 or HB24 or similar language. So make it broad so that you're specifically listing them and then also say or any other bill that contains similar language with the net effect of regaining local control over zoning and density and because I mean that would be the the resolution overall is local control of res of density and zoning and then you would be listing these house bills and senate bills as examples and then maybe specifically list then the language you want to see continued local control, support for local control.

Sounds good. Yeah.

So, I mean, this has been a really good discussion and I think to kind of wind this down. What do we want to do from a priority standpoint? Do we want to say pick one or sorry, pick two or three of these and say, "Let's work on these in the next quarter." Um or do we want to try and grind through all of these? We've taken one basically down. We've got one that's already done. So, we're down to 10. Do we want to reestablish a top 10 or are we thinking let's just pick two or three that we can get done this quarter and then at another our next work session we can kind of revisit what to do next? Thoughts?

Yeah. Uh well, the only two we haven't really discussed was the public banking presentation and the um uh a recall process. Uh number 10. Yeah. Um you know, there's no rush on a public banking presentation. I mean, just a my personal uh thing that I wouldn't mind seeing sometime this year. So, you know, there's we got budget coming up and there's no rush to do that. Um, but just sometime this year would be great. Um, if everyone agrees. Uh, 10. Um, so the recall process, not really a rush on that either, but those two are probably more longer longer term like in, you know, third or fourth quarter or something. Um

10 also requires time for this that's the state delegation as well.

Yeah. So 10 and and that's to start the process of uh working with our state delegation. It's our state delegation. It's a local bill. I think there's layers to that um here. And then of course time on task with our attorney. Um for me the way I'm looking at it here is just the to bite this uh down here into smaller pieces. Christmas tree seemed like an action item that we want to accomplish this year. So we probably need to start planning this first quarter to [snorts] implement it if we wanted it for this 2026 Christmas season. I I would recommend bringing that up to uh some somewhere around the second or third priority or something like that as a first quarter action item. Um the board response it sounds like something that's an immediate lowhanging fruit action item. So we can go ahead and put that as number one. Um uh we all are in agreement that we can kind of push back the option five red oaks trail. It is weather dependent. Um and so we can maybe roll that back into March or um so the tail end of this first quarter uh before opening up the spring. Um I think it's reasonable to also then go ahead and take a look um at uh seeing if I don't know if it's accomplishable this quarter, but to go ahead and do the uh presentation of employees and efficiencies within partnership with our town manager. Um and and we'll that seems like something that may be to put uh on this quarter's agenda. Um that or the uh campus mitigation.

Yeah, the efficiency program is or already exists and so and I I did forward an email, you know, the email chain that uh brought it about. Um, so something we probably could do fairly soon. I mean, shouldn't be too difficult to do a presentation on. Yeah. Um, so go ahead, Kevin.

Okay. Um, for number nine, um, um, if if that's something that the board is in, um, consensus on, we have a, uh, I guess it would be an omnibus bill of, uh, text amendments we're probably bringing to y'all probably late spring, early summer. Um, they're going to be related to development. We could put the trees in there as part of that. We'll go ahead and put that on our kind of list of to-dos. That'll be a second quarter kind of list, I guess, but we can get that before you guys around that time if you're all right with that. I support that. Okay.

Uh, so to summarize, and please correct me if I'm wrong, Commissioner Ferris, I know. So, I'm not going to include one since it's done. Um, so for Q1, we're looking at item three, item four, item 8, and item seven. 34 78. Does everyone agree that these are items we want to address in Q1 of this year? Okay.

Yes. And then it sounds like for Q2, we've already got item two and item nine queued up for Q2. And we'll talk further about Q2 in a couple work sessions. Is that clear, Mr. Dodson? Awesome. All righty. That is the last of our agenda items. So I will now open the floor for general commissioner comments. Anyone?

Thank you for a great work session.

I thank you. Uh this has been a fabulous work session. So uh comments from the mayor. This has been good and productive. Uh I think we made good progress. We talked over a lot of good items here. Um, and this is basically going to be our new culture. This this is what we're going to do moving forward. Um, Scott and I have talked about this at length. It's something that is more representative of the best practice in terms of municipal government. So, this is what we want to establish as the culture of Waxaw and this is what's expected moving forward. So, we'll keep doing this. Um, if these end up long, they end up long. If they end up short, great. But, uh, we will do these once a month and then we'll do a board meeting once a month. So, thank you everyone for attending and thanks for everyone's input. This is a really good discussion. Thank you.

Do we? Uh, looking ahead, our next Do we need a Do we need a motion? Just looking ahead, our next board meeting is on February 10th at 6:30 p.m. at the town hall chambers where we're at today. And without further ado, can I get a motion to adjurnn? So moved. All in favor? Any opposed? All right. If you're opposed, you can wait here. Have a good night. Thank you.