3-17-25 - Minutes bwm approved FINAL FINAL
UnionCounty,NCBoardofCommissionersMeetingMinutes
UnionCountyGovernmentCenter
500NorthMainStreet
Monroe,NorthCarolina
www.unioncountync.govMonday, March 17, 20256:00PMBoardRoom,FirstFloor
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Closed Session - 5:15 PM
25-163 Closed Session
At approximately 5:25 p.m., in the open session, in the Stony D. Rushing Conference Meeting Room, Chair Merrell called the regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners to order.
Chair Merrell moved that the Board enter closed session pursuant to G.S. 143-318.11:
(a)1), to prevent the disclosure of information that is privileged or confidential pursuant to G.S. Section 132-1.1(a);
(a)(3), for attorney-client privilege:
(a)(4), to discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by the public body, including agreement on a tentative list of economic
development incentives that may be offered by the public body in negotiations; and
(a)(5), for property negotiations;
as such purposes are fully stated in the agenda for this meeting, which has been made publicly available.
The motion passed by a unanimous vote as follows:
Chair Melissa B. MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina B. HelmsAye
Commissioner Gary SidesAye
At approximately 5:48 p.m., Chair Merrell moved that the Board take a recess to reconvene at 6:00 p.m. in the Board’s meeting chamber. The motion passed by a unanimous vote as follows:
Chair Melissa B. MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina B. HelmsAye
Commissioner Gary SidesAye
Opening of Meeting - 6:00 PM
At approximately 6:00 p.m., in open session, in the Board’s meeting chamber on the first floor, Union County Government Center, 500 North Main Street, Monroe, North Carolina, Chair Merrell
called the meeting of the Board of Commissioners to order.
PRESENT:Chair Merrell, Vice Chair Brian W. Helms, Commissioner Gary Sides, Commissioner Chirstina B. Helms, and Commissioner Clancy Baucom
NONE:None
ALSO PRESENT:Brian W. Matthews, County Manager; Patrick Niland, Deputy County Manager; Clayton Voignier, Assistant County Manager; Lynn G. West, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners;
Jason Kay, County Attorney; and other interested residents
Invocation - Commissioner Christina Helms offered the invocation.
Pledge of Allegiance – Chair Melissa Merrell led the body and audience in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.
Informal Comments
Chair Merrell noted that not many people had signed up to speak during Informal Comment but said she wanted to inform every one of two changes to the Business agenda for the evening.
She stated that staff had requested the removal of item 25-145, the Employee Compensation and Benefits Update from tonight’s agenda. Chair Merrell said that unless there was an objection,
that item would be removed from the agenda. She also stated that the rezoning application associated with item 25-123, Conditional Rezoning CZ-2024-007 Gold Branch, was withdrawn earlier
in the afternoon by the applicant. She stated that by operation of the law, the item was removed from the Board's consideration for the night.
Chair Merrell asked the Clerk if anyone had registered to speak during informal comments.
Chair Merrell read the guidelines for speakers making comments during Informal Comments.
The Chair recognized Chad Emerin as the first speaker.
Mr. Emerin introduced himself, stating he lives in Weddington. He explained that he had planned to speak about the Conditional Rezoning for Gold Branch, but since that item had been
withdrawn, he had nothing further to say and thanked the Board.
Chair Merrell announced that the next person signed up to speak was Doug Presley.
Robert Douglas Presley said he lives in Indian Trail, right near Sun Valley. He said he wanted to implore the Commission not to raise property taxes by 60 percent. He shared that he
isclose to retirementand said this would create tremendous hardship for people like him who will soon be on a fixed income.
He shared that he lives in an old house on an old homestead that he doesnot want to leave. He said much higher taxes are going to make that difficult for him and for others in the same
situation.
He said he understood the County must have revenue and that taxes will increase, but he implored the Commission not to raise taxes by the enormous amount he has been reading about in
the newspaper.
Rich Kempter introduced himself as a Union County resident residing at in Wesley Chapel and a member of the Heritage South Community. He mentioned that the community has appeared before
the Board multiple times to report on the ongoing sewer odor issue.
He explained that Union County Water began a pilot program last summer, which followed some measurements prior to a contractor implementing the pilot program. He emphasized the strong
communication they have had with John Shutak and the water team, saying they have been wonderful with which to work.
Mr. Kempter noted that, to his understanding, today was the last day of the pilot program, which had been extended for about ten days. He acknowledged that some very technical, professional
measurements have beingbeen taken, but he wanted to report on what he called a veryuntechnical simple test—the smell test. He shared that from his and his family’s perspective, since
the pilot program started, there has been virtually no odor and said that he believed the pilot program has been very successful.
He expressed hope that in the coming weeks that the technical measurements will be assessed and will beshared with the Board at the beginning of April to continue the program. He closed
by thanking the Board and Union County WaterDepartment.
Deana Terry introduced herself as a Union County resident living in Indian Trail and the founder of Keystep, a nonprofit that supports foster youth transitioning out of care. She shared
that she spent five years in the foster system before aging out 37 years ago, and she still feels the lasting effects.
She said that she entered foster care as a 4.0 student but left homeless, pregnant, and without a diploma. Ms. Terry shared that it was not until her mid-40s that she was able to climb
out of poverty. She said that in her 50s, her small business began to thrive, which gave her the opportunity to start Keystep.
She clarified that she does not consider herself a success story, but rather sees it as a tragic story with a better outcome than most. She said her journey did not have to be a constant
battle just to reach self-sufficiency.
Deana Terry continued by sharing data about the foster youth in Union County. She stated that there are currently 41 former foster youth between the ages of 18 and 24 known in the county,
but only 17 of those youth qualify for support through the LINKS program, which ends at age 21. She shared that by 2026, that number is expected to increase to approximately 70. She
noted that these figures only include those who age out at 18 and do not account for those who reunify with families as adolescents.
She described the national statistics as grim. Ms. Terry said that 20 percent of foster youth leave the system unhoused, 70 percent become parents before age 21, 50 percent leave without
a high school diploma, and less than five percent have a driver’s license. She stated that former foster youth experience PTSD at twice the rate of war veterans and experience higher
rates of anxiety, depression, and suicide. She pointed out that the most tragic statisticis that 55 foster youth go missing every day in the U.S.,yet there are no Amber Alerts or flyers
for them.
Despite these challenges, she said Keystep, a non-profit for aging out foster youth, has had a tangible impact in under six months, offering critical resources such as a fully stocked
pantry, job opportunities, tutors, and even loving host homes for two youth who were about to become homeless.
Deana Terry shared that Gary Sides, serves as a life coach for one of the couples in her program. She emphasized that with the right support, foster youth do notjustonly survive,but
they also thrive. She said they can become engineers, business owners, nurses, and even nonprofit leaders. Some, she said, could reach for the stars like Steve Jobs.
She said for that to happen, the first step is recognizing that the current system needs adjustments. She pointed out that the system had not changed much in nearly 39 yearssince Title
IV-E was amended to include Independent Living programs, or even since 2008 when Extended Care up to age 21 was introduced. She noted that there is not even an after-hours crisis line
for youth in extended care.
Ms. Terry stressed that listening to former foster youth is one way to make the right adjustments and that organizations such asKeystep should be embraced and supported, because they
help fill in the gaps. She explained that nonprofits can engage and involve the community in ways government programs often cannot.
In closing, she said she was here to begin a dialogue with the County and to ask for its support in helping these young adults reach their full potential. She thanked the Board for their
time.
Chair Merrell thanked everyone forattending tonight’s meeting and asked if there were any other speakers who had not signed up but wished to speak tonight. Shante Plowman came forward
and indicated that she would like to comment at this time.
Ms. Plowman stated that she resides at Howey Bottoms Road. She asked whether it was Colton or Kevin Presley who had the house development that was withdrawn.
Chair Merrell responded that application had been withdrawn.
Ms. Plowman continued by saying that the tax increasewhichshe agreedseems to be is about 60 percent. She mentioned that the Board should take takes into consideration all the new houses
and developments built, which she believes will bring in a lot of money.
She asked if the tax rates would go down or if the tax amount would remain the same. She expressed hope that the Board takes into consideration the significant amount of money being
brought in from these developments.
Chair Merrell responded that the Board would be entering budget season in the coming months and encouraged everyone to stay informed by watching online or attending meetings during that
time. She thanked everyone for being therepresent.
She then asked if anyone else wished to speak. Hearing none, she announced that they would move on to the next item on the agenda.
Public Hearing(s)Chair Merrell opened the public hearing at approximately 6:14 p.m. and announced that the next four items on the agenda were all public hearings related to proposed
road naming. She explained that these hearings would be conducted at the same time. Anyone wishing to speak on a specific item should identify the item in their remarks; otherwise, it
would be assumed they were speaking to all four items collectively.
The items were as follows:
Item 25-126: Road naming for the unincorporated portion of Segments C and E, located between Tory Path and the existing Helms Road.
Item 25-134: Road naming for the unincorporated portion of Segment D, located between Waxhaw-Marvin Road and NC 75.
Item 25-135: Road naming for the unincorporated portion of Segment F, located between Waxhaw-Marvin Road and the CSX Railroad.
Item 25-137: Road naming for the unincorporated portion of Segment G, located between Segment C and the CSX Railroad.
The Chair opened each of the public hearings and recognized Bjorn Hansen, Senior Planner, to provide comments from the planning staff.
Bjorn Hansen thanked Chair Merrell, members of the Board, and Manager Matthews. He displayed a map showing the various road names and segments being discussed.
He explained that these road projects are the result of a successful grant awarded to NCDOT for improving railroad access on the west side of Waxhaw. Mr. Hansen explained that the grant
was awarded several years ago, and some of the roadslike one of the longer ones shown on the maphave already been built.
He stated that progress prompted staff to partner with NCDOT and the Town of Waxhaw last fall to conduct a public comment period to gather suggested names for the new roads.
Mr. Hansen explained the current status of the roads involved. He said one of the new roads is already open, while Tory Path has been closed at the railroad. He stated that Helms Road
is also expected to be closed at the railroad.
He pointed out that the new road,which isconsidered to be theamajor part of the project,will eventually serve as a bridge crossing over both NC 75 and the railroad, creating a connection.
He stated that a short section of Helms Road will remain.
Mr. Hansen explained that some of the road segments are located within Waxhaw, but most are in a combination. He said they could have held six public hearings, but Tory Pathwas recommended
to keep its current name, so it did not require a hearing. He stated that residents were notified that Tory Path would not be part of the public hearing process.
He said the long section that crosses over Helms Road is recommended to be named King Hagler, in recognition of a Catawba Indian chief from the 1700s who served as a peacemaker between
settlers and local native tribes.
Mr. Hanson stated that a short section of Helms Road is proposed to be renamed Ernest Way, to honor a property owner whose land was acquired for the road project. He said another section
of Helms Road would keep its existing name and continue over to NC 75. He further stated that the final short section of Helms Road is to be renamed Sabinsky Way, in recognition of a
Town of Waxhaw employee.
Mr. Hanson said the proposed names are recommended by staff in cooperation with the Town of Waxhaw. He noted that the Board has been provided with a copy of the resolution passed by
Waxhaw last month taking action on its portions.
He explained that once the names are finalized, staff would coordinate with the post office, Google, the tax office, 911, and NCDOT to update all relevant databases.
Chair Merrell announced that no one had registered to speak during the public hearing. She asked if there was anyone in the audience who had not signed up to speak but who wanted to
speak during the public hearing.
Jackie Zamora came forward and stated that she resides at 4524 Helms Road. Ms. Zamora stated that she doesnot have a problem with most of the proposed name changes. However, she expressed
concern about the small section of Helms Road that is set to be renamed King Hagler.
She explained that although many homes are being demolished or removed as part of the project, there are still a couple homes and businesses on Helms Road that are not being removed.
She suggested that instead of changing the name of that section to consider keeping it as Helms Road and rename where no one lives and no businesses are located. She stated that changing
the name of the section would affect the people who live there and their addresses would change.
Chair Merrell asked Jackie Zamora if she had attended any of the Waxhaw meetings to share her concern or option.
Ms. Zamora replied that she had not. She explained that she received the notice by mail, which is why she chose to come to this meeting instead. She also noted that her property is outside
the Waxhaw city limits.
Chair Merrell thanked Ms. Zamora for attending tonight’s meeting and sharing her thoughts.
Ms. Zamora added a comment that one of her neighbors is a 75-year-old woman who has resided there her whole life. She said she believed it would be inconvenient for her neighbor to have
to change her address at this point, especially since the name change is not finalized yet.
Chair Merrell asked Mr. Hansen if he could address those changes and explain the changes would affect the area Ms. Zamora had mentioned.
Mr. Hansen asked for clarification, confirming that she was referring to the section in the middle of the map he had presented.
Ms. Zamora came forward and pointed to the map, identifying the pink section labeled Sabinsky Way. She explained that a few homes are located in that area, including her own, her elderly
neighbors, and another nearby neighbor. She also pointed out a couple of businesses in that area. She said she was hoping they could keep the Helms Road name awhere people still live
and instead rename the section where no one resides King Hagler Road.
Mr. Hansen responded that the map did not show the full municipal limits, but noted that in any case, it is important to keep the road name consistent along the road itself. He stated
that would mean changing the current recommendation for the purple segment and realistically until they found an intersection such as Sabinsky Way or possibly as far as Tory Path to
change King Hagler to Helms Road or potentially Old Helms Road to accommodate the request.
He added that he could not provide a definitive answer at that moment and said they would need to go back to Waxhaw to ask its input on the proposed change.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms said he thought it was worth exploring. He suggested that since residents would be affected by address changes, it would not hurt to reach out to Waxhaw to
ask if it would be amendable to the changes.
He added that once they receive that information, the Board could deliberate on it. He emphasized that he would be interested to know if Waxhaw would consider reversing the road names,
especially if it impacts multiple residents.
Mr. Hansen responded that they would follow up on the matter.
25-126 Public Hearing - Road Naming for Unincorporated Portion of
Segments C and E, Located Between Tory Path and the Existing
Helms Rd.
25-134Public Hearing - Road Naming for Unincorporated Portion of
Segment D, Located Between Waxhaw-Marvin Road and NC 75
25-135 Public Hearing - Road Naming for Unincorporated Portion of
Segment F, Located Between Waxhaw-Marvin Road and the CSX
Railroad.
25-137 Public Hearing - Road Naming for Unincorporated Portion of
Segment G, Located Between Segment C and the CSX Railroad
At approximately 6:26 p.m., Chair Merrell closed each of the four (4) public hearings.
Staff Recognition
25-125 Recognize Union County Water Staff
Chair Merrell recognized Christopher Clark, Director of Water and Wastewater Operations, for this item.
Chris Clark recognized Matt Hargett from the Sewer Field Services Division. Mr. Clark expressed appreciation to the Board for the opportunity to recognize Union County Water staff and
congratulated the team for a job well done. He added that he personally loves the work in Water and Wastewater Operations, and believes they have fantastic people, with Matt Hargett
being a prime example.
He stated that at the Annual NC One Water Conference in Raleigh, NC, the NC One Water Association selected Matt Hargett for the Three Musketeer Award. Matt Hargett works as a Utility
Field ServicesSupervisor in Water and Wastewater Operations and has been working atin Union County Water for 22 years. He explained that The Three Musketeer Award is designed to honor
three individuals who have not only volunteered countless hours in their respective committees but have also gone above and beyond in giving their time, resources, and support to the
NC One Water Staff. He stated that Mr. Hargett was given this honor byfor conducting himself as one who truly represents “All for One, and One for All” for the Association. In addition
to this award, Mr. Hargett was elected to a 2-year term on the Board of Trustees for NC One Water. Mr. Clark said Mr. Hargett’s dedication to the water and wastewater industry and its
continued growth within North Carolina is made evident by this recognition and election to serve as a Trustee.
Mr. Hargett was photographed with the members of the Board of Commissioners.
Mr. Clark recognized the second group of employees: Water Competition Teams – NC One Water State Competition.
He stated that during the 2024 Annual NC One Water Conference, Union County Water had four competition teams compete in four events: Operations Challenge, Hydrant Hysteria (forMen and
Women), and Water Pipe Tapping. He explained that the Operations Challenge Competition comprises of five timed, skilled events that range from cutting pipe and making taps, pump maintenance,
laboratory processes and calculations, to performing a confined space personnel retrieval exercise. Mr. Clark said the hydrant hysteria competition tests the team’s ability to not only
put together a different hydrant each year, but to maximize teamwork and communication to successfully and safely compete with a winning time. He stated that the water tapping team also
focuses on collaboration, effective communication, and skill to be able perform in this water specific task in timed competition. He shared that the County’s teams performed well in
this state level competition and brought home the following awards:
Operations Challenge:
1st – Overall, in Competition
1st - Collections Event
1st – Safety Event
1st – Maintenance Event
1st – Process Control Event
2nd – Laboratory Event
Hydrant Hysteria:
1st – Men’s event
1st – Women’s event
Water Tap Competition - 1st Place
Operations Challenge:
•Brett Fisher – Utility Technician Supervisor
•Hayden Hunter – Safety Officer
•Jonathan Jordan – Water Reclamation Superintendent
•Austin Medlin – Utility Technician Supervisor
•Coach – Jayme Hargett – Safety Officer
Hydrant Hysteria (Men’s Team):
•Justin Huntley – Utility Service Manager
•Jimmie Guillen – Senior Utility Technician
•Coach – Jonathan Smith – Water Treatment Plant Manager
Hydrant Hysteria (Women’s Team):
•Michelle McCarver – Administrative Professional, Water
•Beth Belk – Senior Administrative Support Specialist, Fire Services
•Coach – Justin Huntley – Utility Service Manager
Water Pipe Tap Team:
•Richard Baker – Cross Connection Control Coordinator
•Rick Mareth – Water Treatment Plant Manager
•Matt Hargett – Field Services Supervisor
•Coach/Alternate - Dominick Hamilton – Utility Technician Supervisor
The members of the teams were photographed with the members of the Board of Commissioners.
Chair Merrell said it was worth attending tonight’smeeting to celebrate the employees and the incredible work they are doing. She noted that placing first, second, or even in the top
ten is impressive, but being in first place is absolutely amazing.
25-143 Service Award Recognition
Chair Merrell moved to the next item on the agenda, 25-143 - Service Award Recognition. She introduced and recognized Jennifer Davis, Assistant Human Resources Director, to present the
item.
Ms. Davis shared that on Thursday, February 27th, Human Resources hosted the Q1 service award ceremony to celebrate 38 employees who had met an anniversary milestone.
During that ceremony, 11 employees were recognized for 5 years of service, five employees for 10 years of service; one employee was recognized for 15 years of service, five employees
were recognized for 20 years of service, and one employee was recognized for 25 years of service.
Ms. Davis expressed how grateful Human Services is to host these events for employees and how much they cherish the stories shared by each one. She mentioned that she personally looked
forward to these quarterly ceremonies and plans to continue inviting the Board members to each one.
She noted that some Board members have attended these ceremonies in the past and shared that the next ceremony will be on April 29th. She said she would be sending out the invitation
soon and encouraged everyone to mark their calendars in hopes they could attend.
She shared a short video of the February 27th service award ceremony.
Chair Merrell said it was fun to attend the service award event and called it absolutely wonderful. She appreciated hearing the supervisors speak about the employees being recognized
for 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 years of service.
She encouraged other Board members who havenot attended one of the service award ceremonies in the past to do so, noting that Vice Chair Brian W. Helms had participated. She said it
was the best way to start the day and added that her dog Oz came along and seemed to enjoy meeting everyone on their way into work.
25-147Recognition by Crime Stoppers
Chair Merrell introduced Item 25-147-Recognition by Crime Stoppers. She recognized Reid Helms from Union County Crimestoppers. She described him as one of the most incredible people
she has ever met in the county. She noted that he serves as Union County’s ambassador to Crime Stoppers.
Mr. Helms thanked Chair Merrell and the Board for inviting him to the meeting. He shared that he has been involved with Crime Stoppers since July 10, 1981, when it was started by Dr.
Paul Helms. He stated that over the years, the program has grown and expressed appreciation for the input and support from many people and sponsors. He mentioned how they have such a
beautiful place to hold the barbecue, at the Ag Center where Crime Stoppers has been holding its annual barbeque for approximately 15 years.
He said last year was the best year that they have had, with people lined out the door. He presented an engraved plaque in appreciation for all the help the Board has given in the
pastand hopefully in the future. He pointed out that some members and associate members of the Crime Stoppers Board were in attendance tonight and recognized Sheriff Eddie Cathey as
a very active member.
Mr. Helms along with the members and associate members of the Crime Stoppers Board were photographed with members of the Board of Commissioners.
Chair Merrell recognized the 2024 Law Enforcement Officer of the Year, Chris Byrum, and acknowledged his family.
Mr. Helms followed by explaining that many probably already read the story in the newspaper or saw it on their phones. He shared that Officer Chris Byrum serves as the school resource
officer at Weddington High School and recently responded to a situation after school, where his actionssaved a young boy’s life. He stated that the Crime Stopper board selected Officer
Byrum as Officer of the Year because his actions went above and beyond the call of duty. He expressed appreciation to Officer Byrum for his service.
Officer Byrum was photographed with his family and the members of the Board of Commissioners.
Consent Agenda
Vice Chair Brian Helms moved to approve the items listed on theconsent agenda as published.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
25-079 Contract - Architectural Services for Judicial Center and
Government Center Renovations Project
ACTION:Authorized the County Manager to 1) negotiate and execute an agreementsubstantially consistent with this agenda item, 2) exercise any renewal orextension term options set forth
in the Agreement, and 3) terminate theAgreement if deemed in the best interest of the County, each in theCounty Manager's discretion.
This request is to approve a contract with CDesign, Inc. to completeAdvanced Planning for the Government Center and Judicial Centerproject. The scope of work for the renovation is anticipated
to includevarious renovations within both buildings expected to be approximately35,000 total gross square feet to accommodate additional courtroomspace. Other scope includes the possibility
of a new connecting bridge toprovide secure circulation between the buildings if necessary.
In the Advanced Planning phase of design, the designer will be
responsible for development of project goals, verification of the building
program requirements, space planning, code requirement review,
conceptual design options and renderings, architectural and engineering
design narratives, site review, preliminary schedule, phasing and bidding
approach and CMAR cost review and analysis. The project is likely to
include multiple phases to allow current operations to be minimally
impacted. The designer will also be tasked with coordination and teaming
with the CMAR to be selected by the County.
The Facilities and Fleet Management Department partnered with the
Procurement Department to issue Request for Qualifications 2024-073,
Architectural and Engineering Services for Design and Construction
Administration, Judicial Center and Government Center Renovations
Project.
On May 13, 2024, eight (8) qualifications packages were received
and reviewed by an evaluation team in accordance with applicable
evaluation criteria for this project. The top three (3) firms were invited to
shortlist interview/presentations. As a result, the team requests approval
to enter into a contract with CDesign Inc. for Advanced Planning services.
Staff recommends the Board approve the contract with CDesign, Inc., the
amount of $113,320.00.Future design phase contracts will be brought to the Board in futuremeetings for consideration and approval.
The cost of the design contract is $113,320.00. There are sufficient funds
to cover this expense in capital account 40080190, JC and GCRenovations Phase 1.
25-119 Budget Amendment - Local Infrastructure and Workforce Support
Funding
ACTION:1) Recognized, received, and appropriated $13,481 of FY2025 AgreementAddendum 123 funding from the NC Division of Public Health forinvestment in performance management to the
Human Services Agency,Department of Public Health and 2) approve Budget Amendment # 26.
This Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funding, awarded
to the North Carolina Division of Public Health (DPH), recognizes
underinvestment in the public health system and the foundational
services it provides. This funding supports core infrastructure
improvements that include, but are not limited to workforce, foundational
capabilities, and data infrastructure.The Foundational Public Health Services (FPHS) framework wasdeveloped by the Public Health Accreditation Board Center for Innovationin 2013, revised
in 2022, to define a minimum package of core publichealth services areas that no public health jurisdiction can be without. TheFPHS framework outlines the unique responsibilities of
governmentalpublic health and the vital role of governmental public health in a thrivingcommunity. One of the DPH PHIG strategies focuses on FoundationalCapabilities within the FPHS
framework. Foundational Capabilities arethe cross-cutting skills, knowledge, and practice needed to support andprovide core public health functions, programs, and activities which arekey
to ensuring opportunities for health, promoting wellbeing andachieving health outcomes across a community.
This Agreement Addendum (AA123- Investment in Performance
Management) provides one-time funds for Union County Public Health to
invest and support its capacity and expertise specific to Foundational
Capability Accountability and Performance Management. Capacity is
defined as having the tools, the people, and the time to carry out the
Foundational Capability. Expertise is defined as having the training,
experience, and skill to cover the Foundational Capability.
Funding in the amount of $13,481 is awarded with no County match.
25-132 Agreement with Anson County Health Department for Maternal
Health Services
ACTION:Authorized the County Manager to 1) negotiate and execute an agreementsubstantially consistent with this agenda item, 2) exercise any renewal orextension term options set forth
in the Agreement, and 3) terminate theAgreement if deemed in the best interest of the County, each in theCounty Manager's discretion.
Anson County Health Department has requested assistance from the
Union County Public Health Department to provide maternal health
services for pregnant Anson County residents or refer to a private
provider in the community, whichever is applicable. Anson County Health
Department does not have the capacity to fully provide maternal health
services as stipulated by the State Division of Public Health and seeks to
assure those services through an agreement with the Union County
Public Health Division. Union County Public Health will assess each
patient’s ability to pay, and charge fees based on a sliding fee scale,
while also ensuring that no patient is refused care or services because of
inability to pay. This is consistent with how Union County Public Health
provides maternal health services to Union County residents. The
projected number of patients seen is under 10 annually. This is an
open-term agreement.
Union County will receive $30,000 annually from Anson County Health
Department for the provision of maternal health services under this
agreement. No additional County funding is requested.
25-164 Grant Application - NC Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
ACTION:Authorized the County Manager to submit the associated grant applicationand make necessary assurances and certifications associated with thegrant application as substantially
consistent with this agenda item, whichincludes the authorization to execute documents related to award of thegrant and budget funds as appropriate.
The North Carolina Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
(NCDMVA) has established a grant program for existing county veterans
offices (CVOs) to provide services to veterans. Union County is eligible
for this grant as a CVO with eight or less certified veteran service officers
(VSOs). If awarded, the grant amount may be up to $20,000 with no local
match required. Eligible grant expenditures include, but are not limited to,
training and education, conferences, compensation for personnel service,
advertising and public relations, and office supplies.
Potential receipt of up to $20,000 with no local match required.
25-127 Contract Renewal - Mass Notification System
ACTION:Authorized the County Manager to 1) negotiate and execute an agreementsubstantially consistent with this agenda item, 2) exercise any renewal orextension term options set forth
in the Agreement, and 3) terminate theAgreement if deemed in the best interest of the County, each in theCounty Manager's discretion.
This mass notification system is used to notify the citizens of
Union County of any bad weather and other emergencies they
need to be made aware of. It is also used to notify employees of
active threats.The Emergency Communications Department, Public
Communications, Public Works and the Health Department have
utilized the contractual services of Everbridge, Inc., for mass
notification since April 2019. The contractor has been effective
and efficient in meeting our service needs and we are requesting
to continue this service for an additional year. The Department
will collaborate with Procurement to explore solicitation options in
the future.
The anticipated annual cost for this service is $52,428.46 and is budgeted,
accordingly, for FY2025.
25-128 Grant Application - North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission
ACTION:
Authorized the County Manager to submit the associated grant application
and make necessary assurances and certifications associated with the
grant application as substantially consistent with this agenda item, which
includes the authorization to execute documents related to theaward of thegrant and budget funds as appropriate.
The North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission (NCTTFC) grants
are restricted to public or public-private enterprise programs that will
promote profitable and sustainable farms by assisting in developing and
implementing plans for the production of agriculture-related business
activities.
The proposed grant funding request ($1,000,000) will be used for the
support of the Union County Food Innovation Center (BARN Project).
Grant funds will be used to increase commissary kitchen equipment
capacity for increased production and usage by clientele, and other
additional amenities needed for the facility. County matching funds
needed for the NCTTFC have already been met.
If awarded, Union County will receive $1 million. The necessary County matching fundsneeded for the grant have already been met.
25-129 Grant Application - The Golden LEAF Foundation
ACTION:
1) Authorized the County Manager to submit the associated grant
application and make necessary assurances and certifications associated
with the grant application as substantially consistent with this agenda
item, which includes the authorization to execute documents related to
award of the grant and budget funds as appropriate, 2) adopt Capital
Project Ordinance Amendments 288F, 344B, and 369A, and 3) adopt
Budget Amendment 27.
The Golden LEAF Foundation grants are restricted to public or
public-private enterprise programs that will promote profitable and
sustainable farms by assisting in developing and implementing plans for
the production of agriculture-related business activities.The proposed grant funding request ($1,000,000) will be used for the
support of the Union County Food Innovation Center (BARN Project).
Grant funds will be used to increase commissary kitchen equipment
capacity for increased production and usage by clientele, and other
additional amenities needed for the facility. County matching funds
needed for The Golden LEAF Foundation have already been met.
In addition to allocating the $1million ,000,000Golden Leaf Grant award, theattached Budget Amendment and Capital Project Ordinance
Amendments also do the following:
· Transfers $400,000 from the Jesse Helms Park Lighting Project to
the BARN fund,
· Transfers $400,000 from the Jesse Helms Support Building to the
Jesse Helms Park Light Project,
· Allocates $277,000 of unallocated Economic Development Fund
Balance to the BARN project,
· Transfers $332,460 to Parks and Rec Paving for the purpose of
paving the entrance to the Ag Center.
These transfers allow for the closeout of the Jesse Helms Support
building, while maintaining the 2/3rds bonds requirements.
If awarded, Union County will receive $1million. ,000,000. County matching fundsneeded for the grant have already been met.
25-155 Union County Agricultural and Event Complex Licensing Policy
ACTION:Approved the proposed revisions to the Union County Agricultural andEvent Complex Licensing Policy.
On April 1, 2024, the Board adopted a comprehensive Facility Use Policy
(the “Policy”) for all County-owned, -operated, or -leased facilities. The
Policy states that it is not intended to modify or supersede any previously
adopted policies and procedures for the use of facilities at the Union CountyParks and the Union County Agricultural and Event Complex. After reviewof those policies and procedures,
some of the prohibited conduct, and thesettingestablishment of capacity limits may be appropriately added to the Union CountyAgricultural and Event Complex Licensing Policy (“Licensing
Policy”).
These changes to the existing Licensing Policy will help ensure that all
policies and procedures related to the use of County facilities are
consistent with public safety and usage goals related to the use of these
County facilities.
The Agricultural Advisory Board reviewed and approved the proposed
changes to the Licensing Policy at its May 9, 2024, meeting.
See Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part of these minutes.
25-156Union County Parks and Recreation Rules and Regulations
ACTION:Approved the updated rules and regulations
On April 1, 2024, the Board adopted a comprehensive Facility Use Policy
(the “Policy”) for all County-owned, -operated, or -leased facilities. The
Policy states that it is not intended to modify or supersede any previously
adopted policies and procedures for theuse of facilities at the Union CountyParks and the Union County Agricultural and Event Complex. In
performing a recent review of policies and procedures related to the facility
use, staff noted that some of the language of the Policy related to
prohibited conduct may be appropriately added to the Union County
Parks and Recreation Rules and Regulations (the “Rules”). These
changes to the existing Rules will help ensure that all policies and
procedures related to the use of County facilities are consistent with
public safety and usage goals related to the use of these County facilities.
See Exhibit “B” attached hereto and made a part of these minutes.
25-136 Contract - Auditing Services
ACTION:Authorized 1) the County Manager to negotiate an agreement substantiallyconsistent with this agenda item; 2) the Chair toof the Board to execute anagreement substantially consistent
with this agenda item; 3) the CountyManager to exercise any renewal or extension term options set forth inthe Agreement and terminate the Agreement and to terminatethe
Agreement if deemed in the best interest of the County, in the County
Manager’s discretion.
Through Request for Proposals #2022-039, Auditing Services, Cherry
Bekaert, LLP, was awarded the financial audit contract to provide auditing
services for Union County. As required by the North Carolina Local
Government Commission (LGC), the auditing contract must be awarded
on an annual basis with approval from the Board of Commissioners. This
request is to award a contract to Cherry Bekaert, LLP, to perform the
financial audit of Union County's accounting records for FY 2025.
The Finance Department has utilized the contractual services of Cherry
Bekaert, LLP, for auditing services since April 2022. The firm has been
effective and efficient in meeting our service needs, and we are
requesting to continue this service for the fiscal year 2025 financial audit.
The anticipated annual cost for this service is $150,000 and is budgeted
accordingly for FY25.
25-157Compensation Adjustment for the County Attorney
ACTION:Authorized the Chair to take the following administrative actions asapproved by the Board: (1) to provide an increase in annual
compensation of $19,636 to the County Attorney, effective January 1,
2025, and (2) to extend the County Attorney’s contract by two years from
the end of its current term.
Pursuant to G.S. 153A-92(a), the Board of County Commissioners is
charged with the responsibility of determining the compensation of all
county officers and employees, including the appointed position of the
County Attorney. After conducting a comparative compensation analysis
pursuant to the results of the Classification & Compensation Study, the
Board determined that an increase in the amount listed is warranted in
order to align the position with other comparable jurisdictions.
No additional funding required. Sufficient funding is included in the FY25
budget.
25-153Resolution - Amend the Board of Commissioners’ 2025 Regular
Meeting Schedule
ACTION:Adopted the Resolution Amending the Regular Meeting Schedule of theUnion County Board of Commissioners for 2025.
On December 16, 2024, the Board of Commissioners adopted its regular
meeting schedule for 2025. This resolution amends the previously
adopted regular meeting schedule by removing the April 21, 2025, regular
meeting and replacing it with a regular meeting scheduled for April 14,
2025. The revised regular meeting schedule is shown on Attachment “A”
to this Resolution.
25-084 Minutes for Approval
ACTION:Approved minutes of the regular meeting of February 3, 2025.
Information Only
25-117 January and February 2025 Union County Public Schools - Monthly
Reports
ACTION:No action was requested. This item was for information only.
This is the monthly report from UCPS as required by the Budget
Ordinance.
25-133 Monthly Communications Report - February 2025
ACTION: No action was requested. This item was for information only.
This report provides valuable metrics and insights into communication
platforms and our efforts to collaborate with all County departments to
inform and engage residents, promote programs and services, and
strengthen internal and external communications.
25-142 Monthly Update - Wastewater Treatment Capacity
ACTION:No action was requested. This item was for information only.
Union County Water is closely monitoring the wastewater treatment
capacities at our Water Reclamation Facilities. Permitting Capacity is
evaluated using the Actual Plant Flows plus the Permitted/Obligated
Flows (unconnected). Union County Water was asked to provide regular
updates. Plant flow information through February 2025 is summarized in
the attached table.
Twelve Mile Creek
· Percent of Actual Flows = 71.1%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 90.8%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 5.333
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 6.811
Crooked Creek
· Percent of Actual Flows = 60.4%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 90.4%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 1.148
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 1.717
Olde Sycamore
· Percent of Actual Flows = 28.7%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 28.7%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 0.043
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 0.043
Tallwood
· Percent of Actual Flows = 42.0%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 42.0%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 0.021
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 0.021
Grassy Branch
· Percent of Actual Flows = 90.0%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 92.0%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 0.045
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 0.046
In addition to the wastewater treatment capacities, flow volumes
associated with development projects that are in the planning and review
process within the Twelve Mile Creek and Crooked Creek WRF service
areas are provided for information as well. Development flow volumes
through February 2025 are summarized in the attached tables.
Business
25-167 2025 Reappraisal Status Update
Chair Merrell recognized Vann Harrell, Tax Administrator, to provide the Board with an update regarding the 2025 Reappraisal.
Mr. Harrell said the Management Team asked him to provide updates on the current status of the reappraisal process, as well as to discuss the appeals process.
Mr. Harrell explained that this reappraisal was ultimately mandated. He said the County received notice from the state in February 2022 requiring a reappraisal to take place in 2025.
He stated the notice turned the process into a triggered reappraisal process under NCGS 105-286. He emphasized that the purpose of the reappraisal is to maintain a stable tax base for
both the county and the municipalities.
Mr. Harrell explained that the county is not just a county but includes municipalities.
Mr. Harrell noted that this third point which he said he had not mentioned in previous slides, because on a four-year cycle there is not a risk of this issue, but if the cycle extends
beyond four years, the risk arises, specifically related to avoiding Equalization. He explained there is a special class of property called Public Service property, which includes infrastructure
like Piedmont Natural Gas, railroads, Duke Energy, and Union Power. These properties and their assets are valued at the state level.
He said that if the reappraisal cycle goesextendsbeyond four years and the sales ratio falls below 85 percent, equalization kicks in. Mr. Harrell stated that this results in about 25
percent of that tax base being cut out, meaning the county cannot tax that portion. He said that based on the last occurrence, the county lost just over a million dollars in revenue
at the current tax rate due to this value reduction. He emphasized the importance of avoiding this situation if possible.
Mr. Harrell provided another recap item to show the progress made to date. He noted that there are now 114,000 parcels in the county. He said the overall increase in value is a gross
increase that does not account for any tax relief that needs to be applied or deferred property values, such as those for farmland.
He reported the county’s overall gross increase was 60.05 percent. He said a recent survey involving 31 counties in North Carolina are conducting reappraisals this year, with 23 counties
responding. He noted that among those, the average countywide increase was 61 percent. He said some counties saw higher increases; for example, Cumberland County’s went up as much as
88 percent, and a number of peer counties that went up in the 70spercentage range. He concluded that Union County’s increase is in line with the overall average, even when considering
smaller counties that have completed their reappraisals this year.
Mr. Harrell broke down the total increase into individual components, explaining that the gross residential valuation increase was 63.45 percent. He added that when looking at individual
property increases across the county, the median increase was just under 57 percent.
He noted that commercial property values increased by 45.6 percent effectively. He also mentioned that exempt properties went up as well, but those changes do not affect taxation.
Mr. Harrell broke down the land values to monitor them, explaining they are all based on sales. He said the overall land valuation increased by 94 percent, but a large part will be deferred
due to the PUV (Present Use Value) programs. He said if the market value on the notice shows $50,000 per acre for farmland, the taxable amount might only be about $255 per acre. He
stated there is a significant reduction in the taxable value of that property because of the PUV (Present Use Value) program.
He explained that one common question has been market value versus tax value or assessed value. He mentioned that some Realtors say market value never reflects the tax value, but it
does for about 48 hours.Mr. Harrell shared that on January 1st of a reappraisal year, the Tax Office’s job is to reflect the current market and the changes that have occurred since the
last reappraisal. He stated they have to update values to that level, which is why there is a market value assessment, and the notices received show market value not necessarily the
taxable value.
Mr. Harrell clarified that if a property owner is in the elderly program, that status is not indicated on the notice because it is irrelevant from the standpoint of a market value change.
He referenced NCGS 105-283, which sets a uniform appraisal standard that they operate under requiring all property to be appraised at its true value in money. He explained that the statute
defines the word true value and money as meaning market value that is from where the market value changes come. He added that the Tax Office monitors that and as he mentioned in earlier
presentations, the 47,000 sales. He stated the data is driven entirely by market-based transactions.
Mr. Harrell presented a graph that tracks sales ratios as far back as1986. He stated that each year-end sales ratio is tracked to show how close actual values were to market over the
past 40 years.
Mr. Harrell explained that the market stays constant at 100 percent, whether it is rising or falling. He noted that tax values have fluctuated over time, typically remaining below 100
percent, except for an inversion during 2008, 2009, and 2010 when they increased above that level.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms stated there have beenquestions regarding why the County is doing a reappraisal every four years as a policy, since the state only requires reappraisal every
eight years. He noted that the graph shows two sides: the state-mandated trigger points and the county’s own policy. He asked for confirmation that the trigger mechanism,as defined
by state statute, is 115 percent or 85 percent, highlighting the distinction between the state mandates and the county’s policy.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms pointed out that, speaking to Mr. Harrell’s earlier point, if the County had not already had a reappraisal planned, the trigger would have happened in 2025.
He said this demonstrates that the four-year reappraisal cycle is intended to even out the market value or assessed tax value of properties, and asked if that was correct.
Mr. Harrell confirmed that more frequent reappraisals help reduce the impact of large increases. He noted that in 2021, there was some sticker shock with a 36 percent increase which
pales in comparison to the current year. He said the recommendation for counties of UnionCounty’s size is to conduct reappraisals every four years. He said when it was discussed with
the Board, the consensus at that time was that a four-year cycle would be a good way to mitigate such a large increase.
Mr. Harrell stated that no one could have predicted the market’s direction over the last four years. He said his office monitors the market and tracks sales that have occurred since
January 1st. He shared that they have been watching the sales ratio for all sales occurring since January 1st. He noted that the sales ratio has already dropped to 95 percent, showing
the market is not going gang busters as it did in 2021. Mr. Harrell said that by the end of January in that cycle, the sales ratio had already dropped 8 to 92 percent.He said in March,
it is at 95 percent so sale prices are increasing in some areas and decreasing in others, the median sales price averages out. He noted that this averaging effect is the purpose behind
having more frequent reappraisals.
Mr. Harrell noted that some counties are now moving to a two-year reappraisal cycle, which would present challenges, but said he believes it is worth discussing if the market continues
to move as it hasbeen moving.
Chair Merrell clarified her understanding that while the state requires every eight years, due to recent sale values, even if the Board had not set a four-year cycle, the county would
have been mandated to do a reappraisal anyway because of those sales price changes.
Mr. Harrell confirmed Chair Merrell’s understanding was correct.
He confirmed that the County received notice in February 2022 regarding the revaluation requirement. He stated that a follow-up reminder was received in August of the following year,
stating that a revaluation was due January 1st and needed to be completed
Chair Merrell emphasized that it was important for constituents to understand the Commissioners did not request the policy. She explained it was policy that was already put in place
and would have been mandated by the state regardless of the Board’s actions. She confirmed with Mr. Harrell that he had the supporting letters.
Mr. Harrell confirmed that he has the letters.
Mr. Harrell addressed the appeals process. He noted they had already gone over the five stages prior to this point. He said the first step, once an appeal is filed, is an informal review
process, which in other areas of the statute, is referred to as the assessor review.
He explained that if the issue cannot be settled.which is usually about 10 percent of the appeals,it moves on to the Board of Equalization and Review. Mr. Harrell said at that stage,
most of the cases are either handled between the Board of Equalization and Review and the taxpayer or they continue working with the taxpayer to reach an agreement based on the evidence
the taxpayer provides for their appeal.
Mr. Harrell explained that after going through the Board of Equalization and Review, if the taxpayer still doesnot agree with the tax value, the taxpayer has the option to go to the
Property Tax Commission. He noted that Commission is made up of political appointees and is a bipartisan body appointed by both the Governor and the General Assembly.
Mr. Harrell stated that from an evaluation standpoint, that is the final step. He stated that if there is a legal or procedural issue, the matter can be appealed from the PTC to the
Court of Appeals, and even to the Supreme Court, if necessary. He shared that over the years since he is been in Union County, there have been three cases that reached the Court of Appealstwo
were won and one was lost. He added that it all depends on the issue at hand.
Mr. Harrell presented the appeals dashboard, noting the County's investment in technology. He explained that the timeline shown from March 4thto the present was the daily amount of appeals
received. He pointed out a peak in submissions over the weekend, suggesting that people likely had more time at home to file their appeals then. As of lunchtime today, they were just
under 1,700 appeals, which was about what they expected at this point.
Mr. Harrell shared a dashboard showing the status of the appeals to give insight into what staff sees on the administrative side. He noted there are currently 1,675 appeals marked as
"in progress," meaning their status has not yet changed. He explained that many remain in this status because staff members are busy on the phones. He said to handle this, they expanded
the call center to include the entire appraisal staff, with approximately 15 people answering calls throughout the day. While there are some call queues outside the main line, if someone
is calling about appeals, there are typically 11 to 13 people available to respond. He added that appraisers are only out in the field when call volumes are low and someone can be spared;
otherwise, they are working the appeals. He said he expected the number of appeals will move through different status categories as the process continues to ensure everything is processing
properly throughout the appeals window.
Commissioner Christina Helms asked how long people can expect to wait before hearing back from the Tax Office about their appeal.
Mr. Harrell explained that response times will vary case by case, but usually once call volume decreases, taxpayers should hear back within about a week from when they can begin working
on their appeals. He said appeals are handled in the order they are received, and it is a matter of workload and call volume. He noted that some appeals are tricky because taxpayers
need to provide evidence for justification for their value. He shared that a number of appeals are received without any evidence. He said they have received some appeals stating the
value is too low, which is unusual but does happen. He assured that the team works as fast as possible with the staff available.
He said he recalled that in 2021 all appeals were typically processed and adjudicated by the end of June. He stated that beginning April 14th, the Board of Equalization and Review (BER)
will be available three days a weekon Monday and Wednesday mornings, and Thursday eveningsoffering an evening option for those who cannottake off work during the day. The BER evening
sessions run from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m., and the Tax Office works with taxpayers to schedule those times. He said the notifications and scheduling details are sent through the appeals system,
and the department works to make the process as customer-service friendly as possible.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms said the Commissioners had received questions from residents in Union County who were unsure about the date on their reappraisal notices in regards to the appeals
process. He explained that while the letters were dated around February 27th or 28th, most people did not receive them in the mail until March 5th. He stated there seemed to be confusion
about the actual deadline for the public to submit their appeals and asked for clarification to clear up that confusion.
Mr. Harrell said that regarding the date on the notice, the Tax Office pulled the final data file to send to the printer on Friday morning. He explained that the printer provided proofs
late that same Friday afternoon. He stated that the letters are generated based on the date the file was received. He said the printer acknowledged they probably should have used the
actual mail date instead.He clarified that after Friday, no printing occurred over the weekend, so the printing took place Monday and Tuesday, with mailing on Wednesday. He said this
timing issue doesnot affect their appeals window.
He said they plan to revise the wording on the statement in the notice moving forward. Mr. Harrell stated that because they have a smaller batch of annual notices sent out for new
construction or property changes, they will address this issue next year. He added that the notice currently requests that appeals be received within 30 days of the notice, which is
intended to give staff time to work with taxpayers before hearing schedules begin. He shared that the goal is to settle cases early so the Board of Equalization and Review doesnot have
to hear those additional cases.
Mr. Harrell added that another reason is to provide tax base estimates for budget purposes. He stated that the faster appeals are processed, the more stable the tax base is for the Commissioners
and the Manager’s Office to develop the next operating year’s budget. He said they have preliminary estimates factored in for appeal losses and tax relief as they work through that process.
He clarified that the absolute deadline to file an appeal is the last day the Board of Equalization and Review is formally in session, which will be May 28thgiving taxpayers just under
90 days to appeal. He also explained that the language in the notice is consistent with what virtually every county in the state uses. He said while there may be some variations in wording,
most counties include a similar statement to allow enough time to work appeals and collaborate with taxpayers.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms expressed appreciation for the clarification, acknowledging that some people had concerns that the County might be trying to shorten the appeals window. He
said he has been reassuring the public that this is not the case.
Mr. Harrell confirmed they will ensure the appeals deadline is more clear in next year’s notice.
Mr. Harrell explained that the informal review and settlement period before April 14th is strictly an assessor’s review. He said if an appeal cannot be settled during that time, a
hearing will be scheduled. He assured that appeals submitted after April 14thwill still be reviewed in the office and will not go straight to the Board of Equalization and Review. He
emphasized that Board’s policy that itdoes not want to hear any appeal that hasnot first been reviewed, since some cases can be resolved beforehand and handled as consent agenda items
or as staff recommendations.
He briefly explained how to file an appeal through the County’s website.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms expressed appreciation to Mr. Harrell for the update. He said it was important to keep everyone informed, noting there has been a lot of concern in the community.
He added that the Commissioners heard from one gentleman earlier that evening who was concerned about a 60 percent tax increase.
Vice Chair W. Brian Helms stressed that the assessed value is not the same as a tax bill. He explained that it is the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners to set the county tax
rate. He said the Board of Commissioners will work with staff to review assessed values and determine tax rates, a process that takes place during the budget process.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms added that for residents who live in municipalities, there will be a municipal board that, through its own budget process, will develop its own tax rate.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms said he wanted to make that clear because there has been a lot of confusion. He explained that when people receive their notices in the mail, many do not understand
that what they are seeing is an assessed value and not necessarily their tax bill, noting those are two separate amounts.
Mr. Harrell agreed and said this was something he had stressed in every presentation he haddone. He mentioned he was headed to another presentation immediately after the meeting. He
explained that an increase in assessed value does not mean a tax increase of an equivalent percentage, as each jurisdiction sets its own rate.
Mr. Harrell recalled a conversation during a presentation the previous week where someone insinuated the reappraisal was a money grab and asked how much money the county would receive.
He told them that was not the case at all and added that how each council interprets the situation for their jurisdiction is up to them.
Mr. Harrell said he can tell that historically the county has always dropped its tax rate during the reappraisal year, but said the municipal councils have to make that call for their
constituents and their budget needs. He emphasized that it is not a county issue, and is a pointhe has made clear everywhere he has made presentations.
Mr. Harrell thanked Mr. Helms for highlighting that point, noting he had planned to mention it himself. He reiterated that the county tax bill does not mean a 60 percent increase.
25-124 Conditional Rezoning CZ-2024-006 New Salem
Chair Merrell recognized Bjorn Hansen, Senior Planner, to address this item.
Bjorn Hansen explained that this is an action request for a rezoning that had a public hearing two weeks prior. He said it was a request by the Stevens Family is requesting to rezone
about two and a half acres near Polk Mountain in Union County, to allow for the construction of mini storage units. He described the site plan, noting the Polk Mountain store is located
across the street and the plan shows two rows of mini storage units, with what looks like three rows actually being a gravel parking lot. He stated that the property is located at the
corner of Sugar and Wine and New Salem.
He showed the existing conditions, pointing out the store and a vacant lot across the street. He noted that no one spoke against the public hearing two weeks ago. He said staff and the
planning board both recommend approval.
Commissioner Christina Helms moved to approve the conditional rezoning for CZ-2024-006 New Salem.
Chair Merrell acknowledged the motion and asked if there were any comments or questions. After hearing none, she called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously.
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Mr. Matthews asked if Commissioner Helms or someone else could also include the statement of reasonableness and consistency that needs to be addressed.
Commissioner Helms moved to: (i) Adopt the Ordinance Approving Revision to the Official Zoning Map of Union County, North Carolina, and ii) adopt the consistency and reasonableness statement
for approval.
The motion passed unanimously.
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
CONSISTENCY AND REASONABLENESS STATEMENT FOR APPROVAL OF THEPROPOSED AMENDMENT (THE PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH THECURRENT PLAN) (CZ-2024-006)
Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 160D-605, theUnion County Board ofCommissioners (the“Board”) does hereby find and determinethat adoption oftheproposed map amendment is inconsistent with thecurrently
adopted Union County ComprehensivePlan (the“Plan”).TheBoard declaresthat adoption oftheproposed map amendment is deemed an amendment to thePlan, including any futureland-usemap in thePlan.Theadoption
oftheproposed map amendment (i)takes into account theneed to amend thezoning map to meet theneeds ofthe community, and (ii) is reasonableand in thepublicinterest because:There aretwo
existing businesses on two separate properties at thesameintersection wherethis property is located.Theseproperties areboth zoned fornon-residential, business commercial uses.Theproposed
light industrial with conditions use, which is limited underthis conditional rezoning to mini-storageuse, is consistent with thenearby existing uses that arecommercial uses as well.Additionally,
theseprevious commercial uses haveestablished this intersection as a commercial center forthenearby community.Thebenefits to thecommunity at large, theneighbors, and theproperty ownerofthe
proposed rezoning outweigh any detriments to theneighbors and others caused by the rezoning.Thebenefits ofthis rezoning includethediversification ofland useby allowing acommercial useon
theproperty; thecontinued establishment ofacommercial nodeat this intersection; and theability forthecommunity and neighbors to haveready access to theproposed services to beestablished
on theproperty.Thepotential detriments oftheuseestablished by this rezoning, such as increased light exposureand increased traffic, areameliorated by thefact that thelimited proposed
use ofamini- storagefacility would likely haveless trafficthan someothertypes ofuses.The proposed use would not create a significant traffic impact.
The use set forth under the conditions would meet Union County development
standards.
25-123 Conditional Rezoning CZ-2024-007 Gold Branch (This item was removed from the agenda at the applicant’s request.)
25-071 Rural Land Use Plan Update
Chair Merrell recognized Bjorn Hansen, Senior Planner, to present the item.
Mr. Hansen said he would provide a short presentation and Allan Baucom, Chair of the Rural Land Use Plan Committee, would be providing a longer presentation. He reminded the Board that
this is the rural land use plan that it authorized last spring. He said a grant was received through the North Carolina Wildlife Commission to help fund outside technical assistance.
He mentioned that Alisa Davis from the Wildlife Commission would present a few slides after Mr. Baucom’s presentation regarding an overview of the program and the expectations from the
program. He added that Mr. Baucom serves as chair of the eight-member committee appointed last fall.
Mr. Baucom said it was his privilege to provide an update from the steering committee that was appointed by theBoard of Commissioners.
He identified the group as the Green Growth Rural Land Use Planning Steering Committee. He displayed a map of the land use plan adopted by the Board of Commissioners and explained that
the update was part of what the Steering Committee agreed to do on a periodic basis.
Mr. Baucom shared that the role of the steering committee was to research options, solicit feedback, and make recommendations to the Land Use Board and to the Board of Commissioners.
He said from the steering committee’s perspective, the role of the Land Use Board is to listen, make recommendations to the Board of Commissioners, and provide feedback similar to the
Steering Committee. He emphasized that the committee would appreciate any feedback from the Board of Commissioners as the process moves forward.
Mr. Baucom displayed a timeline for the project and stated that the project is on schedule. He noted the Steering Committee’s work began in October of last year.
He described the committee appointed by the board as broad spectrum, representing many sectors of the county both geographically and across different aspects of the county. He said they
are now at the March stage shown in the middle of the timeline, where a presentation and update are taking place.
Mr. Baucom stated that if everything works as anticipated, by this time next year the committee will have worked themselves out of a job. He expressed hope that they will provide quality
recommendations to the Board of Commissioners and looked forward to doing so.
He said that the committee developed a vision statement which was completed and then posted for public comment during January. He shared that the vision statement was posted across the
county, including in the county newsletter and the Union County employee newsletter. He stated that committee members and staff distributed postcards in various places such as Sunday
school classes and local businesses throughout the rural areas of the county.
He reported that they received at least 210 responses. Of those respondents, 86 percent of the respondents live and work in rural areas of the county, 60 percent of the respondents have
lived in the area for more than 20 years, and 43 percent of the respondents are over 60 years old.
Mr. Baucom said the feedback from the vision statement showed that agriculture was number one, rural character was number two, environment was number three, and then absolutely nothing
was number four.
Mr. Baucom said that the feedback on what people did not like about the vision statement included it being overly vague, which he noted is just the natural course of a vision statement.
He listed some of the other concerns included were flexible land uses, skepticism that it will be followed through, and the need for more environmental emphasis.
Mr. Baucom said the top concerns about the rural parts were, number one, development; number two, the lack of infrastructure; number three, the loss of environmental features; and number
four, the loss of farmland.
He saidhe was surprised when he saw that development was the number one concern followed by lack of infrastructure.Mr. Baucom stated that as a lifelong resident of Union County, he knows
if there is water and sewer, it is not long before development follows. He explained that he is calling water and sewer infrastructure, but by the same token, roads are certainly deemed
infrastructure by a lot of people, and there are probably other things people are calling infrastructure.
Mr. Baucom said that number one what people want to see preserved in rural Union County is, by far, farmland followed by natural habitat and rural culture.
Mr. Baucom reported that when asked if the Union County vision statement described a good outcome, 58 percent of the respondents said “yes” and 23 percent of the respondents said “somewhat
yes”, totaling 81 percent who believe it is a viable outcome. He added that 8 percent of the respondents said “it was okay either way”, while 11 percent of the respondents said “no.”
Mr. Baucom read the approved vision statement:
He reviewed these potential strategies and stressed these are certainly not all-inclusive but the Steering Committee is seeking feedback.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms expressed appreciation forto Mr. Baucom forbeing present to share the information. He noted that from the presentation, the top concern from the public is development,
which he believed waswould not be a surprise to anyone, including those in the audience.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms saidstated that development is something the County deals with every single day, regardless of which side of the fence one falls on regarding development. He
shared that one thing he liked in this variation of the vision statement was the phrase "stewards of the land," which he appreciated. He explained that many people were raised around
farming, and he recalled a lesson from his grandfather, who taught him that education and land are the two most valuable things in life. He saidstatedhis grandfather believed education
is valuable because, once acquired, it cannot be taken away, andthat land is also one of the most valuable things,becauseasthere is only so much of it, and with land, one can have many
uses, including feedingyour family.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms referred to the strategies slide. He mentioned that a couple of points stood out to him and that he had some questions. He expressed a desire for more information
and suggested they could discuss it further when the group returns in September. He pointed to the strategy about adding conditions to allow commercial uses on residential property.
He asked if this was referring to home businesses, questioning what the scope of the recommendation would be.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms highlighted the second bullet point regarding aboutthe potential to increase increasingincrease or reduceingthe number of commercial nodes. He expressed that
increasing commercial development is of utmost concern to the Board because there is a need to diversify the ratio between residential and commercial propertiesaswell as andbuild the
tax base.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms said the last point he wanted to address was the evaluation of private engineered and permitted septic fields, which is a particular concern for him. He noted
that they are seeing more alternative wastewater systems and acknowledged that some of this is out of the County’scontrol hands since the state has determined that some of these systems
are acceptable.
He expressed astrong interest in the information the committee will bring backbecause, as Mr. Baucom pointed out, having infrastructure makes undevelopable land developable. He believes
this is exactly what is happening with these privately engineered and permitted septic fields. Vice Chair Helms emphasized that this issue is very pertinent to the Board's work and expressed
appreciation to Mr. Baucom for his presentation.
Mr. Baucom acknowledged that all the points raised were very relevant and pertinent.
He explained that, as a committee, the rezoning aspect was for work-at-home small businesses, such as landscapers who may have started out as individuals and now have one, two, or three
employees, but continue to work are still workingout of their homes. He emphasized the question of how to address this situation and how to make a recommendation for the Board to consider.
Mr. Baucom explained that the steering committee is very concerned about the private engineering statute due to concerns about going forward. He said it emphasized the importance of
understanding the elements involved and the timeline behind it. He noted that the committee’s main concern is about the County’s liability over the long term, or in perpetuity.
Mr. Baucom noted that in the future, there might be a probability of there being a challenge and questioned who would be responsible for managing that challenge. He pointed out that
in the past, it has always been the County.
Commissioner Baucom said he wanted to reiterate what Commissioner Helms was sayinghad said about evaluating private engineered and permitted septic fields. He mentioned that he has always
paid attention to land and has seen lots perkmany perked within the last 15 years that should never have never perked.
He said the steering committee welcomes any of Commissioners to attend its meetings at any time and would appreciate it. He added that they are there to serve both the Board of Commissioners
and the citizens of the County. He noted that it is all volunteer work, but everyone on the committee is passionate about their work. what they do.
Commissioner Christina Helms asked Mr. Baucom if he could let the Commissioners know when the meetings are scheduled so they can put themthe meetings on their calendars.
Mr. Baucom responded that the next meeting will be next Tuesday. He explained that the committee meets on the fourth Tuesday of every month at 11:30 a.m.,and the meetings are held in
the Commissioners’ boardroom.
Mr. Hansen said they now had a presentation from Alisa Davis about the program they are working through. He added that she would share examples of where this has been done elsewhere
in the state, which could provide ideas for outcomes they could hopefully emulate because they are quite impressive.
Ms. Davis thanked everyone for having her that evening and introduced herself as a representative workingoffor the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. She explained that she
is one of two Wildlife and Fisheries Conservation Planners and that she coverscovering the southern half of the state, from the mountains to the coast.
She explained that her job is to coordinate and administer the Green Growth Toolbox Program and the Partners for Green Growth Program, which isa cost-share program that the County has
been awarded. She said they are very excited to work with Union County.
Ms. Davis explained that the Green Growth Toolbox Program is a non-regulatory technical assistance program designed to integrate forintegratingpriority wildlife habitat conservation
into local government land use and transportation planning. She stated that she works with planners to assist them to prioritizein prioritizing conservation alongside their regular planning
activities, including ordinances, and to discusses incentives for developers to include more conservation into their site plans and other projects.
Ms. Davis said this program is not intended to stop development, but ratherbut it is intendedto direct development so that it does not overcome any of their priority wildlife habitats.
She explained that the intention of theprogram’s intention is to help identify those areas and include them for conservation. She said since 2010, they have been included in 68 land
use and transportation plans and ordinances across the state, and that number only includes those who reached out and worked with them directly. She added that everything they do is
free and all their resources are available online.
She said that one of these counties, Harnett County, has a new land use plan currently going through final comments before being presented to theirits Board of Commissioners. She said
they have set aside important conservation areas that are already protected. She displayed a slide of Harnett County’s Land Use Map, which included agriculture conservation overlays.
She said they have worked with Chatham County the longest and have found that the county does a fantastic job with some of its land use plans. She stated that Chatham County has included
its protected lands areas and a conservation overlay that supports habitat connectivity, allowing animals to move back and forth across habitats. She stated that they have also included
an agriculture protection overlay, making Chatham another county that is really trying hard for agriculture protection.
Ms. Davis explained that Union County and Pender County received the Partners for Green Growth cost-share program at the same time. She said this isalso essentially what Pender County
is working on. Ms. Davis said that Pender County started around the same time as Union County and has identified areas with the greatest potential for connecting habitats, incorporating
those with already protected areas.
Ms. Davis described this as Pender County’s general plan for what will happen, essentially serving as a preferred development guide. She stated that developers who want to come incan
contact the county, receive thatthe guide, and be directed more toward cluster areas.
She said she is always available if anyone has any questions and shared her contact information.
25-145 Employee Compensation and Benefits Update (This item was removed from the agenda during the meeting.)
25-144 Appointments to Boards and Committees
Chair Merrell noted that there are four boards with vacancies to consider this evening.
She explained that these vacancies have been advertised in accordance with the Board's Rules of Procedure, and applications have been received.
Home and Community Care Block Grant Advisory Committee
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms moved to appoint Dale Louder to the Home and Community Care Block Grant Advisory Committee.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Library Board of Trustees
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms moved to appoint as thePeter Kovacs as the Weddington Representative to the Library Board of Trustees.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Historic Preservation Commission
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms moved to appoint Crystal Gilliard and John Mullen to serve on the Historic Preservation Commission.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Juvenile Crime Prevention Council.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms movedto appoint to the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council appoint Daniel Hailey as the county commissioner appointee and Ethan X. Davis to serve asfillthe personvacancy
for a person under the age of 21.to the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
County Manager's Comments
Chair Merrell recognized County Manager Brian Matthews for his comments.
Mr. Matthews stated that March 7thwas National Employee Appreciation Day. He explained that the County observes an Employee Appreciation Month to recognize its employees and to provide
something tothat saysthank youthank you for all the work they do. He wanted to give a shout-outfor thatand acknowledged the hard work of the staff in putting it together.
Mr. Matthews expressed appreciation to Vann Harrell, Tax Administrator, for providing an update on the reappraisal process and appeals. He stressed that the Board, as Vice Chair Brian
W. Helms said, will be considering the tax rate as part of the budget, and reminded everyone that the reappraisal is not the tax rate.He assured thatthere will be a lower tax rate than
the current 58.5 cents, but acknowledged it may yieldresultin a different tax amount people have to pay, which can be confusing. He stated that the rate will not remain at 58.5 cents
by the end of the process and will be lower. He said the actual rate will be determined by the budget, the revenuesrequired, and the bonds that must be paid back for approved projects.
He said he wanted to make that clear.
Commissioners' Comments
Chair Merrell expressed appreciation to Mr. Matthews for his comments. She recognized Commissioner Sides for his comments.
Commissioner Sides had no closing comments.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms thanked the County Manager for raising those points and expressed appreciation to Vann Harrell for being present to provide the appraisal update. He acknowledged
that there is a lot ofconfusion in the county and among the public about the issues at hand. He emphasized that the more information shared with the public, the better it will be.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms thanked Allan Baucom for his presentation and expressed anticipation for the committee’s future recommendations. He also thanked everyone who came to speak,
emphasizing appreciation for public input. He reminded that this is their county and expressed eagerness to hear from those willing to speak.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms briefly addressed the rezoning item that had been planned for discussion that evening but was withdrawn, as Chair Merrell mentioned. He acknowledged that several
people likely came to speak regarding that item and apologized that they did not get the opportunity to express their concerns. He explained that the withdrawal effectively counts as
a no vote and noted that the applicant cannot bring the matter back for 12 months.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms encouraged people to reach out to their state delegation. He mentioned that Senate Bill 219, filed by Senator Todd Johnson, includes modifications to satellite
annexation affecting Marvin and Stallings. He urged anyone with concerns about the project to contact reach out totheir state representatives.
Chair Merrell clarified that people were allowed to speak on the rezoning item that was removed from the agenda, noting that one person did come forward and had the opportunity to speak.
She emphasized that anyone who showed up was given an opportunity to speak.if they wanted to regarding that item and that was not removed.
She expressed appreciation to Allan Baucom for being present and for his tireless work in land preservation. Chair Merrell highlighted that Union County ranks number 13 in the nation
for loss of farmland, which is a significant concern for everyone. She expressed appreciation for Mr. Baucom for bringing his life’s work to advise the committee and lead the efforts.
Commissioner Christina Helms congratulated the Union County water staff for its impressive wins, including the belts. She extended her congratulations to the team.
Commissioner Christina Helms addressed Mr. Baucom, saying this issue is very near and dear to her heart. She explained that her husband puts in a lot of hours on the farm, and she also
puts in a few hours as well. She agreed with Chair Merrell that Union County beingranking 13th in the nation is not a proud statistic and expressed hope that the county will drop in
that ranking.
She expressed thanks to the Land Use Board for its diligent work to protect Union County and its farmland, expressing sincere gratitude to everyone involved.
Commissioner Baucom acknowledged that, since the Gold Branch development item was pulled, he felt it incumbent to say that he had heard from numerous people in the Mill Grove - 218 Fairview
Community who opposed the project. He said he was prepared to vote for denial of the Gold Branch development.
He expressed hope that there would not be any effort by the legislature or any other body to circumvent the will of the people, emphasizing that such decisions should be made as close
as possible to those affected.
Brian Matthews, County Manager, with a heavy heart, announced that one of the County’s employees recently lost his son. He shared that Luke Faucet’s son, who was 13 years old, had heart
disease and underwent a heart transplant that unfortunately failed. He said the boy recently passed away.
Mr. Matthews expressed condolences and sympathy for the family, and said our thoughts and prayers are with them. He apologized for missing this announcement earlier.
Chair Merrell thanked Brian for sharing the news and expressed that her thoughts and prayers will be with the family.
Adjournment
With there being no further comments or discussion, at approximately 7:55 p.m., Chair Merrell moved to adjourn the regular meeting. The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
UnionCounty,NCBoardofCommissionersMeetingMinutes
UnionCountyGovernmentCenter
500NorthMainStreet
Monroe,NorthCarolina
www.unioncountync.govMonday, March 17, 20256:00PMBoardRoom,FirstFloor
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Closed Session - 5:15 PM
25-163 Closed Session
At approximately 5:25 p.m., in the open session, in the Stony D. Rushing Conference Meeting Room, Chair Merrell called the regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners to order.
Chair Merrell moved that the Board enter closed session pursuant to G.S. 143-318.11:
(a)1), to prevent the disclosure of information that is privileged or confidential pursuant to G.S. Section 132-1.1(a);
(a)(3), for attorney-client privilege:
(a)(4), to discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by the public body, including agreement on a tentative list of economic
development incentives that may be offered by the public body in negotiations; and
(a)(5), for property negotiations;
as such purposes are fully stated in the agenda for this meeting, which has been made publicly available.
The motion passed by a unanimous vote as follows:
Chair Melissa B. MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina B. HelmsAye
Commissioner Gary SidesAye
At approximately 5:48 p.m., Chair Merrell moved that the Board take a recess to reconvene at 6:00 p.m. in the Board’s meeting chamber. The motion passed by a unanimous vote as follows:
Chair Melissa B. MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina B. HelmsAye
Commissioner Gary SidesAye
Opening of Meeting - 6:00 PM
At approximately 6:00 p.m., in open session, in the Board’s meeting chamber on the first floor, Union County Government Center, 500 North Main Street, Monroe, North Carolina, Chair Merrell
called the meeting of the Board of Commissioners to order.
PRESENT:Chair Merrell, Vice Chair Brian W. Helms, Commissioner Gary Sides, Commissioner Chirstina B. Helms, and Commissioner Clancy Baucom
NONE:None
ALSO PRESENT:Brian W. Matthews, County Manager; Patrick Niland, Deputy County Manager; Clayton Voignier, Assistant County Manager; Lynn G. West, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners;
Jason Kay, County Attorney; and other interested residents
Invocation - Commissioner Christina Helms offered the invocation.
Pledge of Allegiance – Chair Melissa Merrell led the body and audience in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.
Informal Comments
Chair Merrell noted that not many people had signed up to speak during Informal Comment but said she wanted to inform every one of two changes to the Business agenda for the evening.
She stated that staff had requested the removal of item 25-145, the Employee Compensation and Benefits Update from tonight’s agenda. Chair Merrell said that unless there was an objection,
that item would be removed from the agenda. She also stated that the rezoning application associated with item 25-123, Conditional Rezoning CZ-2024-007 Gold Branch, was withdrawn earlier
in the afternoon by the applicant. She stated that by operation of the law, the item was removed from the Board's consideration for the night.
Chair Merrell asked the Clerk if anyone had registered to speak during informal comments.
Chair Merrell read the guidelines for speakers making comments during Informal Comments.
The Chair recognized Chad Emerin as the first speaker.
Mr. Emerin introduced himself, stating he lives in Weddington. He explained that he had planned to speak about the Conditional Rezoning for Gold Branch, but since that item had been
withdrawn, he had nothing further to say and thanked the Board.
Chair Merrell announced that the next person signed up to speak was Doug Presley.
Robert Douglas Presley said he lives in Indian Trail, right near Sun Valley. He said he wanted to implore the Commission not to raise property taxes by 60 percent. He shared that he
isclose to retirementand said this would create tremendous hardship for people like him who will soon be on a fixed income.
He shared that he lives in an old house on an old homestead that he doesnot want to leave. He said much higher taxes are going to make that difficult for him and for others in the same
situation.
He said he understood the County must have revenue and that taxes will increase, but he implored the Commission not to raise taxes by the enormous amount he has been reading about in
the newspaper.
Rich Kempter introduced himself as a Union County resident residing at in Wesley Chapel and a member of the Heritage South Community. He mentioned that the community has appeared before
the Board multiple times to report on the ongoing sewer odor issue.
He explained that Union County Water began a pilot program last summer, which followed some measurements prior to a contractor implementing the pilot program. He emphasized the strong
communication they have had with John Shutak and the water team, saying they have been wonderful with which to work.
Mr. Kempter noted that to his understanding today was the last day of the pilot program, which had been extended for about ten days. He acknowledged that some very technical, professional
measurements have being taken, but he wanted to report on what he called a veryuntechnical simpletestthe smell test. He shared that from his and his family’s perspective, since the pilot
program started, there has been virtually no odor and said he believed the pilot program has been very successful.
He expressed hope that in the coming weeks that the technical measurements will be assessed and will be shared with the Board at the beginning of April to continue the program. He closed
by thanking the Board and Union County Water.
Deana Terry introduced herself as a Union County resident living in Indian Trail and the founder of Keystep, a nonprofit that supports foster youth transitioning out of care. She shared
that she spent five years in the foster system before aging out 37 years ago and she still feels the lasting effects.
She said that she entered foster care as a 4.0 student but left homeless, pregnant, and without a diploma. Ms. Terry shared that it was not until her mid-40s that she was able to climb
out of poverty. She said that in her 50s, her small business began to thrive, which gave her the opportunity to start Keystep.
She clarified that she does not consider herself a success story, but rather sees it as a tragic story with a better outcome than most. She said her journey did not have to be a constant
battle just to reach self-sufficiency.
Deana Terry continued by sharing data about the foster youth in Union County. She stated that there are currently 41 former foster youth between the ages of 18 and 24 known in the county,
but only 17 of those youth qualify for support through the LINKS program, which ends at age 21. She shared that by 2026, that number is expected to increase to approximately 70. She
noted that these figures only include those who age out at 18 and do not account for those who reunify with families as adolescents.
She described the national statistics as grim. Ms. Terry said that 20 percent of foster youth leave the system unhoused, 70 percent become parents before age 21, 50 percent leave without
a high school diploma, and less than five percent have a driver’s license. She stated that former foster youth experience PTSD at twice the rate of war veterans and experience higher
rates of anxiety, depression, and suicide. She pointed out that the most tragic statisticis that 55 foster youth go missing every day in the U.S.,yet there are no Amber Alerts or flyers
for them.
Despite these challenges, she said Keystep, a non-profit for aging out foster youth, has had a tangible impact in under six months, offering critical resources such as a fully stocked
pantry, job opportunities, tutors, and even loving host homes for two youth who were about to become homeless.
Deana Terry shared that Gary Sides, serves as a life coach for one of the couples in her program. She emphasized that with the right support, foster youth do not just survive,they thrive.
She said they can become engineers, business owners, nurses, and even nonprofit leaders. Some, she said, could reach for the stars like Steve Jobs.
She said for that to happen, the first step is recognizing that the current system needs adjustments. She pointed out that the system had not changed much in nearly 39 yearssince Title
IV-E was amended to include Independent Living programs, or even since 2008 when Extended Care up to age 21 was introduced. She noted that there is not even an after-hours crisis line
for youth in extended care.
Ms. Terry stressed that listening to former foster youth is one way to make the right adjustments and that organizations such asKeystep should be embraced and supported, because they
help fill in the gaps. She explained that nonprofits can engage and involve the community in ways government programs often cannot.
In closing, she said she was here to begin a dialogue with the County and to ask for its support in helping these young adults reach their full potential. She thanked the Board for their
time.
Chair Merrell thanked everyone forattending tonight’s meeting and asked if there were any other speakers who had not signed up but wished to speak tonight. Shante Plowman came forward
and indicated that she would like to comment at this time.
Ms. Plowman stated that she resides at Howey Bottoms Road. She asked whether it was Colton or Kevin Presley who had the house development that was withdrawn.
Chair Merrell responded that application had been withdrawn.
Ms. Plowman continued, saying that the tax increase, which she agreed is about 60 percent. She mentioned that the Board takes into consideration all the new houses and developments built,
which she believes will bring in a lot of money.
She asked if the tax rates would go down or if the tax amount would remain the same. She expressed hope that the Board takes into consideration the significant amount of money being
brought in from these developments.
Chair Merrell responded that the Board would be entering budget season in the coming months and encouraged everyone to stay informed by watching online or attending meetings during that
time. She thanked everyone for being there.
She then asked if anyone else wished to speak. Hearing none, she announced that they would move on to the next item on the agenda.
Public Hearing(s)Chair Merrell opened the public hearing at approximately 6:14 p.m. and announced that the next four items on the agenda were all public hearings related to proposed
road naming. She explained that these hearings would be conducted at the same time. Anyone wishing to speak on a specific item should identify the item in their remarks; otherwise, it
would be assumed they were speaking to all four items collectively.
The items were as follows:
Item 25-126: Road naming for the unincorporated portion of Segments C and E, located between Tory Path and the existing Helms Road.
Item 25-134: Road naming for the unincorporated portion of Segment D, located between Waxhaw-Marvin Road and NC 75.
Item 25-135: Road naming for the unincorporated portion of Segment F, located between Waxhaw-Marvin Road and the CSX Railroad.
Item 25-137: Road naming for the unincorporated portion of Segment G, located between Segment C and the CSX Railroad.
The Chair opened each of the public hearings and recognized Bjorn Hansen, Senior Planner, to provide comments from the planning staff.
Bjorn Hansen thanked Chair Merrell, members of the Board, and Manager Matthews. He displayed a map showing the various road names and segments being discussed.
He explained that these road projects are the result of a successful grant awarded to NCDOT for improving railroad access on the west side of Waxhaw. Mr. Hansen explained that the grant
was awarded several years ago, and some of the roadslike one of the longer ones shown on the maphave already been built.
He stated that progress prompted staff to partner with NCDOT and the Town of Waxhaw last fall to conduct a public comment period to gather suggested names for the new roads.
Mr. Hansen explained the current status of the roads involved. He said one of the new roads is already open, while Tory Path has been closed at the railroad. He stated that Helms Road
is also expected to be closed at the railroad.
He pointed out that the new road,which is considered to be the major part of the project,will eventually serve as a bridge crossing over both NC 75 and the railroad, creating a connection.
He stated a short section of Helms Road will remain.
Mr. Hansen explained that some of the road segments are within Waxhaw, but most are in a combination. He said they could have held six public hearings, but Tory Pathwas recommended to
keep its current name, so it did not require a hearing. He stated that residents were notified that Tory Path would not be part of the public hearing process.
He said the long section that crosses over Helms Road is recommended to be named King Hagler, in recognition of a Catawba Indian chief from the 1700s who served as a peacemaker between
settlers and local native tribes.
Mr. Hanson stated that a short section of Helms Road is proposed to be renamed Ernest Way, to honor a property owner whose land was acquired for the road project. He said another section
of Helms Road would keep its existing name and continue over to NC 75. He further stated that the final short section of Helms Road is to be renamed Sabinsky Way, in recognition of a
Town of Waxhaw employee.
Mr. Hanson said the proposed names are recommended by staff in cooperation with the Town of Waxhaw. He noted that the Board has been provided with a copy of the resolution passed by
Waxhaw last monthtaking action on its portions.
He explained that once the names are finalized, staff would coordinate with the post office, Google, the tax office, 911, and NCDOT to update all relevant databases.
Chair Merrell announced that no one had registered to speak during the public hearing. She asked if there was anyone in the audience who had not signed up to speak but who wanted to
speak during the public hearing.
Jackie Zamora came forward and stated that she resides at 4524 Helms Road. Ms. Zamora stated that she doesnot have a problem with most of the proposed name changes. However, she expressed
concern about the small section of Helms Road that is set to be renamed King Hagler.
She explained that although many homes are being demolished or removed as part of the project, there are still a couple homes and businesses on Helms Road that are not being removed.
She suggested that instead of changing the name of that section toconsider keeping it as Helms Road and rename where no one lives and no businesses are located. She stated that changing
the name of the section would affect the people who live there and their addresses would change.
Chair Merrell asked Jackie Zamora if she had attended any of the Waxhaw meetings to share her concern or option.
Ms. Zamora replied that she had not. She explained that she received the notice by mail, which is why she chose to come to this meeting instead. She also noted that her property is outside
the Waxhaw city limits.
Chair Merrell thanked Ms. Zamora for attending tonight’s meeting and sharing her thoughts.
Ms. Zamora added a comment that one of her neighbors is a 75-year-old woman who has resided there her whole life. She said she believed it would be inconvenient for her neighbor to have
to change her address at this point, especially since the name change is not finalized yet.
Chair Merrell asked Mr. Hansen if he could address those changes and explain the changes would affect the area Ms. Zamora had mentioned.
Mr. Hansen asked for clarification, confirming that she was referring to the section in the middle of the map he had presented.
Ms. Zamora came forward and pointed to the map, identifying the pink section labeled Sabinsky Way. She explained that a few homes are located in that area, including her own, her elderly
neighbors, and another nearby neighbor. She also pointed out a couple of businesses in that area. She said she was hoping they could keep the Helms Road name awhere people still live
and instead rename the section where no one resides King Hagler Road.
Mr. Hansen responded that the map did not show the full municipal limits, but noted that in any case, it is important to keep the road name consistent along the road itself. He stated
that would mean changing the current recommendation for the purple segment and realistically until they found an intersection such as Sabinsky Way or possibly as far as Tory Path to
change King Hagler to Helms Road or potentially Old Helms Road to accommodate the request.
He added that he could not provide a definitive answer at that moment and said they would need to go back to Waxhaw to ask its input on the proposed change.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms said he thought it was worth exploring. He suggested that since residents would be affected by address changes, it would not hurt to reach out to Waxhaw to
ask if it would be amendable to the changes.
He added that once they receive that information, the Board could deliberate on it. He emphasized that he would be interested to know if Waxhaw would consider reversing the road names,
especially if it impacts multiple residents.
Mr. Hansen responded that they would follow up on the matter.
25-126 Public Hearing - Road Naming for Unincorporated Portion of
Segments C and E, Located Between Tory Path and the Existing
Helms Rd.
25-134Public Hearing - Road Naming for Unincorporated Portion of
Segment D, Located Between Waxhaw-Marvin Road and NC 75
25-135 Public Hearing - Road Naming for Unincorporated Portion of
Segment F, Located Between Waxhaw-Marvin Road and the CSX
Railroad.
25-137 Public Hearing - Road Naming for Unincorporated Portion of
Segment G, Located Between Segment C and the CSX Railroad
At approximately 6:26 p.m., Chair Merrell closed each of the four (4) public hearings.
Staff Recognition
25-125 Recognize Union County Water Staff
Chair Merrell recognized Christopher Clark, Director of Water and Wastewater Operations, for this item.
Chris Clark recognized Matt Hargett from the Sewer Field Services Division. Mr. Clark expressed appreciation to the Board for the opportunity to recognize Union County Water staff and
congratulated the team for a job well done. He added that he personally loves the work in Water and Wastewater Operations, and believes they have fantastic people, with Matt Hargett
being a prime example.
He stated that at the Annual NC One Water Conference in Raleigh, NC, the NC One Water Association selected Matt Hargett for the Three Musketeer Award. Matt Hargett works as a Utility
Field Services Supervisor in Water and Wastewater Operations and has been working at Union County Water for 22 years. He explained that The Three Musketeer Award is designed to honor
three individuals who have not only volunteered countless hours in their respective committees but have also gone above and beyond in giving their time, resources, and support to the
NC One Water Staff. He stated that Mr. Hargett was given this honor by conducting himself as one who truly represents “All for One, and One for All” for the Association. In addition
to this award, Mr. Hargett was elected to a 2-year term on The Board of Trustees for NC One Water. Mr. Clark said Mr. Hargett’s dedication to the water and wastewater industry and its
continued growth within North Carolina is made evident by this recognition and election to serve as a Trustee.
Mr. Hargett was photographed with the members of the Board of Commissioners.
Mr. Clark recognized the second group of employees: Water Competition Teams – NC One Water State Competition.
He stated that during the 2024 Annual NC One Water Conference, Union County Water had four competition teams compete in four events: Operations Challenge, Hydrant Hysteria (Men and
Women), and Water Pipe Tapping. He explained that the Operations Challenge Competition comprises of five timed, skilled events that range from cutting pipe and making taps, pump maintenance,
laboratory processes and calculations, to performing a confined space personnel retrieval exercise. Mr. Clark said the hydrant hysteria competition tests the team’s ability to not only
put together a different hydrant each year, but to maximize teamwork and communication to successfully and safely compete with a winning time. He stated that the water tapping team also
focuses on collaboration, effective communication, and skill to be able perform in this water specific task in timed competition. He shared that the County’s teams performed well in
this state level competition and brought home the following awards:
Operations Challenge:
1st – Overall, in Competition
1st - Collections Event
1st – Safety Event
1st – Maintenance Event
1st – Process Control Event
2nd – Laboratory Event
Hydrant Hysteria:
1st – Men’s event
1st – Women’s event
Water Tap Competition - 1st Place
Operations Challenge:
•Brett Fisher – Utility Technician Supervisor
•Hayden Hunter – Safety Officer
•Jonathan Jordan – Water Reclamation Superintendent
•Austin Medlin – Utility Technician Supervisor
•Coach – Jayme Hargett – Safety Officer
Hydrant Hysteria (Men’s Team):
•Justin Huntley – Utility Service Manager
•Jimmie Guillen – Senior Utility Technician
•Coach – Jonathan Smith – Water Treatment Plant Manager
Hydrant Hysteria (Women’s Team):
•Michelle McCarver – Administrative Professional, Water
•Beth Belk – Senior Administrative Support Specialist, Fire Services
•Coach – Justin Huntley – Utility Service Manager
Water Pipe Tap Team:
•Richard Baker – Cross Connection Control Coordinator
•Rick Mareth – Water Treatment Plant Manager
•Matt Hargett – Field Services Supervisor
•Coach/Alternate - Dominick Hamilton – Utility Technician Supervisor
The members of the teams were photographed with the members of the Board of Commissioners.
Chair Merrell said it was worth attending tonight’smeeting to celebrate the employees and the incredible work they are doing. She noted that placing first, second, or even in the top
ten is impressive, but being in first place is absolutely amazing.
25-143 Service Award Recognition
Chair Merrell moved to the next item on the agenda, 25-143 - Service Award Recognition. She introduced and recognized Jennifer Davis, Assistant Human Resources Director, to present the
item.
Ms. Davis shared that on Thursday, February 27th, Human Resources hosted the Q1 service award ceremony to celebrate 38 employees who had met an anniversary milestone.
During that ceremony, 11 employees were recognized for 5 years of service, five employees for 10 years of service; one employee was recognized for 15 years of service, five employees
were recognized for 20 years of service, and one employee was recognized for 25 years of service.
Ms. Davis expressed how grateful Human Services is to host these events for employees and how much they cherish the stories shared by each one. She mentioned that she personally looked
forward to these quarterly ceremonies and plans to continue inviting the Board members to each one.
She noted that some Board members have attended these ceremonies in the past and shared that the next ceremony will be on April 29th. She said she would be sending out the invitation
soon and encouraged everyone to mark their calendars in hopes they could attend.
She shared a short video of the February 27th service award ceremony.
Chair Merrell said it was fun to attend the service award event and called it absolutely wonderful. She appreciated hearing the supervisors speak about the employees being recognized
for 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 years of service.
She encouraged other Board members who havenot attended one of the service award ceremonies in the past to do so, noting that Vice Chair Brian W. Helms had participated. She said it
was the best way to start the day and added that her dog Oz came along and seemed to enjoy meeting everyone on their way into work.
25-147Recognition by Crime Stoppers
Chair Merrell introduced Item 25-147-Recognition by Crime Stoppers. She recognized Reid Helms from Union County Crimestoppers. She described him as one of the most incredible people
she has ever met in the county. She noted that he serves as Union County’s ambassador to Crime Stoppers.
Mr. Helms thanked Chair Merrell and the Board for inviting him to the meeting. He shared that he has been involved with Crime Stoppers since July 10, 1981, when it was started by Dr.
Paul Helms. He stated that over the years, the program has grown and expressed appreciation for the input and support from many people and sponsors. He mentioned how they have such a
beautiful place to hold the barbecue, at the Ag Center where Crime Stoppers has been holding its annual barbeque for approximately 15 years.
He said last year was the best year that they have had, with people lined out the door. He presented an engraved plaque in appreciation for all the help the Board has given in the
pastand hopefully in the future. He pointed out that some members and associate members of the Crime Stoppers Board were in attendance tonight and recognized Sheriff Eddie Cathey as
a very active member.
Mr. Helms along with the members and associate members of the Crime Stoppers Board were photographed with members of the Board of Commissioners.
Chair Merrell recognized the 2024 Law Enforcement Officer of the Year, Chris Byrum, and acknowledged his family.
Mr. Helms followed by explaining that many probably already read the story in the newspaper or saw it on their phones. He shared that Officer Chris Byrum serves as the school resource
officer at Weddington High School and recently responded to a situation after school, where his actionssaved a young boy’s life. He stated that the Crime Stopper board selected Officer
Byrum as Officer of the Year because his actions went above and beyond the call of duty. He expressed appreciation to Officer Byrum for his service.
Officer Byrum was photographed with his family and the members of the Board of Commissioners.
Consent Agenda
Vice Chair Brian Helms moved to approve the items listed on theconsent agenda as published.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
25-079 Contract - Architectural Services for Judicial Center and
Government Center Renovations Project
ACTION:Authorized the County Manager to 1) negotiate and execute an agreementsubstantially consistent with this agenda item, 2) exercise any renewal orextension term options set forth
in the Agreement, and 3) terminate theAgreement if deemed in the best interest of the County, each in theCounty Manager's discretion.
This request is to approve a contract with CDesign Inc. to completeAdvanced Planning for the Government Center and Judicial Centerproject. The scope of work for the renovation is anticipated
to includevarious renovations within both buildings expected to be approximately35,000 total gross square feet to accommodate additional courtroomspace. Other scope includes the possibility
of a new connecting bridge toprovide secure circulation between the buildings if necessary.
In the Advanced Planning phase of design, the designer will be
responsible for development of project goals, verification of the building
program requirements, space planning, code requirement review,
conceptual design options and renderings, architectural and engineering
design narratives, site review, preliminary schedule, phasing and bidding
approach and CMAR cost review and analysis. The project is likely to
include multiple phases to allow current operations to be minimally
impacted. The designer will also be tasked with coordination and teaming
with the CMAR to be selected by the County.
The Facilities and Fleet Management Department partnered with the
Procurement Department to issue Request for Qualifications 2024-073,
Architectural and Engineering Services for Design and Construction
Administration, Judicial Center and Government Center Renovations
Project.
On May 13, 2024, eight (8) qualifications packages were received
and reviewed by an evaluation team in accordance with applicable
evaluation criteria for this project. The top three (3) firms were invited to
shortlist interview/presentations. As a result, the team requests approval
to enter into a contract with CDesign Inc. for Advanced Planning services.
Staff recommends the Board approve the contract with CDesignInc.. the
amount of $113,320.00.Future design phase contracts will be brought to the Board in futuremeetings for consideration and approval.
The cost of the design contract is $113,320.00. There are sufficient funds
to cover this expense in capital account 40080190, JC and GCRenovations Phase 1.
25-119 Budget Amendment - Local Infrastructure and Workforce Support
Funding
ACTION:1) Recognized, receive, and appropriate $13,481 of FY2025 AgreementAddendum 123 funding from the NC Division of Public Health forinvestment in performance management to the Human
Services Agency,Department of Public Health and 2) approve Budget Amendment # 26.
This Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funding, awarded
to the North Carolina Division of Public Health (DPH), recognizes
underinvestment in the public health system and the foundational
services it provides. This funding supports core infrastructure
improvements that include, but are not limited to workforce, foundational
capabilities, and data infrastructure.The Foundational Public Health Services (FPHS) framework wasdeveloped by the Public Health Accreditation Board Center for Innovationin 2013, revised
in 2022, to define a minimum package of core publichealth services areas that no public health jurisdiction can be without. TheFPHS framework outlines the unique responsibilities of
governmentalpublic health and the vital role of governmental public health in a thrivingcommunity. One of the DPH PHIG strategies focuses on FoundationalCapabilities within the FPHS
framework. Foundational Capabilities arethe cross-cutting skills, knowledge, and practice needed to support andprovide core public health functions, programs, and activities which arekey
to ensuring opportunities for health, promoting wellbeing andachieving health outcomes across a community.
This Agreement Addendum (AA123- Investment in Performance
Management) provides one-time funds for Union County Public Health to
invest and support its capacity and expertise specific to Foundational
Capability Accountability and Performance Management. Capacity is
defined as having the tools, the people, and the time to carry out the
Foundational Capability. Expertise is defined as having the training,
experience, and skill to cover the Foundational Capability.
Funding in the amount of $13,481 is awarded with no County match.
25-132 Agreement with Anson County Health Department for Maternal
Health Services
ACTION:Authorized the County Manager to 1) negotiate and execute an agreementsubstantially consistent with this agenda item, 2) exercise any renewal orextension term options set forth
in the Agreement, and 3) terminate theAgreement if deemed in the best interest of the County, each in theCounty Manager's discretion.
Anson County Health Department has requested assistance from the
Union County Public Health Department to provide maternal health
services for pregnant Anson County residents or refer to a private
provider in the community, whichever is applicable. Anson County Health
Department does not have the capacity to fully provide maternal health
services as stipulated by the State Division of Public Health and seeks to
assure those services through an agreement with the Union County
Public Health Division. Union County Public Health will assess each
patient’s ability to pay, and charge fees based on a sliding fee scale,
while also ensuring that no patient is refused care or services because of
inability to pay. This is consistent with how Union County Public Health
provides maternal health services to Union County residents. The
projected number of patients seen is under 10 annually. This is an
open-term agreement.
Union County will receive $30,000 annually from Anson County Health
Department for the provision of maternal health services under this
agreement. No additional County funding is requested.
25-164 Grant Application - NC Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
ACTION:Authorized the County Manager to submit the associated grant applicationand make necessary assurances and certifications associated with thegrant application as substantially
consistent with this agenda item, whichincludes the authorization to execute documents related to award of thegrant and budget funds as appropriate.
The North Carolina Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
(NCDMVA) has established a grant program for existing county veterans
offices (CVOs) to provide services to veterans. Union County is eligible
for this grant as a CVO with eight or less certified veteran service officers
(VSOs). If awarded, the grant amount may be up to $20,000 with no local
match required. Eligible grant expenditures include, but are not limited to,
training and education, conferences, compensation for personnel service,
advertising and public relations, and office supplies.
Potential receipt of up to $20,000 with no local match required.
25-127 Contract Renewal - Mass Notification System
ACTION:Authorized the County Manager to 1) negotiate and execute an agreementsubstantially consistent with this agenda item, 2) exercise any renewal orextension term options set forth
in the Agreement, and 3) terminate theAgreement if deemed in the best interest of the County, each in theCounty Manager's discretion.
This mass notification system is used to notify the citizens of
Union County of any bad weather and other emergencies they
need to be made aware of. It is also used to notify employees of
active threats.The Emergency Communications Department, Public
Communications, Public Works and the Health Department have
utilized the contractual services of Everbridge, Inc. for mass
notification since April 2019. The contractor has been effective
and efficient in meeting our service needs and we are requesting
to continue this service for an additional year. The Department
will collaborate with Procurement to explore solicitation options in
the future.
The anticipated annual cost for this service is $52,428.46 and is budgeted
accordingly for FY2025.
25-128 Grant Application - North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission
ACTION:
Authorized the County Manager to submit the associated grant application
and make necessary assurances and certifications associated with the
grant application as substantially consistent with this agenda item, which
includes the authorization to execute documents related to award of the
grant and budget funds as appropriate.
The North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission (NCTTFC) grants
are restricted to public or public-private enterprise programs that will
promote profitable and sustainable farms by assisting in developing and
implementing plans for the production of agriculture-related business
activities.
The proposed grant funding request ($1,000,000) will be used for the
support of the Union County Food Innovation Center (BARN Project).
Grant funds will be used to increase commissary kitchen equipment
capacity for increased production and usage by clientele, and other
additional amenities needed for the facility. County matching funds
needed for the NCTTFC have already been met.
If awarded, Union County will receive $1,000,000. County matching funds
needed for the grant have already been met.
25-129 Grant Application - The Golden LEAF Foundation
ACTION:
1) Authorized the County Manager to submit the associated grant
application and make necessary assurances and certifications associated
with the grant application as substantially consistent with this agenda
item, which includes the authorization to execute documents related to
award of the grant and budget funds as appropriate, 2) adopt Capital
Project Ordinance Amendments 288F, 344B, and 369A, and 3) adopt
Budget Amendment 27.
The Golden LEAF Foundation grants are restricted to public or
public-private enterprise programs that will promote profitable and
sustainable farms by assisting in developing and implementing plans for
the production of agriculture-related business activities.
The proposed grant funding request ($1,000,000) will be used for the
support of the Union County Food Innovation Center (BARN Project).
Grant funds will be used to increase commissary kitchen equipment
capacity for increased production and usage by clientele, and other
additional amenities needed for the facility. County matching funds
needed for The Golden LEAF Foundation have already been met.
In addition to allocating the $1,000,000 Golden Leaf Grant award, the
attached Budget Amendment and Capital Project Ordinance
Amendments also do the following:
· Transfers $400,000 from the Jesse Helms Park Lighting Project to
the BARN fund,
· Transfers $400,000 from the Jesse Helms Support Building to the
Jesse Helms Park Light Project,
· Allocates $277,000 of unallocated Economic Development Fund
Balane to the BARN project,
· Transfers $332,460 to Parks and Rec Paving for the purpose of
paving the entrance to the Ag Center.
These transfers allow for the closeout of the Jesse Helms Support
building, while maintaining the 2/3rds bonds requirements.
If awarded, Union County will receive $1,000,000. County matching funds
needed for the grant have already been met.
25-155 Union County Agricultural and Event Complex Licensing Policy
ACTION:Approved the proposed revisions to the Union County Agricultural andEvent Complex Licensing Policy.
On April 1, 2024, the Board adopted a comprehensive Facility Use Policy
(the “Policy”) for all County-owned, -operated, or -leased facilities. The
Policy states that it is not intended to modify or supersede any previously
adopted policies and procedures for use of facilities at the Union County
Parks and the Union County Agricultural and Event Complex. After review
of those policies and procedures, some of the prohibited conduct and the
setting of capacity limits may be appropriately added to the Union County
Agricultural and Event Complex Licensing Policy (“Licensing Policy”).
These changes to the existing Licensing Policy will help ensure that all
policies and procedures related to the use of County facilities are
consistent with public safety and usage goals related to the use of these
County facilities.
The Agricultural Advisory Board reviewed and approved the proposed
changes to the Licensing Policy at its May 9, 2024, meeting.
See Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part of these minutes.
25-156Union County Parks and Recreation Rules and Regulations
ACTION:Approved the updated rules and regulations
On April 1, 2024, the Board adopted a comprehensive Facility Use Policy
(the “Policy”) for all County-owned, -operated, or -leased facilities. The
Policy states that it is not intended to modify or supersede any previously
adopted policies and procedures for use of facilities at the Union County
Parks and the Union County Agricultural and Event Complex. In
performing a recent review of policies and procedures related to facility
use, staff noted that some of the language of the Policy related to
prohibited conduct may be appropriately added to the Union County
Parks and Recreation Rules and Regulations (the “Rules”). These
changes to the existing Rules will help ensure that all policies and
procedures related to the use of County facilities are consistent with
public safety and usage goals related to the use of these County facilities.
See Exhibit “B” attached hereto and made a part of these minutes.
25-136 Contract - Auditing Services
ACTION:Authorized 1) the County Manager to negotiate an agreement substantiallyconsistent with this agenda item; 2) the Chair to the Board to execute anagreement substantially consistent
with this agenda item; 3) the CountyManager to exercise any renewal or extension term options set forth inthe Agreement and terminate the Agreement and terminate the
Agreement if deemed in the best interest of the County, in the County
Manager’s discretion.
Through Request for Proposals #2022-039 Auditing Services, Cherry
Bekaert, LLP was awarded the financial audit contract to provide auditing
services for Union County. As required by the North Carolina Local
Government Commission (LGC), the auditing contract must be awarded
on an annual basis with approval from the Board of Commissioners. This
request is to award a contract to Cherry Bekaert, LLP to perform the
financial audit of Union County's accounting records for FY 2025.
The Finance Department has utilized the contractual services of Cherry
Bekaert, LLP for auditing services since April, 2022. The firm has been
effective and efficient in meeting our service needs, and we are
requesting to continue this service for the fiscal year 2025 financial audit.
The anticipated annual cost for this service is $150,000 and is budgeted
accordingly for FY25.
25-157Compensation Adjustment for the County Attorney
ACTION:Authorized the Chair to take the following administrative actions asapproved by the Board: (1) to provide an increase in annual
compensation of $19,636 to the County Attorney effective January 1,
2025, and (2) to extend the County Attorney’s contract by two years from
the end of its current term.
Pursuant to G.S. 153A-92(a), the Board of County Commissioners is
charged with the responsibility of determining the compensation of all
county officers and employees, including the appointed position of the
County Attorney. After conducting a comparative compensation analysis
pursuant to the results of the Classification & Compensation Study, the
Board determined that an increase in the amount listed is warranted in
order to align the position with other comparable jurisdictions.
No additional funding required. Sufficient funding is included in the FY25
budget.
25-153Resolution - Amend the Board of Commissioners’ 2025 Regular
Meeting Schedule
ACTION:Adopted the Resolution Amending the Regular Meeting Schedule of theUnion County Board of Commissioners for 2025.
On December 16, 2024, the Board of Commissioners adopted its regular
meeting schedule for 2025. This resolution amends the previously
adopted regular meeting schedule by removing the April 21, 2025, regular
meeting and replacing it with a regular meeting scheduled for April 14,
2025. The revised regular meeting schedule is shown on Attachment “A”
to this Resolution.
25-084 Minutes for Approval
ACTION:Approved minutes of regular meeting of February 3, 2025.
Information Only
25-117 January and February 2025 Union County Public Schools - Monthly
Reports
ACTION:No action was requested. This item was for information only.
This is the monthly report from UCPS as required by the Budget
Ordinance.
25-133 Monthly Communications Report - February 2025
ACTION: No action was requested. This item was for information only.
This report provides valuable metric and insights into communication
platforms and our efforts to collaborate with all County departments to
inform and engage residents, promote programs and services, and
strengthen internal and external communications.
25-142 Monthly Update - Wastewater Treatment Capacity
ACTION:No action was requested. This item was for information only.
Union County Water is closely monitoring the wastewater treatment
capacities at our Water Reclamation Facilities. Permitting Capacity is
evaluated using the Actual Plant Flows plus the Permitted/Obligated
Flows (unconnected). Union County Water was asked to provide regular
updates. Plant flow information through February 2025 is summarized in
the attached table.
Twelve Mile Creek
· Percent of Actual Flows = 71.1%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 90.8%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 5.333
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 6.811
Crooked Creek
· Percent of Actual Flows = 60.4%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 90.4%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 1.148
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 1.717
Olde Sycamore
· Percent of Actual Flows = 28.7%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 28.7%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 0.043
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 0.043
Tallwood
· Percent of Actual Flows = 42.0%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 42.0%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 0.021
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 0.021
Grassy Branch
· Percent of Actual Flows = 90.0%
· Percent of Actual + Permitted Flows = 92.0%
· Actual Flows (MGD) = 0.045
· Actual + Permitted Obligated Flows (MGD) = 0.046
In addition to the wastewater treatment capacities, flow volumes
associated with development projects that are in the planning and review
process within the Twelve Mile Creek and Crooked Creek WRF service
areas are provided for information as well. Development flow volumes
through February 2025 are summarized in the attached tables.
Business
25-167 2025 Reappraisal Status Update
Chair Merrell recognized Vann Harrell, Tax Administrator, to provide the Board with an update regarding the 2025 Reappraisal.
Mr. Harrell said the Management Team asked him to provide updates on the current status of the reappraisal process, as well as to discuss the appeals process.
Mr. Harrell explained that this reappraisal was ultimately mandated. He said the County received notice from the state in February 2022 requiring a reappraisal to take place in 2025.
He stated the notice turned the process into a triggered reappraisal process under NCGS 105-286. He emphasized that the purpose of the reappraisal is to maintain a stable tax base for
both the county and the municipalities.
Mr. Harrell explained that the county is not just a county but includes municipalities.
Mr. Harrell noted that this third pointwhich he said he had not mentioned in previous slides, because on a four-year cycle there is not a risk of this issue, but if the cycle extends
beyond four years, the risk arises, specifically related to avoiding Equalization. He explained there is a special class of property called Public Service property, which includes infrastructure
like Piedmont Natural Gas, railroads, Duke Energy, and Union Power. These properties and their assets are valued at the state level.
He said that if the reappraisal cycle goes beyond four years and the sales ratio falls below 85 percent, equalization kicks in. Mr. Harrell stated that this results in about 25 percent
of that tax base being cut out, meaning the county cannot tax that portion. He said that based on the last occurrence, the county lost just over a million dollars in revenue at the current
tax rate due to this value reduction. He emphasized the importance of avoiding this situation if possible.
Mr. Harrell provided another recap item to show the progress made to date. He noted that there are now 114,000 parcels in the county. He said the overall increase in value is a gross
increase that does not account for any tax relief that needs to be applied or deferred property values, such as those for farmland.
He reported the county’s overall gross increase was 60.05 percent. He said a recent survey involving 31 counties in North Carolina are conducting reappraisals this year, with 23 counties
responding. He noted that among those, the average countywide increase was 61 percent. He said some counties saw higher increases; for example, Cumberland County’s went up as much as
88 percent, and a number of peer counties that went up in the 70s. He concluded that Union County’s increase is in line with the overall average, even when considering smaller counties
that have completed their reappraisals this year.
Mr. Harrell broke down the total increase into individual components, explaining that the gross residential valuation increase was 63.45 percent. He added that when looking at individual
property increases across the county, the median increase was just under 57 percent.
He noted that commercial property values increased by 45.6 percent effectively. He also mentioned that exempt properties went up as well, but those changes do not affect taxation.
Mr. Harrell broke down the land values to monitor them, explaining they are all based on sales. He said the overall land valuation increased by 94 percent, but a large part will be deferred
due to the PUV (Present Use Value) programs. He said if the market value on the notice shows $50,000 per acre for farmland, the taxable amount might only be about $255 per acre. He
stated there is a significant reduction in the taxable value of that property because of the PUV (Present Use Value) program.
He explained that one common question has been market value versus tax value or assessed value. He mentioned that some Realtors say market value never reflects the tax value, but it
does for about 48 hours.Mr. Harrell shared that on January 1st of a reappraisal year, the Tax Office’s job is to reflect the current market and the changes that have occurred since the
last reappraisal. He stated they have to update values to that level, which is why there is a market value assessment, and the notices received show market value not necessarily the
taxable value.
Mr. Harrell clarified that if a property owner is in the elderly program, that status is not indicated on the notice because it is irrelevant from the standpoint of a market value change.
He referenced NCGS 105-283, which sets a uniform appraisal standard that they operate under requiring all property to be appraised at its true value in money. He explained that the statute
defines the word true value and money as meaning market value that is from where the market value changes come. He added that the Tax Office monitors that and as he mentioned in earlier
presentations, the 47,000 sales. He stated the data is driven entirely by market-based transactions.
Mr. Harrell presented a graph that tracks sales ratios as far back as1986. He stated that each year-end sales ratio is tracked to show how close actual values were to market over the
past 40 years.
Mr. Harrell explained that the market stays constant at 100 percent, whether it is rising or falling. He noted that tax values have fluctuated over time, typically remaining below 100
percent, except for an inversion during 2008, 2009, and 2010 when they increased above that level.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms stated there have beenquestions regarding why the County is doing a reappraisal every four years as a policy, since the state only requires reappraisal every
eight years. He noted that the graph shows two sides: the state-mandated trigger points and the county’s own policy. He asked for confirmation that the trigger mechanism as defined
by state statute is 115 percent or 85 percent, highlighting the distinction between the state mandates and the county’s policy.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms pointed out that, to Mr. Harrell’s earlier point, if the County had not already had a reappraisal planned, the trigger would have happened in 2025. He said
this demonstrates that the four-year reappraisal cycle is intended to even out the market value or assessed tax value of properties, and asked if that was correct.
Mr. Harrell confirmed that more frequent reappraisals help reduce the impact of large increases. He noted that in 2021, there was some sticker shock with a 36 percent increase which
pales in comparison to the current year. He said the recommendation for counties of UnionCounty’s size is to conduct reappraisals every four years. He said when it wasdiscussed with
the Board, the consensus at that time was that a four-year cycle would be a good way to mitigate such a large increase.
Mr. Harrell stated that no one could have predicted the market’s direction over the last four years. He said his office monitors the market and tracks sales that have occurred since
January 1st. He shared that they have been watching the sales ratio for all sales occurring since January 1st. He noted that the sales ratio has already dropped to 95 percent, showing
the market is not going gang busters as it did in 2021. Mr. Harrell said that by the end of January in that cycle, the sales ratio had already dropped 8 to 92 percent.He said in March,
it is at 95 percent so sale prices are increasing in some areas and decreasing in others, the median sales price averages out. He noted that this averaging effect is the purpose behind
having more frequent reappraisals.
Mr. Harrell noted that some counties are now moving to a two-year reappraisal cycle, which would present challenges, butsaid he believes it is worth discussing if the market continues
to move as it hasbeen moving.
Chair Merrell clarified her understanding that while the state requires every eight years, due to recent sale values, even if the Board had not set a four-year cycle, the county would
have been mandated to do a reappraisal anyway because of those sales price changes.
Mr. Harrell confirmed Chair Merrell’s understanding was correct.
He confirmed that the County received notice in February 2022 regarding the revaluation requirement. He stated that a follow-up reminder was received in August of the following year,
stating that a revaluation was due January 1st and needed to be completed
Chair Merrell emphasized that it was important for constituents to understand the Commissioners did not request the policy. She explained it was policy that was already put in place
and would have been mandated by the state regardless of the Board’s actions. She confirmed with Mr. Harrell that he had the supporting letters.
Mr. Harrell confirmed that he has the letters.
Mr. Harrell addressed the appeals process. He noted they had already gone over the five stages prior to this point. He said the first step, once an appeal is filed, is an informal review
process, which in other areas of the statute, is referred to as the assessor review.
He explained that if the issue cannot be settled.which is usually about 10 percent of the appeals,it moves on to the Board of Equalization and Review. Mr. Harrell said at that stage,
most of the cases are either handled between the Board of Equalization and Review and the taxpayer or they continue working with the taxpayer to reach an agreement based on the evidence
the taxpayer provides for their appeal.
Mr. Harrell explained that after going through the Board of Equalization and Review, if the taxpayer still doesnot agree with the tax value, the taxpayer has the option to go to the
Property Tax Commission. He noted that Commission is made up of political appointees and is a bipartisan body appointed by both the Governor and the General Assembly.
Mr. Harrell stated that from an evaluation standpoint, that is the final step. He stated that if there is a legal or procedural issue, the matter can be appealed from the PTC to the
Court of Appeals, and even to the Supreme Court, if necessary. He shared that over the years since he is beenin Union County, there have been three cases that reached the Court of Appealstwo
were won and one was lost. He added that it all depends on the issue at hand.
Mr. Harrell presented the appeals dashboard, noting the County's investment in technology. He explained that the timeline shown from March 4th to the present was the daily amount of
appeals received. He pointed out a peak in submissions over the weekend, suggesting that people likely had more time at home to file their appeals then. As of lunchtime today, they were
just under 1,700 appeals, which was about what they expected at this point.
Mr. Harrell shared a dashboard showing the status of the appeals to give insight into what staff sees on the administrative side. He noted there are currently 1,675 appeals marked as
"in progress," meaning their status has not yet changed. He explained that many remain in this status because staff members are busy on the phones. He said to handle this, they expanded
the call center to include the entire appraisal staff, with approximately 15 people answering calls throughout the day. While there are some call queues outside the main line, if someone
is calling about appeals, there are typically 11 to 13 people available to respond. He added that appraisers are only out in the field when call volumes are low and someone can be spared;
otherwise, they areworking the appeals. He said he expected the number of appeals will move through different status categories as the process continues to ensure everything is processing
properly throughout the appeals window.
Commissioner Christina Helms asked how long people can expect to wait before hearing back from the Tax Office about their appeal.
Mr. Harrell explained that response times will vary case by case, but usually once call volume decreases, taxpayers should hear back within about a week from when they can begin working
on their appeals. He said appeals are handled in the order they are received, and it is a matter of workload and call volume. He noted that some appeals are tricky because taxpayers
need to provide evidence for justification for their value. He shared that a number of appeals are received without any evidence. He said they have received some appeals stating the
value is too low, which is unusual but does happen. He assured that the team works as fast as possible with the staff available.
He said he recalled that in 2021 all appeals were typically processed and adjudicated by the end of June. He stated that beginning April 14th, the Board of Equalization and Review (BER)
will be available three days a weekon Monday and Wednesday mornings, and Thursday eveningsoffering an evening option for those who cannottake off work during the day. The BER evening
sessions run from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m., and the Tax Office works with taxpayers to schedule those times. He said the notifications and scheduling details are sent through the appeals system,
and the department works to make the process as customer-servicefriendly as possible.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms said the Commissioners had received questions from residents in Union County who were unsure about the date on their reappraisal notices in regards to the appeals
process. He explained that while the letters were dated around February 27th or 28th, most people did not receive them in the mail until March 5th. He stated there seemed to be confusion
about the actual deadline for the public to submit their appeals and asked for clarification to clear up that confusion.
Mr. Harrell said that regarding the date on the notice, the Tax Office pulled the final data file to send to the printer on Friday morning. He explained that the printer provided proofs
late that same Friday afternoon. He stated that the letters are generated based on the date the file was received. He said the printer acknowledged they probably should have used the
actual mail date instead.He clarified that after Friday, no printing occurred over the weekend, so the printing took place Monday and Tuesday, with mailing on Wednesday. He said this
timing issue doesnot affect their appeals window.
He said they plan to revise the wording on the statement in the notice moving forward. Mr. Harrell stated that because they have a smaller batch of annual notices sent out for new
construction or property changes, they will address this issue next year. He added that the notice currently requests that appeals be received within 30 days of the notice, which is
intended to give staff time to work with taxpayers before hearing schedules begin. He shared that the goal is to settle cases early so the Board of Equalization and Review doesnot have
to hear those additional cases.
Mr. Harrell added that another reason is to provide tax base estimates for budget purposes. He stated that the faster appeals are processed, the more stable the tax base is for the Commissioners
and the Manager’s Office to develop the next operating year’s budget. He said they have preliminary estimates factored in for appeal losses and tax relief as they work through that process.
He clarified that the absolute deadline to file an appeal is the last day the Board of Equalization and Review is formally in session, which will be May 28thgiving taxpayers just under
90 days to appeal. He also explained that the language in the notice is consistent with what virtually every county in the state uses. He said while there may be some variations in wording,
most counties include a similar statement to allow enough time to work appeals and collaborate with taxpayers.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms expressed appreciation for the clarification, acknowledging that some people had concerns that the County might be trying to shorten the appeals window. He
said he has been reassuring the public that this is not the case.
Mr. Harrell confirmed they will ensure the appeals deadline is more clear in next year’s notice.
Mr. Harrell explained that the informal review and settlement period before April 14th is strictly an assessor’s review. He said if an appeal cannot be settled during that time, a
hearing will be scheduled. He assured that appeals submitted after April 14th will still be reviewed in the office and will not go straight to the Board of Equalization and Review. He
emphasized that Board’s policy that itdoes not want to hear any appeal that hasnot first been reviewed, since some cases can be resolved beforehand and handled as consent agenda items
or as staff recommendations.
He briefly explained how to file an appeal through the County’s website.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms expressed appreciation to Mr. Harrell for the update. He said it was important to keep everyone informed, noting there has been a lot of concern in the community.
He added that the Commissioners heard from one gentleman earlier that evening who was concerned about a 60 percent tax increase.
Vice ChairW. Brian Helms stressed that the assessed value is not the same as a tax bill. He explained that it is the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners to set the county tax
rate. He said the Board of Commissioners will work with staff to review assessed values and determine tax rates, a process that takes place during the budget process.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms added that for residents who live in municipalities, there will be a municipal board that, through its own budget process, will develop its own tax rate.
Vice Chair BrianW. Helms said he wanted to make that clear because there has been a lot of confusion. He explained that when people receive their notices in the mail, many do not understand
that what they are seeing is an assessed value and not necessarily their tax bill, noting those are two separate amounts.
Mr. Harrell agreed and said this was something he had stressed in every presentation he haddone. He mentioned he was headed to another presentation immediately after the meeting. He
explained that an increase in assessed value does not mean a tax increase of an equivalent percentage, as each jurisdiction sets its own rate.
Mr. Harrell recalled a conversation during a presentation the previous week where someone insinuated the reappraisal was a money grab and asked how much money the county would receive.
He told them that was not the case at all and added that how each council interprets the situation for their jurisdiction is up to them.
Mr. Harrell said he can tell that historically the county has always dropped its tax rate during the reappraisal year, but said the municipal councils have to make that call for their
constituents and their budget needs. He emphasized that it is not a county issue, andis a pointhe has made clear everywhere he has made presentations.
Mr. Harrell thanked Mr. Helms for highlighting that point, noting he had planned to mention it himself. He reiterated that the county tax bill does not mean a 60 percent increase.
25-124 Conditional Rezoning CZ-2024-006 New Salem
Chair Merrell recognized Bjorn Hansen, Senior Planner, to address this item.
Bjorn Hansen explained that this is an action request for a rezoning that had a public hearing two weeks prior. He said it was a request by the Stevens Family is requesting to rezone
about two and a half acres near Polk Mountain in Union County, to allow for the construction of mini storage units. He described the site plan, noting the Polk Mountain store is located
across the street and the plan shows two rows of mini storage units, with what looks like three rows actually being a gravel parking lot. He stated that the property is located at the
corner of Sugar and Wine and New Salem.
He showed the existing conditions, pointing out the store and a vacant lot across the street. He noted that no one spoke against the public hearing two weeks ago. He said staff and the
planning board both recommend approval.
Commissioner Christina Helms moved to approve the conditional rezoning for CZ-2024-006 New Salem.
Chair Merrell acknowledged the motion and asked if there were any comments or questions. After hearing none, she called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously.
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Mr. Matthews asked if Commissioner Helms or someone else could also include the statement of reasonableness and consistency that needs to be addressed.
Commissioner Helms moved to: (i) Adopt the Ordinance Approving Revision to the Official Zoning Map of Union County, North Carolina, and ii) adopt the consistency and reasonableness statement
for approval.
The motion passed unanimously.
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
CONSISTENCY AND REASONABLENESS STATEMENT FOR APPROVAL OF THEPROPOSED AMENDMENT (THE PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH THECURRENT PLAN) (CZ-2024-006)
Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 160D-605, theUnion County Board ofCommissioners (the“Board”) does hereby find and determinethat adoption oftheproposed map amendment is inconsistent with thecurrently
adopted Union County ComprehensivePlan (the“Plan”).TheBoard declaresthat adoption oftheproposed map amendment is deemed an amendment to thePlan, including any futureland-usemap in thePlan.Theadoption
oftheproposed map amendment (i)takes into account theneed to amend thezoning map to meet theneeds ofthe community, and (ii) is reasonableand in thepublicinterest because:There aretwo
existing businesses on two separate properties at thesameintersection wherethis property is located.Theseproperties areboth zoned fornon-residential, business commercial uses.Theproposed
light industrial with conditions use, which is limited underthis conditional rezoning to mini-storageuse, is consistent with thenearby existing uses that arecommercial uses as well.Additionally,
theseprevious commercial uses haveestablished this intersection as a commercial center forthenearby community.Thebenefits to thecommunity at large, theneighbors, and theproperty ownerofthe
proposed rezoning outweigh any detriments to theneighbors and others caused by the rezoning.Thebenefits ofthis rezoning includethediversification ofland useby allowing acommercial useon
theproperty; thecontinued establishment ofacommercial nodeat this intersection; and theability forthecommunity and neighbors to haveready access to theproposed services to beestablished
on theproperty.Thepotential detriments oftheuseestablished by this rezoning, such as increased light exposureand increased traffic, areameliorated by thefact that thelimited proposed
use ofamini- storagefacility would likely haveless trafficthan someothertypes ofuses.The proposed use would not create a significant traffic impact.
The use set forth under the conditions would meet Union County development
standards.
25-123 Conditional Rezoning CZ-2024-007 Gold Branch (This item was removed from the agenda at the applicant’s request.)
25-071 Rural Land Use Plan Update
Chair Merrell recognized Bjorn Hansen, Senior Planner, to present the item.
Mr. Hansen said he would provide a short presentation and Allan Baucom, Chair of the Rural Land Use Plan Committee would be providing a longer presentation. He reminded the Board that
this is the rural land use plan that it authorized last spring. He said a grant was received through the North Carolina Wildlife Commission to help fund outside technical assistance.
He mentioned that Alisa Davis from the Wildlife Commission would present a few slides after Mr. Baucom’s presentation regarding an overview of the program and the expectations from the
program. He added that Mr. Baucom serves as chair of the eight-member committee appointed last fall.
Mr. Baucom said it was his privilege to provide an update from the steering committee that was appointed by theBoard of Commissioners.
He identified the group as the Green Growth Rural Land Use Planning Steering Committee. He displayed a map of the land use plan adopted by the Board of Commissioners and explained that
the update was part of what the Steering Committee agreed to do on a periodic basis.
Mr. Baucom shared that the role of the steering committee was to research options, solicit feedback, and make recommendations to the Land Use Board and to the Board of Commissioners.
He said from the steering committee’s perspective, the role of the Land Use Board is to listen, make recommendations to the Board of Commissioners, and provide feedback similar to the
Steering Committee. He emphasized that the committee would appreciate any feedback from the Board of Commissioners as the process moves forward.
Mr. Baucom displayed a timeline for the project and stated that the project is on schedule. He noted the Steering Committee’s work began in October of last year.
He described the committee appointed by the board as broad spectrum, representing many sectors of the county both geographically and across different aspects of the county. He said they
are now at the March stage shown in the middle of the timeline, where a presentation and update are taking place.
Mr. Baucom stated that if everything works as anticipated, by this time next year the committee will have worked themselves out of a job. He expressed hope that they will provide quality
recommendations to the Board of Commissioners and looked forward to doing so.
He said that the committee developed a vision statement which was completed and then posted for public comment during January. He shared that the vision statement was posted across the
county, including in the county newsletter and the Union County employee newsletter. He stated that committee members and staff distributed postcards in various places such as Sunday
school classes and local businesses throughout the rural areas of the county.
He reported that they received at least 210 responses. Of those respondents, 86 percent of the respondents live and work in rural areas of the county, 60 percent of the respondents have
lived in the area for more than 20 years, and 43 percent of the respondents are over 60 years old.
Mr. Baucom said the feedback from the vision statement showed that agriculture was number one, rural character was number two, environment was number three, and then absolutely nothing
was number four.
Mr. Baucom said that the feedback on what people did not like about the vision statement included it being overly vague, which he noted is just the natural course of a vision statement.
He listed some of the other concerns included were flexible land uses, skepticism that it will be followed through, and the need for more environmental emphasis.
Mr. Baucom said the top concerns about the rural parts were, number one, development; number two, the lack of infrastructure; number three, the loss of environmental features; and number
four, the loss of farmland.
He saidhe was surprised when he saw that development was the number one concern followed by lack of infrastructure.Mr. Baucom stated that as a lifelong resident of Union County, he knows
if there is water and sewer, it is not long before development follows. He explained that he is calling water and sewer infrastructure, but by the same token, roads are certainly deemed
infrastructure by a lot of people, and there are probably other things people are calling infrastructure.
Mr. Baucom said that number one what people want to see preserved in rural Union County is, by far, farmland followed by natural habitat and rural culture.
Mr. Baucom reported that when asked if the Union County vision statement described a good outcome, 58 percent of the respondents said “yes” and 23 percent of the respondents said“somewhat
yes”, totaling 81 percent who believe it is a viable outcome. He added that 8 percent of the respondents said“it was okay either way”, while 11 percent of the respondents said “no.”
Mr. Baucom read the approved vision statement:
He reviewed these potential strategies and stressed these are certainly not all-inclusive but the Steering Committee is seeking feedback.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms expressed appreciation for Mr. Baucom being present to share the information. He noted that from the presentation the top concern from the public is development,
which he believed wasnot be a surprise to anyone, including those in the audience.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms said that development is something theCounty deals with every single day, regardless of which side of the fence one falls on regarding development. He shared
that one thing he liked in this variation of the vision statement was the phrase "stewards of the land," which he appreciated. He explained that many people were raised around farming,
and he recalled a lesson from his grandfather, who taught him that education and land are the two most valuable things in life. He said is grandfather believed education is valuable
because, once acquired, it cannot be taken away, and land is also one of the most valuable things because there is only so much of it, and with land, one can have many uses, including
feedingyour family.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms referred to the strategies slide. He mentioned that a couple of points stood out to him and that he had some questions. He expressed a desire for more information
and suggested they could discuss it further when the group returns in September. He pointed to the strategy about adding conditions to allow commercial uses on residential property.
He asked if this was referring to home businesses, questioning what the scope of the recommendation would be.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms highlighted the second bullet point about increasing or reducing the number of commercial nodes. He expressed that increasing commercial development is of utmost
concern to the Board because there is a need to diversify the ratio between residential and commercial properties and the tax base.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms said the last point he wanted to address was the evaluation of private engineered and permitted septic fields, which is a particular concern for him. He noted
that they are seeing more alternative wastewater systems and acknowledged that some of this is out of the County’s hands since the state has determined that some of these systems are
acceptable.
He expressed strong interest in information the committee will bring backbecause, as Mr. Baucom pointed out, having infrastructure makes undevelopable land developable. He believes this
is exactly what is happening with these private engineered and permitted septic fields. Vice Chair Helms emphasized that this issue is very pertinent to the Board's work and expressed
appreciation to Mr. Baucom for his presentation.
Mr. Baucom acknowledged that all the points raised were very relevant and pertinent.
He explained that, as a committee, the rezoning aspect was for work-at-home small businesses, such as landscapers who may have started out as individuals and now have one, two, or three
employees but are still working out of their homes. He emphasized the question of how to address this situation and how to make a recommendation for the Board to consider.
Mr. Baucom explained that the steering committee is very concerned about the private engineering statute due to concerns about going forward. He said it emphasized the importance of
understanding the elements involved and the timeline behind it. He noted that the committee’s main concern is about the County’s liability over the long term, or in perpetuity.
Mr. Baucom noted that in the future, there might be a probability of there being a challenge and questioned who would be responsible for managing that challenge. He pointed out that
in the past, it has always been the County.
Commissioner Baucom said he wanted to reiterate what Commissioner Helms was saying about evaluating private engineered and permitted septic fields. He mentioned that he has always paid
attention to land and has seen lots perk within the last 15 years that should have never perked.
He said the steering committee welcomes any of Commissioners to attend its meetings at any time and would appreciate it. He added that they are there to serve both the Board of Commissioners
and the citizens of the County. He noted that it is all volunteer work, but everyone on the committee is passionate about what they do.
Commissioner Christina Helms asked Mr. Baucom if he could let the Commissioners know when the meetings are scheduled so they can put them on their calendar.
Mr. Baucom responded that the next meeting will be next Tuesday. He explained that the committee meets on the fourth Tuesday of every month at 11:30 a.m. and the meetings are held in
Commissioners boardroom.
Mr. Hansen said they now had a presentation from Alisa Davis about the program they are working through. He added that she would share examples of where this has been done elsewhere
in the state, which could provide ideas for outcomes they could hopefully emulate because they are quite impressive.
Ms. Davis thanked everyone for having her that evening and introduced herself as working for the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. She explained that she is one of two Wildlife
and Fisheries Conservation Planners and that she covers the southern half of the state, from the mountains to the coast.
She explained that her job is to coordinate and administer the Green Growth Toolbox Program and the Partners for Green Growth Program, which is a cost-share program that the County has
been awarded. She said they are very excited to work with Union County.
Ms. Davis explained that the Green Growth Toolbox Program is a non-regulatory technical assistance program for integrating priority wildlife habitat conservation in local government
land use and transportation planning. She stated that she works with planners to assist them to prioritize conservation alongside their regular planning activities, including ordinances,
and discusses incentives for developers to include more conservation into their site plans and other projects.
Ms. Davis said this program is not intended to stop development, but it is intended to direct development so that it does not overcome any of their priority wildlife habitats.
She explained that the intention of the program is to help identify those areas and include them for conservation. She said since 2010, they have been included in 68 land use and transportation
plans and ordinances across the state, and that number only includes those who reached out and worked with them directly. She added that everything they do is free and all their resources
are available online.
She said that one of these counties, Harnett County, has a new land use plan currently going through final comments before being presented to their Board of Commissioners. She said
they have set aside important conservation areas that are already protected. She displayed a slide of Harnett County’s Land Use Map which included agriculture conservation overlays.
She said they have worked with Chatham County the longest and have found that county does a fantastic job with some of its land use plans. She stated that Chatham County has included
its protected lands areas and a conservation overlay that supports habitat connectivity, allowing animals to move back and forth across habitats. She stated that they have also included
an agriculture protection overlay, making Chatham another county that is really trying hard for agriculture protection.
Ms. Davis explained that Union County and Pender County received the Partners for Green Growth cost-share program at the same time. She said this is essentially what Pender County is
working on. Ms. Davis said that Pender County started around the same time as Union County and has identified areas with the greatest potential for connecting habitats, incorporating
those with already protected areas.
Ms. Davis described this as Pender County’s general plan for what will happen, essentially serving as a preferred development guide. She stated that developers who want to come in can
contact the county, receive that guide, and be directed more toward cluster areas.
She said she is always available if anyone has any questions and shared her contact information.
25-145 Employee Compensation and Benefits Update (This item was removed from the agenda during the meeting.)
25-144 Appointments to Boards and Committees
Chair Merrell noted that there are four boards with vacancies to consider this evening.
She explained that these vacancies have been advertised in accordance with the Board's Rules of Procedure, and applications have been received.
Home and Community Care Block Grant Advisory Committee
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms moved to appoint Dale Louder to the Home and Community Care Block Grant Advisory Committee.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Library Board of Trustees
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms moved to appoint as thePeter Kovacs as the Weddington Representative to the Library Board of Trustees.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Historic Preservation Commission
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms moved to appoint Crystal Gilliard and John Mullen to serve on the Historic Preservation Commission.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
Juvenile Crime Prevention Council.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms moved to appoint Daniel Hailey as the county commissioner appointee and Ethan X. Davis to serve as the person under the age of 21 to the Juvenile Crime Prevention
Council.
The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye
County Manager's Comments
Chair Merrell recognized County Manager Brian Matthews for his comments.
Mr. Matthews stated that March 7th was National Employee Appreciation Day. He explained that the County observes an Employee Appreciation Month to recognize its employees and provide
something to say thank you for all the work they do. He wanted to give a shout out for that and acknowledged the hard work of the staff in putting it together.
Mr. Matthews expressed appreciation to Vann Harrell, Tax Administrator, for providing an update on the reappraisal process and appeals. He stressed that the Board, as Vice Chair Brian
W. Helms said, will be considering the tax rate as part of the budget, and reminded everyone that the reappraisal is not the tax rate.He assured there will be a lower tax rate than the
current 58.5 cents, but acknowledged it may yield in a different tax amount people have to pay, which can be confusing. He stated that the rate will not remain at 58.5 cents by the end
of the process and will be lower. He said the actual rate will be determined by the budget, the revenues needed, and the bonds that must be paid back for approved projects. He said
he wanted to make that clear.
Commissioners' Comments
Chair Merrell expressed appreciation to Mr. Matthews for his comments. She recognized Commissioner Sides for his comments.
Commissioner Sides had no closing comments.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms thanked the County Manager for raising those points and expressed appreciation to Vann Harrell for being present to provide the appraisal update. He acknowledged
that there is a lot of confusion in the county and among the public about the issues at hand. He emphasized that the more information shared with the public, the better it will be.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms thanked Allan Baucom for his presentation and expressed anticipation for the committee’s future recommendations. He also thanked everyone who came to speak,
emphasizing appreciation for public input. He reminded that this is their county and expressed eagerness to hear from those willing to speak.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms briefly addressed the rezoning item that had been planned for discussion that evening but was withdrawn, as Chair Merrell mentioned. He acknowledged that several
people likely came to speak regarding that item and apologized that they did not get the opportunity to express their concerns. He explained that the withdrawal effectively counts as
a no vote and noted that the applicant cannot bring the matter back for 12 months.
Vice Chair Brian W. Helms encouraged people to reach out to their state delegation. He mentioned that Senate Bill 219, filed by Senator Todd Johnson, includes modifications to satellite
annexation affecting Marvin and Stallings. He urged anyone with concerns about the project to reach out to their state representatives.
Chair Merrell clarified that people were allowed to speak on the rezoning item that was removed from the agenda, noting that one person did come forward and had the opportunity to speak.
She emphasized that anyone who showed up was given an opportunity to speak if they wanted to regarding that item andthat was not removed.
She expressed appreciation to Allan Baucom for being present and his tireless work in land preservation. Chair Merrell highlighted that Union County ranks number 13 in the nation for
loss of farmland, which is a significant concern for everyone. She expressed appreciation for Mr. Baucom for bringing his life’s work to advise the committee and lead the efforts.
Commissioner Christina Helms congratulated the Union County water staff for its impressive wins, including the belts. She extended her congratulations to the team.
Commissioner Christina Helms addressed Mr. Baucom, saying this issue is very near and dear to her heart. She explained that her husband puts in a lot of hours on the farm and she puts
in a few hours as well. She agreed with Chair Merrell that Union County being 13th in the nation is not a proud statistic and expressed hope that the county will drop in that ranking.
She expressed the Land Use Board for its diligent work to protect Union County and its farmland, expressing sincere gratitude to everyone involved.
Commissioner Baucom acknowledged that since the Gold Branch development item was pulled, he felt incumbent to say that he had heard from numerous people in the Mill Grove - 218 Fairview
Community who opposed the project. He said he was prepared to vote for denial of the Gold Branch development.
He expressed hope that there would not be any effort by the legislature or any other body to circumvent the will of the people, emphasizing that such decisions should be made as close
as possible to those affected.
Brian Matthews, County Manager, with a heavy heart, announced that one of the County’s employees recently lost his son. He shared that Luke Faucet’s son, who was 13 years old, had heart
disease and underwent a heart transplant that unfortunately failed. He said the boy recently passed away.
Mr. Matthews expressed condolences and sympathy for the family, and said our thoughts and prayers are with them. He apologized for missing this announcement earlier.
Chair Merrell thanked Brian for sharing the news and expressed that her thoughts and prayers will be with the family.
Adjournment
With there being no further comments or discussion, at approximately 7:55 p.m., Chair Merrell moved to adjourn the regular meeting. The motion passed unanimously as follows:
Chair MerrellAye
Vice Chair Brian W. HelmsAye
Commissioner Clancy BaucomAye
Commissioner Christina HelmsAye
Commissioner SidesAye