2026-09-22 - Town Council Work Session

03:40We'll

03:50convene the September 22nd council work

03:53session. At this time, I'll turn it over

03:55to our interim town manager, Russ.

03:58>> Thank you, mayor. Me briefly walk

03:59through the agenda tonight. Um Jenny's

04:02going to review a meeting schedule. I

04:04think we didn't rehearse this.

04:06>> Yeah. [laughter]

04:08Uh, Deputy Town Attorney Matt Pence is

04:10going to walk us through a real estate

04:12property discussion with you all. And

04:14then, mayor, I'll kick it back to you to

04:15give the council recommendations

04:16committee update and then I'll have a

04:19few updates regarding our moving forward

04:21dashboard. And I don't believe there's a

04:23close session tonight.

04:26>> So, there you go, Jenny.

04:27>> Yes. So, we start with tonight and then

04:29we move into our regular meeting for the

04:3024th. Um, we have Thursday, October 8th,

04:34the work session plus regular meeting.

04:36And then below you'll see that the extra

04:38work sessions that we are holding for

04:39joint meetings are now reflected as work

04:41sessions.

04:43>> So a comment about that. I got asked by

04:46the mayor of Marsville

04:49>> if we would be willing to do joint

04:51session meetings and I let him know that

04:53it's not a high priority now. And he

04:56asked if I would be willing to meet with

05:00them. [snorts] And I didn't know how

05:02council felt about that. and I totally

05:04forgot about it until this moment since

05:06that happened last night. So, how does

05:08council feel about that?

05:10Rather than having joint meeting, which

05:12is like hering cats, I will meet with

05:14them and we will not be hosting which

05:17was one of the things they wanted us

05:18[snorts] to do.

05:20>> It's fine by me.

05:22>> Fine with me.

05:22>> Is it you and the and their entire

05:24council or is it mayor to mayor or

05:27>> sound like entire councils? and he said

05:30Holly Springs and Marsville. Are those

05:33the two?

05:36>> I'll add that I've let Holly Springs

05:37manager and the Apex manager know of the

05:39um revised schedule.

05:40>> Okay.

05:41>> And they were having difficulty meeting

05:43our schedule.

05:44>> We had nobody committed yet.

05:46>> Yes.

05:46>> Okay. We'll just wait and hear from them

05:48then.

05:49>> Okay.

05:50>> I'll share um just so everybody knows, I

05:52will be out of the country the first two

05:53weeks of October.

05:56>> [snorts]

05:57>> Do you have any of your committee

06:01meetings that need coverage?

06:02>> We didn't. Well, um I don't believe we

06:05have one for those two weeks. It's one

06:07of the reasons that we scheduled um

06:10quite a few in a row in September. And

06:13then we do have one

06:16>> the 19th, I believe.

06:17>> October or something.

06:18>> No, not the 19th.

06:20Don't guess, Carissa.

06:22see if I can find it before you do.

06:25>> Thursday the 22nd, we're going to do a

06:28committee meeting immediately prior to

06:29the council meeting since we don't have

06:31a work session that day.

06:32>> Yep.

06:33>> So, after next Monday, that'll be the

06:35next um committee meeting.

06:38>> Cool. I was just going to offer if you

06:39did, I would be happy to jump in.

06:41>> Awesome. Thank you.

06:44>> That's it. Okay. All right.

06:47All right.

06:49That

06:53And remember, Matt is presenting to you

06:55tonight because he is leading the real

06:58estate team.

06:59>> I am for now. Yes, that is true. Good

07:02evening, council. Uh, as you can see and

07:04have heard, we're going to talk about

07:06some real estate. Um, and we're going to

07:09do three things tonight. We want you to

07:11know three things when you walk out.

07:13First, the town is very active in the

07:14real estate space. Second, the real

07:16estate division manages all of that

07:18space. Pun intended. and the division is

07:21not very big. And finally, there are

07:22three downtown properties staff would

07:24like council to consider today and uh

07:26offer some guidance and other things.

07:29But first, trivia time.

07:32>> All right. How many swimming pools does

07:34the town of Kerry own?

07:36>> Oh, zero.

07:37>> And we got we got multiple choice here.

07:39We got a zero, we got B2,

07:42we've got C4, and we've got D7. Wait,

07:45does the Downtown Curry Park pond count

07:48as a swimming pool?

07:49>> I hope not because people are not

07:52neither of those are supposed to have

07:54people in them. So, I would say no.

07:55>> This feels like a trick question.

07:57>> I I know.

07:57>> I know. Maybe a trick question.

07:59>> I think I'm going zero.

08:01>> Zero.

08:01>> Zero. You would be right. None. Carrie

08:04owns no swimming pools. We do own seven

08:06lakes and five interactive water

08:07features, but no pools.

08:09>> The fountain is not an interactive

08:11water.

08:11>> No. And that is not one of the

08:12interactive water features.

08:14>> How come? But there are alligators

08:15there. [laughter]

08:17>> Approximately how many separate

08:19properties does the town own?

08:22>> A 150 approximately, 350,

08:2750 [snorts] or 250.

08:29>> So these are all properties or

08:31properties that are

08:33>> this is properties all properties we own

08:36in fees simple. So it's not easements,

08:38but it's properties that we our name is

08:40on the deed.

08:40>> Okay.

08:41>> So [clears throat] parks.

08:42>> Mhm. Oh, then it's more than 50.

08:44>> I' I'd say 350.

08:45>> 350.

08:46>> Oh, look at you guys. Two for two. 350.

08:49>> I just wanted to be different.

08:50>> Spanning almost 3,000 acres with a

08:53current assessed value at over half a

08:56billion dollars. The five largest are

08:58Bond Park, the Bryson Nature Preserve,

09:01the Western Wake Regional Water

09:03Reclamation Facility, and then the South

09:05Carry Reclamation Facility, and Thomas

09:07Brooks Park. So those are our five

09:08biggest

09:09>> which is probably why the assessed value

09:10is so high when you think of those

09:12facilities on

09:12>> maybe

09:15>> third one. How many water towers do we

09:17have?

09:18>> Oh

09:19>> A3

09:20>> no

09:21>> B4

09:23>> C six

09:24>> maybe

09:24>> and D8

09:26>> six or eight

09:27>> six.

09:28>> Look at Jamie. He's if he's here he's

09:30doing

09:31>> he's not here

09:33six. It's either six or eight.

09:35>> Oh the streak is broken. It is. Oh, I

09:37have sorry I have bonus questions.

09:38Sorry.

09:39>> Oh.

09:39>> Oh,

09:39>> bonus. How many host telecom equipment?

09:42>> All of them.

09:43>> And then double bonus. How many carriers

09:46are represented

09:48>> amongst those?

09:49>> Oh,

09:51>> all of them should be accepted.

09:52>> Yes. [laughter]

09:54>> Okay. All right. So, we have eight water

09:57towers.

09:57>> I got that one right. [laughter]

09:59>> I didn't hear eight. I heard six in

10:01there. Okay. Okay. We can check the

10:03recording later. I was going to say, how

10:06many have have I climbed? Zero.

10:07>> Zero.

10:08>> You haven't climbed one.

10:10>> Oh, we got to do that again.

10:11>> Yeah, you do. Yeah. Four host telecom

10:13equipment. We don't have it on all of

10:14them, but four. And that's based off of

10:16where they're located within the town

10:17and coverage maps and things like that.

10:19So, we have four. We have that. And then

10:21three carriers are represented. They are

10:23the three big ones. We used to have

10:25four, but then T-Mobile bought Sprint

10:27and then it

10:28>> and then it shrunk the amount of

10:29carriers.

10:31>> Okay. Hey, how many properties has the

10:32town purchased under the storm drainage

10:34and flood mitigation policy?

10:37A4.

10:38>> No.

10:39>> B9.

10:40>> C16.

10:42D21.

10:44>> Nine.

10:44>> Nine or 16?

10:45>> 16. I think

10:47>> locked in everybody. They're nine.

10:49[laughter]

10:49>> I'm saying 21.

10:50>> Okay. 16 have been purchased between

10:542006 and 2024. And this is what we've

10:56done on most of them. We've planted

10:58trees and shrubs on 11. And then we plan

11:00future plantings on four more once the

11:02existing structures are demolished.

11:03They're still there. We haven't done

11:04that yet. Um and so that is what we've

11:08been doing under that policy.

11:10How many active leases is the town a

11:12party to? That means both sides. How

11:15many are we a tenant of and how many are

11:17we a landlord for? A5

11:21>> B9 C13

11:24D22. Does a Does a garage count as an

11:28active lease?

11:29>> It can if we are renting space. Oh, no.

11:33I do not. The the parking deck

11:35condominiums are not part of this.

11:36>> Oh, they're not. No.

11:37>> Oh,

11:39>> 22. 13.

11:41>> Okay.

11:42>> 13.

11:42>> I've got bonus ones on this one, too.

11:44>> So, how many is Carrie a tenant for? And

11:47then, shocker, double bonus. How many

11:50are we a landlord for?

11:51>> So, that would be like police

11:53substation. Yes, that would a tenant. We

11:56would be a tenant of the police

11:57substation

11:58>> would be we would be a landlord for

12:01>> let's say that gas station that we least

12:04>> Oh yeah, the gas.

12:05>> I'm going to say seven and six.

12:07>> Okay. Oh,

12:08>> here we go. Hey. Hey. [laughter]

12:12>> So, we are a party. We have 13 active

12:15leases right now that we are either a

12:17tenant or a party to or a landlord for.

12:19And then seven of them were tenant uh

12:21tenant for seven. Six is landlord. Fun

12:24fact, one of these ones that were a

12:25landlord for it's the ATM in the parking

12:28lot.

12:30>> So we could get to five in my head, but

12:32I couldn't get to six. Why? It was the

12:34ATM.

12:34>> ATM.

12:35>> Okay.

12:36>> Wow.

12:37>> All right. How often does staff inspect

12:38town properties with vacant structures

12:40on them?

12:43>> A. Twice a year. B quarterly. C.

12:46Monthly.

12:49D twice a month.

12:50>> Monthly

12:52>> A.

12:53>> Okay.

12:55>> B

12:56A

12:58>> twice a month. We have six properties

13:00that we currently are doing this

13:02recently down from 27. That was the

13:05multimodal center that we just re uh

13:07those properties that we recently

13:08completed demo for. But there was 21

13:11properties there. And so that we had

13:14staff going out twice a month to put

13:16eyes on each and every one of those

13:17properties. So just with six, that's 12

13:20site visits every month, 144 a year. And

13:22we do this because vacant structures, no

13:24one's around to watch them. So bad stuff

13:26can be happening. And we want to make

13:27sure that we figure that out.

13:29[clears throat]

13:30Finally, how many employees make up the

13:33real estate division as of today?

13:36>> Two. [laughter]

13:37>> One or two.

13:39So A2 B4 C7 D

13:44>> 12

13:46A B4

13:48>> two FTEES there are two positions are

13:51authorized one is filled we had a recent

13:53departure

13:54>> so that's 350 plus properties 13 leases

13:57seven ton tele 17 telecom installations

13:5916 flood mitigation properties six

14:00vacant structures in addition to every

14:03easement acquisition of which there are

14:04a lot rightway closure eminent domain

14:07case etc etc etc that is being managed

14:10by

14:10>> Is this your performance review for you

14:11to get a [laughter]

14:13>> That's not me. I'm not even included in

14:15here. This is This is Suzanne. She was

14:17at the last meeting.

14:18>> She wrote the slide then.

14:19>> Uh, no. I wrote this slide. She would

14:21probably be mortified letting that I'm

14:22that I'm talking about her right now in

14:24this context, but she's an excellent

14:26employee and she's doing a great job,

14:27but she's only one person. So, and then

14:29Britney got the uh you got to meet her

14:32at the uh quarterly.

14:34>> Can you share what your role is?

14:37So my my role now is this was so we call

14:40this the real est I call it the real

14:41estate division. Yeah. And it used to be

14:43under transportation. Um do I did I have

14:46no that didn't make it in. I had a slide

14:47that did have the history but we cut it

14:49out for time. But

14:50>> it used to be under transportation and

14:52that was because the real estate

14:53division primarily was uh back in the

14:55day was acquiring properties in support

14:57of transportation projects.

14:58>> Capital projects.

14:59>> Capital projects. Capital projects. Yes.

15:01Not just transportation, utilities as

15:02well. But that's where it lived. And

15:04then when Shelley came on due to her

15:06past history and etc etc it made sense

15:08to put it under her and that's where it

15:10went and then Shelley has departed us.

15:12So now it was decided to come under

15:15legal for at least the time being

15:17because we spend a lot of time talking

15:20with them anyway because it's a lot of

15:22all of these things are very legal heavy

15:24and so that's where it is now. So, I am

15:26I am Suzanne's supervisor now. And so, I

15:29am working with her to make sure she has

15:31what she needs or at least what I can

15:32give her. And um yeah, that's

15:36>> and for those citizens that are watching

15:38this who are not familiar with you, your

15:41title is

15:41>> Oh, well, he introduced me, but I am the

15:43deputy town attorney for the town of

15:45Kerry. So,

15:45>> and specifically kind of came on to help

15:47with real estate matters from that was

15:49originally how it how Yeah, that was the

15:51original plan. Uh it got a little bit

15:53bigger than that and but yeah. Yes. So

15:56that's that is the way this all works.

15:58>> Thank you.

15:59>> Um

16:00>> make that clear.

16:00>> We checked our two boxes first two

16:02takeaways. We are now going to move to

16:06uh discussion of downtown properties.

16:07But before we do that, I'm would like to

16:10remind you all on what our abilities are

16:13to dispose of properties we own. We're

16:15subject to the North Carolina General

16:17Statutes. There are several that go

16:19through in detail what we can do when we

16:22sell property and what we can't do.

16:23>> I feel like I'm in class. I just have to

16:25say you got your professorial.

16:28>> Oh, I appreciate that. We'll see if you

16:30actually there won't be a test. We did

16:31it in the front, not the back. But um

16:34we'll see. Don't feel like you're in

16:35>> if you learn if you learn anything from

16:37here. And when I say dispose, that does

16:38not mean ex blow up or demolish. Dispose

16:41is just the term the general statues use

16:42to just get rid of. That can be selling,

16:44that can be donating, that can be

16:46exchanging, that can be doing all kinds

16:47of stuff.

16:49So, the button works. Okay, these are

16:52the five main ways to dispose of

16:54property. You can do it via sealed bids.

16:57That means you say, "Hey, we want to

16:58sell this property. Who wants it? Give

17:00us sealed bids. We'll open them all at

17:02the same time, and then we'll pick the

17:03one that satisfies the statutory

17:05criteria."

17:07The next one is negotiated offer with

17:09upset bid. This is when some a third

17:11party comes and says, "Hey town, I want

17:13to buy that property and I'm willing to

17:15pay this much." And then we have to take

17:17that offer and then start an upset bid

17:20process. So we then say, "Hey, ABC

17:23company's come to us and says wants to

17:24buy this property. We're we're willing

17:27to sell it for them to them for this

17:28amount, but who can do better?" And then

17:30we start our eBay auction and we get

17:32people to to come in and bid.

17:33>> That's the most commonly used method in

17:35general. Public auction is another

17:38option. That is the true eBay. That is,

17:40hey, we have a piece of property. Who

17:42wants it? And then whatever whatever

17:44bids we get, we got to live with. Um

17:48then there's the exchange. Uh you guys

17:50recently saw this in relation to um some

17:53development too. Actually, we did some

17:54exchanging as well as part of the

17:56parking deck. I believe right Lisa, did

17:57we exchange some property? So, this is

17:59when someone comes to us and says, "Hey,

18:02I've got this piece of property that I

18:03don't want anymore, but it is basically

18:05equal in value to that property you have

18:08that I do want." And we can swap it. Um,

18:11and we don't have to do any bidding. We

18:13don't have to do any any auction,

18:14anything like that. However, there has

18:16to be an equal value between the

18:18properties being exchanged. And that can

18:21be that can be uh that line can be moved

18:22a little bit. It's not like the property

18:24itself has to be the exact size. You can

18:26you can supplement that with with

18:28payments or other things. But that's the

18:29gist of how this works. And then

18:31finally, there is private sale. Private

18:34sale is the town coming going to

18:36somebody or somebody coming to the town

18:37and we both saying yes, we like one

18:39another. We want to sell this property

18:41to that specific person without having

18:43to do any public auction or anything

18:44like that. That one is very very narrow.

18:47We cannot use that in almost all cases.

18:52These are the three cases we can do it

18:54for. So, you can do a private sale for

18:56historic or conservation property sold

18:58to a qualifying nonprofit. Qualifying

19:00nonprofit is a nonprofit who is in the

19:02historic preservation or conservation

19:04business and has the ability to do that.

19:07You can sell the property for a public

19:09purpose. [snorts] This is this is this

19:12one's probably the broadest of the

19:13three, but this is if we can do it, if

19:15we could use our our public authority to

19:17do something, we could sell it to a

19:19private party to do that thing, not on

19:21our behalf, but kind of in that same

19:23realm. But when we do that, we have to

19:26we can only sell it to nonprofits in

19:27this way and we have to put conditions

19:29in the deed or in some other method to

19:31limit the use of that property going

19:33forward for that public purpose. And you

19:36can't do it with any property we've

19:37taken via eminent domain. It's just the

19:39way the statute's written. And then

19:41finally, and this one's a very niche

19:43case, but it is you can sell property to

19:45volunteer fire departments or volunteer

19:47rescue squads. that is that is a private

19:48entity that if they came to you and

19:50said, "Hey, we would like this property

19:51and we and we could we could do that."

19:55There are other tools that town that the

19:58town has at its uh at its beck and call

20:00for using property that isn't

20:03necessarily straight up sale. So, one,

20:06we can lease or rent it up to 10 years.

20:09If we go over 10 years, we have to then

20:12use one of those five uh methods of

20:15property disposal because the law treats

20:17it as a disposal because you're

20:19essentially um uh you are encumbering

20:23public land for a very long period of

20:25time. So 10 years is the cap. When we

20:27talked about those telecom leases, we

20:29cap those out at 10 for this reason. Um

20:32we can't go above 10 for true leases.

20:35Um, and then we can transfer to another

20:38government on any terms with or without

20:40payment. We've done this fairly often

20:41for small things, but we can go to

20:43another government and say, "Hey, we'll

20:44swap you this for that." DOTs, we've

20:46done that with DOT property. We've done

20:48that with some of our adjacent neighbors

20:49to true up lines and make things work.

20:51So, you can do that and that can be

20:53that's this is this one here is actually

20:54the most flexible we ever are with

20:56property. It's this one. And then

20:59finally, we can lease land for housing

21:00if at least 20% of the units are set

21:02aside for low-inccome. I am grossly

21:04simplifying what the statute allows us

21:06to do, but it it can be done. Um, it

21:08gets complicated. Uh, it is not the

21:10easiest thing to do, but it is on the

21:12menu.

21:14>> Does the school board count as another

21:16government?

21:16>> Yes, it does. Mhm.

21:19>> Is the wake

21:21lease that we have with the state in one

21:25of those?

21:25>> It would be like a transfer to another

21:27government essentially.

21:28>> So, we don't pay for

21:30>> Well, with Oh, so we do pay. You can. So

21:33when I say most when I say most

21:35flexible, I mean on both sides of the

21:37spectrum. The a government entity can

21:39come to us and strap on as many rules,

21:41regulations, and rent as they want or

21:43they can go the exact opposite and be as

21:45fluid as they want. But it is

21:46>> another example is the um regional

21:48library downtown.

21:50>> Wake County has a ground lease with us

21:52for 40 years. It's either a dollar or no

21:55charge, right? Um, so it's a lease,

21:58long-term lease, longer than 10 years,

22:00um, but with another government entity.

22:02>> Yep.

22:04>> Okay. Any other questions before we move

22:07on? All right. Now, um, oh, I'm sorry. I

22:11forgot about this. This is just an

22:13update. We have um, this is actually

22:14about property purchase, not property

22:16disposition, but we want to because

22:19we're talking about real estate, we

22:20thought it was pertinent to bring this

22:21up. This is the update to the delegation

22:25um the resolution delegating authority.

22:27So what we changed with that is now any

22:30purchase that the the town makes of

22:33property that is above $300,000

22:37has to come before you all for approval

22:39unless it is part of a uh it is required

22:44for or with and within the scope of a

22:46capital project for which you all have

22:48adopted an appropriation in the budget.

22:50So this is for a capital project. This

22:51is for like a road widening project. If

22:53you guys have approved that project and

22:55we need to get right ofway for that that

22:57exceeds $300,000, this would allow us to

22:59just get that and not have to come to

23:01you for the individual

23:04purchases of that property related to

23:06that capital project.

23:07>> You still funded it as part of your

23:08budget approval.

23:09>> Correct. Correct. So the idea is if

23:11you've approved that project, you've the

23:14trickle down approval for the property

23:15that you all are aware that we would

23:17need for that project would would go

23:18hand in hand. So that's what it

23:19currently says. If you don't like that,

23:21talk to us and we can talk about

23:22changing it. But that's what it

23:23currently says in that resolution.

23:25Okay. Now, we get to the main event.

23:28We've got three properties we're going

23:30to talk about. Um, and we're going to

23:32start with the fire administration

23:35building. So, this is on 100 North

23:37Academy Street.

23:40That way, maybe that way there. Yeah.

23:43>> Um, [clears throat] and it was built in

23:451965. Oh, we bought it in 1961. Um, I'm

23:48sorry. Wait, how did that work? How did

23:50we Oh, we bought the property in 1961.

23:52We built the building in 1965.

23:55And then uh it's in Town Center mixeduse

23:57zoning. And then right now it was built

24:00in 1965 and it is a little bit outdated.

24:03The fire alarm is outdated and there's

24:04no sprinkler system.

24:06Council authorized starting the

24:09negotiated offer and upset bid process

24:11for this parcel via a May 1st, 2025

24:14resolution. So, you have seen this

24:15before and we have talked to you about

24:17it before and we've talked to you about

24:18it about disposing of it before. What

24:21has changed is that offer has since been

24:23withdrawn

24:25and due to recent events, the bidding

24:28never got going on that because there

24:30were certain other things that were

24:32happening and the so now um we're coming

24:37back to talk to you about it, but the

24:38original offer was uh it has been

24:42withdrawn and it included streetscape

24:45costs. Lloyds has since installed that

24:48streetscape at its expense. So, not only

24:51was that offer withdrawn, if it hadn't

24:52been, it would be outdated because it

24:54would include things that have already

24:56happened.

24:58What is the building worth? It's

24:59assessed now at that at 1 million

25:0372,565.

25:06Its appraised value as of summer 2024

25:09was roughly $2,300,000.

25:12And the amount that was offered in that

25:14sense withdrawn offer was uh 3 million

25:18about 3.1. But that offer included

25:21$700,000 of streetscape costs. And if

25:24you do the rough math there, you see

25:26that it was streetscape plus appraised

25:28value was what it was what the initial

25:30offer we got for it was

25:33what it would cost to keep. So Scott and

25:35his team have been doing some work to

25:36see what it would cost to maybe upfit

25:38for either our continued use or upfit

25:41for rental to to rent it out to other uh

25:43you know a restaurant or a another

25:45commercial business. And that number is

25:48coming out between 1 million to 1.5. 1

25:51million is more the commercial side of

25:52things. 1.5 is the restaurant side of

25:54things, but that's kind of how that that

25:56plays out. Um, and so yes, that's the

25:59approximate cost to renovate or upit the

26:01building to allow for our continued use

26:02or make it rentable.

26:07You guys have three paths before you. We

26:09can dispose of it and that means we can

26:12explore using all four or five of those

26:14options that we talked about. So upset

26:16bids, seal bids, exchange, auction. We

26:20can retain and renovate. So we spend 1

26:22to 1.5 million and take on landlord

26:23risk. I will say we're not super

26:26thrilled in being landlords if we can

26:27help it, but it is an option. And then

26:30finally, we can retain as is with the

26:31known deficiencies.

26:33Um staff recommends disposal for for

26:36numerous reasons. Um but and then also

26:39whatever we decide there is a public

26:41rightway.

26:43There's some public rightway I want.

26:45They're not issues. It's just they're

26:46not it's not aligned now with where the

26:47streetscape is, etc., etc. So, whatever

26:50you all decide and whatever we do, you

26:53will be seeing something related to

26:54right sizing that right away at some

26:56point. The rightway goes right up to the

26:58building and we don't want that. We want

27:01to back it out a little bit. So, we

27:03would most likely be abandoning some of

27:04that right away. I'm sorry, closing that

27:07right away. I get on people about saying

27:09that and I just did it on television. Um

27:13but we will close that right of way in

27:15order to rightsize it. So

27:16[clears throat]

27:17um so yes,

27:19>> can you explain your reason? You said

27:22staff recommends it. Can you give us

27:23some of your reasons why besides the

27:25>> So So it's a it's a structure right now

27:28that I believe is is it's located in in

27:31a prime location in downtown Kerry.

27:34the the thinking being that the town if

27:36we did retain and use it, we could make

27:38use of the structure, but it we don't I

27:40believe it's it's the general consensus

27:42that it's not the highest and best use

27:43of it where it is. Um, and the amount

27:46the the the size of the square footage,

27:48its location, it it just seems that it

27:51might be of better use in private hands.

27:53Um, given its location,

27:55>> put it back in the tag space.

27:57>> Yes.

27:57>> Etc.

27:58>> Yep. And then also, we don't like being

28:00landlords. Like it's a lot of work. Um,

28:04and it creates uh situations that are

28:07that are that can just get very

28:09complicated very quickly. So if if I

28:12know if I go to Suzanne and have the

28:13option, hey Suzanne, would you prefer to

28:15be a landlord in a property or to

28:17dispose of it? She would say dispose

28:19every time and I would agree with that

28:21just because it's it's organizationally

28:23and administratively it's it's just

28:24easier. Um, and then and we've had

28:27interest. We've had stated interest in

28:29it. So, we know that there is a

28:30potential uh desire out there for it to

28:33be used by someone other than us. And

28:36because we haven't had a long-term um

28:39plan for it, it it just seems like the

28:41best the best situation.

28:43>> Then, um if they make that decision, it

28:45still has to come to you to accept the

28:47bid. You're not making the decision to

28:49sell it tonight.

28:50>> No. And if you wanted to dispose of it

28:52tonight, we would look for guidance on

28:55what you might be thinking and we'd

28:56bring back a staff report. Um, and at

28:59the May 1st, 2025 quarterly, you you

29:02have to adopt a resolution to start the

29:03upset bid process. So, there's more work

29:05that would have to be done. So, you're

29:06not making any final decisions tonight,

29:08but it's just trying to get your feeling

29:10which way you're leaning

29:11>> when when you go off and prepare those

29:15materials. Are are there options

29:18associated with the upset bid where we

29:20can limit the type of use associated

29:22with it? Because I don't want to see,

29:23let's say, I don't want to see a banana

29:25republic there. I don't want to. Right.

29:27I would like to see something that adds

29:29value to the

29:30>> Democrat against Banana Republic.

29:32>> Any of those any of the three options

29:34that involve

29:35>> Yes.

29:36>> bidding. [laughter]

29:37>> I love it.

29:38>> Any of the three options that involve

29:39bidding, it's not like you open the

29:42gates and you have to sell it at the end

29:44of the day. All three of those, no

29:47matter whoever the winning bidder is,

29:50you have complete discretion to say, you

29:52know what, never mind. We're not going

29:54to do it this round. Um and so you can't

29:57because of that complete discretion you

30:00you the only the only discretion you

30:02don't have is the monetary amount. So if

30:05let's say Banana Republic is the high

30:07bidder compared to another vendor or

30:10another another entity that you would

30:12prefer you have to pick the high bidder

30:15or you have to cancel the whole thing.

30:17So that would be the limitation.

30:19>> We can put deed restrictions

30:21[clears throat]

30:21>> on the property to limit the use. Now um

30:24we have to talk about what sort of

30:25things we could do with that. But

30:27>> would you be able to do that on the on

30:29the bid before the bid process that they

30:31would be aware of it?

30:32>> Yes, we would be able to go out and say

30:34we are offering this property

30:36with these conditions who wants it.

30:39>> Is that more just for clarification

30:42um in the example that was used if it's

30:44retail are you in broad classes or

30:47specific? because I was thinking as a

30:49retail um example that might get

30:53difficult to it could be this retailer

30:55but not that retailer.

30:56>> Yeah, I wouldn't go with names. Um but

30:58>> sorry, but you know name

31:00>> for example [clears throat]

31:01um for the Cedar Street parking deck

31:03with the retail spaces that are there

31:05that are part of the condominium that

31:08that group now owns. Um there are

31:10restrictions on those condominium units

31:12at least for a certain period of years.

31:14And so we what you really like to do is

31:16say what uses are prohibited. And so

31:18we've said uses such as adult bookstore,

31:21you know, things like that we um have

31:24said were prohibited. So we have a list

31:25of things. Also at the Walker um the

31:29ground floor of the Walker apartments,

31:30we have a similar list of uses that were

31:33prohibited that cannot be there for a

31:34certain number of years. So it's usually

31:36you look at prohibited lists instead of

31:39permitted. H but we realistically don't

31:42know exactly the purpose outside of a

31:45broad category that someone purchasing

31:48the property falls into. Right. They

31:50don't have to disclose to us exactly

31:52what is it going to be an ice cream shop

31:54or a head shop. It it's retail

31:57>> depending upon the nature of the

31:59restrictions we impose.

32:00>> Right. Okay.

32:00>> So we

32:02>> there's a give and take that we can we

32:04we can only be so detailed but we also

32:06don't you're right. We how detailed do

32:08we want to be? Do we feel like that

32:09would tamper down desire for the So, but

32:12it's a conversation that you all can

32:14have.

32:14>> And does that deed restriction remain

32:16with the property definitely until we as

32:18a body

32:19>> depends on how you write it.

32:20>> Yes. Okay.

32:20>> It it is not uncommon to have deed

32:22restrictions that do have a sunset

32:24period, but those sunset periods are

32:25like 30 40 years in the future. So you

32:28get the you there's a general thing in

32:31property law where you

32:34>> there's a general dislike of of

32:36encumbering property for long periods of

32:39time but long periods of time is

32:41relative and 30 and 40 years is totally

32:44kosher. So

32:44>> because we get less money for it. The

32:46more restrictions there are the less

32:48potent value property could be

32:50>> potentially potentially. It's the idea

32:52too though that things could change and

32:53you don't want to you don't want to

32:54limit you don't want to put a a

32:56restriction on a property that would

32:58make sense today that in 20 years is

33:00ludicrous and then and then that tanks

33:02the property's value. So

33:04>> sure.

33:04>> So Mike, it's a great presentation and

33:06really this this is very helpful.

33:09>> Um coming back to deed restrictions.

33:13>> Um is there a plan for downtown? like I

33:17thought there was a vision and a plan

33:20that's on paper.

33:22>> So will the staff be able to guide us

33:25like what would be the best use for this

33:27uh property?

33:28>> So the the plan is in line with what

33:31Lisa talked about uses. So there is the

33:35plan there but it it's a question of

33:38whether those that's detailed enough to

33:41satisfy your all concerns about who

33:43might be in there. But do do we see as a

33:46broad range of category? Do we want to

33:48see that um as a new restaurant

33:52>> um or a grocery store which is like very

33:56>> you hear about that quite a lot like is

33:58there some sort of vision or guidance um

34:02that you already have available? I would

34:04say probably not that we already have,

34:06but that would be something we would

34:07bring back. And I'm looking at Scott.

34:09>> Well, the town Yeah, Scott can add the

34:10town center area or I guess the downtown

34:13special area. Yes. Well, TCAP was in

34:15Oakland.

34:16>> Yeah.

34:16>> All right. Um is is very broad ranged,

34:20right? HMXD, MXD category, broad

34:22categories.

34:23>> Gotcha.

34:24>> Um individual property owners can, I

34:26guess, limit themselves to whatever they

34:28wish to be. And and that's the kind of

34:30conversations we had with the Walker and

34:32with the Cedar Street parking deck

34:34condominium is, you know, what kind of

34:37uses would we want to see there, but

34:38specifically not want to see there and

34:40put that in a restriction that would

34:42apply.

34:43>> This helps because I've heard this a few

34:45times from like, you know, council

34:47members who were here like in the part

34:50of the previous years from 10 years ago.

34:53They have mentioned quite a few times

34:54that you know they sat down and there

34:56was a vision and there's a plan that's

34:59why I asked.

35:02>> So just to share with the newer council

35:04member we talked about this at the

35:05quarterly in 2025. I think you were

35:08there.

35:08>> I was there.

35:09>> Yeah. Um

35:10>> I was there too.

35:11>> You were there. Well, yes. I wasn't

35:13[laughter] I knew you were there.

35:15>> No.

35:16>> No. No. I was just

35:17>> not yet as a council member. Correct.

35:20>> Yeah. Not you weren't in the newer

35:21you're not a new council member anymore.

35:23>> That's a good comeback.

35:24>> Yeah. Um [laughter]

35:26and I remember this because the vote was

35:29five to two. Five four and two against.

35:33Um and I was on the losing vote. Um

35:36[clears throat] but part of

35:38>> You mean um the vote was to sell this

35:40property and you voted against selling

35:42this property? Okay. Got

35:43>> correct. And you know part of the reason

35:46I guess it will bleed into other

35:48discussions of other property is trying

35:51to understand why are we selling it?

35:54What is the need? Obviously there is a a

35:57cost associated with maintaining it and

35:59that sort of thing. But a townowned

36:02parcel has more value than just the real

36:05estate. it has the ability for the town

36:09and its residents and citizens to be

36:12able to decide what's the best use of

36:14it. And so just selling it to the top

36:17bidder didn't seem to me at that time

36:20and and I would say right now doesn't

36:22seem the best idea unless we know and we

36:26agree and we know what we want to do

36:28with it. So, I would that's kind of how

36:30I would lean and what I'm thinking about

36:32is it's a very unique property and it's

36:36right in the heart of downtown. I'm sure

36:39it would be very um interesting for a

36:41lot of people, but I I wouldn't want to

36:43just let it go without having some say

36:46in it.

36:48>> And the one other option just to put out

36:50on the table, and we did this with the

36:52Walker property was a downtown

36:54development project agreement is what

36:55they're called. And the um number five

36:58flat iron agreement that you'll see

36:59Thursday night is a downtown development

37:01project agreement. But through that

37:03process, you can sell property and put

37:06restrictions on it and work with the

37:08future owner. Um so there is a way to do

37:11that if you have a very specific vision

37:12for something like we did for the

37:14Walker.

37:16>> I mean we do we have a vision? That's

37:18the question. We had a vision for

37:20Walker. Do we have a clue? So, it was

37:22part of the campus redevelopment at one

37:26time.

37:26>> That's what you're going back to.

37:27>> And so, that has been permanent. Well,

37:30not permanently, but long term put on

37:33hold. So, no telling that'll happen in

37:34our lifetime.

37:36>> Um, but the question I have is

37:38especially getting to the use is my

37:41understanding is Cedar Street at least

37:44some or all of it is in the railroad

37:46right away. the

37:48>> if they came next year and said we want

37:51it,

37:52>> then that changes the whole value of

37:54that property, right?

37:57>> I would think

37:57>> the right of way encompasses all of

37:59Cedar Street and we'd have to as part of

38:01looking into the property do additional

38:03surveying to make sure we knew exactly

38:05where the right-of-way boundary is on

38:06the property. I think that needs to be

38:09taken into consideration, too. If we're

38:11thinking about keeping it,

38:13>> uh especially

38:16>> might not be a good idea.

38:17>> And on some level, it fronts Academy

38:19Street more than Cedar Street even

38:21though it has a lower level that comes

38:23out to Cedar Street.

38:24>> Yep.

38:25>> And go to the next slide at least. So

38:26there's a possibly Matt picture of it.

38:28picture is

38:29>> if that helps at all.

38:30>> Is the railroad um realignment with

38:34Maynard at the other end of Chadam is

38:37does that potentially affect this

38:39property at all to our knowledge?

38:41>> Not that we know of.

38:42>> That's correct.

38:43>> And and I'm going to ask this question.

38:45I'm trying to find a nice way to ask it

38:48because I this is not accusatory. I'm

38:50trying to understand why one of the

38:53options isn't use this property as a

38:57community use, not a rent it out, not be

39:00a landlord. Why is one of the options

39:02not put the 1 million into it?

39:04>> Oh, it could be.

39:05>> And use it as a satellite

39:07>> retain. It could be

39:08>> senior center. No, no, that's that's

39:10completely on the table. But but I I

39:12believe that the it's likely that there

39:14are factors in this building and I've

39:17walked around it one gazillion times,

39:19right? It's not in the best shape in the

39:21world and it's unusual.

39:23>> I'm assuming there are some features of

39:25this building that make it not a great

39:27candidate for

39:29community use without very significant

39:31investment into the building. Is that a

39:34safe assumption? The it is in the prime

39:37the primary it's fire it's fire safety

39:39fire meeting current fire

39:41>> cut wildly ironic I [laughter] know

39:43isn't it fire administration building

39:44>> that the fire admin fire improvement

39:47probably

39:48>> it was also offices not

39:50>> retail space

39:51>> and access for people with disabilities

39:53and all that I think especially around

39:55the side it looks like there'd be a

39:56single point of ingress egress

39:59>> if somebody had mobility issues all that

40:01kind of stuff

40:01>> there are definitely complications but I

40:03mean there's nothing preventing you from

40:05having staff explore

40:08carri continued use as an as a as a

40:12going forward. I mean that there's

40:14nothing stopping you from doing that.

40:16It's just staff's again staff's

40:18recommendation was disposition just

40:20because of some of the things you talked

40:22about and

40:23>> um

40:24>> Scott can speak to the work that they've

40:26done to at the preliminary level to look

40:28into that. I I just and I'm I'm assuming

40:32that especially for a publicly use like

40:34we would we would intend as as you know

40:37a council and staff that the renovation

40:40cost would be above that 1 to 1.5

40:42million in addition. Is that accurate?

40:45>> Yeah, I think that's fairly accurate.

40:47When we looked [clears throat] at the

40:49kind of get a baseline of renovation

40:50costs, I told I once we walked through

40:52the building, I directed the staff to

40:54just look at that upper level floor to

40:56completely ignore that basement part

40:58just because of the shape it's in and if

41:00you tried to get public access to that,

41:02the cost um oftent times when you

41:04redevelop a building, we talk about you

41:07could really bring it up to any code you

41:08want if you have enough money and and I

41:11agree with uh council member Con Johnson

41:13that it would likely be over the dollar

41:16value we quote, "If you're doing more of

41:17a public type of space,

41:20>> would this building potentially be

41:24more useful as a tear down and a rebuild

41:26than a rehab of the existing structure?

41:32>> This is very expensive land and carry."

41:35[laughter]

41:36>> Yes. If if you could go taller,

41:38>> right,

41:39>> probably gets to your point.

41:40>> That was the next thing that was going

41:41to come out of my mouth. You're a

41:42genius.

41:43>> That the Yeah. What is the height

41:45limitation in this

41:46>> corner? 60.

41:48>> Is it 60 ft by five stories? Six eight

41:52>> I think it's sorry I don't have a

41:54multiple choice one 60 ft by right

41:57>> campus redevelopment proposed eight

41:59right

41:59>> but it was back from academy in west

42:01chat.

42:03>> So Matt I have look it up while you are

42:05continue your discussion.

42:06>> Um starting the bid process does not

42:11obligate us to sell. No. Correct.

42:14>> And so, you know, one potential argument

42:17is we open up the bid process to let the

42:19market tell us how much this is worth so

42:23that when we're making a decision about

42:26keeping it in town ownership and using

42:28it potentially for community use

42:30>> versus the potential profit from selling

42:33it.

42:35Is that valuable information or do we

42:37have a pretty keen sense of plus or

42:40minus what the likely bids are going to

42:42be and we don't need to go through the

42:44process to understand that?

42:45>> I mean that so there's there's two

42:48things to that too. You can all you can

42:50offer it you can start the bid process

42:53or you can actually request negotiated

42:55like you can request bids. You can say

42:57hey we're thinking about selling this.

43:00>> Who wants to anybody wants to bid on it?

43:02Um and then if you do then we're up

43:05front, right? We'll start the process.

43:06We can do it that way as well.

43:08>> Um but as you saw the last time the the

43:12appraised value was what we got the

43:15offer on. So what another option could

43:18be we get a new appraisal. Um that would

43:20be another thing where we do a moderate

43:22appraisal. We see what that appraised

43:23value is and then that informs that

43:25could inform multiple things going

43:27forward. Um, but the

43:32it I mean it we have options. I don't

43:34want to say one way or the other. All

43:36information is good information. It's

43:37just a question. I can't answer your

43:40question with is it worth it or not? I

43:43don't know.

43:44>> If we're just looking to get a better

43:46idea of what kind of, you know, a

43:50potential sales price is going an

43:53appraisal route or a bid route. Are

43:55there pros and cons to

43:56>> the appraisal route is quicker and we

43:58have and then the the if we go the bid

44:01route I would only caution that because

44:04we can't control the messaging around

44:06that and how it's perceived.

44:07>> Got it.

44:08>> And and if we if we say hey

44:11if if our position is hey we're just

44:13information gathering that might

44:15dissuade so f folks from bidding because

44:17like they're not serious about this.

44:18They just want to know numbers and I'm

44:19not going to give them my number because

44:20it might be higher than what I want. I

44:21want they're not serious. I want to I

44:23want to wait until they're serious or

44:24and so and so I think there's some

44:27>> there are there's no legal risk in doing

44:29anything that you're asking about. But

44:30the the optics of it and and how it

44:32actually plays out are are potentially

44:35um basically an appraisal the appraisal

44:37is the way to go I think if you are

44:39truly trying to rightsize whatever we're

44:42looking for now for this market today.

44:44>> Yeah. And that's several thousand

44:46>> correct. Yeah.

44:47>> For an appraisal.

44:49MXD height is 45 feet.

44:51>> That's 45.

44:52>> 45

44:53>> four stories roughly.

44:55>> And there's nothing stopping from

44:56someone from purchasing the property and

44:58then coming to you all

45:00request to resone it

45:01>> four stories from level where

45:02>> or building by right

45:03>> or building by right above

45:05>> to right. So

45:06>> so there's all kinds of

45:09>> they can't just build

45:12the by the new definition of housing

45:14right for MXD.

45:16>> Uh MXD permits commercial uses. So, if

45:19someone could buy the property and take

45:21advantage of that new law.

45:22>> Okay. So, that could potentially

45:24>> if we didn't deed restrict it.

45:26>> Okay.

45:27>> Oh, yeah. I could call.

45:28>> Someone's paying attention.

45:30>> Yep.

45:30>> So, let's see if I understand what

45:33you're saying. So, there's the one one

45:35time sale.

45:37>> I can go back. You want to go back to

45:38Yeah. The options.

45:39>> The option.

45:41>> And there's even more that aren't on

45:42there, right? There's like the onetime

45:44sale gives us cash today, but keeping

45:46ownership

45:48>> gives [clears throat] residents

45:49>> Oh, you want

45:51>> you want the uh just one slide back.

45:53>> There is there is the caveat with any of

45:55these. We also have the ability to put

45:58restrictions on it. So, we're we we can

46:00put restrictions in any of these

46:02instances as well. So, we're not limited

46:04to the um the extra options for

46:07restrictions. It's just some of the

46:09extra options require restrictions.

46:12>> Okay.

46:13>> Do you have an idea of what it costs? I

46:16know you you put all those that front

46:18matter there. What does it cost to keep

46:21this property while we decide what what

46:23have we been what has the expense been

46:26>> to keep the building?

46:27>> I'm going to have to throw that to

46:28Scott, but I'm not sure if we've looked

46:29in that in depth. I I don't believe it's

46:32incredibly high because currently we

46:35fire admin was in there. They have moved

46:37out. So there is nobody in there now,

46:39>> right? I mean, you're probably power is

46:41on. No one's using water utilities per

46:44se, but you know, some version of it's

46:46probably heated and cooled to a degree

46:48that's

46:48>> in one of the vacant properties that

46:50we're looking at twice a month.

46:52>> Yes.

46:52>> But I think it the depreciation also

46:54happens right on the property because

46:57it's not

46:57>> it hasn't depreciated. Look

46:59>> and that streetscape is they did a

47:02beautiful job. I mean just beautiful. If

47:05anything, it's tripled in value.

47:08>> It's appreciating in the sense because

47:10the market value is going up in that

47:13area,

47:14>> but it's um um the the operations cost

47:19like you know operationally it's

47:21depreciating because we do have to

47:23invest money and have to upkeep. And

47:25>> that was the question I asked which is

47:27what's it costing us to do? If somebody

47:29bought it for $3.5 million, what would

47:31the tax revenue on that property be?

47:36>> Stacy,

47:37>> well, while Stacy's looking that up, I

47:39council,

47:41Stacy, I was trying to do that math in

47:42my head. Failing miserably.

47:44>> Yeah.

47:44>> While Stacy's looking that up, I did

47:46look at the map again. It is HMXD.

47:49Sorry. Two different color yellows. So,

47:51it's a 65 foot. Yep. I thought it was

47:55five stories.

47:56>> Five, six. Yeah.

48:00>> 122,

48:02>> 500.

48:04>> Did I get that right, Stacy?

48:06>> You said you said three and a half

48:07million, correct?

48:08>> Yeah, I did with 30 cents.

48:10>> Well done, Lori Bush.

48:11>> Yeah. So,

48:13>> that would be good tax base.

48:15>> It would it would be I

48:17>> I go back to the question. Maybe it was

48:19you that asked it that

48:21>> Yeah.

48:21>> the vision of what we want, right? Yes,

48:25it's cash. Yes, it's I mean I'm I want

48:27us to find more revenue all the time. $1

48:30million. This is very similar to the

48:32conversation we're going to have about

48:34killed our farm. What is the value and

48:36what is our vision for this corner?

48:40Right. And

48:42I don't know that we have that. And I

48:44would certainly be interested in what

48:46our residents have to say as well, what

48:49they'd like to see because I don't know

48:51that we have it's it's always been a

48:54public building. And [clears throat]

48:56when you said it, um, Council Member

48:59Khan Johnson, a community space, you

49:02know, we we got on our prioritization,

49:05three of us said we need a senior center

49:08expansion.

49:09We don't have to build a building if we

49:11[clears throat] have one. Certainly, we

49:12have to invest in it,

49:14>> but there are just so many uses and ways

49:17to act to continue to activate downtown

49:20rather than just selling to the highest

49:22bidder.

49:23>> Yeah. And I said that with the

49:25inclination to the opposite of that to

49:27be I remember we were on the opposite

49:29side of this last time. The side the the

49:33downstairs bay door that's all awkward.

49:36>> This doesn't feel significantly usable.

49:39in its current. [clears throat]

49:40>> I think it would need probably be a tear

49:42down in a multi-story building for it to

49:44be useful to citizens. And I also

49:46believe, you know, if you look here at

49:47town hall, I think there's probably ways

49:51to invest in this campus to increase

49:53community space. That would be a lot

49:55more convenient. There's parking,

49:57adjacent parking, and not in a deck or

49:59on the corner. This there's nowhere to

50:00park here except for to go to the deck,

50:03which would put pressure on the deck.

50:05And if you stand at this intersection

50:08and you look down Cadam the opposite

50:11direction from if you look east, it's

50:14extremely activated and there's a lot of

50:15foot traffic. And when you look west,

50:18you'll see that that foot traffic peters

50:20off right at that intersection.

50:23Personally, I'd like to see more

50:24activation happen on that west side of

50:28Cadam Street. We have bats, but we don't

50:31have people right in and on that block

50:34as much as I think we need to. All the

50:36also Caddyy Corner from there, they're

50:38redeveloping um Ashworth's Village. So

50:42there's there's just going to be more

50:44momentum that way. And I feel like that

50:46Cadam Street I feel like this is part of

50:48Chattam Street. I feel like Chattam

50:50Street is commercial. It is not

50:52necessarily that's just how I kind of I

50:55guess part of the problem is I have a

50:57future vision in my head for what it's

50:58going to look like in 20 years and 20 in

51:0120 years I just imagined that this

51:02building is

51:05part of that commercial strip downtown

51:08where people are drawn to it and from a

51:11business development perspective I just

51:12feel like we need we haven't reached

51:15critical density downtown yet.

51:19That's just my my opinion. And those two

51:21blocks right there are the critical

51:22heart of that that

51:24>> and it backs up to um

51:27>> Tara,

51:28>> right, as an old kind of shopping center

51:31that was also kind of um

51:33>> made better, but also has potential for

51:35redevelopment in the future, too.

51:37>> I mean, there's I think there's kegs

51:38right behind it and some

51:41>> trash and Yeah. Like

51:43>> Yeah. Yeah.

51:44>> But directly behind the building, it's

51:45it's

51:47where you hide stuff.

51:49I would love to find out what it's

51:50worth. I mean,

51:53>> when was the last assessment?

51:55>> Uh, the last appraisal was 2023.

51:58>> It's probably changed a lot.

52:00>> Yeah. I I think for me it's hard to make

52:05a decision on hypotheticals without a

52:07little more information on both sides of

52:09the equation. I think a few thousand for

52:11an appraisal sounds like it could be a

52:13good data point. Um, and then the

52:17potential for community use, maybe more

52:20concrete ideas with more concrete price

52:23tag attached. Um,

52:26>> that would give me what I need to make a

52:27decision.

52:28>> Yeah, me too.

52:28>> An appraised value and um

52:31>> upfet costs for what

52:36I want to um clarify one of your

52:38comments um

52:40>> or at least my understanding of what

52:42you're saying. You said that, you know,

52:44com like um community use would be

52:47inappropriate, but then you also said

52:48your vision is that could potentially be

52:50a retail um strip and you would like to

52:54see a lot of density

52:56>> or even housing. Yeah.

52:57>> So, um you're open for either or based

53:00on the data that we get. Gotcha.

53:02>> Okay.

53:02>> And I and I do believe that there are

53:04other locations downtown. I do believe

53:06we need some kind of community space

53:08downtown that you we we're the art

53:11center is full. Everything's full.

53:12Everything's full. Um, but that I don't

53:14think is necessarily the best spot. I

53:16think here at town campus, we're

53:18probably going to need more more and

53:20upgraded space for staff. We're stacking

53:22people like firewood. Is that accurate?

53:25We're out of space here on in town hall

53:27campus. So, I I just don't see us

53:29avoiding some kind of investment in what

53:32would be space here at Town Hall. We

53:35have the multimodal center and there are

53:37other properties. you know, just because

53:38we don't own it today doesn't mean that

53:40when the need arises, we can't purchase

53:43appropriate property, too.

53:45>> And I agree with you, you know, that it

53:47we could actually go either way. Um,

53:49given we have more information because I

53:51think what mayor said is pretty solid

53:54that, you know, do we want to wait for

53:56the point time when we have to give

53:58right away and those kind of decisions

54:01have to be made. um if you open um put a

54:05community center or something there like

54:08how would that get impacted? So um going

54:11back to what I said earlier, I think

54:13having a vision

54:16um for that street by our staff, I think

54:19that would give us some direction and

54:21sense of where we want to take this. Um

54:25that would give us a good idea, but I'm

54:28not against selling it. I can like you

54:30know I'm I'm on board if that's the

54:32direction that staff is suggesting. I

54:35mean that's fine.

54:37>> So when you talk about vision, we do

54:38have a vision.

54:40>> That's what I asked for like in the

54:41beginning like do we have the vision

54:43>> designed to be

54:45more generic than prescriptive?

54:48>> And so are you looking for something

54:50more prescriptive?

54:51>> I like we're looking for a grocery

54:53store. we're looking for.

54:54>> I I am actually, you know, to give us

54:56some idea on uh now we have some

54:59restaurants. We need some housing there

55:01to increase.

55:02>> Well, we've got more we've got a lot

55:03more housing coming in downtown. So, the

55:05mix I feel like the mix is healthy. I

55:08hate to say it like this because I don't

55:10always put all my, you know, confidence

55:12in capitalism to solve our problems, but

55:15I believe that the those in the market

55:18are responding with businesses that'll

55:21thrive and do well and they kind of

55:22complement themselves. I'd be surprised

55:24if a third ice cream shop opened up, for

55:26example.

55:27>> There was three that was

55:28>> I do hope that we open a grocery store,

55:31someone opens a grocery store because

55:32that's one thing that comes up over and

55:34over again. So,

55:35>> yeah. Well, and but

55:38Mayor Prom Bush Lori makes a very good

55:40point though we

55:43I don't think this council has thought

55:45about what that space could be from a

55:48from a municipal use perspective. Nor is

55:51there some kind of partnership or

55:54something that we just we we just

55:56haven't taken a hot minute to consider

55:58>> right

55:58>> the options. I mean it's possible that a

56:02we need to have more of a visioning

56:04discussion about where we see

56:06development different types of

56:08development you know transit oriented

56:10development it's right along the

56:12railroad right um we've heard lots of

56:16comments about just like you said about

56:18grocery and you know bodeas and you know

56:22this is a this is a very different area

56:25than it was that we discussed it even

56:27just a couple a year or two ago. it's

56:29really morphed and it need has a

56:32different set of uses. Um, and it's a

56:35one it's an opportunity to take a minute

56:38and get it right. Understand what it's

56:40worth. Let the let, you know, let the

56:44commercial

56:45folks also weigh in what they see their

56:47vision is. They also they have their

56:50hands on the pulse of what's going on

56:52and what what could definitely

56:54>> and what can get financed and what what

56:56could be profitable. I' I've not heard

56:58good things about the profitability of

57:00small grocery stores for example,

57:01>> right?

57:02>> But everybody wants one, right?

57:04>> Hey, Manny opened one and um few in New

57:08York City, so we can do that in K in a

57:11downtown.

57:12>> We don't want to be

57:12>> You don't want to be landlord.

57:13>> We don't want to be landlords. We don't

57:14want to be landlords. [laughter]

57:15>> Fine. I take that, Matt.

57:17>> Let's let let's let New York kick the

57:19tires on that for a couple years before

57:21we start thinking about it.

57:23Sounds like we have spent a lot of time

57:25on this and from what I'm hearing um is

57:28we need a little bit more data points to

57:30make that decision whether like you know

57:33um town own for community use or

57:36commercial like selling it u what

57:38exactly and how do we restrict the deed

57:41for certain types of use right that's

57:43what I'm hearing

57:44>> so we would need a motion

57:45>> I think Britney correct two suggestions

57:47make an excellent motion for next steps

57:50>> you I think you

57:51>> do you remember what you I do. Do we

57:54require a motion, Lisa, to advance us?

57:56Okay,

57:57>> I make a motion that we direct staff to

57:59pursue an appraisal on the property and

58:03to return to council with suggestions

58:05for municipal uses and potential deed

58:08restrictions should we sell. Is that

58:10what we wanted to

58:11>> and a ballpark cost to making this

58:14>> retaining it

58:16>> and the cost of those municipal uses

58:18>> to legitimately to legitimately upfit it

58:20for municipal use with cost.

58:22>> Can I add one more amendment on there

58:24and to potentially to any um commercial

58:28uh entities that are interested in a

58:30partnership that might want to provide

58:32us additional ideas because we don't

58:35have all the potential ideas that are

58:37possible. So, I need someone to restate

58:39that motion, please. [gasps]

58:42>> I move that we direct staff to appraise

58:46the fire administration building to

58:49return to council with suggestions for

58:51municipal uses with price tags, to

58:56propose potential deed restrictions

58:59should we sell, and to seek the input of

59:02commercial partners making suggestions

59:04for the property.

59:06>> There's a motion. Is there a second?

59:08Second discussion. All in favor, please

59:10say I.

59:11>> I opposed. Motion carries.

59:14>> All right, we could do that.

59:15>> Yay.

59:15>> Okay. I told you at the start of this

59:17that we were talking about three

59:18properties. I lied.

59:20>> We are now going to skip one. You're

59:22going to see it. So, this is something

59:23we'll come back to talk about. No,

59:26don't. We want to We want to wet the

59:27whistle here. We want to let them uh

59:29think about this. That's what we're

59:30going to talk about later at a future

59:32time.

59:33>> Where's Talos?

59:34>> Yes. So now uh this is a council member

59:38initiated item. This is 6604 Kildair

59:41Farm Road submittifi submitted by these

59:44folks here in this room.

59:46>> So that would Oh

59:47>> oh sorry I got I got a little spiel and

59:49then I'll let you guys loose. Two

59:52distinct parcels 1.5 acres total.

59:54Current assessed value is that almost

59:57$400,000. Both parcels again were

59:59appraised in 2023 for 1.1 million. Again

1:00:03this was a joint appraisal. This was not

1:00:04we didn't the appraisal we had done at

1:00:06that point in time was done for uh

1:00:08acquisition of easements over that or

1:00:10greenway easements over that property.

1:00:11We did them at the same time. So I don't

1:00:13have values for each individual but

1:00:15that's what they were appraised at in

1:00:162023.

1:00:17>> And there's a property line. You can

1:00:18kind of see.

1:00:18>> Yeah. Sorry my my outline.

1:00:20>> Yeah. Down the middle.

1:00:21>> You kind of see it there. So there's two

1:00:23distinct parcels there currently.

1:00:25Um, if you all remember with council

1:00:27initiated items, the way this works is

1:00:30you can either discuss the issue and

1:00:31take action at this meeting if no

1:00:33information is required from us or you

1:00:35do not seek public input. Second, you

1:00:37can refer the request to a future

1:00:38council meeting at which I have a typo

1:00:40there. Needs to be a space at which time

1:00:41a staff report with a recommendation

1:00:43will be prepared. Or three, decide not

1:00:45to pursue the council initiated request.

1:00:47So, we're just this is a little bit

1:00:49different than what we did just now. We

1:00:51are now in this procedural realm. So,

1:00:54these are your three things to do today

1:00:57and I believe that's all I got. Would

1:00:59you like me to leave that up or do you

1:01:00want

1:01:01>> Let's throw it to the mayor and uh

1:01:02council member Bonser um as the

1:01:05initiators.

1:01:06>> So, I made this uh council initiated

1:01:10item request

1:01:12uh because of the process in which these

1:01:15properties were acquired. My

1:01:17understanding was that they were

1:01:19acquired with the former manager

1:01:23uh having staff assess the property is

1:01:25not worth buying and then ending up

1:01:28buying the property more than the

1:01:30appraised value. So, initially my

1:01:33thought when I made this council

1:01:35initiated request was to sell the

1:01:38properties to try to get taxpayer

1:01:39dollars back. Um mainly because it

1:01:43skipped the process. we use taxpayer

1:01:46dollars without uh citizen input,

1:01:49resident input. And uh to me that's

1:01:52wrong. Um so we've received a lot of

1:01:56feedback asking us to keep this as open

1:01:59space. Well, I while I love open space

1:02:03and like that idea, there's still issues

1:02:05related to that. You're asking us to

1:02:07once again skip the process and change

1:02:11this to open space and you're asking us

1:02:15to uh put it in a put it in a state that

1:02:21can be changed by a future council. Um

1:02:25so in my mind as we discuss this if the

1:02:28council's desire is to make it open

1:02:31space that somehow we make it a

1:02:35permanent open space so that it cannot

1:02:38be changed. In other words which is not

1:02:41making it permanent but name it as a

1:02:43park or there are options to give it to

1:02:48uh

1:02:49>> conservation overlay

1:02:50>> conservation overlay. you know, there's

1:02:52so many options. Uh, but if we're we're

1:02:55going to go

1:02:57>> that route, that's what I would

1:02:58recommend to make sure that it stays

1:03:00open space, not that

1:03:02>> it's open space for a couple of years,

1:03:04then it turns into apartments, uh, which

1:03:07is not what I I'm guessing that's not

1:03:11what the million dollars of taxpayer

1:03:13money over what the appraised value

1:03:16>> I Let me clarify, mayor. We did not pay

1:03:18over appraised value. Carrie paid

1:03:20appraised value for the properties.

1:03:21>> We did.

1:03:22>> Yes.

1:03:22>> Go back. We did.

1:03:25>> Yeah.

1:03:26>> The assessed value is the Wake County

1:03:28tax value, but Carrie got the appraisals

1:03:30and when they purchased when the

1:03:31property was purchased, it was purchased

1:03:32for appraised value.

1:03:33>> Okay. My apologies.

1:03:35>> Yeah. [snorts]

1:03:35>> Uh over assessed value is not appraised

1:03:37value.

1:03:38>> Yes.

1:03:38>> Yeah. But again we we did that appraisal

1:03:41originally because we were doing that's

1:03:44a standard practice when we are

1:03:46acquiring interests for projects. There

1:03:49is the greenway project that was here.

1:03:51So appraisals were performed as part of

1:03:53that because we always do appraisals to

1:03:56offer fair market value when we go to

1:03:58purchase these interests. it and then it

1:04:01happened that events transpired to where

1:04:03they went to purchase the entire

1:04:05property and they utilized those same

1:04:07appraisals to uh reach the purchase

1:04:11price.

1:04:12>> Can you explain the difference between

1:04:14assessed value and appraised value?

1:04:16>> Yes. Assessed value is the value that

1:04:19the Wake County Tax Office gives to

1:04:22properties. It is when the tax assessor,

1:04:25back in the old days, they used to walk

1:04:26around and go to every single property

1:04:27and look at them and make their notes

1:04:28and do that. Now they use

1:04:30computers and other methods to do this,

1:04:32but that is what they believe to be the

1:04:35tax value of the property.

1:04:38Traditionally, assessed value and

1:04:40appraised value

1:04:42are often different and are often

1:04:44different in large ways. Um, because the

1:04:48assessor is not looking at it in the

1:04:50same way that an appraiser traditionally

1:04:52is. An assessor is looking at, and I'm

1:04:55simplifying this, but an assessor is

1:04:56looking at what is the current um what

1:04:59is the current state of the property and

1:05:02how much is that worth? And so, we're

1:05:03going to tax it based on that. An

1:05:05appraiser is looking more more often at

1:05:08highest best use and is looking at okay,

1:05:11if we buy this property, what can we do

1:05:13to it to maximize the value? And so,

1:05:15that is why you see great disparity

1:05:18between um assessed value and appraised

1:05:21value. And it is also why when we

1:05:23acquire property, we get appraisals and

1:05:25we don't necessarily go we don't just go

1:05:28to the assessed value because we know

1:05:30that's not a realistic value to offer in

1:05:32most cases.

1:05:33>> Um so

1:05:35>> well in assessed value then done by the

1:05:38county per their schedule to

1:05:40reassessments. So you have that period

1:05:42of time where value could go up or down

1:05:44and then they reassess it over time.

1:05:46It's likely that that could

1:05:47>> go up. No, that's that's an excellent

1:05:50and incredibly important point to bring

1:05:52up. Thank you, Russ. Regarding

1:05:53assessments, they are they are timed.

1:05:55They are done. So, an appraisal an

1:05:58appraiser often will look at when the

1:05:59last assessment was and and they factor

1:06:01that into to their depending upon what

1:06:03method they're using.

1:06:05>> I would like to add to why I seconded

1:06:09mayor before we move forward. Is that

1:06:11okay?

1:06:12>> Okay. So um

1:06:15uh about two years ago I started having

1:06:18this conversation with our former

1:06:20manager about um the assets the town

1:06:24owns and what are we doing with this and

1:06:27how much money is being allocated and

1:06:28what are what is the purpose and you

1:06:30know all kinds of a new person kind of

1:06:33question. So um I did not get too much

1:06:38information back then but Ross um and I

1:06:43have been talking since we have

1:06:44appointed him and I've requested that

1:06:47you know we start looking at all these

1:06:50different sites that we have and you

1:06:52know wherever possible we get out of

1:06:54that rental or lease business and start

1:06:57looking at a bigger picture and reinvest

1:07:00that money back into you know the the

1:07:03economy. economy or for our residents or

1:07:05wherever we can however we can repurpose

1:07:08these properties. So for me this I'm

1:07:11looking at this more of an opportunity

1:07:13as how do what do we do with this? We

1:07:16have spent significant amount of

1:07:18taxpayers funds and this is more

1:07:20important like what mayor said it was in

1:07:22news it's in audit report and it it

1:07:25holds more value in terms of public

1:07:29scrutiny and you know things that have

1:07:31gone happened in past few months but

1:07:34fiscal responsibility for me is really

1:07:37more important and I'm thinking in terms

1:07:38of what is the best value for this land

1:07:42um I'm just thinking like few there are

1:07:46few things um that you know

1:07:49or maybe as we progress during these

1:07:52discussion and this discussion and um

1:07:55and maybe um or this presentation I can

1:07:59ask more questions about how did we get

1:08:01here and what is you know the real value

1:08:03and the vision and whatnot. So maybe um

1:08:07but I just wanted to provide my

1:08:10perspective that when I saw mayor's

1:08:12request when he initiated for the sale

1:08:14of this property, I'm looking at this

1:08:16purely from a perspective of fiscal

1:08:18responsibility and I want to make sure

1:08:20that if we are [snorts] going to put our

1:08:22money somewhere that is for the best use

1:08:24of our residents and and Carrie.

1:08:29So

1:08:31just as a reminder where we are

1:08:32procedurally

1:08:34these are the three things that or one

1:08:37of these things needs to happen this

1:08:39evening to follow your all's process

1:08:41with council initiated items. It sounds

1:08:44to me like

1:08:46this is going to happen the second one

1:08:49potentially given the conversations but

1:08:52again that's just what it seems to me. I

1:08:55don't know what you all want to do.

1:08:56>> That would require a motion.

1:08:57>> Yes.

1:08:59and you would need to let us know what

1:09:00kind of information. So, if you're

1:09:02looking for it to come back at a future

1:09:05council meeting, I think you know, let

1:09:06us know what kind of things you're

1:09:08looking for. If you're looking into how

1:09:09would we protected as open space, if

1:09:11you're looking if you're maybe it's a

1:09:13lot of different things you want us to

1:09:14look at, but give us some ideas of what

1:09:16that would be.

1:09:17>> I have some information that I wanted to

1:09:18share from a historical perspective.

1:09:21There was some question raised with a

1:09:24petition online and we had a a speaker

1:09:27come to public speaks out and mention

1:09:30about

1:09:32um historical significance of the

1:09:34property. And a couple of week, I think

1:09:36it was about a couple of weeks ago, the

1:09:39chair of the historic preservation

1:09:40commission and I asked staff to present

1:09:44about these properties at our our

1:09:48meeting about the historical

1:09:50significance at what had been said was

1:09:54about the first African-American church

1:09:57in Kerry being on this property. and

1:10:00staff said, "I'm going to my notes

1:10:03because it was a lot of information and

1:10:06we we may or may not know some new

1:10:09things, but at the staff presented about

1:10:12the archaeological study that was done

1:10:14as a part of the Higgins Greenway

1:10:17planning, I believe,

1:10:19>> and

1:10:21they presented that the first

1:10:22African-American church remnants are on

1:10:25a property adjacent to the property, not

1:10:29on the property at 600 and 604 Kildair

1:10:32Farm Road that the town owns. [snorts]

1:10:34Staff also said that from what they

1:10:37knew,

1:10:38the historic elementary school, which

1:10:40had been built for African-American

1:10:42students, was thought to have been

1:10:44beside

1:10:45beside the church and therefore was not

1:10:49believed to be on the town property. But

1:10:51of course that

1:10:53school burned down and so the the other

1:10:58building there are remnants there but

1:11:00the school that burned down it

1:11:04we had not gathered that information to

1:11:06this point. Since then, the friends of

1:11:09the Paige Walker Kerry's Historical

1:11:11Society has said that they believe that

1:11:15the his um that this historic

1:11:19African-American elementary school did

1:11:22sit on one of these parcels

1:11:25that is owned by the town. And so

1:11:30my ask would be that we just take time

1:11:34to gather more information. I I think as

1:11:37property owners, we would want to just

1:11:39take time to make sure that we know more

1:11:41about the property before we would take

1:11:44action to dispose if if that was our

1:11:47choice. And we may be leaning toward

1:11:50gathering more information anyway. But

1:11:53um

1:11:55I would love to see as the council

1:11:58liazison for historic preservation

1:12:00commission and for the friends of Paige

1:12:02Walker, the historical society. I would

1:12:04love to see some kind of designation

1:12:08um be put for those two um locations,

1:12:13that first African-American

1:12:16church and the the First

1:12:17African-American

1:12:19school.

1:12:21For the one that we don't own, we have

1:12:24no control over that. But if we

1:12:26potentially do have control over the

1:12:28other, I would just like us to take that

1:12:31into into consideration before we were

1:12:34to do something with it that would take

1:12:36that control away from us.

1:12:38>> So Michelle, where exactly you said the

1:12:41study was done? Sorry, I missed that

1:12:42part.

1:12:43>> I think I could add I don't know that a

1:12:45study has been done. Information has

1:12:47come about and there um the study that

1:12:49was referred to was on a neighboring

1:12:51parcel. I don't know that we have

1:12:53studied anything related to R2 parcels

1:12:56and we would want to do that um and

1:12:59bring that back to you be before saying

1:13:02what was or wasn't there.

1:13:03>> So which parcel was um has been studied?

1:13:07All right.

1:13:08>> Well, there was I think there was an

1:13:09overall study as part of the Higgins

1:13:10Greenway project and I think that initi

1:13:13there were that revealed that there was

1:13:16um the location of um the structure on

1:13:21this parcel.

1:13:22>> Can you point out the Higgins Greenway

1:13:24entrance is probably not

1:13:25>> it's kind I'm going to get it wrong, but

1:13:27it's basically

1:13:28>> it's you can see it. I believe it's on

1:13:30the

1:13:30>> It's right there below. Yeah. So, it

1:13:33comes here and then this comes up and

1:13:34over runs the property line. property

1:13:37>> and that's it's got like a an art piece

1:13:40there arches at the beginning. My

1:13:42understanding that it's we're not

1:13:43completely [clears throat] certain, but

1:13:44the belief is that the church was just

1:13:47to the right of the edge of the box. So,

1:13:49kind of in right where he's pointing and

1:13:51that potentially the school was just

1:13:54like probably overlapping which is I

1:13:57believe the western boundary of the the

1:14:00square part of the property.

1:14:02>> Yeah. But there there's there's not

1:14:03certainty. But you know, a couple

1:14:05hundred feet or doesn't really I think

1:14:07matter all that much. I I think we can

1:14:09all agree Michelle

1:14:12probably that's playing more

1:14:13>> and we could we could um put a

1:14:15historical marker at the street side too

1:14:19marking it as well. And we do have out

1:14:21at the greenway we do have recognition

1:14:24of can somebody

1:14:27>> remind me for sure it is it the is it

1:14:30the church and the school that are both

1:14:34>> mentioned out there

1:14:35>> I've seen the placard that are

1:14:37>> was it the friends of the page walker

1:14:38that did that along the greenway

1:14:40>> I don't know

1:14:40>> I believe the town

1:14:42>> the Raleigh it was a grant we received

1:14:44from the Raleigh villagers

1:14:46>> oh okay

1:14:47>> the community building grant and they

1:14:48work with the friends in the town.

1:14:50>> Okay.

1:14:51>> So my um please and I'm just asking from

1:14:55education perspective.

1:14:56>> I hope I can answer the question.

1:14:57>> I have no idea how and what and when

1:15:01kind of things. So I'm really educating

1:15:03myself here and I hope it helps people

1:15:06who are listening too. Um,

1:15:09how was this just recently raised when

1:15:12it's really, you know, it was on sale

1:15:15for many years and then, um, we

1:15:18purchased it, but nobody had objection

1:15:20back then, but today when it's owned by

1:15:22the town, it has become

1:15:24>> the historic aspect of it.

1:15:25>> Yeah, it has become more pro the it has

1:15:28become a conversation piece now.

1:15:30>> Well, I can't I I don't know the full

1:15:32history. So the answer I'm going to give

1:15:34is going to be lacking. But it's my

1:15:36understanding that the reason it is

1:15:39coming now is because it was privately

1:15:41owned and private owners are not they

1:15:45don't have any public records

1:15:47requirement. They don't have to tell us

1:15:49about anything at any time. And I think

1:15:51really it came about because the study

1:15:54was people started paying attention

1:15:56because people started seeing more of

1:15:59the of the evidence of of what was there

1:16:01and then the folks who were seeing it

1:16:04were brought it up and started

1:16:06discussing it and now because it is

1:16:08publicly owned because the eyes have now

1:16:11been upon it and now there is a

1:16:14possibility of it of the town taking the

1:16:16town is now in control and so I think

1:16:18that's why those voices have been have

1:16:20been magnified because now they do see

1:16:22like oh we we can do something about

1:16:24this. There is a there is a path forward

1:16:27>> and so that but that is that is my own

1:16:29personal opinion on it and it would just

1:16:31be speculation

1:16:31>> and it is incredibly it's all

1:16:33speculation

1:16:34>> but it would be nice to have that study

1:16:36done our own assessment and understand

1:16:40some of the background and history of

1:16:42this like how did this suddenly become

1:16:44like I people are asking me how did this

1:16:46suddenly become an issue and we did not

1:16:48know this before we purchased it.

1:16:50question.

1:16:50>> Ser, I would share that at the

1:16:52African-American community here locally

1:16:55wanting more recognition for historic

1:16:57African-American sites, properties,

1:17:00cemeteries, and other things is not new.

1:17:03Um, my first year, I would say my first

1:17:05year on council, we we had folks come

1:17:07quite a few times actually and and ask

1:17:10the town to step in and try to help them

1:17:12maintain properties and such. and and

1:17:15north of here is in the Kingswood area

1:17:18which is just north actually just near

1:17:21here actually just north of the railroad

1:17:24tracks that was a very significant

1:17:26community for African-Americans who were

1:17:28freed and then had a really kind of a

1:17:31thriving

1:17:32>> their own downtown area was it was a

1:17:34really

1:17:36yeah very specific community and so

1:17:38there's and also along as you're going

1:17:41out Chadam towards where high house is

1:17:44out there. There's a lot of properties

1:17:46out there that and north up towards

1:17:48heavens. Yeah. So, it's sort of like

1:17:50it's concentrated here in this area. So,

1:17:52I think what people are missing, this is

1:17:55not a a soul site where an important

1:17:58piece of history is being ignored. If

1:18:00you if you look at it, and I believe

1:18:03they have a pretty great history walk

1:18:04downtown. If you go into the top floor

1:18:06of the Kerry Theater, you'll see

1:18:08historic um signage up there explaining

1:18:11the history of what that second floor

1:18:13was for individuals who weren't allowed

1:18:16to sit downstairs if they're

1:18:17African-American, for example. But it's

1:18:19it's sort of peace meal around this

1:18:22area, I think, quite a bit. And I don't

1:18:25believe there was a lot of awareness of

1:18:27why this site matters. You can go into

1:18:29the Kerry Arts Center, you can read that

1:18:31there was African-American school that

1:18:33burnt down, but it doesn't say 162 yards

1:18:37that direction, you know. So, it's I

1:18:39think it's that the the history was

1:18:41known, but I don't think folks were

1:18:43quite aware that it was specific. Both

1:18:46of those things were specific to

1:18:48>> So, this is good information for people

1:18:49listening. I've been to Kerry Art Center

1:18:51multiple times and I I've been in

1:18:53council meetings where people have come

1:18:55um to the meeting and shared their their

1:18:58um lineage and heritage and their

1:19:00background in uh Kerry

1:19:03>> and I do

1:19:05>> being me brown woman I cherish that and

1:19:08I would want to retain that but my

1:19:10question is more about the timing that

1:19:12why did it never came back like you know

1:19:15why was this not

1:19:17>> a topic of discussion when this is

1:19:20privately owned and why is it now in the

1:19:23public now?

1:19:24>> Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead.

1:19:25>> Um, I can't say why the person raised

1:19:28the person who raised it at public

1:19:30speaks out and the petition I haven't

1:19:33spoken with her personally and asked why

1:19:35she specifically mentioned it. I'm I'm

1:19:38thankful that she did, but because she

1:19:41did and it was spoken into a microphone

1:19:45at one of our meetings, I I know that

1:19:47the friends of Paige Walker

1:19:50in the past at least couple of years, I

1:19:53will say, have had a person watching

1:19:56every one of our meetings, making sure

1:19:59that we're not missing anything related

1:20:02to historical aspects. So from there I

1:20:06know that that's um one reason um like

1:20:10that I you know brought it up from

1:20:12there. Um but anytime I mean because

1:20:18under the former town manager money was

1:20:20taken away from historic preservation

1:20:22without my knowledge as the liaison

1:20:25and since then there have been eyes

1:20:27keenly making sure that we're not

1:20:29missing anything. That would be why I

1:20:31believe one possibility of why it's

1:20:34raised now as opposed to two years ago.

1:20:38But for example, there was the not count

1:20:41on property but Kerry Farm life building

1:20:43that was potentially that was for sale

1:20:47recently and they um the friends of

1:20:50Paige Walker was on that immediately and

1:20:53so they're watching

1:20:54>> potential sales of property. Also,

1:20:57>> it's so helpful when you join council. I

1:20:59I was able to be the historic

1:21:00preservation commission council liaison

1:21:03and learn a ton and then Michelle came

1:21:05on board and took over and does a much

1:21:06better job than I did because you're

1:21:09just better at it. Uh but you really do

1:21:11you learn a ton uh working on that board

1:21:14or working with that board. You don't

1:21:15obviously they're doing all the work but

1:21:17they share resources. So if anybody is

1:21:19interested I know um Chris Carmichael

1:21:23shared a couple of books. We've swapped

1:21:24books and I learned a great deal from

1:21:26the books that she shared with me. She's

1:21:29I think she's got them in her office or

1:21:30something. When I asked she just had

1:21:32them on hand so

1:21:33>> I can purchase them.

1:21:34>> So Russ um the obviously we did not

1:21:37purchase this land back then with the

1:21:40understanding that we want to retain

1:21:41this as an open space. Um do we know

1:21:44what was the intended use of this

1:21:46property?

1:21:47>> All I know is you all never discussed

1:21:48it. So I would say no. We don't know

1:21:52what the intended purpose was because

1:21:54the council never discussed one.

1:21:57It doesn't sound like we're imminently

1:21:59taking action tonight, but I have a lot

1:22:02of thoughts on this that I would like to

1:22:03share with my colleagues now because we

1:22:05have the opportunity to.

1:22:09In my time on council so far, I don't

1:22:11think I've had any decision that feels

1:22:14right or wrong, black or white. I think

1:22:16it's a matter of priorities. So I

1:22:19completely respect the impetus for

1:22:22bringing this council initiate initiated

1:22:25item before us

1:22:27and I appreciate that a lot of it is

1:22:29about transparency and fiscal

1:22:31responsibility and I think it feels

1:22:34perhaps like writing a wrong to me

1:22:38selling it feels more like two wrongs

1:22:41don't make a right that we don't need to

1:22:44relitigate how we came to acquire this

1:22:46property we know it did not happen

1:22:48through the process we wanted it to

1:22:49happen through. But for me, it's more of

1:22:52but we do now own it. It is now

1:22:55townowned. And so much of this role is

1:22:59having privatelyowned land come before

1:23:02us for land use decisions. And if we're

1:23:06doing our job well, hopefully we're

1:23:08shaping that land use into some sort of

1:23:10community good. But the profit motive is

1:23:13such we know it's really not if it's

1:23:15going to develop but how it's going to

1:23:17develop. Uh and you know that is our

1:23:20opportunity for intervention.

1:23:23But this parcel I own you own 192,000

1:23:27people in Kerry own and for me profit is

1:23:31not going to be the highest motivation.

1:23:33um for a parcel like this that is so

1:23:37heavily treed open space is going to win

1:23:40for me every time. And so you know I

1:23:43mean uh to justapose that with the

1:23:45conversation we just had swapping

1:23:47concrete for concrete for me is like

1:23:49okay well it's a age building now let's

1:23:52turn it into some kind of concrete

1:23:54that's going to be a better purpose.

1:23:57trees versus concrete is a very

1:23:59different equation for me and I really

1:24:01see the value of keeping this as open

1:24:04space and so I think we're going to have

1:24:07uh another conversation about all the

1:24:09potential uses but I will go ahead and

1:24:11plant my flag in the ground now letting

1:24:14you know that I love the idea of of

1:24:16preserving it long term of thinking

1:24:17about if it's conservation easements or

1:24:20a town designation as open space or park

1:24:24that is very much uh my priority

1:24:27So Britney, I would just say one more

1:24:29thing to what you just said. I 100%

1:24:31agree with you. Like if that's the

1:24:34intended purpose today, future

1:24:35direction, I'm all on board. But um I

1:24:38was on the council when this land was

1:24:40purchased and there's a lot of history

1:24:41and information like what mayor said and

1:24:44um I feel like I don't have that

1:24:47information. So if somebody asks me this

1:24:49question today, do you know why this

1:24:51land was purchased? I would not be able

1:24:53to answer. And I understand where you're

1:24:54coming from because you don't have that

1:24:57history. You don't have that time on the

1:24:59council, but I want to make sure that

1:25:02I'm fully educated on this and people

1:25:06are curious. People want to know what

1:25:07exactly happened and this is what

1:25:09transparency means. But I agree with

1:25:11future direction. If this if there's any

1:25:14use if we decide as a council that we

1:25:17don't want to sell this land

1:25:19>> 100% we should uh preserve this as open

1:25:22space and like what mayor said we should

1:25:25put a deed restriction on this so that

1:25:27it cannot be repurposed

1:25:29>> and that would be my ideal choice as

1:25:32well. I I I think the history there is

1:25:35inform perhaps for me informative but

1:25:37not decisive. And I just want to

1:25:40recognize too that I'm not ignorant of

1:25:42the financial implications not that you

1:25:44suggested but for folks listening

1:25:46because to keep it as open space I

1:25:48understand for goes both the sale price

1:25:50and the future tax revenue that's an

1:25:53investment I'm willing to make. Well, we

1:25:55are also investing in our environment by

1:25:57preserving space for with the land that

1:25:59we already own. And I think there's

1:26:01definitely an advantage like you know

1:26:03what Karissa mentioned um for the

1:26:06greenway that directly cuts through. So

1:26:10there's an advantage definitely there

1:26:12and preserving um historic aspect is

1:26:15important like what Michelle said. So

1:26:18I'm in agreement with everybody but what

1:26:20the reason why I'm asking questions

1:26:21because I never had an opportunity to

1:26:24ask this questions and that's why this

1:26:26is a council initiated item separate

1:26:28from other property discussions.

1:26:31>> Well um I'd like to weigh in as well

1:26:33because I think what I'm hearing is that

1:26:36we need to separate transparency and

1:26:39accountability from stewardship

1:26:41>> and we can do both of them in parallel.

1:26:44[clears throat] Right now, we have a

1:26:46unique property, a you know, as we've

1:26:49heard online, a well-loved property that

1:26:52borders a brand new and absolutely

1:26:56magnificent greenway and historic area

1:26:59with our cemetery and the Kerry

1:27:01Elementary School. Um, and public land

1:27:05like this, just

1:27:07selling it. Um right now it is currently

1:27:10zoned at OIP which means a daycare, a

1:27:13veterary, an office building could go in

1:27:15by right and it would if we sold it

1:27:19that could help unless we put deed

1:27:20restrictions or something like that on

1:27:22it. Um so I think from my perspective

1:27:25it's a unique public asset.

1:27:28um that zoning that currently is aligned

1:27:33on that property has a number of

1:27:35potential uses and I think that our

1:27:40vision for the prop property has to be

1:27:42discussed but I'm along with you. I

1:27:44think it's a unique piece of property

1:27:46that could stand alone in our commitment

1:27:51to environmental stewardship, to the

1:27:54beauty that is right along the greenway,

1:27:57but separating that accountability from

1:27:59stewardship is really important. And I

1:28:01think we still should go down that route

1:28:04and figure out we have with the

1:28:06delegation of authority limiting um uh

1:28:10real estate transactions as we saw for

1:28:12the previous slides. Um so the for me

1:28:16the past process shouldn't push us into

1:28:19a permanent decision that won't serve

1:28:22residents

1:28:24today and many generations from now. I

1:28:27do think it that a visioning exercise

1:28:30may be similar to what we might do um

1:28:33with the fire admin building. I think

1:28:35we're all aligning what I'm feeling is

1:28:37we're all aligning on the fact that we

1:28:40have an we each have an idea of how that

1:28:42property could be useful. But I think

1:28:46our responsibility for this land is

1:28:48really long-term and we own it today. we

1:28:52can we have made several strides to

1:28:57um put in place guardrails so this sort

1:29:00of thing doesn't happen and at the same

1:29:03time we have a unique opportunity to

1:29:05really save a gem. So for me it's not

1:29:09whether or not we should sell the land

1:29:11it's what should we do for this property

1:29:13that that enables us to protect it for

1:29:16the future. So, for the sake of time,

1:29:18I'm going to use a phrase that Jack

1:29:20Smith once used. I think we're all in

1:29:22violent agreement. [laughter]

1:29:24>> Yeah.

1:29:24>> So, I don't think anybody's saying sell

1:29:27it. And

1:29:27>> and why waste staff's time with a lot of

1:29:30work on a whole bunch of things if

1:29:32there's four of us,

1:29:33>> probably five or six or seven of us that

1:29:36are going to say we want this

1:29:37permanently preserved as open space.

1:29:39>> That's I would love

1:29:41>> I think we might be I might really be in

1:29:43violent agreement though. I love that

1:29:45you said that. But I would still want an

1:29:47assessment from a historic preservation

1:29:50perspective if because if there is some

1:29:52significance then we should mark that

1:29:54land for that relevance and honor the

1:29:57heritage you know that's important um

1:30:00like what Karissa said because that's a

1:30:02recognition that we strive for for

1:30:04everybody. It's an inclusive community.

1:30:06So I is that Russ a big ask? Like I know

1:30:09that

1:30:10>> well

1:30:10>> I promise that we will not ask any more

1:30:13items. I I think you've got an ask in

1:30:16that. I think you need to consider how

1:30:17to not do anything with this council

1:30:20initiative and then

1:30:21>> or let Michelle bring it to the HPC

1:30:25because there's landmarking, there's

1:30:27historic there's there's different

1:30:29levels

1:30:30>> and it's and it's possible.

1:30:32>> There's there's strict rules about what

1:30:34you can and can't do a historic landmark

1:30:37or or have it historically preserved.

1:30:39Like there's Right, Michelle. There's

1:30:41>> I think we would first need to

1:30:45get more information

1:30:47>> to see for sure if it's actually on

1:30:50>> if it's on the

1:30:51>> that would I believe would need to be a

1:30:53council initiate or a council request.

1:30:56>> So I think

1:30:58>> correct me if I'm wrong. We could do a

1:31:00motion that says come back with a way we

1:31:03can permanently preserve it and assess

1:31:06the historic value of this property and

1:31:10>> bring move forward at that time. That's

1:31:13what I'm here.

1:31:13>> I just want to be I'm going to be the

1:31:16devil's advocate or the kind of um I

1:31:19don't know wet rag. We just went through

1:31:21an entire prioritization process.

1:31:24Would this be your red dot or green dot?

1:31:28Do you want to spend staff work?

1:31:31>> That's why I just tried to get us to not

1:31:33spend a whole bunch of staff time. And

1:31:34it's also I'm just

1:31:35>> Yeah.

1:31:36>> If you're deciding not to pursue selling

1:31:38it,

1:31:39>> we could just

1:31:40>> It really just becomes a timing issue of

1:31:42what do you wish to do with it at what

1:31:44period of time.

1:31:44>> Right. Exactly. We don't

1:31:47I would have put a red dot on this last

1:31:49week. I would have put a red dot.

1:31:51>> You would have. Okay.

1:31:52>> Just because

1:31:54>> if there's a red dot on it, we still own

1:31:55it. That still gives us time to I did

1:31:58not I spoke with staff today and

1:32:03confirmed that we don't know for sure.

1:32:08>> Right.

1:32:08>> So I confirmed nothing but I we have

1:32:11different information than we did two

1:32:12weeks ago because um the friends of

1:32:14Paige Walker seemed to have better

1:32:18information and so the conversations

1:32:20didn't happen before we met before. So I

1:32:25would I am fine with if we decide not to

1:32:28pursue the council initiated request

1:32:31>> at this time knowing that we still own

1:32:34it. It can't go away unless we do this

1:32:37process.

1:32:37>> So I want to be clear

1:32:38>> but would want the designation in the

1:32:40future the option to be able to pursue

1:32:42that. So I I think what what I'm hearing

1:32:44is and um that we whether it is it has

1:32:48historic relevance or not, we do want to

1:32:51preserve this as open space and we want

1:32:53to make sure we have a deed agreement on

1:32:55this um at a future date. Maybe we can

1:32:59explore whether it has historic pres uh

1:33:03sorry relevance and we can bring that

1:33:06back to HBC and have that conversation

1:33:09at that time. Is that correct? But yeah,

1:33:11and so I think that's an important

1:33:13distinction between between that and

1:33:16doing nothing. Doing nothing means okay,

1:33:19next November we're all out of here.

1:33:21Somebody comes in.

1:33:22>> That is a good

1:33:23>> we're going to build apartments.

1:33:24>> We want to Yeah, we want to preserve

1:33:27that.

1:33:27>> So my direction is staff, we want that

1:33:29motion before we're all kicked out of

1:33:31office.

1:33:32>> That's that's the motion I' I'd like to

1:33:34hear made. I' I'd be comfortable making

1:33:36a motion that we ask staff to look into

1:33:40the best way to permanently preserve um

1:33:4360

1:33:45>> farm 604 Kildair Farm Road as uh

1:33:51>> order preserve space.

1:33:53>> So can I say something? Sorry. Um

1:33:54>> well I'll second um before second the

1:33:57motion now discussion. Um I don't think

1:34:01I agree with that. You know we we're

1:34:04asking the staff to find the best way of

1:34:07the your use. I thought the conversation

1:34:10was that we are we are in agreement that

1:34:12this will stay as open space.

1:34:14>> That's what I just said. No, you said uh

1:34:16what is the best way to preserve this

1:34:18space?

1:34:19>> There's multiple ways to do it.

1:34:21>> You can do a conservation overlay. You

1:34:23can do

1:34:24>> but I would be more comfortable if we

1:34:27use what I understand. Please let me

1:34:29finish. But I would like to

1:34:31>> include word open space there so that

1:34:34you know it's clear that we all agreed

1:34:36on keeping this as open space.

1:34:39>> This is not my area of expertise. I

1:34:42don't know all the options. Lisa.

1:34:44>> U. So if if you would like to what I'm

1:34:48hearing you say is perhaps Carissa,

1:34:50you'd like to clarify your motion to say

1:34:53um and this is up to you if you want to

1:34:54take an amendment to your motion. Um

1:34:56what I was writing down is notes. So

1:34:58this is what I wrote down as she was

1:34:59speaking that staff would come back with

1:35:01options to permanently preserve the two

1:35:04parcels as open space.

1:35:05>> Yep.

1:35:06>> Or Yeah. And open space is defined as

1:35:09natural space. Correct. Because I

1:35:11>> well the key being

1:35:12>> can open space be a mode lawn because

1:35:14that's not the intention.

1:35:15>> It can be because that's I don't I don't

1:35:18want this to be a monoulture place to go

1:35:21play soccer. I'd like this to remain a

1:35:23natural area.

1:35:24>> Open space is traditionally just

1:35:26non-built upon area. So if you want n if

1:35:29you want the natural area to be

1:35:32preserved

1:35:32>> I intentionally used the word natural.

1:35:34>> You want like a conservation you want to

1:35:36lean more towards a conservation angle.

1:35:39Well, I think we would want the

1:35:41definitions associated with each of

1:35:43them. No, that's all we hear in option.

1:35:45I'm hearing options. I think options

1:35:47being broad.

1:35:48>> Exactly. That's been that's the word

1:35:51that concerned about her intent. Yeah,

1:35:53we got it.

1:35:53>> I think that's that was your intention.

1:35:55Is that correct?

1:35:56>> To keep it natural spaces permanently.

1:35:59Okay, got it.

1:36:00>> Well, so it um

1:36:02>> Okay, go ahead. Is my rewarding of your

1:36:05motion?

1:36:07>> Can you read it again, please?

1:36:08>> That staff would bring back options to

1:36:10permanently preserve 6604 Kildair Farm

1:36:13Road as natural open space.

1:36:16>> Yes.

1:36:16>> Okay. So, that's an amended motion.

1:36:18Amended. Second.

1:36:19>> Second.

1:36:20>> Okay.

1:36:20>> All right.

1:36:21>> Further discussion. I just wanted to say

1:36:24one more time that I would like us to

1:36:26revisit in the future, but because we

1:36:28did this priority exercise and there

1:36:30were way more items than we are able to

1:36:33talk about before the end of the year,

1:36:35some of them being very time pertinent

1:36:38that that that is the only reason I'm

1:36:41not requesting that staff put time,

1:36:43effort in for us to put potential money

1:36:45at this time. Could the HPC add this to

1:36:48their work plan for the next year and

1:36:49then bring us a recommendation and

1:36:51perhaps they could step in and help sort

1:36:54of as a extension of staff since they

1:36:57have so much expertise and work can work

1:36:59so well with the other historically

1:37:03knowledgeable groups in town.

1:37:04>> I I know we have to move on, Michelle.

1:37:06can't uh we can't think about every

1:37:08possibility tonight, but I I I just also

1:37:10wonder considering that it seems like

1:37:14there's some ambiguity here about

1:37:16exactly where the historical structure

1:37:17was, if that even matters, meaning we

1:37:21own right these parameters, it will be

1:37:24close enough to put a marker somewhere

1:37:27on there saying in this vicinity so that

1:37:29we don't have to spend so much time

1:37:32precisely knowing the location if the

1:37:34desire is just for people to know that

1:37:36this vicinity was significant.

1:37:38>> Yeah,

1:37:39>> since they're they're doing their work

1:37:42plans in October, I think it's a great

1:37:44opportunity for them to weigh in prov

1:37:47and do some of the great leg work based

1:37:49on as you said perfectly, their

1:37:51expertise and knowledge and connections.

1:37:54I think that would be a great effort

1:37:58>> and help.

1:37:59>> We have a motion and a second and we've

1:38:01thoroughly discussed it. All right. All

1:38:04in favor of the motion, please say I. I

1:38:06I

1:38:06>> Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you,

1:38:08Matt.

1:38:09>> Well, I Let me add Matt.

1:38:11>> I want Jenny to give us a time check.

1:38:13>> Oh, yes. It's 704,

1:38:15>> right? Because we haven't done your item

1:38:17and we've skipped one of the real estate

1:38:19items. Kind of which way do you wish to

1:38:22go?

1:38:22>> I'm thinking my item is just an update

1:38:25and I'm thinking 15 minutes max. I'm

1:38:29hoping

1:38:30>> uh because I'm just providing

1:38:32information for you to

1:38:34>> have. I don't know, mayor. Historically,

1:38:36I don't know if we're capable of

1:38:3715minute conversations. [laughter]

1:38:39>> I was trying to

1:38:41>> That might be optimistic.

1:38:43>> Right. Because the other property was

1:38:45the old library site. There's no reason

1:38:47to do that tonight unless you wanted.

1:38:49So, I'm just time checking with an

1:38:51ending of

1:38:52>> Can you go back one slide, please?

1:38:54>> It's a red dot for me.

1:38:56>> Just so we know what the old library

1:38:58site actually means. When we say old

1:39:00library site, we mean the actual old

1:39:02library site and two parcels on

1:39:04Harrison.

1:39:05>> We have technically three. There's a

1:39:06there's a little parcel right here.

1:39:08>> Oh, that's right. The little sliver.

1:39:09>> But we the town of Kerry owns these four

1:39:12properties.

1:39:12>> This right here will help grease the

1:39:14wheels of conversation. Since there are

1:39:16so many misunderstandings, what's when

1:39:18when two people talk about the old

1:39:20library site, often we are talking about

1:39:23very different

1:39:24>> and it was probably dubbed that at an

1:39:25old council staff retreat where

1:39:27initially we had a parking conversation

1:39:30regarding parking downtown at the time

1:39:32with no direction from council. I'm not

1:39:34even certain when we had that violently

1:39:36disagreeable argument about the old

1:39:39downtown libraries site that we were all

1:39:41talking about the same thing

1:39:43>> that I so

1:39:45>> I think we were because the discussion

1:39:47was about what to do with the building

1:39:49if you all remember and should we do a

1:39:53>> what are those called the

1:39:55>> tabletop

1:39:55>> tabletop parking tabletop

1:39:57>> there were two discussions one was

1:39:59>> that you had to take down a building or

1:40:01something like that

1:40:02>> but where was this parking lot supposed

1:40:04to be

1:40:04>> uh across the back part or the far back

1:40:07portion.

1:40:07>> The back part.

1:40:08>> I thought it was up further. The

1:40:11picture,

1:40:11>> but we can get to this. You can you can

1:40:13get to this later. It's one of many

1:40:15other properties that you also own

1:40:17downtown. This one just uh having the

1:40:19Ivy Ellington house use on it

1:40:21specifically. You do not have to have

1:40:22any discussion on it tonight. It just

1:40:24happened to be in the vicinity of your

1:40:26other properties you're discussing

1:40:27tonight.

1:40:28>> A lot of questions. While we have the

1:40:30map, can you point to where the historic

1:40:33Ivy Ellington is?

1:40:37>> No. No. Go.

1:40:38>> Oh, the Ivy Ellington.

1:40:39>> We're going

1:40:41right. I'm sorry.

1:40:42>> Like, wait a minute.

1:40:43>> You're like, I don't know.

1:40:45>> I'm pretty sure that's the Ivy

1:40:46Ellington. [laughter]

1:40:47>> Is there another one?

1:40:48>> No, you're right.

1:40:51>> Yeah, it's right there.

1:40:54>> All right.

1:40:54>> Just pointing out that there's

1:40:56historical nature on the property. We

1:40:58were not talking about that site

1:41:00specifically.

1:41:02>> All right. Thank you, Matt. Thank you,

1:41:05Matt.

1:41:05>> You're welcome.

1:41:07>> Do you need the clicker? Mayor, are you

1:41:09up next?

1:41:09>> All right. Somebody can advance it for

1:41:11me.

1:41:11>> No, she's got it.

1:41:15>> Oh, I have to get there. Yeah. Okay. Uh,

1:41:17the committee, subcommittee of council,

1:41:21which is we've named ourselves the

1:41:23recommendations committee, has been

1:41:25meeting. We met three times. We meet

1:41:27again Monday and then we'll meet mid

1:41:30October

1:41:31>> November

1:41:32>> October

1:41:33>> prior to our 22nd council meeting in

1:41:36November.

1:41:36>> And so what we've been doing is going

1:41:38through the um recommended

1:41:43items from Cherry Beckert um WMA Bon

1:41:46Dickinson and OSA.

1:41:49um we're at a point where we're ready to

1:41:52start crafting things, but we want to

1:41:54make sure before we go down in a deep

1:41:56dive that we're not going in the wrong

1:41:58direction. So, this is kind of an update

1:42:01to give you guys an idea of where we've

1:42:03been and hopefully where we're going.

1:42:07So, already said that. And so, tonight

1:42:10I'm going to talk specifically about the

1:42:14council benefits as compared to staff.

1:42:16and then we're going to talk a little

1:42:18bit about where we're going with

1:42:19compensation.

1:42:21So, there is a policy that exists that

1:42:24was created in 2007

1:42:26and updated in 2010 about council's

1:42:30health

1:42:32and dental insurance benefits. And it's

1:42:35there. It's 117. You can look it up. I'm

1:42:37not going to read it to you. I did

1:42:39underline the cost of this coverage

1:42:42shall be the same as the costs

1:42:44applicable to any full-time regular

1:42:48employee. are basically the same as

1:42:50employees.

1:42:53And then the findings, well, I looked at

1:42:56the top seven populated municipalities

1:42:59in North Carolina and the six of seven

1:43:01of them have uh these types of benefits

1:43:05for their elected officials. And

1:43:08basically Kerry council members receive

1:43:11the same health coverage as staff

1:43:14although staff has more options related

1:43:16to exo ex auxiliary benefits. Trying to

1:43:20talk and nothing happens. Um council

1:43:23also receives a premium lower rate

1:43:26equivalent to the rate staff has who

1:43:28participates in the wellness program. So

1:43:32we also have a chart that goes through

1:43:34all of this and basically I'm just going

1:43:36to hit the highlights. uh medical,

1:43:38health, dental, medical FSA, dependent

1:43:41care, FSA, pretty much all the same as

1:43:44staff.

1:43:46And then uh we start having HSA, LSA,

1:43:51and EAP,

1:43:53similar about the same. And then we get

1:43:56into oh, and workman's comp. If a

1:43:58council member like fell down going out

1:44:00the door, I guess you'd get workman's

1:44:02comp. Um then we get into staff benefits

1:44:06and it's mostly insurance like life

1:44:08insurance

1:44:09and their volunteer benefits and

1:44:11supplemental

1:44:13>> we do not get

1:44:14>> right sick leave all that kind of stuff

1:44:17that's all employee benefit only not

1:44:19council benefits

1:44:22>> and then now we move so that any

1:44:24questions about the benefits before we

1:44:26move on so we're close to crafting that

1:44:29up or it's basically there is policy 17.

1:44:33>> I just want to share for clarity that we

1:44:35are offered these benefits. We do not

1:44:36all receive them.

1:44:37>> Good point.

1:44:38>> You know, for example, I have employer

1:44:40sponsored benefits. So, I decline

1:44:42through the town. I think that's true

1:44:44for a couple of us, but it's they're

1:44:46they're offered.

1:44:47>> Yep. Good point. And then for

1:44:50compensation, we have um charter

1:44:53language which says things and was some

1:44:57of it was very interesting. And part of

1:45:00this uh charter language says we may not

1:45:03reduce during the current term of office

1:45:07unless the person agrees to there. So

1:45:10>> yes and this is the statute.

1:45:12>> Yeah.

1:45:12>> Um I don't know if you also have this is

1:45:14your next slide the charter next slide.

1:45:16>> Um so that's the state statute and then

1:45:18this is car's charter language and

1:45:20they're different. Um, and so we had a

1:45:23nice healthy debate in the legal

1:45:25department earlier today about how to

1:45:27how you reconcile this. And there's

1:45:29another statute that tells you how to

1:45:30try to reconcile this. Um, essentially

1:45:33um what um we believe that you either

1:45:36need to choose working under the state

1:45:38statute or working under the charter and

1:45:40that you can choose between the two. Um,

1:45:42and the primary difference is, um, under

1:45:45the state statute, you're only permitted

1:45:47to change your compensation either up or

1:45:50down at a time of budget adoption. Um,

1:45:53also, when you change your compensation,

1:45:55you cannot decrease the mayor's

1:45:57compensation unless he consents to it

1:46:00during his current term in office.

1:46:02>> Good.

1:46:02>> Or any mayor's term in office. Um, also

1:46:05if you go under the statute then you can

1:46:07do your allowances as either straight

1:46:09reimbursement or as a fixed allowance

1:46:12which is what you have today. So today

1:46:14we've been operating under the statutory

1:46:17um process under the charter process

1:46:19which is on your screen now. Um, you can

1:46:22actually change your compensation at any

1:46:24time during the year except you cannot

1:46:28reduce anyone's compensation on the

1:46:30council during their term without their

1:46:33consent. But you're also restricted in

1:46:35terms of your expenses um to actual

1:46:38reimbursement. So you would not be

1:46:40allowed to have a separate allowances.

1:46:43It would just be a strict reimbursement

1:46:44basis for expenses. Um so you have two

1:46:48choices and again the statute is what we

1:46:50believe we've been operating under and

1:46:52so to um but those are there's two

1:46:55choices there.

1:46:56>> So statute estate and charter

1:46:58>> is carry only.

1:47:00>> Oh s

1:47:01>> granted by the state it gets very com

1:47:03>> created by the state but applicable only

1:47:04to carry.

1:47:05>> Okay but I want to ask a question. Um

1:47:08Britney, you mentioned in one of the

1:47:09work sessions that we cannot change the

1:47:12compensation just about anytime. It is

1:47:14>> the statute statuto language. So Lisa,

1:47:18another clarifying question.

1:47:20>> Since we do have fixed allowances, we

1:47:24are currently operating under state

1:47:25statute and not local ordinance,

1:47:28>> right?

1:47:30>> Can you pick and choose? Meaning if we

1:47:34are currently operating under state

1:47:35statute by virtue of having fixed

1:47:37allowances, are we then bound to the

1:47:41budgetary timeline or can we have fixed

1:47:44allowance per the state and amend our

1:47:46compensation at will per the charter?

1:47:48>> That is not a legal question that we

1:47:50have the answer to.

1:47:51>> Okay.

1:47:52>> Um but uh I think our our suggestion is

1:47:55that it's choose one or choose the

1:47:57other. Operate under the statute or

1:47:59operate under the charter. So here's as

1:48:01a whole

1:48:01>> here's what we're thinking.

1:48:05>> Compensation changes as been discussed

1:48:07would take effect next budget. We

1:48:10recommend forming a resident committee

1:48:12to determine the compensation.

1:48:15And we recommend that we do that by

1:48:18taking a member from each advisory

1:48:21board. And so each advisory board would

1:48:23designate a member member uh to be on

1:48:27this committee to discuss compensation.

1:48:30And of course someone's got to give them

1:48:33a charge. What that they what do we

1:48:36expect them to do? And uh we like we

1:48:40expect them to be fair. We expect them

1:48:42to come up with such and such a date.

1:48:45They have plenty of time because it

1:48:47won't take effect until the next budget.

1:48:50>> June. June and we have the boards and

1:48:54commissions changing over adding new

1:48:56members in October. And so we would

1:49:00recommend starting later in the year

1:49:02doing this process or early next year.

1:49:05But if we know that this is a path we

1:49:07want to go down, then we can still make

1:49:10progress. Um so that's kind of the

1:49:12check-in about this is to see where you

1:49:15guys wanted to go with that. If you're

1:49:16okay with what we're thinking, then we

1:49:19will continue with this and we'll work

1:49:21on a charge uh for the committee and try

1:49:26to craft all that up. So, the committee

1:49:28would be ready to go once it's

1:49:29appointed.

1:49:30>> And mayor, if I could just um clarify a

1:49:33little bit on the first bullet under

1:49:35recommendations, the resident committee

1:49:36could not actually determine your

1:49:38compet. They could make recommendations.

1:49:40>> That's right.

1:49:41>> So, they would make recommendations for

1:49:42you to decide whether you would

1:49:43incorporate or not into the budget. Yep.

1:49:46>> And just as you all know, I sent out a

1:49:49note that many other municipalities have

1:49:52done this. Raleigh and Charlotte both

1:49:54used resident committees um s or study

1:49:57groups, I guess they called them, to do

1:49:59this sort of thing. I' love to hear what

1:50:02drove you to the having an advisory

1:50:05board member or um as your membership

1:50:10group. I'm just

1:50:11>> politics.

1:50:12>> Yeah. to

1:50:13>> keep politics out.

1:50:14>> Harold said it very well. We want this

1:50:16to be as nonpartisan as possible. So I

1:50:19asked them, I said, "Well, would we have

1:50:20you appoint these members? Would each

1:50:22council member appoint a me member or

1:50:24what?" I immediately said thought to

1:50:27myself, "Okay, that is going to create a

1:50:31host of problems choosing the

1:50:33individuals." So I remembered that for

1:50:35the Kerry 150 commission what was done

1:50:37was an individual from each one of the

1:50:40advisory boards was was chosen. And so

1:50:43when we were talking it through we

1:50:44introduced an an an additional level of

1:50:49us taking a backseat in determining our

1:50:51own compensation by allowing the

1:50:53individual boards to select the person

1:50:56that would serve on the committee

1:50:58instead of us directly choosing somebody

1:51:01and appointing. So the intention was uh

1:51:03as much neutrality as we could muster

1:51:06while tapping into a really wide we have

1:51:10so much um variability and thought age

1:51:14demographic everything you can think of

1:51:16on our advisory board. So that was Did I

1:51:19say that? Did I Did I capture all of

1:51:20that?

1:51:21>> And Jenny, correct me if I'm wrong. We

1:51:22also talked about that being a mechanism

1:51:26that we could implement more quickly

1:51:29than starting a recruitment um from

1:51:32scratch.

1:51:32>> Yeah.

1:51:33>> Yeah. Yeah.

1:51:34>> Yeah. So I listened and I loved it and I

1:51:35thought you should share why you came up

1:51:38with it. So

1:51:38>> Oh, you did listen?

1:51:39>> I did. I um So yeah, I love that idea. I

1:51:42love how you guys came up with that. And

1:51:44this would just be the formal boards,

1:51:46not it wouldn't be like the greenway

1:51:48committee or the festivals committee or

1:51:50would it only be the

1:51:51>> We talked about nine boards.

1:51:53>> Talk about the advisor board. Okay. I

1:51:55just want to make

1:51:55>> thoughts. I'm sorry. I think I cut you

1:51:57off.

1:51:57>> No, I was just saying that's a very good

1:51:59point. Like I I really like what you

1:52:01shared and how you shared it. It's I

1:52:03think it makes complete sense

1:52:04>> getting those those we appoint the

1:52:07boards. Um you know we we know what we

1:52:11know about people. I mean, I most of the

1:52:12people that I've appointed to my boards,

1:52:14they're they're strangers, right? I

1:52:16don't know much more than what was on

1:52:17their application and what they said.

1:52:19Um, so they've turned out to be way more

1:52:21diverse than I ever could have really

1:52:23imagined. My biggest concern was trying

1:52:25to keep this as neutral as possible

1:52:28because Mr. Mayor, you were exactly

1:52:30right. Your first reaction was, "Oh boy,

1:52:32how do we keep this from being

1:52:33political?" So, I thought the more

1:52:36layers of division between us, like

1:52:38being as hands-off as possible, that

1:52:40that was the best way to achieve that.

1:52:43Now, could this maybe not be as great as

1:52:45we think it's going to be? Maybe. Or

1:52:48we'll have stress tested a new way to

1:52:50get really good groups of citizen

1:52:53feedback without having to for staff to

1:52:56go to every single one of our our

1:52:59boards, too. I thought that might just

1:53:01open up a way for us to just have more

1:53:04direct feedback and and rapidly.

1:53:07>> Yeah. And council,

1:53:08>> one thing to add about the ad Sorry.

1:53:10>> No.

1:53:10>> And one thing to add about the advisory

1:53:12boards for those who don't where they're

1:53:15not very Oh, yeah. Perfect. You want to

1:53:17say it?

1:53:17>> Okay. Reading each other's minds.

1:53:19>> So, um, one of the things a benefit of

1:53:22bringing advisory board members is

1:53:24they're very engaged and plugged in and

1:53:26they go through this budget cycle with

1:53:28us every year. So they kind of

1:53:30understand the process. So I really

1:53:32appreciate the idea and I really

1:53:34appreciate the idea of keeping it

1:53:36nonpartisan and making it really focused

1:53:38on the facts and you know the research

1:53:41and what what should we do, what is the

1:53:43right thing to do. One of the things I

1:53:44want to say is that online I heard a lot

1:53:46of chatter about what is right, what is

1:53:48wrong. There was lot of public opinion

1:53:51about oh this is not fair this is

1:53:53conflict of interest and and I want to

1:53:55thank all three of you for spending so

1:53:58many of your personal hours volunteering

1:54:00for this and coming up with a plan which

1:54:02is much more um transparent and honest

1:54:07and um you know let let this process

1:54:10play and I would request everyone to

1:54:12please let the process play its course.

1:54:16So I was just going to add well two

1:54:18thoughts now. One is to explain the

1:54:21conflict of interest um notion is that

1:54:25by statute we have the authority which

1:54:28is to say the responsibility to set our

1:54:31compensation and so that is why even the

1:54:34committee a resident committee cannot

1:54:35determine our compensation. They can

1:54:37recommend it and we still have to by law

1:54:40exercise the authority to set our

1:54:42compensation ourselves. So that's not an

1:54:44option. We cannot abdicate that

1:54:46authority entirely to some third party.

1:54:49But also just clarifying for folks

1:54:51listening who might not be familiar with

1:54:53our board appointment process, lest they

1:54:55think every year or every election cycle

1:54:58we come in and appoint a full board of

1:55:00members that they have usually

1:55:04three-year terms eligible for a second

1:55:06term up to six years with rolling

1:55:09appointments. So we we inherit a lot of

1:55:12boards. So, I have a board, you know,

1:55:15the two boards I'm a liazison for, um,

1:55:17are almost exclusively appointed by my

1:55:19predecessor. So, I just I I want folks

1:55:22to know that that appointment process

1:55:24represents a lot of previous council

1:55:27members. Um, and it it's not as if we

1:55:30come in every year and create a board

1:55:32from scratch um that we have personally

1:55:34appointed.

1:55:34>> Very good point. Good point.

1:55:36>> One quick question. when you say the

1:55:38term the word compensation.

1:55:41>> Oh, we didn't define that.

1:55:43>> You did watch.

1:55:44>> Was ah I thought it was on here. I I

1:55:47actually had it in my notes to define

1:55:49it.

1:55:50>> So yes, because we we we are asking you

1:55:53to volley it back to us to define the

1:55:57exact charge, but we did have the

1:56:00conversation about how wide we might

1:56:02want the committee's purview to be. uh

1:56:04compensation again by statutory

1:56:07definition is salary and allowances. Do

1:56:11we want the committee to be that narrow

1:56:13or do we want it to also extend to

1:56:16benefits or considering the slides the

1:56:19mayors just presented are we satisfied

1:56:22to keep our benefits policy intact and

1:56:25keep the committee focused on

1:56:26compensation?

1:56:29So my my thought is that the term

1:56:32allowance is the next question would be

1:56:34okay so that's how you define

1:56:35compensation how do you define allowance

1:56:38right some people might you know taking

1:56:40it one down right it's like a rabbit

1:56:42>> there's a legal definition actually we

1:56:44had to do a lot of homework I never seen

1:56:46all of that but

1:56:47>> I saw I saw some of it I so I would

1:56:51lovely fringe benefits legally um and

1:56:55that's why our uh our allowances are are

1:56:59taxed. So that would be your technology

1:57:01allowances and your car allowance and

1:57:03such.

1:57:04>> This is they're taxed as salary as

1:57:06wages. So I would say the default

1:57:08presumption would be compensation means

1:57:10salary plus any allowances such as what

1:57:13you're receiving today.

1:57:15>> And my point would be that I would love

1:57:17for the res the resident group to weigh

1:57:19in on on what they thought. Do they you

1:57:22know is a car allowance um amanable? Is

1:57:26it technology alliance? those we want

1:57:28to. Oh yes.

1:57:29>> Is a training allowance is a travel

1:57:31allowance. I

1:57:33>> cuz that is separate because I you know

1:57:35for us compensation exclusively means

1:57:38what appears in a paycheck.

1:57:39>> Yeah.

1:57:40>> What what appear your taxable income

1:57:42that appears in a paycheck. Um and we

1:57:44are right now prior to your direction

1:57:48treating benefits separately. benefits

1:57:51meaning primarily dental and medical and

1:57:55the uh life style spending account. Um

1:58:00and then all of the other uh council

1:58:04related expenses such as travel to be

1:58:07captured in a separate policy, but that

1:58:09we would make the committees charge our

1:58:14compensation compensation being the

1:58:16dollars we are paid in a paycheck as

1:58:19wages or allowances that are treated as

1:58:22wages. Yeah, it would be great to hear

1:58:24their feedback on what what they would

1:58:28say an allowance should accomp, you

1:58:30know, accomplish. You know,

1:58:33>> you we all may feel that training or

1:58:36travel,

1:58:37>> right? Travel to NLM or some of these

1:58:40others are should be maybe in a

1:58:43reimbursement

1:58:45methodology or we may just say, hey,

1:58:47there's a bucket of money that you're

1:58:49given for this set of training. It would

1:58:52be great to just hear them weighing in

1:58:54on it because every single one of those

1:58:57groups think differently, right?

1:59:00>> And they can do that task after this

1:59:02task because we're actually doing the

1:59:05deep dive on that now.

1:59:06>> Okay.

1:59:07>> So we

1:59:08>> So we'll come back to you for that as

1:59:10well.

1:59:10>> Maybe next time I can come back with the

1:59:14travel recommendations. Yeah.

1:59:16>> One other consideration, I'm sorry I'm

1:59:18going off script here a little rogue. We

1:59:20talked about this at our very first

1:59:22meeting but not explicitly this week is

1:59:26um if it would be a worthwhile data

1:59:28point to pursue and it could be for the

1:59:32committee uh to to inform the

1:59:35committee's work is we have already

1:59:38funded through our budget the work and

1:59:40pay classification study

1:59:42>> if it would be worthwhile and I don't

1:59:45know where we currently are in the RFP

1:59:47process with that specifically if it is

1:59:49so ownorous and impractical to implement

1:59:52or expensive. I am willing to abandon

1:59:55that that line of questioning, but if it

1:59:57would be worth us directing staff to

2:00:00make that part of the class and pay

2:00:02study even if we form a resident

2:00:04committee. So the resident committee had

2:00:06that data point

2:00:07>> and we're currently in process. We have

2:00:10um the proposals are still out. We

2:00:12haven't selected a consultant yet.

2:00:14>> So would it

2:00:15>> I don't think it would cost very much to

2:00:17have

2:00:17>> Okay. council.

2:00:19>> I mean, it's not it's not that hard.

2:00:21It's public record.

2:00:22>> Yeah.

2:00:23>> Any of us could do the homework to get

2:00:25>> 13 or 25.

2:00:26>> You already did. Lori Bush

2:00:29[laughter]

2:00:30>> and Britney, I just want one one point

2:00:32of clarification. what Karissa said

2:00:35earlier about the benefits, you know,

2:00:37that they they're available and it's

2:00:40optional and things that you're talking

2:00:42about also they're going to be it's not

2:00:45set in stone and you know council

2:00:48members have an option to opt out of

2:00:50anything that

2:00:50>> I don't think we have

2:00:51>> they can like do allard or what

2:00:53>> nothing is yeah I don't think anything

2:00:55is predetermined I think you know we we

2:00:58confine

2:00:59uh what we are expecting them to study

2:01:02but in terms of what those recommend

2:01:04recommendations come back as flat

2:01:06salary, salary and allowances, what

2:01:08those allowances are. We would we would

2:01:11leave that to the committee to decide.

2:01:14>> By the way, not to make the meeting any

2:01:16longer, but I do want to say that I

2:01:18truly enjoyed watching you guys not just

2:01:21brainstorm, collaborate, agree,

2:01:24disagree. I mean, it it was it was

2:01:27really nice to see government at work

2:01:30quite hard coming in with homework. You

2:01:32guys did an absolutely phenomenal job.

2:01:35>> Thank you, Mayor Pam.

2:01:37>> All right, so we will proceed down this

2:01:39path

2:01:40>> and we will

2:01:43>> probably

2:01:44I would say it doesn't require a motion,

2:01:46but if you'd like to preserve this for

2:01:48the record, it'd be great to have a

2:01:49motion.

2:01:50>> Okay.

2:01:50>> Do you want to make a motion?

2:01:52>> No, go ahead.

2:01:53>> Oh, should just read the

2:01:55recommendations.

2:01:56>> Okay. I'd like to make a motion to to do

2:02:01what's recommended here. Form a resident

2:02:03committee to determine compensation of

2:02:07the council.

2:02:08>> We recommend

2:02:09>> recommend recommendation.

2:02:10>> Sorry, I screwed that up.

2:02:11>> That's fine. My eyes I I don't have

2:02:13glasses, so you can easily get away with

2:02:15that. Mayor, [laughter]

2:02:18each advisory board uh designates a

2:02:20member recommendations committee defines

2:02:23the change

2:02:25>> charge

2:02:25>> charge work to begin later this year or

2:02:28early next year.

2:02:29>> There's a motion. Is there a second?

2:02:32>> I'll second.

2:02:33>> Discussion. All in favor, please say I.

2:02:38>> I'm sorry. That's okay. Discussion. Go

2:02:39ahead. I was just going to say I

2:02:41appreciate the neutrality and I know

2:02:43we've had a similar situation with the

2:02:46carry 150 before. Our advisory board

2:02:49members are very engaged and probably

2:02:51very willing, but have we considered if

2:02:55a group of members of an advisory board

2:02:58said like, "Hey, we're stretched really

2:03:00thin and we signed up for this one

2:03:02thing." Have we anticipated what could

2:03:05happen if if an advisory board if there

2:03:08are no volunteers

2:03:10>> and I think that's the perfect time to

2:03:12come back and say okay you you said you

2:03:14wanted this we can't do this now what do

2:03:16you want to do

2:03:16>> and I suppose too you know we thought

2:03:19our extraordinarily engaged citizens

2:03:21would jump at the opportunity to do a

2:03:22little extra work they probably will

2:03:25have nine boards we didn't determine the

2:03:28number required for the committee so if

2:03:30five we thought an odd number would be

2:03:32better as most deliberative bodies are

2:03:34better with an odd number. But if only

2:03:36five of the boards came back,

2:03:38>> that's probably that's a discussion we

2:03:41could have if that happens. Very good

2:03:42point.

2:03:43>> And I liked your point here when you

2:03:45said if it's six members and it's three

2:03:48three that's a no.

2:03:49>> Yeah, not a decision which I had never

2:03:52thought of it that way.

2:03:53>> I mean at the council table if

2:03:55somebody's absent well somebody's absent

2:03:57tonight and if we voted 33 on this

2:03:59motion then the motion fails. Yeah, you

2:04:02do nothing or you can make another

2:04:04motion. So, yeah, same thing.

2:04:06>> We had that once.

2:04:07>> We had there a liaison to this

2:04:11>> group. I think we just wanted the pulse

2:04:13check tonight to know that we were going

2:04:15in the right direction. But I think we

2:04:17will in that defining the charge

2:04:19>> come back to you with a lot more details

2:04:21about because if this was a no from you

2:04:23guys that you didn't want to pursue,

2:04:24>> we're going to go a totally different

2:04:26direction.

2:04:26>> Yeah. Right. If you said no, we asked

2:04:28committee to do this work. stop being so

2:04:30lazy and asking our residents to do it

2:04:31for us, then we would have abandoned

2:04:33this route.

2:04:34>> Okay. All in favor of the motion, please

2:04:36say I.

2:04:36>> I. Any opposed? Motion carries. That

2:04:39concludes our business. We have four

2:04:41quick slides.

2:04:42>> Okay. Uh

2:04:42>> oh.

2:04:42>> If you don't mind, because

2:04:43>> Oh, that's a half an hour.

2:04:44>> Well, we [laughter]

2:04:46hopefully with no discussion. All right.

2:04:48Affirmation, not discussion. Uh cuz what

2:04:50what I've kind of committed to

2:04:52>> a lot of giggling from the back of that

2:04:53[laughter] one.

2:04:54>> It's true.

2:04:55>> I don't know that they think you can do

2:04:56it.

2:04:57>> You were just being too honest.

2:04:59were.

2:05:00>> And just a time check, it is 7:30.

2:05:02>> Yes, this will be quick because um we've

2:05:04kind of committed to do a moving forward

2:05:05dashboard update.

2:05:06>> But what if I have a question?

2:05:07>> Uh you [laughter] can ask a question.

2:05:09It's your meeting technically. All

2:05:11right. So with our uh moving forward

2:05:13dashboard, I just want to point out um

2:05:15that we have made three changes to um

2:05:17the recommendations. And as Matt pointed

2:05:19out, one of those changes in his real

2:05:21estate update tonight was that we have

2:05:23actually completed the work for bringing

2:05:25real estate purchases back to you with

2:05:27um your delegation of authority action

2:05:29um earlier this summer. So we have moved

2:05:31uh WLE bond Dickinson 08 to complete.

2:05:34We've uh moved Wubble Bond Dickinson uh

2:05:3710 the review of technology acquisition

2:05:39procedures to research and then W uh W

2:05:42uh BD12 fiduciary obligations and ethics

2:05:45uh certification for the town manager to

2:05:47research as well. So moving that from

2:05:49not started those two to not started to

2:05:51research. And then I just think this is

2:05:54good news and should be repeated because

2:05:56as you heard at your quarterly meeting

2:05:57last week, we had Ty Welfford from the

2:05:59Davenport and Company give an update um

2:06:03on kind of carry financials at a high

2:06:05level and he had some really good quotes

2:06:07in that and I know that not everyone can

2:06:08watch every meeting, but I felt like

2:06:10this just deserves some uh repetition uh

2:06:13regarding our strong uh health and

2:06:15financial position of the town. So

2:06:17Carrie has the highest credit rating you

2:06:18can get is one of his um quotes. And

2:06:22then Carrie has very much prided itself

2:06:24in its triple AAA credit rating and

2:06:26certainly that is a value in and of

2:06:28itself and I think he gave you uh slides

2:06:30on just how few folks in North Carolina

2:06:33and maybe across the country have that

2:06:35designation and just for the record. Um

2:06:37this is what those three credit rating

2:06:39agencies are in their AAA rating. Um so

2:06:42that was it for me mayor. I just wanted

2:06:44to point

2:06:45>> that is a reflection of your financial

2:06:47strength. That is a quote I remember not

2:06:50just your ability to borrow money but a

2:06:53reflection of your financial strength.

2:06:55Correct. So just wanted to

2:06:57>> thank you

2:06:57>> share that. All right. Anything else?

2:06:59>> And I'm really glad you brought Ty in. I

2:07:02I have to say that was one of the best

2:07:04presentations I've ever I've ever had

2:07:07here. And his ability to take really

2:07:10complex ideas and bring it down to the

2:07:14layman's terms I thought was really

2:07:15great.

2:07:16>> Yeah. All right, that's it. Thanks

2:07:19everybody. We are ajourned. Okay.