TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH

REGULAR BOARD MEETING

April 5, 2007

7:00 P.M.

PRESENT:

Mayor W. Rodney Knowles, Mayor Pro-tem Larry Hardison, Aldermen Richard Farley, Fred Handy, Richard Peters and Daniel Tuman, Bradley Smith, Town Manager,  Loraine Carbone, Town Clerk, Robert Kilroy, Attorney

QUORUM:

Mayor Knowles called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the North Topsail Beach meeting room and declared a quorum present.

INVOCATION:

Alderman Handy gave the invocation.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

The Board of Aldermen and citizens present recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

Alderman Tuman moved, seconded by Alderman Handy approval of the Agenda as presented.  The motion passed unanimously.

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

Beach Nourishment – Dick Macartney

Our Beach Nourishment Committee has met 5 times since November, but are frustrated because “we are dead in the water’ without an Engineering resources to answer what if questions.  Beach Nourishment got started in this town back in 1998 or so.  Once the Federal project was started we still needed a solution for the CRBA area 7.5 miles of the 11.  C P & E was hired to develop the options back in 2002 I believe.  Working since then we still are at least a year away from getting regulatory approval to do anything with our CBRA area shoreline.

Since the November vote we have had a cooling off period and rightly so.  People need to get involved and they are.  We need to listen to what was wrong with the first plan, but we still have to address our long term erosion problem.  Our committee has stated and has agreement from this board that outside financing is a necessary ingredient in any plan.  The mayor’s committee is a very favorable recognition by the board that Money is the most important issue.  However, to raise money and to evaluate alternative plans our town needs an engineer.  None of our citizens has this training.

CP & E is a renowned coastal engineering firm with 73 specialized and educated staffers dealing in coastal engineering from the Gulf coast to New York.  To be sure they have not missed our work the past 5 months as they are busy with other projects including the one in Topsail Beach.

Our Project Engineer Mr. Tom Jarrett has been working with other coastal communities to develop alternative beach erosion solutions and has proposed a terminal groin test.  That should help people realize that things other than dredging are being considered.  Tom, an ex-Engineer with the Corps, lives in Wilmington and is available and willing to help our committee when we call.  We would like to call him and ask him to meet with our committee and interested citizens to offer various plans which we can discuss.  This does a couple of things - it proves to the outside funding sources that we are still in search for a combination that will allow us to protect our beaches.  It proves to State and Federal agencies that we are serious and that they must respond to our pending draft environmental impact statement.

So we are hopeful that our board tonight will once again listen to the concerns of our citizens regarding beach erosion and take action to keep in place a process that will allow work to continue to find a plan or plans that will pass a voter referendum at some future time.  The first step in that journey is to remove the suspension of the C P & E engineering efforts.  They have said it will cost around $400,000 for them to advise the town and respond to the concerns of the environmental agencies.

At the same time our Federal project joint with Surf City will be moving ahead for $350,000 of which $175,000 will be federal dollars recently approved in the 2007 Corps work plan.

Yes, beach nourishment is expensive, but to stop a process that has been going on for 10 years just because the numbers did not suit the first time is not prudent.  Let’s keep working together to find solutions that will be voted on favorably by our voters.

Planning Board – Mike Yawn, Chairman:

The Planning Board held a workshop with Ginger Booker on March 8th. This was very productive and they went over major organizational changes to the zoning ordinance.  The next workshop is April 12^th at 1:00 p.m.

Planning Board held their regular meeting on March 8^th. Topics included:

• Private bridges - had a number of representatives from NC DOT to describe their standard. They were very helpful and will be assisting town staff with added documentation.

• Discussed re-zonings for two properties as recommended by the BOA. Those are on the April 12^th Planning Board agenda.  We do have questions about whether the BOA would like to rezone properties 11 and 19.

• Staff reports

The next Planning Board is April12th @ 6:30 p.m.

Land Use Plan Team met on March 19th.  They are starting the policy definition part of the plan.  They went over policy requirements from CAMA, schedules, and over many of the CAMA areas in detail.

The next LUP meeting is Monday, April 23 @ 5:00 p.m.

Alderman Farley said he heard that anyone who owns a duplex doesn’t own the land underneath them.  Manager Smith said if it was illegally subdivided then they own the property underneath it.  Mr. Yawn noted that Ginger Booker is working on the inconsistencies.

Board of Adjustments – Jerry Convy:

Their last meeting was held in February and a report was given in March. He said there was an error on the Harris case that was given to the Board.  The Town doesn’t have any time limits on the verbiage and we didn’t put in a six month revision, this is state law, and once given a variance they have six months.  This restriction is not necessary to be placed in a variance.  He requested that the Harris case be put back on for the April meeting.  They explained to him that he had six months to get permits.  Manager Smith said he thought that once a variance was granted it went with the land, but Mr. Convy noted that it goes away once six months is up.  You can restrict the six months but not liberalize it by giving him nine months and he can re-apply.  Alderman Farley said he thought Mr. Convy said the intent was that people don’t get variances when they want to turn around and flip the property.  Alderman Tuman didn’t think that the Board of Adjustment had to do anything since it was a six month lifetime variance and if he doesn’t apply for a permit it is null and void and he would start the process again. 

MANAGER’S REPORT:

1.       I have met with NCDOT and ONWASA separately to discuss the issue of replacing the lines on and around New River Inlet Road.   DOT has agreed to resurface New River Inlet Road after ONWASA has replaced the lines and made the necessary patching.  ONWASA has agreed to have DOT and I sit in on the pre-construction meeting to coordinate the resurfacing work to be done.

2.       With the tourist season upon us, parking will again become an issue.  I have had several complaints made to me by both citizens and Board members about parking problems.  Most of the issues arise from overflow parking on the right-of-ways.  This happens under a couple of different circumstances.  The first is renters come with more vehicles than the home can accommodate and then the parking spills into other people’s driveways and the public right-of-way.  The other time parking becomes an issue is when anyone (permanent citizens or renters) has a party or reception of some type.  When someone has a party or wedding, etc. then their guests are faced with parking on the right–of-ways.  These times are for a short(less than 8 hours) period and then they are gone after the event.  I propose that all public right-of-ways be designated as “NO PARKING EXCEPT BY PERMIT”.  This allows a compromise for someone having an event at their home.  The Police Department could issue the permits.  Each permit would have the date and times that it is valid.  The permits could either be a courtesy and free or we could charge a nominal fee per vehicle or a single fee for the event.  The permits would not be given out for someone to park on the right-of-way for several days.  No renters that need the parking for overflow for a weekend or longer would be issued a permit.  If everyone agrees with this way of handling overflow parking, then I would draft an ordinance for the designation of the no parking except by permit areas and have it ready for Board approval at the May Board meeting.

3.       I met with Waste Industries to discuss the garbage issues.  I have a bid for them to switch to Monday and pull back the carts.  This would cost the Town an additional $8281.35/month or an additional $3.25/cart/month.  This would bring the amount charged per cart to $155.00/year.  Waste industries also would request a 5 year extension of the existing contract which is set to run out in 2008.  Waste Industries has also given me a proposal for just changing to Monday and not pulling back the carts.  The increase is approximately $3500/month or $1.38/cart/month and a request for a 5 year extension.  If Holly Ridge agrees to change their day to Tuesday, then there would be no new cost to our existing contract.

4.       I have had several requests from citizens for sea oats.  We can continue as the Town has in the past and purchase the plants and then have the property owners pick up the plants for planting.  Last year the Town went another way.  The Town was to purchase 120,000 plants and have them planted by inmates (free labor).  This did not occur due to the lack of available inmate labor.  The Town paid for and planted 100,000 plants.  Sheila and Lydia did most of the planting.  This has left the dunes with a hit or miss program for stabilization through plants.  About 10% of our frontal dunes are vegetated.  I have a proposal from Coastal Transplants to plant several different species of plants, fertilization, and sand fencing installation to maintain the dunes in a uniform manner.  I feel that with the slow progress on beach nourishment we are left with the dunes being our main defense from storms.  Some are planted and some are not.  Sand fencing has been installed in some areas and not in others.  Also, a lot of the fencing that has been installed was installed wrong per CAMA guidelines.  We just have no Town wide consistency in regards to the dunes.  Since the Board did not approve my plan of mandating each property owner to maintain their dunes, I feel that this proposal would be a reasonable alternative.  The cost for initial work would be about $300,000/year for 3 years.  Then the contract would be lowered to cover maintenance of the dunes.

5.       I have received a request form the interim Chief of Police concerning the drug dog, Robbie.  Since the Town acquired the dog we have under utilized him.  We just do not have the drug activity in Town to keep the dog working.  The dog has become quite expensive to maintain.  There are food costs, vet bills, and trainer costs associated with keeping a dog.  Surf City Chief has requested the use of the dog on several occasions.  Surf City has used the dog many more times than we have actually used the dog.  The Chief would like to donate the dog to Surf City.  In return Surf City would reimburse the Town $2500 for k-9 equipment and would make the dog available to North topsail Beach when needed.  A letter outlining the Chief’s concerns and the proposal is included.  Unless any of you have a problem with this request, I am going to approve it effective next week.

6.       Holland Consulting has sent us a subcontract to continue the work on our Land Use Plan.  This is an extension of the already Board approved contract with Holland.  There is no increase or surprises.  The Mayor and Attorney Kilroy must sign this new contract.  This is just for your information that we are continuing with the Town’s original decision for the Land Use Plan.  Also we have a State grant to help offset the cost of the plan.  Finally, a copy of the plan to date has been sent to each of you individually.  You should be receiving it in the next day or so.  Please let me know if you do not receive one.

7.       I met with Bass Hampton today concerning a major motion picture that will be filmed here in Town at Hampton Colony in June.  Mr. Hampton is the Location Manager for Carolina Pictures.  At this time we are working with him and his staff on the logistics of the filming—parking, night filming, CAMA requirements, and base camp setup.  This will be very positive publicity for the Town.

8.       I have enclosed a copy of my calendar for April.  I will not bore you with the meetings that I attended last month.  Each of you received a copy of last month’s calendar.

Alderman Farley noted that the trash cart used to be $75.00 and we are doubling the cart fee in three years.  Manager Smith said they would have to charge if they wanted the Town to put the cans back.  Alderman Peters said that at the Board Retreat they had agreed to pay to send out a notice to the Holly Ridge citizens if their board agreed to change the day of their pick up and he asked if this was done.  Manager Smith said he had not followed up on that.

In regard to sea oats, Alderman Tuman said that he supported a dune program and felt that when they lose a dune and there is sand there the dune should be planted and fenced.  State legislation supports us and we get county money and we should dedicate it to where it is needed.  Alderman Farley felt if it was private property then they should take care of their own property.  Mayor Knowles said that they should take this up at budget time.

Manager Smith noted that Casey Fillinger is doing an excellent job as interim police chief. 

Alderman Farley asked if there was anything we could do on the height of the shoulders on the road work on New River Inlet Road.  He said they once talked about a scraper to get the water off the road. 

OPEN FORUM:

Mel Hauser, St. Regis, said in looking at the contract with CP&E, this week the Hurricane Center issued its forecast and what doesn’t get mentioned here are the hurricanes and encroaching high tides.  Hurricanes occurred often in the 90’s and they will return.  Mr. Jarrett gave a presentation on how much safer the town would be with more sand.  Other towns faired better, but we could expect roads to be washed away making the remaining homes unreachable.  Replacing New River Inlet Road will result in the destruction of many houses and he asked how the town could condemn so many homes.  If you look at fifty homes valued at $400,000, it is 2/3 of the high end estimate of the beach nourishment plan.  The Town will lose half of its town value and the remaining home owners will incur expenses.  Residents claim that the beach is a problem just for ocean front and they are not seen as part of the community.  They voted the referendum down with signs.  80% of the number isn’t accurate and the Board thought it wasn’t a good plan.

Wayne Pace provided the following statement that was not read in its entirety due to the 3 minute Open Forum rule but it is scanned here as presented to the Town Clerk:

Good evening, Mayor Knowles and Aldermen.  I am Wayne Pace. My wife and I own a condominium at St. Regis Resort. Thank you for convening this forum and allowing non-resident taxpayers like us to give our opinions and inputs on the very important issue of beach nourishment. I also want to thank Mr. Macartney and the members of the Beach Nourishment Committee for their long hours of dedicated work to find the right solution for beach nourishment in North Topsail Beach. I have recently begun to educate myself about beach nourishment and one of the things that I learned very quickly is that Mr. Macartney is an authority and that North Topsail Beach residents and owners are fortunate that he chairs our committee.

My purpose tonight is to urge the Board to approve the $400,000 continuation of funding for the engineering services and support that is provided by CP&E to the Beach Nourishment Committee and the town. There are many reasons to continue the funding, two or three of which I would like to mention to the Board in my comments.

1.   First, you should continue the funding in order to give the town the best possible scientific advice. We all know that beach nourishment is an issue that has and will continue to face North Topsail Beach for as long as any of us can foresee. It is essential that the beach nourishment committee and the board have the best possible scientific advice as you continue to seek solutions. I have recently been able to read carefully many sections of the coastal engineering reports provided to the town by C P&E.  Having myself been a professional scientist for over 30 years, I find that these reports are of high-quality, thorough and unbiased. They provide the committee and the board with the scientific and engineering information necessary to make informed decisions. This kind of unbiased engineering support is essential as the committee continues to examine the numerous alternatives that have been proposed, from sand replenishment through installation of hardened structures.

2.   Secondly, I believe that you should continue the funding so that all the possible solutions can be evaluated scientifically as well as politically. For example, last year's referendum necessarily addressed only one possible apportionment of the cost of beach nourishment between oceanfront and non-oceanfront properties.  I believe that, by careful engineering analysis and surveys, we can find an apportionment that is satisfactory to all residents and taxpayers, including oceanfront, non-oceanfront and owners in both the southern federal region and in the northern CRBA region. By satisfactory, I mean an apportionment that will be approved by the required voter in the affected areas. For example, I know I have had discussions with other owners like myself of alternatives that have not yet even been proposed seriously. In order for these proposals to be proposed formally and their costs determined carefully, the engineering support of CP&E is essential. We must continue to base our analysis on sound engineering principles and to examine all possible approaches before we abandon beach nourishment.  This issue is much too important to the residents and to the non­resident taxpayers of North Topsail Beach to stop at this crucial juncture.

3.   Finally, you should continue the funding to avoid having to restart the process of obtaining the necessary nourishment permits. I am sure that you have been told many times about the importance of continuing the beach nourishment permitting process without interruption, and you are well aware of the costs the town would incur if the process had to be restarted from the beginning. If I have my figures correct, the town has already spent $1.4 million in order to reach the present status in the permitting process. Starting anew could not be less expensive to reach the same point than the costs already incurred. The support of CP&E is essential in order to continue the permitting process without interruption and to therefore relieve the town and its taxpayers of the burden of investing once again in engineering services to achieve a result that we have already achieved at the present.  Thank you very much for your kind attention.  Respectfully, Wayne Pace, Ph.D.

Dr. Chiang, 3634 Island Drive, asked the Board to consider continuing funding.  We have spent 1.4 million dollars already and it would be a waste to put it aside.  He said he has seen the petition and he disagreed with that since the vote was to stop beach nourishment.  He didn’t think it was designed to carry the votes.  It was all negative from the southern district and he doesn’t support that petition. Dr. Chiang noted that he was first against it and then he voted on it since he believes that nourishment is in the best interest for all of NTB.  If we have more damage from hurricanes it will hurt the town.  We will get positive publicity from this movie and Wilmington is taking a lot of credit.  Emerald Isle didn’t pass the first time and we need to do it right and look at the options to make it work. Everyone should unite as neighbors and friends. 

John Barazzo, 184 Seashore Drive said that he was not a resident but he takes pride in what he owns and he has a vegetated dune and sand fence.   He said he read in the retreat minutes that the Board discussed recycling and asked if that could be part of the new contract.   

Robert Swantek, 3773 Island Drive, said that at the last meeting a task force was established by the Mayor and he asked if anything has been done and have they gone to Raleigh to get funds?  Mayor Knowles said they haven’t done anything so far.  Mr. Swantek noted that the state just bought Chimney Rock and approved renovating a house for a 30 million dollar total and we can’t get anyone to give us money for beach nourishment.  He said that we need to get someone to lobby for us in Raleigh.  Mayor Knowles noted that these are your congressmen and you need to contact them.    Mr. Swantek said don’t just give money to give to a company that just takes our money.

CONSENT AGENDA:

The consent agenda consisted of the February 6^th and March 1^st 2007 Board Meeting minutes, Department Head Reports, Benefit Accrual Report and Budget vs. Actual.

Alderman Handy had a correction to the February 6^th minutes on page 10, last paragraph in regard to the septic tank issue. It should state “for those requesting septic, their covenant should state that they apply for a tap and hookup is within 90 days once a tap is available.”

Alderman Handy moved, seconded by Alderman Tuman approval of the Consent Agenda as amended.  The motion passed unanimously.

OLD BUSINESS: 

a.         Beach Nourishment Permitting with CP&E:

Manager Smith noted that at the December meeting the Board voted to temporarily halt spending with CP&E for the Town’s permits for the beach nourishment project.  CP&E was notified of this decision and spending was halted.  At the Board retreat, a consensus of continuing the permitting process was reached.  This was non-binding and had no effect on changing your December vote.  The Board needs to vote to either continue the permitting process or to continue with the temporary halt to spending.  He has already been notified informally that State agencies think that this is a defunct project and are not willing to make their required comments on our preliminary environmental impact statement.

We also have a grant application in at the State level for outside assistance that will be in jeopardy if we do not notify the agencies that we are moving forward.  A PDT meeting has been set for April 25^th and CP&E needs to know if they should go forward.  A break down to date of project spending was reviewed by the Board and approximately $400,000 is needed to obtain permits.

Alderman Farley noted that he looked at the bills today and a recent invoice we had was $350,000 and $165,000 and there are questions on the bills and he felt that it didn’t include monitoring.

Alderman Tuman moved, seconded by Alderman Peters that North Topsail Beach honors its contract to completion with Coastal Planning & Engineering regarding beach nourishment activities.

Alderman Farley didn’t think we should spend this money since people voted this down.  They had every opportunity to support it and no one is arguing for it.  We save $400,000/year in taxes and it costs us 3 million dollars to save that money.  This will not stop a hurricane; it is just for erosion and has a limited impact for people in our town.  One citizen said where he lives it will be another 450 years before it gets back to him.  Citizens of this town got up on Tuesday, November 8^th in large numbers and voted no.  We used a survey of people who said they wanted it.  He said he would rely on those who voted against it and he requested that they don’t approve any more money for this.

Mayor Pro Tem Hardison said he was still puzzled as to why we have just ignored the results of the referendum.  Or at least tried to look or analyze what some problems were about the plan to improve it.  We should have used the time since then to poll people, or call people to find out how things might be improved or changed or be more acceptable.  There is a wide range of why people voted why they did.  People felt that nature is going to be nature and do want it wants to do.  To continue a process that people feel strongly about and objected to and to have a body to totally ignore their response - he didn’t think that was good for nourishment in the future.

Alderman Tuman said that they need to focus on the contract with CP&E and whether or not it is in the Town’s best interest to do nourishment.  This contract is to complete the basic work to determine that beach nourishment is technically feasible should the Town pursue this in the future.  In regard to the Feasibility Study, CP&E is at work to find sand and that it meets quality standards and environmentally issues that need to be overcome.   This is important work and necessary to receive financial assistance from the state and county and in order to preserve the Town’s options for the future, we have to continue this work.  We need the data to establish if it is feasible.  Five years ago they said there wasn’t enough sand around and we went to the Corps and to CP&E and the Corps is doing the same work for the non-CBRA section of Town.  There is skepticism with the county that the Town supports this, but we need to complete the contract or we kill any opportunity to pursue it.  This is a small amount of money to complete this contract. 

Alderman Handy said this will also be giving us answers to federal and state governments.  Federal will want to know if we met environmental issues and we will need the impact study to continue. 

Mayor Pro Tem Hardison said that we are jumping beyond the most important thing we have to work with and that is the people who will support nourishment.  People have to be acknowledged and when they are not, they will let you know that and if they continue to be ignored you may win the battle now, but how can you go to the state and county if you don’t have people behind you.  He said he has heard two or three people say that we don’t need it and don’t want it, but he didn’t see people who say we don’t want it, but look at this again and see if something we can come up with is something that will be acceptable. 

Alderman Farley noted that it was said that Emerald Isle turned this down twice, but they didn’t since it went to the county and it was slaughtered.  The precincts had one or two for it.  In regard to hurricanes, we saw pictures that had a project done, the difference is they had a federal project and had 25% more sand and we won’t be able to stand up to that.  If you told people in the beginning that this would cost 34 million dollars we never would have gone forward.  We should honor the people’s vote since they knew what they were voting on.

Alderman Peters said there was a petition signed opposing the expenditure, but he firmly believes that we as a Town are not willing to retreat and not to give up.  The only legal alternative we have to retreat is beach nourishment and any other alternatives like solid structures have to go through state approval and will take many years, but we are open to be included in a groin study with Ocean Isle.  A petition was carefully written to cease the specific spending until such time as a new plan can address NTB erosion is approved by the citizens of NTB.  The only permissible plan is beach nourishment and any other plan will take lengthy years to achieve.  Much of the issue of approving additional funds is that there is the position of suspicion that we may not do beach nourishment or we may lose the funds.  We as a Board are not ignoring you.  It is a lose - lose situation that we are in right now and if we do approve the additional funds we could lose the $400,000.  If we don’t, we could lose significantly more by having to start over with another type of program.  The only way for a win - win solution is to approve the contract and with every citizen, resident and owner to resolve to work together and determine a plan or plans to address erosion which would ultimately be approved by the voters.  Everyone must decide to work together to this common goal despite our many differences of opinion and geographic location otherwise total retreat is the answer.

Alderman Farley noted that a comment was said before about the viciousness of people who are against this.  When you allude to the petition, one of the problems that some of the proponents of this plan had are they believe it is just a handful of people and just one part of the community that is against it and that is wrong since it is widespread.  People expressed their opinion and he said he applauded them.  Alderman Peters said that he also admires these folks, but we haven’t demonstrated that we can work together.  There were many reasons why people signed this petition, but we have to search out everyone we have as citizens and see what they want.

The motion passed three to two with Alderman Farley and Mayor Pro Tem Hardison voting nay.

NEW BUSINESS:

a.         Ordinance – Digging Holes on Beach Strand:

The following ordinance is proposed to address holes and digging on the beach.  It is modeled after Surf City’s and Topsail Beach’s ordinances.

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10 – ARTICLE 11. BEACHES – DIVISION 1. GENERALLY

New Section 10-22 – Digging of holes on beach strand

Add the following language:

Sec. 10-22.  Digging of holes on beach strand.

To help prevent personal injury and damage to property, it shall be unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation within the corporate limits of the Town of North Topsail Beach to dig into the sand on any part of the beach strand greater than twelve (12) inches deep, without having a responsible person attending the area to prevent any person or persons from walking into any existing hole and risking personal injury, and to allow public safety vehicles the ability to respond to emergencies without risk of damage to equipment or personal property.  Prior to leaving the area, and 30 minutes prior to sunset, any hole greater than twelve (12) inches deep shall be filled to level with the surrounding area, leaving the area in the same general condition in which it was found.

Persons violating this ordinance shall be cited and punished pursuant to the provisions of N.C.G.S. 14-4.

This Ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.

Adopted this 5^th day of April 2007.

Mayor Knowles asked that the language, “and 30 minutes prior to sunset” be added after “Prior to leaving the area”.

Alderman Handy moved, seconded by Alderman Tuman approval of “An Ordinance Amending Chapter 10 – Article ii. Beaches – Division 1. Generally – Digging of holes on beach strand.

Alderman Farley requested clarification from Attorney Kilroy why we didn’t need a public hearing and Attorney Kilroy noted that it is an ordinance for public safety and health.  Manager Smith said you can change an ordinance anytime in NC if it is not on zoning.  Alderman Farley noted that we did discuss this twice.

The motion passed unanimously.

b.         Resolution and Agreement between County and NTB for Advalorem Distribution of Local Sales Tax:

The Board reviewed the Resolution in support of the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for the Division of Sales Tax and the actual Agreement between the County and the Municipalities.

RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR THE DIVISION OF SALES TAX BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF ONSLOW

WHEREAS, the Town of North Topsail Beach recognizes that it would be in the County’s best financial interest to change the method by which the local sales taxes are distributed to municipalities within the County from a per capita to an ad valorem basis; and

WHEREAS, the ad Valorem basis would also benefit the Town of North Topsail Beach; and

WHEREAS, after last year’s reassessment, the County is collecting $5.5 million more from the Town of North Topsail Beach; and

WHEREAS, The Town of North Topsail Beach will be encountering astronomical expenses in dealing with beach erosion; and

WHEREAS, the County would gain money for their school systems by distributing local sales taxes on an ad Valorem basis, wherein presently the County loses money by using the per capita basis; and

WHEREAS, the Town of North Topsail Beach does not have the same annexation authority that other municipalities in the County have, thus allowing them to expand their revenues through annexation.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town of North Topsail Beach does hereby acknowledge that the ad Valorem basis for distributing the local sales tax would benefit both the County and the Town and that the Board of Aldermen unanimously support the “Interlocal Cooperation Agreement “ for the Division of Sales Tax. 

Adopted this 5^th day of April 2007.

Manager Smith said that this is a five year agreement and when looking at the budgets in general, the phase-in doesn’t hurt any town or city.  If the county thinks that per capita is better for them in the future then that will be phased in. 

Alderman Handy stated that Jacksonville took in Camp Lejeune and they have no expense there.  Mayor Knowles noted that 1990 was when they made the change and that was when we incorporated. 

Alderman Tuman moved to approve the “Agreement” and also approve the resolution but to change the title by deleting the other towns in the county.  Alderman Handy made the second.  The motion passed unanimously. 

Mayor Knowles noted that a couple of years ago they requested that the county discuss this with us and no citizens attended the county meeting.  Alderman Handy said when a proposal in the county was to change zoning of a piece of property near North Shore Country Club they had many attend the meeting and the proposal was turned down.  We need to have a strong voice at the county meeting.

Mayor Knowles agreed and said that this is not a done deal and if you know a commissioner please call him.   Alderman Tuman said that the impact is great for this town.  When implemented we will go from receiving $200,000 to almost 1.3 million dollars and it is so significant that that it has the City of Jacksonville upset and they are running a commercial on the government station against it and they talk about NTB and how everyone are millionaires here.    The Onslow County meeting is on April 16^th at 7:00 p.m. when the advalorem tax distribution is on the agenda and it would be a big impact if our citizens attend. 

c.         Budget Amendment #2

Manager Smith noted that we are doing well with the budget and we may have one other before the end of the year to do any cleanup so we don’t get caught by the auditor like we did last year.  Alderman Farley said he was not comfortable that the manager said that we would go over budget and then come up with an amendment to make the auditor happy since we shouldn’t be going over the budget.  Alderman Farley said we shouldn’t be overspending what the Board has approved and saying we need it anyway and we should work within the budget.  Manager Smith said a perfect example was part time salaries for firemen, what is he supposed to say, tell them they can’t go to a fire until he gets more money in the budget?  There is also maintenance and repair at the fire station and we have to fix the roof. 

Alderman Farley said that he could understand a roof leak, but the idea that we will clean up after overspending is bad policy.  Alderman Tuman noted that if you are asking for a budget amendment there should be language up front that explains what it is you are requesting and why you are doing it and a rationale for it.  You shouldn’t say you will spend as you do and you reconcile the numbers and we are either ahead or we are short and need an amendment – that sounds like bad management.  Manager Smith reviewed the general fund revenues and expenditures and explanations were given for various line items.

Alderman Farley questioned beach nourishment and asked if there was a mistake in the budgeted amount?  He said we are increasing this fund $45,000 on one item and $3,000 on another one and he had posting questions on some items.  Manager Smith said that was money that was spent on the hardbottom study which was $51,000.   The TISPC minutes of April 27, 2006 stated that we agreed that the district would proceed with Surf City and NTB if NTB voted to fund the CP&E study and NTB would move forward with their own near shore hardbottom survey and submit their costs for an in-kind work credit with the Corps.  Since that was on the southern end for both projects that information could be used for any project.  He said he put it into the federal southern end and it could go into either place.  Alderman Farley said the issue is that money came out of the Corps line item which is not in the budget for CP&E on their contract and they posted it against one of their line items.  Manager Smith said that on our books we can show it on either one.  Alderman Farley noted that the one he suggested was where we put the expenditures of all those items.  Manager Smith noted that the contract had an increase, but that was before he got here and we had to pay for it.  Alderman Farley noted that the issue is that this fund continues to rise and he has no confidence when we are adding $45,000 and possibly another $50,000.