session, you did realize this was a rhetorical question. >> The only answer is no. Keep looking over your house first. I'm going to come over to your house. I think you should also All right. Good evening everyone. I'd like to welcome you to the May the fourth city council work session. And just a reminder to silence your devices. And first on our agenda this evening, we recognize emergency management director Kevin Turner. >> Good evening, mayor. Good evening, council. So, uh, just want to spend a few minutes with you this evening and and thank you for allowing some time for us to present a project that we just want to bring some awareness to you about. Um so the emergency management program uh for the cities our overall vision is is a better prepared city and a more resilient city and certainly that extends beyond the walls of our facilities and and past the operations that that we conduct as a government to our to our residents and to our communities. And so that's kind of the birthplace of this project. Um I've been fortunate enough to have Audrey not. she's with me tonight uh to kind of champion this and bring this home. And we've got some of our community partners that have made this successful, too. So, we wanted to start looking at how we could spread that preparedness culture and and educate our citizens and our residents. We know that residents that are better prepared, more resilient, take some burden off of us uh when when disasters come, when we have to respond. And one of the ways we looked at doing that was to create this emergency preparedness kit. I don't know step on Audrey's toes too much. Um, but I'll let her explain to you, but we really wanted to look at where that would have value and where it would have benefit and what we could do with that. so partnered with United Way uh with a uh reimburseable grant along with some um uh manh hours and some input, feedback and guidance and and data to really help us pull all this together and and start to push that culture preparedness out out into our community. So, I'm going to let Audrey take it and go through a little bit of how we we landed on what went in the kids, where the data we came came from for our communities and things like that. So, >> well, good evening everybody. My name is Audi N and I've been an intern for the city's energy management office since June of last year. So coming up on the year, I'm also a student at Elon University and I'm graduating this semester actually which is very exciting. >> Congratulations. Thank you. Um so yeah, the mission of today's presentation is just to um bring awareness to this project that I talked about this past year under the guidance of Kevin Tennon and United Way. Okay. So we'll be giving a brief history of the project, who actually funded it, who in the community were targeting, and then the events that occurred associated with this event. So this project all beca all happened um it occurred over the summer when Kevin tked me to come up with an inclusive outreach initiative for the city um specifically to um address and increase resources for community members with identity, location, and cost barriers. Um, this project really came to fruition when I found the survey from Chadman University. It found that 86% of Americans believe that an emergency kit would improve the chances of surviving a disaster. However, 72% of Americans have made no absolute effort effort to put together a kit. And the number one reason given by these Americans for not owning a kit is because they expect first responders to come to their aid, which as we know this is an very unrealistic belief in the wake of a major disaster because dementia services all overwhelmed in the first 72 hours. Okay, so this is our project's mission to equip the city's most underresourced and vulnerable residents to survive and recover more efficiently during and after disaster through the production and distribution of disaster preparedness kits. So we were very fortunate to be able to partner with United Way faithfully funded this project. um for the this fiscal year they gave us a 7500 reimburseable grant. So we're very thankful of them. Um and then I worked very closely with the city's GIS department to actually find our talk and neighborhood. So the first metric that we used was the CDC's environmental justice index. So this index ranges from zero which is the least vulnerable to one which is the most vulnerable. Um we found that with there were three census tracks in the highest category of 0.9 to1. Two of those were in Burlington with 4,41 total residences and then those one in. And then to get a better idea of disadvantages disadvantaged neighborhoods in these broader censor tracks. We looked at data from the 2023 American Community Survey. Uh specifically we looked at the poverty rate and then the per capita income. So specifically for the poverty rate data for this was classified um into 10% to 50% categories and we found there were nine census block groups that were in the highest categories with poverty rates between 40 and 50%. Okay. And lastly we looked at the per capita income. So this data was mapped and categorized in 5,000 ranges all the way up to 30,000. um we found that there were five block groups in that lowest category of per capita income ranging from 9500 to 15,000. So this is how we um were able to locate Alto community. There was only one block group that was in the highest category for the EGI index, highest category of poverty rate and then lowest category of per capita income. And this was census block group one track 202. So this is in the area Bington bounded by North Mean Street, Queen Anne Street, the railroad and South Graham Hopeedale also containing Fair. So this falls in the census track with the highest EGI of 0.95 um a poverty of 43% and then a per capita income of 12,655. So there are 427 residences in this block. Unfortunately, we were not able to produce and distribute 427 emergency kits, but we had the funding to produce and distribute 150. And we're hopeful that this can become an annual project. So, we had two production events. The first one with the Burlington Youth Council, so around 20 kids were able to produce 72 kits in like 20 minutes. So, I was very impressed. And then we also partnered with some Elon University students um through the Canobyl Center for Civic Life and they were able to build the rest. So our final distribution event is is not this Saturday but the next on the 16th at the Alman's Dream Center. We're very fortunate that they agreed to partner with us because they're near our target location and we have a lot of trust with community members with which is important for a project like this. So we hope you can all attend and yeah do you have any questions? What type of things did y'all include? >> Yes. So, we have a solar powered weather radio, an emergency blanket, a can open and a festicated, and then also someformational flies. And that's all in a tote bag. >> Thanks. Thank you. >> Other questions? >> Great work. Thank you. >> Thank you. So, next on our agenda, we'll recognize Assistant Water Resources Director Amy Barber. And we're going to continue our conversation about storm water. Okay. So, tonight uh we are going to discuss the next steps for the proposed storm fee evaluation as well as the credit policy. On the agenda, we're going to step back just a little bit and give a background of why we're doing this. Um I know because we've been here so many times, it's may have gotten muddled for some people. So, we're going to take a step back, give a background, um the fee structure evaluation results, um as well as the prop proposed fee structures, uh both capped and uncapped for as well as the projected revenue scenarios and then staff recommendations so that we can move forward. So, just some background. Um, currently our storm water fee is a flat rate of $7 and that is for both residential and non-significantly residential properties in the city of Burlington. Um, what's really driving this uh proposal and evaluation is um a couple things. So, there's um inequities with the storm water throughout Burlington. Residents really bear a lot of the burden of flooding and and aging infrastructure. um yet the impervious area in the city it the majority of the impervious area comes from non-s single family residential property. Um so that's one driver. Other drivers include um uh potential um regulations that are coming down the pipeline for state storm water requirements um as well. And I'm not feeling wrong but anyway, sorry. Um, another another driver for this is a growing list of critical storm water infrastructure projects. So, as our infrastructure ages, um, we're seeing a decline in in their function um, and north flooding. Some more background um just what we've done, the effort that we put forth in early 2019, staff came to council and um gave permission to move forward with the fee evaluation and and come back with um alternatives that we can propose um to create a more equitable solution for storm water. Um and then most recently in April of 2026, we came back with a credit policy because we did realize, you know, this could be a hard hit for some. So, um we did want to create a credit policy that allows um non- single family residential properties to implement storm water control measures uh on their property to get up to 40% of a discount on the fee. So the results of the evaluation um we have seen a major revenue gap under the current fee structure. Um so that gap lies with the aging infrastructure um and the revenue that we have. Um it also lies with the amount of permit compliance that we can implement. Um inequitable cost distribution. So the current funding model places this uneven district financial burden on the residents. Um fiscal impact of the change um shifting to a new er eru based structure um is projected to generate additional 75,000 to 100,000 in the first year and that's if we adopt the the first proposed fee structure um with $7 as the base rate and phasing it in for five years. Um long-term capacity. New funds are designated for critical asset inventory, wershed planning and personnel needs to meet the state and federal water requirements. Continued um commercial average. So an analysis found that the average commercial property in Burlington is 17 erus. Um the a residential average is um the average s area of impervious the average impervious area on a single family residential lot is 2950 square ft and that was that's the base we're using for that eru. So one eru equals 2950 ft of imperous area proposed fee structure. So, um, based on local mapping data, the average amount of impervious surface is 2,950 ft equal to 1 eru. Um, and impervious surface, what does that include? It includes rooftops, driveways, uh, parking lots, um, gravel drives as well, um, which a lot of people aren't aware of, but gravel is considered impervious. Um patios are another example of any really any surface that doesn't allow the rain water to soak into the ground is considered purchase. Um impact on residential properties. If the b rate is if the base rate is determined to stay at $7, that's not going to change for residents. Um for the non- single family residential properties, this evaluation and proposal is just impacting the non single family residential properties. And to get how many er that a property has, you're going to take the square footage of the imperous area and divide that by the 2,950. And that gives you how many er is on a property. So, we are proposing a 5-year phase in um at 20% increments and um we do have the credit framework in well, we have proposed the credit framework um to begin to allow non- single family residential properties to implement storm water control measures. So, a revenue estimate the the fun stuff the res revenue estimate cap versus no cap. Um, so the 5-year phase in at $7, um, which is $7 for both the cap and no cap. There's a difference in year five of approximately $500,000 by the time we reach year five. Um, but we do have a pretty steady growth throughout um, that five years. Um on this slide on this graph you can see the green is what we're currently at. Um so it's showing six years but uh that green is what we're currently at in 2026 at seven. Um when we looked at doing the stairst step approach. So $5 for years one and two, $6 for years three and four, and then finally $7 for year five. um we do show a dip in the revenue the first year. Um and actually if we have no cap or if we have a cap on the erus, there's also a dip in year two. But if we don't have a cap, we just have that dip in year one in revenue. Um and that was approximately $300,000 dip. And this table just gives you some more detail on the revenue that would be generated by that stairstep approach. Um so as you can see um there's a pretty good it's pretty aggressive of a growth from if you have a no cap um it's it's an aggressive an aggressive approach. Um and then it's it's a lot more steady with with the no cap single family residential. Um and that's basically um that's assuming that we would change the um single family residential base rate. If we do decide to change that base rate at the end of that 5 years, we'd be projected to have a total revenue of 4.7 million. So this is just showing you the growth um in revenue um from the monthly fee options. So, this is showing you capped versus no capped at $7 a month. Capp versus no capped at $6 a month. Capp at no cap. Capp in no cap for $5 a month. Um, you can see that dip at the $5 a month that we have. Um, actually also at the $6 between um this current year and 2027. Um, so that's something to keep in mind. But there is beyond that a a nice steady growth. staff recommendations is for council to determine if we do want a cap or no cap. Um determine base rate, that base rate, do we want to have a solid base rate for all five years? Do we want to do a stairst step approach? Um, and regarding that, um, after really looking at the stairstep approach, some pros that I see of that is less of a of a shock to non-s single frame residential properties at the beginning. But then if you look at year five, there could potentially be more shock because then they're reached the $7 a month base rate, but they're also now paying the 100% of the ERU rate. So that's what I can see. I could see that initial sticker shock being lessened as a pro, but then that year five would would hit hard. Um, but that five-year phase in also gives time to implement um storm water control measures or best management practices as well. Um, so I I I think with determining the base rate, that's, you know, we need to talk about do we want to do that stairst step approach or do we just want to keep that that base rate flat? Um, determine a potential adoptive adoption and effective timeline and then set a public hearing date once we've determined that. Those are our recommendations and if you have any questions, we are open to answer. >> Thank you. Um, so I'm going to look to council. We have a Can you go back one slide? So that way we're all seeing the cap. Um, determine the cap versus the no cap. And I know we're not we don't make decisions here, but I would just love to kind of check in and see are do you know where you stand on the cap versus no cap? Do you have enough information to decide whether or not to move forward with the cap or no cap? Yes. >> Okay. >> Base rate and everything else too. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. I like that. Um so do okay. We don't make decisions here but >> but we can put together what would be set of public. Yes. of these criteria >> and just I don't know if we clarified that the cap was at 100 erus and then it only affected 50 some properties. >> Right. So what what is our recommendation to our storm water team on this? >> I recommend the nail cap. >> Okay. >> For sure. >> Yes. >> Um no cap. >> I'm I'm with you on that. Okay. So, it looks like it looks like we're in agreement on that one. Okay. Yay. We can take the top. >> I'm checking. Okay. So, let's talk about the base rate. Um, this this month we saw a $5 beginning, $6 $5 for two years, $6 for two years, $7. And just kind of wondering where where you are on that one. Initially, I was thinking the $5 could be less of a sticker shock. >> I do agree with Amy saying that it also puts the burden on your on the year five when you get that full $7 shop. Um, so that is something to consider. After thinking about it and reading the materials and doing the figures on it, I think that the $6 I'm leaning I'm in the middle of thinking of $6 start at $6 if we do the tier. But at least you have a better idea of what the five the next uh five years will look like and then you only have that going to $7 versus confusing the five, the six, the seven. That can be very confusing. Um, so you want to know what your monthly bills are going to be and you want to know what that looks like over a long period of time. And I just feel like the $6 brings in the revenue to get the work done in the city and then it also um gives is transparent um to our residents. >> I won't repeat that. I'm I'm >> with the six six cap >> or six beginning. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And so if we did six as a beginning point, would that be six for four years and then seven in the fifth year? >> I mean, that's something that we can we can look at. Yeah. Um, so you could just not, you know, skip that $5, do six for four years, and then go up ultimately to the seven or stay at six. >> Although we're also doing the percentage increase. Correct. >> The percentage increase doesn't apply to single family, right? They stay right there. >> Correct. Yeah, they'll stay flat. >> Yes. And then if we change the base rate to six, then all the residential would actually get a decrease $65. >> Oh, okay. We do better. >> Amy, you mentioned that at least on this with the $5, I guess a little less on year one of the phases, we actually see $300,000 less. How does that impact what we've talked about as far all the different projects that you all know? There areas within the storm water budget where I think we could push some city projects to the next year. So I think we would be able to mitigate that impact on us. Um for example, we have a line item that is for storm water control measure implementation and a lot of times those projects take end up taking longer than just one fiscal year. Um so it's you know something that we are planning on implementing an SDM this year for example so we can skip it the next year so so we can I think work with that >> and could you go forward to the other set of charts so if we talk about just starting a $6 rate then that would mean that year one we collect $6 no cap would be fairly close to the 2 million so it would actually be a almost negligible difference in the revenue that we collect allowing you to kind of move as many projects forward as possible. >> Less of a dip, >> less of a dip on the first year. Um, and then staying on that $6 like you have talked about create that predictable slide rather than that hockey stick event. >> You could also do six for two years, 650 for two years and stuff. >> I like that idea. Mhm. >> You could also do 625, 650, 675, >> right? >> See, there's nothing to those rates now in this decision. It's something that could be evaluated annually with our fee schedule anyway. >> Start with six. >> Start with six. We know we're going to get this revenue increase anyway. And then should unforeseen circumstances happen should we have more projects we just like any other people we could evaluate at that time every monetary change you make compounds with the 20% addition right so just think about a simplistic formula >> right >> for 5 years 100% >> and then reassess >> right if there's some critical name shorter term we could go in and we could artificially change it but unless we know what that need is. I would argue for simplicity just six six straight across the board we get to 100%. Poke your head up and look at the math. >> Okay. >> And we would still land somewhere just north of 400 $4 million revenue at the end of year five. >> It's a lot of projects. >> Yeah. Significant increase in our capacity project >> which is our goal. So >> and needed projects, right? And the more equitable solution I like reducing that base rate. So talked a lot about what is the burden that our single family homeowners who are already struggling to make ends meet >> have been asked to bear more than their fair share so far. So what I'm hearing is $6 for five years with the 20 40 60 80 and then year six we we evaluate and determine where to go. >> Okay with that everybody good with that? >> Yay. We're making progress. >> Very good. Um so next on this list is determine potential adoption and effective timeline. Um first thing we have to do is have a public hearing. Correct. >> Uh you want to um I would recommend getting a timeline. Yeah. That way we have more information to >> Yeah. Um and and I I can say administratively we cannot implement it July one for fiscal year. Um, so I would say the earliest to start implementation would be January one. >> Okay. >> January one. Makes sense. >> You you still want to have the public hearing ASAP, right? >> Correct. >> And then the effectively, you know, January 2027. >> Yeah. >> Sounds good to me. >> What would be the latest effect? No, we've got a budget hearings coming up. Those are always public hearings. Um, and a lot to digest. Would we be able to schedule this to not coincide the public hearing still have time to prepare? >> Yep. And that that was going to be my next question actually. >> I think the anticipated hearing date is the June 16th. >> June 16th >> which is that would be after Okay. Right. Thank you for going back and, you know, giving us so many more options and preparing. I know this has not been the easiest process, but I I do believe it's the right thing to do and we have um prior to council we have, you know, discussed this and I think that we have now found a solution to move forward. So, thank you for your work in providing those. >> Thank you all for your support >> and and also the consideration. I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. I was just going to say we thank you for your attention and consideration on this matter as well. >> I really appreciate the work that you've done on the credit >> part too that um not only does that reduce somebody's bill, but it helps our city in the long run. And I think that's I just I really love that idea. So, thank you. >> And that was new, right? Cuz before we didn't we wasn't looking at the um increase with the with the um rebates. that we were correct and we're not. So that is something that new that's another step forward of now we've added that to um the consumers and business owners so you know at least receive some incentive so I think adding that incentive reducing then removing the cap we doing the right thing >> I think a incentive based program is what the city one last bit of appreciation just being cognizant of the fact that home viewers are watching and they maybe weren't here prior months. So the the system of always giving us that snapshot of background for context and then the decision to be made tonight and then we roll forward. So I think sequentially that would benefit us moving forward to have that backdrop >> and then we're good to go. That way everybody's up to speed that's watching or listening or present today. >> So thank you and thank you for the dialogue we've had with folks who reached out with concerns. I know we'll continue to have questions leading the public. Appreciate the work that you've done to kind of express how this does move us forward and how it treats um both the funding and the the fee equitably uh and allows us to achieve the goals we want to. Thank you. >> Quick question. the credit policy would be as proposed >> and that can can I I just say that um the first goround the draft that it is right now after having some discussion with Bob and Michael and like there's some things that I think can be added and clarified in that. So I would hate to say like let's finalize it right now I can tweak it and then give you the draft back. Yeah, I think we have a framework, but I think we need to work out something. Okay, >> we have a concept of a plan, >> but we'll at least have that stream for folks as they see that. >> Thank you for your work and council, thank you for working on this as well. So, next on our agenda, um I recognize city manager Bob Patterson for our proposed budget presentation. Thank you, Mayor Council. Um, we have our uh preliminary budget to uh discuss tonight. Um, I'd like to start by thanking our our budget team. Um, Peggy, Bruce, Julianne, Rachel, put a lot of work in and all our department heads. um uh started with a uh a keen eye on on troubles or challenges rather that uh we would be facing this year and so I'd like to thank them for their uh cooperation. Also um our theme this year um is uh covering the bond debt service and uh inflationary increases primarily. Um when we look at revenues um we we will be proposing a property tax increase. subject point to that in a couple couple slides later. Um we're we do um looking at our current tax base um we're seeing predicting about a 3% growth in in uh in our tax base based on new developments um and updates to existing city uh properties in the city. Um be proposing a dollar a month increase in the solid waste fees. Um and also separating the sanitation fund from the general fund and and creating the enterprise fund which we had talked about last year. Um looking at sales tax um projecting a 3% growth in sales tax. Of course during the co years we saw double digits growth but that that's kind of moderated now. But um we're still seeing some some decent delta growth and uh projecting a requesting a 5% rate increase on the expense side. Um of course we have the bond debt serve service and inflationary increase search which is the same thing. um the general obligation bonds that the uh the citizens passed for the uh street resurfacing, streetscape, recreation bonds, um the bonds that have been issued for the resurfacing of sidewalk, the Paramount, and the uh Aquatic Center projects. Um we have about $3.4 million this year in debt service, the payment of interest on those um bonds. Um, we're also looking um at a proposing a 3% cost of living increase for for all of our employees to help help retain and uh continue to do the good work that they do. Um, and personnel is about 70% of the general fund budget. Um, we see increases in contracts and services and also uh chemical increases. Um and on the capital uh project side um we have the CAD of RMS project which is a multi- agency um project to upgrade the um computer aated dispatch and records management systems that enforcement and the fire department. um also um increasing our taping budget and other large expenses. Just looking uh general economy for North Carolina. Um looking at the unemployment rate, it's been fairly consistent. Um 3 and a half to 4% for the last several years, which which means it's a competitive job environment. Um and we have trouble filling some of our jobs. And then economically um the last several years we've been seeing about a 3% or slightly under 3% cost of living increase. These numbers are through February. So we're not seeing that impact of of the higher gas prices of diesel fuel and ancillary year. We're still over effects of of those increases yet. So that that number is going to go up by. Um so looking at our revenues again um for property tax we're projecting um $50.8 million in in property taxes. Um again our tax base growth of about 3%. Um our tax collection rate um at 98% that's what we budget that we will collect that 98% of the the assessed properties taxes for the year. And that $50.8 $.8 million is based on a 7 cent tax increase. And I'll get a little more detail on that in a moment. Um the sales tax, again, a 3% growth over the prior budget, which uh amounts to a total of about $23 million and then removing the sanitation fees from the general fund budget. On the spending side, um we're proposing the 3% cost of living raise for uh core employees. Um, and that includes that's um about $2 million and that includes one 1.1 million of that is public safety. Um, and then the public safety payroll is increasing 2 million for uh developmental increases overtime. Um, we're proposing to requesting to add four telecommunicator positions. Um, and then there's a a mandatory retirement increase in the retirement system. Um, health and dental insurance is projected to go up almost $500,000. Um, and vacant positions filled. Uh, previous budget strategies were if we had vacant positions um projected to carry into the next budget year, they were only funded at 3/4 or 75%. um which work to balance the budget, but now that we're nearly fully staffed, that creates um extra strain on the budget and then it also starts puts us in a hole um of about a half a million dollar. So, we're trying to right size that number. Um operations wise, um again, removing the sanitation uh fee expenses um from the general fund is a decrease of 5.3 million. um maintenance and service contracts, 489,000. A big chunk of that are annual increases for software um products that we use across the the city. Um we also have an increase in 400 of $445,000 proposed for ADA improvements. Um we have um about nine years left to implement um our ADA plan across the city at city facilities where there's public access and also in the sidewalks and whatnot. Um so this is a step towards um towards those uh improvements. Um equipment not capitalized increases almost 400,000. And a big chunk of that is uh our computers and PCs which we're also seeing an increase in cost of those as as the demand for chips and processors um has increased and professional services an increase of about 251,000 primarily. A big chunk of that is to update the comprehensive plan for planning department which the last one was 2015 I believe. Um on the capital outlay side um then we have the 3.5 u 3.4 million for the general obligation bond debt. Um and our un unfinanced capital expenditures we increase $1.3 million. Um graphically the pie chart on the left are the revenues. You can see the yellow uh property tax, sales tax, and permanence and fees make up um nearly uh 83% of our uh revenue um and some other share tax cut. address and spending on the uh the right side in the blue. Police, fire, recreation, public works, and debt service make up 74%. And um all the rest in the orange, it's about 26% of our spending. And this is another way to depict that. All the the orange are the uh smaller but still very important departments in our in our city. And then that big chunk of um looking at the capital request um for the general fund we had um request from all the the city departments of a little over $21 million. Um, of that we were able to approve a little over 6 and a half um total um through a combination of financed uh capital and that's our rolling stock vehicles um back home equipment things of that nature. Um and total unfinanced about 3.3 million and that's those are projects or equipment that are directly purchased through the through the budget process. um 414 a little over 14 million not approved. Um of those projects that were approved on the finance side, um 1.5 million for fire truck, um 800,000 for police vehicles, um a leaf truck and a dump truck in and public works. And then unfinanced, we're increasing the uh resurfacing sidewalks. um we should be at 2 million um a year. So, we'll be moving over the next couple of budget years hopefully to that 2 million a year while we still have the bond money to to make up the the u the balance. Um the CAD RMS uh project $868,000 that's 74% funded. um that is a multi-year project and that um depends on milestones on when we have to spend that money. And we're also uh proposing to do some exterior work on main memorial library to seal the windows or seal the brick and replace windows. That's about 265,000. And we have an annual allocation towards the airport for their their projects of 263,000. Um, looking at personnel, um, we, uh, had some positions that were requested that we were unable to fund. Um, animal services requested to convert some part part-time positions to a full-time business assistant, um, a safety support specialist, two IT positions. Um, so we were not able to fund those. Um but we were um did include four telecommunicators in our request. Um communications staff has has done an outstanding job. Um but they are heavily worked and um this would add another person per shift for for coverage. Um, also a Paramount technical director to coincide with our our upgraded opening of the Paramount and half a year of the Paramount event center manager. Um, we funded that position perhaps this year. So that's those are >> Bob. Is there an offset in overtime expenditures to the four TC's? >> Yes, there would be. Yes sir. It's uh so far this year it's about 175,000 that we spent on TC over time. So we expect that to pretty much go away. >> So it's almost self tremendous savings for taxpayer. >> Perfect. Um and then also we're we're uh working with the um our animal services agreement with with the other uh municipalities in the country in the in the county and um if if Brandham and Elvon elect to um ask us to do their animal enforcement then that would be um add another employee but it would be reimbured 80% Going back on that slide, just confirming that even though we haven't funded some of the promotions on the left, that doesn't jeopardize or any of our services really. >> No, we're able to um maintain all of our operations. So, I had mentioned a 7 cent tax increase. Um on the right it um it states that one cent for one penny is worth generates about $917,000 in revenue. Um we looked at the average residential values in Burlington. Um and that is about 247,000 per property or the median is 212 and the average is in the middle or is the average of all properties. The median is in the middle. So um roughly half of all properties that are above that, half are below. Um and of that 7 cents, 4 cents goes directly for that debt service and 3 cents pays for um operations. Um it's the equivalent of the the public safety increases. So on the left we broke down um so just so we had round numbers that are close to those average and median. So for a $200,000 property, a $250,000 property is $300,000 property. So um I'll use the $250,000 as an example. Currently at our 4836 per 100 tax rate, that property pays about $1,29 annually in property tax, Burlington property tax. U 1 cent generates about $25. Um, so 7 cent um would be an additional $175 for that property. Um, so while 7 cents sounds like a lot, sounds like a big percentage increase, um, when it's spread out over the annual cost, it for any one homeowner, it's generally would not be a huge burden. Bob, if you don't mind, just quick question. Can you break down that seven cents again just so for folks who are watching understand where you said 4% was once was the debt service >> four cents pay would would offset the general obligation bond debt service or the interest on the bond >> which was approved by the voters >> required to pay because we've issued the bonds that were voted on by the voters the other three three cents covers the increase in operational costs um and just not necessarily public safety expenses, but that number is about equal. >> Thank you. >> So, looking at the water resources fund, um revenues projected to $39.7 million. Um our primarily our our revenue sources are the water rents, the sewer rents or the water bills and sewer bills are customer Um and Green City of Greensboro is our largest uh single customer and they generate about 2 and 12 million revenue. Um on the spending um shared resources are are operations that that touch both water and sewer operations. Um that's about 14.5 million. Um the water plants are about $12.1 million, sewer plants about 10.6 6. And on the water resources side, we have about 1.7 million in debt service and we pay a small portion towards the lake and marina operations that were that are run by the recreation and parks department. So, what does a 5% rate increase and a dollar a month sanitation look like on a typical utility bill for a for a small one to two person household? um that that will typically use about 2500 gallons of water a month. So um in the first column there's the current 2026 uh figure. Um so between water, sewer, storm water, solid waste from recycling, that monthly bill is about $59.90 or about $2 a day. Um, with the proposed 5% increase in water and sewer and the dollar a month for for sanitation, um, that goes to 6330 per uh, per month or about $211 or about 11 a day increase. How do we compare to other utilities across the state? The school of government has a dashboard that um you can um compare to other utilities in North Carolina and plug in any any value of use. So for this example is 5,000 gallons a month which is more your typical uh residential home. Um so after that the proposed increase our bill would be 588 5847 um which comparing to other utilities across the state is on the very low end um and comparing the um median household income or median affordability annual bills as as a percent of the household income um is is on the very low side. So, we're still very affordable compared to other utilities. This is a breakdown generally by departments and services um our building and administrative services at 6.4 4 million also includes two and a half three and a half million uh reimbursement to the general fund for uh shared purposes such as uh human resources, legal finance things that we would have to duplicate if we were a standalone. Um and then uh each of our operating divisions um water plants and wastewater plants are the the largest um and then all of our other customer service and water and sewer line maintenance lab and residual management. So and then this will be our first budget with the solid waste enterprise fund. That's one of our side lovers, one armed bandits we call them, and pick up our trash. Um, and so last year's budget, we we moved to support the self u funding enterprise fund. We increased it a dollar a month um as of January 126 and we're proposing one more dollar um with the the budget effective July one. Um and uh capital for solid waste includes a new side loader, new rear loader and pick up about $85,000 capital and 6.5 million balance budget revenue. our storm water fund um at about 2.9 million. Um this is based on that $7 a month for residential and no change to the the fee structure. um to comply with our permits and reduce pollutants. Um and we have some projects planned. V Virginia Avenue Culver replacement cost share drainage improvements, some culvert replacements and other stream restoration. Now, that $7 going back to I could be confused between the water services, but with the storm water, we mentioned that that $7 could be reduced to six. But right now, we're still in the budget at the seven because it's starting next year 2027, but possibly we're looking at that seven being reduced to six. Am I correct? >> You are correct. But what I would um say staff will try to do is hearing that your recommendation is to go forward with a $6 amount on January effective January 1 that will those numbers may actually be a little bit lower because we'll go back and reduce the revenues. >> I understood that >> we'll try to get a closer projection that will be a little bit lower. >> Okay. So make sure >> yes when we present this at the June budget meeting we will project what the um revenues and expenses will be basically with half a year at $7 a month for everybody and then beginning July one with the >> January January. >> Thank you. um our public transportation fund um 4.5 million um 62% or 2.8 million comes from federal funds. Um we have other uh other revenue sources including about 15% of that from from our general fund. Um and then on the spending side about 3.6 six for its operation and a little over.9 million for the capital replacement. And then other funds that are that are we have um include the MOA Macintosh Marina uh capital reserves for water and sewer um municipal service district and our senior teaching programs. We put those all together um between the general fund, the enterprise funds, and those other funds, and that's 144,45,000 budget. So, we propose to have a public hearing on June 6. And if um we'll entertain any questions here, but if um we could add that there's a public hearing on the agenda tomorrow night. >> June. >> Yeah, that's I thought that was from June. >> June. >> Thank you. Any questions, comments? Um, I appreciate you all prioritizing public safety in this split up with the four sets for the general funds and the three three for public safety. I know catch up on a couple expenses from last year, but that's that's key to mention here is that sacrifices made last year >> to prevent doing a tax increase. Um, even though we already in that service sort of plan, so we got that $3.4 million in debt service that hits this year. We've got to take care of that as the voters asked us to important for us to to really that should be our message. You know, I'm spread it as much as possible and we even I was even transparent last year when we did not do the increase that to go ahead and get Brady down. have a year to get prepared because next year they are going to go up. So hopefully that was a little cushion and that the um our residents are prepared and they are like they are aware. Um I do feel good about that that they know they're going up. So I think you guys did a great job with just compiling everything, taking care of business, taking care of the house, taking care of in-house um without overloading. So I'm fine with it. about that. >> So just for this group, uh we spoke two weeks ago about police pay and right sizing that is that in this or that's not in this >> um police will end up getting a 5.3% increase in next year's budget, 3% cola and their 2.3% BI. Okay. So, we are um working right now with police on police and fire. >> Um Graham just had a notice published of offering firefighters and it says 56,000, but in small print it says includes a 5% increase after probation is completed. So, their starting pay is really a little less than that, but um you know that's grand and we certainly need to be competitive. So we are still working on um getting structures that will work for police. >> I think at least initially this group is aligned that we want to make sure that we meet a certain threshold in our region right >> put words in his mouth but that's >> I speak you can speak for me that we at the 40 percentile I believe based on the last work session that was new to me. I had no idea that we had failed in that direction. So you can speak for me. >> At the right time, we need to formalize that statement of intent that then translates to work that y'all do to bring that to a reality to make sure that we're at the right threshold, right? Whatever steps get us there, that's up to you to propose. But I think we're prepared to make a conceptual statement about how we expect to manage police pay in this pretty scarce environment moving forward agreement. >> And as we look forward coming budget cycles, we have a tax reval process that will hit in which years? Um currently the uh Alamance County properties are being um revalued right now and it will the revaluate the valuation that they come to will be effective January 1 27 which would hit our January which would hit our July 127 to June 3028 budget year. However, uh in uh a bill has made it out of committee to the Senate floor at the North Carolina legislature about putting a moratorum on revaluations for this year and next year. And so I'm not sure >> what will actually happen >> what will actually happen. >> But um >> this has been >> in the same way that um in the same way that um in the early 2000s, city council had to raise water and sewer rates by 24 22 25 22% backtoback years. And at that time we were a lot more textile heavy and the textile companies were very vocal about letting um staff know that you just can't do that increment a little bit each year is much more >> easy to tolerate. And so, um, in I would imagine that, um, in bringing forth a proposal for police and possibly fire that it's going to have some kind of property tax, minimal property tax increase um, every year and that will be much more tolerable than, you know, doing something like we're having to do this year. But part of what the majority of what we're having to need to do this year is is full of covering the bonds that the >> right >> approved. And when did our last tax rebal come into play? >> It was in um >> 23 23 >> 23 23 and so Alamance County was on 8year cycle and at that time they also moved to go for a fouryear cycle to I would say to also not have such a heavy hit. because I think that's important for us to consider as we talk about how do we we fund that desire to stay top in fire if that bud that bill does not move to the legislature then we can count on some revaluation from that four time additional revenues if it does not move restricted for being able to provide that funding that consider alternative funding >> another bill coming through the house is um one that would limit the amount you could increase. So that might be another reason to start doing small steps, but we will see. Um they're just out there right now. Nothing has passed yet. And I do also want to bring point out that in um the reout prior to the 23 re, we actually had a decrease. >> That's what made 20 23 super hard. Yeah. >> Um, and then coming back to and then all the properties escalating throughout that four year, it was hard. I'll be honest, it was hard for our family to come off. I think the police last raise was in 2022, correct? It it all hit. So, it was a police raid, the evals, all of that hit at one time in the 2023. So, it was hard. And so, like, I really want to make sure that our residents have that time, have that cushion. Let's make sure that our employees are supported and they have what they need rather than that massive that massive jump um jump in order to you know take care of everything. That is the whole point. How do we find an increment system to support both our employees and our residents? A little bit is always easier. >> Well, credit to the work you all have done. While we're seeing increases kind of across the board, it's in that deliberate, incremental, and predictable pattern, recognizing that everything's expensive. >> Everything trying to be deliberate and incremental in our our process that folks can count on balancing the budget as we try to. >> The other thing that strikes me about this budget is there's there's not flood in here. This is like maintaining the quality that we have. Um so um and and anticipating moving to a place of being able to grow quality. Um so no I mean this this is about not cutting services. That's how I understand this. Thank you. Any other questions, comments? >> Just a comment on the the solid waste enterprise fund. I think it's important to clarify that these were funds that previously live in the general fund. Um it's not that this is a brand new fund. We're just parsing this out so that it lives in its own dedicated bucket now. >> And as an enterprise fund, the the fees generated have to support rather than getting kind of muddy with all our other general fund expenses. the process very clearly see is it sustaining from its fees or is it changes? Thank you. Um next we'll recognize executive director of training and development services Jamie Lawson for a planning and zoning commission report. Good evening, mayor and members of council. We had uh two items that were on the planning and zoning commission's agenda um from last month. And so the first one I'll um bring you up to speed on uh this is a request for a conditional uh conditional industrial resoning. The properties um are bounded uh by Elmyra North Park Avenue Hamilton Street and Durham Street. And there are two parcels across the street. These are all owned by the same entity, um, Topia Real Estate LLC. All of the properties are currently in the heavy industrial zoning district. And so, um, the request for the reszoning to conditional industrial serves a purpose for the applicant to um, they're interested in operating a recycling center. that use is only allowed under a conditional industrial zoning and there are a number of other uses that the applicant has also included um as part of request. So it's similar to a limited use resoning request. This is only allowed recycling centers are only allowed in conditional industrial with a bunch of other uses requested this area. um under the future land use designation is uh partly within traditional residential and um and partly within business park light industrial. So as I mentioned the current zoning of the property is heavy industrial. All of the uses that are um in the yellow font are currently allowed within the existing zoning designation. So by right they any of these uses could occur right now the only thing that's being added is that recycling center. So um any questions about that? >> I have a question kind of I'm just wondering as far as the environment like in the people is right there in the middle of a residential area a residential neighborhood like on all sides except for itself. I'm just wondering like what the ramifications are for the residents and the recycling center that you know I mean it has to be sunken in the air you breathe in and I don't even know if that's right now is the question for that or you know >> so as as part of the process for this conditional industrial there were 12 conditions that were included. So what happens with a conditional industrial resoning process is um the the plan the map and all the conditions are presented to the technical review committee first. >> Okay, >> that's our internal staff um and other agency reviews. So, uh, all of the conditions that are shown here, which also include adhering to all, um, state, federal, state, and local regulations and requirements, um, and all of our federal nuisance type ordinances, um, noise and, um, other nuisances, those are listed, um, as part of a condition associated with this resilient request. There's also >> and they um the applicant is also not proposing any building expansions, any uh new buildings as part of this resoning request. Um all of the buildings are generally nonconforming. They're they're close to the road um with not a lot of setback. So there really isn't a lot of opportunity unless you're completely removing the building >> from the property to change existing conditions in terms of buffering or landscaping for the for the neighbors. Um essentially what the applicant is is seeking to do is is to keep the the site um as is with respect to entrance points and um and other site features. So, uh there has been um there has been activity on the site uh over the last year, but really the intent is for this property is to is to bring a brownfields underutilized site back to life. Um and the there's a number of other provisions on here uh regarding screening and coming back through the process. uh if there are any deviations whatsoever. >> Jamie, >> does the applicant have any estimations on the impact of traffic? >> Right now, as I understand it, the traffic flow will stay as it's been operating. the site um you know the building itself was used as a a manufacturing site >> historically and so there's been activity with respect to truck traffic and and parking flow there's no change um with respect to that and um the building I think is you know has been designed over time historically to have trucks just drive right in and unload and come back in. >> Okay. >> There is a parking lot as part of this that's across the road. >> That's correct. >> Without costly facilities between those. Is that something keep an eye on as activity increases? Just make sure >> cuz right now it's not really operating at full capacity, >> right? >> I didn't even know it was even doing anything until like you said like maybe two years ago. I think I started sending the trucks there. I think they're just going in and out. But I'm thinking about if you add recycling center, it's going to be employees there. Now you're going to have it's going to be employees on site now working inside along with whatever traffic. If you say that it's going to be that center for recycling, I'm just imagining employees and now more traffic cuz you it doesn't have much right now. It's it feels like it's at a minor capacity, but what is it going to look like? the recycling center does open it. I mean, it I don't know if they're going to have employees, but it will add traffic. I suppose >> I my feeling is uh they're anticipating roughly 50 employees. Um this would be this would not be a recycling center that is open to the public, right? This is a recycling center that would be um taking aftermarket products and um using different methods to pelletize or do what they do to to um to get that source and and then it goes out into a different market. Uh but this just describes simply what the layout of the property is right now. And so um you know there's the the trough docks entrances off Myra and then you've got this large um page area which is really where the employee parking is. >> Is that in the front? Is that in the front of the building? I never seen or in the back. >> It's in the back. >> It's in the It's in the back. >> This is Park Avenue here. So from Park Avenue, you mainly if you mainly see like a lawn um disturbed area and like I said, they're only requesting to add that recycling center use above and beyond what's already allowed. Um these are not all of the uses that are allowable. They have been paired down as well. And so, uh, planning and zoning commission, um, recommended this unanimously. They did have a applicant did have a neighborhood meeting that there were maybe five people that attended. Um, really just out of curiosity, uh, the applicant also, um, spoke at the planning and zoning commission meeting. If you haven't watched that video, I think it's worth hearing. Um there's a lot of interest in employing residents from the neighborhood and you know working with the neighborhood in terms of being part of the community. >> Okay. >> And um staff also did recommend this resoning as well. So we're asking for this to be put on the May 19th uh city council date for a public hearing. The second case um is a another limited use resoning request. Uh this is North Church Street and Shannon Drive. It is the home in sort of circling around of the low funeral home and crematory. The property that is uh in yellow which is medium density residential is also owned by the family which they own property on the east side of Shannon Drive too. They are seeking to utilize the building which was previously a home for their family or members of the family. Uh they're seeking to convert that building that's there uh for business purposes. Um so they have requested the limited use um principal uses only uh that would coincide with their existing operations and um essentially if if they wanted to if somebody wanted to convert it back to single family. Uh so related to the commercial use classifications um your request would be for funeral related services office professional and then live work dwelling and single family uh detached. >> Any questions on that so far? >> J as far as this limit use applies. um did a meeting. We talked about the use car lot um and that limited use for one use. Does this include other uses beyond the four that you listed up there? >> No, it's just the four. >> It's just the four uses. Okay. >> Is that normal or would there be a preference to see more uses? >> Well, I think considering they the the property is owned >> and it basically serves right now as a accessory use to the existing business. Um it's a natural progression. Um as I understand it, all of the all the traffic will be and parking really will be internal from the existing parking lot and entrance points. Um and this will really be uh you know more controlled uh coming off of Shannon Drive. Um, I think the the applicant um has no other intention than than using it for ex their existing business. And so, um, this does coincides with the, uh, future land use designation of the area. Um, planning and zoning commission also recommended this unanimously and uh, so did staff and we're requesting this to be added to the May 19th council meeting as well for public hearing. >> Any questions? >> And it was a property across the street, right? It was three different parcels. Am I correct? It was the side by side and I thought I read something um, about a property across the street. No, >> they own >> they own the properties here, the one that's in blue, which is O and I and GB. And then they also own properties um that I'm circling circling around in G. But they're only asking for one, one of those areas each. >> And um you know, I I asked the applicant when they initially applied for the resoning um you know, why they were not seeking general business as a as a um as a proposal. And so their response, which I think is valid um to the O and I, which also allows for all the uses that they're thinking of, is a is intended to be a good buffer between G and um residential zoning districts. >> Yes. >> Other questions. So, can we agree that both of those go on May 19th? >> Thank you. >> At this time, I recognize our city attorney, David Huffman. >> Two minutes. >> Two minutes. Okay. >> Five minutes. This I put this in front of you I think just before the meeting. This is uh pertaining to the property sitting at the end right really it's on it's on Grand Hotel Road right across from Fairchild Park Community Center and you're standing in the front yard you look across the street you remember there used to be a car wash over there and then there may be a property to the left of that also. Y'all have already acted on it. Jamie helped me with this. I don't know where it is in the process, but uh this property is develop wants to use it for affordable housing. Three stories and four stories. What it was? I can't remember. >> I believe it's um I believe it's three stories. I I will have more information um for the council by names. >> Okay. Well, but the bottom line to it is I get a call from their attorney earlier uh last week and said, you know, we've gone back and did a title search and it looks like when Burlington owned the property back in 1967 and sold it off, which was Fairchild Airport at the time that you reserved a air rights over top of the property and we want to turn around and see if y'all will, you know, relinquish relinquish those and we have already done So on one piece of property the cory's ended up buying this whole property the whole length of the road the airfield and um when you and Walmart bought their lot for their property from we link this mayor too. So uh we're doing the I'm proposing to do the same thing here. They're trying to have a closing on the 11th of May to move their project forward. I think they're similar in the TRC process here. And uh what when take a look take a look again. You have to uh there's a special provision in the charter for quit claim. Do you uh manager has to determine there's no uh no longer any public purpose to the property and also there's no substantial uh value to it. These are the air rights only. We don't own anything right. So that's what we're doing. We're relinquishing those to uh the CE so they can have their uh closing on the 11th to move forward. And I ask that it be put on tomorrow night's agenda. >> Any questions or concern? That's the whole facility from the from the part of the car wash down to where it's gated at right in front of Fairsh got a map on the back of this. >> If there's no opposition, then I think we we keep moving. Thank you. Um, at this time I recognize um, city engineer Amy R. Good evening. Make this really quick. The state snuck up on us with a date of June 10th to adopt the new flood damage prevention ordinance. And so the ordinance is something that's offered through the National Flood Insurance Program. allows people to actually get insurance on lots that have flood plane on them. It is something the ordinance is there to protect human life property and just for the general well-being also to educate new property owners if that property they're purchasing is in the flood plane. Also to try to minimize the amount of damages that occur and the amount of response that our first responders have to do uh in respect to um anything that happens in the flight line. So, we need to like to request that uh you add this to tomorrow night's agenda to set a public hearing on May 19th. And if the hearing goes well to consider adopting the ordinance as part of that, we're also moving from it being a part of the UDO to the state's preference, which is to extract it and have it as a standalone ordinance, not part of the UDO. And at the next update from the UVO, we will work on removing all those portions from the UDO and anything in the flood plane ordinance that is adopted. We'll see proceedings in the very quick in a nutshell. We just need to say for public hearing and move forward to consider adoption. >> Thank you. Any questions? I do have a quick question. I'm sorry. So, here recently with all the storm water issues, um there I've heard from several residents who are concerned about the new homes um the new construction going in our flood plane areas and they've asked me like, you know, how is it legal for them to be building in these areas? It's like a known flood plane area and then the runoff goes here was going different directions messing up my property. So, I'm actually glad you guys brought this up tonight. So we actually with this we're going to be able if a if a resident or builder buys some property that's in a flood plane we're going to a give them an option well the state gives them an option to add their own insurance even though it's in a flood plane area is what you're saying right >> and then there's some other provision it protects the city from >> well the the protection of the city is if there is flooding in the trying to reduce the amount of building that's actually occurring in the flood plane. And if we can reduce that by education of, you know, potential home buyers and that's something our first responders have, you know, less likelihood of going into those areas, but uh we do currently have a flood damage prevention ordinance. This is just the update to it. So, and updating the maps that are associated with it. So, this is pretty much carrying on exactly what we've got now. Just a few tweaks to maps and and a few items to nothing significantly different. >> Bob, help me find that. I want to look at that um the whole flood plane or just keep me updated, update me, educate me on how that is working right now. >> This flood plane ordinance deals with um areas that have been um studied and mapped through the FEMA flood mapping program. Um, and so there generally affects the larger streams. There's a limit on how far upstream these studies go. Generally, they get to a point where I think it's one square mile upstream is not mapped. It doesn't mean it couldn't flood, but they're just not studied. And so that's when our other development regulations. So there's in the flood plane ordinance there's there are uh requirements that make it more difficult to develop in the flood in the flood plane. they they still can, but there are suits they have to jump to. And then in the areas that are not mapped and our our development ordinances and our and our other ordinances then kick in and we have some stream buffers, >> things of that. >> I think someone spoke at our council meeting about that as well, dealing in those flood plans. I'm fine with this, but I'm definitely interested more into what I know land is everything right now. You know, that's something you can't, you know, people are are buying things they would not have, you know, probably bought 5 years ago, but just on the whole storm water, if they build in that area, where is their, you know, probably should charge them some extra money for the water maybe a little bit more, but thank you. So the request is to put this on May 19th. >> So tomorrow night hearing for May. >> Okay. Um our um next on our agenda our uh C city council committee reports, but also Ian was going to share with us last our last work session um from the his trip to the NLC gathering. And so um council received these via email um and then also copies of last meeting. Um just going to quick go some highlights from cities and some things that I thought were important for us to keep in mind. Um so a couple things related to federal funding. We've heard about the there um and also recommending that cities not consider federal funding as a stable and increasing source surprise. Um but we are seeing generally those numbers are being adjusted downwards across the board. Also more and more cities are seeing cancellations in federal funding. Even if you're midway through receiving some type of grant, um they've recommended that if you do receive a cancellation that you immediately pursue some type of legal activity. Uh when possible, the state's attorney general may be already working on something for other cities that are equally impacted by the same cancellation. Uh what we're seeing is that cities that pursue legal activity eventually end up getting their money. It's just annoying we have to go through that additional process for money that was already destined for local government. Um, one thing to consider is if there are any subreipients of money um through the city. The federal government is increasing their crackdowns on unlawful DEI, which is not a term they've yet defined. Um, but the city is technically liable for enforcing unlawful. So, it's just one of those be aware of who we're working with or something like that. Um just talking about the census. It's coming up in 2030. Um upcoming process of staff is the legal process which is how we identify properties that will be part of the census. So just wanted to make sure that that was on staff's radar. Um and I did confirm with our GS department that we we follow all those guidance possible and have um under economic development. There's a couple things to just be aware of there. Specifically, um regional clusters are something that the SBA and EA are both looking at. Um they're releasing another set. It's probably released by now of regional cluster types. These are around specific industries or innovation. Um and then they're providing funding uh to the $500 $500 million for those cluster areas. That's something to keep an eye on uh what new clusters are popping up in our area and should be aware of. Um also talked about the economic injury and disaster loan as we see new types of disasters impacting businesses. Um this is something I thought was interesting. Um it can be any type of disaster whether man-made accidental or a whole other causes um and only needs to affect at least five businesses. Um, and then the governor can declare that a local disaster opens up funding to the federal government, SBA, potentially help those properties tracking kind of how cities apply funding and then how that's driving return on investment. There's an unprecedented amount of federal funds coming into local governments. I hope that we have future opportunities like that, but not um but they're looking at how the cities do with applying those funds and driving economic reinvestment. So, it's just curious how Burlington did. I know we had discussions about trying to roll up those numbers as we go. Um under workforce development, just an interesting item, the workforce is now kind of tied to the Department of Labor. Um and there's some uncertainty about kind of whose responsibility um workforce will be. Uh and so that's put along many different activities. Railroad policy was fairly central because there's a number of things going through uh right now as well as surface transportation is being talked about at the federal level since we are railroad community with railroad going straight through. I thought it was interesting that since the East Palestine uh rail disaster in uh Indiana, there have been 3,100 additional rails across the country. They don't all make the news. It's just something for us to always be aware of for our emergency services. Folks are always asking about that. Um but the rail safety act is in Congress but not currently progressing. Um the rail administration has generally shown a lack of interest in increasing safety standards increasing cost of them. Um and the Trump administration's also been seeking to reduce rail regulations. So all things to be aware of uh knowing we have lots of rail activity. Um there's a number of funding items related to rail including the Chrissy uh program. You know, we've had discussions over the past about the main street crossing, which is a surface level crossing. There's some safety and some uh traffic flow concerns there. Um but we see as an option for potentially eliminating road crossings. So, just wanted to bring that up. um as we continue to think about what does north main street development look like and track and train stops multiple times per day and if we see increased passenger rail service the train will only stop for blocking that grade crossing. So as we think about how do we work with our property owners and work with your development there, we also have to consider train that algorithm. And then they talk a little about railroad quiet zones. Um just something that's been on my radar for a long time. There's a lot of health data about the noise uh that comes from rail roads particularly from the horns um and how it impacts folks living very close to road track. We got lots of residential properties. Um, I went to college right next to the Elon Rail track and train coming through at 3 a.m. would wake me up every day. And so that has a long-term toll on the human body and the health of our residents and children. Um, rail quiet zones are something that has to be requested by the local government entity. And I want for us to explore that sometime in the future about what might that look like and how could that improve our community. There's always nostalgia about the sound of the trains, but for those who live closest to it, there's not much nostalgia there. >> And then talked about the service transportation bill, safe streets and roads for all and Christy grants are open or opening soon. So on our radar, um just FYI, CSX and Northol Southern are in the process of considering a merger. Um community members can weigh in on that. However, the folks who were there indicated that because those two railroads don't overlap in their surface area, we just start theirs actually change the impact to our local system. It's more about a larger network. That's some folks from Amrak there. They talked about their strategies. Um they're focused. They're seeing the same thing that NC do reported to us a few months ago, which is rid. It's generally exceeding capacity. um their biggest bottleneck is engine equipment cars just like in COG D was talking about and then they mentioned that commuter rail which is something we talked about is generally a state policy issue not necessarily something that happens at the state level under civic engagement and civility. Um this was unfortunately a topic that was is coming up more and more. There is, as they put it there, a club of communities that have experienced mass shootings and violence related to city council meetings and public events. Uh, and so local governments are exploring ways that they can lead by example. There's always been a higher level of trust from local government. Um, and as you look at the rhetoric at higher levels of government more these days, um, cities are considering passing a civility resolution um, related to how we should get between each other. This body generally had a very respectful cander. I appreciate that not every city council is that way. But at the same time, when we think about the next generation of leaders in our community, the example that they're seeing from political leaders is the federal and state example of folks victory on the TV. Um, and I would love for our council to consider. There's an example of one of these civil resolutions that city councils could pledge ourselves to uh at the end of this document. I would love for us to have a conversation later, whether it's at a retreat or at a later work session about possibly considering that. I think it's important both in how we treat the public, how we treat each other, and how we ask folks who may come to a public hearing or public comment to treat each other and especially our staff. You know, staff's at the front line of a lot of calls, a lot of interactions with the community. We ask for civil across the board. Just something to consider as a conversation. water. >> I'm going to appreciate it. So, uh there's also the dignity in sex in here was just related to that. It's a eight point scale talking about how we show respect to each other. That was an interesting way of quantifying listening and understanding in our conversations. So, um almost done. Housing was a big issue. There's the 21st century housing road to housing act and the road acts. Um I got some more information some flyers from NLC that I'll read about that in the manager's office for anyone who's interested. Um it was I've not looked at those lately as far as where they're progressing. Senator Tillis indicated there's going to be a lot of work to try to reconcile those between the House and the Senate. Um, but there's a lot of hope, too. This would be the first time in decades that really reforms how the federal government handles funding and housing and housing affordability. So, there's a lot of hope there. There's a long road ahead of us. Um, and then some miscellaneous items. It's obviously the 250th anniversary. A lot of communities were talking about how we spread our events out throughout the community rather than just always holding them at the same central city locations already set up across the city there. And then next conference dates will be in Nashville in November um on the 18th to the 21st and then the congressional city session which is always March is March 13th through 17th of 2027. As we look at our council schedule, I highly encourage anyone's interested in going to these two. Um, but as we consider our annual council meeting schedule, just something to consider as far as overlap dates. I miss our city this time. >> Thank you. Bring that back. >> No worries. Any questions related to this? >> Thank you. If anyone else in the public is interested in these know we can provide that that >> thank you for the opportunity to represent the community always good. North Carolina has one of the strongest delegations of any state in the country and national when it's just across the border in Nashville Tennessee even stronger. >> Thank you. Um, other committee reports. >> There's one from TAC. Did you happen to bring it >> last work session? They gave I think they distributed online. Correct. >> Okay. Okay. Got it. I say they didn't we'll give you two next time. >> Um, there was some talk though about um I think it was you mayor about knowing what projects are coming. Wasn't there a conversation by email or something recently? We were discussing about how do we um make sure that we know the upcoming projects and on the TAC Bob helped me out. Um it was only my first meeting so I can't give you much of an update of anything. Um but look except to say that I signed the ethics that process that hard process. But there are a lot of projects I know for me being on council being my third year, a lot of things that I was concerned about. I was unaware until I joined that group. And those a lot of those projects are already on the way. Like they've already been approved through the TAC, but as a council member, I was unaware. um the Maple Avenue the uh Graham Hopeale Road is going to have the work side something some sidewalks or road wide or something but um I was just very glad to know that the project that I had in mind or what the community wanted 3 years ago even though it's not coming through council the people always feel like it's the decision that we're making and that we're pushing forward and which we are I'm Sure, those projects have been long in the ways of of coming to fruition, but they are. So, there are a lot of projects, the sidewalks and things that we're asking for. We asking for money to to do these things, but a lot of those projects are coming through that um that committee. So, if there was a way to know sooner, which would be great. Um, I don't know how that would do because you said that those projects they were bidded on like it's maybe four or five years in the making, right Bob? Longer >> and then they were just released I'm assuming the public information that we received you know last month. So if we could know which projects therefore when you call in the city or you complain about things to the city we can say hey you know they're working on it um in this area. It may not be coming to the city, but those areas have been identified. >> One caveat, I'll say, sometimes it make you list, but sometimes it gets bumped. That's an issue, too. >> You don't want to shoot. You don't want to tell it too soon. Yeah. And then cuz it's not in its final stages. >> When when the when the property has been bought right away, and it stayed on the project for 5 years and the fund is there, you pretty good to go. be, you know, pretty safe to make some announcements at that point. But the highway project quite frankly, you know, take a long time. It's not all allgether new um that take 15, 20 years to have to wait the appropriate time, you know, to announce it. So people won't have well wrong expectations. >> Okay, that does make sense to why. But those projects the I don't exactly know what they're doing on those streets. So, I'm going to be honest with you. Um, but they are like the make avenue for example. >> Uh, they're they're widening. They put they're going to put another turnway, you know, intersection of Chapel Hill Road and Mel Avenue. >> Okay. >> It's going to be I think it's going to be two lefts, you know, coming in from Interstate 85, >> which they started. Yeah. >> Cuz they're out there at night. Um I I can almost guarantee you they're there tonight. I saw them they they started working I was there about two weeks ago. Maybe our last work session. They are out there doing the work. So there are some great things happening. I I do feel like I I don't know what that process looks like with the community with their concerns and things working in the background and kind of how do you how are we able to put that information out there? One one one thing in particular has been a project that I'd like to see come come to fruition from Mel Avenue up to Deb Street how we can sport it's only a two lane thing but it's been on again off again with respect to the STIP program. a state improvement. >> Okay. >> So, you had to be careful cuz at one time I was excited because it was on then it got bombed out. >> But we can report out what we think is pretty sure, right? >> Thank you. Um, the committee that I guess I have the most information on is the heart Pedmont Area Regional Transit and they just they are continuing to um grow their network um by by partnering with agencies like Link um to to create more access across the region. So that's um that continues to grow and we did not have a meeting in April. So there should be more next month. >> There going more to electronic, >> you know, billing >> payment. Yes, that's right. That's right. Um like tap or um phone payment. So it's actually >> moving in that direction. Not all municipalities have the capacity to do that yet. So definitely >> good. We had our ACT meeting a couple weeks ago. Um I think this is we talked a lot about the budget cycle coming up um and some of the inter between and no activities within these different committees. So having this dialogue would be ever more important because there were a decision made by the NPO about how fairs and populations are calculated across some of the funding and how they fit splits of the federal dollars. Um that changes which agencies get how much split. So there's things like that that may be happening in one committee but directly impact the other committee that we are dividing that >> and you were at our housing committee meeting right >> me >> mayor >> no wasn't there for the home consortium they have finally did the approvals I think right of all the RP. >> Yeah, I can give you a really brief um overview. So, the home consortium um board did meet and they they awarded or recommended to award the funding which I think was 820 total. um to three different three different projects. Um subsequent to that review, there was a I don't know if it was an informal review by our HUD perhaps and two of the three of the projects um were disqualified due to procedural things. Um, for example, you they cannot request funding for projects that have already been started because there is an environmental review that is required prior to the funding being um issued. And u and so one of the projects that remained going forward was the Habitat for Humanity project for um county. Um and so we'll be meeting back with the home consortium board um as we move forward with the with the allocation that was um that we received notification about for fiscal year 26 27 and going to the consortium board on how that money should be um spent. So you've approved one, they've approved one project, one of the three. >> So the the consortium board can make a recommendation on projects, but then in order for them to get funded, it's not just that they have to qualify under all of the different guidelines associated with the dispersement of funds. So um so that disqualified two of the three and Um to be honest with you, it's a very very detailed process. >> I can imagine. >> Yeah. That I'm sure um I'm missing a few steps, but ultimately we have received notification that we will get funding. Um we got funding last year for the consortium board. Um the board is the body that will ultimately decide how the funding gets dispersed uh for the for the through the entire region, not just Burlington. >> Correct. And this is our first cycle of having funds cuz the home consortium was just approved last year 2025. Right. >> Right. This is our first time getting our funding and actually trying to distribute it among what the five counties Alamance Ashboro a couple of them that's included rent >> that's included and it's the first cycle of distributing those funds. >> Yes. So any funds that were not distributed will get rolled into the next >> Oh, that's good. So we don't lose anything by not spending it this year. That's what that's going to be my next question to you. Do we have to spend those funds now? >> No. No. They'll be they'll be wrapped into the next fiscal year finding. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And at this time, I'll recognize our city manager for city managers report. >> Uh thank you, mayor, council. Um first item, um an update on our we received our RFQS for the council retreat. Um, our staff committee has narrowed it down to two. Um, one one probably a little higher. So, we're going to get discussions with them to uh formalize the the agenda and whatnot. But, um, we were looking at probably trying to set a date now of August 27th, which is the last Thursday in August. Most availability No. >> No. >> Maybe. >> Say maybe. What? August 27. I got something, but I think I did. >> Is it optional date? Is it just that date right there? You have >> um we're looking at the 20th or the 27th, but I think there was some conflict. >> I had confidence. Um, we also mentioned later because the 20th is much better. Okay. >> What day is that? >> And you don't have to decide right now. calendar, >> right? >> 20 or 187. >> Um, and then one other item. Um, Council Member Baltude has asked us um since we have we're in the process of milling Edgewood Avenue um and resurfacing um if we were going to restripe it um to uh match recommendations that are in the bicycle pedestrian plan. Um and init my initial response and email was yeah, we're going to try to do that. Um when we got out there and took measurements on the ground, the um the street is not as wide as the projections that were in the uh the plan. Um and so that that provides some some challenges. Um and then there's also a section in there um primarily along in front of Turn Time Middle School, which the pedestrian plan called that for one lane in each direction with a center turn lane. and bike lanes on each side and um the way that road gets congested with school that doesn't we don't think that's a feasible option. Um so rather than a rush to implement the recommendations from the plan which are not a prescriptive requirement, our recommendation is to strike it the way that that it is currently. Um an alternative would be a multi-use bath. So, we can look at that, but we need time to do the the proper study to make sure we do it right. And so, I just wanted to alert you to that fact that um we aren't going to be able to do it at this point, but we'll see how we can incorporate that. So, that um and then going forward with the resurfacing, we'll try to do a better job of coordinating that that ahead of time. If there is a live street that's being resurfaced, it's all part of that plan. >> Yeah, I know when we improve those plans, the problem is always these create opportunities when we're doing other work so you can better leverage our taxpayers dollars so you're not restriing road grinding the strikes back off and striping again spending the same spending double the money. >> So trying to deliver more value efficiently with taxpayers. So I really I know we've had this conversation but really want to see when we do plans like our resurfacing that we're bringing other departments forward on that to say what else needs to happen when we get the resurfacing because that's the best time to make that investment and it's only going to last for the next 20 30 years. So, we've got transportation and engineering communicating on um but that's the only items that I have. Okay, thank thank you all. Um I think I think that is the end of our agenda. Um I will just say one one other thing. Um awesome carousel festivals um this weekend. Good job to to those who made that happen. Thank you and we'll see you tomorrow.