Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout01-26-2009 Workshop MeetingJanuary 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop ~m ~~ approved: l~7arch 9, 2009 Pale 1 of 12 P _ Minutes ,~; ~_ Board of Commissioners Monthly Workshop January 26, 2009 at 7:00 PM Town Barn PRESENT Mayor Tom Stevens, Commissioners Evelyn Lloyd, Frances Dancy, Brian Lowen, L. Eric Hallman, and Mike Gering. STAFF PRESENT: Town Manager Eric Peterson, Assistant Town Manager/Public Works Director Nicole Ard, Town Clerk/Director of Administration and Human Resources Donna Armbrister, Planning Director Margaret HaLrth, and Senior Planner Tom King. 1. Open the Workshop Mayor Tom Stevens called the workshop to order at 7:02 p.m. He stated that tonight was a workshop and was not intended to be a public hearing, although he knew that those present were very interested in the topic regarding Item #4, Discussion of Road hnprovements and Congestion Mitigation Project Priorities for Inclusion in the Regional Priority List for NCDOT Funding. He said if it seemed that it was appropriate to accept continents they would endeavor to do so, or to set up a time for that at some later meeting. Mayor Stevens said they did want to make sure that there was public involvement, but that was not the purpose of tonight's meeting. 2. Agenda Changes & Agenda Approval 7:03:07 PM Planning Director Margaret HaLrth added an item related to recent information received from the County that the State had indicated to them that the Town did need to be a co-applicant with the County for the PARTF grant application for Fairview Park, because the Town owned some of that property that would be developed with the grant funds. She said because that was not what the Board had authorized she would ask that the Board consider formally authorizing the Mayor to add his signature to the County's application on behalf of the Town so that the application could go forward. Ms. Hauth stated beconung a co-applicant did not obligate the Town to any matching fiords or other costs, nor would it endanger any application the Town might make. Mayor Stevens suggested the Board vote on that as soon as the agenda had been set. Assistant Town Manager/Public Works Director Nicole Ard added a Closed Session item regarding a Personnel Matter. 7:04:11 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Hallman, seconded by Commissioner Dancy, the Board moved to approve the agenda as amended by a vote of 5-0. The motion was declared passed. Mayor Stevens asked that the Board consider formal authorization for the Town to be a co-applicant on the County's PARTF grant application as Ms. Hauth had outlined. January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop approved: l~7arch 9, 2009 Pale 2 of 12 Upon a motion by Commissioner Hallman, seconded by Commissioner Lowen, the Board moved to authorize the Mayor to sign the County's application for a PARTF Grant for Fairview Park, indicating the Town as a co-applicant on that grant application, by a vote of 5-0. The motion was declared passed.. 3. Committee Updates and Reports 7:05:06 PM Conunissioner Lowen said that he had planned to provide an update on the Orange Community Land Tnist, but because Ms. Hauth had provided the Board with copies of the quarterly report that would not be necessary. Mayor Stevens stated he had wanted to thank everyone for their participation in the Board's recent budget retreat, noting he believed it had been very successful and the time spent was valuable. 4. Discussion of Road Improvements and Congestion Mitigation Project Priorities for Inclusion in the Regional Priority List for NCDOT Funding 7:06:20 PM Ms. Hauth provided some history of how they had reached this point as well as an overview of where they were now. She said in late 2008 they had been awaiting the environmental document on the three options for the Elizabeth Brady Road project, and as a draft document was being readied for release the Federal Highway Administration had expressed some concern about how the analysis was playing out in terms of whether any of the options really addressed the Statement of Purpose and Need. Ms. Hauth said there were two items in the Statement of Purpose of Need, one which said to reduce traffic congestion and improve the level of service in the central business district including Churton Street and St. Mary's Road; and, the second being to improve traffic safety along Churton Street and NC 86. She said because that term "level of service" was included and the alternatives as they were being analyzed were not showing a change in letter grade in congestion in the downtown, the Federal Highway Administration had concerns. Ms. Hauth said even though they were showing documented improvement in reducing the wait time, they could not conquer bringing the letter grade up. Ms. Hauth said they had discussed some time ago whether they should change the purpose and need, or change their priorities, or start all over and do something different. She said the Federal Highway Administration had backed down some and was willing to look at other descriptors and other benchmarks and criteria to show whether or not the project looked at the Statement of Purpose and Need, so the federal issue was now off the table. Ms. Hauth said that did raise an interesting question for the Town Board and for the Town of was there a package of smaller projects when taken together might get them the same or better results than any of the alternatives looked at for Elizabeth Brady Road. She said in doing that, when the Board adopted their priority list that went to the MPO they had placed the projects in an order such that a group of road projects were placed in higher priority than Elizabeth Brady Road. Ms. Hauth said those projects included South Churton Street, the Orange Grove Road extension, and the alignment of Eno Mountain and Mayo Streets, thinking that those three projects together along with perhaps some others might yield similar results to Elizabeth Brady Road and allow the Town to no longer include Elizabeth Brady Road. She said when that priority list went to the MPO and all the projects had points assigned to them, Elizabeth Brady Road came higher in January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop approved: l~7arch 9, 2009 Pale 3 of 12 point criteria than some of the other projects. Ms. Hauth said according to the models it appeared to generate higher benefits and have more need associated with it than some of the others. Ms. Hauth said it was traditional in the MPO that when they took the individual priorities and merged them with others to create a regional priority list, to respect the priority lists that were sent in from each of the individual jurisdictions. So, she said, if the criteria assigned 15 points to Elizabeth Brady Road, but it was the Town's fourth priority, and the Town's number one priority only generated 12 points, the board of representatives that ran the TAC would allow the substitution of that number one priority in that higher slot, basically placing a project with 12 points ahead of a project with 15 points because it was the Town's number one priority. She said that was the point they were at now. Ms. Hauth said located in the packets was the priority list for highway projects in Division 7 and it could be seen that was exactly what had happened. She said when they ranked the highway projects Elizabeth Brady Road would have been the third highest priority for Division 7, which for the purposes of their region was everyone in Orange County. Ms. Hauth said because the Orange Grove Road extension and others were higher priorities, the TAC had switched the priorities and put Elizabeth Brady Road down to number eight and moved Orange Grove Road extension which had more points into that number three slot. 7:12:10 PM Commissioner Hallman said Orange County also had a weighted priority list that went into that. Ms. Hauth said that was correct, adding that the list contained Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough projects. Commissioner Hallman said his point was that Orange County had in its own TIP list some of those improvements that they had ranked in their list. Ms. Hauth said at this point the MPO was considering the projects in that priority order, with Elizabeth Brady Road being reduced to represent the priority list that the Town had sent in. She said they were close to finalizing that priority list that would then be sent to the Department of Transportation so that the State could begin to create a State TIP. Ms. Hauth said just because something appeared on a priority list did not guarantee it a slot in the TIl' because of funding limitations, but they did want to recognize all of the local criteria and priorities as well as the point system. Ms. Hauth said while it was on the regional calendar for possible adoption in Febniary, it was unlikely they would take action the first time it was reviewed. She said the MPO generally would take two meetings to look at the priority list, so they were much more likely to adopt the regional priority list on March 1 L Ms. Hauth said if the Town Board wanted to offer anything more than what they had already, then those needed to come to the MPO board no later than March 11, and of course sooner was better. Ms. Hauth said they could go forward exactly as it was now and they would not have to make a final decision about whether they wanted to take Elizabeth Brady Road off the list completely, because at some point it would come down to whether or not they wanted to leave it on or take it off the list. She said at some point the State would ask that question so that if the Town wanted it taken off the list then that finding could be appropriated to other projects. Ms. Hauth said at some point that decision would have to be made, but it did not necessarily have to be made before March 11. She said it would need to be made at some point either before or shortly after the State released its draft TIP sometime between November 2009 and June 2010. January 26, 2009 l~lonthly Workshop approved: l~larch 9, 2009 Page 4 of 12 Ms. Hauth said what she had wanted to get to tonight was what data would the Board like to have to make that decision. She said if that was what they were going to do, then they would want to make sure that list was complete and they got as much benefit from a traffic congestion elimination stance as possible. Ms. Hauth said she did not have the technical expertise to tell the Board which list of projects was the best, but she could tell them what sort of information they needed to be able to make that analysis. 7:16:39 PM Commissioner Dancy asked what the timeframe was for Elizabeth Brady Road as well as the estimated cost. Ms. Hauth replied the timeframe continued to slide, because of the wait for the environmental documents, and those documents needed to be out for at least a year in a draft format before it was finalized. She said at this point, she could not give a potential start date. Commissioner Dancy stated she was looking at the costs associated with each project, and wanted to make sure that whatever the estimated cost was for Elizabeth Brady Road that that financial benefit could be retained for the other projects. Ms. Hauth stated that was one reason she had provided the chart with the packet, so that the Board could see what those projects added up to. She said if moving the projects on the list was a tnie swap, then the Town needed to come from the standpoint that there was $48 million on the table, and the Town needed to get $48 million worth of commitment for new constriction. Ms. Hauth said that was not uncommon, noting the State had done that before, and it sounded as if the MPO would support the Town if they wanted to undertake reprioritizing the projects. Commissioner Dancy stated the main thing was to nutigate as much traffic on Churton Street as possible, but also to make sure that they got their money's worth. 7:18:57 PM Commissioner Hallman stated they had Elizabeth Brady Road partially funded at $29 million, with nothing else allocated at this point. Commissioner Dancy said then they would want to keep that $29 million allocation. Commissioner Hallman responded no, they would want to go for the entire $48 million. He said he had added up the estimated cost of competing projects and they came to $51 million. Commissioner Hallman said the TAC staff was looking at how those three projects Ms. Hauth had outlined would line up if they were combined, and that would be done this month to see how the ratings would fall when looked at as a single project. Ms. Hauth said the TAC was also pulling some data out of the regional model to tell them what those three projects did with and without Elizabeth Brady Road as alternatives. She said she was also working with the State who had developed a more fine-grained model for the Hillsborough area directly related to Elizabeth Brady Road, to see whether they would at least release the underlying traffic model that they had developed that was more specific and specialized to Hillsborough at a finer grain than the Triangle regional model, and suggested that if the Town were to contract that same firm to do some analysis for the Town they would benefit from the work that was paid for by DOT. Ms. Hauth said it was possible they would not get access to it, but she would at least make the request since it was apublicly-funded study of the Hillsborough area. She said if the Town were to contract with the same firm, it seemed like that contractor would be able to use a tool that they had developed. Ms. Hauth said she believed they would find more detailed local information that was not captured in the January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop approved: l~7arch 9, 2009 Pale ~ of 12 regional model, although it was not inconsistent. She said if the outcomes were the same on the major roads, Churton Street, NC 86 and US 70, then hopefiilly that more specialized model would give them information on other streets such as Margaret Lane, Hassell Street and Wake Street. Ms. Hauth said that specialized and finer-grained model might do a better job of telling them local impacts and help them highlight smaller, more fined-grained places to focus on that the regional model would not capture. 7:22:21 PM Commissioner Hallman said there were a couple of other pieces that played into that. He said he believed everyone knew that the overpass over I-85 on new NC 86 was already a real issue, and the finding for those improvements were out beyond 2015. Mayor Stevens stated the real time sensitive issue was whether the Town Board wanted to support a swap and the issue of going on record of whether it was a no-build or to go forward with Elizabeth Brady Road. He said in any case there were limited resources. Ms. Hauth said at this point, while they wanted to be clear in their intent to do a swap by leaving Elizabeth Brady Road on the list at this point, if they did some intervening study and could not find a package of better improvements, and the Board decided that they did need to see that environmental document, that it did not put them in a bind where they had potentially lost that finding. She said that fiill commitment to the real swap and the wallcing away from Elizabeth Brady Road could be done at a later time. Ms. Hauth said it may make their negotiations somewhat more difficult, but it would reserve an option since they did not have enough information at this time to make sure they were satisfied with the results. 7:24: l7 PM Commissioner Lloyd said in thinking about the traffic flow, she did not believe there had been a study of the intersection of new NC 86 and US 70A. She said that intersection was not as safe as it could be with the amount of traffic that went through it, especially considering they did not know what would happen down US 70A to the east. Commissioner Lloyd said that intersection should be improved if Elizabeth Brady Road did not come. Ms. Hauth said that was why they needed a model that showed what traffic would look like without Elizabeth Brady Road in the mix, and they would then be able to zoom in on that intersection to see if there was some realignment or adjusting of lanes that would allow it to fimction better without getting into the Elizabeth Brady Road extension. Conullissioner Lloyd said Ms. Hauth had suggested using the same contractor that the State had used, and asked was she suggesting that the Town pay for that. Ms. HaLrth stated it was likely the Town would have to pay for it, because if they asked the State to pay for that it would chip away at the $48 million allocation. Conunissioner Lloyd said regarding Orange Grove Road to US 70A, she wondered exactly where that would go. Ms. Hauth stated that was an unknown and did not know if it would be known at the time they committed to it. She said you would not necessarily have to, noting that if they wanted to go to that level and have a feasibility study done to determine the cost, and if they believed that cost was too high and they wanted to maximize their money, it might be worth the Town spending some local money to have it better studied if they believed they could save some finds on the back end. Commissioner Lloyd said the Orange Grove Task Force had tallced about that but no exact plans had been shown to them. January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop approved: l~7arch 9, 2009 Pale 6 of 12 7:27:44 PM Commissioner Hallman stated at the last TAC meeting they had discussed that, and it had resonated with the other municipalities in that they had also been fnistrated with the lack of local control over projects, and cited several projects in Durham and Chapel Hill. He said they had recognized that with the new State administration and the mandate that there would be changes at the DOT, as well as the Executive Order enacted regarding the DOT and the willing support of the MPO to stand behind them if they chose to take that route, that the timing was right for something like that. Mayor Stevens stated Commissioner Hallman as well as Ms. Hauth had spent a lot of time developing relationships and the Town had a lot of support, and offered his thanks for that work. Commissioner Hallman stated that was the only federal highway money the Town had seen in years and all that they would likely see for some time, and they needed to make the right choice and use the money wisely. 7:29:02 PM Commissioner Gering said in thinking about the local control option, that was important to him because it was not simply a matter of traffic counts and if those three projects reduced the same amount of traffic as what was projected for the Elizabeth Brady Road project. He said since that was where they lived they had other considerations to factor into that, such as environmental and neighborhood considerations. Commissioner Gering said it was more than just an engineering exercise to figure out which package reduced traffic more. He said if they did have an opportunity for a level of local control that was exactly one of the reasons why he believed that even if the other three projects did not add to what was projected for Elizabeth Brady Road it was still more appealing to him. Commissioner Gering wondered if dropping Elizabeth Brady Road at this stage enhanced or reduced their bargaining power with pushing forward the three options, adding he saw arguments on both sides of that. Ms. Hauth stated at this point she was unsure who they would be bargaining with. She said regarding Governor Purdue's Executive Order, the current DOT Board was sitting but there was no way to know if those members would continue to sit. She said the Governor was delaying appointing a new Department of Transportation Board until there was some analysis of DOT operations and what other improvements might be needed. Ms. Hauth said there was a new Secretary of Transportation who knew nothing about the Elizabeth Brady Road project, and who had now been charged with malting those decisions and malting them based on technical data and not persuasion from DOT Board members. She said that would make it more challenging. 7:31:10 PM Commissioner Gering stated the factors that had him wondering were that since they had money allocated for the Elizabeth Brady Road project, if they were to take it off the list at this stage then someone else could make the argument that they did not have to place any priority at all on any of the other projects. Ms. Hauth stated it could throw the finding back into the mix for reallocation, noting if they wallted away it could mean that others would see that finding as fiiture allocation for other projects. Commissioner Gering stated if they kept that project on the list for the time being, it might give them some maneuverability later on if they had to adjust the list again to make the decision about whether or not to keep Elizabeth Brady Road in light of other projects. January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop approved: l~7arch 9, 2009 Pale 7 of 12 7:31:55 PM Mayor Stevens stated that would seem to be a default decision based on the information they had now could change as new data came to light. Commissioner Lowen stated that was a valid point, noting he had always said that if there were other alternatives they should be considered, but he did not want to back out if it meant loosing the fiiture funding already allocated. He stated the State could always shift the money in any way they saw fit, and then they could really have a fight on their hands. Commissioner Gering stated they would only be delaying the discussion. Commissioner Lowen agreed. Conunissioner Gering said he had been involved in the Elizabeth Brady Road planning for seven years, and for him it had always hinged critically on the environmental impact study. He said it seemed strange to him that he was in the position of having to make a decision by weighing the merits in the absence of the environmental impact study, and it appeared that they would still not have access to that information before they had to make that decision. Commissioner Gering asked what the chances were that they could get that draft document. Ms. Hauth stated she would try, adding that certainly they all wanted to see the data it contained. She said there was a reason somewhere as to why it had taken so long to prepare the document and she believed it contained valuable information. But, she said, whether or not they could get it was another matter. Commissioner Dancy stated it should be public record since it was paid for with State dollars. 7:33:53 PM Mayor Stevens stated he believed they were all very concerned, as Commissioner Gering had voiced, about the environmental and social impact and the impact on historic sites. He said those concerns were above and beyond just mitigating traffic, and it was a delicate negotiation issue. Mayor Stevens said the Town Board had already expressed that concern when they had been given the opportunity several months ago to move forward with Elizabeth Brady Road and they had declined to do so because they wanted to keep the option of looking at alternatives. He said what he was hearing from the Board tonight was that they needed to get very specific information but they needed to do that quicltly. Mayor Stevens asked what the turnaround time was. Ms. Hauth stated she believed they had until at least November, noting the list could go forward as is and they could notify the State that that was what they intended to do so that the State did not inadvertently let a new contract for something that would decrease that $48 million that the Town wanted for other things. Ms. Hauth said they needed to begin the discussion on whether to contract with the same contractor the State had used and get access to that data, or did they need to go to someone else, as well as to spend some time thinking about exactly what the scope of the study would be, what exact questions they wanted answered, and what level of data they would be comfortable with in malting the analysis. Ms. Hauth said they could select the firm and go forward or they could get someone else to help them make that list. She said the Board could begin malting that list tonight if they were so inclined. 7:36:07 PM Mayor Stevens stated one step would be to provide some direction to staff. Ms. Hauth agreed, noting that fiords were currently budgeted for a road analysis that was meant to be used for the street analysis related to the Cornelius Street Plan, and that could be used to contract with someone. January 26, 2009 l~lonthly Workshop approved: l~larch 9, 2009 Page R of 12 Commissioner Hallman stated he would like to see them approach the County regarding sharing the cost of that analysis, since most of those impacted in those road alignments were County residents. Mayor Stevens asked should that be placed on the agenda for the joint meeting. Conunissioner Gering responded yes. He said he did not see the need to spend a lot of money on the engineering analysis of those priorities, noting for him it was more important to get the level of data that was convincing to whomever they dealt with about the Town's level of priorities. Commissioner Gering said he was not sure what that level of certainty might be. Mayor Stevens said the list now reflected the Town's priorities as best they could from a non- professional and non-technical point of view. He said they now needed to see how they stood up to that professional and technical point of view. Ms. Hauth stated she would asked the State what level of information they would want to see to be convinced that the group of three projects was a reasonable and fair swap for the Elizabeth Brady Road project. 7:38:11 PM Commissioner Hallman said the direction about the reprioritization for the TIP had already gone forward to the TAC, so for TAC purposes he believed they were okay for now. Ms. Hauth agreed. Mayor Stevens stated then they could go forward with the TAC and put this discussion on the joint agenda with the County. Ms. Hauth stated staff needed some direction regarding beginning work on a scope of services with an engineering firm, either the one used by the State or someone different in an effort to move forward and meet the State's requirements. She said that would likely come back at the Board's March meeting. Commissioner Lowen asked if at that time they would have an estimated cost. Ms. HaLrth replied yes. Mayor Stevens stated the joint meeting with the County was scheduled for Febniary 19, and he believed the issue had been settled from the Board's point of view. Ms. Hauth stated that she did not know how many of the Board had had the opportunity to met Tom King, who was present tonight and was the Town's Senior Planner. She said Mr. King represented the Town at the TCC which was the staff version of the TAC, and they would likely have Mr. King begin attending a few of the TAC meetings when the agenda looked to be of interest to the Town. Ms. HaLrth stated that Mr. King had previously worked for Orange County and was local to Mebane, so he knew and understood the Town's issues. 7:40:06 PM Mayor Stevens indicated there were several members of the public who wanted to speak to this issue. He said he was happy to take a few comments but they needed to be kept brief at just a minute or two. 7:40:46 PM Bill Crowther stated he believed tonight's meeting had been fniitful. He said they had been fnistrated with the situation regarding Elizabeth Brady Road, mainly because it was an old project which had appeared and disappeared over the years. Mr. Crowther said the residents, including himself, had been in limbo and every time the alignment shifted new lives were put on hold. He said January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop approved: l~7arch 9, 2009 Page 9 of 12 another reason was that of the current three alignments, most if not all of the citizens affected were not in the Town's limits although some were in the ETJ, and it was fnistrating to those residents that they had to speak to the County Commissioners to represent them. So, he said, they were happy to hear that the Town Board would be tallcing with the County Commissioners very soon. Mr. Crowther said the last reason was that they had watched the project from two directions, which was confiising as a citizen to see that the finding came from Division 7 which was aTriad-focused region. And, he said, that the planning for the project came from Division 5, which was the Triangle area. Mr. Crowther said it was confusing as a citizen to have to deal with the project as it came from those two directions. Mr. Crowther said they understood the condition the Board was considering, even though they were not considering a no-build they were taking what he believed was a big step in the right direction. He stated the neighbors in that area had been enduring this dark cloud long enough and they were glad to see that it was being discussed. Mr. Crowther said perhaps the Town Board and the County Commissioners could determine a solution that would allow the residents to be more at ease. 7:43:50 PM Robin Barnhill, a resident of Ivy Drive, stated the project as it now existed would come through her living room and take away her home on the Eno River. She said when tallcing about the swap, she had thought there were improvements to the bridge on Lawrence Road that would factor in to that. Mayor Stevens stated it was not in their planning area, noting they were not tallcing about trying to move traffic around but rather how traffic would flow better along Churton Street. Commissioner Hallman stated he believed the improvements on Lawrence Road were already fimded. Ms. Barnhill said as far as getting around, the idea of looking at a situation that would take her home but improve someone's drive time by a few minutes was disturbing. She said the improvement of the Lawrence Road bridge would make that situation better as far as getting around the area, and she did not understand why that had not been in the mix. Commissioner Hallman stated it was outside of their purview, noting that was up to Orange County. 7:45:16 PM Commissioner Gering said it was likely part of the mix, but was not on the list of things that the Town was tallcing about. Ms. Barnhill said for those who lived there, the no-build option made the most sense. 7:45:38 PM Commissioner Lloyd said she thought at one time that Lawrence Road was one of the options. Commissioner Hallman stated it was, as well as the western bypass, but both had been removed early on. 7:45:59 PM Renee Price presented to the Board a petition that had been circulating for nearly two years and contained almost 1,000 signatures. She said the petition explained the views of those who had signed. January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop approved: b4arch 9, 2009 Pale 10 of 12 Mr. Gephart stated he was president of the Poplar Ridge Homeowners Association, and it was his understand that much of the data was very old and flawed. He said the idea of tearing up historic and residential areas on information that outdated was something the residents were very opposed to. Mr. Gephart stated that current information was needed in order to make logical decisions, and the idea discussed tonight of combining the three projects to replace the Elizabeth Brady Road project made much more sense. 7:47:44 PM Cranford Goodwin provided some history, noting he was part of a group in 1991 who had a vision for Hillsborough, which was of a Town that surrounding a wonderfiil central park on the river. He said on the basis of that vision they had persuaded a number of private citizens and institutions, mainly the Johnston Foundation which had given them close to $900,000, and Classical American Homes who had provided the rest, to purchase the land from the France family. Mr. Goodwin said they had all accepted the vision of what an extraordinary opportunity that was for the Town to create that central park. He said it was important to keep that in mind as the Board tallced about the calculations, because it would be a tragedy to bisect that marvelous piece of land. 7:48:57 PM Mayor Stevens thanked Mr. Goodwin for reminding them of the vision of that incredible greenway on the Eno River and what that meant to Hillsborough and to the larger Orange County. He thanked all who had attended tonight and offered comments. 5. Other -Closed Session 7:49:17 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Conunissioner Dancy, the Board moved to go into Closed Session to discuss a Personnel Matter as authorized by North Carolina General Statute Section 143-318.11 (6) regarding Personnel Matters by a vote of 5-0. The motion was declared passed. 6. Adjourn Upon returning to Open Session, and upon a motion by Commissioner Lowen, seconded by Commissioner Dancy, the Board moved to adjourn the workshop at 8:20 p.m. The motion was declared passed. Respectfull~~ submitted, Donna F. Aimbrister, MMC Town Clerk January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop approved: b4arch 9, 2009 Pale 11 of 12 January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop approved: b4arch 9, 2009 Pale 12 of 12