Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout02-11-2013 Regular MeetingFebruary 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 1 of21 T °Wn MINUTES °f HILLSBOROUGH TOWN BOARD Hills gh a February 11, 2013 7:00 PM, Town Barn PRESENT: Mayor Tom Stevens, Commissioners Frances Dancy, Mike Gering, Evelyn Lloyd, and Brian Lowen, and L. Eric Hallman. STAFF PRESENT: Town Clerk Donna F. Armbrister, Planning Director Margaret Hauth, Public Works Director Ken Hines, Police Chief Duane Hampton, Finance Director Greg Siler, Town Engineer/Utilities Director Kenny Keel, and Town Attorney Bob Hornik CTO: 7:00:33 PM Mayor Tom Stevens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1. PUBLIC CHARGE 7:00:42 PM The public charge was not read but he asked that everyone abide by it. 2. AUDIENCE COMMENTS REGARDING MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA There were none. 3. AGENDA CHANGES & AGENDA APPROVAL Agenda stands as presented. 4. INTERVIEWS A. Interview 2 volunteers for in town vacancies on the Planning Board 7:01:23 PM Christy Raulli informed the Board that the only information that had changed from her first interview was that she had accepted a new job. She is now working for Development Finance Initiative which is a new project at the School of Government at UNC Chapel Hill. It is basically an Economic Development Consulting Service consulting on projects around the state. 7:02:50 PM Mayor Stevens congratulated her on her new job and asked the Board if anyone had any other questions for Ms. Raulli. He thanked her for her willingness to share her expertise. 5. APPOINTMENTS A. Reappoint Zach Read to a second Historic District Commission term to expire February 28, 2016 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 2 of 21 Commissioner Brian Lowen moved to approve. Commissioner Frances Dancy seconded. Upon a unanimous vote of 5 -0, the motion was carried. B. Appoint Christy Raulli to first full term on the Planning Board with a term to expire January 31, 2016 C. Appoint Sarah Mallet to a partial term in the Planning Board with a term to expire July 31, 2014 Commissioner Mike Gering moved to approve B and C as presented. Commissioner Dancy seconded. Upon a unanimous vote of 5 -0, the motion was carried. 6. COMMITTEE REPORTS (Critical) 7:04:04 PM None 7. REPORT FROM THE TOWN MANAGER 7:04:11 PM None 8. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS 7:04:15 PM None 9. ITEMS FOR DECISION — CONSENT AGENDA A. Consider approval of the Minutes of the January 14, 2013 Regular Town Board Meeting and the January 14, 2013 Regular Town Board Meeting Closed Session B. Authorize the temporary placement of sculpture on town property as part of the 2013 Sculpture Tour C. Consideration of Budget Amendments D. Authorize "Paint the Town Purple" campaign to support Relay for Life 7:04:22 PM Commissioner Lowen moved to accept these items for approval. Commissioner Dancy seconded. Upon a unanimous vote of 5 -0, motion was carried. 10. ITEMS FOR DECISION — REGULAR AGENDA A. Discussion on whether or not to proceed with modified version of Special Assessment District (SAD) for Waterstone 7:05:37 PM Town Attorney Bob Hornik asked the Board's pleasure on how to proceed with the discussion since Commissioner Eric Hallman was not present to lead the discussion. He stated that he could provide a summary to update the Board on what has happened since the last discussion two weeks ago. Mayor Stevens asked if Mr. Hornik could make sure that he had a resolution. Mr. Hornik replied that he would go over the resolution, which he thought had been attached to the agenda item but apparently was not. Commissioner Lowen asked Mr. Hornik if he could tell the Board if the items that they discussed in closed session were addressed. Mr. February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 3 of21 Hornik replied yes. He stated they were addressed in the conditions of the resolution. Ocie Best asked Mr. Hornik if she could make copies of the resolution for the Board. Mr. Hornik replied yes. Mr. Hornik stated he had reported to the Board last meeting that he had met with the Waterstone representatives in December. The Board had subsequent discussions with them in January and provided more information that the Board had looked at last meeting. The DPF &G had done an analysis of the 10 year, 15 year and 20 year repayment terms. It looked like the 10 year repayment term was feasible and was a major consideration that the Board had with the prospect of moving forward. The other issue is whether Orange County would collect through the assessments of the administration collection of the Special Assessment Districts (SAD). Mac Hall and the people with Waterstone & Stratford have had communications with Dwayne Brinston regarding the matter. Mr. Hornik spoke to John Roberts, County Attorney, about it. Mr. Hornik also met with Greg Siler, Mac Paul, John Roberts, Dwayne Brinston, and Linda Strickland and talked about whether the County would be willing and able to do the special assessment collection. The County Staff said they would be able to do it. They have the computer module there. Data would have to be loaded into it and they would need training on it, all of which would be paid for by the proceeds from the SAD. John Roberts had indicated to Mr. Hornik that Frank Clifton has the authority to enter into the initial agreement so the County can provide those services. The terms were that the County wants control over the process, which the Board wouldn't have a problem with, and they don't want to be responsible for enforcement of foreclosures. Someone else would be hired by the SAD or Mr. Hornik's firm to take care of those issues and would be paid for by the SAD. The County wants 3% of what they collect as their fee, which is a little higher than what they collect for taxes. Mr. Hornik stated the County Staff is ready, willing and able to do this under their terms. John Roberts wasn't sure whether Frank Clifton would feel the County Commissioners need to say it's a policy matter. Mr. Hornik reported at that meeting that this Board and the County Commissioners are meeting on February 21, 2013. One of the items on the agenda is Waterstone and Commissioner Eric Hallman asked Mr. Hornik to write the agenda item for that meeting. He indicated in the agenda item the status of Waterstone and the one outstanding issue seemed to be the arrangement for the collection of the Special Assessment. It's a policy decision that the Commissioners felt they needed to weigh in on. Commissioner Eric Hallman stated the Board hoped they would say go ahead and do it. Mr. Hornik commented it may be an item that Commissioners to Commissioners need to partake o£ 7:10:56 PM Mayor Stevens asked if for some reason the Commissioners did not approve it does that just stop it. Mr. Hornik replied unless some other arrangement from some other entity was made Stratford would have to provide the Board with some comfort level of someone out there that can do that. He stated that in the resolution, condition 6 on Exhibit A addresses the following circumstances: the Town must be able to make arrangements acceptable for the Town, meets the discretion for the County or other acceptable entities, bill and collect the Special Assessments and take enforcement action for the benefit of the assessment and the Town recognizes that the County may charge for its work. This is the most significant development since the meeting two weeks ago with the County representatives. The County Staff feels 3 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 4 of21 they've got what they need to perform the task. They will need some training at an approximate cost of $3,000. It will not be paid by the Town. The only question would be whether the County Commissioners will say OK and we should know that by February 21st or 22nd. This proposed resolution draft was prepared by Mr. Bob Jessup. It is very similar to the resolution done two or three years ago at the outset of the original version of the Special Assessment. It is a resolution that the Local Government Commission (LGC) wants to see the Board adopt before the LGC will take up the resolution. It says this Board is willing to proceed with the SAD process under these terms and conditions. In the first paragraph on the first page it is estimating the bonds will be about $5,000,000. Mr. Hornik stated according to the information received from DPF &G, $4.6 million dollars is about one third of the assessed value. The five numbered paragraphs on page 1 and 2 are the findings that the LGC wants to see the Board make to show the project is necessary and appropriate for the Town under the circumstances. Secondly, the estimated amount to be financed will be adequate to cover the cost and not excessive. Thirdly, the project is feasible. Fourth, Greg Siler and the Town's finance officers confirm the Town's debt management procedures are sound and comply with the law and the account is not in default under any debt service obligations. Fifth, the Town will be able to mark the reasonable rates of interest. Mr. Hornik spoke with the consultants from the Davenport group and they felt the terms for the 10 year repayment interest were reasonable and the bonds could be sold in the market or private place if appropriate. There would be a market for the bonds at that term and rate. Exhibit A, page 3 contains the six terms and conditions that are proposed in the draft for the Board to look at and discuss. Mr. Hornik noted Mr. Jessup had done the initial draft but there was some editing done by Ocie Best or someone from Stratford. In it 46, "or other acceptable entity ", that came about as a result of their conversation with Orange County. Mr. Hornik requested they spend some time discussing the modification proposed by Stratford in paragraph one. In the very beginning the Board talked about financing a maximum of one third of the assessed value of the property. The assessed value as of October 2012 was $12,030,000. The assessed value on August 15, 2012, after phase three improvements would be completed is $15.4 million. That is a $3.5 million difference. The prospective market value by the completion of phase two was $13.65 million. This is the number we would be working with right now. When he looks at these numbers, he sees we are at the $13.65 million. The value to lien ratio is 2.93 %. We have said all along that 3:1 or 3% is what we want. To use the hypothetical market value, which is what Stratford would like for us to do, we would have a 3.32:1 ratio, which is just about the 3 %. He asked the Board if the 2.9% close enough to the 3:1 to be satisfied or do we say no and hold fast that we can only borrow our one -third and say that the value is $13.65 million, then whatever is one -third of that is the most that we raise for lot financing. 7:20:43 PM Mr. Bob Jessup asked to clarify two issues regarding the ratio. The Board has talked regarding the difference in what the LGC requires and what the Town will require on this ratio. The ratio is important because it is the security. If someone doesn't pay an assessment and the property must be foreclosed, we want to make sure there's enough value in the property to get the money out of it. The LGC requirement is stated in an alternative; 2:1 based on the current value in the property or 3:1 based on the as- built -out basis. What the Town has said in its previous resolutions and in the previous discussions is that the Town will require 3:1 based on 4 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 5 of21 the current conditions. That doesn't have to continue to be the Town's viewpoint at any point along this process. They can decide to go back to the original version of paragraph one, adopt the modified version or just strike number one out for the purposes of this resolution. It can always be revisited. He just wanted to clarify slight what the issue of what that ratio is and how if fits into the contents of the other issues discussed. 7:22:34 PM Mayor Stevens asked for clarification that the modified version would clearly fall within the LGC requirements. Mr. Jessup said yes. He stated it may or may not be the number that is in the DPF &G report. That would have to be hashed out once they got further into the numbers. 7:22:57 PM Commissioner Gering asked when the Board could expect a response from the LGC regarding clarification whether the 3:1 ratio is what they would advise. Mr. Jessup said they have a meeting scheduled to talk about this. He said the LGC has decided 3:1 as -built is sufficiently safe for the approval process. Commissioner Gering said they may have a different viewpoint after looking at these facts. 7:24:39 PM Mr. Jessup, using a rounded number of $5,000,000 for example to make figures easier to divide up, explained the $5,000,000 would be composed of money for reserves, money to pay expenses and construction money. The whole $5,000,000 would be borrowed at once. The construction piece of $3.5 million would be placed with a trustee and there would be a contract with Stratford to get the work done. For example, if we get to three years after this first bond issue and we realize we have more value in the district and recognize the need for further improvements, we could borrow more money based on the new ratio and impose a new set of assessments to pay for the second round of bonds. At that point you would still need to get 66% of the landowners by value to agree to it but it is something that could be done. Mayor Stevens asked if that would be a whole new process. Mr. Jessup replied it would be a whole new process in terms of levying the assessments. The bond finance is a lot easier the second time around because the infrastructure is in place and the process for levying collecting the assessments in place. So it won't be much different from the Board's perspective but, from Staff and consultant basis, it will be a whole lot easier. Commissioner Hallman asked if the trustee had some discretion how quickly to pay that money out. Mr. Jessup said the trustee will not exercise any discretion other than the checkpoints the Board told them to check are done, which will not include any construction monitoring. That would have to be a Town function. If they say they are 10% complete and they want 10% of the money, the trustee isn't going to decide that, the Town will have to sign -off on that however it decides to. There will be a sign -off process. 7:26:46 PM Mr. Hornik commented the trustee doesn't have anything to do with the timing of the sale of the bonds. The trustee handles the depository of the proceeds of the sale of the bonds and distributes however they are told to distribute. Commissioner Hallman questioned whether there were enough checkpoints in place during the process to make sure it doesn't drop below a 3:1 ratio. Mr. Jessup stated in terms of the LGC process, they are going to monitor on the day the 5 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 6 of21 bonds are sold. They will say the appraisal is X, the bond issue can't be more than one -third X, not even one -third X plus $10. 7:27:47 PM Mayor Stevens said this may be at the risk of complicating things slightly, but asked if we could split the difference. Mr. Jessup replied yes. It was completely a Board decision. He said he isn't trying to advocate that the Board continue with what happened before. He's just trying to bring that point back. 7:28:20 PM Mr. Hornik stated the resolution as written talks about one -third but doesn't say one - third of what. He asked if it was one -third of the value now with phase two complete, which according to the report is about $13.5 million. Or is it one -third of the $15.4 million. Mr. Jessup said whatever amount is borrowed there is still the process of negotiating what the money can be used for and that is controlled by the Town. 7:29:01 PM Commissioner Hallman asked if it was determined what would happen with the remainder of the money that wasn't spent on building out the new infrastructure. Mr. Jessup said the way it's connotated in the resolution based on his discussions with Commissioner Hallman and Mr. Hornik is there will be a list of projects that will be funded. Then there will be a mechanism in the documents for what happens with any money that is leftover. The Town's position at this point is that it will be used either for additional improvements or to repay bonds as the Town decides in the end. 7:29:43 PM Mr. Hornik said the last sentence of condition three states that any bond proceeds available after completion of the stated improvements will be used for additional improvements or other allowable costs such as early redemption of the bonds as the Town may direct at its discretion. It may be that there's money available to help build the police station or fire station or other improvements to the park. It may be used to pay down the bond debt. The way it will be written up in the agreement is that the Board gets to make that call when the time comes. 7:30:35 PM Commissioner Gering proposed changing the first sentence of point three to say it will be used to pay "costs of new public improvements" instead of "new costs of public improvements" because theoretically the money could be spent on improving even more existing stuff Mr. Jessup agreed there was a distinction there. 7:31:34 PM Mayor Stevens stated with all of them being stakeholders they want to make sure there's enough bonds in there to do what needs to be done and there's enough value in the property and work closely with those things. 7:32:16 PM Mr. Hornik said this is just the first step of the process if the Board adopts this resolution. What happens next is the property owners submit a petition to the Town asking for the formation of the district. It's a simple form that will tell the Board they want to form the district, what properties will be in the district, what they propose to do and what it will cost them to do the work. Once the petition is received, the next step is for the Board to adopt a preliminary resolution, schedule and conduct a public hearing. After the public hearing the Board would then adopt a final assessment resolution forming the district. There is some timing February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 7 of 21 requirements but assuming the Board approves this resolution tonight, Stratford will submit a petition within the next week or so. The hearing process could be conducted in March or April. He anticipates a June onset if everything goes well with the LGC. 7:33:41 PM Commissioner Hallman stated at one time there had been a discussion within the last three years whether they needed to restart the paperwork process. Mr. Hornik said this is essentially what we are doing now. We are taking the first step we took three years ago. We are starting over. Instead of trying to modify or amend the process, we will start with a new petition, a new public hearing with this proposal, as this is a different thing than it was years ago. Procedurally, he feels it's the right thing to do. 7:36:12 PM Mr. Hornik said one thing the Board could do is in paragraph three where it states "the bond proceeds available will be used to pay costs of new public improvements for Waterstone ", we could say "including improvements to the community park ". 7:36:49 PM Ms. Hauth said yes. They are already committed under the SUP for the park to a certain level of investment so it would probably be worthwhile to specifically call out the restroom building and the Cates Creek Parkway and other improvements the Board agrees on in the future. 7:37:24 PM Mr. Hornik said he's including Cates Creek Parkway extension to South Churton Street. 7:37:55 PM Ms. Hauth added to include a restroom facility in Cates Creek Park. 7:38:10 PM Mr. Hornik read the amendments he had noted in paragraph three. "The bond proceeds available for construction costs will be used to pay the costs of new improvements for Waterstone including the Cates Creek Parkway extension to South Churton Street and provision of a restroom facility in the Cates Creek Park. It will not be used to reimburse the property owner for old costs or to make any payments on existing loans related to the property." 7:38:43 PM Commissioner Hallman asked if the Board had seen the agreement. Mr. Hornik replied yes. Commissioner Hallman asked if the dates on the Morrin's bridge had been adjusted. Mr. Hornik answered they had not yet been adjusted. There had been discussions with the Morrins who are aware that this process is going on. The feedback he received was they look favorably on this process. Ms. Hauth stated the dates for that road were adjusted in the new SUP's for the residential component so as long as the Board remains on the schedule for the SAD that allows those dates to be met, those dates live and exist. She doesn't think they've passed the set time when those dates are still reasonable but that would be the mechanism by which the dates would be adjusted. 7:39:56 PM Mr. Hornik recollects from the Nashton Woods SUP that was approved several months ago that those dates are that construction would begin June 2013 or construction to be complete roughly a year later. Ms. Hauth stated those documents were recorded at the Register of Deeds so they live on. 7 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 8 of21 7:40:38 PM Commissioner Hallman said an issue that came up that was never really addressed was that Staff time was a concern and asked Ms. Hauth if she was comfortable with where they were with that. Ms. Hauth said reducing it to 10 years eliminates her concern as that's within her retirement horizon. She said as long as there's someone here who will live throughout the whole thing and is available to answer questions it's in the best interest of everyone. 7:41:25 PM Mayor Stevens asked if there were any other questions. 7:41:32 PM Commissioner Lowen moved to adopt the resolution with amendments. Commissioner Dancy seconded. Upon a unanimous vote of 5 -0, the motion carried. B. Discuss Upper Neuse River Basin Association dues increases and operational needs 7:42:54 PM Commissioner Gering stated he asked for this item to be put on the agenda at the last meeting and Mr. Terry Hackett, Stormwater Manager, is going to elaborate. The Upper Neuse River Basin Association Board of Directors meets on February 20th, 2013. 7:43:45 PM Mr. Hackett stated that a couple of things that have transpired since the last Board meeting. The UNRBA Path Forward Committee met and went over the proposed cost in the consultant's proposed monitoring plan. He passed around summary tables from that meeting to all the Board members. The summaries list six goals in the proposed monitoring studies that Cardno Entrix, the consultants UNRBA hired to provide this information, is proposing. The UNRBA Path Forward Committee discussed a recommendation to bring to the Board later this month. They will be meeting again about which of these goals and which of the studies are the ones most needed. The two highlighted goals, the Lake Response Modeling and Supportive Regulatory Options, are probably the two most important followed very closely by Jurisdictional Loading which is the nutrient load assigned to a given jurisdiction. He said basically this whole remodel is addressing Stage II of the Falls Lake Rules. Stage 11 is where each jurisdiction must show they are meeting the 77% reduction in nitrogen and 40% reduction in phosphorus. That is big. The City of Durham estimated in the billions of dollars. He is now trying to get a handle on where they are with loading rates, but presumably, it's expensive. The idea was to take UNRBA from just an informational group to a lobbying group through this monitoring in hopes they can give the State data that says the initial modeling is not right. He says everyone, even the State, agrees the data they used was spotty. Some of the data collected was during some of our worst drought years. It included data from 2002 and 2007. Bottom line is a lot of people are saying these numbers aren't right and they want to do something. The Falls Lake Rules for Stage 11 allowed Division of Water Quality (DWQ) to accept monitoring data. It has to be at least three years of data and must meet their standards, which is why they have those studies. They discussed some costs at the last UNRBA Path Forward meeting. He provided a packet to the Board. He said to do all the studies for three years minimum was $3.2 million. They are looking at possibly doing them for four to five years February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 9 of21 because if they start doing the monitoring and during the three year period they have extremely wet years or extremely dry years they may be back to square one with poor data. Most of the people on the Path Forward Committee are leaning towards at least four years. If they were to do all the studies to meet all the goals in the table it's roughly just over $1 million annually. He also included if they only did the studies to meet the two primary goals it's a little less. Three years would be a little over $800,000. One of the things discussed at the last Path Forward meeting was not necessarily raising the dues because the dues were just doubled recently. The annual dues projected right now for the upcoming fiscal year for Hillsborough is a little over $4,600. That may stay the same so UNRBA can continue to have an Executive Director and do some of the other things they are doing now. The bylaws for UNRBA allow for special assessment for monitoring. In the packet is an example of the table with the dues. There is a cost formula they are using now to calculate what a member's dues are. It is based on number of gallons of water used in watershed. Only three jurisdictions are actually pulling water and Hillsborough is one of them. There is a base rate of 10 %. Well water demands is 50% of the calculation and land area is 40 %. Hillsborough's dues for the upcoming fiscal year are $4,600. The monitoring using that same breakdown depending on what the UNRBA Board decides would be somewhere between $15,000 and $20,000 in addition annually based on the current structure, which they assume will stay the same. They are looking at $20,000 to $25,000 annually for the next four to five years if they agree to be a part of this. 7:51:37 PM Mr. Hackett stated he didn't have an answer to that. He said they could try to come up with an answer. Durham already has an idea of what they believe it's going to cost them. When they look at the two things it's a slam dunk for them. For the Town of Hillsborough, he's not sure what it's going to end up costing to meet the Stage II goals. He reminded them the monitoring is only geared at stormwater. It's not even talking about the wastewater requirements. We also would have additional costs to meet Stage II of the wastewater rules. Tc put it in to reference, he worked on a stormwater retrofit project with Orange County Schools where they received grant money to build a stormwater pond and bio- retention. The cost of that was about $380,000. We are getting about 72 pounds of nitrogen and 10 pounds of phosphorus reduction annually from that, which is a drop in the bucket. That's probably 1% to 2% of our loading rate. Potentially it could cost millions. 7:53:16 PM Town Engineer/Utilities Director, Kenny Keel stated he did not have any exact figures on a wastewater plant but it could easily, if we are able to delay or make phase two a lot easier or not even have phase two, it could certainly save several million dollars on the next upgrade to the wastewater plant and could also delay the need for the next upgrade so we finish paying for this one first. This is just ballpark figures but very reasonable to assume. 7:53:53 PM Mayor Stevens stated this was not going toward trying to get out of the being stewards but having the information. Mr. Hackett confirmed. 7:54:06 PM Commissioner Gering stated the premise is the requirements they have to meet are unjustifiable based on the data they collected and what they are intending to do to improve Falls 9 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 10 of 21 Lake. The association feels like the lake could be improved by taking a different approach and measuring the right variables and studies. 7:54:34 PM Mr. Hackett said that was correct. He said when DWQ initially modeled this and came up with these reductions they made some very broad assumptions. They assumed that a pound of nitrogen or phosphorus nutrients discharged here leaving Hillsborough jurisdiction would be a pound at the lake. He says there are biological, chemical and natural processes as that pound flows in the stormwater and as it goes through streams that it's assimilated. So what this monitoring would hope to do is to show the fate of those nutrients in transport for somebody who is so far up in the watershed. That is a very important aspect. An easy way to look at that in simple terms is phosphorous binds to soil. So one way they control phosphorous is to control erosion. That lake already has a bunch of sediment in it. Sediment that is deposited at the top end of the lake that has phosphorous gets resuspended and goes back into solution and feeds the algae and causes problems. DWQ's data made some very broad assumptions that were just starting from a brand new lake and they already know there is stuff going in there. He pointed out that 2002 was a big drought year and the lake was so dry there was lots of plant material growing in the upper end of the lake. Those were sources of nutrients that weren't really accounted for. They are probably there but the hope is that by doing this monitoring they can go to DWQ and show that Hillsborough doesn't need to do a bunch of retrofits. They can focus in the lake or some other aspect. This whole process is driven quite a bit from the City of Durham who has the most sources. They have wastewater plants and a lot of development. The City of Raleigh is the other big player because it's their water supply. They don't want to have to start spending a lot of money to upgrade their plant to address these water quality concerns. They're still driving things. They drove those consensus principles and other things. He said the Town was smart to hold back. We need to be a part of it. If we set out to do any of these studies we couldn't afford it. He feels going through the UNRBA is a positive means in that regard. He stated the packet contained a table that showed some cost comparisons. Going back, the Town of Hillsborough fiscal dues are at $4,600 for the upcoming year. Orange County, with a lot of land mass, is at $27,000. 7:58:31 PM Mayor Stevens asked if there was a chance to or would we want to get the DWQ to redo their monitoring or studies. Mr. Hackett stated the DWQ has already said they would not. As far as they are concerned, this is what they've done. 7:58:47 PM Commissioner Gering said they are reducing their monitoring in the basin. Mayor Stevens said he wasn't surprised. Commissioner Gering said his recommendation is to find a way to suck it up and plan on spending an estimated $25,000 per year for the short term. Commissioner Hallman asked what the time frame would be. Mr. Hackett replied it would for the upcoming budget year at the earliest. He said time was of the essence to get the monitoring started because of the 2016 deadline to submit the data. There is a need to get started. July 2013 would be the earliest they could get something rolling. 8:00:10 PM Commissioner Hallman asked where the other municipalities were on this. Mr. Hackett said everyone was pretty much on board with it. The only detailed conversation he has 10 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 11 of 21 had was with a colleague with Orange County who said he didn't know where they were going to get it. Orange County has a lot of land mass but not much development in this basin that they are responsible for. Their pill is a little harder to swallow. Most of the others including the attorney that represents Stem, Creedmoor and a couple of other smaller towns are in as long as we can address the jurisdictional loading. That's important to us as well. Commissioner Lloyd asked if each of the other groups had to pay this amount. Mr. Hackett replied everyone's payment is based on that formula. Commissioner Lloyd inquired how big the payment would be for the other cities. Mr. Hackett said, based on $1 million, Butner's cost for the monitoring would be somewhere around $14,000. Creedmoor's cost would be just under $10,000. Stem's cost would be around $7,500. This compares to the City of Durham which is somewhere around $236,000. The City of Raleigh would be somewhere around $275,000. Theirs is based primarily on the water they are using. 8:02:26 PM Commissioner Gering stated Hillsborough was a small player in this. They briefly discussed the tables in the packet comparing the sizes of the cities involved. 8:03:08 PM Mayor Stevens said he's hearing general support for doing this and that it is worthwhile to do this. Part of that message is we want to make sure it is being done right and the money is being spent well and cost containment will ensure we get the value for the money we put in. 8:03:40 PM Mr. Hackett pointed out that in the initial fiscal year 2014 budget there was an allotment for the dues to double. If that number fits in the budget it's not such a big jump from where we are right now. At least the Staff and the Board has been thinking about it. He will be talking with Mr. Keel as things get sorted out. Right now it is a line item in Mr. Keel's budget. He said this monitoring may need to come from stormwater budget. They will have to figure out where it will come from. He definitely feels it is something they should try to do. Commissioner Lloyd asked if there was any chance the Town could bow out if they saw they couldn't afford it or were they stuck with it. Commissioner Gering said the Town of Hillsborough can withdraw from the Association with relatively short notice. He thinks it's a six month to one year notification period without paying anything. He recalled that Wake Forest may have left the association and came back in. Mr. Hackett said he thinks it was actually Wake County. Commissioner Gering commented that the Town was not legally bound. Mr. Hornik stated he was certain there is a clause that allows members to withdraw after a certain amount of notice. He thinks it's a one year notice. Commissioner Lloyd commented the notification period was necessary to keep everyone from withdrawing at the same time. Commissioner Gering stated he had clear direction that as long as they can demonstrate it is benefitting them more than it is costing them. C. Receive Report regarding the State of the Stormwater Program 8:06:48 PM Mr. Hackett thanked the Board for giving him the opportunity to talk with them about the Stormwater Program. He feels it was a good decision to bring this position in -house given the Falls Lake Rules and some of the changes and requirements in our stormwater permit. And 11 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 12 of 21 knowing that Orange County is going through some of the same resource constraints, his time previously was split. He says it's a good thing the Town brought this program in -house and allowed them to do more and be more efficient. He said it was part of the stormwater permit that the Board provides input and that he gives the Board updates. He went over some of the programs they are implementing. One is the MPDS Phase II permit which is issued by the State and is a federal program that has six major components including the educational and outreach requirement, public involvement, elicit discharge elimination, good housekeeping inspections and procedures where they actually go out and inspect the Town and facilities. The new development requirements are where he actually reviews projects for new development to make sure they are meeting the stormwater standards. There is also a component for stormwater from construction sites. Orange County is still providing erosion control services for the Town for private development projects. The only projects in our jurisdiction they wouldn't be permitting erosion control would be public projects such as a hospital, where the erosion control permit comes from the State. But in our permit we are required to look after that. He will still be going out to construction sites. If the hospital had an offsite sediment loss, which they did, technically it's a violation of our stormwater permit. If the EPA came to visit that day they would slap us and we would turn around and slap the hospital. Actually we contacted the State and asked them to come out and look at it. That is how we will deal with Orange County. Orange County does erosion control for all the municipalities in the County, including the Orange County portion of Mebane. The Falls Lake Rules is another program. Mr. Hackett stated there were two other programs they hope to start implementing this year. One is the Neuse Buffer Rules, which is a state program. Orange County has local delegated authority to do that now so they are still doing some of that review. But after discussing this with Ms. Hauth, they feel like it would be much more efficient to bring that back in since Mr. Hackett is already trained in doing the stream determinations. The Town already has a stream buffer program, the stream buffer protection requirements in the UDO. This is really just administrative to have the official delegated authority. Another area that is already being implemented as part of the Utility Department's pre- treatment requirements is the FOG program. That will come under his purview as well. It marries well with the stormwater program. He said from an educational standpoint, they don't want to put anything down a drain, whether it's a storm drain or a kitchen drain. The oil and grease, once it gets into the sanitary sewer system, can cause overflows and we do have to report those on our stormwater permits. So it is tied together. Mr. Hackett commented on other major tasks he will be working on. He has already been involved in general environmental support for town projects. When there are town -owned projects that go to construction he will go out and do compliance inspections, especially for erosion control or other environmental conditions. This will give another layer of oversight which he feels is important. Mr. Hackett noted some other major accomplishments which the Board saw last year. They did adopt Falls Lake new development stormwater requirements. He spent a significant amount of time assisting the Planning Department in putting that package together to be approved by the 12 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 13 of 21 State. He mentioned there was some discussion about last year's budget regarding the C.W. Stanford stormwater retrofit project. The school district obtained a grant from Clean Water Management Trust Fund to install a stormwater pond and some bio- retention. That stormwater pond collects water from about 19 acres of impervious surface and athletic fields. It's collected, filtered and sent back through their irrigation system. It is saving the school district approximately $15,000 per year. At one point the engineers estimated the schools were spending somewhere between $80,000 to $100,000 in potable water. The project went live in May. While that seems like it's taking money out of our pocket this project is a reduction in nutrients and we will be able to use that as part of our Stage I reduction goals under the Falls Lake Rules. It's an early adoption measure so it's a good thing. Also, this project was born out of C.W. Stanford's eco- classroom project team, which Mr. Hackett is a member o£ It has become the cornerstone of the stormwater education program in the schools. The high school students and the middle school students are involved in plantings, monitoring and will continue to do some measurements. He feels it's a win -win for the community. They recently submitted the existing development inventory to the State in regards to Falls Lake. He included the inspections in the packet to show the Board that, while inspection may be a small portion of his time at any given point, we do enough of them that it is a major component. That includes going out to construction sites or post - construction to locate a stormwater BMP or structural practice to see if it's functioning, asking the owners to do their maintenance, etc. and also at public assistance site visits. It is a fair amount that he gets out to look at these things. Mr. Hackett updated the Board on some current things. As part of the Falls Lake inventory they had to provide an inventory of the stormwater Best Management Practices (BMP). They are trying to move the industry from BMP to a better term of Structural Stormwater Practices (SSP). These are engineered devices so bio- retention or stormwater wet ones. They have about 55 but Ms. Hauth gave him a few more to investigate to see if they are there or are supposed to be there. They are still discovering some that were built a long time ago. All the ones that were built under the new rules we know where they are and we are working on them. They are ongoing. The Neuse Buffer Delegation will be putting that together and submitting it to the State for their approval soon. He has been involved with a couple of other town projects: the UNRBA Falls Lake, the Riverwalk II project and the Eno Dredging project. He will continue to be involved with those even when they go to construction. Mayor Stevens asked if the Board needed to reprogram so that BMP is now SSP. Mr. Hackett confirmed but said they still have BMP (Best Management Practices) but there is a difference between a practice and a structural device. He is trying to train himself to say structural stormwater device or something of that nature. Mr. Hackett went over some of the challenges they have. One is the elicit discharge plan. It is a great plan but it just isn't implemented the way he'd like it to be partly because of the way things were when they were contracted with the County and partly due to just making the time for it. One thing they will be doing is trying to provide training, hopefully, to all town employees, especially the ones out in the field, to recognize illegal discharges. Then they will be doing some screening and looking at some other things. 13 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 14 of 21 Another challenge is the FOG program. He hoped with the creation of this position it would help out the Utilities Department and take that off their plate. Mr. Hackett said he had been to one workshop on this and as soon as he can spend some time meeting with Mr. Keel they will be ramping that up and taking that over. He already mentioned the BMP inspections and mapping. He said in regards to the structural practices, the owners are responsible to file an actual Operation Maintenance Agreement who is supposed to do annual inspections and send Mr. Hackett a report. That doesn't always happen. In the actual Stormwater Permit it says when each one is approved, his department should physically go out and see it at least once every five years, which is the life of the permit cycle. He stated they would like to do that more and know that they are functioning. It will be a big challenge, especially the ones that are older, finding out who is financially responsible for maintaining them and getting to the right person. Tracking data is always a challenge as well. Mr. Hackett moved on to note future challenges. Falls Lake: the existing development program is the one that has Stage I and Stage II goals. That is just for the stormwater, not wastewater. The UNRBA Path Forward Committee has a meeting with DWQ early March and will present a draft of the model program for Stage I existing development requirements. Presumably they will get to comment and provide some good information to them. They will take it to the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) and will have to be approved by July 2013. Assuming it is approved at that time, Mr. Hackett will have six months to put their program together regarding what they are going to do and then, once that is approved, six months later they must start implementing. Mr. Hackett started to address the Eno River hydrilla issue and asked Mr. Keel if anyone had previously provided any information to the Board. Mr. Keel replied he wasn't sure. They had some funding in the budget the last couple of years and he thinks he had talked briefly about this program and someone coming in to try to control it. 8:21:49 PM Commissioner Lloyd asked if he had spoken to them about the carp. Mr. Keel replied yes. The main thing they are doing right now is putting the carp being the eco. Commissioner Lloyd asked if there were any carp left. Mr. Keel said yes. They had been replenished recently. He said it was relatively under control in Lake Orange. It was a bad problem years ago and they added carp and some other things to control it. There's quite a bit of it in West Fork and they have been working with the State on trying to eliminate it through the fish and the application of herbicides. Commissioner Lloyd recalled when the County did it the Town had to pay half. Mr. Keel said it wasn't just in West Fork. It's all the way down to Eno State Park in Durham all through the run of the river. The State is working with other stakeholders in trying to do something about it. 8:23:13 PM Mr. Hackett stated that's where the real big problem is. The hydrilla invasive plant is bad for the environment. Water fowl ingests the plant and there is a bacteria that gets into their system. Then when eagles eat the water fowl, it kills the eagles. The hydrilla is hard to kill but relatively easy to control in a reservoir because you can put the grass carp in. That doesn't work in the river. If you put grass carp in the river they would displace all the native species and that 14 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 15 of 21 would be bad. The other problem is the Eno River is one of only four rivers in the United States, he thinks, that has a hydrilla issue and it's because of the moving water. The moving water usually keeps the hydrilla from catching root and it flows down to the next reservoir. The State is trying to get some funding and build some partnerships to apply a different chemical. This concerns the Town of Hillsborough because we have a water intake and a wastewater plant discharge. He has had some brief conversations with the managers of those facilities as to whether or not it will be a problem having this chemical. The Utility Department is working on it and Will Baker has asked him to sit in on this and get to know the folks with the State who are trying to control it because it is an issue. Mr. Hackett addressed the funding of these programs such as monitoring, the Falls Lake Rules if they need to get to retrofits, etc. Funding it is going to be a problem. He said there had been some discussion with the Board whether or not to look at stormwater utilities. He remembered the Board didn't want to go in that direction, however, it is an option that is available. Another option is to raise taxes. In regards to raising taxes, citizens want to know they are getting a service for that and it's a challenge for even the larger municipalities to have big budgets but these things are significant. He reminded everyone that their stormwater flows to the Eno River and about half of the citizens appreciate what they are trying to do, especially if he isn't preventing them from building sheds or doing something to the stream buffer. 8:27:09 PM Commissioner Lloyd and Commissioner Hallman briefly exchanged comments on the effects of the hydrilla. Mr. Hackett agreed the hydrilla is some rough stuff He informed the Board to feel free to contact him with any questions. He would be more than happy to take a field trip with them to see some of this and try to understand what is going on. Sometimes sitting in an office or in meetings it's hard to get a clear picture. 8:27:44 PM Commissioner Lowen said the FOG program has been a concern of his for a long time because he has seen commercials out of Durham encouraging people not to pour cooking oil and things like that down the drain. A few years ago he experienced a lady actually pouring cooking oil down her kitchen drain and turn on the hot water. She said she does it all the time. He said people don't realize what that does to our water. 8:28:33 PM Mr. Hackett said education is a big part of this and right now the only inspection requirements are restaurants. Restaurants are high on his list, not only for the FOG but the illegal discharges. He had the privilege of sitting on an advisory committee that UNC and Chapel Hill Stormwater Department sponsored. It was an education campaign they developed for restaurants because their illegal discharge person was finding that was his biggest problem area. One of the high -end restaurants there actually went out with their wash water and their grease to a storm drain and dumped it in. That particular drain flowed maybe 100 ft. where it discharged into a stream. He saw pictures and it was ugly. That is where he plans to start because it's big but then they will turn to residents and try to promote the education. He noted that things like Gold Park and the Riverwalk extension, because they are near the river and near the sanitary sewers, people are more aware if there are overflows because they might be walking by it. When you can tie that back to something they take ownership for we have a better chance of changing that behavior. 15 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 16 of 21 8:30:16 PM Commissioner Lowen commented about options to educate and offer the residential base so they would know how to properly dispose of oil and grease and what happens when they don't. He sat and talked with the lady he mentioned earlier in regards to pouring the oil down her kitchen drain. She brought up a good point. People don't know what to do with it because they can't pour it down the drain or out in the yard because it affects our water and they can't put it in a can or bottle and put it in the trash can because those are supposed to be recycled. 8:31:15 PM Mr. Keel stated there were some promotional products that he could look into. Maybe there is an inexpensive disposal system. Commissioner Lowen suggested they make a spot at one of the town facilities where residents can take their cooking oil, similar to that of a landfill where people take their motor oil. Mr. Hackett said that was something they could certainly look into. 8:32:08 PM Mayor Stevens thanked Mr. Hackett for coming. Mr. Hackett thanked the Board and told them if they had any other thoughts or ideas to please contact him. D. Discuss "Hot Topics" for the February 25, 2013 Monthly Workshop 8:32:19 PM Mayor Stevens asked for any suggestions and noted there was a County meeting on February 21st and the retreat on March 2nd. They are little behind on working on the agenda for that. He said they would probably do something very similar to what they did last time. Commissioner Hallman is preparing a 7 -8 page summary. They also have a request from the news launch to take a group picture of the Town Board. 8:33:50 PM Commissioner Gering suggested they cancel their workshop. 8:33:53 PM Commissioner Dancy made a motion to cancel the workshop. Commissioner Lowen seconded. Upon a unanimous vote of 5 -0 the motion was carried. 8:34:06 PM Commissioner Lloyd asked Mayor Stevens if there were any items to be added to the agenda for the meeting with the County. Mayor Stevens replied he had not yet seen the agenda but items that were discussed last time have all been submitted and are in process. There will probably be some updates. 8:34:41 PM Commissioner Dancy made a motion to go into Closed Session. Commissioner Lloyd seconded. Upon a unanimous vote of 5 -0 the motion carried. 11. CLOSED SESSION A. Closed Session as authorized by North Carolina General Statute Section 143 - 318.11 (a)(3) regarding update on Legal Matter involving property acquisition - under Attorney - Client Privilege Commissioner Lowen made a motion to return to Open Session. Commissioner Dancy seconded. Upon a unanimous vote of 5 -0 the motion carried. 16 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 17 of 21 12. ADJOURN Upon returning to Open Session, and upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Lowen, the Board moved to adjourn at 8:55 pm by a vote of 5 -0. The motion was declared passed. I � '•/ .� Respectfully submitted, Donna F. Armbrister, MMC Town Clerk 17 Town 11 February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 18 of 21 I(ElvMJIVIO, ,00111311 911 i1 n11.1 Batt" �. 1:; 17ttYGN1r "ktrol;(�II111SHU��O1 X01(1 "1vl'h4 [o yl ",l' "llN! V4tWN I'B I p "I 1 IN S+ TIPOV,B O] W 1 , % FOR ll q 2013 wffl& W %S, .1..40 l'p,tagc Como o 1;xko fi_m I a4a I tvrrj'0 od) be hod ur Maur "r, 20L, at 4hc IfiH h��11�1a11a: `wa;'lz� +arl iu l p'9;uiad. grad '+yV1B3N4l I6, .B.a, build cn amoo'rutl. and it n) *,opporl i'ol this e%,ei1, the q,hml to Tamt flhr yap m Putllrle, Iry a{1.r17lzayi nv, pDulpIc how~ di'llAI1VRmn alva l I'raarru ,yprnl 27`'" lh aa„u, Ia )a,q 4 h . cajO 1 lBF�W:; S, 1 (Rn ;il lcsa dcllk wid fbosii)css cw,i u , gate, ihlc to h0p alul s,ho+,, suppoa lay pvwarfiJjl Oauk 9r) NOW I Iii IdflB�VORIv BE I B Nil Sip VH), pay IBtc 7ovn ikeam%j of l omAt k'siorlcr,, alutti 1br R ,;la" fi+r I ift, alc ao- imilP3lar; lic °rch . llfitme cld to place, lho Okc 1nibli u� ghr of' ;ay taw Bo aial sulcaauu tl b;,r th , eel rianu nuly to onl°nrom ¢his IrropaaerLmll ealuw Btr aaBtaate.a� a rut altaac °:a thee au'v mo,r cotaiCona hle- IsarrtSl rruts,Mawm. 'rw S'EAI P , J� ��� Y��✓Ykselkti,v !' 101 ! ar^1 r)r'ara p.,4 4lr ruaa , P 0 Pm 1,79 + Pli I41!raa,r�,, g to 'aae't�r l Arr ad'e' aau v �. " "5' Y 2- f ..�r 1'rcu �,+a a ry to ",d� o February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 19 of 21 Ril I ION 4r(1130M -10 A ResWicirtion suppoming an apphuban M dw LmW Mir 1L��Aklmmtml ialluss--Slmnl rev omt.hond —flWV0'A R RqMREAS -- JBjo J'mkwi i prcOmady agir"d in primJj.rk W pin'sue �[ pcc�-,fl ewcwatrraz h,rr,j tn,,,,,,er,,",, a ?1 "tJrc hmtr Jr&!r (he t�,oWchucs of Me North Umd% I oul "owmuwm 0-nihiml G,, governing body Inrl [ craw C(ijralIn lirlffill-% or fild 4N a iujljlm,l 111e] omn's apphCaliun 1,61, [lie LOC's, ajpprclwal or,thel plol)owd finnircing 771t,'REJ-DRE, BE it RI;SOLVIJ) by ille 13mtrd of Commissioners of the Town of FUHsWwough, Norlh Carl Iha flic makes a jjickrninar� docirinkadon to i"uc sNcW uscamad runaw Nm& W mmum ndmwd m nor ,,, 0,, QljWJH) W HWMV rrJC)Ar pjrj.)JjC rc,quirod mesa es wand to pa) finanving ccisl�,. I he reirm, of flu" holki issaw iinr�4 he consisir,mt w4h i1w, wi nr, and conchl Ions qailc,k6 ill IrswTurlblr, /v 'Mis Wa in wn rtrararrl to ho cxfiausfl%c, to the 1'mNn Board oM mdu a find delumhallon al a Inner date as W whkqhcw 11+ proccod c%illh dl o Kind kmjo ,,ind Io apprm,c ll finwlCjwlip CryrS ,jr[it fjmV, Ylaraarr�aJ 'Ifl lrg,,JpIS to appmve or nol unmwc a And Nmd Ww. or ks caNt kwwk towuni a hymid iqmw id aq W "Wha w nM Aw HnA or pvq"W 11WHCOW Wimis wd oWlew am emsimm %kidi iho terirj� so oul Ill 1,6ihit A HE IT fTWTUER RASOL UY."D lihal tyre Board ofColinjuissioners itnikes the WM"UgMWWPo1Al L Hh! proposed projec[ Is liccc,,sar�, and appnj)riale fitir the Vomn under all 4W chvwIrslances I hc, Spnwemems pryumod Rn Wnchg me nemssmy lor sairrued and ordorl± ac oloprnen in (he Board ha,� deternkincd that fxirsu�ung the bond tlmlrlcir, i"', Qu." uhonalke lo pro%jda jor fliose wilh the purpose o accelcradn�,,; irwrc vics In dw I own 's lax b v;c and pro% idinp, idifililIon"'d wAIMI and Iran rwss opporfinl in [he lo✓n, rffl fiw Ow heircid 1)1,111Q hi "'Ind it 2, IN calunwed kunowns "; hc lbwn,sml MH b"Wqmw mid mo mc=&, [Or the fwopo ed jllwpos�, Ow I. n WW dimco rurew pnps"l IrlawhT no" Upom inarkel raRc,, with guidaiwe firom ffic I(;(' ,arid ir,' d'ira°urw6al ad% kQl I he kmnf wdl chwo MMI&W sw CWMRS hw dw "H"le'tilon of ll to be :"I HIC llrirjW is fcu- ihhc. I he I o Nrj hcfi(nes Ill"'a spccjal a,.sCSsnlcn1xL to be recpora °d Il poa dw llnq)osod Himrd�, %01 ll rc.rsonAhle under die The I oNNII ba!-"es rr,,a bckQ1 on inifial C,,almaioor from the p�'(Jperrll ()yala ,,r . auCl ft,' February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 20 of 21 4, /d', c''clifill"Inccl b tk lumn's knalic'! ji) lhe debt immmgemcw pinedums mW pIdn am wmd and in coaphunm "kh law. amd W) 1he kmn k not rndchull undct,m� , ot as dcht 5, Jcm-ia %rffl lie nl.4c o m,,,ukvI llw bonds al Tvasonnbk- ritel, of'iEflcf-t- tho ln'oped�' ok"110% lLS COW,Ullanus and he hond undcrww,rhci. as N)cH :o the I =Ws VimmON Wwo We Wwl 11W hmn Owl a Qmd kmw or to pwpwal We �Ind finail ciop lean is venal-IN c(l�flkk! ad ntvonal i k: i atc, 0 100- CUn cnr L i ai 1,;m I col ld l6uo ls,, (a) 'Hw I mm anwjlds fluat ffic iadopiicn offlO,,,, Nkffl be a of, the Fown"s official irotrfa lo k,uxj pro 00 cxpl.,11(filinros Inmii l"mancing proccQds, lhe I ook,n inictuk lhua lunds &I I= been H&;irwed ltq pi )ject cosl�,, or whMi way he so a(KaodCcd. Qlc� !,�gncla[ rund, or an) inher Im%il 6,tmL nia, In rl°ornhurscd h'01n thC 11110Miu procu%:&- 011 "Ille locmll MuVi',ipO% [I'v.- HnanCC (Aficer and aH o(twi looin ofhou ,r-; and emploaees ar dja "cctcd w"ake aH aMmghw Mqn umwd Ow um"Okm or 111c, Omminy WWI colMA&I an qokokn us We ix, sw a mpymn or a proposed AH [arias- dCliOD", 01 1 0MI I-Cl)V0'QiHAfiNCS ill doS rag rd uaw jcgar'ded as Md &I (C) I h r ,a)kaj(ni ^ffieed * * * & k * . & k * & I Q h * i * I cenjQ us RMY Rml Wei WpAy raAWn = pWmt &"cd w a imclkW KI We IWO oT CommisAams I he hmn WAMUnm4L Nmh UmM, fluld this Ineenlip, was prop,cdy Wkd wW 19d on Qkm* I K RON IM a Wmmm was alhl aciiilp, illmughoul Ihis nlc,e144,n and thm J& re,oluiion has not hoco Inoditi wd oraulcmkd, and all h,ffl C11"C'0 `h, of, loday, DaWd Jus, I 11h do, ol hAmioty , 2M ;, /I HU "Am n Clerk ��j IWAI] Towo od I ifflshonmqfl), Nonh Cwokna February 11, 2013 Town Board Regular Meeting Approved: April 8, 2013 Page 21 of 21 Exilibit A -- F%2nKRgjFvrny ary! QQ09 UAAM���� I. I he prAw#I anummi oV IN hond We "M nw unud mwAkd " We ImM d"mhU ow awf Ow pspaQ, & !N cwmm wmNAn and mme A d"O"mmi mid hKAuchng mn) Mw mmAMM " Wi the cmOU At 4 Ac mw fiN W A"WWMMIs Io [wc I'iNjtdQd ray the: ncL lion pnmxclo two be IoLatcd vkithin ihe as;icssInctil Hie nlu*l be i n fool In ,nn dsubstajwC ACCCj')ifl11c to dw g own, 2, Hie icrin oCH)c bond k,;nQ v0l nol e\ceed en I Ite NMI fl-OCCC(k av&iikfl1c fin con"'InIction iw fll be usc k) 1m), the com of riow p"Iflic klipn cnienL,; 161 W ikn°:Aonu, jn,ehld�ny i1he Caies Creek Park\kay CNL��,g n,,�on h) South Cjwmm 9MO MW PWsion ofa T'cslrvoin racilir� in ("aic" Cruck 11,111, OlId WiU '101. be Lt"e(J o) -ehiilltttr,,e flie. prop,o.ny wwnej, l'oc old awls or w nuike �iny Inipmw on QMWy Amh mhwd W dw. pnqwn, I hu luind chwunwnB W sW• klaC Ampnwonciss lo bc Smiud Any annanwihn hond pnweNk a"Huh• ahor aniW4011 of dw swed &jmnv"wm will be uwd fawn WWW Qwmmmb w oMa WKwHe cost ,iq Otc, of hoods) si, the lov�w n j,nay Ifit-oct hi its ifiscrelion. 4, Ahliough flic dei c-kj)cns v, ffl he aunholized to emer uIao aH w ,'ontract,,, fin, 111c (]QsIgn mid Construckon and IH mch conlrack (a) nnvO be wilh co]Ilp�innes rca!,onaN�, tIcccp�ahlc to Ow dowji, and (11) nnw,i 1),ro,jde fiit ,,III warnanfiv"" 111-o6ded no the dcesflo�I� N to •in ekpjall� Io tlhc Eown� In parlkcu4u, itio, wwwN nuist pm\Wo J& the (mvovur •nNimcbm wmath" AM Ow Wa 10"lly Nqwms Q MMMCOM" wwymo& PQUN us Mn to TU hanom It dw WWW 11te cmmms ww"AW smh wmmWm iw Miich me Town he he ,cs ,houkl coninin these %,,ariianiics, nttr)i he nrj, rol,ril mid Te".1sonably acccj,,)taHc to thQ, lomn to the me"t than I own hehcv• a provkkm aH6:1S the f'owrl", hncrcss, I Is OnowchT docwww"Mw Awsk lums a"PUMN bo we I own in its Likcrefion cn, flic cwn,icle of die hond docuinenis. of an) ort-goiny tadwlaurnvtrtwtnvc Costs related W dw dMAL OW WMMUMIS iu OW Nmd Wwo TWc, anoiipuuw�niq n'lay o-1 colnillifinent lo payiment by a urQat6 rra4 cnfit� o1het tlwn [Ito JJC me K"Wq OMM r i hc� t cn% n nwsl be aagvda Io niake n"pAhe W Ow I mn 4 hs TwM&M AV OW cmlnoy ol- (flhol ;ILcepl,,Jqe endw(s) to bill and oollco tber spockd ,ns'c�cssnlo,ifl"'' ,a nd Io lake aclion in flIc e%cni ofwi unpaid Hie oltw wane ofltca naydiarge 161 %%'Odk.