County “willing to look at” joint funding issues


Henderson Mayor Pete O’Geary told the Joint Intergovernmental Committee at the outset of yesterday’s afternoon meeting that he hoped the city and Vance County boards could develop a work plan that will resolve concerns in a “win-win manner” by late spring.

The city’s intergovernmental team consisted of council members Sara Coffey, Lonnie Davis, and Brenda Peace. Vance County’s Board of Commissioners was represented by Terry Garrison, Scott Hughes, and Tim Pegram. County Manager Jerry Ayscue and City Manager Ray Griffin were also present along with city Financial Director Sandra Wilkerson and county Finance Director Stephen Stanton.

Council member Garry Daeke sat in the audience during the meeting and did not participate.

Before moving on to agenda items, Hughes said that in the three years he’s served on the county commission that he thinks the number of joint meetings have been “inadequate”. He said he would like to see the joint meeting followed by more, and that future meetings should at least be quarterly.

“We really need to start working together,” Hughes said.

By convention, when the city hosts the meeting, it is run by the mayor. Before moving to the first discussion item, O’Geary remarked that it is “no secret that [the city] has concerns about funding ratios and the tax collection rate”.

Prefacing a discussion of tax collection, Griffin noted that the collection rate fell by 4% in 2009. He said that the council also has questions about foreclosures and collecting delinquent taxes. He asked county commission members if it is possible to “beef up” the collection rate and enhance its ability to collect back taxes.

Ayscue responded that county commissioners have authorized the tax office to use foreclosure for taxes delinquent three or more years, and that it is actively pursuing foreclosures. He said that Griffin and he have discussed the possibility of sharing a house attorney who would be dedicated to such collection action.

The county manager told the committee that the tax office does wage garnishments, liens on bank accounts, and takes tax returns. He said that the collection rate is a “reflection somewhat” of the economy, but that the county government is receptive to new ideas and approaches. He claimed later in the discussion that there is not much tax money that is written off, although even one dollar is too much.

Commissioner Hughes claimed that some of the county’s more aggressive tax collection measures were enacted following a joint meeting in 2007 when the city asked for stronger tax collection action.

When Griffin pressed the committee about whether the idea of a joint attorney for tax collection should be explored, Commissioner Garrison said that the recently hired county tax administrator should “be given the benefit of a doubt” before the city and county take such action.

Next on the slate was a discussion of the funding of the Vance County Board of Elections. According to the current agreement, which dates back to 1972, the city pays for 22% of general elections and 100% of the cost for municipal elections.

Griffin questioned the 22% city contribution for county-wide elections, noting that all who vote in those elections vote as county residents.

“Is that percentage appropriate?” Griffin asked.

Ayscue responded that the 100% the city pays for municipal elections is only spent on items specific to those elections, including poll workers who may be hired to work those elections. He said that the rest of the cost comes out of the 22% city contribution. He went on to say that the elections board must function on a continual basis to meet state and federal requirements.

Garrison said that the commission would “certainly be receptive to taking a look at that again”. He said that if a change is needed because of a population change, the commission would take that into account.

Regarding 911 emergency services, Griffin told members that Henderson and Vance County were the first governmental entities in the state to consolidate the service in an agreement dating back to 1986.

The cost of the operation is split evenly between the city and the county, with 53% of the calls originating in the city.

Griffin argued that in the years since the 911 agreement was established, the service has evolved into more of a county function. On that basis, he asked if the 50-50 split was still appropriate.

In a discussion of the H. Leslie Perry Memorial Library, Griffin called the arrangement “unique”, noting that the city and county provide funding to a board of trustees who are essentially contractors who run the library for both governments. He said the council’s question is whether or not library funding has become more of a county service.

The county currently pays 65% of library expenses, with the city picking up the remainder.

In remarks more related to the broader issue than the library, Hughes voiced his support for changing the joint funding “as a Henderson resident”. He acknowledged that if the county were to assume funding all of the programs, it would increase county taxes. He indicated that he hoped there would be a corresponding decrease in city taxes.

Hughes said that “debating like this can get small things done, but won’t get what the city wants”.

Henderson council member Coffey said that he city is not asking the county to take over everything, and that the city has a responsibility [to provide some] funds, but that the city wants to see the proportions become more fair.

Council member Lonnie Davis said that if the city and county reach a roadblock on these issues that they won’t be able to do other things that are beneficial and cost-saving down the road.

At Garrison’s urging, the discussion turned back to the agenda, specifically the Recreation Department.

Currently, the city pays 55% of operational costs and 50% of the debt service on the Aquatics Center. The county provides 100% of the youth services budget.

Griffin asked commissioners if there was a “better percentage” the city might be looking at for 2010 and beyond.

Ayscue replied that recreation services in North Carolina are mostly city and town services. He characterized the current arrangement as “excellent”.

The discussion turned briefly to the perennial issue of transportation to the facility.

Public transportation is a county function.

In addition, Coffey said that she would like to see more advertising of the recreation facility.

Moving off of joint funding issues, the discussion moved to alcohol sales in Vance County. Griffin questioned if bottle tax revenues are being distributed fairly. The city gets 15% of the bottle tax, while Vance County gets 85%.

Ayscue responded that county money is earmarked for mental health and alcohol treatment and education. Griffin responded by stating that in terms of discretionary funds, the county gets $215,000 per year while Henderson nets only $38,000.

The current alcohol revenue split is statutory rather than a result of an interlocal agreement. It dates back to 1935. At the time the proceed split was established, all ABC stores were located in the county. The sole ABC store currently operating is within city limits.

Ayscue said that revenues would be lowered for the next ten years as the Alcohol Board of Control pays off its debt for the new facility off of Beckford Drive. Garrison, however, indicated that the county would be “receptive to taking a look at it”.

Moving down the agenda, the county manager urged Henderson to conclude a water deal with the county in the next 60 days so that Vance may move forward with its county-wide water project.

As for surplus property, Hughes suggested that the Armory be taken off the market and grants be sought to revitalize it.

Council member Brenda Peace called it a “wonderful idea”.

Griffin said that the problem with marketing the property is the cost of bringing it up to code. Ayscue suggested that a Rural Center planning grant be sought , but recommended that the property be kept on the market as long as possible.

Garrison asked that the Armory issue be put on the agenda for the county commissioner’s upcoming retreat.

As for the “old bank building” on Garnett Street, members agreed that it could not be allowed to deteriorate further, especially as the possible future site of a Henderson high speed rail station. The managers were directed to have their staffs look at it and report back to their respective boards.

Before adjourning, the members agreed to a meeting in mid-March. The date and location of the meeting will be announced at a future time. Members agreed to keep the meeting time at 3:30 p.m.