Laserfiche WebLink
like and similar positions in other local governments, private companies, and <br />in our labor market area. <br /> <br />capital i~rovements, improved bond ratings, future improvements to the Jail <br />and funding for recreation purposes. Chairman Fennel proposed the <br />appropriation of more money for soccer fields and lass to regional parks. He <br />stated the tournaments held at the plAn-ed soccer complex at Stonewall <br />Jackson School would have an economic impact for the County. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cli£ton discussed the need for road improvements in Cabarrus County <br />and the potential for County fun~ing to assist with those improvements. <br />Durin~ the process to obtain driveway permits for the COX Mill Elementary <br />School, the North Carol~-~ Department of Transportation had advised of the <br />need for improvements to the intersection at Christenbury Road and Derita <br />Road. Tha estimated cost for these impro~ements was $300,000.00. Planning <br />etaff members have been working with property owners in that area to find a <br />more efficient way to deal with the issue. <br /> <br /> Mr. Alex Rankin with Concord Engineering and representing Mr. Ken <br />Christenbury, property owner who was present for the meeting, proposed the <br />realignment of C~ristenbury Road, the realignment of Cox Mill Road and the <br />extension of Concord Mills Boulevard to address traffic problems in the area. <br />He stated that Mr. Christsnbury has agreed to donate the right of way for <br />this project that will improve t~affic safety for the school as wall as <br />provide direct access to %he Highland Creek subdivision. The estimated cost <br />for the roadway construction, including professional services, was <br />$1,051,060.00 ($258,200.00 for the Cox Mill Road portion and $792,860.00 for <br />the Concord Mills Boulevard extension). Mr. Rankin proposed that the County <br />proceed with the Concord Mills Boulevard ~xtsnsion to Christenbury Road and <br />said the State might be able to do the Cox Mill Road realignment with its own <br />employees. <br /> <br /> Mr. Clifton outlined a proposed city, County and private partnership to <br />fund the Concord Mills Boulevard ~xtenaion with the County, City of Concord <br />and Highlan~ Creek Developers each providing $250,000.00 and. the Christenbur~ <br />family dona=in9 the right of way and contributing approximately $50,000.00 to <br />the project. He stated the work would address road issues and also create an <br />economic development opportunity in the area. Mr. Clifton asked for <br />authorization from the Board to pursue the agreements with the various <br />parties to move forward with the road improvement project. <br /> <br /> ~PON MOTION of Com~issioner Privet=e, seconded by Chairman Fennel and <br />unanimously carried, the Board authorized staff to proceed with the proposed <br />Concord Mills Boulevard extension, including $250,000.00 in County funding, <br />aa outlined by the County Manager and Mr. Alex Rankin. <br /> <br />Edue&t~un Funding - Non-Public S~haoLs <br /> <br /> Mr. Hat=sell presented an overview of various legal issues and <br />challenges =hat may arise to ~he creation and implementation o£ a wschool- <br />Choice" or voucher program, designed to ~rant public dollars to parents of <br />Cabarrus County school-age children for use in private achoolsf including <br />religions schools, Re introduced his associate, Attorney F/m Lyda, who had <br />done much of the legal research concerning the 18sue. Mr. Her=sell reviewed <br />the issues relating to public purpose, constitutional considerations <br />involving the separation of church and state, the need for statutory <br />authority and the legal feasibility of developing a School-Choice prngram to <br />provide an incentive for economic development. He stated the proposed <br />pro,ram would in all likelihood meet the issue of public purpose; however, <br />there would be a series of criteria to look at to determine if a specific <br />program would meet constitutional requirements. Mr. ~art~ell advised that <br />the County does not have statutor~ authority at this time to implement such a <br />program unless the school board agrees =o do so. Finally, he advised there <br />'might be authority to in~tiate such a program through the economic <br />development statute. However, he stated the program would still have to meet <br />· constitutional criteria relating to the separation of church and state. <br /> <br /> Mr. Clifton pointed out that whatever the Board decides to pursue <br />regarding the proposed school program will probably result in liti~ution and <br />court challenges to the validity of the program. <br /> <br /> There was discussion about the following issues: court cases involving <br />school fundin~ issues; ~hs North Carolina Legislative tuition grant of <br /> <br /> <br />