Laserfiche WebLink
April 19, 2010 (Regular Meeting) <br />Page 1877 <br />Gather subdivisions to take ownership of the solution by way of <br />education and training. This should also include field <br />demonstrations. Residents of communities are motivated. <br />Unpolluted water keeps our children and pets safe and healthy and <br />increases property values. <br />Seek out grant writing opportunities in conjunction with <br />environmental companies to attract them to the area. This would <br />mesh Cabarrus County business and job growth with the <br />environmental problems. Maybe we could trade tax breaks and <br />other incentives for companies who would help clean up our <br />waters. <br />Form and train resident teams to train other teams to go out all <br />over our county and get all the water cleaned up. Training needs <br />to include governmental restrictions in relation to getting in <br />the water, creek beds, what can and cannot be removed etc. <br />Research and network other funding sources on a regular basis to <br />be part of the accountability neighborhood group. <br />Eight photographs were also presented identifying the location of the <br />pollution and illustrating various pieces of large debris blocking or <br />polluting the creek, such as: exposed Duke Energy wires, tires, dead trees <br />and a shopping cart. <br />Chairman White advised someone would contact Ms. Easton by the end of <br />the week. <br />Harris Morrison, resident of 260 Eastover Circle S.E. in Concord, spoke <br />on behalf of the Old Creamery in regards to the new location for the Board of <br />Elections. He suggested the top floor of the Sheriff's Administration <br />building would be an unwise allocation of funds, provide poor access and <br />discourage voter participation. He asked the Board to study other viable <br />alternative options, including a 10,000 square foot building at the Old <br />Creamery. <br />With there being no one else to address the Board, Chairman White <br />closed that portion of the meeting. <br />(E) OLD BUSINESS <br />(E-1) BOC - Request by Research City, LLC for Refund of Ad Valorem Taxes <br />Paid on Real Property - $2,744.55 - Tabled from the March Regular Meeting <br />Richard Koch, County Attorney, presented the following information <br />regarding the request by Research City, LLC in March for a refund of Ad <br />Valorem Taxes paid on real property in the amount of $2,744.55: a number of <br />questions were raised by the Board in March concerning who paid the 2009 <br />property taxes and what happened in the bankruptcy of the original owners, <br />who were foreclosed on as a result of a homeowners' association lien; the <br />taxes in question were for 2009, were paid by the existing mortgage holder <br />and were for property purchased by Research City, LLC that was later deeded <br />back to the original owner; in reference to the bankruptcy, the Austin's <br />filed for Chapter 13 in the North Carolina Bankruptcy Court for the Western <br />District of North Carolina in 2007; the County was notified of the bankruptcy <br />and filed a Proof of Claim for the property taxes; when Research City, LLC <br />paid the taxes, the County amended its Proof of Claim down to zero as <br />required by bankruptcy law; Warren Tadlock, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for <br />the Western District, advised that a claim by the County for those taxes <br />would be denied because the claim was extinguished in the bankruptcy court; <br />and the reference to the Redevelopment Commission of High Point v Gilford <br />County, cited by Zac Moretz, attorney for Research City, LLC, does not apply <br />to this situation. In conclusion, Mr. Koch advised, according to N.C.G.S. <br />105-381, the Board lacks authority to refund the taxes in this situation. <br />Commissioner Privette MOVED to deny the request by Research City, LLC <br />for a refund of Ad Valorem Taxes paid on real property for $2,744.55. <br />Commissioner Carruth seconded the motion. <br />Chairman White commended Mr. Moretz for his compelling presentation for <br />his client. <br />The MOTION unanimously carried. <br />(F) CONSENT AGENDA <br />