ASHEBORO, N.C. — There will be no Agricultural Event Center bond referendum on the Nov. 6 general election ballot.
The Randolph County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously after a public hearing Monday night not to hold a referendum that would have given voters the option of approving general obligation bonds totaling up to $58 million to build an Agricultural Event Center (AEC).
Instead, the board agreed to discuss at its Sept. 4 meeting an alternative resolution offered by a private group. That resolution calls for the county to add more representation to the Ag Center Advisory Committee, seek more funding sources and to educate the public on the benefits an AEC would have for all citizens in the county.
It was a packed commissioners meeting room on the second floor of the Historic 1909 Courthouse, with more than 30 speakers addressing the commissioners, roughly split down the middle in favor of and opposed to the referendum. But when Kemp Davis, chair of the Voluntary Agricultural District board, asked for those who supported an AEC, the vast majority of the audience stood.
County Manager Hal Johnson began the meeting with an overview of the AEC process, which he said had been talked about "for at least the past 20 years." That process picked up steam a couple of years ago with the purchase from Klaussner Home Furnishings of 104 acres near the intersection of U.S. 64 and Salisbury Street in Asheboro.
"One of the consistent development themes expressed by citizens during the design and input phase was the importance of developing the entire project at the same time," Johnson said. "The current cost of the fully-constructed Randolph County Agricultural Event Center is estimated to be no greater than $58 million. Randolph County does not have the ability to construct a facility of this size and scope without an increase in property tax."
It's for that reason that the commissioners had pursued the bond referendum, he said.
"The proposed facility is designed to provide opportunities for farm-based education programs, enhanced opportunities for residents to buy local foods at a centralized farmer's market, office space for agricultural support agencies, meeting space, hosting of graduations, county fairs and 4-H youth educational activities, and event space for livestock, equestrian, rodeo and trade shows," Johnson said.
"The entire agricultural complex could attract overnight visitors. The proposed site plan reserves commercial spaces that will add jobs and taxable activities."
Johnson said that if a referendum were approved by voters, the county would pursue other funding sources, such as low-interest Rural Economic Development loans through Randolph Electric Membership Corporation. Other possible sources include naming rights, office rent from outside agencies, private fundraising, grants, a possible occupancy tax increase and potential state support such as has been provided to centers in Asheville and Lumberton.
Leading off the public hearing, Alan Ferguson of the Randolph Agricultural Event Center Action Committee (RAECAC) talked about the need for the AEC but expressed concerns about the cost and scale of the project.
"Tonight, we do not want the extensive efforts underlying the planning of the Ag Center to go forward without the assurance of broad and deep public support," he said. "Obligating Randolph County to the project without these assurances would run counter to our goal of supporting a home-grown and home-nurtured industry."
Ferguson gave two courses of action for the commissioners:
- To put the referendum on the Nov. 6 ballot.
- Delay the project for further refinement.
Ferguson then introduced Ken Austin, chair of the RAECAC, to read an alternative resolution for developing the AEC. The resolution supports the plans for the AEC but directs the county manager to:
- Expand the representation of the Ag Center Advisory Committee to complete the site and facilities plan.
- Commission the professional development of a business and promotional plan that identifies a timeline and key performance indicators for measuring financial success and sustainability.
- Collaborate with community partners to seek other funding opportunities to lower the county's financial investment in construction.
- Leverage community partnerships to educate the public as to how the project supports the 2016 Strategic Plan and benefits all citizens of the county.
- Report back to the Board of Commissioners at the Feb. 4, 2019, meeting with an update and recommendations regarding construction and funding options.
Among those in favor of the referendum were a number of youth involved in 4-H and FFA programs.
Brodie Smith, a junior at Eastern Randolph High School, said the county has 1,200 members of Future Farmers of America (FFA), which offers training in agriculture careers as well as leadership. "This (the AEC) could be a wonderful place to learn, develop knowledge and careers," he said in encouraging the commissioners to continue plans for the AEC.
Other young people supporting the referendum were Erin Wills, Laura LeGlue, Rylee Scholfield and Kyle Richardson.
Jerome Davis, a former professional bull rider whose career was ended when he was paralyzed in a fall, said he holds the largest one-day rodeo in the nation with 500 youth at his arena in the Cedar Square area. "We need a facility in Randolph County," he said. "I don't know how to do it, but we need it."
Ann Evans called the AEC "an awesome project. You'll lose money at the outset, but it will grow."
David Jones, retired director of the N.C. Zoo, supported the AEC but questioned the operations cost figures and the number of staff to maintain the facility. "In reality, you need a large staff to run events," he said. Jones also recommended another year of research, including advice from "people who really know how to run events."
Those speaking against the referendum were mostly opposed to the tax increase while expressing support for agriculture.
Faye Cox, who said she is a farmer, said, "I don't have a problem with farming. But when you start messing with my pennies, I get upset." She said she knows of people who have to decide between purchasing food or prescription drugs.
Kate Pruitt questioned the feasibility studies. "What if the performance measure indicators aren't met?" she asked. "You need to slow down and look at the numbers. The concept is good, but you need to find a different way to pay for it."
Bob Morrison, who is running for commissioner against David Allen, said he had a number of questions and concerns about the project. He mentioned that the annual operational cost figure didn't include repayment of the debt, the feasibility study overlooks depreciation of the facility, and there is a need for commitments from potential lease agencies as well as other issues. "We need answers to these questions," he said.
After the public hearing was closed, Commissioner Darrell Frye said the project has "strong support from the agricultural community" and the study during the past two years has had "good positive input. But there are legitimate concerns that deserve answers.
"I'm not ready to vote on the bond referendum without changes," Frye said. "I want the best project out there."
He commended the RAECAC for bringing "a thoughtful resolution for consideration. I make the motion that we not proceed with the bond referendum on the November ballot and that we bring (the RAECAC) resolution for full discussion at our September board meeting."
Commissioner Kenny Kidd seconded the motion, saying the board needs to "work to present a project we can all be proud of." He also commended the turnout of people showing concerns for the agriculture center. "So many people are so passionate about agriculture."
Hope Haywood, who was sworn in to replace her late husband Stan in July, said she has read minutes from past meetings. She said her concern was "have we really pursued other funding? Let's give time to pursue that and bring specific information to the public."
Commissioner Maxton McDowell said a theme of the night was to delay the process. He said he found that most people are "very much in support of the agriculture community and the event center. Let's step back and look more into other funding and make sure the people know we're exhausting all avenues. We owe that to the people of Randolph County."
Allen noted that there are risks in delaying the project, including other nearby counties building their own ag centers. He said construction costs are increasing as well as interest rates. While thanking the RAECAC for their resolution, Allen added, "If we do it in its entirety, there will be a tax increase. ... How to pay for it is the tough part."
The board then voted unanimously in favor of Frye's motion.
After the meeting, Ferguson said he thought the commissioners were "very receptive to building the ag center, it's just a question of design and payment. This is the best thing that could have happened. A referendum wasn't going to pass."
Austin said the September meeting, when the commissioners will consider the RAECAC resolution, will be "important to how to move forward: Time frame, business plan, operating costs. An in-depth business plan takes a lot of time."
Austin agreed that the resolution was "intended as a compromise to head off negativity and to include people not included previously."
Later, Johnson gave assurances that he had not met with the action committee but knew they were looking at a different direction. He said the commissioners couldn't vote on the RAECAC resolution Monday night because it was not on the advertised agenda. He also said allowing Ferguson and Austin extended time to speak was "an extended courtesy" of the board.
Prolonging the AEC process, Johnson said, "will give the county more time to look into details, such as operating costs, and answer questions that citizens asked."
What he took away from the public hearing, he said, was "almost universal support of the Agricultural Event Center. It was very beneficial to the project."
