[{"_1":2,"_121":-5,"_122":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,73,85,97,109],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":55,"_72":55},"mediaId",6284172,"mediaKeyId","2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c","parentId",2582765,"title","Mayor criticizes commissioners who reversed stance on transit sales tax; debate continues over rail, bus rapid transit and funding mix","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",23708000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c&start=23708&end=23708","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c/thumbnail_23708000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6284172/Matthews/Union-County/North-Carolina/Mayor-criticizes-commissioners-who-reversed-stance-on-transit-sales-tax-debate-continues-over-rail-bus-rapid-transit-and-funding-mix","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6284172-f33a962616608b423deebf5460d356e9/orig.mp4?Expires=1775223824&Signature=lr-1lE-fbqOtT84E5clBkzy5VHUtBKEHlmvQBNUWvzLiWA0RuIB1MwnhW9r4zf4le40LnWGIfTgPjkWjP7ZDa8Aokixpd118dY35FQ26o9KBsa9cneCT~oIyUg14Ow~7yjR4XRno8hBgqSqV-tC120RnoJp5GVDOfD8l2UVlZaNOV3axzpHycLMwGLFtxLPCce5dFZ4y75wPVvJuKNok2IX15P3vb13UAJ1y78AqS3l~1dcOwiwrMaG2CL7V5fDDeimV-s-tk1xIC9g9XcJGOSVP~tisOBAwZSWcK7NqlyX9Rw77tFJKjzvAWNRrcUQfIyz7YaUSUk9Ziw~prqS6gQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-03-11T04:33:08Z","article","A contentious exchange over the proposed Mecklenburg County transit sales tax (Senate Bill 145) marked the March 10 meeting as Mayor John Higdon publicly rebuked commissioners who said they reversed earlier opposition to the measure.

Higdon said the board’s earlier resolution opposing the county sales‑tax plan reflected the town’s best interests and that three commissioners later told media they no longer opposed the bill or that they would remain neutral on a countywide referendum. The mayor criticized those changes, saying the version of the bill circulating — and the public messaging he had reviewed — did not guarantee a rail line to Matthews and could leave the town paying a higher sales tax without receiving Silver Line rail service.

The meeting also included a public presentation from Garland Green, an advocate who urged an alternative distribution of the proposed 1‑cent sales tax. Green suggested shifting the allocation away from the city’s 40/20/40 proposal (40% roads, 20% buses, 40% rail) to a 45/10/45 model that would allocate more funding to roads and rail while preserving bus funding. He said that change would raise the county‑wide rail funding pool from about $7.8 billion to $8.7 billion under the same overall tax and argued the reallocation is achievable if county leaders and municipalities lobby Raleigh together.

Board members expressed sharply divergent views. Some commissioners said they supported a fuller conversation in Raleigh and wanted to keep options open; other members, including Mayor Higdon, said they would vigorously oppose a county‑level referendum that delivers little for Matthews while imposing a higher sales tax on local shoppers. Several commissioners and members of the public also urged consideration of bus rapid transit and microtransit options as more immediately actionable measures to improve regional transit connectivity.

Why it matters: Senate Bill 145 and its proposed allocations would shape regional transit investment for decades; Matthews commissioners said they want a clearer guarantee of benefits to the town before backing any countywide tax. The mayor’s sharp criticism highlights political divisions within the board and the small‑town stakes in a countywide vote.

Ending: The board did not adopt a new position on the tax at the March 10 meeting; commissioners said they will continue to discuss the proposal, lobby in Raleigh and seek cost‑share or allocation changes that would protect Matthews’ interests.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board of Commissioners Meeting - March 10, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","A public debate flared over Senate Bill 145 (Mecklenburg transit sales tax). Mayor John Higdon publicly rebuked three commissioners who withdrew earlier opposition and said the bill, as currently proposed, would not deliver rail service to Matthews; advocates urged changing the county funding mix (from 40/20/40) to fund both roads and rail.","taxTitle","Matthews, Union County, North Carolina","taxId",56171,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":74,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":75,"_41":76,"_43":77,"_45":78,"_46":79,"_48":80,"_50":81,"_52":82,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":83,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":84,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":55,"_72":55},6284178,"Commissioners question EQV Strategic contract communications; town attorney asked to research information‑sharing options",1320,11669000,12989000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c&start=11669&end=12989","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c/thumbnail_11669000.jpg","/articles/6284178/Matthews/Union-County/North-Carolina/Commissioners-question-EQV-Strategic-contract-communications-town-attorney-asked-to-research-informationsharing-options","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6284178-6a6ec322b5b0c715e205c8e3701250e9/orig.mp4?Expires=1775223824&Signature=bhNAY0UyNk~KVDw81-zfX8BzSYKUYDi-KDLkvfxY1citquX87JcOHNLe3naAu5NSIaO8-0Pa409TlZDaImJ-8BG8YAGuImzZDzR95S2LSc3FiQyM4UAlVm204jezNuqHQxBgV4Rm5Jy6rPaRioV9uRR3hhLVSf077S4u4tL-HhOeBODHX1slrD~gnRwm1l16bbPq~av3vQFfw7eRdZeaNa93WMFBf3OVj2RjyCxj83PNiz~rWTZJy7h0DEkOn0dCCGB02cyrEceZ2lQjiWBXsjCG0xUPu6btwWJ1Zq4WKVuK1ZOG1puakvpXmzYqyNFDN8SVCi6ZFl0rcu0v6nwOIw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A dispute over communications from the town’s retained legislative firm, EQV Strategic, surfaced during the March 10 meeting when Commissioner Mark Tofano asked whether the board should cancel the contract after reporting difficulty obtaining a roster of EQV’s outreach and topics.

Tofano said he had sent a broad set of inquiry emails to area legislators and local government officials asking whether they had spoken to EQV about Matthews‑related matters; he said few had replied and he had not received the detail he expected from the firm. Town Manager Becky Hawk explained the contract was authorized by a board motion; she and EQV representatives had treated the town manager as the board’s point of contact. Hawk said EQV had committed in the signed contract to provide monthly written updates and to circulate weekly general updates to clients; she told the board she has received direct verbal updates and had asked EQV to provide written monthly updates (the board received EQV’s March write‑up during the week before the meeting).

Several commissioners said they wanted a better, consistent way to receive EQV Strategic updates without creating public records that a lobbying firm would not publicize (lobbyists and municipalities both worried that distributing detailed meeting notes could expose advocacy strategies). Town Attorney Daniel Peterson said the public‑records law limits confidential exceptions; he recommended a memo summarizing statutory options and the limits on “confidential” lobbying communications. He agreed to research whether closed‑session briefing or another process could legitimately accommodate more detailed updates, then circulate guidance to the full board.

Outcome: The board did not cancel the contract. Instead the town attorney was asked to research and advise the board on how to balance commissioners’ desire for more detailed, timely advocacy briefings with public‑records obligations. Town Manager Hawk and several commissioners said EQV representatives had offered to speak one‑on‑one with any commissioner who wanted a private briefing.

Why it matters: Lobbying and outreach are core to small municipalities’ influence in the general assembly; commissioners said they want assurance that the town’s retained consultant is actively engaging the right legislators on Matthews’ priority issues and that the board receives timely, consistent updates.

Ending: The town attorney will present options and limitations to the board in a memo so commissioners can decide how they want to receive future updates from EQV Strategic and staff.","Commissioner Mark Tofano asked the board to cancel the town’s contract with EQV Strategic after seeking who EQV had contacted about Matthews bills and receiving limited written detail; the board did not cancel but directed the town attorney to research ways to share lobbying updates with commissioners while respecting public‑records limits.",{"_33":86,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":87,"_41":88,"_43":89,"_45":90,"_46":91,"_48":92,"_50":93,"_52":94,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":95,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":96,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":55,"_72":55},6284183,"Commissioners authorize $11.05 million general‑obligation bond sale for parks and transportation projects, 4‑3",336,18998000,19334000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c&start=18998&end=19334","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c/thumbnail_18998000.jpg","/articles/6284183/Matthews/Union-County/North-Carolina/Commissioners-authorize-1105-million-generalobligation-bond-sale-for-parks-and-transportation-projects-43","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6284183-6f146975d5e6ff80d3f4c4bd115f1064/orig.mp4?Expires=1775223824&Signature=Oo4Q-QrICHw0sWDtiUXfzKorIXoSH4uPaWlddRWmLRJ6HHQUbcf7zDP2UGV9ANMP9suaCzbSSP2i-3eFPWVXihQn35ww3HK9~-wkCf2Q5u92JLcBkL~2eizzTjmeyXZtmJSHnsVVMS~zkuqKcbDCcpk52VFtymT0Bi~FBHNYXKCkGjBTCCsdmaUAJVDa0m08GwMMKZ-HKA1vgoeY~kU5qLVGIza68p2PS267WhUFM--Q4TB8RERISgP14Bzf54hwzdchoeLUQdqxcyCVVkjKiPp0Tj3irsIFwLyl6w40g5aSJ3EAaYmlhSDbf~8WkVZ~bF9LrHatvzOP6QMU0QxhBw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Matthews Board of Commissioners voted 4‑3 on March 10 to authorize the issuance of general‑obligation public improvement bonds (Series 2025) to provide financing for voter‑approved parks projects and a transportation project.

The resolution authorizes selling $11,049,512 in bonds tied to the town’s 2022 voter‑approved bond program; the issuance will cover roughly $10.94 million for parks and about $104,573 for a transportation project, per staff. The board indicated the borrowing will be structured so the debt service is covered by a proposed 1.35‑cent increase in the town’s property tax rate (the manager described the tax impact as a requirement to pay the debt service under scenario 3 presented in earlier budget discussions).

The motion to approve the resolution passed 4‑3; the transcript records Commissioners Robert (first name not recorded in vote log) and Mayor Pro Tem Gina Hoover voting against the measure and indicates three negative votes (the meeting minutes report the vote as 4‑3). Staff said the town expects to close the sale in late April and receive proceeds in the current fiscal year; procurement of consultants and contract solicitations for park construction will follow receipt of funds.

Why it matters: The bonds will fund sections of the park bond program approved by voters in 2022; approving the sale moves projects toward design procurement and construction. Commissioners who opposed the sale said they were not yet comfortable committing to the proposed tax increase or wanted additional detail about project scopes and cash‑flow timing.

Ending: Staff will proceed with the bond sale process and follow the board’s direction on next steps; the projects funded by the sale will be scheduled for design and procurement once proceeds are received.","By a 4‑3 vote the board authorized sale of general‑obligation bonds (Series 2025) to fund earlier voter‑approved park projects and a transportation item; commissioners Tofano and Mayor Pro Tem Hoover were recorded in opposition.",{"_33":98,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":99,"_41":100,"_43":101,"_45":102,"_46":103,"_48":104,"_50":105,"_52":106,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":107,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":108,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":55,"_72":55},6284187,"Commissioners approve Matthews Help Center rezoning, deny Gorgon office; multiple planning petitions moved to planning board or continued",330,8844000,9174000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c&start=8844&end=9174","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c/thumbnail_8844000.jpg","/articles/6284187/Matthews/Union-County/North-Carolina/Commissioners-approve-Matthews-Help-Center-rezoning-deny-Gorgon-office-multiple-planning-petitions-moved-to-planning-board-or-continued","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6284187-96eae92d5013fbfb8fe4310108f0531d/orig.mp4?Expires=1775223824&Signature=HY~O2wwi9E~tq1XtsdERHg5H2RdLZgXUt-b-dSKpFRJcdPio2AaFVRBZ-2-uLmeSTP4LZTDMJMvrN6hAPBWx0jzuvNq0Y1pk5BXGNdSbI36m-y8NAIJCrP2h6rFOgmDONyD88axW35SidLXfPlnFBU4eGzLNdXj75h7PgmRck5vVHuZjSljoIusfAFshbzyFFlSHwPSF4Fns-HJHji2eCgP7Ols9Ng175jcqS0DSQJt3BjMqAMtEvQ6aCl3YQTWLW4ot8hLJ49ChAVKsILJl0Reb58wmdnFVQPsWbddoOr4Pam37sd~4JWOg9V1MpEbsWFuqovrD2FrT3d5NjzWUkQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Matthews Board of Commissioners handled several planning and zoning matters at its March 10 meeting, approving one rezoning, denying another and sending multiple petitions back to the planning board for further consideration.

Rezoning approved: Matthews Help Center (Zoning application 2024‑806). Commissioners voted unanimously to rezone 119 N. Ames Street to allow the Matthews Help Center to expand. Commissioner Ken McCool moved to approve with the previously submitted elevations noted; Commissioner John Urban seconded. Staff said concerns about a landscape wall, sidewalk planning strip and dumpster relocation had been addressed before the vote.

Rezoning denied: Gorgon office (Zoning application 2024‑807). After large public comment and substantial revisions from the applicant, Commissioner Ken McCool moved to deny the conditional rezoning for 3412 Matthews‑Mint Hill Road/13105 Blacksmith Court citing impacts to surrounding residential properties; Commissioner Leon Threatt seconded. The board voted to deny the application.

Other planning business and outcomes:
- Epic Hospitality (7903 Council Place) — a revised proposal for a 104‑room hotel (residential‑scale elevations offered). The board voted unanimously to send the matter back to the planning board for additional review of elevations and site details. (Motion by Commissioner John Urban.)
- John Street townhomes (Zoning application 2024‑801, East John Street) — a revised site plan proposed 73 townhomes with a larger buffer for the Brightmoor neighborhood and commitments for porches and amenities. After public comment, the board voted to send the petition to the planning board for further review and TIA/stormwater detail work.
- Brookchase / Margaret Wallace (Zoning application 2023‑781) — a proposal for 36 townhomes: the board continued the public hearing and continued the petition to April 14, 2025, to allow the applicant to resubmit a transportation impact analysis and address staff comments.

Public comment: Several dozen residents attended and spoke, particularly regarding the Gorgon office proposal and the John Street project. Speakers voiced concerns about traffic impacts, tree loss, the scale of development relative to existing neighborhoods, school capacity, and the location of commercial uses adjacent to single‑family homes. Applicants and their consultants made design revisions and committed to added screening, stormwater enhancements and other conditions in response to neighbors’ requests.

Why it matters: The votes affect land use near downtown and along East John Street and reflected resident pushback over several projects’ density and design. The planning board will receive multiple remands with explicit direction to address sidewalk connectivity, stormwater/TIA issues and architectural design refinements.

Ending: The planning board will review the remanded petitions and revised materials; several items will return to the commissioners after staff and the planning board complete technical reviews.","At the March 10 meeting the board approved Matthews Help Center rezoning, denied a conditional‑use office rezoning near Blacksmith Court (Gorgon office), and remanded or continued several other petitions to the planning board for further review.",{"_33":110,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":111,"_41":112,"_43":113,"_45":114,"_46":115,"_48":116,"_50":117,"_52":118,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":119,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":120,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":55,"_72":55},6284192,"Matthews commissioners review proposed 2025–26 legislative priorities; transportation funding and school planning dominate discussion",5176,25000,5201000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c&start=25&end=5201","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2582765-ac4412856b6415612a95d93978d49c8c/thumbnail_25000.jpg","/articles/6284192/Matthews/Union-County/North-Carolina/Matthews-commissioners-review-proposed-202526-legislative-priorities-transportation-funding-and-school-planning-dominate-discussion","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6284192-0ffc204a5ea331554bc6057f91e68c32/orig.mp4?Expires=1775223825&Signature=XOaMpg-oLgMCKEE64cBkNH7Ai5Lst-I9bquqq1rt0bTjv0jS7dy5S6tAQC9PXt3LHEkvXhQYi25wXnFMJv4KFlHa~fpVZGFu~frnR1DPoifiyqDslVlVlyTTYoTgLdfqgex~wpPwFJ4a1yH7ejCKbZR28E3Bn~Ps4KOle1erwjOtDs88oECusjLr~T2aUAjvWqwOTq3AZ7edRqVALSMogc0P18mvDHZNKHZINRsaDojNi7d2EbYusVlc6FDr4laomdCsqfbOZJa1MPTNkUaXbS4p7wIMxmDODIyATKbjGekTDybad1iqeejYIZrX~rprWPnDmCa30uMtjju3ia-RNA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Matthews commissioners spent the March 10 work session reviewing a one‑page draft of the town’s 2025–26 legislative priorities prepared by EQV Strategic, focusing discussion on transportation funding, affordable housing and school‑capacity forecasting.

The board did not adopt the priorities at the March 10 meeting; the agenda item was deferred to the March 24 regular meeting so staff can present revised wording and commissioners can suggest targeted additions. Town Manager Becky Hawk told the board the one‑page format reflects feedback from EQV that North Carolina legislators prefer brevity.

Transportation prompted the longest debate. Commissioners and residents pressed for a clearer statement about Powell Bill funding — the state program that distributes gasoline‑tax revenues to municipalities — noting revenue declines tied to higher fuel efficiency and electric vehicles. Commissioner John Urban and others asked that the draft prioritize new funding mechanisms for NCDOT projects, or raise statutory “caps” that limit spending in particular NCDOT divisions; speakers cited U.S. 74 as an example of a project whose costs exceed those caps. Several commissioners also raised concern that use of public‑private partnerships and express‑lane projects is shifting costs and tolls onto users.

Board members asked staff to add language about electric vehicles and evolving revenue sources, and to consider an explicit ask to increase or maintain Powell Bill funding rather than simply “support maintenance.” Staff said the town does not yet know its FY‑26 Powell Bill allocation.

Affordable housing and funding drew multiple suggestions. Commissioners discussed lobbying for state funding streams and a proposed statewide cabinet position to coordinate housing policy and funding; several said the board should explicitly request increased long‑term state funding for municipal housing partnerships. Staff and commissioners also debated how much specificity to put in the document — for example, whether to ask for state help securing property for developers, or for low‑interest loans to towns.

School capacity and forecasting were also raised as legislative asks. Several commissioners urged the town to seek clearer statewide forecasting rules to ensure rezonings and new developments are evaluated against realistic, up‑to‑date school capacity forecasts. Commissioners proposed a legislative request for mandatory post‑occupancy evaluations or updated forecasting formulas so school‑building decisions reflect growth patterns.

Other items discussed included:
- Local control and recent state bills that limit municipal authority (commissioners suggested including concrete Matthews examples such as billboard law impacts).
- Public‑notice modernization: commissioners asked to broaden the draft request to allow electronic public‑notice options beyond the large‑circulation newspaper currently required (Charlotte Observer) while retaining physical on‑site signage and direct mail.
- Broadband and “dig once”: Commissioners asked the draft to support classifying broadband as a utility or otherwise encourage shared conduit to avoid multiple trenching in public rights‑of‑way.
- Police video access: staff said the draft asks the legislature to permit more local discretion for providing police video to governing bodies when appropriate.
- NCDOT rights‑of‑way: commissioners requested wording to allow municipalities to replant trees or install landscaped berms in NCDOT rights‑of‑way in some locations as an alternative to sound walls.

Why it matters: commissioners repeatedly said the goal is a concise, one‑page document that Raleigh will read and use. Staff and EQV will return with revised wording and a recommended prioritization; the board plans to consider final adoption at a March 24 meeting.

Commissioners and staff said they will continue to work with EQV Strategic on framing and prioritization; the board did not take a final vote on the legislative priorities at this session.

Ending: Staff will circulate the redrafted one‑page priorities ahead of the March 24 meeting and suggested EQV attend a follow‑up session with commissioners to map advocacy timing and top‑level asks.","Commissioners reviewed an EQV Strategic–draft one‑page legislative priorities document, discussed transportation funding (including Powell Bill, EV impacts, and NCDOT caps), affordable housing funding options, school‑capacity forecasting and other topics; formal adoption was deferred to March 24, 2025.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Mayor criticizes commissioners who reversed stance on transit sales tax; debate continues over rail, bus rapid transit and funding mix

Commissioners question EQV Strategic contract communications; town attorney asked to research information‑sharing options

Commissioners authorize $11.05 million general‑obligation bond sale for parks and transportation projects, 4‑3

Commissioners approve Matthews Help Center rezoning, deny Gorgon office; multiple planning petitions moved to planning board or continued

Matthews commissioners review proposed 2025–26 legislative priorities; transportation funding and school planning dominate discussion