The Highlands Town Board of Commissioners on April 17 directed the town attorney to research legal options for the building that currently houses the Highlands Chamber of Commerce and visitor center after a lengthy public presentation and debate over rent, donor intent and town authority.

Kaye (Chamber representative) asked the board to renew a 10‑year triple‑net lease at $1 per year, citing the donor intent of Jane Woodruff and the Lords’ discounted 2012 sale. Kaye presented a history of the donation and maintenance investments: she said Jane Woodruff donated $700,000 toward the purchase in 2012 and that the sellers accepted a $1,172,000 sales price that effectively reduced the town’s cost. Kaye said the Chamber and Visit Highlands NC have invested $488,481.01 in building renovations and listed recent community contributions and support she attributed to the visitor center operations.

Town officials and several commissioners voiced support for preserving the donors’ intent but said they must operate within applicable statutes and legal advice. Several commissioners offered alternatives discussed in meeting comment: renewing a $1 lease, conveying the property with a reversionary clause, or pursuing county legislative changes to allow tourism‑related expenditures to cover building costs. Town Attorney Nick Kostka told the board that North Carolina law allows conveyance of public property for a public purpose if the conveyance includes a reversionary interest that returns the property to the town should it cease to serve the public purpose.

Why it matters: The building was purchased and donated with documented donor intent to house visitor‑services functions, and the Chamber argues continued low rent recognizes that intent and the Chamber’s on‑going financial contributions and stewardship. The town’s legal options could alter the town’s liabilities and the building’s ownership and affect how the Chamber funds visitor programming.

Board direction: The board asked Attorney Nick Kostka to research and develop a legal approach that could: (a) permit a conveyance or a sale with a reversionary clause that preserves the building’s use as a visitor center; (b) evaluate whether the Chamber’s organizational status (a membership nonprofit rather than a 501(c)(3)) affects litigation or conveyance options; and (c) provide model language or alternatives (including lease terms) that would protect donor intent. Commissioners also discussed whether the town could request the county to modify county-level statutes that govern tourism expenditures.

Kaye’s presentation details: Kaye read two letters into the record that she said corroborate the donor’s intent (one from a long‑time local contact, David Wilkes, and a letter from the sellers, Gus and Jan Lard). She also provided a line‑item list of community investments she said totaled about $682,000 over five years in locally beneficial projects (fireworks, holiday lights, Founders Park items, contributed playground funding and other items). Kaye requested renewal of a $1 per year triple net lease for 10 years in keeping with the 2012 arrangement.

Ending: The board made no final decision on the lease or conveyance and instead asked the town attorney to research legal options and return to the board with findings; the board also agreed to further discussion about whether county legislative changes could clarify allowable uses of tourism funds.