Johnston County holds public hearing on Clayton Commerce Center incentive request

Johnston County economic development staff opened a public hearing May 5 on a proposed incentive package for the Clayton Commerce Center, a developer-led plan to construct three speculative Class A industrial buildings totaling about 382,000 square feet on U.S. 70 in the Town of Clayton.

The county's economic development director, Chris Johnson, told the Board of Commissioners the proposed program would pair a developer-led build-to-lease model with an economic development incentive grant (EDIG). He said Wiley Capital would build the project and the county would commit to a temporary lease for up to 100,000 square feet at a subsidized rate while the developer markets the property to prospective tenants.

County staff and the developer said the project would aim to attract advanced manufacturing jobs and widen local employment options. "We're only committing to $3 a square foot and that is significantly well below the market average of $9 to $12 a square foot," Johnson said, describing the county payment structure designed to lower the developer's near-term carrying cost and speed construction. Jason Simons, owner of Wiley Capital, said the incentive is a key factor in making the project feasible: "If it weren't for these incentives, however, it makes it much more challenging...so these incentives and the grant are really important to us bringing this project forward and creating it."

Why it matters: County staff said the project is intended to reduce the number of residents who commute out of Johnston County for higher-paying work and to expand local access to manufacturing jobs. Johnson cited a labor-shed figure — that roughly 77% of Johnston County's approximately 125,000-person labor shed works outside the county — and framed the project as one way to retain jobs locally.

Key facts and conditions presented at the hearing - Size and scope: three speculative tilt-up concrete buildings totaling about 382,000 square feet; the largest building would be about 221,000 square feet. The county would commit to at most 100,000 square feet of that 221,000 square feet. - Investment and eligible costs: the developer anticipates total project investment in excess of $55 million; the EDIG eligibility is tied to vertical/hard construction costs, stated by staff as not less than $30 million (staff estimated that number could be nearer $41 million). - Jobs: the agreement requires at least 25 permanent full-time jobs at an average salary of $74,000; the county's hired economist, Dr. Mike Walden, estimated a larger employment and indirect impact (an estimate of 166 jobs was presented by staff as a forecast of direct plus induced impacts). - Timing: staff said the capital investment deadline is December 2027 and estimated that grant payments would begin in 2028, depending on completion timing. - County commitment and protections: the lease subsidy would be $3 per square foot and the county's grant payments would be calculated as 50% of the ad valorem taxes actually paid on eligible investment. Staff and counsel emphasized that payments stop if the building is sold or leased during the lease period, and the agreements include recapture (clawback) provisions if contractual benchmarks are not met.

County counsel described the statutory criteria the project must meet for economic-development incentives, including job creation and capital investment, and outlined the proposed grant and lease contract terms (payments in annual installments over five years tied to taxes paid and subject to recapture). An attorney for the county said the agreement "does meet the four factors required under the statute," and staff said the EDIG and lease provisions were vetted by the county's economic development advisory board.

Public input and commissioners' questions - Public input: No speakers spoke at the podium; the board read and entered into the record an emailed comment from Shannon Peterson, who asked the board to vote against the project and cited concerns about traffic and quality of life. The clerk noted the email would be part of the official record. - Commissioners asked about traffic, building design, and the difference between targeted manufacturing buildings and warehouse/distribution facilities. Johnson and the developer said the site is already in an industrialized area near the I-42 and Clayton Boulevard interchange and that the middle building's greater depth is specifically designed to accommodate manufacturing uses. Staff also said the commission's advisory board has moved away from incentivizing cross-dock/warehouse distribution projects and is focused on manufacturing.

History and risk factors noted in the hearing County staff told the commissioners that past commitments under the county's incentive program have had mixed results: four commitments were made historically, two projects did not move forward (one because interest rates changed, another because of infrastructure cost overruns), and two previous projects reached occupancy. Staff flagged implementation risks tied to financing, infrastructure extension (water/sewer), and market absorption, and described the recapture language and payment triggers as safeguards.

What's next The hearing was informational in the portion of the transcript provided; staff and the developer answered commissioners' questions but the transcript did not record a final vote approving or denying the EDIG or the lease. The county will proceed according to its normal procurement and contract-review steps before any final agreement is executed.

Ending note: The board heard the presentation, accepted an emailed public comment into the record and requested clarifications on building design and safeguards; no final action on the incentive package was recorded in the supplied transcript.