Finance committee recommends mayor pay four Hendersonville Library invoices; seeks clearer county–city agreement

The Hendersonville Finance Committee on April 22 recommended that Mayor pay four outstanding library invoices and asked city staff to press the county for a clearer maintenance agreement before paying any additional claims.

Committee members discussed a recent county request that the city reimburse roughly $24,000 in past invoices for repairs and maintenance at the Hendersonville Library, including charges dating to November 2017. Finance staff presented the invoices and said the request was transmitted to the mayor in mid-March.

The committee said some items appear to be routine maintenance that the city has historically performed and could be paid now for operating goodwill, while larger items look like capital work and should not be charged to the city under the current agreement. Committee members were explicit about treating recurring landscape and irrigation repairs differently from asset replacements.

“I brought up the original agreement. On it, it says the city will continue to provide routine maintenance, landscaping, and other support services,” said Chairman Jeff Sassy. “Routine maintenance typically does not cover major capital improvements.”

Mayor (unnamed) told the committee he could not obligate current-year budget funds for work done in 2017. “I can’t spend money in this current year's budget for activities that were done in 02/2017,” he said, noting the invoices arrived recently and that documentation accompanying the county email was insufficient.

A number of specific items drew committee attention: about $1,801.28 in irrigation/landscape charges; a plumbing/commode charge the committee found reasonable to cover; a roughly $700 engineering invoice described as “related to a rooftop” that the body linked to a planned HVAC/heat-pump replacement; and a larger $17,000–$18,000 line that staff described as a heat-pump replacement. Committee members characterized the heat-pump work as a capital asset and said, under their reading of the current resolution and past practice, the city is not responsible for capital replacements that sit on the county’s books.

“Installation of a heat pump is not routine maintenance. It’s a capital asset. I would agree, and we shouldn't pay that,” Alderman Mark Evans said.

Committee members also said the city should have had the opportunity to perform some landscape/irrigation work through its public-works staff rather than be billed after the fact. “We should have had the opportunity to make those repairs,” said Mark Burgworth, vice chair; public-works staff confirmed the city mows and maintains the library grounds.

The committee unanimously approved a motion recommending the mayor pay the four smaller invoices now (the three irrigation-related items totaling $1,801.28 and the commode/fixture invoice) and to continue negotiating a new, less-ambiguous maintenance agreement with the county before approving any further county invoices. The committee also recommended that the mayor decline responsibility for capital items — including the heat-pump replacement and related engineering work — under the current resolution until the parties adopt clarified language.

The finance director said the three irrigation items can be covered from the public-works building-maintenance budget and that the city currently appropriates $50,000 annually to partially fund library operations. Committee members directed staff to tell the county the city will pay the recommended small invoices now but will not cover other past or capital claims until the agreement is revised.

The committee approved the recommendation by voice vote without recorded roll-call; the chair described the outcome as unanimous.

The committee also noted a prior meeting with county representatives and said city attorneys were to draft clearer language to replace ambiguous terms in the existing resolution; that redrafting has not yet occurred. Committee members asked staff to return with a proposed communication to the county documenting the city’s position and to report back once county responses or new language are available.