Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Anson economic development director defends hiring and outlines industrial‑site push, including a potential $75M project
Summary
Anson Economic Development Corporation presented site and infrastructure updates — a 45,000 sq. ft. shell building and nearly finished sewer — and said it submitted a proposal for a $75 million, 425‑job project. Commissioners pressed AEDC leadership on hiring and transparency after the group requested county funding.
Anson Economic Development Corporation leaders told the county board they are pressing to make county‑served industrial sites marketable and defended recent staffing decisions after questions from commissioners.
Mark Bridal, introduced to the board as AEDC's director, gave commissioners a slide presentation describing a 45,000‑square‑foot shell building (designed to be expandable to 90,000 sq. ft.), an Atlantic Gateway sewer line that AEDC said is roughly 85% complete, and a corridor of potential development along Highway 74. Bridal said the shell building is being marketed through North Carolina Southeast and that AEDC is mapping parcels and utilities so staff can respond quickly to inquiries.
"We've got a community college. We can do it," Bridal said when describing workforce potential for a prospect AEDC submitted for the Wadesboro Industrial Park. He told the board the prospect — an ammunition manufacturer — is being evaluated as a possible $75,000,000 investment that could create as many as 425 jobs.
Commissioners pressed Bridal on construction safety and procurement after a portion of the building frame partially collapsed several months earlier. Bridal said the collapse occurred because a subcontractor attempted to lift a steel I‑beam with a forklift rather than using coordinated cranes and that the general contractor (he believes Southern Builders) had hired the subcontractor. "Thank the Lord that nobody got killed," Bridal said, adding AEDC will follow up with the contractor name for the record.
The meeting also included sustained questioning about AEDC's recent leadership change and funding requests. One commissioner said that AEDC had requested $250,000 in county funds in March and that the news of Bridal's hiring followed publicly a month later; the commissioner asked how residents should interpret the sequence. Bridal said the funding request preceded any hiring decision and that he did not participate in the earlier presentation asking the board to continue funding AEDC. He described his role as providing tools and said he would welcome the board's written expectations for the partnership.
Bridal reviewed AEDC's funding: he said a state earmark of about $8,000,000 is dedicated to building construction while operating support has come from Anson County; the agency is working toward a model that can be more self‑funded over time. He also said AEDC staff have spoken with Lockheed Martin and other site‑selection firms and are pursuing targeted outreach.
The board did not take immediate action on AEDC funding at this meeting. Commissioners asked staff to provide follow‑up details (contractor names and additional documentation on advertising for the director role) and for a list of measurable expectations from AEDC that the commission can review before future funding decisions.
