Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cleveland County commissioners approve incentives for Project Champion manufacturing operation
Summary
The Cleveland County Board of Commissioners unanimously approved a three-year local tax-incentive resolution for "Project Champion," a proposed manufacturing operation expected to create 101 jobs and invest roughly $28 million; the board approved a 25% local tax-rate grant estimated at about $68,850 over three years.
The Cleveland County Board of Commissioners on May 5 approved a resolution to support Project Champion, a proposed manufacturing operation that the county's development staff said would create 101 jobs with an average wage of $51,381 and roughly $28 million in capital investment over three years. The board voted unanimously to adopt the economic development incentive as presented.
Courtney Ashley, identified by the board as development director, told commissioners the company is considering multiple locations and that county staff recommended a local incentive grant that would apply a 25% reduction of the current tax rate for three years. "They intend to create 101 new jobs with an average wage of $51,381," Ashley said, and staff estimated the three-year grant amount at about $68,850.
No members of the public had signed up for the hearing, but two attendees rose during the open hearing to ask questions and offer support for the project. One resident said the proposal looked promising and another told the board, "I think it's a very good initiative." Chair (S2) and commissioners stressed the standard review steps for incentive agreements before final contract execution.
Commissioner (S8) moved to approve the resolution; Commissioner (S5) seconded. The board then voted for approval unanimously. The board's action authorizes county staff to complete the procedural steps necessary to implement the incentive and forward the resolution to relevant state authorities as required.
The county did not provide a company name beyond the Project Champion placeholder in the public presentation, and project details such as the exact incentive agreement and performance clauses were not included in the presentation; staff indicated contract details would follow the board's approval.
