NEMAC Timeline Part 3 January 21, 2015

The Mayor's Memorandum included a convenient timeline highlighting a period in which the county stopped considering the question of incorporation.

Over 6 years

I don't know if the NEMAC completed their study by April of 2005, but since it doesn't appear in the timeline I assume as much. The Board of County Commissioners established a moratorium on incorporation in November of 2005. A moratorium prohibits an activity. (Like President Obama's 2010 moratorium on offshore drilling.)
In 2012 the BCC changed its mind and lifted the moratorium. Two and a half years later Commissioner Heyman reintroduced the NEMAC officially. However according the the Mayor's Memorandum the NEMAC reconvened February 2013, almost two years before.
To this date I have not discovered under whose authority they met, nor who called any of these meeting, but I have inquired with county staff.
I also await the minutes for these NEMAC meetings. Hopefully those can address some of these concerns.
On to the Resolution!

The resolution packet starts off with two memos, the first informing us that Sally Heyman requested the preparation and placed the resolution for consideration at a BCC meeting (January 21, 2015). The second memo comes from the mayor with some pertinent information.

I recommend reading those two paragraphs as they summarize many details, including the deadline for the NEMAC to report, and the conclusion of its existence if "the Board submits the question on the creation of a new municipality to the electorate."
Finally, it reiterates the NEMAC meeting again starting in February 2013, with county staff participation.

Then we get to the ordinance itself. Let me here admit that I don't know the particular difference between a resolution and an ordinance but the first two WHEREAS highlight at least one difference.

 The third whereas mentions something that always perks my antennae: submission of a report!

Though outdated, I have interested in seeing the form and content of this report. In previous posts I speculated on whether or not the NEMAC ever completed their report. It appears so.

Then a couple lines ahead things start to get interesting.

The first WHEREAS suggests the NEMAC reconvened at the behest of county staff, but the second acknowledges it didn't exist anymore.

Then we get to the action! Section 2 of the ordinance is where the county seems to brush under the rug the fact that the NEMAC may have met for two years without authorization from the Board of County Commissioners.

This means that ANY meeting of the NEMAC after it was officially dissolved now gets considered official and legitimate. I'm surprised how often governments do this. And I have to wonder its legality.

The county contracted PMG Associates to conduct a $200,000 study. I don't know the relationship between this and that study, but it's on my list of posts to write. I will need the courage to read the long study, but I will get to it.

Otherwise, this only interests as it reveals orchestration behind the process for determining the feasibility of a new municipality. If you recall from my post on PMG Associates, Inc.'s budget review, they contributed very little, if any, productive input to the NEMAC Pro-Forma input.

It strikes me as a terrible use of public money, but in incorporating the PMG study into the NEMAC process it gives it some kind of air of legitimacy, since, as far as I know, no other third party provided any feedback or review of the NEMAC process, or any of its resultant documents.

Then I found an interesting tidbit in Section 6, raising a question of why the Mayor excluded this in his memo:

Regardless of the other conditions, the ordinance gave the NEMAC a max of two years.

As it was adopted April 21, 2015, and given the facts of which we have awareness, the NEMAC officially ceased to exist either six months after the BCC accepted the PMG Associates, Inc Study, or on May 1, 2017. Whichever came first.

At this time I don't have any document extending the NEMAC beyond that. I will look for such a document, and I will also determine to which study the BCC referred in this ordinance: the October 2015 study or the April 2016 Budget Review. If the October 2015 study, it means the NEMAC should have ceased existing in May of 2016. If the April 2016 study the NEMAC should have ceased existing November 2016.