BY MILES LAYTON
Firing range is out, at least on Soundside Drive.
During Thursday’s Edenton-Chowan Partnership Board meeting, the Partnership decided to transfer the deed to that property to the Town of Edenton. For the extra point, Ron Haight – the businessman interested in developing that site into a firing range – has rescinded his offer to purchase the property.
Partnership didn’t debate or discuss the matter, but then again, it’s been a coffee-table topic for months now – there are even signs reading “No public gun range” posted near and far across town. You know if you got signs, then it’s a for-real-deal issue.
Firing range aside, the partnership took decisive action Thursday on multiple fronts, establishing a new recreation committee while carefully weighing a significant industrial development proposal that could reshape the county’s economic landscape.
Recreation Committee Formed
The board then turned to what Partnership member Bob Turner described as a months-long discussion about forming a committee focused on recreation and quality-of-life improvements. Turner proposed combining Partnership members with outside volunteers to pursue funding for recreation facilities, programs and land acquisition.
Turner discovered that another group had been meeting independently with similar goals, prompting him to invite them to Thursday’s session. That external coalition included Mary Scott Haigler, along with residents Amber Hardy, Brian Bunn, Adam Britt and Paul Hicks.
Mainstreet Edenton Executive Director Ches Chesson provided context by referencing the Creating Outdoor Recreation Economies (CORE), a state-managed effort launched approximately one year ago. The initiative conducted asset mapping and analysis of recreation resources and developed a strategic plan to create outdoor recreation economies. The draft plan would provide a framework for the new committee’s work.
From an economic development perspective, Chesson emphasized that quality of life and access to recreation consistently rank among the top priorities for business executives selecting community locations. He noted that while the county has abundant outdoor resources, much of it remains privatized rather than available to the general public.
Haigler provided historical context, tracing the external group’s efforts back approximately five years. The coalition had initially pursued recreation improvements through a bond referendum. Despite extensive advocacy, she said, the bond failed decisively at the polls. Rather than abandoning their goals, the group persisted.
Haigler acknowledged that most members no longer have children directly benefiting from youth recreation programs. Nevertheless, the group remains committed to improving community amenities for future generations. Over the past decade, local families have regularly traveled to surrounding communities with superior recreation facilities, including Hertford, Windsor, Little Washington, Williamston and Currituck.
Following the bond’s defeat, the group explored alternative approaches, eventually preparing to establish their own nonprofit when Turner’s outreach created an unexpected partnership opportunity. Collaboration with the Edenton-Chowan Partnership would provide immediate nonprofit tax status, eliminating the time and expense of creating a new entity while opening access to grant funding.
County Manager Kevin Howard expressed support for collaborative approaches but noted his office had not been invited to participate in early discussions.
Partnership members acknowledged this concern, clarifying that a formal committee structure had not yet been established.
Discussion participants noted that the bond referendum’s defeat stemmed primarily from taxpayer reluctance to fund improvements through increased levies rather than opposition to recreation itself. Survey data consistently indicated support for enhanced recreation amenities, but voters balked at the proposed financing mechanism.
Following extensive discussion, Partnership Chair John Dowd exercised authority to establish the Recreation Committee as an ad hoc entity, with Turner designated as chair. Dowd invited other board members to join and instructed Turner to coordinate with Haigler’s group and county officials to ensure inclusive participation.
Industrial Development Proposal
Partnership considered an industrial development proposal from the Ruddell Group, a Birmingham, Alabama-based real estate company specializing in spec industrial buildings. Company representative Dean Taitz presented a detailed proposal to develop the county’s industrial park with multiple buildings ranging from 10,000 to 80,000 square feet.
Taitz’s presentation is posted at the end of the article.
Taitz explained that there has been a decisive market shift from companies seeking raw land for custom facilities to demand for move-in-ready buildings. Current market participants increasingly prioritize speed to occupancy over building specifications.
The company’s portfolio currently encompasses approximately 1.6 million square feet of completed projects, with another 750,000 square feet in pre-development. Their first public-private partnership in North Carolina was launched in Rocky Mount.
Taitz presented an economic impact analysis indicating that each 10,000 square feet of industrial construction generates 10 direct and indirect jobs, approximately $650,000 in additional labor income, and $470,000 in household spending. Applying these metrics to the proposed Edenton development, Taitz projected 220 direct jobs and an equal number of indirect positions once the park reaches full buildout, along with $14 million in occupational income.
Chesson said the proposed Memorandum of Understanding would be between Ruddell Group and the Edenton Chowan Partnership.
The proposed partnership structure would involve the Partnership conveying industrial park land to the Ruddell Group at no cost. In return, the company would fund all building construction, with no capital required from local partners. This zero land basis would enable competitive lease rates.
The proposal includes a risk-sharing provision for the initial building. If that first structure remains unleased for twenty-four months after construction completion, the Partnership would assume a ten-year lease obligation at approximately $18,000 per month. This backstop applies only to the inaugural building. Subsequent buildings would carry no such guarantee, with leasing risk remaining entirely with the developer.
Chesson said the lease obligation would need to be covered by the Partnership, which can’t currently support that financial commitment if it were to make it to that point.
The development would proceed in phases, beginning with a 20,00-square-foot building constructed as a clear-span space. Subsequent phases would add buildings before culminating in an 80,000-square-foot structure designed for expansion. Taitz stressed flexibility, indicating willingness to adjust building sizes based on actual tenant requirements.
Partnership members posed numerous questions about the proposal’s structure and risks. Dowd sought clarity about the lease guarantee, confirming that failure to secure a tenant within two years would obligate the Partnership to make monthly payments. One board member calculated that, including the 18-month construction timeline, the total period to identify a tenant before the lease obligation would activate is 36 months.
Discussion addressed the importance of interstate highway access for industrial tenants. Taitz acknowledged such access as very important, particularly for logistics operations.
However, Chesson noted that many inquiries target four-lane highway access, airport proximity and waterway access rather than interstate locations specifically. He referenced a current prospect for a Swiss glass optics manufacturer that required quality infrastructure but not interstate access.
Chesson emphasized that the Partnership’s strategy focuses on selective tenant recruitment aligned with workforce capabilities and community values rather than attempting to accommodate every possible industrial user.
Dowd indicated that significant internal discussion would be necessary before the Partnership could commit to the proposed structure. He suggested a closed session would be appropriate for detailed deliberation, given the real estate transaction aspects.
Economic Development Updates
During Chesson’s regular report, he provided updates on multiple projects. Construction has commenced on the Provalus project at 211 South Broad Street, with building permits secured and framing underway. The project targets completion in August with operation by late next year.
The Hotel Hinton project continues to advance through construction document development, with updates planned for the town council in January. The Gordman’s building downtown is expected to begin repurposing/refitting in January or February.
A grocery store feasibility study funded by ElectriCities has produced a draft report confirming market support for such operations. The study indicates that the existing Food Lion store generates revenue comparable to major national grocery brands. Two potential sites remain under consideration: an infill location at the Village Shopping Center — that’s where Tractor Supply is located — or new construction near Feyer Ford on Virginia Road.
Dowd concluded the meeting by noting that December would not include a regular session, with the next meeting scheduled for January. The executive committee would need to convene to address board membership transitions and prepare a slate of officers for the February annual meeting.