) STOKES COUNTY GOVERNMENT
COUNTY OF STOKES ) DANBURY, NORTH CAROLINA
) JANUARY 15, 2010
The Board of
Commissioners of the County of Stokes, State of North Carolina, met
for an Emergency Called Meeting in the Commissioners’ Chambers of the
Ronald Wilson Reagan
Memorial Building (Administration Building) located in Danbury, North
Carolina on Friday,
January 15, 2010 at 2:00 pm with the following members present:
Chairman Jimmy
Walker
Vice Chairman Ernest
Lankford
Commissioner J.
Leon Inman
Commissioner Ron
Carroll
Commissioner
Stanley Smith
County
Personnel in Attendance:
County
Manager K. Bryan Steen
Clerk
to the Board Darlene Bullins
Support
Services Supervisor Danny Stovall
Public
Health Director Josh Swift
Environmental
Health Specialist Supervisor Leslie Easter
Environmental
Health Specialist Fletcher Pipes
Others
in Attendance:
Gary
Robbins, Architect
Darian
Creed, Engineer
Chairman Jimmy Walker called the meeting to
order.
EMERGENCY CALLED
MEETING
Chairman Walker noted the Emergency Called Meeting
had been scheduled for the
following:
·
Review of Community College Site Plan for possible
revision to avoid unnecessary delay
of septic and well permit approvals and project financing
that could jeopardize the scheduled opening
for Early College in August 2010
Chairman Walker stated
there is a very tight schedule for having everything ready
for Early College by August 2010 and individuals involved in the
project could meet with
county officials today.
INVOCATION
Vice Chairman Lankford delivered the
invocation.
Chairman Walker opened
the meeting by inviting the citizens in attendance to join the
Board with the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF
AGENDA
Chairman Walker requested input from Board
members regarding the format of today’s
Agenda.
Commissioner Carroll
requested to ask a couple of very basic questions before the meeting
proceeded any further.
Commissioner Carroll
asked the following question:
·
“How many people in this room including the Board are
familiar with the site plan that this Board approved on December 28th
and are licensed to practice as an architect or engineer in the State of North
Carolina?”
Mr. Gary Robbins and Mr. Darian Creed
responded affirmatively by raising their hands.
Chairman Walker asked if there was any
opposition to Commissioner Carroll continuing
with his questions to members in the audience.
There was no objection from the Board to allow
Commissioner Carroll to continue.
Commissioner Carroll directed the following questions
to Mr. Robbins and Mr. Creed:
·
“Is there any reason from an architectural or
engineering standpoint that this plan cannot work?” Mr. Robbins responded “No sir” and Mr. Creed
responded, “Not to my knowledge”.
·
“Is there any reason why this plan or the use of
this plan should cause any unnecessary delay of septic and well permit
approvals and project financing?”
Mr. Robbins and Mr. Creed both responded, “No sir”.
Commissioner Carroll directed the following
question to the health specialists in the
audience:
·
“Is there any reason why the use of this plan would
cause unnecessary delay of septic and
well permit approvals that another plan would not cause otherwise?”
Environmental Health Specialist Supervisor
Leslie Easter responded, “There is no reason
the plan received with the county’s application can’t be completed”.
Commissioner Carroll stated the following:
·
He considered this an improper meeting and an abuse
of the Open Meetings Law
·
The letter from our attorney justifying the
emergency meeting is because there are necessary changes because of site plan
problems
·
The people with the expertise have just told me
that there are no problems
·
If there are no problems, there is no emergency
·
If there is no emergency, there is no basis for a
meeting
Commissioner Carroll moved to adjourn the
meeting.
Chairman Walker noted
there was no second to the motion.
Motion dies for lack
of second.
Chairman Walker
requested if there was any further discussion before agreeing on the
format of today’s agenda.
Commissioner Smith
expressed concerns regarding the amount of grading that the site plan
indicates that will need to be done.
Commissioner Smith
requested clarification from Environmental Health Specialist
Supervisor Easter if the primary drainage field indicated on site plan
“B” is sufficient and suitable
for the 248 early college students.
Supervisor Easter
requested to review the site plan “B”.
Supervisor Easter noted that
site plan “B” does not include the entire area laid out by the Environmental
Health Department. The
area flagged and approved by Environmental Health which is not on the
site plan "B" presented by
Commissioner Smith will encompass the initial and repair area for the Early
College.
Commissioner Smith
noted the need for this emergency meeting to review the discrepancy
from the Board’s approved site plan “B” and the actual area marked by
Environmental Health
Department. Commissioner Smith noted
issues with the area marked on the site plan as the
“ primary septic area” in relation to the location of the driveway and
reiterated the need for the
emergency meeting. Commissioner
Smith stated he felt that this Board needed to go to the location
to review the proposed septic design plans.
Supervisor Easter
noted that soil in the whole area was approved, but the design is to the
right of the proposed driveway.
Chairman Walker
requested the Board determine the format of today’s meeting before any
further discussion.
[Chairman Walker asked
the commissioners if they wished to excuse Commissioner Carroll
from the meeting. There was no
response. (Commissioner Carroll
requested on 01-25-2010 to
add the
following: There was no legal basis for Commissioner Carroll to be
excused from the
meeting.)]
County Manager Bryan
Steen discussed the following memo, requested by Chairman
Walker, regarding the need for the emergency meeting:
(Manager Steen included County Attorney Edward Powell’s legal opinion)
To: Stokes County
Commissioners
From: Bryan Steen,
County Manager
Date: January
15, 2010
Ref: 01-15-2010
Emergency Meeting
Regarding the need to call
for an Emergency Meeting, the Board is aware of the time pressures related to
completing the Early College project and critical steps (financing, site
preparation, POD construction, permit approval for well and septic system,
etc.) required for us to be able to receive Early College Students this August.
As you know, the Board met
01-11-2010 and Commissioners were informed that placement flags had been set in
accordance with the Site Plan that was approved by the Board on 12-28-2009 and
you were asked to view the site. Since
the Jan. 11th meeting, several concerns have been voiced by
Commissioners regarding the Site Plan and possible need to make significant
changes before we go any further.
In calling for an Emergency
Meeting, I want the Board to be aware of the following issues:
On January 13th, a
routine conference call was held with the Local Gov. Comm. (LGC) to discuss our
loan application for financing of the Nancy Reynolds and Community College
projects. Both projects have been put
into one loan package and interest rate.
During the call, LGC staff
directed / required me to provide additional information related to the well
and septic system permits. The
information is critical for approval of our loan application and thus moving
forward with the financed projects as established without delay and the
consequences that would result from a delay of another 30 days for another
review by the LGC. Keep in mind that the
current loan amount was for the combined financial needs of both projects and
not as separate smaller amounts.
Additionally, it was the total loan amount for both projects that was
placed out for bid and responded to with a loan term to include the interest
rate. Separation of the projects will
result in a project delay to go back to the market for a new loan amount and
new loan bid / interest rate.
I’ve been working on
development of the information necessary for the LGC required letter. Part of the required information is related
to approval of the septic system permit and timeline for approval. I was in the process of getting an
Improvement Permit from Environmental Health based on the use of work that has
been completed for the area identified and examined as the result of our
approved site plan. The Improvement
Permit would support the fact that soil in the area identified would be
acceptable for use and therefore infers that the formal septic system permit
would be approved if the system design was acceptable to the approving
agent. Additionally certain timeline
inferences could be made as to when approval would likely occur. This is information required by the LGC. Should the Board direct us to change the
approved site plan and location of the septic system, all work on the septic
system design and soil examination will be thrown out and we will have to start
the process anew, about a three week delay.
The LGC is scheduled to make a decision on our loan application Feb. 2,
2010.
A change in the current Well
location, as established in the Site Plan, we also require us to start the
approval process again and result in a delay for the project and development of
information required by the LGC for the Feb. 2, 2010 meeting.
These are the main factors that
resulted in my discussion with the County Attorney to ask the Chairman to call
an Emergency Meeting on this matter.
I will do my best to see that
the projects are completed as desired and on time, but there are certain
regulatory factors and minimal time requirements for activities that I can’t
control.
Time is of the essences and I
do not believe we can wait until next week to have a Special Called Meeting to
review the issues that have just come up, respond to potential changes in the
Site Plan and complete provision of required information early enough for loan
approval consideration during the Feb. 2nd LGC meeting and have a
reasonable chance in completing the project in time to receive students
attending Early College.
Attorney Powell’s legal opinion:
January 14, 2010
Mr. Bryan Steen
Stokes County Manager
Ronald
Reagan Administration Building
1014
Main Street
Danbury,
North Carolina 27016
Re: Requirements
for an Emergency Meeting of the Board of Commissioners
Dear
Bryan:
The requirements for having an
emergency meeting of the Board of Commissioners are contained in G. S.
143-318.12:
§
143-318.12 Public notice of official meetings.
(a) If
a public body has established, by ordinance, resolution, or otherwise, a
schedule of regular meetings, it shall cause a current copy of that schedule,
showing the time and place of regular meetings, to be kept on file as follows:
(1) For
public bodies that are part of State government, with the Secretary of State;
(2) For
the governing board and each other public body that is part of a county
government, with the clerk to the board of county commissioners;
(3) For
the governing board and each other public body that is part of a city
government, with the city clerk;
(4) For
each other public body, with its clerk or secretary, or, if the public body
does not have a clerk or secretary, with the clerk to the board of county
commissioners in the county in which the public body normally holds its
meetings.
If a
public body changes its schedule of regular meetings, it shall cause the
revised schedule to be filed as provided in subdivisions (1) through (4) of
this subsection at least seven calendar days before the day of the first
meeting held pursuant to the revised schedule.
(b) If
a public body holds an official meeting at any time or place other than a time
or place shown on the schedule filed pursuant to subsection (a) of this
section, it shall give public notice of the time and place of that meeting as
provided in this subsection.
(1) If
a public body recesses a regular, special, or emergency meeting held pursuant
to public notice given in compliance with this subsection, and the time and
place at which the meeting is to be continued is announced in open session, no
further notice shall be required.
(2) For
any other meeting, except an emergency meeting, the public body shall cause
written notice of the meeting stating its purpose (i) to be posted on the
principal bulletin board of the public body or, if the public body has no such
bulletin board, at the door of its usual meeting room, and (ii) to be mailed or
delivered to each newspaper, wire service, radio station, and television
station, which has filed a written request for notice with the clerk or
secretary of the public body or with some other person designated by the public
body. The public body shall also cause notice to be mailed or delivered to any
person, in addition to the representatives of the media listed above, who has
filed a written request with the clerk, secretary, or other person designated
by the public body. This notice shall be posted and mailed or delivered at
least 48 hours before the time of the meeting. The public body may require each
newspaper, wire service, radio station, and television station submitting a
written request for notice to renew the request annually. The public body shall
charge a fee to persons other than the media, who request notice, of ten
dollars ($10.00) per calendar year, and may require them to renew their
requests quarterly.
(3) For
an emergency meeting, the public body shall cause notice of the meeting to be
given to each local newspaper, local wire service, local radio station, and
local television station that has filed a written request, which includes the
newspaper's, wire services, or station's telephone number, for emergency notice
with the clerk or secretary of the public body or with some other person
designated by the public body. This notice shall be given either by telephone
or by the same method used to notify the members of the public body and shall
be given immediately after notice has been given to those members. This notice
shall be given at the expense of the party notified. An "emergency
meeting" is one called because of generally unexpected circumstances that
require immediate consideration by the public body. Only business connected
with the emergency may be considered at a meeting to which notice is given
pursuant to this paragraph.
(c)
Repealed by Session Laws 1991, c. 694, s. 6. (1979, c. 655, s. 1; 1991, c. 694,
ss. 5, 6.)
G. S. 143-318.12(b)(3) provides that
notice of the emergency meeting must be given to those members of the media who
have filed a written request for notice of meetings and must be given by
telephone or the method used to notify the members of the public body and shall
be given immediately after notice to the Board of Commissioners. An emergency meeting is defined as one called
because of unexpected circumstances that require immediate consideration by the
Board of Commissioners, and the only business that may be conducted is that as
described in the notice of the meeting.
David Lawrence of the UNC School of
Government has stated in his book on Open Meetings and Local Governments in
North Carolina that two conditions must be met in order to call and conduct
an emergency meeting, First, the meeting must concern "generally
unexpected circumstances" and, Second, those circumstances must require
"immediate consideration" by the public body.
As you described to me, this meeting
will involve a meeting to discuss necessary changes in the site plan of the
Early College and is necessary because the Board of Commissioners has just
learned of the site plan problems which must be resolved and finalized before very
limited time constraints concerning the loan application approval by the Local
Government Commission and the requirement that the Early College be in
operation at the new site for the summer 2010 opening of Stokes County schools.
It would certainly seem that these
facts constitute unexpected circumstances which would require immediate consideration by the Board of
Commissioners because of the time constraints involved.
Sincerely
yours,
/s/
Edward L. Powell
Edward
L. Powell
Stokes
County Attorney
Commissioner Smith,
Commissioner Inman, Vice Chairman Lankford, and Chairman
Walker agreed to proceed with the meeting due to the critical timing
outlined by Manager Steen.
Commissioner Carroll
questioned the purpose and the outcome of the meeting.
Chairman Walker noted the
reason for the meeting is to do whatever is needed to make sure
the county has the best product that will serve the needs of the Early College
students and for others
who may use the facility in the future by going with the approved site
plan or making necessary
changes.
Vice Chairman Lankford
noted he would like to discuss options A and B and would
request the Board visit the site before making any final decisions.
Commissioner Inman
agreed with Commissioner Carroll that this Board had agreed on
a site plan, but feels the County needs to make sure the future
facility for a community college
is in the best location possible on the property and he had some
concerns regarding the location of
the septic area which have been addressed. Commissioner Inman stated
that most of his concerns
have been alleviated and his goal is not to detain the progress, but to
make sure everything is
located in the best possible place.
Supervisor Easter
wanted to make sure that the Board realized that the Environmental
Health Department’s site plan did not look like the site plan shown to
her by Commissioner Smith.
Chairman Walker entertained
a motion regarding the format of the meeting.
Vice Chairman Lankford
moved that the Board of Commissioners have discussion
regarding the site plan, recess the meeting, and reconvene at the property. Commissioner Inman
seconded and the motion carried (4-1) with Commissioner Carroll voting
against the motion.
Chairman Walker opened
the floor for discussion regarding the site plan.
Supervisor Easter
noted that she had not seen the site plan shown to her by Commissioner
Smith. Mr. Robbins noted that
Ms. Easter’s map is an actual working drawing map and that
Commissioner Smith’s is a schematic drawing of the intentions of the
project.
Mr. Robbins noted the
septic field was based on the idea it would be in the general
area located on site plan “B”, before any test pits were dug.
Supervisor Easter stated
the septic field has been evaluated and laid out as indicated on
her site map.
The Board discussed
the proposed septic field with Environmental Health Specialist
Supervisor Easter.
Vice Chairman Lankford
expressed concerns regarding areas on the site plan that need to be
graded for possible future growth, buildings, etc. that may be affected
by the location of the
drainage area.
The Board discussed
the areas questioned by Vice Chairman Lankford with Mr. Robbins.
Mr. Robbins noted that
there was no intention to grade where the septic area is planned and
pointed out areas that need grading and areas where the earth needs to
be moved.
Vice Chairman Lankford
noted the need to view the proposed sites discussed by Supervisor
Easter and Mr. Robbins at the property.
The Board discussed
the location of the primary structure for a future stand-alone facility.
Mr. Robbins noted the location of the facility could be moved if
needed.
With no further
discussion, Chairman Walker recessed the meeting to reconvene at the
property site.
Chairman Walker called the meeting back to
order at the property site. All those in
attendance at the beginning of the meeting were also at the location
site.
Mr. Robbins pointed
out the areas that would need to be graded and described the
amount of grading that would be needed.
Supervisor Easter pointed
out the septic field area which had been laid out and approved by
Environmental Health.
The Board discussed
the grading with Mr. Robbins and the septic field area with the
Environmental Health staff.
County Manager Steen
questioned Mr. Darian Creed regarding what kind of delay
would occur if the septic field had to be changed. Mr. Creed responded approximately one
month. Mr. Creed noted the
application and plans for erosion control were almost ready for
submission to NCDEHR.
Supervisor Easter
wanted to make sure the Board knew that the septic field was designed
for the 248 students for Early College with no food preparation.
Commissioner Smith
questioned the capacity of the POD.
Manager Steen noted
the POD would accommodate approximately 174 students and that creative
scheduling would be
needed for students in their last two years. Director Ann Watts was aware of the capacity
and saw no problems with scheduling students since most students in the
last two years are
not on campus every day.
Chairman Walker entertained a motion.
Commissioner Smith
moved to accept the site plan prepared by Mr. Robbins and the
septic field plan evaluated/approved by Environmental Health which was presented
by Supervisor
Easter at today’s meeting and to proceed with the project. Commissioner Inman seconded the
motion.
Chairman Walker called
for any further discussion.
Commissioner Smith wanted
to reiterate the need to be on the property site due to the
differences in the site maps before proceeding with the project.
Commissioner Inman
wanted to reiterate that it was not his intention to hold up the
project or question Architect Robbins, but he just wanted to make sure
that everything was in
the best possible location.
Vice Chairman Lankford
stated he also wanted to make sure everything was in the
the best possible location and feels the plan will work.
Commissioner Carroll
noted he was fine all along.
Chairman Walker noted
that before calling the emergency meeting, he had input from
the Commissioners who were concerned about issues with the site map and
had a comfort level
to call the emergency meeting.
Chairman Walker also noted that he shared the Board’s goal
to have a good project and to have a project done right that will serve
the purpose.
Chairman Walker called
the question.
The motion carried
unanimously.
Chairman Walker
expressed the Board’s appreciation for those in attendance at today’s
meeting.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before
the Board, Chairman Walker
entertained a motion to adjourn the meeting.
Vice Chairman Lankford moved to adjourn the
meeting. Commissioner Smith
seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
_________________________
_____________________________
Darlene M.
Bullins
Jimmy Walker
Clerk to the Board Chairman