Columbus County Community Chat

• It isn’t really a sale of property, Waste Management says

By NICOLE CARTRETTE
Staff Writer

Columbus County’s negotiations with Waste Management appeared to be close to settled at a Dec. 17 meeting.

In a 6-1 vote, the Board of Commissioners verbally agreed to sell a three-sided metal waste transfer station and lease the land the building sits on to Waste Management in exchange for certain incentives.

Putting the agreement in black and white was all that was left to do.

Commissioner Ricky Bullard, who opposed the sale, said after the meeting that he didn’t think the sale was legal.

According to state law, county real property and property valued in excess of $30,000 can’t be privately sold unless it is going to a non-profit and meets certain state requirements for historical or other value.

It had to be done through a bidding process, Bullard said.

Now, Waste Management, in a letter from corporate legal counsel, is saying the letter presented to the board in December “mischaracterizes the payment of the $325,000 by Waste Management to the county as a payment for the purchase of the transfer station building.

“In fact, the proposed $325,000 payment to the county is to compensate the county for waiving its option to purchase the transfer station building under the current agreement, in conjunction with the extension of the agreement,” Janne C. Foster wrote in a letter to Interim County Manager Leo Hunt dated Dec. 27.

The letter explains that Peverall “was clear in his statements to the county about the ownership of the transfer station building,” but adds that “the transfer station has been owned by Waste Management since it was constructed pursuant to the June 25, 1997 Transfer Station and Disposal Service Agreement.

“Waste Management built the building at its expense and holds the permit for operation of the transfer station,” the letter reads.

“I’m still against selling the transfer station,” Bullard said Friday. “I think when Waste Management owns the transfer station it is going to be hard to get a fair bid.

“I don’t think any contractor should have a hard contract to where we have no way to negotiate and bid out a contract,” Bullard said.

Bullard said news that the details of the $325,000 payment had changed it “stunned him.”

“I haven’t seen anything that shows me they own the building in black and white,” Bullard insisted. “If they built it and paid the contractor for it it’s probably a situation where they own it,” Bullard added.

Bullard said according to the terms of the old contract the county would own the building in five years with no cost. Under the new proposal Bullard said the county would be stuck either renewing a contract or paying more than what the building is worth to buy it back.

“The building will be 15 years old,” Bullard said.

Bullard said clarification of what the payment is for is a way around the law. He said previously the sale did not follow the law.

“I think all they are doing is changing the verbiage to make it legal,” Bullard said. “Well, that’s my opinion – that’s a way around it.”

It is noted on the upcoming commissioner’s agenda that the issue of selling the building was “tabled.”

“The issue was not tabled – the issue was voted on,” Bullard said.

Bullard said the contract on leasing the land, the trash pick up contract and transfer station agreement should all expire at the same time.

Chairman James Prevatte and Commissioner Bill Memory said at a previous meeting they had worked that out with Waste Management.

The latest proposal from the company is a little unclear.

While the proposal specifically states that the transfer station agreement and waste disposal service contract run until Dec. 31, 2012, a notice of the intent to buy the transfer station is required months in advance.

In addition, the proposal does not specify that the lease of the land is until Dec. 31, 2012. It states the lease is for five years but indicates no start or end date.

“Everything should expire at the same time,” Bullard said.

That permit is not in the county’s possession.

County administration staff said Friday they did not have a copy of the permit in question.
A call to Peverall was not returned.

The county building inspections department has been unable to locate any permit issued to the company 10 years ago.

Discussion of the agreement began in November when the county received a letter from Waste Management. No one was aware that the agreement was up for renewal and the board was crunched for time and did not want service interrupted.
Bullard has called the situation confusing because of a series of changes in the negotiation.

First, the Columbus County Board of Commissioners had two choices: pay Waste Management $325,000 for the metal building located at the closed New Hope landfill (owned by the county) or renew the company’s exclusive multimillion dollar agreement with the county and get a break on consumer price index increases for a year.

The company had never paid taxes on the building and some commissioners thought the price was excessive.
Then, things changed.

A few commissioners met privately with the company and Waste Management came back with an apology stating a clerical error resulted in the price error of $325,000 that should have been $171,000.

Greg Peverall, an executive with Waste Management, said in a “good faith effort” the company wanted to pay the county $325,000 for the station and pay the county to lease the land the building is located on.

Peverall maintained that the company owned the building but was offering to pay the county for it, plus give the county a break on consumer price index increases in the countywide curbside pick-up and transfer station agreement.

By NICOLE CARTRETTE
Staff Writer

It sounded good to Columbus County Commissioners.

A couple hundred thousand in cash and another $125,000 in gate credits from Waste Management won the favor of six of seven commissioners Monday Dec. 17.

The agreement to sell the three-sided metal building located at the closed New Hope landfill comes just weeks after the county was told they didn’t own the building.

At that time the county was told it could either renew a five-year transfer station agreement with Waste Management or buy the building for the company’s $325,000 book value.

Waste Management had something different to say Monday.

Error on value

Greg Peverall, of Waste Management, told the board an error had occurred in the calculation of the building’s book value and it was actually only worth about $171,000 and that his company in the “spirit of trust and good faith” had a new offer.

That offer was to pay the county $325,000 for the building with $200,000 being in cash and the rest in gate credits at the transfer station.

Under the plan the county will receive an additional $90,000 over the next five years in gate credits for the land the building sits on and 56 cents per ton for trash moved through the station.

Waste Management will forego the annual consumer price index increase for the next two years for more than $400,000 in savings, Peverall proposed.

Contracts concurrent

The county’s curbside pick-up contract and transfer agreement will both run concurrent for five years. Both will expire on Dec. 31, 2012.

Fuel surcharges will continue.

Peverall wanted a 10-year lease on the building and option to buy the land and scales from the county in five years but the board pushed for the five-year lease.

“At our December 3 meeting we had to buy the building,” Commissioner Bullard said. “Why is it you are asking to buy the building?

“Who owns the building?” Bullard insisted.

“We own the building,” Peverall said.

Sell building

“Mr. Chairman, I personally oppose the selling of the building. I feel like we have a noose around our neck. We only have 30 days to negotiate a contract,” Bullard said of the contract that expires Dec. 31. “I just don’t feel it’s a smart move on the county’s part. I just oppose selling the transfer station.”

Peverall suggested the county would have the option to buy the building back in five years at fair market value but have a 10-year lease on the land.

“They want to lease the land for 10 years with a five-year contract and I oppose that,” Bullard said.

Chairman James Prevatte agreed.

“This is something Mr. Peverall and I discussed and I told him this might be a problem,” Prevatte said.

Commissioner Amon McKenzie appeared frustrated that the two board members who met with Waste Management, Bill Memory and Prevatte, didn’t have a clear-cut recommendation on the proposal.

Prevatte explained that he and Memory met with Peverall a few times but he did not like some details Waste Management wanted in the contract.

“They paid to build the building but it was never put – the building – in their name,” Prevatte said.

No last minute

Prevatte explained that he had asked for the contracts to run concurrently and asked for a one-year notice of the renewal date so that the county will not be caught with renewing a contract at the last minute.

“Other parts are what they have offered,” Prevatte said.

“I think we need to look at the lease on the property. It needs to coincide with the five-year contracts,” Commissioner Ronald Gore said. He said he would like the county to have the option to buy the building back at tax value.

Peverall said if the company was spending $325,000 on the building the sale value in five years should not be the tax value.

“One of the things we discussed was a negotiation of the price,” Memory said. He said the company and the county would both get an appraisal and then negotiate the price.

“Right now they are moving forward. I think they realize they made an error and we have spent a ton of money with them,” Memory said. He pointed out the company had agreed to concurrent contracts.

Good faith

“I think that’s a good faith effort on their part,” Memory said, before adding that he too agreed the lease should also be five years not 10.

“We have a gentleman’s agreement to work out the details in 30 days,” Memory said. “We can’t afford to let 170 tons (of trash) a day build up.”

“I was in the understanding that you two negotiated this and it was my understanding in essence you had agreed to the proposal,” Commissioner Sammie Jacobs said to Memory and Prevatte.

“The committee went there; do you have a proposal?” McKenzie added.

“I don’t have a problem with giving them a lease for five years but I can’t obligate past the five years,” Prevatte said.

“Do we pass up the $200,000 cash they propose to give us?” Jacobs asked.

“I oppose,” Bullard said. “In five years the board will not have the money to buy any building.”

Move on

“We can do either one,” McKenzie said. “I want the recommendation so we can move on.”

“We are leasing the land itself and selling a three sided building for a price that is pretty hefty and would put $200,000 in our coffers,” Memory said.

Memory said he didn’t see what the problem was. “There is already a problem with the floors,” Memory said. “I’ve looked at it.

“This is an opportunity for Columbus County to reduce solid waste fees by 56 cents a ton. Unless we have someone standing outside the door with a better offer, gentleman, I think we had better take some action on it,” Jacobs said.

“They have made some good offers,” Bullard said, but did not back down from his opposition to the sale.

Consider cash

“We should maybe consider the cash payment,” McKenzie said, but questioned if it could be put in a lease, not sale, of the building.

Peverall said he would not be willing to lease the building on those terms.

“Why is the building so important?” Bullard asked Peverall.

“What would you lease the land for?” Prevatte asked.

“I’ve not been prepared to offer any other,” Peverall said.

“Mr. Chairman, are we passing up $200,000?” Jacobs asked. “I thought you had it negotiated.”

“Personally, I think it’s a good offer,” Memory said.

Prevatte asked about extending the negotiations an additional 60 to 90 days.

“We would prefer while we are all here to make it work,” Peverall said.

McKenzie said the county is not displeased with its service from Waste Management. “We feel two parties can agree and we can at least work with them and at least trust them,” McKenzie said.

McKenzie said a recommendation should have been made by the negotiating board members.

“We cannot decide for seven,” Prevatte declared. “I’m telling you there are two points there I don’t agree with.”

Problem here

“I’m beating a dead horse here,” McKenzie said.

Memory said it was a matter of how the proposal was worded.

“We have a problem here, gentlemen –that’s 170 tons a day that’s got to be moved out of county,” Memory said. “We could put money in the bank to reduce the cost of waste collection. We are looking at almost $1 per ton in savings with the five-year lease and extension in five years.

“That’s a lot of money for us,” Memory said. “We could lose the $200,000 and lose the 56 cents gate credit.”

Prevatte pointed out that they had negotiated the lease from $60,000 to $90,000 and no CPI increase in 2009.

Good job

“I think you did a good job. We just need to follow through,” Jacobs said.

Another obstacle in negotiations was a provision that if the county chooses to buy the building back, they need to let Waste Management know two years before the contract expires, or in 2010.

“That lets them know if you are or are not gong to renew the (waste) contract,” Bullard declared.

“I see no problem giving them two years,” Jacobs said.

“In the spirit of moving forward we will make a six-month concession,” Peverall said. The county must notify the company by July 1, 2011.

Peverall explained the permitting process for a transfer station could easily take a year and they would need time to site a new one.

Memory made a motion to accept the proposal with the suggested amendments. His motion was seconded by Commissioner Lynwood Norris. Only Bullard voted “no.”

• Chairman says better deal forthcoming but is quiet on company never listing building with tax office.

By NICOLE CARTRETTE
Staff Writer

Waste Management has never paid taxes on a building located at the county-owned but closed New Hope landfill.

Two weeks ago in a board meeting a representative with the company told Columbus County commissioners the three-sided metal building was worth $325,000 on their books and the county could either buy it or renew a five-year contract.

County Tax Administrator Richard Gore said Thursday it was not brought to his office’s attention during revaluation that the building was not county property. While the building is valued at $59,000 on the tax books, it is exempted as being county-owned.

“No one knew that it belonged to Waste Management, “ Gore explained. “They never got a building permit.”

“Nobody has told me that they own it,” Gore said. “I’m just hanging loose until somebody tells me whose it is.”

Gore said if the county and Waste Management agree it belongs to the company, the office could go back five years to collect taxes which would amount to about $3,000 in taxes and penalties based on the $59,000 valuation, not Waste Management’s value of $325,000.

The Waste Management office building is listed with the tax office as well as a number of vehicles.

It is unclear why a building permit was never obtained or why no taxes have been paid on the building.

When asked about the building not being listed with the tax office, Commissioner Chairman James Prevatte had little to say about the situation.

“I have to be careful because there is some negotiation going on there,” he explained. “It’s not listed in their name at this time.”

It appears that possible offers, which Prevatte did not disclose, have put the tax issue on the back burner for now.

“I can’t divulge the contract negotiations right now but it doesn’t look as bleak as it did,” Prevatte said. “It’s a contract negotiation.”

Prevatte said he and others had met with Greg Peverall, a representative with Waste Management, to discuss the contract and a subsequent meeting was planned prior to Monday’s commissioners meeting.

Prevatte said he had requested that someone with the authority to make changes and actually negotiate the contract be at Monday’s (tonight’s) meeting and that person would likely be Peverall.

Under the county’s current transfer station agreement, which must be renewed by Dec. 31, the county owns the land the transfer station is on but does not own the building or most of the equipment used at the station.

The county does not receive any portion of fees per ton nor a reduction on its waste and user fees for hosting the transfer station, with the exception of 33 percent of the fee paid on inert debris dumped at the closed landfill.

The county finance office could not determine the exact amount of money being paid to the county for such measures but said it appeared to be minimal.

Public Utilities Director Leroy Sellers said it was his understanding very few trucks from out of county come into the station.

According to the contract, trash may be hauled into the station for transfer to larger trucks from a 100-mile radius, which would include other counties in North and South Carolina.

At the previous public meeting, several commissioners blasted the contract as being to the benefit of Waste Management.

Commissioner Bill Memory said the county appeared to be between a rock and hard place and pointed out the county residents had paid the company millions over the years only to be told a metal building on their own property was valued at $325,000.

Waste Management had offered to defer consumer price indexing increases for the first year of the renewal that would have saved the county more than $400,000 a year but most commissioners weren’t agreeing that it was such a great deal considering the county’s waste contract with the company is around $6 million and not including fuel surcharges.

“This is, in my opinion, a one-sided contract,” Commissioner Ronald Gore said Thursday, but pointed out he hoped negotiations would bring forth a better deal for the county. “We need to see some issues ironed out,” he said, pointing out “there is room for negotiation.” Ultimately he admitted: “I think we are going to have to renew the contract.”

Interim County Manager Leo Hunt was reluctant to comment on what his recommendation would be to commissioners.

He has prior commitment and will not be at Monday’s meeting but did have concerns that the board found out about the contract at such a late date – less than a month before its renewal .

“I wish I’d known about this earlier – this almost slipped by us,” Hunt said.

As for the building not being taxed, Hunt said that would likely change and referred the reporter to the tax office. “It looked like it belonged to us,” he explained.

Commissioners meet tonight (Monday) in the Dempsey Herring Courthouse Annex building at 6:30 p.m.

Other agenda items include a request that the county purchase additional land for the airport, a county recreation department update, and a scheduled closed session for personnel to interview manager candidates.

In his book, “Where Have All The Leaders Gone?,” Lee Iacocca, the man who rescued what appeared to be a doomed Chrysler Corporation from collapse in the 1980s, credits much of the company’s successful turnaround to the people he hired as his lieutenants. Finding good people to work for you is a key to effective leadership, Iaccoca says.

That’s why hiring the right county manager should be job number one on the commissioners’ list.

Columbus County has advertised for a county manager for some time now and commissioners say they’ve found no one who they think can do the job.

Former County Manager Jim Varner has been gone for a while, and while Interim Manager Leo Hunt has held down the fort in the meantime, he says he’s ready to fade into retirement.

With round one of interviews apparently unsuccessful, we think the county commissioners should reassess the process.

For starters, the job calls for applicants to have a master’s degree with county government experience. Having someone with both those qualifications would be nice, but we believe this severely limits the pool of candidates. Some of the finest journalists to ever work for The News Reporter, for example, didn’t go to journalism school.

We’re also concerned by recent comments by commissioners that the county can’t afford the salary that some candidates might demand.

We say we can’t afford not to pay a top-notch candidate. Rookies and low-man-on-the-totem-pole candidates will demand a salary in the $50,000 range. A good manager’s salary will start in the $80,000 or $90,000 range.

If the commissioners are shooting for a $60,000 manager as they have in the past, then the county will likely be saddled with an average to below-average manager.

As we’ve said many times before, the commissioners should hire a quality manager and leave him or her alone to do his or her job.

With the county’s finances at a precarious level, the need for economic development and better planning, we urge the commissioners to broaden their search and remember that the cost of hiring a good manager will easily be recouped.

If the commissioners want to turn Columbus County around, do what Lee Iacocca did – hire the best people and the rest will take care of itself.

Disposal of the county’s garbage is an expensive proposition – about $5.8 million annually – so any contract negotiations should be taken seriously and with much thought.

The county commissioners haven’t been known for their due diligence on tedious documents in the past, but they deserve credit for raising questions about the latest contract extension proposal from Waste Management.

The commissioners had planned to cancel their Dec. 17 meeting during the Christmas season, but have instead chosen to use the time to get more answers from Waste Management on their valuation of a three-sided metal building they’re offering the county at the “bargain” price of $325,000. As so often happens with monopolies, Waste Management has given the county the choice of paying $325,000 for this grossly overvalued building or accepting another long-term contract for waste transfer.

Whether the “deal” Waste Management is giving the county in the new contract is a good one needs study, but the commissioners are right to raise a red flag about the price of this shell of a building.

There are other issues that need to be thought out as well, such as aligning the transfer contract with the time frame of the collection contract because it’s not practical to have one contract commensurate with the other.

Second, the contract requires a minimum of 100 tons of garbage a day be moved through Waste Management. That kills any incentive to recycle or cut the waste stream, which would save taxpayer dollars in landfill fees.

Making sure taxpayers get the best deal in contract negotiations is what the commissioners are elected to do, even if it means working through Christmas. This is one trashy deal that wasn’t swept under the rug.

If there is a department of county government that must do its job well, it’s the 911 Center.

No matter how good the county’s fire, police and EMS services are, their efforts will be diminished if there are procedural issues at the 911 Center .

Sheriff Chris Batten recently appealed to the county commissioners for help in resolving issues with the 911 Center and communications with his deputies.

When it comes to stressful jobs, 911 dispatchers are at the top of the list. We have a dedicated crew at the 911 Center here, but they need to be in an environment where they can do their jobs effectively.

Bear in mind that dispatchers not only answer phone calls, they also dispatch them, type in information for record keeping, plus maintain radio communications with responding units – all simultaneously. Usually, four dispatchers can handle what comes in, but sometimes, several emergencies happen concurrently. That’s when you don’t want to be understaffed.

Several problems listed by Batten and brought to light recently need to be addressed. Perhaps the first is the simplest: 911 dispatchers here have to handle too many non-emergency calls. Often, these are calls for situations like interrupted water or sewer service or lost pets.

Citizens should expect answers to these calls, but intermingling these with heart attack or house fire calls is putting too much stress in an already stressful environment.

Batten is correct in asserting that whoever is handling sheriff’s department calls needs to be a sheriff’s department specialist – someone who understands law enforcement and is familiar with sheriff’s department protocols.

Can these current issues be resolved by honing procedures for non-emergency calls and rethinking operations? Maybe, but the 911 Center’s performance will never be predictable because of the nature of emergencies, which often occur en masse.

There are plenty of areas where the county can cut expenses, but the 911 Center isn’t one of them. Error has to be on the side of caution.

• State agencies converge on Silver Spoon farm.

By JEFFERSON WEAVER
Staff Writer

State water quality and environmental officials are investigating a livestock waste spill in the Silver Spoon area.

The spill, which was apparently swine waste, was reported Wednesday around 6 p.m., according to officials on the scene. The owner, Barry Freedman, raises hogs for Murphy Brown. He contacted the state Division of Water Quality immediately, investigators said.

A response team was on site by 7 p.m. Wednesday, returned Thursday morning, and was scheduled to return each day until the spill is cleaned up.

Murphy Brown was scheduled to have suction trucks on the scene by 7 p.m. Thursday. Officials were using an airplane to photograph the extent of the spill.

The state investigator, who asked not to be identified, said representatives of the DWQ, Soil and Conservation Service, and other agencies were monitoring the spill, which apparently spread from a waste lagoon to a drainage ditch.

The ditch drains into a creek that feeds a sensitive wetlands area downstream, he said.

Freedman reported to The News Reporter Thursday night that the spill resulted from an irrigation hydrant malfunction. It is the first spill at the farm in 11 years of operation.

By JEFFERSON WEAVER
Staff Writer

Whiteville officials are trying to revive plans to establish at least one National Registry historic district in the city.

“It’s been proven that historic districts are beneficial to revitalizing downtowns,” said City Manager Josh Ray. He and planner Lainie Johnston have been reviewing the 1997 and 2003 historic district plans for ideas.

Johnston said one of the key steps will be recognizing which areas would be best for the designation.

“Whiteville has an uptown and a downtown,” she said, “plus the Madison Street corridor.

All these areas have different strengths, and their own particular character.”

To gain historic district status, a municipality must submit plans to the National Parks Service highlighting the historic nature of homes and businesses in the target areas.

If the district is approved, the municipality and a local historic district commission writes guidelines designed to maintain the appearance of the area, and to provide an additional tool for managed growth.

Property owners who choose to purchase or restore properties in the districts can be eligible for significant tax breaks, Johnston said.

“When people hear that they can save big money by following historic district guidelines,” Ray said, “they tend to listen a lot more closely.”

Historic districts have come under fire in some cities because of the restrictive nature of local rules. Ray and Johnston emphasized there is no desire to do that here.

“It’s all about promoting the city,” Ray said. “We want to do what we can to improve and revitalize the area. When you get people interested in coming downtown, merchants will provide places for them to go. Right now there’s virtually no place to walk to downtown after dark. There’s no reason, aside from the health benefits, to walk around downtown at night. We’d like to change that.

“If we give people a reason to go downtown after 5 p.m.,” Ray said, “then we’ll see more development.”

Johnston said she is exploring which areas to include in the proposed districts, as well as how far they should extend out from the Madison Street corridor.

“We have a lot of things to examine from the start,” she said. “How far out will it reach? Should we concentrate on one of the three centers first? Do we emphasize business or residential property? There’s a lot to consider before the work can begin.”

Ray also pointed out that some simple beautification tasks will go far toward helping preserve and improve the uptown and downtown areas.

“Something so simple as planting a few trees can make all the difference in the world between a bare parking lot and an attractive place,” Ray said.

Ray and Johnston said the onus of the project rests on the community.

“This isn’t something we’re pushing,” he said. “Right now, there is no historic district commission, and we don’t have a part of town government dedicated to establishing an historic district. It has to be something the people want to do. If the people want it, we’re here to help.”

Johnston pointed to her own hometown of Tarboro as an example.

“For a number of years,” she said, “you couldn’t sell a house downtown. Then the revitalization effort got underway (after the town was flooded by hurricanes).

Now you can’t sell a house in the suburbs. People are reaching out for that neighborhood feeling again, and they like having things within walking distance.

“I grew up being able to walk to the store, and walk to church,” Johnston said. “People are wanting a return to that, and an historic district can help.”

“I think it would be a big boost for the City of Whiteville,” Ray said, “but only if the people want it. The property owners have to be willing to take the steps to make it happen.”

By NICOLE CARTRETTE
Staff Writer

The Columbus County Board of Health voted to change intensive livestock rules after it was brought to their attention that a new turkey growing operation couldn’t get an electrical permit from the county inspection department.

After a series of meetings held in November and December, the board voted to change intensive livestock rules that would make the new operation eligible for permits that could not be obtained under old rules.

The old rules called for a setback of at least 200 feet from adjoining property lines. Two of the houses did not meet those guidelines and rules were changed to require only a 50-foot setback from property lines, among other things.

A public hearing was not properly advertised and county officials aren’t denying it.

A public hearing has now been scheduled for 7 a.m. on Dec. 28 but the operation has already been permitted and the turkeys are in the houses.

County Health Director Kim Smith said the Board of Health looked at the rules and determined the setbacks as written were not based on a health risk.

“The board met, changed and accepted the N.C. Poultry Federation Guidelines and Standards and this is actually what the farmer built the farm on,” Smith said. “He was unaware that Columbus County had an intensive livestock ordinance.”

When asked what date those rules were changed, Smith was uncertain.

“I’d have to go back and look but I’m going to go ahead and tell you the general statute says that you have to give public notice any time you adopt new rules and we’re in the process of correcting that,” Smith said.

The Board of Health has the duty and power to protect the public’s health, Smith said.

“The footage was changed because there was not a health reason and all of the research we have done is that most of the risk is to poultry workers, not adjoining property owners or residences that are nearby,” Smith said. “In this case the board felt there were not any health reasons why this should be 200 feet from the property line.

“Where is the health risk?” Smith said. “That was the mindset going into this.”

Building Inspections Director Ray Reaves said he was asked to issue electrical permits for two of four houses at 1119 Jimsie Hester Rd. at W&W Farms, but the electricity would be turned on to all four and he couldn’t.

“We stayed within our guidelines,” Reaves said. “When we were told it was cleared by the health department I issued a permit for all of it.”

Reaves said the construction and wiring were already complete before the owner applied for a permit.

“We didn’t have an application prior to him building the buildings,” said Bill Horne with environmental health. “What we acted on was that rules had changed a week ago –we just acted on what we were told,” Horne explained.

Neil Floyd, also with environmental health, said prior to 2002 swine had been included in the intensive livestock rules but after Chatham County lost a lawsuit over their rules, Columbus County changed its plan by deleting any mention of swine in the rules but made no other changes.

Floyd said the grower, Michael Wilson, did eventually submit all of the documents required of the rules, such as a site plan, waste plan and proof of an attempt to contact adjacent landowners.

The paperwork came after the houses were constructed.

Draft minutes from a Nov. 13 “workshop” state that, in part: “This workshop was held to inform the board of the new construction of four turkey houses erected in the northern part of Columbus County without notifying Columbus County Health Department to obtain the required permit.”

Draft minutes of a Dec. 5 meeting show that “a total of 15 members of the public made comments for and against the poultry farm.” Those minutes do not reflect who spoke or what was said.

After the comments were heard, a closed session was held but the purpose for the closed session nor the statute under which the board was operating to go into the private session is not noted. Anthony Terrance is the only board member listed as not being present.

County Attorney Steve Fowler and 10 other board members are listed as being present at the meeting.

The closed session lasted from 7:30 pm to 9:05 p.m. and included two environmental health employees and one USDA employee “for a brief period,” the draft minutes show.

After the closed session, Dr. Darryl Diefes, Chairman of the Board of Health, encouraged negotiation between the two parties, the draft minutes indicate. He also questioned “Mr. Prestage” about his knowledge of the rules. The minutes do not list a Prestage as being in attendance and do not give a first name.

“He assured the board that if and when Prestage Farms established any more business in Columbus County this would not happen again,” the minutes show. “Prestage” said the company had established houses in several counties in N.C. and never encountered this.

“(County Commissioner James) Prevatte wanted to know more about wetland regulations from the Army Corp of Engineers,” the minutes read.

“Steve Fowler stated the Board of Health will continue looking into this but the two parties should continue negotiations,” the drafts state.

Records show board members George Floyd, James Prevatte and Anthony Terrance were not present at a Dec. 10 meeting where the board first voted on changing the setback rules. The next morning the board had a second reading of the changes with members C. Lacy Tate, Jr., Earl Fowler, James Prevatte, Franklin Boone, George Floyd, Twyla Hodges, Clyde Burns, Peggy Blackmon and Darryl Diefes present.

The changes were adopted on Dec. 11 in a 7 to 1 vote of the board, with Prevatte opposed.

Records obtained from the county building inspections department and health department show that electrical, building, and operational permits were issued on the same day the board took its final vote.

Diefes has said the board was unaware it was violating any law and the health rules under the old policy were not based in science.

By FULLER ROYAL
Staff Writer

During its Nov. 13 meeting, the Whiteville City Schools Board of Education heard a legislative update from Superintendent Dr. Randall Shaver.

Topics included the school calendar, school tax districts and merger studies.

Shaver reported on the statutes of North Carolina General Assembly House Bill 359, which would restore some flexibility to the dates for school startup.

The current law, enacted two years ago, requires all schools in North Carolina to begin classes no sooner than Aug. 25.

Prior to that, the city schools had been starting around the middle of August.

HB 359 would allow districts to apply for exceptions to the start date for district-wide purposes, such as working in partnership with a local community college.

The Whiteville City Schools works in conjunction with Southeastern Community College on many junior and senior courses.

Shaver said that an earlier start date would better accommodate Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate exams.

“It addresses the unique problems that schools with block schedules have,” Shaver said. “I believe that every school system should have the flexibility to determine its own calendar. This is an attempt to gain that flexibility back.”

Shaver said the bill was in a good position to be voted on when the General Assembly convenes for its short session in 2008.

Shaver said that another bill, HB 1740, is bound to raise some eyebrows.

Known as the School Board Fiscal Accountability Act, it would remove the obligation of local school financing from county commissioners and place it with elected school boards.

Instead of the state’s county commissions setting tax rates for schools, the school boards would.

Shaver said that North Carolina is one of the few states that doesn’t allow school boards that option.

Shaver said the law would allow schools boards to levy and collect taxes and take away the fiscal school accountability from the commissioners.

Shaver said that both local school systems have been “flat funded” by the commission for three years, which is actually a decrease in funding when inflation and rising fuel prices are factored in.

Shaver said that the North Carolina School Boards Association is lobbying for passage of the measure in 2008 and was asking for a resolution and help in lobbying legislators.

Shaver said the school board could operate more efficiently if allowed to collect its own money.

“I hope it will pass,” said board member Greg Merritt. “One of our county commissioners made statements about us abusing our funds. It shows how little they know about the funding of the school system. I think it would benefit this county if it does pass.”

Shaver said the current bill is the closest any has come to being seriously looked at.

Shaver said that in most cases where school boards had been given tax authority, the taxes have come down. He cited South Carolina as an example.

“Hopefully, (the commissioners) would not continue to tax at the same rate,” Merritt said.

“This would be an opportunity to work with the county commissioners,” said Chairman Carlton Prince.

Shaver said the school board needed to meet with the commissioners.

‘We don’t want them to feel threatened,” he said, “They are doing the best they can with what they have. This would be removing from them a huge responsibility. This board should have that responsibility.”

“This might be a good time to have a dialogue session with our legislators and commissioners,” Prince said.

Shaver mentioned that since Sen. Tony Rand’s Senate Bill 120 – to fund only one school district per county – had failed to pass in the state senate, Rand had managed to attach at the last minute a study on the feasibility of school merger to a bill that will study the 10 funding formulas used by the state for its schools.

The study would determine if reducing the number of school districts would save significant money.

Shaver said that the existing city school districts need to join forces and lobby against the possibility of merger.

“We need to stay on top of this,” he said. “Everywhere we look, the big systems are breaking up into smaller units.”

He cited the findings of the (Bill) Gates Foundation that smaller is better.

He said that Rand is moving in the opposite direction.

The second largest school system in the state – Mecklenburg – has divided itself into seven smaller school districts, each with a supervisor and a guidance committee answerable to the superintendent and big school board.

“This was at the urging of Judge (Howard) Manning who understands that smaller is better. If large isn’t working, then small might. Now, Sen. Rand wants us to be larger without any say-so from us.”

Shaver, who taught cost analysis debate at the high school level, said the overall public school budget in North Carolina is $6.5 billion.

He said the potential savings of $10 million would pale in comparison to the loss of knowing the best ways to teach a smaller school population.

Shaver recommended that the Whiteville City Schools join the small city school consortium being put together by the 15 affected units.

Each school system would contribute $4,000.

“I think the $4,000 would be money well spent,” Shaver said