A proposed expansion of the Carthage Extraterritorial Jurisdication [ETJ] was unanimously rejected by the Moore County Board of Commissioners during their Tuesday, November 15 meeting. More than eighty Moore County residents who attended the meeting greeted the decision with a standing ovation.
The Carthage Board of Commissioners had asked to extend the ETJ to include 371 parcels of land -- a total of 5,700 acres.
"All we want is the one mile around our town to protect our boundaries,” Town Manager Carol Sparks explained during the public hearing.
North Carolina General Statutes allow towns one-mile -- and, in some cases, two-mile -- ETJs, so that they can exert some control over development in areas just outside the city limits. But the General Statutes also make the enlargement of a town's ETJ subject to approval by the county Board of Commissioners.
Because Carthage has annexed areas in its ETJ, making them part of the town, the ETJ in some spots no longer extends a full mile from the municipal limits.
When questioned by Commissioner Tim Lea about whether or not the expanded ETJ would eventually lead to annexation, Sparks denied that was the motive. Referring to the residents of the areas that would be rolled into the expanded ETJ, Sparks said, “They're not paying any taxes. They're not going to pay any taxes.”
"The whole purpose of this is to protect the town," she added.
Tom Brady, a landowner in the proposed ETJ expansion area, told the Commissioners, “It is one thing to say today that there will be no tax implications with expanding the ETJ. But it is a foot in the door for future fees, more regulation, and taxes.”
The Times spoke with Planning Director Debra Ensminger, who explained that areas outside the ETJ are subject to County regulation and County taxes.
Sparks told The Times that residents within the ETJ pay only County taxes, but are subject to land use and zoning policies set by the town. ETJ residents have representatives on the town's planning and zoning board; in fact, they would have made up half of that board's members under Carthage's ETJ expansion proposal. However, ETJ residents, because they are not citizens of the town, cannot serve on its Board of Commissioners.
“The County already has planning, zoning, and permitting departments," Brady told the Board. "I see absolutely no rationale for creating another layer of bureaucracy and regulation.”
“By definition an ETJ is a precursor to annexation,” third generation farmer Joan Robinson told the Commissioners. “We are independent people and enjoy our rural lifestyle . . . we want to remain independent and want to remain in the country. That is why we live there.”
Commissioner Larry Caddell responded to to the ETJ expansion request by saying, “I am for less government, not more . . . . This is a very difficult decision, and one we [Commissioners] won’t take lightly, I assure you.”
The Moore County Planning Board reviewed Carthage's ETJ expansion request in October and recommended denying it, on the grounds that explaining that there seemed to be no benefit to landowners if the ETJ was approved, and that property owners within the expansion area would not have representation regarding future zoning changes affecting the property [despite having representation on the town's planning and zoning board.]
After hearing the Planning Board’s recommendation against approval and the overwhelming opposition to the extended ETJ from members of the public who spoke during the hearing, the Commissioners voted unanimously to turn down Carthage's request.
Twenty-one citizens signed up to speak in opposition to the proposed ETJ expansion, but only three actually gave testimony, after the Commissioners determined that they had heard all they needed to hear to render a decision.
Working Lands Protection Plan Tabled
The Commissioners tabled a decision on The Working Lands Protection Plan after a public hearing was conducted during the Commissioners’ Tuesday, November 15 meeting. Chairman Nick Picerno asked the Planning Board to try to gather additional input from Moore County farmers before bringing the plan back before the Board.
Testimony during the hearing suggested that one of the primary benefits of the plan -- if adopted -- is that it could facilitate the flow of grant money from the North Carolina Agricultural Development and Farmland Preservation Trust Fund to farmers in Moore County.
For example, Moore County Planner Jeremy Rust told the Board, it could be used to pair retiring farmers with beginning farmers in a type of apprenticeship.
“If one deserving farmer benefits from the plan, it’s a success,” Glen Bradley, Chairman of the Agricultural Advisory Board, told the Board.
So far, ten counties in the region surrounding Fort Bragg have adopted similar plans, leaving Moore County as the only county that has not adopted a working lands protection plan. The concern is that, if Moore County does not adopt the plan, it may end up at the bottom of the list to receive any grant funding.
Commissioner Tim Lea said it seems as though the plan “is all tied to money.”
"It's a good plan," Soil & Water Conservation Board Member John McDonald told the Commissioners. “The boards who have worked on it have taken the County’s best interest to heart.”
But there has been "limited response" from the public about the plan, McDonald added.
Planner Rust told The Times that gathering the additional input requested by the Commissioners will take time, making it unlikely that it will appear on the Board's agenda again until after the first of the year.
The Working Lands Protection Plan assesses the current state of the $373 million farm and forest industries in Moore County, and suggests strategies for preserving working lands. To date the plan has been recommended for approval by the Moore County Soil and Water Conservation District Board, the Moore County Agricultural Advisory Board, and the Moore County Planning Board.
Public Works Projects
Also during Tuesday's meeting, the Commissioners accepted a $150,000 Rural Economic Development Center grant that will help fund a waterline upgrade on Midland Road. The project will both approve hydraulics in the County's water system and allow the expansion of Carolina Eye Associates; the Rural Center grant is tied to the ten jobs that expansion is expected to create. Moore County’s total contribution to the project is $408,000. The grant will be used to create ten jobs at $15,000 each.
The Board approved a $1 million project ordinance for the replacement of Pinehurst Lift Stations 3 and 4, as well as an $129,000 engineering agreement with McGill Associates, PA, and Hydrostructures, PA. Public Works Director Randy Gould said the project is being funded by a low interest loan from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund. The existing lift stations pump one million gallons of wastewater per day.
US 1 Bypass Public Hearing Scheduled
The Commissioners scheduled a special public hearing on a possible bypass of US 1 near Southern Pines that is among the long-term options the NC Department of Transportation [NCDOT] is considering to improve transportation in Moore County. The session will be held on Monday, December 5 at 5:00 pm in the Historic Courthouse in Carthage.
Commissioner Jimmy Melton, who is the Board's point man on transportation issues, said he wants to “be sure all people of Moore County have their say on this particular transportation thing.”
Steven Later, an attorney with Robbins, May and Rich, told the Commissioners during Public Comment that the any US 1 bypass routed through "horse country" would do damage to a sector that contributes $165 million per year to the County's economy. Later is scheduled to make a presentation during the December 5 public hearing.
Redistricting Tabled
The Board tabled a decision to adopt a new map for Moore County residency districts until each of the six options can be further reviewed; the Commissioners plan to look at the options in more detail during a retreat on Thursday, November 17.
During Tuesday night’s public comment period, both Jo Nicholas and Carolyn Mealing of the League of Women Voters of Moore County spoke in favor of adopting residency district map “Option Six.” The “Option Six” map would produce five equally-sized districts and avoid moving any current Commissioners or School Board members outside the boundaries of their current districts. However, Option Six would split Seven Lakes across two districts.
Other Business
In other business during the Tuesday, November 15 Commissioner meeting:
• Two Moore County citizens -- David Korb and Jo Nicholas -- spoke in favor of video recording regular Commissioners’ meetings and making them available to the public. Commissioner Lea has advocated this step, proposing that video recordings of the meetings could be placed on the County website alongside the audio recordings of meetings currently offered on the web. The County's Information Technology department is gathering information about the cost and feasibility of video recording the Commissioners' meetings.
• The Board approved a compensation policy that details how Commissioners can be reimbursed for travel and other expenses. Chairman Picerno said the new policy brings transparency to the process.
• The Board approved a binding commitment providing a $15,000 grant to the Northern Moore Family Resource Center to administer and a program is designed to help thirty low income families or individuals become homeowners in northern Moore County.
• The Board appointed Ken Crow to an additional three year term to the Board of Convention and Visitors Bureau.
Tabled Items
The following items were tabled during the Board of Commissioners’ Tuesday, November 15 meeting:
• A revision to the residency recruitment policy requested by Commissioner Craig Kennedy. County Manager Cary McSwain and County Attorney Misty Leland will further review the policy, which requires that top county managers live within the county.
• The appointment of a Steering Committee to spearhead an update of the County's Land Use Plan. The Commissioners wanted more time to review a list of organizations that the Moore County Planning Department felt should be represented on the committee.
• The refinancing and refunding of a series of General Obligation bonds issued in 2003, pending further review and discussion of the three options presented to the Board.
