08-02-2021 Agenda Packet BOCPERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MEETING AGENDA
304 South Morgan Street, Room 215
Roxboro, NC 27573-5245
336-597-1720
Fax 336-599-1609
August 2, 2021
7:00pm
CALL TO ORDER………………………………………………….. Chairman Powell
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT/APPROVAL OF AGENDA
ITEM #1
PUBLIC HEARING July 12, 2021 continued to August 2, 2021
Petition SUP-02-21 - A request by the applicant, Berea Solar,
LLC, on behalf of the property owners, Elizabeth Christian and
Catherine Phelps, John and Linda Mangum, Malcolm Mangum,
Jr. and Mary Susan Williams, Matthew Moore, Jeffry Hendriks
and EM & RM LLC, (Elvin Mangum) on Tax Map and Parcel
numbers A110-7, A110-2, A110-31, A110-29, A110-6, A111-5 and
0961-06-5906 (Granville County PIN), totaling 920 acres located
on Berea, Bethany Church and Isham Chambers Roads, for a
Special Use Permit to establish a Level 3 (10 acres or greater)
Solar Energy System …………………………………………….Commissioner Gentry
1
ITEM #2
Consideration to Grant or Deny request by the applicant, Berea Solar,
LLC, on behalf of the property owners, Elizabeth Christian and
Catherine Phelps, John and Linda Mangum, Malcolm Mangum, Jr.
and Mary Susan Williams, Matthew Moore, Jeffry Hendriks and
EM & RM LLC, (Elvin Mangum) on Tax Map and Parcel numbers
A110-7, A110-2, A110-31, A110-29, A110-6, A111-5 and 0961-06-5906
(Granville County PIN), totaling 920 acres located on Berea, Bethany
Church and Isham Chambers Roads, for a special use permit to
establish a Level 3 (10 acres or greater) Solar Energy System …… Chairman Powell
ITEM #3 pg. 3
PUBLIC HEARING:
Request to add McKenzie Chandler Dr., a private roadway, to the
database of roadway names used for E-911 dispatching ……………. Sallie Vaughn
ITEM #4 pg. 4
Consideration to Grant or Deny request to add McKenzie Chandler
Dr., a private roadway, to the database of roadway names used for
E-911 dispatching ……………………………………………………. Chairman Powell
INFORMAL COMMENTS
The Person County Board of Commissioners established a 10-minute segment
which is open for informal comments and/or questions from citizens of this
county on issues, other than those issues for which a public hearing has been
scheduled. The time will be divided equally among those wishing to comment.
It is requested that any person who wishes to address the Board, register with
the Clerk to the Board prior to the meeting.
ITEM #5 pg. 5
DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT/APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
A. Budget Amendment #2
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
ITEM #6 pgs. 6-35
Consideration of the Organization and Governance
Structure for County Human Services ………………………... Commissioner Gentry
NEW BUSINESS:
ITEM #7 pgs. 36-40
Development Moratorium Process ……………………………………… Ellis Hankins
CHAIRMAN’S REPORT
MANAGER’S REPORT
COMMISSIONER REPORTS/COMMENTS
Note: All Items on the Agenda are for Discussion and Action as deemed appropriate
by the Board.
2
The Person County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Monday,
August 2, 2020 at 7:00pm in the Commissioners’ Boardroom 215 of the Person County Office
Building at 304 S Morgan St, Roxboro, North Carolina to hear the following:
Request by the Person County Address Coordinator to add McKenzie Chandler Drive to the
database of roadway names used for E‐911 dispatching. The proposed private roadway will
be located to the west of Stoney Mountain Rd between Mountain Ridge Rd and Jim Latta Rd
in Mount Tirzah Township. Article IV, Section 402 H of the Ordinance Regulating Address and
Road Naming in Person County requires any private roadway serving three or more homes to
be officially named.
Citizens will have an opportunity to speak regarding the above request. Specific information
about the request can be obtained from the Person County GIS Department, 325 S Morgan
St, Suite D.
Sallie Vaughn
GIS Manager
3
AGENDA ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 2, 2021
Agenda Title: Public Hearing for a Request to add McKenzie Chandler Dr., a private roadway,
to the database of roadway names used for E‐911 dispatching
Summary Information: There are two residences currently, and additional residences are planned
to be added along a private driveway, which necessitates the naming of the driveway (see map
below).
Background Information: Two private residences (1793 and 1301 Stoney Mountain Rd.) are
currently located on a private driveway off Stoney Mountain Rd. A potential third private residence
is being added to this driveway. In accordance with Article IV, Section 402 H of the “Ordinance
Regulating Addresses and Road Naming in
Person County,” the driveway must be
named. The addition of this road will
require occupants of the existing
residences to change their addresses to
reflect the new roadway name.
North Carolina General Statute 153A‐
239.1(A) requires a public hearing be held
on the matter and public notice be
provided at least 10 days prior in the
newspaper. The required public notice was
published in the July 22, 2021 edition of
the Roxboro Courier‐Times. A sign
advertising the public hearing was placed
at the proposed roadway location on the
same date.
Adjacent property owners were contacted
in person and via certified mail. The
majority of individuals responded and agreed upon a single road name, McKenzie Chandler Dr.,
which is compliant with all naming regulations in the Ordinance.
Recommended Action: Motion to approve the recommended roadway name.
Submitted By: Sallie Vaughn, GIS Manager
4
8/2/2021
Dept./Acct No.Department Name Amount
Incr / (Decr)
EXPENDITURES General Fund
Public Safety 25,089
Environmental Protection 11,995
Human Services 56,406
REVENUES General Fund
Property Taxes 335,000
Other Revenues (335,000)
Intergovernmental Revenues 35,575
Fund Balance Appropriation 57,915
EXPENDITURES CIP Fund
Transfer from Other Funds 2,465,206
REVENUES CIP Fund
County Projects 691,308
PCC Projects 413,600
School Projects 1,360,298
Explanation:
BUDGET AMENDMENT
Revising the "Property Taxes" revenue category to reflect the prior year tax estimate for FY22 (+$335,000) that
was erroneously budgeted in a line item in the "Other Taxes" category (-$335,000); recognizing the 2020
Governer's Crime Commission Grant awarded to the Sheriff's Department ($23,580); appropriating fund
balance for insurance claim received at end of FY21 for vehicle damage in the Sheriff's Department ($351);
appropriating a portion of remaining CRF funds for the purchase of Covid santizing equipment for EMS
($1,158); recognizing a new equpiment grant for the Soil & Water Conservation Department received from the
NC Foundation of Soil & Water Conservation ($11,995); appropriating fund balance in the Health Fund to utilize
remaining funds that were appropriated in FY21 to cover the cost of contracted workers in the attempt to meet
the service demands in the Environmental Health Department ($5,000) as well as bringing forward unspent
vaccine fees to cover other contractual commitments in the Public Health Department ($51,406); and budgeting
new CIP projects that were approved by the Board of Commissioners for FY22 ($2,465,206).
BA-25
AGENDA ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 2, 2021
Agenda Title: Consideration of the Organization and Governance Structure for County Human
Services
Summary of Information: The NC Legislature approved in 2012 a law expanding the options for
consolidating human services agencies in county government (S.L.2012-126). Person County
currently operates with two separate agencies: Public Health Department and the Department of
Social Services. Each department is governed by an appointed Board: the Board of Health and the
DSS Board. The 2012 law provides County Commissioners some additional options for the
organizational structure and the governance of human services.
The Board of County Commissioners may decide the organizational option of separate departments
or to consolidate the two departments into one consolidated human services agency.
The Board of County Commissioners may also decide the governance and reporting option as either
an appointed board (consolidated human services board) or assume the powers and duties of the
board themselves.
These decisions also impact the reporting structure of the agency directors, which can then report
directly to the Board of Commissioners or to the County Manager depending on the structure. If the
Board consolidates the departments, county department employees can then become subject solely to
county personnel policies and procedures rather than be subject to the State Human Resources Act as
they are currently.
Recommended Action: Receive the information and direct staff as appropriate.
Submitted By: Commissioner PJ Gentry
6
Human Services Organization & Governance: A Changing LandscapeJill D. Moore & Aimee N. WallLegal Basics for Human Services AdministratorsMarch 20187
Why are we talking about this?S.L. 2012- 126 (H 438)•Consolidation law changes in countiesS.L. 2017-41 (H 630)•Social services regionalization & supervision working group8
What are we talking about?• Agencies• Directors• EmployeesOrganization• Local boards and advisory committees• Role of stateGovernance9
General Framework•Requirement: Counties must provide public health and social services•Organizational options:– Single-county separate PH & SS agencies– Single-county consolidated human services agencies– Multi-county agencies– Other (authority models, interlocal agreements)•Governance options for single-county agencies:– Appointed governing board(s), or – BOCC may assume powers and duties of board(s)410
CONSOLIDATIONG.S. 153A-77 (S.L. 2012-146, H 438)11
Consolidation Law Timeline1973• Large counties may abolish boards (Mecklenburg)1995• Large counties may establish CHSAs (Wake)2012• All counties authorized to abolish boards and/or establish CHSAs612
OptionsStay the sameOptions in PH & SS lawsOptions in consolidation law13
Board of County CommissionersDepartment of Social Services and/or Public HealthBoard of County CommissionersConsolidated Human Services BoardConsolidated Human Services AgencyBoard of County Commissioners as a Consolidated Human Services BoardConsolidated Human Services Agency123Options in Consolidation Law14
Not consolidatedConsolidated human services agency (CHSA)with a consolidated human services board (Wake)CHSA with BOCC as governing board (Mecklenburg) PH and SS Organization and GovernanceJune 201215
SS & PH agencies with appointed governing boardsOption 1 with both SS & PH agencies governed by BOCC (Graham, Stokes, Sampson [eff. April 1, 2018])Option 1 with SS agency governed by BOCC, PH agency with appointed governing board (McDowell, Mitchell, Watauga, Wilkes, Surry, Columbus)Option 2 with consolidated HS agency including SS & PH, appointed CHS board (Jackson, Haywood, Buncombe, Gaston, Union, Stanly, Rockingham, Wake, Nash, Edgecombe, Carteret, Dare)Option 2 with consolidated HS agency include SS and other human services but not PH, governed by appointed CHS board (Polk)Option 3 with consolidated HS agency including SS & PH, governed by BOCC, health advisory committee (Clay, Swain, Yadkin, Mecklenburg [no advi. comm.], Guilford, Montgomery, Richmond, Bladen, Brunswick, Pender, Onslow)Option 3 with consolidated HS agency including SS & other human services but not PH, governed by BOCC (Cabarrus)PH and SS Organization and GovernanceResolutions as of February 1, 201816
Agency Board Hire Agency Director PersonnelDSSSeparate Appointed;3-5 mem.Board hires SHRAPHSeparate Appointed;11 mem.Board hiresSHRAOneSeparate Elected* BOCC hiresSHRATwoConsolidated(any combo of human services)Appointed;up to 25 mem.Manager hires with advice & consent of CHS boardSHRAOptionalThreeConsolidated(any combo of human services)Elected* Manager hires with advice & consent of BOCCSHRAoptional* If public health affected, must appoint health advisory committee (except in Mecklenburg)Key Differences17
What goes in a CHSA?•Law does not require any particular mix of human services•May include:– Public health– Social services– Other county human services departments or programsGaston County• Public Health, Social Services, Transportation, Aging, Youth Services, Child Advocacy Center, Battered Women’s ShelterGuilford County• Public Health, Social Services, Transportation, County Veterans’ AffairsCabarrus County• Social Services, Aging, Transportation18
CHS BoardMembership (if appointed) •County commissioner•4 consumers of human services•Professionals: psychologist, pharmacist, engineer, dentist, optometrist, veterinarian, social worker, registered nurse, two physicians (one must be a psychiatrist)•Up to 12 othersPowers and duties•Assume all powers and duties of PH/SS boards, except hiring director•Other powers and duties– Advise and consent to hiring/firing of director– Plan and recommend a budget – Assure compliance with state/federal laws– Recommend creation of human services programs– Perform public relations and advocacy functions1319
Board of Social ServicesMembership (if appointed)•Two members appointed by BOCC•Two members appointed by NC Social Services Commission•One member appointed by the other membersPowers and duties•Consult with director in preparing agency budget•Authority to inspect social services and public assistance records•Authority to make some decisions related to Work First, Special Assistance, and services funded through the Social Services Block Grant•Review suspected cases of fraud for some public assistance programs1420
Board of HealthMembership (if appointed)•County commissioner•Physician•Dentist•Optometrist•Veterinarian•Registered nurse•Pharmacist•Professional engineer•3 general public membersPowers and duties•Make policy for local public health agency•Adopt local public health rules•Adjudicate disputes regarding local rules or locally imposed public health administrative penalties (fines)•Impose local public health fees•Satisfy state accreditation requirements for local boards of health1521
Common threads•Statutorily required •Statutes and regulations grant authority•Agency director not a member•Role in advising the director•Role with regard to agency employees22
Key differences•Appointment•Size and composition•Removal •Vacancies•Fees•Budget•Appointing agency director•Rulemaking•Adjudications•Accreditation-related duties•Social services program related duties•Access to records•“Assure compliance”23
BOCC as governing boardProcess• 30 days’ notice of public hearing• Resolution adopted after public hearingMembership• Conferred by election to board of commissioners• Not required to meet statutory requirements for particular professionsPowers & duties• Board of commissioners acquires; multiple sources of law• Some may be delegated; some may notAdvisory committee(s)• Advisory committee on health required if BOH duties assumed• Expanded committee or additional committees allowed24
Role of advisory committees•No guidance or specific grant of authority in consolidation statute•PH accreditation expressly allows certain duties to be delegated from the local board of health to an advisory committee, such as– Review and report on community data– Receive community input– Foster partnerships with the community– Advocate for public health 25
Lessons Learned•Organizational structure– Flexibility, but still must comply with state and federal mandates•Employees– Advance discussion about implications of change– Update HR policies/ ordinance in advance to comply with federal merit personnel standards– Open legal question about transitioning career status employees•Advisory committees– Define roles, including appropriate delegation•Information sharing– Don’t assume a components of a CHSA will be able to share information more freely than they could before consolidation•Budget impact– Don’t assume creating a CHSA will save money26
SOCIAL SERVICES WORKING GROUP27
Overview – S.L. 2017-41 (H 630)28
SSWG’s Puzzle PieceStage One• Once reform is underway at the State level, how should a new and improved State system use regional offices to provide oversight and support for the county departments administering the social services program?• Once reform is underway at the State level, how should a new and improved State system use regional offices to provide oversight and support for the county departments administering the social services program?Stage Two• In the county-administered system, what change is needed to improve coordination and collaboration at the county level?• What would a regionally-administeredsystem look like?• In the county-administered system, what change is needed to improve coordination and collaboration at the county level?• What would a regionally-administeredsystem look like?29
SSWG’s Focus – Stage One•The WHOLE enchilada– Child welfare– Adult services– Public assistance, including Medicaid, Food and Nutrition, State-County Special Assistance, Work First, Energy programs, program integrity, etc.– Child support enforcement– Adult care home oversight– Other programs30
Not SSWG’s Focus •Organization of the state agencies overseeing local administration•Services– What services are being delivered– Who is delivering services– Who is receiving services•Finance– Who is paying for services– How much do services cost31
Discussions•Supervisory functions– What is involved in supervising social services administration? – Who does what? Central v. Regional v. County•Staffing model – What types of staff should be in the regional offices?•Maps– What factors are important when designing regions?•Relationship with Board of County Commissioners– Should the BOCC have an expanded role in supervision of DSS when there are challenges facing the agency?32
TimelinesStage One Report 4/15/2018DHHS Plan 11/15/2018NCGA Acts?Regional Supervision? 3/1/2020Stage Two Report 2/1/2019NCGA and/or DHHS Acts? 33
Information •Social Services Microsite– Meeting notices– Materials– Minutes – Recordings•https://www.sog.unc.edu/resources/microsites/social-services34
Questions?•Jill Moore– 919.966.4442–moore@sog.unc.edu•Aimee Wall– 919.843.4957–wall@sog.unc.edu35
AGENDA ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 2, 2021
Agenda Title: Development Moratorium Process
Summary of Information: The County Attorney will review the Board’s authority and the
process for implementing a development moratorium under the provisions of NC G.S. 160D-107.
Recommended Action: Receive information from the attorney and discuss.
Submitted By: Ellis Hankins, County Attorney
36
MEMORANDUM
To: Person County Board of County Commissioners
From: The Brough Law Firm, PLLC
Date: July 26, 2021
Re: Moratoria on Solar Energy System Development Activity
Commissioners,
This Memorandum is intended as a brief summary of North Carolina law, as it relates to
the imposition of moratoria on certain development activity, including a general outline of the
steps necessary to enact a moratorium, and a brief discussion of several relevant considerations
that should be addressed when enacting a development moratorium.
Summary of North Carolina Law
I. Procedural Requirements
a. Notice Requirements
Under the present circumstances—where there does not appear to be an imminent and
substantial threat to public health or safety resulting from the current Solar Energy System
Ordinance (the “SESO”)—the County must conduct a public hearing prior to enacting a
moratorium on development activity under the County’s SESO.
If the County proposes to enact a moratorium on development activity that is 60 days in
duration or shorter, the Board of Commissioners must hold a legislative hearing and must cause at
least one notice to be published in a newspaper having general circulation in the area not less than
seven days before the hearing date.
If the County proposes to enact a moratorium that is 61 days in duration or longer, the
Board of Commissioners must hold a legislative hearing and must cause a notice of the hearing
shall be given once a week for two successive calendar weeks in a newspaper having general
circulation in the area. The first notice must be published at least 10 days and not more than 25
days before the hearing date.
In cases where the moratorium is necessitated by an imminent threat to public health and
safety, the moratorium may be adopted without notice or hearing.
b. Content of Moratorium Ordinance and Required Statements
37
An ordinance enacting a development moratorium must include four specific statements.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 160D-107(d) requires that:
“Any development regulation establishing a development moratorium must include, at the
time of adoption, each of the following:
(1) A statement of the problems or conditions necessitating the moratorium and
what courses of action, alternative to a moratorium, were considered by the local
government and why those alternative courses of action were not deemed adequate.
(2) A statement of the development approvals subject to the moratorium and how a
moratorium on those approvals will address the problems or conditions leading to
imposition of the moratorium.
(3) A date for termination of the moratorium and a statement setting forth why that
duration is reasonably necessary to address the problems or conditions leading to
imposition of the moratorium.
(4) A statement of the actions, and the schedule for those actions, proposed to be
taken by the local government during the duration of the moratorium to address the
problems or conditions leading to imposition of the moratorium.”
The purpose of these required statements is to ensure that the Board of Commissioners
have provided adequate public justification for the moratorium. It is critical that these statements
are thoroughly discussed during the legislative hearing and that the moratorium ordinance clearly
summarizes the basis for the Board of Commissioners’ decision.
c. Renewal or Extension of Moratorium
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 160D-107(e) expressly prohibits the extension or renewal of a
moratorium “unless the local government has taken all reasonable and feasible steps proposed to
be taken in its ordinance establishing the moratorium to address the problems or conditions leading
to imposition of the moratorium and unless new facts and conditions warrant an extension.”
Under this section, in order to renew or extend a moratorium, the Board of Commissioners
must adopt a new moratorium ordinance making the same findings as described above and must
also include a statement of all new facts or conditions warranting the renewal or extension of the
moratorium. It is also good practice to include a statement explaining all reasonable and feasible
actions taken by the local government during the moratorium’s original term to address the
condition(s) warranting the moratorium.
II. Additional Considerations
a. Duration of Moratoria
38
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 160D-107(a) generally permits municipal and county governments to
place temporary development moratoria on “any development approval required by law.” The
duration of a moratorium must be reasonable in light of the conditions warranting the imposition
of a moratorium and shall not exceed the period of time necessary to resolve such conditions.
Similar to Statement No. 3, discussed above, it is critical that the Board of Commissioners
conduct a thorough discussion of the chosen duration of any moratorium and must clearly explain
why that duration is reasonable in light of the conditions warranting the moratorium. In a similar
vein, it is important for the Board’s discussion to include information, more than mere speculation,
about the existence of conditions warranting the moratorium.
b. Vested Rights Law
Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 160D-107(c), unless there is an imminent threat to public health
and safety, development moratoria do not apply to any project with legally established vested
rights. These include, but are not limited to: projects for which a valid building permit has been
issued; projects for which a special use permit application has been accepted as complete;
development set forth in a site-specific vesting plan approved pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 160D-
108.1; development for which substantial expenditures have already been made in good-faith
reliance on a prior valid development approval; and to preliminary or final subdivision plats that
have been accepted for review by the local government prior to the call for a hearing1 to adopt the
moratorium.
It is important to note that, based on this section, any moratorium enacted by the Board of
Commissioners on development pursuant to the SESO would not apply to special use permit
applications for solar farms that have already been submitted and accepted as complete.
c. Permit Choice Law
Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 160D-107(c), applicants who have submitted complete
development permit applications are entitled to the protections of North Carolina’s “permit choice”
laws, found in N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 160D-108(b) and 143-755. Under these laws, where a complete
application is submitted before the effective date of a moratorium ordinance, action on the
application is suspended for the duration of the moratorium. However, upon the expiration or
termination of the moratorium, the applicant will be entitled to choose between the regulations in
place prior to the moratorium or those in place following the moratorium.
The practical result of these laws is that development regulations amended during a
moratorium do not automatically apply to complete development permit applications which were
submitted prior to the effective date of the moratorium ordinance.
d. Constitutional Considerations
1 Note: At this time, it is unclear what is meant by “prior to the call for a public hearing.” According to David
Owens’ Land Use Law in North Carolina, this likely refers to the time at which the governing board directs staff to
notice the hearing.
39
Under both North Carolina and federal law, reasonable temporary development moratoria
are generally considered to be constitutional. However, under certain circumstances, it is possible
that development moratoria may infringe on constitutional rights.
An indefinite moratorium may constitute an unconstitutional taking if the moratorium
deprives a property owner of all economically beneficial us of their property. Courts have also
found moratoria designed to depress property values prior to condemnation by the local
government to be unconstitutional takings.
Moratoria may also infringe on certain First Amendment rights. For example, a moratorium
on temporary-use permits which precludes the approval of a temporary-use permit for a religious
organization may constitute an unconstitutional restriction on religious freedoms.
Conclusion
The Board of Commissioners is authorized to enact a development moratorium on
development activity pursuant to the SESO. If the Board of Commissioners chooses to do so, the
Board should be careful to follow the procedural requirements outlined in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 160D-
107. The Board should also be sure to conduct a robust discussion of the required findings, under
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 160D-107(d), during the legislative hearing. The Board’s findings should be
supported by facts rather than speculation. Finally, the Board should be aware of, and give due
consideration to, the additional considerations discussed herein.
40