February 8
February 8, 2010 1
PERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FEBRUARY 8, 2010 MEMBERS PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
Johnny Myrl Lunsford Heidi York, County Manager Jimmy B. Clayton C. Ronald Aycock, County Attorney
Kyle W. Puryear Brenda B. Reaves, Clerk to the Board
B. Ray Jeffers Samuel R. Kennington
The Board of Commissioners for the County of Person, North Carolina, met in special session on Monday, February 8, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. in Durham County for the purpose of viewing
historical renovation projects at or near the American Tobacco Campus including the Crowe Building, Fowler Building, Bay 7 Event Hall, Bay 11 Office Space, Strickland Building, the Venable Center, Dibrell Building and the Golden Belt Studio Space. Chairman Lunsford,
Commissioners Clayton, Kennington, Jeffers, the County Manager, County Attorney and the Clerk to the Board were present for the tour. Commissioner Puryear was absent for the tour. The
tour was guided by Mr. Eddie Belk of Belk Architecture. Mr. Ben Nixon and Mr. Jack Moore of
Nixon Construction also joined the group on the tour.
**********
The Board of Commissioners for the County of Person, North Carolina, met in joint session on Monday, February 8, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. with the Durham County Commissioners in
the Durham County Chambers located at 200 East Main Street, 2nd Floor, Old Courthouse,
Durham, North Carolina. All members of the Person County Board of County Commissioners were present, as well as the County Manager, County Attorney and the Clerk to the Board.
Durham County Officials attending the joint session meeting were:
Michael D. Page, Chairman of the Board, Ellen W. Reckhow, Vice Chairman, of the Board, Commissioner Joe Bowser, Commissioner Becky Heron, Commissioner Brenda Howerton, Durham County Attorney, Lowell Siler, Durham County Manager, Mike Ruffin,
Assistant County Manager, Drew Cummings, Deputy County Managers, Wendell Davis and Carolyn P. Titus, and Clerk to the Board, Michelle Parker-Evans.
Both Chairman Lunsford and Chairman Page called the meeting to order at 4:15 p.m.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES:
County Manager, Heidi York presented the opportunity for both boards to discuss the possibility of mutual interest between both governing bodies for joint economic development
efforts in southern Person County and northern Durham County. It was the consensus of both governing boards for both county managers to explore
opportunities to partner in economic development ventures and report back to both Boards sometime late August, early September.
February 8, 2010 2
PROPOSED FALLS LAKE RULES:
Durham County Assistant County Manager Drew Cummings presented the following implications of Falls Lake Rules / rulemaking process in collaboration with Person County
Manager, Heidi York.
Background Information on Falls Lake Falls Lake and its watershed are the uppermost parts of the Neuse River watershed. Falls Lake was constructed by the Army Corps of Engineers in the late 1970s and early 1980s primarily as a flood control device, though it is also authorized for water supply, water quality,
recreation and other purposes. The lake covers roughly 20 square miles and has a watershed of roughly 700 square miles covering parts of Orange, Person, Durham, Granville, Wake, and Franklin Counties. The lake is broken into a number of sections by five road crossings that
restrict flow considerably, and the lake is also very shallow in its upstream sections. Both of these aspects make the upper portions more susceptible to algae growth, the main water quality problem observed in the lake. In 1997-1998 the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission (EMC) and the General Assembly adopted a set of permanent rules (the “Neuse Rules”) limit nitrogen loading in the entire Neuse watershed, and the timeline below outlines the
current effort to further repair and protect water quality in the lake.
Timeline for Falls Lake Rules
• 2005 – General Assembly directed the EMC to develop nutrient control strategy for Falls
Lake
• 2008 – Entirety of Falls Lake added to 303(d) list of impaired waters, which means
there’s too much Chlorophyll A (which results from excess nitrogen and phosphorus
nutrients).
• Stakeholder meetings have been ongoing since summer 2008.
• Since mid-December 2009, two sets of draft rules have been released by the Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) and two sets of comments received from local governments and
other stakeholders.
• DWQ fiscal impact analysis of rules is due to the Office of State Budget and
Management (OSBM) by end of February and draft rules are due March 10, 2010 to
EMC.
• The EMC approves the rules and releases them for a 60 day public comment period.
DWQ will then take a final set of rules back to the EMC for adoption in Nov. 2010 or
Jan. 2011, at which point the temporary rules will be in effect pending review / approval
by the Rules Review Commission. The General Assembly could review the rules either
in their 2011 long session or the 2012 short session.
Highlights of the Current Proposed Rules 1. Goals: How much overall reduction and by when; “adaptive management”
2. New Development: Pretty strict. Developer has to achieve certain % of required
reductions and then may purchase offsets for rest if they want. DWQ creates “model
plan,” we develop ours, DWQ approves or not, we adopt an approved plan. No planned
“Stage II” for New Development rule.
February 8, 2010 3
3. Existing Development: Includes septic and discharging sandfilter systems. After Jan.15,
2011, we have 3.5 yrs. to develop a plan to get back to 2006 loading levels (not sure what
DWQ’s estimates for that loading will be yet), another year to implement, and another
5.5 yrs. (until 2021) after that to get down to those 2006 levels. Then, possible after
remodeling of the lake / watershed, a much more draconian Stage II will kick in.
4. Wastewater Discharge: Luckily, Roxboro’s wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) does
not discharge in the Falls watershed. The City of Durham’s northern WWTP will require
major investments to meet its reduction goals. SGWASA’s WWTP, relative to its size,
may require even more extensive upgrades.
5. Agriculture: Applies to farming, horticulture, and poultry and livestock operations
above a certain number of animals. On top of reductions in nitrogen loading already
achieved through the Neuse Rules (and Tar-Pam rules for Person County), the current
goal in the Falls Lake Rules is to get 20% N and 40% P reductions from 2006 baseline
loading by 2021 and a total of 40% N and 77% P reductions by 2026. Activities guided
by Watershed Oversight Committee (for entire watershed) and Local Advisory
Committees in each County.
6. State and Federal Entities: State and federal entities aside from NCDOT have to meet
more or less the same reduction requirements as other new development. NCDOT, under
the currently drafted rules, gets a sweeter deal. Should they?
7. Options for Offsetting Nutrient Loads: This rule governs the conditions under which
various entities can buy or sell credits for nutrient load reductions. It is designed to add
flexibility to the overall scheme of reductions. Built-in tracking / accounting methods
will be required of all trading mechanisms.
8. Fertilizer Management: Basically, all commercial applicators will have to be certified.
There have been earlier certification schemes in the Neuse Rules that haven’t been
tracked very well. There were concerns at the last stakeholder meeting that this could
result in increased fertilizer application.
Advocacy: Durham County has been working with the City of Durham and a number of other local governments for several months to try to better understand and improve the rules being developed
by DWQ. The City of Durham has fully developed stormwater, drinking water, and wastewater systems, and hence greater staff resources to put towards this task.
Person County has been following the development of the rules and recently retained Jim Wrenn, a partner with the Hopper Hicks and Wrenn law firm, to advocate for Person County.
Mr. Wrenn has a similar arrangement with Granville County, the Towns of Butner and
Creedmoor and the South Granville Water and Sewer Authority. The interests of all of these governmental units are similar and economies of scale can be accomplished by having a single
attorney. Mr. Wrenn has filed comments on behalf of all his clients regarding the proposed rules. Prior to filing the comments, Mr. Wrenn had extensive discussions with Durham County and City and the City of Raleigh to attempt to reach common accord on our approaches. By and large these
efforts have resulted in a cooperative approach. Discussions are continuing. A major component of our efforts is to provide for the creation of a joint entity (mostly likely an expanded UNRBA) for the affected local governments to both monitor and test for compliance and to determine the
February 8, 2010 4
causes and source of the pollutants entering the watershed. The entity could also help provide
monitoring and enforcement of the rules.
Joint Action on the Rules? Durham and Person County share two areas where there is significant overlap in our interests and
where cooperation both before and after the rules are finalized may be helpful:
• the rule governing agriculture and livestock operations, and
• the “existing development” rule as it relates to septic and discharging sandfilter systems.
Mr. Cummings stated both counties propose to continue to communicate openly during the remainder of the rule-making process to promote improved understanding of the impact of the
rules as well as studying whether coordinating messages to the state and to the public would also
be helpful.
Both governing bodies were in favor to seek ways to partner related to implementation, enforcement and monitoring of the Falls Lake rules, if approved.
Chairman Lunsford thanked the Durham County Board of Commissioners for their time, hospitality and the opportunity for both governing bodies to discuss issues that are of mutual
interest.
ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear, seconded by Commissioner Kennington,
and carried to adjourn the meeting at 5:40 p.m.
_____________________________ ______________________________ Brenda B. Reaves Johnny Myrl Lunsford
Clerk to the Board Chairman