Sturza, who is also the mayor of Kill Devil Hills, made a presentation to the county board on September 7th, where he outlined four new proposals which, if adopted, would update the county's Land Use Plan (LUP). Sturza appeared in his capacity as a county employee and it is arguable whether he mixed politics with his public duties to plan and report on behalf of the county.
Because the State of North Carolina does not allow hard structures along our beaches, Dare's current LUP acknowledges this and simply states that "beach nourishment is the acceptable means of combating shoreline erosion in Dare County." However, Judge, who owns several oceanfront motels and would like nothing more than to see hard structures along our beaches wants to see that changed. In addition, he openly supports Nags Head's current plan for beach nourishment, one that also calls for a terminal groin at the southern boundary between the town and the National Park Service. Likewise, Mayor/County Planning Director Sturza, who is retiring from county service this month, is also fighting for beach nourishment and is unopposed to hardening of the shoreline in Kill Devil Hills.
One had to listen closely (viewable on county video) as Sturza, who has a gift for gab, made his presentation to the board. Sturza said he, "...wanted to see if the (planning) board had the language they (commissioners) wanted in the updated proposals..." He referred to a planning board workshop held earlier this year that was attended by "some" county commissioners and the discussion that "...centered around legislation that was under consideration by the State that would authorize the use of terminal groins at the "terminus" of barrier islands as an additional tool in the tool box for abating erosion..." (note, the use of "terminus" in Sturza's statement).
(Terminus is a Latin word that literally means boundary stone. It may also be used to describe the end of a road.)
Sturza reminded the board that the proposed legislation has stalled in the General Assembly, but would probably surface again next year. This, in the opinion of this writer, sets the groundwork for Judge and Sturza's planned end run play. Are the other six county commissioners a part of this ploy? In the sense they will probably vote along with Judge, the answer is "yes,"; however, in the sense they understand or care what is really going on, this writer has doubts.
Sturza told the board that if they approve the amendment and it is accepted by Coastal Area Management (CAMA), ".. it will include language that says, in addition to beach nourishment, the use of terminal groins, offshore reefs, and other similar techniques are compatible with the shoreline management goals of Dare County..." The reader should note here that the wording/phrase, "terminus of barrier islands" is omitted from the language.
And, herein lies the shoddiness of what Judge and Sturza are attempting to do. The fact is that the State of North Carolina is only considering legislation (if it gets out of committee) to allow terminal groins at the "terminus or end of barrier islands, e.g. at inlets." Even, State Senator Marc Basnight is on record as opposing terminal groins along our beaches and says he will fight to see that no such language is inserted into any law dealing with the matter. Yet, Judge and Sturza are determined to prevail.
In replying to Sturza, Judge referred to the language as an "implementation strategy". Sturza agreed and said it would be a "political function" of the (county) board when the General Assembly gets together to let them know the county does favor these new techniques. Judge responded by laughing and saying, "if Coastal Area Management approves this, we can go to the State and say, "Well your own agency approved it."
EOD has reviewed the minutes of the joint workshop between the county commissioners and the planning board on March 15, 2010 and it contains no specific wording as to the language makeup of these proposed amendments.
The workshop was attended only by Commissioners Judge, Burrus, Tillett and Dutton; and only four of the seven planning board members.
Interestingly, an official part of Dare's current LUP are the detailed results of a Citizens' Survey that was conducted in 2007. See the above chart which shows that only 24.9% of the respondants supported "seawalls, groins and harden structures" on our beaches. Clearly, if the Dare County Commissioners adopt this amendment, they will be doing an "end run" and disservice to the citizens of this county. It should not be tolerated.
Meanwhile, a public hearing on the draft 2009 update and LUP amendments is scheduled for the October 11, 2010 meeting of the Dare County Planning Board. We encourage you to voice your opinion on this important matter. Don't let our beaches become harden shorelines like those in New Jersey and other northern beaches.
The commissioners' email addresses are listed in the right-hand column of this blog.
Their county paid cell phone telephone numbers are:
Warren Judge - 473-8250
Allen Burrus - 216-7019
Richard Johnson - 216-7045
Virginia Tillett - 475-0591
Jack Shea - 216-5793
Max Dutton - 216-5629
Mike Johnson - 473-8262
14 comments:
You are incorrect to say a terminal groin is a part of the Nags Head plan for nourishment. The potential benefits of a terminal groin have been discussed, and the potential downside, but it's never been part of this plan.
The legislation that passed the State Senate referred to a terminal groin at the end of a littoral cell, not at an inlet, in plain black and white.
The LUP seems to indicate that most people saw nourishment as the best solution to the erosion issue, with state or federal funding (not available) as the first preference, and occupancy tax as the second choice for funding. So I assume you'll accept the will of the people as well?
This looks like a straight run up the middle, not an end around.
No, most people did not vote for nourishment.
Most people voted for Abandon Shoreline/Relocate Inland, by a large margin.
What the hell were those? An attempt to split the vote against nourishment by having two answers to confuse opponents? Yep!
How about this question:
Do you support Beach Nourishment, OR, Do you support planned retreat from specific high-erosion areas?
Let's see who wins when the real question gets asked, Bob.
And who gives a shit what the non-residents think. They buy our product. They don't get a vote.
Gotta blow the whistle here, Bob.
I know that a terminal groin is not a "written" part of Nags Head's nourishment plan. However, it is a matter to written and spoken record that your board majority favors putting one there as soon as they can "pull it off."
Second, an "inlet" is, in fact, at the "end of a littoral cell (drift)" That is what the legislation intended to deal with, not terminal groins along the beach(es).
And, 46% hardly constitutes a majority, Bob. Furthermore, did you know that out of 1338 respondants, when the question in the poll was about what the most important issue affecting the future of Dare County was, only 55 people said it was "support for beach nourishment."
Surprise! Surprise !
Gee whiz, Bob, I just looked at that survey chart again, and you know what?
I didn't see swimming pools and doggie parks listed on it anywhere.
Wonders never cease!
Umm..."terminus" is a perfectly acceptable word in English that any adult should recognize, or be able to figure out. Quit ripping off wikipedia as a source.
:) :) I was just trying to reassure myself about "terminus".
Actually, I don't think I've ever used the word. For sure it can't be found in the Official Dictionary of the Outer Banks Language, so I had to resort to wikipedia for my less astute readers, especially those from New Jarsey. :):)
LOL, good response!
Hey, wait a second...I'm from New Jersey. How'd you know that when I posted the terminus message? ;-)
By all means, NH Local, I would like the taxes I pay to OUR county to go to beach nourishment rather than your schools, emergency services, street maintenance, trash pick-up, street lights, etc. You see, I pay taxes to OUR county and do not receive any of the above. In fact, the town does not have my private street on their emergency services GPS. If the non-residents don't matter to the town, then allocate our taxes to what benefits us, the beach! Lets not forget that the beach benefits you as well. You will see just how important we are! Typical. Really typical.
Ray, you said it was part of the plan. It's not. Can't you just admit it? And it's your chart that said 46% preferred nourishment, not a majority, but easily the largest preference.
And this attitude from NH Local and you that the property owners that have invested in Nags Head don't matter - that's wrong too. Occupancy tax and transfer tax have funded incredible benefits in quality of life for Dare County. And no, they don't have to buy our product.
According to Ray's government tax collector philosophy, we're all just collecting income for the taxman, and should be happy to be allowed to keep some.
And Bob, let's quit dancing, let's see you put your plan where the rubber meets the road. Ask this question of all local voters:
Do you support Beach Nourishment?
OR,
Do you support gradual, planned retreat from specific high-erosion areas?
Anonymous @ 11:53 AM: This is not YOUR county, despite the fact that you pay property taxes. You obviously don't live here and the county is not obliged to even consider your thoughts. Put your money where your mouth is. Move down here as a permanent resident and put up with the crap that people like you put the locals through. Until then, go away!
Bob O.,
You are mincing words here. I said it was part of the "plan" not part of the "project"...and, no doubt, it is part of a majority of your board's "plan" if they can pull it off. Right?
As to my tax philosophy...there's no doubt the investors (cottage owners) make it possible for our visitors to come here and pay taxes that benefit us all. In return, the investor gets all kinds of tax writeoffs that locals can only dream of when we file our tax returns. Again, I repeat, the amount of taxes most of these investors pay out of their own pockets to NC is scandalously low...you know it and I know it..
I agree about the low taxes, Ray. I pay less taxes here on a house that is valued at over twice the amount of my home in Ohio.
Shhh, don't tell anyone...but our property taxes are so low that most out-or-towners who buy here are dumbfounded.
So I say phooey to the absentee owners who gripe. You people are getting one helluva better deal here than if you had bought in YOUR OWN home State or County, thus keeping your money where it WOULD benefit you the most.
You made a conscious decision to buy here because it WAS A DEAL; admit it.
Post a Comment