Currituck County Commissioners Prioritize Projects For 2013

From an Article in the Daily Advance, there are some interesting comments regarding the Off-Road Beaches.  2013 is sure to be a year to keep an eye on things at the Federal, State, and County level.

FROM THE DAILY ADVANCE


Animal shelter, OBX sewer plant Currituck priorities

By Cindy Beamon

The Daily Advance

Monday, February 11, 2013



COROLLA – A new animal shelter in Maple and a wastewater treatment plant in Ocean Sands will top the list of new capital projects in Currituck for the coming year, commissioners decided at the board’s annual retreat Saturday.

Commissioners compiled a long list of county needs during a brainstorming session, but an informal vote narrowed those priorities to six. The list will assist County Manager Dan Scanlon in preparing a budget for the upcoming year, said the session’s facilitator, Lydian Altman with the University of North Carolina’s School of Government.

Other priorities included:

• Deciding the level of service to be provided by fire and emergency medical services;

• Developing a plan to boost off-season tourism;

• Deciding if the county is capable of developing two small area plans at the same time, one for Moyock and one for Currituck’s off-road beaches; and

• Deciding the next step for economic development – possibly by getting input from businesses in roundtable discussions.

In coming months, commissioners are expected to schedule work sessions to discuss the issues in more depth.

Altman said the challenge ahead for commissioners will be sticking to those goals throughout the year as other competing needs arise.

Scanlon warned the Currituck Board of Commissioners will have less money to spend than in previous years.

A flat tax base means the county can no longer afford to fund multiple projects at the same time, he said.

“We are going to have to make some tougher decisions than we have had to make before. We are going to have to say no to some stuff,” said Scanlon.

Timing for some of the projects is also a concern. If the county doesn’t make some big decisions about commercial development in the four-wheel drive areas of Currituck beaches, then the courts may, Commissioner Paul Martin warned. Already the county is facing one lawsuit by a developer wanting to build commercial buildings in the off-road community.

In addition, three or four applications for “conference centers” — large beach structures with 24 or more bedrooms — have recently been submitted, said County Attorney Ike McRee.

“We are going to have to make some decisions, and I think we are going to have to make them sooner rather than later,” said Chairman Paul O’Neal.

The pending lawsuit adds urgency to the issue, but the county’s planning staff is already tied up with forming a small area plan for Moyock, said Scanlon. Jumping on another project would be too taxing to the county’s planning staff, he said.

Commissioners agreed to take a closer look in coming months at if and how they can handle the ongoing Moyock Small Area Plan and take on another complex planning project for the northern Outer Banks. In the past, commissioners have rejected a proposal to contract out the work to consultants.

Commissioners said they also want to take a closer look at travel expert Judy Randall’s report last year on how to improve tourism on the Outer Banks. The county needs to focus on expanding the number of visitors during the “shoulder season,” the months before and after the busy summer months, commissioners said.

The fate of a proposed Mid-Currituck Bridge will have a big impact on that effort, commissioners agreed.

“Everything centers on the bridge as far as economic development,” said Commissioner Butch Petrey.

The new priorities did not exclude several ongoing projects to which the county has already committed. Plans for Currituck Community Park, including practice soccer fields, still remain on go. Renovations to the ABC store in Moyock also fall under prior budget priorities.

Other concerns and capital projects may have to wait, however.

Commissioners bumped several projects to lower priority, meaning they are less likely to get funded in the coming year.

Lower priority projects include:

• More hangar space and a new taxiway for the Currituck Regional Airport;

• A salary study for employees, particularly for the tourism department. The Randall report suggested the county examine salaries to ensure they are competitive with what other counties are paying. Scanlon said the county underwent a study just two years ago, and some employees’ salaries were adjusted as a result.

• A new interpretive exhibit and building for historic boats and agricultural equipment at the Rural Center in Powells Point.

• Construction of a new school, possibly a new elementary school in Moyock.

• Small-area plans for landing points for the proposed Mid-Currituck Bridge.

Currituck County Limits Horse Tours on 4WD Beaches

Currituck revises rules for horse-tour operations


By Jeff Hampton

The Virginian-Pilot

© January 9, 2013

CURRITUCK, N.C.


After three years of debate and public input, Currituck County commissioners this week approved a new ordinance that will rein in the long rows of tourist-filled Jeeps rolling through the Currituck Outer Banks beach in search of wild horses.


The ordinance will:


-- Cap the number of tour operators at the 10 already in business.


-- Require each operator to buy a license renewed annually at a cost of $950 per vehicle.


-- Limit tour operators to five vehicles. Those who own fewer than five cannot expand. The total number will drop to 32 from 48.


-- Outlaw the use of buses for tours.

-- Limit tour hours to between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. west of the dunes.

Although the fee is high, horse-tour operators generally support the new law, said Jay Bender, owner of Corolla Outback Adventures, which has a fleet of more than five vehicles.

"By and large, this is a good thing," Bender said. "It was inevitable it was going to be needed."

The new ordinance takes effect immediately.

Previously, horse-tour businesses had to get a county permit to operate, but there was no fee, and their fleet size was limited only by the amount of parking they had.

License revenue will raise $30,400 annually for administrative costs, as well as park and road maintenance within the four-wheel-drive communities.

"I think we've done our homework on this," said Currituck County Commissioner Vance Aydlett. "I feel good about it."

Tour operators must follow the longstanding rules as well, including the 15 mph speed limit when driving within 300 feet of people. They and customers must remain at least 50 feet from a wild horse.

Operators who get cited for two or more violations in 30 days will have to shut down for three days. Five citations in 30 days will mean a 10-day suspension, and 10 or more citations will lead to license revocation.

One suspension could cost a lot of money. A company with five vehicles, each with a capacity of 14 customers, would typically charge $35 a customer per trip and could run five trips a day. A three-day suspension would result in more than $36,000 in lost ticket revenue.

"I believe that is severe enough," Aydlett said.

About 120 horses roam north of Corolla on a strip of beach about 12 miles long and a mile wide. The herd naturally divides itself into smaller groups of a few mares and foals led by a stallion and can be seen grazing in the meadows, walking along the dunes and even standing in the shade of a multimillion-dollar oceanfront home. The Corolla Wild Horse Fund oversees the health and safety of the herd.

Through the 1990s and early 2000s, the number of tours grew. Tour drivers were often accused of going too fast along the criss-crossing sandy roads, making the numerous pond-size potholes even worse. Residents complained that tourists would get too close to the wild horses, in some cases putting small children on the animals' backs.

Officials, residents and even some tour operators called for more restrictions.

Wild-horse tours in Corolla attract about 3,000 people a day during the summer. Last year, North Carolina tourism officials highlighted the wild herd in its national advertisements.

Currituck County's Mid Currituck Bridge propects continue to erode with NC Political make-up

FROM THE DAILY ADVANCE


Top Stories of 2012, No. 4: Mid-Currituck Bridge — Hope to uncertainty

By Cindy Beamon

The Daily Advance

Thursday, December 27, 2012

CURRITUCK — The fate of the proposed Mid-Currituck Bridge became less certain in 2012 as lawmakers questioned the $660 million price tag for the project.

At the start of the year, the project appeared to be on its way toward construction in 2014. In January 2012, the N.C. Turnpike Authority, responsible for overseeing the project, released its final environmental impact statement. State officials said the FEIS was the last major hurdle in plans for the seven-mile span linking Currituck’s mainland to the Outer Banks.

But more hurdles have popped up since then.

Last summer, state lawmakers agreed to divert funding from the

project for the second year in a row. Under the earlier leadership of Marc Basnight, D-Dare, the General Assembly had agreed to set aside $28 million a year for the next 30 years to pay the state’s share of costs for the new toll bridge. Turnpike was also negotiating with a private partner to cover the cost of maintaining and operating the project.

Lawmakers have yet to begin making those promised payments.

For the past two years, funds earmarked for the bridge have gone to other road projects. Transportation officials say the funds were not needed until the bridge was closer to construction.

New challenges were also aimed at delaying the start date for construction or possibly ending the funding plan altogether.

State Sen. Bill Rabon, R-Brunswick, chairman of the state’s Joint Legislative Transportation Oversight Committee, charged “political cronyism,” not the project’s merits, were responsible for the project’s earlier approval in the General Assembly. This fall, he asked the state Department of Transportation to answer a long list of questions about the project.

Currituck commissioners, sensing a threat to the Mid-Currituck Bridge, had hoped to show committee members a newly produced video outlining all the benefits of the bridge. Committee members denied commissioners that chance in October.

The election of a new governor also adds to the project’s uncertainty.

Governor-elect Pat McCrory, while campaigning for the office, said he wanted to examine the merits of the project before deciding if he will support it. Long-time bridge supporter Rep. Bill Owens, D-Pasquotank, said the governor’s support will be crucial. McCrory appoints members to the state Board of Transportation, responsible for overseeing the state’s contract with its private partner in the project. If the board wants to kill the project, it certainly has that ability as negotiations are underway, said Owens.

The bridge also faces another likely assault from environmental groups. The Southern Law Center and Defenders of Wildlife are already suggesting that funds for the bridge be redirected to Dare County for an alternate option to the Bonner Bridge.

In the midst of the renewed opposition, the proposed Mid-Currituck Bridge is not without its optimistic allies.

Two newly elected state lawmakers have vowed to use their Republican connections to garner support for the bridge.

Bob Steinburg, R-Chowan, and Bill Cook, R-Beaufort, both said they will have greater influence with a GOP-dominated General Assembly than their Democratic opponents in November’s election would have had.

The bridge will be losing the last of two powerful supporters, however. Basnight left office in 2010, and Owens finishes out his term in December with the bridge’s future still uncertain. Owens has said House Speaker Thom Tillis has pledged his support for the bridge, but changing alliances after November’s election could strain that commitment, some political observers have said.

Bridge supporters have argued that halting the project at this point would cost the state millions of dollars. The state has already invested $24 million in planning the project and stands to lose another $10 million if it backs out of negotiations with its private partner.

Opponents say those losses, although considerable, do not come close to the millions the state will pay if it continues the project.

The Turnpike Authority’s most recent estimate for completion of the project is 2018.

Mid-Currituck Bridge Time Line

January 2012 — Plans for the $660 million mid-county bridge cleared its last major hurdle with release of the final environmental impact statement by the N.C. Turnpike Authority. According to the state’s updated schedule, construction would begin in 2014, and the span would be ready for traffic by 2018

Summer 2012 — Gap funds earmarked for the mid-Currituck bridge are diverted to other road projects for the second year in a row. Lawmakers say the funds were not needed in 2012-13 because construction on the project had not yet begun.

August 2012 — State Sen. Bill Rabon, R- Brunswick, chairman of the Joint Legislative Transportation Oversight Committee, questions the state’s plan to pay $28 million for the next 30 years for the new toll bridge linking Currituck’s mainland to the Outer Banks

September 2012 —¬ Gov.-elect Pat McCrory, while running for office, said he would review plans for the mid-Currituck Bridge before deciding if he would support it. Long-time bridge supporter, State Rep. Bill Owens, D-Pasquotank, said the governor’s support will be crucial to the bridge’s future.

October 2012 ¬— Currituck releases a new video aimed at countering lawmakers’ criticism of the proposed Mid-Currituck bridge.

October 2012 ¬¬— Lawmakers in Raleigh submit a long list of questions about the bridge to state DOT officials. The Joint Legislative Transportation Oversight Committee, an advisory board to the General Assembly, refused an audience with Currituck officials wanting to voice support for the span.

December 2012 — Two environmental groups suggested that funds for the proposed Mid-Currituck Bridge be redirected toward finding a solution to erosion problems in Dare County. The Southern Law Center and Defenders of Wildlife are expected to file suit against the Mid-Currituck Bridge after it gains approval from the Federal Highway Administration.

Article on Currituck's Tax Assessment Process and Procedure

As most know, the taxes are reassessed every 8 years and this falls on the 2013 tax year.  Below is an article on that process:

FROM THE DAILY ADVANCE


Currituck revaluation rules online

By Cindy Beamon

Staff Writer

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

CURRITUCK — The rules Currituck will use to determine new property values are now online, but it will be a few months longer before county taxpayers know how those rules will affect them.

The schedule of rates, standards and values used in appraising property does not list specific properties yet. Rather, the schedule of values explains how appraisers will calculate the value of nearly 24,000 properties in Currituck in the coming year. The document is on the county’s Web page, www.co.currituck.nc.us, and available for viewing at the tax office.

Under state law, counties are required to revaluate property at least every eight years. Once adopted, those new property values are used to determine how much owners will pay in taxes.

The new rules are designed to make sure all properties are treated the same, said Currituck Tax Director Tracy Sample.

“The goal is to get market value, and the even bigger goal is to treat everybody the same, to treat everybody fairly,” said Sample.

Currituck commissioners have agreed to set a public hearing on the schedule of values for Jan. 7. Once adopted, the new rules can be used to figure the new property appraisals.

Taxpayers could receive notice of new values by late February or early March 2013, said Sample. Initially, the county had estimated an earlier mailing, but complications with a computer program slowed the process a little, he said.

The revaluation process actually began more than a year ago.

Throughout 2012, appraisers have been visiting each property in the county to assess its value. The appraisers were looking for certain features that may add to or subtract from the value of a home, business, or farm. The goal for appraisers is to value the property at what the typical buyer would be willing to pay for it.

Appraisers look at what other similar properties are selling for to determine that value. They also look at other factors.

Appraisers basically rank houses at five levels, from “X” for superior quality to “D” for fair quality. Houses with gabled roofs and unique designs usually rank higher than less distinct box-like houses. The house’s condition, size, age, and location also factor into its ranking. For businesses, the property’s money-making potential is a likely consideration.

Building materials also make a difference. For a commercial building, a brick veneer rather than a wood one adds to its value. According to the schedule of values, brick can add $9 to $13 a square foot to the value of a building, compared to about $6 to $9 a square foot for a wooden storefront or about $3 a square foot for a light metal one.

Add solar glass, a deluxe heating and air-conditioning system or a balcony, and the value is likely to go up.

Location also matters. A house on the oceanfront could be valued at more than $1.5 million over a soundfront home on the mainland. Typically, appraisers will look for how much houses nearby are selling to come up with the value.

For farmland, the type of soil is a big factor because better dirt means higher yields and money-making potential. Sand or “Currituck muck” ranks the lowest for farmland while Portsmouth or Altavista soils have greater value.

All the factors are plugged into mathematical equations to determine the property’s value. Even the calculations can vary, depending on what information the appraisers are able to gather.

The selling price of houses in their neighborhood is likely to make a big difference. With the upswing in foreclosures and short sales in recent years, property values are likely to go down. Because of the downturn in the real estate market, county officials are expecting lower appraisals overall than eight years ago.

Some areas in Currituck are more likely than others to be affected by that trend. Sample said he expects property values in the four-wheel drive area of the Outer Banks to go down the most. Houses in Moyock, where real estate sales have been less affected by the economic downturn, are expected to either hold their value or go down less than other areas of the county.

Sample said he doesn’t know how property owners will react to the new appraisals.

Normally, property owners are most concerned when values go up because that means higher property taxes. It’s uncertain how many residents will decide to challenge appraisals that actually go down, he said. Commissioners will be scheduling appeals sometime after the new appraisals are mailed out.

County officials are expecting some challenges regardless.

With all the variables involved, coming up with property values is not an exact science, appraisal company Tyler Technologies acknowledged in the rate schedule report.

“No program, regardless of how skillfully administered, can ever be expected to be error-free,” reads the report. “The appraisal must be fine-tuned, and this can best be done by giving the taxpayer an opportunity to question the value placed upon his property and to produce evidence that the value is inaccurate or inequitable.”

Currituck County moves to Dismiss Lawsuit for Commercial Development

Currituck seeks to dismiss Swan Beach suit


By Cindy Beamon

The Daily Advance

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

CURRITUCK — Currituck is asking a Superior Court judge to dismiss a challenge to its ban on commercial development on the county’s off-road beaches.

The county filed the motion in September after Swan Beach Corolla sued the county last summer for blocking its construction plans.

In the county’s motion to dismiss, Currituck is seeking the case be dropped on grounds that Swan Beach Corolla filing its complaint too late; that it did not exhaust all remedies outside of court; and that the county, because it is a governmental entity, is immune from lawsuits like the one the company filed.

A date for the hearing has not yet been scheduled.

Developers filed the lawsuit last July charging they already had county permission to build businesses in Swan Beach, although the county is now opposed to those plans.

Swan Beach Corolla claims a plat with commercial lots was approved four decades ago, but the county has since reneged. The complaint seeks to reverse the county’s recent denial for commercial use of the lots totaling 37 acres.

The lawsuit claims the county rezoned six commercial lots decades ago without notifying the owners who purchased the property in 1966. Despite the rezoning, the county still billed the property owners as if the lots were zoned for business use, the lawsuit claims.

Developers apparently tried to remedy the problem several years ago by asking the county to restore the lots’ previous zoning.

Since 2004 Developer Charles “Chip” Friedman and other business owners who brought the suit have sought three times to rezone six lots originally zoned for commercial development.

In May, Currituck’s Board of Commissioners voted for the third time to deny Friedman’s rezoning request to build a cluster of cottage suites and businesses, including a convenience store, offices and a wedding chapel.

The decision upheld a 30-year-old county policy to restrict commercial development on Currituck’s northernmost beaches.

Outer Banks residents have protested the project would open the door for more business growth in an area ill-equipped to handle it. The remote beaches that begin at milepost 13 have no paved roads and no central water and sewer.

The lawsuit alleges that the county already allows commercial development on the off-road beaches because certain businesses are operating there.

Currituck County to waive certain fees for storm related repairs

There is some confusion circulating that the County is waiving permits for repairs.  THIS IS NOT TRUE.  The County is waiving certain fees but still requiring the permits for repair work.  See below an email  from Jennie Newbern of the Currituck County Planning Department answering my request for clarification:

Jason,


Thanks for your email. CAMA Approval & Building Permits are required. The County has waived building permit fees for Hurricane Sandy related damage until November 30, 2012. If CAMA permits are required, those fees are still applicable.



Also, please see the attached (included on blog below) information regarding the emergency permit issued from the Secretary of NCDENR. Permits for dune restoration efforts (including sand importation & beach push) may be obtained from the District DCM office at no fee. Again, permits are required, fees waived.



Please do not hesitate to contact me with any other questions or concerns.



Thanks,



Jennie Newbern

Planner I/Code Enforcement/CAMA LPO

County of Currituck

P: 252-453-8555 ext. 222
F: 252-453-8300

Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor Dee Freeman, Secretary
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Release: Immediate Contact: Michele Walker

Date: Nov. 1, 2012 Phone: 919-707-8604

Coastal Management Offers Emergency CAMA Permit for Beach Bulldozing Following Hurricane Sandy

RALEIGH – Oceanfront property owners with beach and dune erosion caused by Hurricane Sandy will be able to obtain a Coastal Area Management Act emergency general permit to allow beach bulldozing for the reconstruction of primary and frontal dune systems.

The emergency permit regulations speed up the authorization process for permit approval. The rules also waive permit fees for these projects. The permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any other required state, local or federal authorization.

Dee Freeman, secretary of the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, activated the general permit today, for use in the Ocean and Inlet Hazard Areas of North Carolina’s eight oceanfront counties: Brunswick, Carteret, Currituck, Dare, Hyde, New Hanover, Onslow and Pender. Work authorized under the emergency general permits must be completed by Nov. 1, 2013.

The permit may be used only to authorize beach bulldozing for the reconstruction of primary and frontal dune systems.

The Division of Coastal Management will open an emergency field office on the Outer Banks next week to assist property owners with these and other Coastal Area Management Act permits for Hurricane Sandy recovery.

On Nov. 5, the division will open an office at the Pitt Center, 6 Skyline Road, Southern Shores, N.C. Office hours will be from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays. The phone number is 252-261-8281.

If you would like to apply for the emergency general permit, here’s how you can help Coastal Management review your request as quickly as possible:


1. Please make your request in person at the N.C. Division of Coastal Management office that covers your county: Pitt Center, 6 Skyline Road, Southern Shores (temporary office);1367 U.S. 17 South, Elizabeth City (Camden, Chowan, Currituck, Dare, Gates, Pasquotank and Perquimans counties); 400 Commerce Ave., Morehead City (Carteret, Craven and Pamlico counties, and the White Oak River bank in Onslow County); 943 Washington Square Mall, Washington (Beaufort, Bertie, Hertford, Hyde, Tyrrell and Washington counties); 127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington (Brunswick, New Hanover and Pender counties, Onslow County south of the New River, and Topsail Island).

2. Bring with you a description of the extent of the proposed dune reconstruction, including dimensions and shoreline length. Pre- and post-storm pictures of the project are helpful.

3. Provide your name, address, phone number and the project location. Include any detailed information that will be helpful, such as the state road number, the name of the water body and the name of the development.

4. If you have had any other CAMA permit on your property, please tell the division. Those permits may contain information that will help staff in the N.C. Division of Coastal Management review your repair or replacement request
Property owners with questions should call their local N.C. Division of Coastal Management office: Elizabeth City, 252-264-3901; Morehead City, 252-808-2808 or 1-888-4RCOAST (1-888-472-6278); Washington, 252-946-6481; or Wilmington, 910-796-7215.

Post Hurricane Sandy Beach Videos of the 4WD Area

Given the volume of calls and emails regarding the beaches and current conditions, I took video driving on the 4WD beach in 1 mile segments so inquiring minds can see some Post Hurricane Sandy shots.  Let me know if you need more specifics.

Ramp to MP 14

MP 14 to MP 15

MP 15 to MP 16

MP 16 to MP 17 (Swan Beach)

MP 17 to MP 19 (USFW land)

MP 19 to MP 20 (N. Swan Beach)

MP 20 to MP 21 (NSB to S. Carova)

MP 21 to MP 22 (Carova Beach)

MP 22 to MP 23 (Carova Beach)

MP 23 to MP 24 VA line

Forgive me, this is rather amateur and I had to put each video to music since the alternative was a repeated dialogue with my 5 year old on the value of eating all the carrots in his lunchbox.

NC Department of Insurance Denies Insurance Rate Increase

BREAKING NEWS:

We have just been informed that NC Insurance of Commissioner (Wayne Goodwin) has issued Notice of Public Hearing on the 2012 Homeowners Insurance Rate Filing.

The Notice of Public Hearing is means that the NC Department of Insurance does not approve of the NC Rate Bureau's Rate Filing and feels that the filed rates are excessive and unjustified.

The Hearing will not begin until June 2013 which allows both the NC Department of Insurance and the NC Rate Bureau the time needed to go through the discovery process and prepare for the Hearing. The Hearing is conducted similar to a trial with the Department of Insurance providing evidence and testimony as to why they disagree with the Rate Filing and the NC Rate Bureau

providing evidence and testimony as to why the Rate Filing is justified. The NC Insurance Commissioner will preside as the Hearing Officer during the Public Hearing. The Public Hearing will be open to the public - the public will not have an opportunity to comment during the process.

As of last Wednesday's Public Comment Session held in Raleigh, approximately 3,000 comments were submitted. The deadline for comments was last Friday, October 19th and over 9,000 comments were ultimately received. This is a telling sign that the rising cost of homeowners insurance is a critical issue in NC.



A press release should be posted soon on www.ncdoi.com.

Article from News & Observer shows NC Legislators' Feelings on Bridge costs

GOP Legislators Attack Plans For Seven-Mile $650 Million Bridge


GOP legislators attack plans for seven-mile, $650 million Outer Banks toll bridge
Published Fri, Oct 05, 2012 06:31 PM
Modified Fri, Oct 05, 2012 10:43 PM
By Bruce Siceloff – bsiceloff@newsobserver.com
By Bruce Siceloff The News and Observer
Tags: N.C. Turnpike Authority
NCDOT
Mid-Currituck Bridge
David Joyner
Sen. Bill Rabon
Sen. Neal Hunt
Outer Banks

RALEIGH — Republican legislators at a committee meeting Friday said the state could not afford to contribute to a planned $650 million toll bridge from mainland Currituck County to the northern Outer Banks.

The co-chairs of a House-Senate transportation oversight committee wouldn’t say when or whether they’ll vote on the Mid-Currituck Bridge, which would be built in partnership with an international consortium of private developers. But members argued against committing the state to pay as much as $28 million a year for four decades to cover an expected gap between toll collections – mostly from tourists – and project costs.



“The problem we have as a state is we don’t have the revenue we need to take care of the infrastructure we currently have, whether it’s Interstate 95 or other roads,” said Sen. Ralph Hise, an Avery County Republican. “It’s just amazing to me the creative ways we’ve come up with to finance and borrow additional money in different areas.”



Transportation officials said the state’s partnership with private developers actually will push the taxpayer cost higher, not lower. And toll collections will cover only 30 to 40 percent of the project cost – compared to a 60 percent share expected from drivers who use the Triangle Expressway in Wake County.



“From that perspective, it’s hard to justify,” Sen. Neal Hunt, a Wake County Republican, said after the meeting. “I know they have needs down there. But, dadgummit, we have lots of needs in the state.”



Acting on instructions from the legislature a few years ago, the state Department of Transportation is planning the Mid-Currituck Bridge as a public-private partnership with a Madrid-based consortium that builds bridges around the world. In exchange for taking profits from toll collections that would continue for 50 years, the private partner would carry much of the risk that the bridge – dependent on a healthy tourism economy – could turn out to be a financial flop.



David Joyner, the DOT turnpike director, said that reduced risk is worth an extra $3 million a year that taxpayers would pay.



“Is this a good deal?” Joyner asked committee members. “You’ve got to help us decide. We think it is.”



State and coastal agencies have been talking since 1975 about a bridge across the Currituck Sound, to ease weekend and summer traffic jams on U.S. 158 and N.C. 12. At seven miles, it would be North Carolina’s longest bridge.



Supporters say it would cut 37 miles and as much as two hours from beach trips. Vacationers and others would pay variable tolls projected to reach as high as $25 per trip during peak hours, with discounts for frequent users.



Elected officials and legislative candidates from both political parties in Dare and Currituck counties like the proposed bridge, and so do out-of-state residents who endure long traffic delays on their vacation trips to the Currituck Banks.



“As far as I know, this is the most important project – and has been for 20 years – in northeastern North Carolina,” said Rep. Bill Owens Jr., a Perquimans County Democrat. “It’s important to our economy, and it’s something that’s been worked on by Democrats and Republicans. … It needs to go forward.”



But a sheaf of letters and emails delivered to the legislature revealed sharp divisions among coastal residents. And the Mid-Currituck Bridge earned low-priority ratings when DOT engineers compared it to other needs.



Sen. Bill Rabon, a Brunswick County Republican who chairs the Senate Transportation Committee, said he’ll wait to see how the bridge project looks next spring, after as many as 50 newly elected legislators take their seats.



He expressed doubts about a 40-year commitment to pay a combined $123 million a year for the Mid-Currituck Bridge and two other pending toll projects – enough money, he said, to widen and overhaul I-95. The other two are the Garden Parkway in Gaston County and the Cape Fear Skyway in New Hanover and Brunswick counties.



“The numbers just don’t add up on these turnpike projects,” Rabon said. “I wish they did. The one in my area is as bad as this one.”



Siceloff: 919-829-4527 or blogs.newsobserver.com/crosstown or twitter.com/Road_Worrier/



Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/10/05/2392577/gop-legislators-attack-plans-for.html#storylink=cpy

.

County to reduce number of Tour Vehicles

Larger vehicles, fewer trips under N.C. horse plan


By Jeff Hampton
The Virginian-Pilot
© October 7, 2012

CAROVA BEACH

A colt about 6 months old pranced around while his mother and three other Corolla wild horses recently grazed in a meadow behind the dunes.

His spiked, immature mane looked like the Mohawk haircut of a rebellious teen, colored dark brown close to the neck with a golden tinge at the tips.

An open-cab Hummer with eight riders pulled up. Four heads popped up over the roll bar and began snapping photos. It was the perfect scene for a wild horse-tour driver giving his customers what they wanted.

County officials, however, are considering ways to limit such horse-viewing trips, and the disruption they cause, by having larger vehicles that make fewer trips.

Nine companies advertise the adventure of riding in a four-wheel-drive vehicle to the north beaches in search of wild horses. It is a booming business attracting about 3,000 people a day in the summer months. North Carolina made the wild horses a featured attraction in its tourism advertising this year, ramping up interest even more.

Many times a day, lines of vehicles rumble along the surf and then turn west, up and over the dunes.

The Currituck National Wildlife Refuge and privately owned meadows and forests offer thousands of acres of habitat. But the horses also frequent the lawns of the 600 to 700 homes built along the rough, unpaved roads.

Residents of the north beach communities often have complained about the traffic and the disturbance. Some tour companies do not obey the rule of staying 50 feet from the horses, said Karen McCalpin, director of the Corolla Wild Horse Fund.

"Too many people are getting too close," McCalpin said. "The law says 50 feet. I don't think that's too much to ask."

Contention between residents and tour operators has smoldered for years while the demand to see wild horses has grown. Owners maintain that the tours attract business and jobs to Corolla, generate tax revenue, and reduce the number of people who would drive up there on their own.

Currituck County commissioners are considering an ordinance that could cut from 46 to 25 the number of tour vehicles permitted. Operators would be allowed to use larger vehicles with greater capacity that still would offer rides to the same number of customers.

Tour owners would have to buy a new license for close to $1,200 per vehicle, raising $29,960. That fund would cover expenses such as maintaining the county's public park and restrooms in Carova Beach and grading its main route, Ocean Pearl Road. None of the roads there are paved, and many have potholes nearly large enough to swallow a pickup.

"I think it's going to be a good thing," said Scott Trabue, owner of Back Country Outfitters in Corolla. "You've got to respect the locals and you've got to respect the authorities."

Richard Brown of Wild Horse Adventure Tours and Bob White of Beach Jeeps would see the number of vehicles they use cut from 10 to four, according to county statistics. Neither could be reached for comment.

Oblivious to the troubles, the Corolla wild horses are doing well, said Wesley Stallings, the herd manager.

An aerial count in September turned up 121 horses, just about the ideal population, he said. Corolla Wild Horse Fund officials await a vote on a bill in Congress sponsored by Rep. Walter Jones that would allow the herd to remain at 120 to 130 horses. An unenforced ordinance agreed to more than 10 years ago by federal and local officials calls for the herd to remain at 60 horses.

Using GPS technology, Stallings locates where the horses live and graze month by month.

The herd naturally divides into harems of four or five horses. Harems migrate according to the season.
Marsh grasses near the Currituck Sound and mast in the maritime forests are best in the winter, while sea oats on the dunes mature in the summer. In the spring and fall, horses graze in the meadows between the dunes and the marshes.

"I know where each horse's home range is," Stallings said.
He hopes his research can eventually help resolve issues of habitat versus development and tours.
On the beach, a harem led by a black stallion well-known for his long flowing mane trotted near a large oceanfront home. A foal left behind whinnied for his mother before trotting along the base of the dunes to where she waited.
An open vehicle from a different tour company was not far away, but more than 50 feet. People stood from their seats taking photos of another memorable scene of wild horses. More satisfied customers.

NC Governor race to determine ultimate fate for the Mid Currituck Bridge

FROM THE DAILY ADVANCE

Governor hopefuls differ on bridge
By Cindy Beamon
The Daily Advance
Thursday, September 13, 2012

Although recent questions about the proposed Mid-Currituck Bridge have arisen in the state Senate, one local lawmaker says the future of the project may likely hinge on the new governor.

Gov. Bev Perdue has supported the project, but her influence will end after November’s election, when a new governor is elected.

State Rep. Bill Owens, D-Pasquotank, says who replaces her could have a big bearing on the bridge. The governor appoints the state Board of Transportation, the body in charge of negotiating the state’s contract with a private partner in building and maintaining the $600 million span, Owens notes.

“If (the BOT members) want to kill it, they certainly can in their negotiations,” he said.

In recent statements, the two candidates for governor have differed on their stances on the bridge.

Republican Pat McCrory, former mayor of Charlotte, was non-committal in his support of the bridge, although a campaign spokesman said that does not mean he opposes the project.

McCrory wants to examine all road projects statewide before deciding which ones should move forward, said Ricky Diaz, press secretary for McCrory.

“If elected, Pat McCrory will develop a long-term

transportation infrastructure plan to once and for all to remove politics from transportation infrastructure funding,” said Diaz. “Pat believes projects should be funded based on worthiness, and will review plans for the Mid-Currituck Bridge to ensure that the long-term economic interests of the state and region are best-served.”

Democrat Walter Dalton, the state’s current lieutenant governor, supports the bridge, said campaign spokesman Schorr Johnson.

“He believes it will help with tourism which is one of North Carolina’s top industries,” Johnson said.

He noted that Dalton also supported project when he served in the state Senate.

Dalton also approves plans to fund the project with a combination of public and private funds.

“The unique public-private partnership is the only way a project of this size will be able to go forward,” Johnson said.

Johnson did add one qualifier. He said funding for the project will have to be re-examined every two years when the state budget is being considered.

The state’s changing political landscape over the past two years has turned out to be a mine field for the proposed Mid-Currituck Bridge project.

Under the leadership of then Democratic Senate President Pro Tempore Marc Basnight, the General Assembly agreed to pay $28 million each year in “gap funds” for the next 30 years to support the project. Gap funds will pay the difference between what the bridge will collect in tolls and the actual cost of construction.

However, after Basnight left office and Republicans took control of the Senate, the project has been under fire on several fronts.

Most recently chairmen of the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee have questioned the state’s plan for funding the bridge. State Sen. Bill Rabon, R-Beaufort, said recently in an interview that the state needs to re-examine the importance of all N.C. Turnpike Authority projects before the General Assembly funds them. The Turnpike Authority is the state agency the General Assembly, then under Democratic control, created to oversee and build several expensive toll road projects, including the Mid-Currituck Bridge.

Owens, who also will be leaving office when his current term ends in December, said the project has already passed close scrutiny over the past two decades. He claims the recent questions are aimed at either diverting funds to other road projects or eliminating toll projects altogether.

Despite the recent attacks, Owens said he believes funding for the Mid-Currituck Bridge will eventually come through. The General Assembly will find it difficult to undo the legislation that already promises state funds for the project, he said.

“It takes both the House and the Senate to take it out,” Owens said.

Bridge Funding Gets Serious Questioning and Scrutiny For Lawmakers

Lawmaker questions need for Mid-County Bridge


By Cindy Beamon
The Daily Advance
Wednesday, August 22, 2012

New questions by lawmakers about the proposed Mid-County Bridge in Currituck signal another tough fight ahead over the $600 million project, local and state officials say.

Four powerful Republicans in the General Assembly plan to review the state’s plan for funding the bridge this fall.

In response, Currituck commissioners are set to meet with the Joint Legislative Transportation Oversight Committee on Sept. 5 to defend what they call a “serious threat” to the seven-mile span crossing the Currituck Sound.

State Sen. Bill Rabon, R-Brunswick, one of the committee’s four chairmen, said “gap funds” for the mid-county bridge — funds to pay for the difference between what the project will cost and the amount private tolls will raise — unfairly favor Currituck over other counties in the state. If Rabon had his way, funds would be more evenly distributed among all 16 of the state’s transportation districts.

“What makes Currituck so special?” Rabon asked in a telephone interview last week.

The newest threat to the project is really nothing new, said state Rep. Bill Owens, D-Pasquotank. In 2011, Owens used the bridge as a bargaining chip when he agreed to vote with the Republican majority for a veto-proof state budget.

“It’s been serious for a couple years now,” Owens said of 
possible funding cuts to the bridge.

The bridge will lose Owens as its chief defender in the General Assembly when he retires later this year. Another powerful bridge supporter, former Senate President Pro Tempore Marc Basnight left office in January 2011.

“We have fought a lot of opposition over the years, and so far, we are still on the table,” Owens said. “But there will be future fights after I am gone.”

That fight could hang on a promise.

Owens said House Speaker Thom Tillis made a promise that he would back the bridge for as long as he remains speaker. So far, Tillis has kept his word, said Owens.

When the Senate sought to cut the gap funding for the project by almost half this year, Tillis helped restore full funding in the General Assembly’s final budget, said Owens. Cutting the gap funds would have “killed the project,” he said.

Tillis could not be reached to comment. Last week, an aide said he was on vacation until Monday.

Owens acknowledged the fragility of Tillis’s promise. Tillis may not be re-elected as House Speaker or he may yield to pressure from fellow Republicans not to continue gap funding for the project, officials have speculated.

In the Senate, opposition to the Mid-County Bridge and similar toll-road projects appears to be building.

Rabon said he doesn’t know if he has support in the General Assembly to end funding for the bridge as lawmakers now know it.

In 2002, the state set up the North Carolina Turnpike Authority to plan and construct toll-road projects that would be too expensive to be funded through the traditional state transportation system.

Rabon is now suggesting the state scuttle Turnpike projects and divvy funds among the transportation districts.

He said the Turnpike projects give an unfair advantage to some counties.

“No one in the state should be special. Everyone should be treated fairly,” said Rabon.

He didn’t mention names, but Rabon said under previous leadership in the General Assembly, northeastern North Carolina has already received “more than its fair share” of state funding for various projects.

“That’s the way it used to be done, but that’s not the way it’s going to be done from now on,” said Rabon.

State Sen. Stan White, who was appointed by the Democratic Party to fill the unexpired term of Basnight, charges that questions about the bridge’s funding are a veiled attempt to shift funding to other road projects in the state.

Currituck Commissioner Owen Etheridge has also questioned the motives of legislators raising questions about the gap funding.

“I just want them to not play politics with the Mid-County Bridge, and that’s what I think is going on,” Etheridge said in an interview earlier this month.

Rabon denied that his district would receive any immediate benefit from shifting funds away from Turnpike projects. He noted that the proposed Cape Fear Skyway, a Turnpike project near Wilmington, would be one of the victims if funding is shifted elsewhere.

Rabon said he doesn’t oppose the Mid-County Bridge, just how it will be funded.

The state’s plan to provide $28 million in gap funds each year for 30 years will turn the bridge into a “billion dollar project,” he said. That’s more than the state can afford, he said.

Rabon also questioned what will happen if the state’s private partner in the project goes bankrupt.

“If they go belly up, who’s going to pay?” he asked.

Local officials say the oversight committee chairmen are overlooking the benefits of the Mid-County Bridge project.

Owens said he’s invited Rabon to Currituck to see the need for the bridge first-hand, but so far Rabon hasn’t accepted.

“I don’t think people realize the magnitude of the problem,” said Owens, noting that evacuation of the barrier island during a major hurricane would be a major problem.

Both Owens and White said the oversight committee’s move to re-examine financing for the bridge could be serious.

“(The) Turnpike (Authority) is nervous,” said White. “The tone of the (committee’s) letter is ‘kill the bridge.”’

Rabon said asking questions is just part of his job as a member of the oversight committee. He said Currituck needs to prove the importance of the project to the entire state.

“If the same project was approved in Avery County, would Currituck support it?” asked Rabon.

Owens said Currituck has already answered questions about the bridge’s importance.

“This is nothing new, and it certainly hasn’t been rushed,” said Owens.

More Speculation on the Mid Currituck Bridge

FROM THE DAILY ADVANCE


Killing bridge could cost $10M
By Cindy Beamon
The Daily Advance
Tuesday, August 14, 2012

CURRITUCK — The state risks losing up to $10 million if it pulls out of a partnership agreement to build the proposed Mid-County Bridge in Currituck, an official with the agency responsible for building the span says.

David Joyner, executive director for the N.C. Turnpike Authority, also has adjusted the proposed construction starting date for the $600 million bridge project to January 2014.

Under that timeline, the seven-mile span across the Currituck Sound wouldn’t open to traffic until 2018.

Joyner made both projections as part of his response to questions posed recently by four powerful state Republican lawmakers critical of the state’s funding for the Mid-Currituck Bridge project.

In a letter to Joyner, state Sens. Bill Rabon, R-Brunswick, Kathy Harrington, R-Gaston, and state Reps. Phillip Frye, R-Mitchell and Grey Mills, R- Iredell, each of them a chairman of the Joint Legislative Transportation Oversight Committee, asked several questions about the bridge. They said the state’s first public-private partnership to build a road project needs to be “highly scrutinized” to avoid a negative outcome.

Among other things, the lawmakers wanted to know the terms of the state’s agreement to build the bridge, and the state’s projected risks and financial obligations for the project.

In his Aug. 3 response, Joyner said the state’s private partner in the bridge project, Currituck Development Corp., is expected to contribute $40 million toward the bridge. CDC is a consortium of private partners including Spanish bridge-building company ACS Group.

Under the proposed public-private partnership, CDC will design, construct, operate and maintain the project over 50 years. The company is expected to recoup its costs by charging tolls, estimated earlier to cost motorists between $6 and $12 one way.

Joyner said if the state were to back out of the partnership agreement with the CDC before closing the deal, it would have to pay up to $10 million.

The private partners have also agreed to shoulder “key risks” in the project, he said. Those risks include: absorbing the risk for collecting tolls; keeping construction on time, and on budget; and operating and maintaining the bridge for 50 years.

The state’s obligation includes providing “gap funds” to subsidize construction costs.

The state Legislature has agreed to pay up to $28 million in gap funds each year for 30 years. For the past two years, however, the General Assembly has delayed its appropriation of the gap funds and diverted the funds elsewhere.

This year, the Senate even removed funding for the project altogether but later agreed in budget negotiations to a one-year delay in funding instead.

Apparently, the new round of questions from the committee chairmen is a continued challenge to the project.

“Transportation infrastructure needs in this state are great and we all must grapple with which projects to finance and how to finance them,” states their letter to Joyner.

Local officials say the questions by the Republican lawmakers signal a serious threat to the bridge project.

“I am very worried they will not come back next year and refund the bridge even though we have assurances they will,” Currituck Commissioner Owen Etheridge said.

The General Assembly is expected to hammer out next year’s budget during its winter session. Funding for the bridge is expected to be part of those budget deliberations.

In the meantime, the state will be working toward finalizing its agreement with CDC.

The Turnpike Authority has projected its commercial agreement with CDC will be ready by October. The next steps would be the project’s final design and environmental permits before the financial closing in December 2013.

Joyner said any legal challenge to the project — which the Turnpike Authority is expecting — would not increase the state’s $10 million liability.

“Historically, environmental lawsuits do not kill projects but they can delay projects,” Joyner said. “Eventually projects go forward assuming financial conditions allow. We have anticipated a reasonable delay from litigation.”

The lawmakers’ letter states their committee plans to meet this fall to review the information from Joyner.

Commercial Developer Sues Currituck County Over 4x4 Beaches

It comes as no major surprise but it has finally made its way to court.  Swan Beach Corolla LLC, figureheaded by Chip Friedman, is suing Currituck County over its refusal to allow commercial development on the 4x4 area of the Outer Banks.  Cindy Beamon of the Daily Advance has the latest below.

Currituck sued on Carova development limits



By Cindy Beamon


The Daily Advance


Wednesday, July 18, 2012


CURRITUCK — Officials’ resolve to ward off commercial development on the remote northern Outer Banks beaches will face a challenge in court.


Developers filed a lawsuit this month charging they already have county permission to build businesses in Carova beach, although the county is opposed to it.


Swan Beach Corolla LLC claims a plat with commercial lots was approved four decades ago, but the county has since reneged. The complaint filed July 6 in Currituck Superior Court seeks to reverse the county’s recent denial of plans for a 290-unit inn and nearby offices and stores on 37 acres in the off-road community.


The lawsuit claims the county rezoned six commercial lots decades ago without notifying the owners who purchased the property in 1966. Despite the rezoning, the county still billed the property owners as if the lots were zoned for business use, the lawsuit claims.


Developers apparently tried to remedy the problem several years ago by asking the county to restore the lots’ previous zoning.


Since 2004, Developer Charles “Chip” Friedman and other business owners who brought the suit have sought three times to rezone six lots originally zoned for commercial development.


After two failed attempts, Swan Beach Corolla, originally operating as Ocean Associates, started legal proceedings in 2008 but later backed down.


In May, Currituck’s Board of Commissioners voted for the third time to deny Friedman’s rezoning request, this time to build a cluster of cottage suites and businesses, including a convenience store, offices and a wedding chapel.


The decision upheld a 30-year-old county policy to restrict commercial development on Currituck’s northernmost beaches.


Carova-area, off-road residents protested the project would open the door for more business growth in an area ill-equipped to handle it. The remote beaches that begin at Mile Post 13 have no paved roads and no central water or sewer.


Friedman, however, charged the county already turned a “blind eye” to illegal businesses operating in the off-road community. His complaint prompted an inspections sweep last year of the off-road area to determine if any illegal businesses were operating in the mostly residential zoning district. The suit claims businesses, including a septic tank company, heavy equipment company, storage warehouse and mining operations continue to operate in the off-road community.


The suit pointed to other developments where businesses have been allowed to develop. Ocean Sands and Whalehead subdivisions have real estate offices and restaurants even though they are zoned R-02, the same as the Carova properties, the suit claims.


During the 1970s, the county told developers that projects approved before new zoning laws would be “grandfathered,” the lawsuit claims.


“County representatives continued to represent to property owners that subdivisions approved prior to regulations would be grandfathered and could be built with their original approvals,” the suit reads.


The suit claims the Swan Beach Corolla properties are being singled out for enforcement of the “no commercial” policy.


The county allows developers to build 23-bedroom beach houses — that some people call hotels — the suit stated. The mega houses, equipped with 91-seat dining rooms and industrial-size kitchens, are granted permits, but the plaintiffs were denied permission to build an inn, the suit states.


“Allowing these extremely large homes to operate for business and commercial purposes as hotels in the R-02 District but to deny plaintiffs the right to operate an inn is purposeful discrimination,” the suit charges.


The lawsuit also claims the plaintiffs had already made “substantial expenditures” toward developing the commercial properties before the county rezoned them.


Developers would not have spent $425,000 in roads, ditches and engineering work in the early 1970s if they had known the county would rezone the property, the suit states.


The county has not yet filed an answer to the complaint.

Bridge Gap funding removed from NC budget for Mid Currituck Bridge.

From the Raleigh News &Observer.  I suspect the public money for the Mid-Currituck Bridge could be in grave danger...even before the sideshow began.  I'd say all options including forgery were exhausted.

By Bruce Siceloff and J. Andrew Curliss The News and Observer




RALEIGH -- The Senate Rules Committee chairman launched an investigation today into what he called “fraudulent” letters sent to legislators last week that appeared to reverse the state Department of Transportation’s position on the need for $63 million in start-up money for two toll projects.


Sen. Tom Apodaca, a Hendersonville Republican, said DOT officials would be asked to speak at a rules committee hearing Wednesday morning, and representatives of Gov. Bev Perdue’s office would be asked to speak at a second hearing Thursday morning.


The letters were drafted last Thursday morning by Perdue staffers on DOT stationery and over the signature of Jim Trogdon, DOT’s chief operating officer, and appeared to contradict a recommendation Trogdon had made in a June 8 memo to legislative leaders.


Trogdon had said June 8 that DOT would not be ready before fiscal year 2014 to spend proposed “gap” funds for the planned Mid-Currituck Bridge in Currituck County and the Garden Parkway in Gaston and Mecklenburg counties, so he recommended that the legislature find other uses for that money in the budget for 2013. Thursday’s letters to two legislators interested in the projects included a line inserted by Perdue staffers Pryor Gibson and Kevin McLaughlin that said the “funds are needed in this budget cycle.”


Trogdon disavowed and retracted the letters Thursday afternoon and told legislators they had been sent and signed without his consent. By then, the false letters had been cited in floor debate over an unsuccessful amendment to restore the toll road funding to the budget.


“Those simple facts in my mind warrant this committee’s inquiry into the integrity of information provided to the Senate as it goes about its business,” Apodaca said this morning. “This is simply an inquiry. We will go where the facts lead us.”


He went out of his way to absolve Trogdon, a major general in the N.C. National Guard, of any wrongdoing.


“This should not be seen as a reflection on any particular DOT official,” Apodaca said. “Specifically, Gen. Jim Trogdon is one of the finest public servants we have in this state. In conducting this inquiry we in no way question the integrity of Jim Trogdon.”


Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/06/19/2146776/senate-will-probe-fraudulent-dot.html#storylink=cpy

Read my lips....

Currituck county approved a budget that keeps property taxes at the same $0.32 level it has been for the last 8 years. Kudos. Below is the details for the Daily Advance's Cindy Beamon: Currituck board OKs $65M spending plan By Cindy Beamon The Daily Advance Tuesday, June 5, 2012 CURRITUCK — The Currituck Board of Commissioners approved a $65 million budget Monday that cuts county spending by 9 percent without raising property taxes. Under the county’s spending plan for 2012-13, the property tax rate will remain where it’s been for the past eight years: 32 cents per $100 valuation. According to county officials, that 32-cents tax rate is now the six-lowest in the state. It also means that for a homeowner with a $200,000 home, his tax bill of $640 won’t change. The budget offers the county’s 363 employees their first raise in several years. Under the spending plan, employees will get a 2-percent cost of living adjustment. Fees countywide will remain the same, except for three sewer districts. Newtown Road Sewer District’s flat fee will rise from $26 to $32 a month. Costs for wastewater services in Moyock Commons will actually go down in next year’s budget. The district tax rate will decrease from 24 cents to 20 cents per $100 valuation. In addition, the wastewater utilization rate will decrease from four times the water bill to 3.5 times the water bill. Wastewater fees at Walnut Island will be based on water usage. The budget includes several capital projects, including the county’s first-ever mosquito spraying service. Other projects include the Aviation Technical Training Center and multi-use fields at Currituck Community Center, new tennis courts at Currituck High School, a new rodeo arena at the Rural Center and the architectural design for a new animal shelter. The spending plan also contributes to a major update of Currituck’s central communications system. The county began upgrading towers and buying new equipment last year for the 800 megahertz system. The budget includes a $10.6 million tourism budget, supported mostly with occupancy taxes, the tax on room stays and cottage rentals. About $4.3 million of occupancy tax revenues will go to tourism promotion and $6.3 million toward tourism-related expenses. The $47 million general fund is the largest of 25 separate budgets that make up the county’s operating budget. About 38 percent of the general fund budget goes toward public safety, which comprises more than half of the county’s work force. Another 22 percent goes toward education. This year, the county expects to contribute $9 million to the school system, almost $5.9 million for Emergency Management Services and another $5.6 million for the sheriff’s department.

Corolla Wild Horses make the New York Times

The popularity and the plight of the Corolla Wild Horses is so large that it made the New York Times. I must say a rather indepth article. Click here for the link

County Commissioners continue to disagree about (insert topic here) once again.

Cohesiveness on the County Board of Commissioners continues to erode and yet again seems to impede their ability to make significant steps towards fully addressing real county issues. The embers of closed door frustrations are spilling over onto public meetings and evoking childhood memories of the old playground at recess. Cindy Beamon of the Daily Advance has the Hall Monitor's recap below:

THE DAILY ADVANCE
Rorer to Petry: Shut up; Petrey to Rorer: ‘You will be sorry’
By Cindy Beamon
Staff Writer
Thursday, April 19, 2012
CURRITUCK — A discussion about deputies turned into a brief, but fiery exchange between two Currituck commissioners at a work session earlier this week.
John Rorer, chairman of the Currituck Board of Commissioners, told fellow Commissioner Butch Petrey to “shut up” after Petrey criticized Rorer for his description of deputies as “power hungry.”
Petrey told Rorer not to tell him to shut up again or “you will be sorry.”
Rorer then threatened to remove Petrey from the meeting if he continued to be “out of order.”
In an interview Tuesday, Petrey said Rorer had insulted deputies in Currituck, and he felt the need to defend him. Petrey questioned if Rorer even had the power to remove another commissioner from the meeting.
Rorer said Tuesday that Petrey’s comments were disruptive and it was his duty as chairman to keep order.
“We have to be tolerant of each other and make allowances, but I do have to run the meeting,” said Rorer.
Rorer said removing another commissioner from the meeting would require a vote, but Rorer thought a majority on the board would have sided with him.
The dispute arose during a discussion about hiring a “courtesy patrol” for the off-road beaches on Currituck’s northern Outer Banks.
Commissioners were discussing whether it would be better to hire college students or pay deputies overtime to patrol the beaches on all-terrain vehicles.
The choice depended on what the board wanted to accomplish, said County Planning Director Ben Woody. If commissioners wanted a courtesy patrol to have enforcement powers, then it would be better to hire deputies, Woody said. If commissioners wanted the courtesy patrol to focus on welcoming vacationers and providing information, then the county may not need deputies, he said.
Commissioners then discussed what would happen if vacationers became unruly with the courtesy patrol. They asked Sheriff Susan Johnson, who said she was there to listen, if vacationers would heed friendly warnings from a courtesy patrol.
Johnson said it would depend on the person and the situation. Based on past interactions between vacationers and volunteer courtesy patrols, about 60 percent of the time, deputies were called to assist, she said.
Commissioner Paul O’Neal said some self-appointed courtesy patrols have provoked vacationers in the past. He said he’d heard reports of some people running up and down the beach yelling at vacationers, telling them to move their cars.
“It’s how it’s done that is going to make a difference,” said O’Neal.
Rorer said he agreed. When the discussion turned to deputies patrolling the beach, Rorer said “the attitude of deputies are not the most genteel and persuasive.” He said their behavior is influenced by having guns and often feel the need to demonstrate their power.
Petrey then told Rorer he should tell Currituck deputies that face to face.
Rorer told Petrey to shut up.
Petrey responded by telling Rorer not to tell him to shut up again.
On Tuesday, Petrey said he was offended by Rorer’s attitude toward local law enforcement.
“They don’t deserve that,” he said.
Johnson said she also disagreed with Rorer’s comments.
“I assure you that the deputies are not interacting with tourists in our area in a negative manner,” she said.
The conflict between Rorer and Petrey was not the only testy moment during Monday’s work session.
Petrey and Commissioner Vance Aydlett also exchanged words after Petrey suggested posting more signs on the beach would cost less than hiring a courtesy patrol.
Aydlett said signs have been on the beach for 15 years and had not solved the problem.
“It’s time to man up and do it or shut up,” said Aydlett.
Aydlett later told board members that his comments were not directed at any one commissioner.
Commissioners ultimately agreed to pay overtime for two more deputies to patrol the 12-mile stretch of beach. The decision will double the sheriff’s department’s ATV summer patrols, said Johnson. Instead of two officers covering six miles each of beach, four officers will cover three miles each, she said. The extra manpower and ATVs are estimated to cost $64,380, which Scanlon said would be funded with occupancy tax revenue.
“I am hoping we will see a marked difference with the safety issues on the northern beaches,” Johnson said.
Commissioners have considered several proposals to resolve a dangerous mix of sunbathers and traffic on the off-road beaches during the height of summer tourist season.
Residents have proposed a permit system to limit the number of vehicles on the beach, but commissioners have rejected that idea so far. Commissioners considered creating a “safe zone” so that sunbathers would not have to cross traffic, but that proposal has been shelved, at least until next year.
Johnson said she’ll know by the end of summer if the added patrols made a significant impact on the safety issues.

County at odds over addressing future of 4x4 beaches

Here is an article about people's opinions how best (or worst) to address the increasing traffic and multi uses on the 4x4 beaches. I am providing a link to this article because the comments on the article are also noteworthy.

http://hamptonroads.com/2012/04/first-hatteras-now-currituck-aims-curb-orv-access

NC Building Code change could have significant impacts for 4x4 homeowners

It seemed that the NC building code rule change was trying to be as quiet on this as they could despite the significant impacts that a rule change like this would have on groundfloor addtions and new construction. I am not saying I don't agree with the intent of the code here, but some more public education on it would have helped Builders, Remodelers, and (most importantly)Inspectors grasp how to adapt to the change. See an article summary below:

Flood code may raise building costs North Carolina

By Jeff Hampton
The Virginian-Pilot
© March 24, 2012
New homes in North Carolina as well as additions to existing homes must be built a foot higher off the ground in flood-prone areas under new regulations, adding an obstacle for homebuilders fighting to survive a sluggish construction industry.

The new North Carolina building code, which took effect March 1, surprised some contractors.

It requires the bottom finished floor to be one foot above where maps show the worst floodwaters would reach.

The change means additional layers of concrete block for the foundation.

Duct work for heating and air conditioning systems and electrical lines can no longer run through the crawl space. Also included are new energy-saving codes that require builders to caulk, insulate and wrap dozens of additional spots on a new home.

All of that adds up to higher costs.

And with petroleum prices rising, the cost of building materials made from plastics - such as plumbing pipes and light fixtures - have also gone up, said Duke Geraghty, an Outer Banks builder and former president of the Outer Banks Home Builders Association.

He estimated the price of a new home could rise by several thousand dollars.

"It's hitting us all at once," Geraghty said.

The Outer Banks Home Builders Association plans to petition for a change to the rules, he said.

Geraghty is preparing to start on a new house soon - his first in two years. A few years ago, he was building 20 a year, he said.

"It's not much of a recovery," Geraghty said, noting that the one house he's building is replacing a home that was destroyed by Hurricane Irene last year.

"We're getting a little more business."

Home additions have provided the bulk of the work, but now, those new rooms will have to be elevated a foot higher than the existing floors, and that could also dissuade homeowners, he said.

The new state code requires the finished floor of a new home be a foot above the base flood elevation in regulated flood zones, said Spence Castello, chief building inspector for Currituck County. The new height is called design flood elevation.

Before March, builders could build the bottom floor to base flood elevation.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency defines base flood elevation as the height of floodwaters that would have a 1 percent chance of reaching that level in a given year.

Weather events of that magnitude are also known as 100-year storms, according to FEMA.

Base flood elevation depends on the ground elevation and the proximity to water, which varies. Nearly 60 percent of Currituck County lies in flood-prone areas that require flood insurance.

In most of Currituck County, base flood elevation lies between 5 and 10 feet above sea level and can vary even within the same community, according to charts on the Currituck County website.

In some places, especially along the oceanfront, where wave action is expected, the base flood elevation rises to 12 feet or more. Builders have to use federal flood maps to know the elevations at a given spot.