February 20 (Regular Meeting) - Pitt County Government

PITT COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
GREENVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
FEBRUARY 20, 2006 MINUTES
The Pitt County Board of Commissioners met on Monday, February 20, 2006, at 6:00 PM in the
Commissioners' Auditorium, Pitt County Office Building, 1717 W. 5th Street, Greenville, North
Carolina.
Commissioners present:
Jimmy Garris, Chairman
Beth Ward, Vice Chairman
Glenn Bowen, Commissioner
Tom Coulson, Commissioner
David Hammond, Commissioner (arrived a few minutes late)
Eugene James, Commissioner
Melvin McLawhorn, Commissioner
John Minges, Commissioner
Commissioners Absent:
Mark Owens, Jr., Commissioner
Staff present:
Scott Elliott, County Manager
Susan Banks, Clerk to the Board
JoAnne Burgdorff, County Attorney
Melonie Bryan, Deputy County Manager/Financial Services
Lori Hartsfield, Community Development Administrator
John Morrow, Director/Health Department
Jeff Niebauer, Tax Collector
James Rhodes, Planning Director
Stephen Smith, Planner III/Floodplain Administration
Michael Taylor, MIS Director
Florida Hardy, Human Resources Director
John Bulow, Deputy Manager/Community Services
Phil Dickerson, Deputy Manager/Facility Services
Call to Order
Meeting Notes
Chairman Garris called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone. Prior to opening
the meeting, the Chairman informed the public that the overflow room was open in the EOC
where people could view the meeting if the auditorium was overcrowded.
Roll Call
Invocation and Pledge
Meeting Notes
The invocation was offered by Chairman Garris.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Bowen.
Approval of Agenda
Staff Recommendation
1
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Motion to approve the agenda as presented with addition of Proclamation for March to be
National Health Month.
Meeting Notes
Chairman Garris suggested that the item on page 82 (Community Transportation
Coordinator Position) be moved to the first item to focus on since Mr. Bulow is present. Chairman
Garris stated that Mr. Bulow had knee surgery and needs to be excused as soon as possible.
Commissioner Coulson asked the board to consider moving the general “Public
Addresses to Board” to the beginning of the meeting prior to the other public hearings due to the
number of interested citizens that were present. It was a consensus to move the public
addresses to the board to the beginning of the meeting.
Motion:
Motion to add the Proclamation for March to be National Nutrition Month to the agenda.
Motion made by Commissioner Glenn Bowen.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Eugene James.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Motion:
Motion to approve the agenda as amended with the addition of the Proclamation for March
to be National Health Month.
Motion made by Commissioner Eugene James.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Melvin McLawhorn.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Approval of the Community Transportation Coordinator Position ­ Scott Elliott
Information Provided with the Agenda
At their January 27, 2006 meeting the Pitt Area Transit System (PATS) Board voted to
prepare and submit NCDOT's Community Transportation Program (CTS) grant assistance
application for 2006­2007. This application will allow PATS to continue to receive money to fund
a full time equivalent (FTE) position, Transportation Coordinator. This is 85% State funded and
15% locally funded. This funding is currently in place for this fiscal year even though this position
is vacant. Position will be a grade 67. This position would answer to the Deputy County
Manager/Community Services as well to the PATS Board.
This position is being proposed to be made a County position because the PATS board
has had difficulty keeping it filled. Currently, the position does not offer benefits because there is
not formal personnel structure, that enables this to happen. It is believed that by having this as a
permanent position within County government, this will lend more stability to keeping the position
filled.
At this point in time, the PATS Board is providing the 15% local match. I would
recommend that the County consider funding this match as a part of the FY 06­07 budget
process.
Staff Recommendation
Approve establishing a Transportation Coordinator position as a county employee, that
will be recruited immediately.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
2

Meeting Notes
Chairman Garris said the position, if approved, will be put in this year’s budget and will
need to be budgeted for next year. Mr. Elliott stated there is a need to bring this position under
the oversight of county government. There will not need to be any additional county funding
needed for the position during this fiscal year. The PATS system provide the 15% match for the
transportation grant which is currently funded this year. The position will report to Mr. Bulow and
himself as well as PATS board. He recommended the county pay 15% of salary as match starting
July 1.
Motion:
Approve establishing a Transportation Coordinator position as a county employee, that
will be recruited immediately.
Motion made by Commissioner John Minges.
Motion seconded by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Commissioner Hammond apologized for being late. He apologized to the Manager and
office staff for his behavior last Thursday and would be better in the future.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Public Addresses to the Board
Meeting Notes
· Nancy Colville spoke about the proposal from MGT of America that addresses funding
problems for local governments and school boards. She suggested her support of an
audit of the schools. She said this report would give the board as well as the public a
better understanding the issues and the system. She supported spending the $65,000
for this audit.
· Ann Baker, sister and aunt of Faulkner family, spoke to the right of people to work in
America. She spoke concerning the Silver Bullet club and felt their rights had been
violated the way the ordinance was passed concerning Sexually Oriented Businesses.
This club provided the income for the Faulkner’s family and they were told they would be
grandfathered in under this ordinance. She stated that this club had been run as
Gentlemen’s Club for 20 years and now the county has shut it down. The county has
taken his income away and the ordinance was pushed in. She spoke of her brother’s
health problems and current medical expenses. She said her brother and his wife are
being deprived of an income since the business has closed. She quoted the law
concerning a person’s constitutional right to earn a living and that they should not be
denied or deprived the right to earn a living. She asked that the board take the
Faulkner’s situation into consideration and please amend the ordinance so they can reopen
the club.
· James Faulkner spoke in reference to his parents’ situation. He said his Grandfather
built the building in the 1960s that was run as an adult theater and in 1980 it was
changed over to an adult club. He stated that the people who moved in across the street
did so knowing what kind of establishment the Silver Bullet was across from them. No
one was forced to go in the Silver Bullet. There were untruths spoke in court in
December in reference to the Silver Bullet.
· Erma Godwin stated she worked at the Silver Bullet and took the job so she didn't have
to be on welfare. It was her choice to make a living this way. She said closing this club
is hurting a lot of older people. Everybody should visit the club one time. She stated
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
3

there was more on television or going on downtown than at this club. It’s a nice place to
go sit, drink a beer, enjoy the music and girls. She said that people may not touch the
girls. She said this is hurting her and her sister. She said there is nothing going on in
the parking lots and she knows because she lives in the first house as you turn in
driveway. She asked the board to reconsider this situation.
· Linda Faulkner, speaking for herself and her husband Earl, said they have run the club
(Silver Bullet) for 20 years, worked together 40 years. She said her husband has recently
had a stroke and has been having major health problems. She said her son Scott and
sisters work there and this is their only income. The doctor said her husband was losing
weight because of worrying about the closing of the club. Her son has lost about
everything including his truck and house because we can't pay the bills. She asked the
board to reconsider the ordinance again.
· T.L. Bryant spoke in support of leaving the confederate monument at the courthouse. He
said he was the Commander of the Captain JCS Barnes Camp Sons of the Confederate.
He said this monument is not different from the historical value of a cemetery. He asked
what was next because there are similar monuments in almost every southern town. He
spoke about contributions that have been made over the years by different segments of
the population (black, white and Indians) and how they have been memorialized. Black
confederate soldiers are a casualty of the war. He made comments about the different
people who served during the Civil War. He stated that removing the Confederate
Monument was removing a tribute to black, native and white Americans.
· Gary Nobles expressed concern that the county could shut down a business that has
been operating for 20 years or more. He said his business was not initially welcomed but
he was worried about everyone having a right to work. He has a tattooing business that
opened in 1990.
· Nicole Della Pena said she was an employee at the Silver Bullet for four years. The
Faulkners have been like a second family. The club is not what people might think. She
said she has worked for other clubs where she left quickly because of what was going on.
She said they knew the people that come in at the Silver Bullet. She said she is waiting
for the day of when they open back up.
· John Harris spoke in support of the reopening of the Silver Bullet Club which he has been
going to since 1995. He said his problem was he did not understand why they were not
grandfathered in. He offered his support of the Silver Bullet.
Chairman Garris asked if anyone else wished to speak. He then asked people who were
present in support of the Silver Bullet to stand. There were approximately 15­20 people present.
He thanked them for being present.
Commissioner Bowen said he has known the Faulkner family since 1960. They are a
good family. He said they got caught up in the changes because and of what the other clubs
were doing. There should be something the county can do for them. Chairman Garris said the
board does not normally respond to the public addresses. Commissioner Hammond said this
situation should be revisited. He offered a motion to revisit this issue. Chairman Garris said this
matter which includes the Silver Bullet is in litigation presently and the board is not authorized to
act on this matter at this time.
· Donald Collins, a Professor Emeritus at ECU, but was not representing the university. He
said he was against the removal of the Confederate monument. He said this matter is
misunderstood. He said one man’s hero is another man’s villain. He said the Buffalo Soldier
nor the Black Soldier was fighting for national policy but were there for other reasons. He
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
4

said his ancestors were from Pitt County and this statue was a way to honor the contributions
of his family during the Civil War. It would be a disservice to remove the monument. He
suggested a compromise and noted that there were two units of black union soldiers from
North Carolina. If they want to compromise, they could put a monument up for the black
soldiers that were from North Carolina. He said there should not be any objection to honoring
anyone.
· Ozzie Hall, resident of Pitt County, said that any monument on the courthouse lawn is
inappropriate. He provided prepared remarks for the board. He said he’s not asking for the
monument be torn down but moved to a museum, a confederate battlefield or a more
appropriate place. He requested that the monument be removed from the courthouse. He
asked for the board to adopt an ordinance requiring the removal of the Confederate
monument at the courthouse. He said in 1914 Pitt County dedicated a monument referred to
as the “Hero’s of 1861­1865… Our Confederate Dead.” He spoke about slavery, racism,
equality for Black People, in a white supremacist system. In wrapping up he stated that
“Ninety­two (92) years later, in 2006 we embark on the revitalization of West Greenville and
the Center City Greenville and profess to embrace ‘Diversity’ and denounce racism let us
remove from the public display, located on the grounds of the Pitt County Courthouse the
Trophy that so proudly immortalizes the Soldiers who fought so diligently to keep my people
in slavery and under the bonds of oppression.” He asked that the board place this on the
agenda for the March 13 th board meeting.
· Jimmy Ward, a retired Marine and native North Carolinian, said that the way veterans receive
recognition is by memorials or monuments. A monument provides a lasting memory. There
has been a trend that started in the early 90s and working its way across the country to
sanitize history by removing such monuments or memorials. He stated that when solders
from the southern states return from serving the US, they are told that they have to change
because of intolerance. He stated this is a disrespectful slap in the face and he fears this
trend will claim monuments honoring WWII vets. He spoke of his service in wars for this
country as well as others service. He gave examples of other wars, service and stated that
all the soldiers were Americans and should be treated as such. He said this is just one
example of the complete history of this country. He asked the board to leave the
Confederate monument in place where its been for the last 100 years.
· Enoch Read ­ lifelong resident of Greenville, said he not want to see the Confederate
monument disturbed in any way. It was dedicated and placed by citizens of Pitt County in
1914. He said the county raised this money in 1909 during tough financial times and yet still
felt soldiers that gave the ultimate sacrifice deserved to be remembered and honored. Time
does not diminish bravery and valor when they gave their all for Pitt County and North
Carolina. The state of North Carolina voted down the succession twice before giving soldiers
to this war. North Carolina gave more soldiers and had more killed in the war than any other
confederate states including whites and free blacks. He noted that the Minority Voice had
honored those men recently in their paper. These men should be honored and remembered
by scholars and historians. He said we need to continue to honor veterans past and present.
· Brenda Harris said she was speaking for Rosa Parks memory for a level playing field. She
spoke of a lady’s tax foreclosure. She said Ms. Suggs lives in Mr. Bowen’s district and has a
$4,000 lot and an $81,000 building and it doesn’t add up. She stated that an larger
percentage of county foreclosures are done on African Americans. She spoke about some
laws working for some and not others. She spoke about some tax debts that Stanley Nichols
has for taxes due for seven years. She stated that Ms. Suggs property has been overvalued
at $81,000. She said she wants a special study of the remind system and the deed of trust
on the piece of property and asked for a private session with the board.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
5

· Keith Cooper spoke of the Confederate statue at the courthouse is a relic representing
slavery, racial oppression and exploitation. It was erected during 1914 during segregation.
He said removal of the statue would help promote fairness and justice since blacks are
disproportionally represented as defendants at the courthouse. He asked why public money
should sustain this monument. He questioned the message that the monument sends to
children. He continued to speak about racism and said some people argued that confederate
soldiers should have been punished for committing treasonous acts against the United
States. He spoke on past presidents and their statements. He asked that the board consider
taking the statue down today.
Chairman Garris asked to have those who support the removal of the Confederate
monument to stand. Approximately seven people stood. He then asked for those who were not
in favor of removing the monument to stand. Approximately somewhere over fifty people stood in
support of leaving the monument at the courthouse.
Chairman Garris called for a short break. The meeting was then continued with
additional public comments concerning the Greenway proposal.
· Bill Klepfer, from the Sierra Club which has 500 members in Pitt County, spoke in strong
support of the proposed Greenway stating it would add to the quality of life for Pitt County
residents. He spoke about this being an opportunity to implement an economical plan of this
kind.
· Barney Kane, lives in Greenville and worked on the master plan. He commended the board,
James Rhodes and the East Carolina University professors who developed this plan. He
spoke about it being a great money savings device and how NCDOT incorporates bridges in
these greenways. He came from a rapidly growing county in Florida and states that there
needs to be plans for pedestrian travel. He urged the board to adopt this because it will save
money down the road and for the health of the citizens of Pitt County.
· Chris Mansfield, ECU physician in the field of Community Medicine, spoke to the health
benefit of the greenway plan. He said they are doing all they can for people in medicine but
they need some help. He said this would or could engage the community and get people
active and walking. He said that adopting this plan opens opportunities and creates a vision
for children, grandchildren, and others to make Pitt County a healthier place to be. He
praised James Rhodes for teaming up with ECU and students to come up with this plan. He
spoke about this being a tremendous partnership.
· Ephraigm Smith, serves on Pitt County’s Drainage District #3, provided a statement from the
drainage district. He expressed concern about the part of the plan that shows using
easements for laterals in the districts and he stated he was not sure they could be used for
this purpose. They were set up for maintenance and cleaning out ditches. There’s concern
about using these travel ways. He said that after the big storm, they have to clean the
ditches. He was concerned about who will accept the liability if someone steps off the
greenway and gets injured. All the chairmen of the drainage districts voted unanimously to
oppose the use of these laterals for the greenway. He stated that they get mowed every two
years so the is very high grass. They are used for hunting and who is going to take
responsibility to make sure no one is on them during hunting season. There are too many
unanswered questioned to sign off on using the laterals in this way. Greenways are nice but
they need to look at other ways than using the travel ways down these ditches.
Presentation
Pitt County Environmental Excellence Award Presentation ­ James Rhodes
Information Provided with the Agenda
6
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

In February, 2004, Pitt County implemented the Environmental Excellence Award
Program to recognize developers who excel in the installation and maintenance of best
management practices while conducting land disturbing activities under the County's Soil Erosion
and Sedimentation Control Ordinance. In determining the recipient of the award, points are
assigned based on preserving the environmental features of the site during the project design,
installation of best management practices (BMP's), and consistently maintaining the site for
compliance with the Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance.
The Pitt County Planning Department is proud to present the 2005 Environmental
Excellence Award to the S.T. Wooten Corporation and Bartlett Engineering and Surveying for
their exceptional effort in designing and constructing the S.T. Wooten Concrete Plant located on
Forlines Road, near its intersection with Highway 11. Construction began on this site in April.
During the five months of construction, the site was inspected a total of ten times. This site
consistently received exceptional scores during all phases of construction.
Representatives from the S.T. Wooten Corporation and Bartlett Engineering and
Surveying will be accepting this award at the February 20, 2006, Board of Commissioners
meeting. In addition, a sign acknowledging the award has been placed at the S.T. Wooten
Concrete Plant site.
Staff Recommendation
Acknowledge the S.T. Wooten Corporation and Bartlett Engineering and Surveying as
the recipient of Pitt County's 2005 Environmental Excellence Award.
Meeting Notes
Mr. James Rhodes said this is an annual event which started last year. They recognize
developers, contractors and engineers that follow best management practices while conducting
land disturbing activities under the county’s Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Program. The plans
are ranked or scored by staff by making site visits. The EEAP award winners are recognized in
the County Page of the Daily Reflector, display of accomplishments on the Planning
Department’s web page, a plaque and a sign is posted on the development site citing their
accomplishment. Mr. Jonas Hill said there were thirty­two new plans that were reviewed and
were eligible.
award.
From January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005
32 new plans were submitted to the Planning Department and were eligible for this
– These sites included 250 disturbed acres.
– Planning Staff conducted 1094 site visits to ensure compliance and to rate the
site for the Environmental Excellence Award.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
7

2005 Environmental Excellence Award
Winner
Congratulations to S.T. Wooten Corporation and Bartlett
Engineering and Surveying for their exceptional effort in
designing and constructing the S.T. Wooten Concrete
Plant located on Forlines Road, near its intersection with
Highway 11.
Mr. Robert Bartlett, said this speaks highly on the staff and how they keep
communication open on permitting a project. He said the helped with the project and saw to
helping with the erosion control. He complemented the contractor and developer, ST Wooten
who was the designer on the project and stated that its one thing to design a project but to stay
with it through all the stages takes a lot of work. He thanked the board and staff for this award.
Commissioner Hammond said they hired a part time employee of his and hope he’s
doing well. Chairman Garris thanked these companies and individuals for setting a good
corporate example.
Public Hearings
2006 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Scattered Site Housing Public Hearing ­ Lori
Hartsfield
Information Provided with the Agenda
As you may recall, the Board closed out the 2003 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) last month. Planning staff members are currently gathering information, and conducting
required meetings and public hearings to make application for the 2006 Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Scattered Site Housing (SSH) funding cycle.
The purpose of this public hearing is to solicit public input about the grant program and to
gain the Board's permission to prepare the grant application. A second public hearing is
scheduled for March 13, 2006, to review the grant application and solicit the Board's approval to
submit the document for funding consideration by the NC Division of Community Assistance.
The anticipated funding level for the 2006 grant cycle is $400,000. No County match is
required.
Staff Recommendation
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
8

Authorize staff to prepare the 2006 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Scattered Site Housing (SSH) application.
Manager Comments
Meeting Notes
Concur with staff recommendation.
Ms. Lori Hartsfield presented the CDBG Scattered Site Housing Program. This program
is designed for low­income homeowner occupants and based on severity of repairs needed. She
said the upcoming funding cycle includes $360,000 to rehabilitate or replace approximately seven
(7) homes in Pitt County. There is no local match required. There is a waiting list of 165 eligible
applicants but they will only be able to serve about 7 homes. They will continue the partnership
with NC Baptist Men in order to spread the funding. They have held all the required meetings.
Project Schedule
• February 20 th – Hold public hearing to solicit
public input on CDBG­SSH program.
•March 13 th – Hold public hearing on completed
CDBG­SSH application.
•March 31 st – Submittal deadline for application.
•Late Spring 2006 – Funding award notification.
•Fall 2006 – Begin construction activities.
Chairman Garris opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Chairman Garris declared
the public hearing closed.
Motion:
Authorize staff to proceed and prepare the 2006 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Scattered Site Housing (SSH) application.
Motion made by Commissioner Glenn Bowen.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Melvin McLawhorn.
Discussion:
Commissioner James said this is only for seven homes for $400,000. He felt more could
or should be done with these funds. Commissioner James said this equates to $57,000
per home. Ms. Hartsfield said they may be able to do more using the Baptist Men but this
is just an estimate for the application. Commissioner James said the County should get
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
9

as much for the money and provide as much help as possible. Mr. Rhodes said they have
been doing more homes than their estimates but they are better to under estimate the
projects than over estimate them. Commissioner James said they spent more last time.
Mr. Rhodes said these were stick built homes that they would be working on.
Commissioner Hammond asked where these homes were located. Mr. Rhodes said they
are scattered sites in the county. Commissioner Hammond asked about extending the
sewer on Pug Moore Road. Mr. Rhodes said they do not have funding for that yet but they
have treated two homes on Pug Moore Road.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Proposed Amendments to the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance ­ Stephen Smith
Information Provided with the Agenda
Attached are proposed Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance amendments with staff
commentary for consideration at the Board's February 20, 2006 public hearing (See Attachment
1). The Planning Board held a public hearing on January 18, 2006, and unanimously
recommended adoption of the proposed amendments to the Pitt County Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance. The public hearing has been advertised and the amendments have been
distributed to local surveyors/engineers and local municipalities for review and comment (See
Attachment 2 and 3).
The primary purposes for the amendments are to clarify enforcement of the County's
"freeboard requirement", specifically for manufactured homes.
The ordinance is a requirement for the County's participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP). The purpose of this program is to make federally­backed flood
insurance available in communities that agree to adopt and enforce floodplain management
ordinances to reduce future flood damage. As you may be aware, the County also enforces its
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance in Ayden, Bethel, Falkland, Fountain, Grifton, Grimesland,
Simpson and Winterville.
Staff Recommendation
Following the public hearing, adopt the proposed Pitt County Flood Damage Prevention
Ordinance amendments with an immediate effective date.
Manager Comments
Concur with staff recommendation to amend the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
10

Meeting Notes
Mr. Stephen Smith said there are two amendments that are brought to the board to clarify
requirements. He presented the changes as provided in the agenda package to the Definition
11
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Section: Section 4­34 and the General Standard Section: Section 4­97. He stated if the board
adopts these changes, staff will notify each of the municipalities. He noted that the Planning
Board supports these amendments.
The Public Hearing was opened by Chairman Garris. No one addressed the board.
Chairman Garris declared the public hearing closed.
Commissioner James asked if these changes addressed the concerns from J.T. Williams
who appeared before the board a couple of years ago. Mr. Smith said these changes would
address his concerns. These changes are countywide and the municipalities have signed on to
them. FEMA still requires two feet above floodplain.
Motion:
Following the public hearing, the board adopted the proposed Pitt County Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance amendments with an immediate effective date.
Motion made by Commissioner David Hammond.
Motion seconded by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Public Hearing for the Pitt County Zoning Ordinance Amendments ­ James Rhodes
Information Provided with the Agenda
Attached are proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments with staff commentary for
consideration at the Board's February 20, 2006 public hearing (See Attachment 1). The Planning
Board held a public hearing on January 18, 2006, and unanimously recommended adoption of
the proposed amendments to the Pitt County Zoning Ordinance. The public hearing has been
advertised and the amendments have been distributed to local surveyors/engineers for review
and comment (See Attachment 2 and 3).
The primary purposes for the amendments are for clarification and consistency purposes,
or to address particular items of concern that have developed over the last year of enforcement.
Additionally, several amendments are proposed to accommodate two major bills passed by the
North Carolina General Assembly that became effective on January 1, 2006.
Zoning Ordinance
Proposed Amendments
The attached draft amendments to the Pitt County Zoning Ordinance are
recommended for clarification and consistency purposes, or they address
particular items of concern that have developed over the last year of
enforcement. The proposed amendments will be presented for approval
according to the following schedule:
• October 19, 2005 – Present draft amendments to Planning
Board
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
12

• November 16, 2005 – Present additional draft amendments to
reflect newly adopted planning legislation.
• January 4, 2006 – Send out draft amendments for public
comment.
• January 18, 2006 – Planning Board Public Hearing
• February 20, 2006 – BCC Public Hearing
Amendments:
1. Amend/add the following uses to the Permitted Use Table:
5­1 Pitt County Table of Permitted Uses
Ref.
R
A
R
R
Zoning Districts
R4 S MF
0 R R
Use Type
SIC
LI
WHOLESALE TRADE
Motor Vehicles 5012 Z Z
Plumbing and Heating Equipment 5070 Z Z Z
TRANSPORTATION, WAREHOUSING
AND UTILITIES
Utility Related Appurtenances, Substation 0000 D D D D D Z Z Z
G
C
G
I
2. Amend Section 6.4.2(1) as follows:
1. Access to Public Road Required: No building or structure shall be
constructed, erected, or placed on a lot that does not abut and have direct
access to a publicly maintained road or to an approved private road, except
as provided in this Section. Buildings or structures constructed, erected, or
placed on a lot that is exempt from the subdivision definition are not subject
to these requirements.
Explanation: Exempt subdivisions will still be required to meet all minimum lot size
requirements prior to the granting of any zoning, building, or health
department permits.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
13

3. Amend Section 7.4 Highway Corridor Overlay Requirements as shown:
7.4 Highway Corridor Overlay Requirements
The Highway Corridor Overlay District, as described in Section 4.3.3, is
established to provide specific appearance and operational standards for
specifically designated highway corridors while accommodating development
along the corridors. Single­family residences on individual lots are exempt from
the requirements of this Section. All other uses in the Highway Corridor Overlay
District (HC) shall require site plan approval from the Zoning Administrator. All
other requirements of the underlying zoning districts shall also apply, with the
more stringent regulations prevailing when standards conflict.
7.4.1 Procedures
1. The applicant shall submit a site plan of the parcel and the proposed
use to the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Director Zoning
Administrator shall review the site plan in accordance with the
provisions of this Section. Approval of the site plan and the
proposed uses by the Planning Director Zoning Administrator
authorizes the issuance of a zoning permit. For those uses that
require a special use permit or a conditional use permit, the site plan
shall be approved by the Board of Adjustment or Board of
Commissioners, respectively.
2. Permits are issued at each phase of development and only in
accordance with the approved site plan.
3. If a site plan was approved and a use permit was issued for the
development of a lot or lots, no subsequent change or expansion
which was not shown on the site plan shall be allowed unless also
approved by the Planning Director Zoning Administrator.
Explanation: Change “Planning Director” to “Zoning Administrator” for consistency
purposes.
4. Amend Section 6.4.1(3) General Lot Requirements as underlined
below:
3. Two or More Single­family Dwellings on a Single Tract: Two or
more principal single­family residences are permitted on a single,
unsubdivided tract pursuant to a site plan approved by the Planning
Director Zoning Administrator, provided that the tract contains
sufficient lot area, lot width, and building setbacks for each dwelling.
Location of the dwellings on the single tract shall be such that, in the
event that the tract is subdivided, each dwelling unit will be situated
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
14

on a freestanding lot that meets all of the dimensional requirements
for the district in which located.
Every principal residential structure shall be situated on a buildable
lot that contains the minimum lot area, lot width, and building
setbacks that are required for the zoning district in which located. A
site plan, submitted to and approved by the Planning Director
Zoning Administrator, shall be required whenever two or more
principal structures are proposed to be located a single parcel or
tract.
Explanation: Change “Planning Director” to “Zoning Administrator” for consistency
purposes.
5. Amend Section 8.20 as underlined below:
8.20 Contractors, General Building and Contractors, Special Trade
8.20.1 Where Required
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
RA and GC districts.
8.20.2 Use Separation
8.20.3 Dust
8.20.4 Noise
Fifty feet minimum from any property line; three one hundred feet
minimum from any residence.
All unpaved areas shall be maintained in a manner that prevents dust
from leaving the property.
Equipment­producing noise or sound in excess of 70 decibels shall be
located no closer than 100 feet to the nearest residence.
8.20.5 Security Fencing
Security fencing, a minimum of 6 feet in height, shall be provided around
all outside storage areas.
8.20.6 Screening
Any outdoor storage area shall be screened from an abutting
residentially­used or zoned lot by a buffer yard which complies with the
requirements of Section 10.8.
15

Explanation: A 300 foot separation was deemed to be excessive for this type of use.
6. Amend Section 8.54 as underlined below:
8.54 Mining, Quarrying, Sand Pits, and Mineral Extraction
8.54.1 Where Required
RA district.
8.54.2 Use Separation
1. The edges of any pit where a mining operation is taking place and
any equipment used in the processing of rock and gravel, any
asphalt plant, or other industrial uses operated in conjunction with
the mine or quarry shall be located at least 300 100 feet from any
property line.
2. Where the mining operation site is bounded by a railroad right­ofway
currently being used for rail service to the mining operation, no
setback shall be required between the railroad right­of­way and
such operation.
8.54.3 Hours of Operation
All operations involving blasting discernible beyond the external property
line on a quarry shall only be conducted between the hours of 7:00 a.m.
and 6:00 p.m.
8.54.4 Mining Permit
A valid state­issued mining permit must be obtained.
8.54.5 Screening
Screening shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of
Section 10.8. However, if a berm is determined to be an adequate
alternative screening method as provided for in Section 10.8, the
minimum height of the berm shall be six feet.
Explanation: Planning staff has conducted research and determined that 300’ is an
excessive setback for a mining operation. Several surrounding
communities require a minimum setback of 100’. The Land Quality
Division of NCDENR does not have a specific minimum distance, however
they recommend nothing less than 50’.
7. Amend Section 8.62 as underlined below:
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
16

8.62 Private Club or Recreation Facility, Other; Public Park or Recreational
Facility, Other
8.62.1 Where Required
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
Private Club or Recreational Facility, Other: RA, RR, R40, SR, and MFR
districts.
Public Park or Recreational Facility, Other: RA, RR, R40, SR, MFR, and
LI districts.
8.62.2 Hours of Operation
8.62.3 Noise
The hours of operation allowed shall be compatible with the land uses
adjacent to the facility.
The amount of noise generated shall not disrupt the activities of the
adjacent land uses.
8.62.4 The Board of Adjustment Zoning Administrator shall not grant the permit
unless it he finds that the parking generated by the facility can be
accommodated without undue disruption to or interference with the
normal flow of traffic or with the right of adjacent and surrounding property
owners.
8.62.5 Location
Principal access must be from a collector or higher capacity road for any
facility greater than 3 acres in size that generates an average daily traffic
volume of over 200 or more trips per day.
8.62.6 Screening
Parking lots and outdoor storage areas shall be screened from adjoining
single­family residential uses by a buffer yard. The required buffer yard
shall comply with requirements of Section 10.8.
8.62.7 Security Fencing
Outdoor swimming pools shall be protected by a fence in accordance with
the Pitt County Health Department’s public pool regulations.
Explanation: The text incorrectly states that the Board of Adjustment grants the permit
for this use. The Zoning Administrator grants the permit
8. Amendments to Section 8.65 (Radio, Television, or Communication
Tower Over 60 Feet in Height) as shown:
17

8.65.6 Separation or Buffer Requirements
For the purpose of this Section, the separation distances between towers
shall be measured by drawing or following a straight line between the
base of the existing or approved structure and the proposed base,
pursuant to a site plan of the proposed tower. Tower separation
distances from residentially­zoned lands shall be measured from the base
of a tower to the closest point of residentially­zoned property. The
minimum tower separation distances from residentially­zoned land and
from other towers shall be calculated and applied irrespective of county
jurisdictional boundaries.
1. Towers shall be separated from all residentially­zoned lands by a
minimum of two hundred feet or two hundred percent of the height
of the proposed tower, whichever is greater.
2. Proposed towers must meet the following minimum separation
requirements from existing towers or towers which have a
conditional use permit zoning permit but are not yet constructed at
the time a conditional use permit zoning permit is granted pursuant
to this Section:
(a)
(b)
(c)
Monopole tower structures shall be separated from all other
towers, whether monopole, self­supporting lattice, or guyed,
by a minimum of seven hundred and fifty feet.
Self­supporting lattice or guyed tower structures shall be
separated from all other self­supporting or guyed towers by a
minimum of fifteen hundred feet.
Self­supporting lattice or guyed tower structures shall be
separated from all monopole towers by a minimum of seven
hundred and fifty feet.
8.65.11 Stealth Design
All towers which must be approved as a conditional use shall be of stealth
design, i.e., designed to enhance compatibility with adjacent land uses,
including, but not limited to, architecturally screened roof­mounted
antennas, antennas integrated into architectural elements, and towers
designed to look other than like a tower such as light poles, power poles,
and trees. The term stealth does not necessarily exclude the use of
uncamouflaged lattice, guyed, or monopole tower designs.
Explanation: This use does not require a Conditional Use Permit.
9. Amend Section 8.70 as shown:
8.70 Rural Family Occupation
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
18

8.70.1 Where Required
RA, RR, and R40 districts.
8.70.2 Minimum Area
1. The Rural Family Occupation (RFO) must be located on a tract of 2
acres or more.
2. A portion of the tract containing at least 25,000 square feet with 100
feet of width must be designated and reserved exclusively for
residential use.
8.70.3 Maximum Area
The total floor area of all buildings occupied by the RFO shall not exceed
5,000 square feet. The maximum land area that may be used in
conjunction with the Rural Family Occupation is 15,000 square feet.
8.70.4 Use Separation
All operations of the RFO shall observe a 50­foot setback from all
property lines.
8.70.5 Location
All operations of the RFO shall be located behind the rear line of the
building occupied as the principal residence.
8.70.6 Screening
All operations of the RFO, including buildings, outside storage areas, and
parking shall be treated as a separate use and shall be screened in
accordance with the requirements of Section 10.8.
8.70.7 Environmental Review
The Pitt County Environmental Health Division shall evaluate each RFO
request to determine the occupation's impact on the surrounding area
with respect to excessive noise, dust, air emissions, odors, and surface or
groundwater discharge. The RFO shall mitigate the impact on these and
other environmental concerns. A written evaluation of these potential
impacts is required by the Environmental Health Division prior to the
consideration of any request for an RFO.
8.70.8 8.70.7 Operation
1. The RFO shall be owned by the landowner who must reside on the
property.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
19

2. No more than 5 persons shall be employed other than those
residing on the property.
3. Outside storage and parking of commercial vehicles is permitted.
The applicant shall indicate on the site plan the type and location of
outside storage and the location and proposed number of vehicles
to be parked on the lot.
4. The RFO shall not be operated between the hours of 9 p.m. to 6
a.m.
5. Permitted uses shall be limited to those products assembled or
manufactured on­site for resale elsewhere, professional and
business services, or stock­in­trade clearly incidental to such
services. Commercial retail or wholesale operations that bring to
the site goods specifically for the purpose of resale shall be
prohibited.
Explanation: Environmental Health does not evaluate RFOs and do not provide written
evaluations of potential impacts such as excessive noise, dust, air emissions,
odors, and surface or groundwater discharge.
10. Section 8.0 Development Standards for Individual Uses ­ Fix reference
numbers in the following sections:
• 8.17.3
• 8.47.2
• 8.48.3
• 8.60.5
• 8.65.2(9)
• 8.65.3
• 8.65.4(3)
• 8.65.13
• 8.65.14
• 8.65.16(2)(a)
• 8.65.16(2)(b)
• 8.65.16(2)(c)
Explanation: When the Zoning Ordinance was last amended, several mistakes were
found in the section numbering in Section 8.0. These mistakes were fixed
and several section numbers changed. The subsections listed above
currently refer to the old numbers and need to be fixed for clarification
purposes.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
20

11. Amend Section 8.88 as shown:
8.88 Utility Related Appurtenances, Substations
8.88.1 Where Required
RA, RR, R40, SR, and MFR districts.
8.88.2 Dimensional Requirements
8.88.3 Noise
All buildings shall be considered accessory buildings or structures.
Equipment­producing noise or sound in excess of 70 decibels shall be
located no closer than 100 feet to the nearest residence.
8.88.4 Security Fencing
Security fencing, a minimum of 6 feet in height, shall be provided around
hazardous operations, as determined by Pitt County, involved with the
use.
8.88.5 Screening
Any outdoor storage area shall be screened from an abutting residentially
used or zoned lot by a buffer yard, which complies with the requirements
of Section 10.8.
8.88.6 Dust
All unpaved outdoor use areas shall be maintained in a manner that
prevents dust from adversely impacting adjacent properties.
Explanation: This reflects the change to the permitted use table. Utility Related
Appurtenances may include other facilities besides substations such as
water towers, lift stations, etc.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
21

12. Amend Section 10.4(c) Design Standards for Parking, Stacking and
Loading Areas as follows:
(c)
Paving shall not be required for:
(i)
Parking facilities used on an irregular basis for churches, private
clubs or other similar nonprofit organizations; or parking facilities for
any use that operates on an irregular basis for no more than three (3)
days per week.
(ii) Parking facilities for residential uses where six or fewer spaces are
required.
(iii) Parking areas for agricultural uses.
(iv) Parking areas in the GI, General Industrial District, provided they are
constructed with an all­weather surface.
(v) Parking areas for tracked heavy construction equipment, skidmounted
equipment and similar equipment, provided they are
constructed with an all­weather surface.
Explanation: Planning staff has determined that the irregular nature of certain uses
does not necessitate the same design and construction standards for
parking areas as those uses that operate on a more regular basis.
13. Section 15.4 Definitions ­ Amend definition of “Subdivision” as
follows:
Subdivision. A subdivision shall include all divisions of a tract or parcel of land
into two (2) or more lots, building sites, or other divisions for the purpose of sale
or building development, whether immediate or future, and shall include all
division of land involving the dedication of a new road or change in existing
roads; however, the following is not included within this definition and is not
subject to the regulations prescribed by this chapter:
(1) The combination or recombination of portions of previously subdivided
and recorded lots if the total number of lots is not increased and the
resultant lots and required supporting infrastructure (including streets,
utilities, open space, and recreation areas) are equal to or exceed the
standards of the county as required in this chapter;
(2) The division of land into parcels greater than ten acres if no road right­ofway
dedication is involved;
(3) The public acquisition by purchase of strips of land for widening or
opening roads;
22
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

(4) The division of a tract in single ownership, the entire area of which is no
greater than two acres into not more than three lots, if no road right­ofway
dedication is involved and if the resultant lots and required
supporting infrastructure (including streets, utilities, open space, and
recreation areas) are equal to or exceed the standards contained in this
chapter; or
(5) The division of a tract among the heirs of a deceased person, where no
person other than an heir receives any of the property at the time of the
division.
(6) The division of land by any method of transfer from a grantor to a grantee
(or grantees) who is a member of the grantor's immediate family, solely
for the residential use of the grantee (or grantees). For the purposes of
this section, the term "immediate family" shall include only direct lineal
descendants (children and grandchildren) and direct lineal ascendants
(father, mother, grandfather, and grandmother).
Exemption With the exception of Section 6.4.2 Road Access
Requirements, exemption of a partition of land from the definition of
‘subdivision’ shall not exempt any resulting lots, tracts or parcels from
meeting the requirements of this Article for the granting of zoning,
building, or health department permits.
Explanation: These proposed changes are to make the Zoning Ordinance’s definition of
“subdivision” consistent with the definition as found in the Pitt County
Subdivision Ordinance.
The Pitt County Subdivision Ordinance was amended on November 15,
2004 to include Family Exemptions under the definition of “subdivision”.
The change to subsection 6 reflects the change in definition.
Amendment to the last paragraph reflects the change in Section 6.4.2 to
preclude exempt subdivisions from the road access requirements.
14. Section 15.4 Definitions – Add definition of “Utility Related
Appurtenance” as follows:
Utility Related Appurtenance. A detached subordinate facility or structure that
is incidental to the operation of a utility provider including, but not limited to, water
towers, substations, lift stations, and pump stations.
Explanation: Reflects the change to the permitted use table and development standards
for Utility Related Appurtenances.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
23

15. Amend Appendix A: Procedural Flow Charts as follows:
A­1­3 Conditional Use Permits
Submission
of application and site plan to the
Zoning Administrator
Review
by the Planning Department and
recommendation to the Board of
Commissioners
Public Hearing
held by the Board of Commissioners
using quasi­judicial procedural
Review and Decision
by the Board of Commissioners
Optional referral to the Planning
Board for recommendation
Disapproval
· Reasons for disapproval
provided in writing
· Appeal may be taken to
Superior Court
Approval
· Simple majority vote required
· Conditions and supplemental
requirements may be attached
to permit approval
Explanation: The Board must hold a public hearing using quasi­judicial procedures for
Conditional Use Permits.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
24

A­1­5 Variances From Watershed District Overlay Requirements
Submission
of application and fee to the
Zoning Administrator
Minor Variances
· Requests reviewed by Board
of Adjustment per the
procedures outlined in A­1­4
Major Variances
· Requests reviewed by Board
of Adjustment per the
procedures outlined in A­1­4
and recommendation made to
NCEMC
Notification
provided to NCDEM NCDENR of
minor variance approval
Review and Decision
by the NCEMC
Disapproval
Approval
Board of
Adjustment
prepares a final
decision denying
the variance
Board of
Adjustment
prepares a final
decision granting
the variance
Explanation: NCDENR receives notification of Variances from Watershed District
Overlay Requirements.
A­1­6 General Rezonings and Text Amendments
25
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Submission
of Application to the
Zoning Administrator 10 days prior
to the Planning Board Meeting
Review
by the Planning Board and
recommendation to the Board of
Commissioners
Public Hearing
held by the Board of
Commissioners
Review and Decision
by the Board of Commissioners
Disapproval
Approval
Filing
of amendments to regulations,
standards or procedures regarding
public water supply watersheds
with the NCDEM NCDENR
Explanation: Amendments to regulations, standard or procedures regarding public
water supply watersheds are filed with NCDENR.
26
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

A­1­7 Conditional Use District Rezonings
Submission
of Application and Site Plan to the Zoning Administrator
10 days prior to the Planning Board Meeting
Review
by the Planning Board and recommendation to the
Board of Commissioners
Public Hearing
held by the Board of Commissioners
using quasi­judicial procedural requirements
Review of the Rezoning Request and Decision
by the Board of Commissioners
Disapproval
Approval
Review of the Conditional Use
Permit Request and Decision
by the Board of Commissioners
Disapproval
· Reasons for disapproval provided
in writing
· Appeal may be taken to Superior
Court
Approval
· Simple majority vote required
· Conditions and supplemental
requirements may be attached to
permit approval
Explanation: Amendments to regulations, standard or procedures regarding public
water supply watersheds are filed with NCDENR.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
Filing
of amendments to regulations, standards
or procedures regarding public water
supply watersheds with the NCDEM
NCDENR and flood hazard areas to
FEMA
27

The following ordinance amendments are recommended to accommodate
two major bills that were passed by the North Carolina General Assembly:
S.L. 2005­418 (S. 518), An Act to Clarify and Make Technical Changes to
City and County Planning Statutes, and S.L. 2005­426 (S. 814), An Act to
Modernize and Simplify City and County Planning Statutes. These bills
received final legislative approval on August 24, 2005, were signed into law
by Governor Easley on September 22, 2005, and became effective on
January 1, 2006.
13.2 Variances
13.2.1 General
2. No change in permitted uses may be authorized by variance. A
variance may be granted by the Board of Adjustment if it concludes
that strict enforcement of this Article would result in practical
difficulties or unnecessary hardships for the applicant and that, by
granting the variance, the spirit of this Article will be observed,
public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done. It
may reach these conclusions if it finds that:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
If the applicant complies strictly with the provisions of the
Article, he can make no reasonable use of his property;
The hardship of which the applicant complains is one
suffered by the applicant rather than by neighbors or the
general public;
The hardship relates to the applicant's land, rather than
personal circumstances;
The hardship is unique, or nearly so, rather than one shared
by many surrounding properties;
The hardship is not the result of the applicant's own actions;
and
The variance will neither result in the extension of a
nonconforming situation in violation of Section 13.0 nor
authorize the initiation of a nonconforming use of land.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
3. In granting variances, the Board of Adjustment may impose such
reasonable conditions as will ensure that the use of the property to
which the variance applies will be as compatible as practicable with
the surrounding properties, provided such conditions are reasonably
related to the condition or circumstance that gives rise to the need
for a variance.
28

13.9 Evidence
3. The Board of Adjustment may subpoena witnesses and compel the
production of evidence. If a person fails or refuses to obey a subpoena
issued pursuant to this subsection, the Board of Adjustment may apply to
the General Court of Justice for an order requiring that its order be
obeyed, and the court shall have jurisdiction to issue these orders after
notice to all proper parties. No testimony of any witness before the Board
of Adjustment pursuant to a subpoena issued in exercise of the power
conferred by this subsection may be used against the witness in the trial
of any civil or criminal action other than a prosecution for false swearing
committed on the examination. Any person who, while under oath during
a proceeding before the Board of Adjustment, willfully swears falsely, is
guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
14.3 Planning Board Review And Recommendation
2. The Planning Board shall review the proposed amendment, along with
planning staff recommendations and any comments received from
applicable reviewing departments and agencies, and submit its
recommendation to the Board of Commissioners. The Planning Board
shall have 45 days within which to submit its recommendation. Failure of
the Planning Board to submit its recommendation within this time period
shall constitute a favorable recommendation.
3. The recommendation of the Planning Board shall include a statement
regarding the reasonableness of the proposed rezoning. The
recommendation must also include a written statement on the
consistency of the proposed amendment with the Comprehensive Land
Use Plan and any other plan that has been officially adopted by the Board
of Commissioners, as well as any other matters as deemed appropriate
by the Planning Board. A statement by the Planning Board that a
proposed amendment is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Land Use
Plan shall not preclude consideration or approval of the proposed
amendment by the Board of Commissioners.
4. The Planning Board shall have 45 days within which to submit its
recommendation. Failure of the Planning Board to submit its
recommendation within this time period shall constitute a favorable
recommendation.
14.4 Board Of Commissioners Review And Adoption
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
29

3. Prior to adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, the Board of
Commissioners shall adopt a statement describing whether its action is
consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and explaining why
the Board of Commissioners considers the action taken to be reasonable
and in the public interest. This statement is not subject to judicial review.
14.5 Public Hearing Requirements
3. With respect to map amendments, the Zoning Administrator shall provide
first­class mail notice of the public hearing to the record owners for tax
purposes of all properties whose zoning classification is changed by the
proposed amendment as well as the owners of all properties within 100
feet of the property rezoned by the amendment. The Zoning
Administrator may also shall prominently post notices of the public
hearing in the vicinity of the property rezoned by the proposed
amendment and on the site proposed for rezoning or on an adjacent
public street or highway right­of­way. When multiple parcels are included
within a proposed zoning map amendment, a posting on each individual
parcel is not required, but the Zoning Administrator shall post sufficient
notices to provide reasonable notice to interested persons. The Zoning
Administrator may take any other action deemed by the Zoning
Administrator to be useful or appropriate to give notice of the public
hearing.
4. The notice required in subsection 3. shall not be required if the zoning
map amendment directly affects more than 50 properties, owned by a
total of at least 50 different property owners. In this instance, the County
may elect, in lieu of the mail notice specified in subsection 3., to publish
once a week for four two successive calendar weeks in a newspaper
having general circulation in the area an advertisement of the public
hearing that shows the boundaries of the area affected by the proposed
zoning map amendment and that explains the nature of the proposed
change. The advertisement shall not be less than one­half of a
newspaper page in size. The advertisement shall only be effective for
property owners who reside in the area of general circulation of the
newspaper that publishes the notice. Property owners who reside outside
the county's jurisdiction or outside of the newspaper circulation area,
according to the address listed on the most recent property tax listing for
the affected property, shall be notified by mail pursuant to subsection 3.
The person or persons mailing the notices shall certify to the Board of
Commissioners that fact, and the certificates shall be deemed conclusive
in the absence of fraud. In addition to the published notice, the County
shall post one or more prominent signs immediately adjacent to the
subject area reasonably calculated to give public notice of the proposed
rezoning.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
30

Amend the following sections of the Executive Summary and Commentary
13.2 Variances
NCGS 153A­345 (d) (c1) authorizes the Board of Adjustment, when ‘practical difficulties or
unnecessary hardships’ would result from carrying out the strict letter of the zoning ordinance, to
vary or modify any regulation or provision of the zoning ordinance. The applicant for a variance
is responsible for demonstrating that the difficulty or hardship claimed warrants a variance.
14.3 Planning Board Review and Recommendation
NCGS 153A­344 requires that before an amendment to the zoning ordinance is adopted by the
Board of Commissioners it must first be referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation.
The Planning Board must be given at least 30 days in which to make a recommendation. The
Board of Commissioners is not, however, bound by the recommendation of the Planning Board.
NCGS 153A­341 requires the Planning Board to advise and comment on whether a proposed
amendment is consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan and any other officially adopted
plan that is applicable. The Planning Board is required to provide a written recommendation to
the Board of County Commissioners that addresses plan consistency and other matters deemed
appropriate by the Planning Board. NCGS 153­342 requires a statement to be prepared that
analyzes the reasonableness of each proposed rezoning to a special or conditional use district, or a
conditional district, or other small­scale rezoning.
14.3 Board of Commissioners Review and Adoption
NCGS 153A­341 requires that prior to adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, the
governing board must adopt a statement describing whether its action is consistent with an
adopted comprehensive plan and explaining why the board considers the action taken to be
reasonable and in the public interest.
14.5 Public Hearing Requirements
NCGS 153A­343 mandates that first­class mail notice of a public hearing concerning a rezoning
be made to the owner(s) of the property proposed to be rezoned and the owners of all parcels
abutting the property to be rezoned. The person mailing the notices must certify to the Board of
Commissioners that fact. NCGS 153A­343 (c) requires that when a zoning map amendment is
proposed, the public hearing notice must be prominently posted on the site proposed for rezoning
or on an adjacent public street or highway right­of­way.
14.10 Protests to Zoning Changes
The general statutes do not specifically authorize protest petitions for counties (protest petition
provisions are mandatory for inclusion in municipal zoning ordinances per NCGS 160A­385).
While there is no express authority for protest petitions in the state statutes for counties, it is felt
that the broad grant of zoning authority provided to counties in NCGS 153A­343 is sufficient to
permit counties to establish the manner in which and the conditions under which they wish to
amend their zoning ordinances. Inclusion of protest provisions in the Pitt County zoning
ordinance is strictly a matter of preference. The bottom line is that such provisions would require
a super majority vote (three­fourths vote of the Board of Commissioners’ membership) rather
than a simple majority vote to approve a rezoning. Obviously, such protest petitions give
adjacent property owners a higher degree of involvement in rezoning requests, which occur
within their immediate area.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
31

Staff Recommendation
Following the public hearing, adopt the proposed amendments to the Pitt County Zoning
Ordinance with an effective date of February 21, 2006.
Manager Comments
Concur with staff recommendation to amend the Pitt County Zoning Ordinance.
Meeting Notes
Mr. James Rhodes said they are still finding different sections of the ordinance that need
changes. They are clarifying some language and new planning legislation which was adopted
last September. Mr. Rhodes presented each of the amendments as provided in the agenda
package. He stated that the Planning Board has to go on record as supporting and consistent
with Land Use Plan now has to be stated legally. Changes were made as required by new
legislation. The Planning Board has reviewed and approved these changes.
Chairman Garris opened the public hearing. No one spoke. He declared the public
hearing closed.
Commissioner Minges brought up the concern stated by a citizen at the last meeting
about requiring fences around private pools. He asked for copy of public pool regulations to see
if private pools could also have regulations set up for security fencing. Ms. Burgdorff stated that
she had been looking into this and the City of Greenville has regulations concerning fencing
around pools. Commissioner James said there needs to be an ordinance pertaining to private
pools for the county.
Commissioner James also asked about a landowner giving his children property to build
on. Mr. Rhodes said the family exemption has been brought forward. Commissioner James said
the county needs to have the swimming pool ordinance done before summertime. Commissioner
Hammond said there have been a lot of amendments to these rules. If we keep making
amendments, there's going to need to be more staff to enforce them. Mr. Rhodes said these
amendments are making the ordinances more consistent and easier to enforce. Commissioner
Hammond spoke about the risk involved with four wheelers going around private open ponds. He
asked if this ordinance protects these open ponds or pond owners from children falling in one of
the ponds. Mr. Rhodes said those are considered private ponds and this ordinance would not
address ponds. Mr. Rhodes said the ordinance states if a landowner wants to give his children a
lot, the first lot has to come through the approval but if he wants to sell a lot or three or four lots
they will have to follow the subdivision process.
Motion:
Following the public hearing, adopt the proposed amendments to the Pitt County Zoning
Ordinance with an effective date of February 21, 2006.
Motion made by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Motion seconded by Commissioner John Minges.
Vote Record:
Melvin McLawhorn
John Minges
Jimmy Garris
Beth Ward
Glenn Bowen
Tom Coulson
David Hammond
Eugene James
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
32
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Total Yes Votes: 6
Total No Votes: 2
Motion Passed.
Mr. Rhodes noted that there will need to be a second reading since this was not an unanimous
vote.
Public Hearing for the Pitt County Subdivision Ordinance Amendments ­ James Rhodes
Information Provided with the Agenda
Attached are proposed Subdivision Ordinance amendments with staff commentary for
consideration at the Board's February 20, 2006 public hearing (See Attachment 1). The Planning
Board held a public hearing on January 18, 2006, and unanimously recommended adoption of
the proposed amendments to the Pitt County Subdivision Ordinance. The public hearing has
been advertised and the amendments have been distributed to local surveyors/engineers and
local municipalities for review and comment (See Attachment 2 and 3).
The primary purposes for the amendments are to adjust or remove certain provisions of
the Subdivision Ordinance due to the amendments made to the North Carolina General Statutes
by the General Assembly.
Attachment 1
Amendment 1
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
Proposed Amendments to the Pitt County Subdivision Ordinance
Sec. 11­102. Definition of subdivision.
A subdivision shall include all divisions of a tract or parcel of land into
two (2) or more lots, building sites, or other divisions for the purpose of sale or
building development, whether immediate or future, and shall include all division
of land involving the dedication of a new street or change in existing streets.
However, the following is not included within this definition and is not subject to
the regulations prescribed by this article:
(1) The combination or recombination of portions of previously subdivided and
recorded lots if the total number of lots is not increased and the resultant lots and
required supporting infrastructure (including streets, utilities, open space,
and recreation areas) are equal to or exceed the standards of the county as
shown in its subdivision regulations;
(4) The division of a tract in single ownership the entire area of which is no
greater than two acres into not more than three lots, if no street right­of­way
dedication is involved and if the resultant lots and required supporting
infrastructure (including streets, utilities, open space, and recreation areas)
are equal to or exceed the standards of the county as shown by its subdivision
regulations.
Staff Comments: The new legislation removes the reference to a division of land
into “two or more” lots, thus making any division of land a subdivision. Except
33

where otherwise exempted. Under the current staff interpretation, Pitt County
allows a “one lot exemption” if the property has not been subdivided since July 1,
1991. With this amendment “one lot exemptions” will no longer be allowed. The
additional language serves to clarify that the supporting infrastructure must be
equal to or exceed the standards in the ordinance to qualify for other exemptions.
Amendment 2
Sec. 11­121. Unlawful subdivision.
The owner or the agent of the owner of any land who subdivides such land in
violation of this article or transfers or sells land by reference to, exhibition of, or
any other use of a plat showing a subdivision of the land before the plat has been
properly approved under the provisions of these regulations, and recorded in the
office of the county register of deeds, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The
description by metes and bounds in the instrument of transfer or other document
used in the process of transferring land does not exempt the transaction from this
penalty. The county may bring an action for injunction of any illegal subdivision,
transfer, conveyance, or sale of land, and the court shall, upon appropriate
findings, issue an injunction and order requiring the offending party to comply
with these subdivision regulations. Building permits required pursuant to
N.C.G.S. 153A­357 may be denied for lots that have been illegally
subdivided. In addition to other remedies, the county may institute any
appropriate action or proceedings to prevent the unlawful subdivision of
land, to restrain, correct, or abate the violation, or to prevent any illegal act
or conduct.
The provisions of this section shall not prohibit any owner or its agent
from entering into contracts to sell or lease land by reference to an approved
preliminary plat for which a final plat has not been properly approved under
this ordinance or recorded with the register of deeds where the buyer or
lessee is any person who has contracted to acquire or lease the land for the
purpose of engaging in the business of construction of residential,
commercial, or industrial buildings on the land, or for the purpose of resale
or lease of the land to persons engaged in that kind of business, provided that
no conveyance of that land may occur and no contract to lease it may become
effective until after the final plat has been properly approved under the
subdivision ordinance and recorded with the register of deeds, provided the
contract is in accordance with N.C.G.S. 153A­334.
Staff Comments: The new legislation allows the County to withhold building
permits for lots that have been illegally subdivided. The second paragraph has
been added to allow the developer to enter into contracts after a preliminary plat
is approved, but before a final plat is recorded. The General Statue referenced in
this paragraph outlines the guidelines that must be included in the contract. One
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
34

equirement is that the contract must inform the potential buyer/lessor that a
final plat has not been approved or recorded at the time of the contract, that no
governmental body will incur any obligation to the prospective buyer or lessee
with respect to the approval of the final subdivision plat, that changes between the
preliminary and final plats are possible, and that the contract or lease may be
terminated without breach by the buyer or lessee if the final recorded plat differs
in any material respect from the preliminary plat.
Amendment 3
Sec. 11­145. Utilities. 1(d) Offsite septic system easements within planned
developments:
3. Require installation of force mains by the developer at a minimum of five
(5) feet one and one half (1 ½) feet apart and with necessary protection at
street and stream crossings. Approval of force main configuration required
during construction plan review.
4. Implement design requirements for accompanying force main easements as
follows:
• When placing multiple force main lines within a common
easement, the easement width must be sufficient to allow
placement of the force mains five (5) feet one and one half (1 ½)
feet within easement boundaries.
Staff Comments: This amendment is recommended by the Pitt County
Environmental Health Department. The new language reduces the amount of
separation between forcemains from five feet to one and one half feet which will
allow for any necessary space for repairs to be performed while not requiring an
excessive easement.
Staff Recommendation
Following the public hearing, adopt the proposed Pitt County Subdivision Ordinance
amendments with an immediate effective date.
Manager Comments
Concur with staff recommendation to amend the Pitt County Subdivision Ordinance.
Meeting Notes
Mr. Rhodes provided the following information.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
35

Proposed Amendments to the
Zoning Ordinance
Schedule
• October 19, 2005 – Presented draft amendments to Planning
Board.
• November 16, 2005 – Presented additional amendments
reflecting newly adopted legislation.
• January 4, 2006 – Sent out draft amendments for public
comment.
• January 18, 2006 – Planning Board Public Hearing.
• February 20, 2006 – BCC Public Hearing
Proposed Amendments
1) Amend Table 5­1 Pitt County Table of
Permitted Uses.
2) Amend Section 6.4.2(1) Public Road
Access Requirements.
3) Amend Section 7.4 Highway Corridor
Overlay Requirements.
4) Amend Section 6.4.1(3) General Lot
Requirements.
36
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Proposed Amendments
5) Amend Section 8.20 Contractors,
General Building and Contractors,
Special Trade.
(cont’d)
6) Amend Section 8.54 Mining, Quarrying,
Sand Pits, and Mineral Extraction.
7) Amend Section 8.62 Private Club or
Recreational Facility, Other; Public Park
or Recreational Facility, Other.
Proposed Amendments
(cont’d)
8) Amend Section 8.65 Radio, Television,
or Communication Tower Over 60 Feet
in Height.
9) Amend Section 8.70 Rural Family
Occupation.
10) Fix Reference numbers in Section 8.0
Development Standards for Individual
Uses.
11) Amend Section 8.88 Utility Related
Appurtenances, Substation.
37
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Proposed Amendments
(cont’d)
15) Amend Appendix A: Procedural Flow
Charts:
ù
ù
ù
ù
A­1­3 Conditional Use Permits
A­1­5 Variances from Watershed District
Overlay Requirements
A­1­6 General Rezonings and Text
Amendments
A­1­7 Conditional Use District Rezonings
Proposed Amendments
(cont’d)
• The following amendments are
recommended to accommodate two
major bills that were passed by the
North Carolina General Assembly in
2005.
• S.L. 2005­418 (S. 518) and S.L. 2005­
426 (S. 814) were signed into law by
Governor Easley on September 22,
2005, and became effective on
January 1, 2006.
38
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Proposed Amendments
16) Amend Section 13.2.1 General
Variances.
17) Amend Section 13.9.3 Evidence.
18) Amend Section 14.3 Planning Board
Review and Recommendation.
19) Add Section 14.4(3) Board of
Commissioners Review and Adoption
20) Amend Section 14.5 Public Hearing
Requirements
(cont’d)
Proposed Amendments
21) Amend Executive Summary and
Commentary:
ù
ù
ù
ù
ù
Amend Section 13.2 Variances
(cont’d)
Amend Section 14.3 Planning Board Review
and Recommendation
Add Section 14.3 Board of Commissioners
Review and Adoption
Amend Section 14.5 Public Hearing
Requirements
Delete Section 14.10 Protests to Zoning
Changes
39
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Planning Board’s Recommendation
• Adopt the proposed Pitt County Zoning
Ordinance amendments with an
effective date of February 21, 2006.
Mr. Rhodes said that no longer would the one lot out exemption be allowed. They can
deny permits for illegal subdivisions of lots. This allows developers to start selling or entering
contracts, based on preliminary plats. Contracts can be made void based on Environmental
Health evaluation for septic systems. There are now requirements of 1.5 ft separation along the
lines. All amendments have been reviewed by Planning Board and approval is recommended.
The public hearing was opened. No one spoke. The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner James said the preliminary plan goes on the tax book so you pay taxes on
that lot and if selling from a farm, then you pay taxes back for last three years. He asked if this is
a state mandate or a county mandate? Mr. Rhodes said these are state mandated.
Commissioner Hammond asked how to prevent making the language more critical to the
owners of the property. The one lot can be subdivided off. Mr. Rhodes said the county has to
abide by state laws.
Motion:
Following the public hearing, adopt the proposed Pitt County Subdivision Ordinance
amendments with an immediate effective date.
Motion made by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Melvin McLawhorn.
Vote Record:
Melvin McLawhorn
John Minges
Jimmy Garris
Beth Ward
Glenn Bowen
Tom Coulson
David Hammond
Eugene James
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
40

Total Yes Votes: 7
Total No Votes: 1
Motion Passed.
These amendments will require a second reading since the vote was not unanimous, also.
West Greenville Redevelopment Plan
Information Provided with the Agenda
The Greenville Redevelopment Commission has made a request to appear before the
Board of County Commissioners. They would like to make a presentation concerning the West
Greenville Redevelopment Plan.
Staff Recommendation
Report Only.
Meeting Notes
Mr. Merrill Flood presented the West Greenville Revitalization Plan. He said it began in
2002 when they noticed that some of the older parts of the City needed some revitalization. He
said they are finding improvements to make for the long term that are viable and help the citizens.
Center City Revitalization and
West Greenville
Redevelopment Plans
City of Greenville, NC
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
41

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
42

West Greenville Redevelopment Area
43
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

NEIGHBORHOODS
•DEFINE THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN WEST GREENVILLE
•PROVIDE
ECONOMIC STIMULUS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES
• LIBRARY BRANCH, RETAIL NODE, PROFESSIONAL OFFICES
•INCREASE
HOME OWNERSHIP
• ELIMINATE RENTAL PROPERTIES
•CREATE
PRIDE AND REMOVE THE STIGMA
•IMPROVE THE SCHOOLS
• SADIE SAULTER AND NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
•IMPROVE
SAFETY AND SECURITY OF NEIGHBORHOODS
• NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH
•IMPROVE
INFRASTRUCTURE
• SIDEWALKS, CODE ENFORCEMENT, CURB AND GUTTER, STORM DRAINAGE, LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING
•PROVIDE
NEW ENTRANCE FROM TENTH STREET AND DEFINE EDGES
URBAN CORE
• Develop a Critical Mass/ / Cluster Like Uses
• Establish Key Parcels for Development
• Develop a Master Plan for County Facilities
• Develop Strong Business Recruitment and Retention Program
• Focus Development on Evans Street in Retail Core
• Build upon existing move toward arts & entertainment
• Develop “Golden Handcuffs” (Financial Incentives) for Office Users
• Implement Financial Incentives For Downtown Investment
44
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

URBAN CORE
• Leverage Large Attractions to Downtown
• Create a Mixed Use Development with a Hotel
• Develop New Entrance on Evans Street with Streetscape
• Increase Amenities, Green Space, , Pedestrian Walkways
• Establish and Enforce Design Guidelines
• Create Residential Opportunities Downtown
• University Housing along Reade Street, Upscale Condos around the Town Common
• Create Linkages to University and Neighborhoods
• Develop Parking Garages for Key Projects
• Improve Infrastructure
Crosswalks, Utilities Underground, Curb and Gutter, Lighting, g, Landscaping
Land Use Objectives
• Emphasis on joint use projects driven by the University’s s growth
• Expansion of the boundaries of the downtown to connect to the
residential areas east and west of the Center City
• Creation of commercial development along the major corridors of
Tenth and Evans Streets
• Improvement of the open space in the Town Common to leverage
adjacent residential and commercial development
• Increase of the density and scope of land use to create night and
weekend activity
• Removal of incompatible uses
45
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Traffic and Parking Recommendations
• Complete the Tenth Street Connector
• Change Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive to a neighborhood collector
• Improve key Tenth Street Corridor intersections
• Reestablish Evans Street as the major route into the Center City
• Deemphasize Dickinson Avenue as a major entrance into the
Center City
• Establish potential locations for additional surface parking
including the reduction in width of First Street and on Reade
Street
• Land bank property for future parking structures
• Improve pedestrian circulation systems in the downtown
46
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
47

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
48

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
49

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
50

Small Business and Employment Creation
• Small business loan pool with local lenders
• Business Plan Competition
• Façade Grant Programs
• Business relocation revolving loan fund
• Start­up training for small business
• Small business incubator
• Land assembly and disposition at favorable terms
• Workforce preparatory training
• GED classes
• Provision of accessible day care
51
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

How can Greenville’s Revitalization programs help you?
How can you help make revitalization a reality in Greenville?
How can we all make Greenville’s Center City
a better place to live, raise a family and do business
Mr. Flood said the process started out with developing a redevelopment plan that met the
state laws but they also wanted to reflect the residential core of these areas. This plan includes
areas just west of the downtown area and it is about an 850 acres area that was studied. The
City entered a contract with developer in 2003. The Plan was approved that December by City
Council. They looked at areas to the west of the downtown area and looked for ways to preserve
businesses in the area, remove blighted influences and make it a better place to live and work.
Homeownership in this area is 20% or less in West Greenville. He reviewed the goals for this
area.
They are looking to make residences on the second floor of buildings that have offices or
commercial on the first floor. They considered Land Use Objectives and Traffic and Parking
Recommendations.
He said there are currently opportunities to work with existing businesses along the Martin Luther
King Drive and work to establish new businesses. They are looking at doing streetscapes on
certain streets. They want to build an Alumni/Hotel Center. They will work to increase home
ownership to 50 percent. The city is currently working with a consultant on a streetscape project
and plan.
This will be a partnership with for profit, nonprofit groups. He presented pictures of the
proposal with additional buildings and improvements along the town common, a water feature,
and on the south side of 1 st street more residential area. A Hotel/Alumni Center along Reade
Street with additional housing is proposed. Plans will be updated and made annually. There is
discussion about an Art Center which is long term.
Mr. Flood said that there are commercial opportunities connected to the 10th Street Connector
project. There goals include more commercial uses along the Albemarle Street area. People
want Greenville to be like it was years ago, with mixed use opportunities. Residents told them
they needed ways to create jobs. This is 15 to 20 year plan and it focuses a lot on partnerships.
Commissioner McLawhorn commended Mr. Flood for his work in this community.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
52

Commissioner Hammond said there have been individuals that have lived there a long
time. He asked about the eminent domain in this process. Mr. Flood said they heard from
residents that went through this in the past. This plan does call for acquisition of homes that are
beyond repair but addresses homes that the homeowners are not in residence.
Chairman Garris said this plan also impacts the county as well as the city. Commissioner
Bowen asked if there was some difference between the West Greenville and the Downtown
Redevelopment Commission. Mr. Flood said there is a committee appointed with seven
members and the state law says they have to reside in the city limits. They come from diverse
backgrounds.
Items for Report
Manager's Report ­ Scott Elliott
Information Provided with the Agenda
Next Meeting Dates;
March 9th, 4pm, Joint meeting with PCC Board of Trustees, at Community Schools and
Recreation Building (dinner to follow)
March 13th, 9am ­ Regular Meeting
March 27th, 6pm ­ Regular Meeting
Congressional Visits in Washington, DC with The Ferguson Group, February 15, 2006
NACo 2006 Legislative Conference, March 4­8, 2006, Hilton Washington & Towers,
Washington, DC
Legislative Breakfast, Sheppard Memorial Library, April 10th @ 7:30AM
Inner­City Visit to Athens, Ga. ­ April 23­25 with the Chamber of Commerce
Reporting out on Council on Aging Donation
Mitch Smith, Director of Cooperative Extension, received the 2005 Carol M. Brickhead
Award for Outstanding County Extension Director
Meeting Notes
Mr. Elliott reviewed the items on the agenda:
· Congressional Visits were made by the City and County Managers, Attorneys and
Greenville’s Mayor and Board of Commissioners’ Chairman as well as Mildred
Council from the Greenville City Council. They presented the joint legislative agenda
for the city and county along with the Ferguson Group. Mr. Elliott noted that hopefully
the county will have an idea of how successful this meeting was by the springtime.
· The Chamber is proposing an Inner­City Visit to Athens, GA for officials to see this
area. Mr. Elliott said for anyone interested in going to let the Clerk or Manager know.
The purpose of this trip is to look at a city that is like Greenville was twenty years ago
and how they dealt with the growth and challenges. This city did adopt a 1 percent
sales tax dedicated to schools.
· Mr. Elliott stated that the board had approved the $250,000 for the senior center for
the Council on Aging. He said the Manager, Chairman, Attorney and Finance
Director met and are recommending that the county provide the funds to the COA
now to assist with their fund raising efforts.
· Congratulated Mitch Smith on receiving the 2005 Carol M. Burke Award for
Outstanding County Extension Director of the Year.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
53

Commissioner Hammond asked if the Manager was encouraged from the trip to
Washington, DC and meeting with the legislators. He said Ms. Council was instrumental in bring
the Ferguson Group to the City of Greenville.
Performance Measurements Annual Report ­ Scott Elliott
Information Provided with the Agenda
Pitt County has completed its second full calendar year of detailed reporting on selected
performance measurements within departments. Included in your packages was the Annual
Report for 2005. A brief overview of selected highlights will be presented today.
The public can view a copy of the annual Performance Measurement Report on the Clerk
to the Board's office located at 1717 West 5th Street.
Meeting Notes
Mr. Elliott provided a report reviewing the Mission, Goals and Objectives of the county
and its departments. He stated that staff prepares a report on a quarterly basis which has been
provided with the board’s agenda. Mr. Elliott said they would dig deeper into the Performance
Measurements during the next budget planning sessions.
Tax Collector's Report ­ Jeff Niebauer
Information Provided with the Agenda
Overall tax revenue has increased compared to last year. The collection rate is slightly
down compared to the same period last year. The 2005 tax bills became past due on January 6,
2006 and enforcement actions have begun to collect the outstanding accounts. Delinquent tax
notices have been sent and the tax advertisement will be published in March 2006.
Staff Recommendation
Approve as Submitted
Manager Comments
Concur with Tax Collector's recommendation.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
54

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
55

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
56

Motion:
Approve as Submitted
Motion made by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Items for Consent
Consent Agenda
Staff Recommendation
Motion to approve items for consent as presented in the agenda.
Motion:
Motion to approve items for consent as presented in the agenda.
Motion made by Commissioner Glenn Bowen.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Budget Amendment ­ Social Services ­ United Way ­ $6,000 ­ (No County Funds) ­ George Perry
Information Provided with the Agenda
The Department of Social Services has received the notification of the annual grant
award from United Way for the Emergency Food and Shelter Program funded by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency. The funds will be used to supplement the Department's other
energy funds to assist the citizens of Pitt County with their heating and cooling and other energy
needs. These are 100% Federal funds.
The Department requests the approval of the attached Budget Amendment to increase
revenues and expenditures by $6,000.00.
No additional County Funds are requested.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the approval of the attached Budget Amendment to increase revenues
and expenditures by $6,000.00
Manager Comments
Concur with the recommendation of DSS.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
57

Motion:
Staff recommends the approval of the attached Budget Amendment to increase revenues
and expenditures by $6,000.00
Motion made by Commissioner Glenn Bowen.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
58
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Motion Passed Unanimously.
Releases and Refunds Greater Than $100 ­ Glenn Cutrell
Information Provided with the Agenda
January 2006 Releases Greater Than $100
Releases ­ Pitt County (114) ­ $ 40,976.90
Releases ­ City of Greenville (21) ­ $ 7,006.72
Refunds Greater Than $100 (8) ­ $ 2,474.21
Elks, Annie Louise ­ $ 429.22
Fambrough, Sandra & David ­ $ 105.42
Hardee, William S. ­ $ 596.57
Harrell, Molly ­ $ 374.11
Harris, Mauriole Jontrel ­ $ 349.00
Pitt County Tax Collector
for Tripp, Charles & Sandra ­ $ 388.24
Pitt County Tax Collector
for Hardy, Guy Jr. Accounts ­ $ 104.77
Tripp, Charles R. & Sandra C. ­ $ 126.88
Staff Recommendation
Approve refunds as submitted.
Manager Comments
Concur with the Tax Assessor's recommendation.
59
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
60

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
61

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
62

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
63

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
64

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
65

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
66

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
67

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
68

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
69

Motion:
Approve refunds as submitted.
Motion made by Commissioner Glenn Bowen.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Monthly Financial Reports ­ December 2005 & January 2006 ­ Melonie Bryan
Information Provided with the Agenda
Attached please find the December and January monthly financial reports. Revenues
and expenditures are within normal ranges and staff continues to monitor closely.
Staff Recommendation
Accept reports for the record.
Manager Comments­ Concur with the recommendation to approve the Financial reports for
December 2005 and January 2006.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
70

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
71

Motion:
Accept reports for the record.
Motion made by Commissioner Glenn Bowen.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Approval of Minutes ­ February 6, 2006 ­ Susan Banks
Information Provided with the Agenda
Minutes of February 6, 2006 board meeting are a separate attachment.
Staff Recommendation
Motion to approve minutes from February 6, 2006 board meeting.
Manager Comments
Concur with the recommendation of the Clerk to the Board.
Motion:
Motion to approve minutes from February 6, 2006 board meeting.
Motion made by Commissioner Glenn Bowen.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Proclamation for National Nutrition Month ­ Scott Elliott
Information Provided with the Agenda
The County Manager has received a request from Public Health asking that the Pitt
County Board of Commissioners approve a proclamation declaring March as National Nutrition
Month in Pitt County.
Staff Recommendation
Motion to approve proclamation for National Nutrition Month.
Motion:
Motion to approve proclamation for March to be National Nutrition Month.
Motion made by Commissioner Glenn Bowen.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Proclamation for National Nutrition Month
WHEREAS, inappropriate diet choices and inactivity are the leading cause of preventable death
in our country, and
WHEREAS, what we choose to eat and how often we participate in physical activity influence the
risk of developing several chronic diseases, including heart disease, cancer, diabetes,
osteoporosis, and obesity, and
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
72

WHEREAS, health experts recommend that all residents of Pitt County consume 5­9 servings of
fruits and vegetables each day and engage in 30 minutes of daily physical activity for adults and
60 minutes for children, and
WHEREAS, dietary and lifestyle changes are best achieved by taking small steps which can add
up to an improved diet and a more active lifestyle for the rest of your life.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Pitt County Board of Commissioners proclaim
March as National Nutrition Time in Pitt County, North Carolina and encourage citizens to choose
a healthier lifestyle through improved diet and physical activity.
ADOPTED this the 20 th day of February, 2006 by the Pitt County Board of Commissioners.
______________________________
Chairman Jimmy Garris
ATTEST
______________________
Susan J. Banks
Clerk to the Board
Items for Decision
Budget Amendment ­ Health Department ­ Administration ­ $13,100 ­ John H. Morrow
Information Provided with the Agenda
The Pitt County Health Department has been awarded a 3 year capacity grant by the NC
DHHS Office of Minority Health and Health Disparities to create a new full time interpreter
position. The grant is in the amount of $20,000.00 per year for a 3 year period. At the conclusion
of the 3 year period the Health Department would be expected to sustain the position. The
Health Department has long used contract interpreters to comply with Title VI requirements
prohibiting discrimination based on limited English proficiency. This budget amendment assumes
the position if filled March 1, 2006 and thus would require no county funding in FY 06. In FY 07
and FY 08, contract interpreter hours would be reduced each year to cover the cost above
$20,000.00 of the new full time position. In FY 09 county funding would be required to offset the
termination of the grant funding. North Carolina Office of State Personnel has established
interpreter positions as classification 63.
Staff Recommendation
Request to establish a full­time position in the Administration Division of the Health
Department.
Manager Comments
Concur with the recommendation of the Health Department.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
73

Motion:
Request to establish a full­time position in the Administration Division of the Health
Department.
Motion made by Commissioner John Minges.
74
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Motion seconded by Commissioner Melvin McLawhorn.
Discussion:
Dr. Morrow stated this was a grant from the state for an interpreter for the Public Health
Department for three years. Pitt County was one of 12 counties in the state that received
the grant. The Health Department has five interpreters currently on contract. They will be
moving contract dollars to positions in order to comply with federal law.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Ronald McDonald House Lease Renewal ­ JoAnne Burgdorff
Information Provided with the Agenda
The Ronald McDonald House lease is due to expire in June 2006 and has been rewritten
to be updated and will continue to be leased by the County for the sum of $1.00 per year for a ten
(10) year term beginning on July 1, 2006 and ending on June 30, 2016, with an option to renew
for additional ten (10) year terms.
Attorney has copy of lease in her office for review.
Staff Recommendation
Approve execution of Lease on the land occupying the Ronald McDonald House on Moye
Boulevard.
Manager Comments
Concur with the County Attorney on the lease renewal for the Ronald McDonald House.
Motion:
Approve execution of Lease on the land occupying the Ronald McDonald House on Moye
Boulevard to Children Services of Eastern North Carolina at Greenville, Inc.
Motion made by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
Discussion:
Ms. Phyllis Flye, Ronald McDonald House Director, was present to answer questions. She
stated that the house is funded by the McDonald’s Corporation, PCMH and contributions
from the local community. They have an 18 member board with six members from each
section. Families pay $10 per night if they can afford it to stay at the house. They have 18
bedrooms and typically have 80% occupancy. Over 500 families stay each year. The
families must be referred by the Hospital or the doctor’s office.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Pitt County Greenway Plan ­ James Rhodes
Information Provided with the Agenda
Over the past year and a half, Planning staff and the East Carolina University Planning
Program have developed a County Greenway Plan (see Attachment 1 ­ Executive Summary).
The plan is an extension of the City of Greenville's Greenway Plan that was updated in 2004.
The County's plan proposes to establish approximately 215 miles of linear parks throughout the
County to link various communities and points of interest (e.g., schools, recreation sites, etc.). Of
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
75

this total mileage, about 90 miles are recommended as conservation areas with little to no
improvements. Over 115 miles of active recreational trails are proposed. Design standards for
the trails range from gravel to asphalt surfaces, depending upon community preference and
funding availability. Just over 50 miles of the greenways are proposed along the travel ways of
designated drainage laterals. Also, nearly eight miles of sidewalks are proposed within some of
the towns (see Attachment 2 ­ map).
Since the proposed greenways are proposed primarily on private property, landowners
consent and approval is vital for plan implementation. In addition, the Pitt County Drainage
District Commissioners must agree to allowing the trails along the travel ways of the drainage
laterals.
The plan has been presented to the town boards of the six municipalities which have
significant greenway segments proposed within their jurisdictions. All six boards have adopted
resolutions of support for the Greenway Plan (see Attachments 3, 4 and 5). In addition,
presentations have been made to various civic and recreation groups (see Attachment 6).
Planning staff will present an overview of the plan at the February 20th meeting and
request that the Board adopt the plan.
Staff Recommendation
Adopt the Pitt County Greenway Plan.
Manager Comments
Plan.
Concur with the Planning Director's recommendation to adopt the Pitt County Greenway
76
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
77

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
78

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
79

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
80

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
81

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
82

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
83

Meeting Notes
Mr. Rhodes gave an overview of the greenway. He stated the vision, goals and
objectives of the plan. He said this have been worked on for a year and a half. They formed a
partnership with ECU. He recognized Al Burne from ECU and said he and his students have
been instrumental in pulling this plan together. This plan has a twenty year horizon. Alice
Keene's office has worked on this draft also. He said the bulk of funding is coming from the
Metropolitan Planning Organization. The City updated their plan in 2004. This Greenway is the
84
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

first one for the county. Greenville and Grifton have a greenways plan. Six municipalities are
included in this plan and have linkages as requested by the municipalities. All the town boards
have offered a resolution of support for this plan. He said they have heard from the Drainage
District commissioners tonight (during public addresses). He said he hopes it can be a
compatible use with the drainage districts. They hope to have recreational trails. Greenways are
linear corridors, they can be natural or undeveloped. There is a transportation option. The
document provided to the board included a wealth of information. There is a link between
communities such as school sites to recreational areas. There is 200 miles in total with some for
conservation.
Pitt County Greenway Plan
Over the past year and a half, Planning staff
and the East Carolina Planning Program
have developed a County Greenway Plan.
This plan is an extension of the City of
Greenville’s Greenway Plan that was
updated in 2004.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
85

Greenway Planning in Pitt County
This is the first Greenway Plan
for Pitt County.
2002 Pitt County
Comprehensive Land Use Plan
includes goal for developing a
Greenway Plan to establish a
county­wide network of
greenways in the County
The City of Greenville and Town
of Grifton both have existing
Greenway Plans
Coastal Carolina Trail Rail­to­
Trail Program
NC Mountain to Sea Trail
Pitt County Greenway Plan
The plan has been presented to the town
boards of the six municipalities which have
significant greenway segments proposed
within their jurisdictions. All six boards have
adopted resolutions of support for the
Greenway Plan.
Presentations on the proposed Pitt County
Greenway Plan have also been made to various
civic and recreation groups.
86
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Pitt County Greenway Plan
Since the proposed greenways are proposed
primarily on private property, land owners
consent and approval is vital for plan
implementation.
In addition, the Pitt County Drainage District
Commissioners must agree to allowing the
trails along the travelways of the drainage
laterals.
The Vision
“To establish a countywide
network of
greenways that will allow
Pitt County residents to
protect and enjoy the
natural environment,
increase recreational
opportunities, while
adding to the long­term
economic vitality and
sustainability of the
county.”
87
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Map of Proposed Greenways
214 miles currently proposed
14 miles in City Limits
44 miles in ETJ
154 miles in unincorporated
areas
90 miles of conservation
greenway
115 miles of recreation greenway
(50 miles of recreation greenway
based on use of drainage laterals)
City of Greenville greenway plan
proposed 105 miles of greenways
Additional areas in the County are
still in consideration to establish
an improved network of connected
greenways
88
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
89

Recommendations
Local governments should use a combination of methods
through land management, regulation, and acquisition to
obtain their property for trails and greenways.
Local governments should seek funding by combining
private sector funds with funds from local, state, and
federal sources.
Local governments should seek public approval and input
through various citizen participation methods such as
public hearings and open house forums.
Recommendations
Land Owner Consent
Subdivision Ordinance Amendments
Zoning Ordinance Amendments
90
3/9/2006 2:27 PM

Pitt County Greenway Plan
Recommendation:
Adopt the Pitt County Greenway Plan.
Fountain is also very interested in being in this process.
Motion:
Adopt the Pitt County Greenway Plan.
Motion made by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
Discussion:
Vice Chairman Ward said that adopting this plan is to give the go ahead to plan the
greenway. Mr. Rhodes said its the beginning of the implementation of the plan.
Commissioner Hammond said the county is quickly becoming an urban county with
greenways and recreation. Commissioner James said he disagreed. He helped build the
Conetoe Creek project done in 1940 and some of this was in Edgecombe County. He said
5 or 6 years ago there were alot of hunters and a 9­10 year old girl got killed on that creek.
If the creek is opened up for people to walk along there it will be trouble because of
hunters and other activities. Commissioner James said he has worked with the drainage
districts for years. They will have to have the approval of the people that own the land. He
said they will have to sell people on this and show them that this is what the county needs.
Mr. Rhodes said they realize they will have to work with the communities and citizens. Mr.
Rhodes said there would be no change in the Conetoe Creek area. Mr. Vinson said the
Corp of Engineers makes requirements on these easements. He said they have a standing
permit to go out there and they keep building in floodplains and its important to maintain
these canals. In the early 1970s, they fought for 10 years in court. They have small
travelways and they need to maintain them. Mr. Vinson said some of these easements had
to be paid for and they are not going to give them up easily. These trails will be closed
during hunting season. Commissioner Bowen said Commissioner James said no one had
come and talked to him. Mr. Rhodes said county staff or staff of the recreation department
will be the ones going out to meet with landowners. Planning staff developed it and
brought it to the Planning Board for approval. Commissioner Bowen said he had calls this
weekend and they said that people were out there working on it. He said citizens had
heard that the county bought the property at Conetoe Creek so the citizens would be able
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
91

to use it but as soon as it was bought they locked the gate. He said Mr. Bulow told him
this was because people were going down there messing things up.
Substitute Motion:
Table this item until they receive additional information (concerning liability issues).
Motion made by Commissioner Glenn Bowen.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Eugene James.
Discussion:
Commissioner McLawhorn said he received a call from someone with the Town of
Fountain stating they were interested in being part of this program. Mr. Rhodes said they
would be contacted and included if that was their desire. Commissioner Minges asked if
the drainage districts ever give reports to the county. Mr. Vinson said the drainage
districts are set up through the Clerk of Court or a Judge. The county collects the taxes
and the landowners are paying for what work is done on the district. A report must be
made to the Clerk of Court, before they can put an assessment on it. He said when
projects were designed they were designed for farm land. He said then alot of
development was put there. The laterals were put in for storm protection and a two inch
rain would flood them out. They can maintain what was originally there. They need to get
with the Corp of Engineers so they can enlarge it. At Highway 118, the ditch is at sea level.
He said he would be glad to take any of the commissioners out and show them what is
there.
Mr. Elliott said this motion is just to move ahead with the plan. Commissioner Coulson
said there sounds like there is a lot of work to do, so the motion just gives the authority to
get started. Vice Chairman Ward said the original motion just gives them permission to do
the things that have not been done such as going to talk to the drainage district
commission. She said staff does not feel they can go out and get started until they have
the board’s approval. Mr. Elliott said that this board would have to approve any
easements and the staff cannot move this forward without the board’s approval.
Commissioner Bowen asked how many more staff members will planning need to
accomplish this? Commissioner James said there is no way they will get everyone’s
permission. Commissioner Bowen asked how this board could vote against the drainage
districts and the attorney needs to look into liability on these trails.
Chairman Garris called for a vote on the substitute motion.
Vote Record:
Melvin McLawhorn
John Minges
Jimmy Garris
Beth Ward
Glenn Bowen
Tom Coulson
David Hammond
Eugene James
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Total Yes Votes: 2
Total No Votes: 6
Motion Failed.
Chairman Garris said the county needs a greenway plan and cannot just go out and take
the land. This gives staff permission to go out and ask for support from these
landowners. The county cannot infringe on private ownership or takeover drainage
districts.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
92

Chairman Garris called for a vote on the original motion “Adopt the Pitt County Greenway
Plan.”
Vote Record:
Melvin McLawhorn
John Minges
Jimmy Garris
Beth Ward
Glenn Bowen
Tom Coulson
David Hammond
Eugene James
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Total Yes Votes: 6
Total No Votes: 2
Motion Passed.
Teresa Garris Conditional Use Permit Extension Request ­ James Rhodes
Information Provided with the Agenda
At its regularly scheduled meeting on September 12, 2005, the Pitt County Board of
Commissioners approved a request by Teresa Garris to rezone 1.23 acres from Rural Agricultural
(RA) to General Commercial (Conditional Use) (GC(CU)), and granted a Conditional Use Permit
to allow Motor Vehicle Sales (Used). Ms. Garris has requested an extension to the Conditional
Use Permit in order to place the office on the property as shown on the approved site plan. The
Conditional Use Permit will expire on March 12, 2006, and conditions have not changed
substantially enough to warrant a new application.
Conditional Use Permits may be extended for periods up to six months if the Board
concludes that: 1) the permit has not yet expired; 2) the permit recipient has proceeded with due
diligence and in good faith; and 3) conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant a
new application. All such extensions may be granted without resort to the formal processes and
fees required for a new permit.
Attached is a copy of the Conditional Use Permit (Attachment 1), the extension request
from Ms. Garris (Attachment 2), Section 3.17 of the Pitt County Zoning Ordinance which explains
the process for time extensions (Attachment 3), a copy of the approval letter and findings of fact
(Attachment 4), a map outlining the subject property and surrounding area (Attachment 5), and
the site plan for the proposed sales lot (Attachment 6).
Staff Recommendation
Approve the request by Teresa Garris to grant a six­month extension to the Conditional
Use Permit.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
93

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
94

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
95

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
96

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
97

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
98

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
99

3/9/2006 2:27 PM
100

Motion:
Approve the request by Teresa Garris to grant a six­month extension to the Conditional
Use Permit.
Motion made by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Motion seconded by Commissioner David Hammond.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
101

Vice Chairman Ward offered her support stating Ms. Garris has done what she needed to
do up to this point. She said she did not think she should have to pay for another permit.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Appointments to the Pitt Area Transit Board of Directors (PATS) ­ Susan Banks
Information Provided with the Agenda
The North Carolina Department of Transportation requires representation from various
organizations on the Pitt Area Transit Board of Directors. At their January 26, 2006 Board
meeting the members voted to add representation from the following groups in order to be in
compliance with NCDOT requirements.
Elected Official ­­ Commissioner Melvin McLawhorn
Health Department ­­ Dr. John Morrow
RPO ­­ James Rhodes, County Planning Director
MPO ­­ Tom Tysinger, TCC Chairperson
2 At­large Members
This board also needs two citizens appointed as at­large members. These positions are
being advertised, however, the PATS board would like to recommend Robert Thompson, and
Joyce Jones to fill the at­large positions.
The PATS Board of Directors requests that the Pitt County Board of Commissioners at
their February 20, 2006 meeting appoint the above­named representation to the Pitt Area Transit
Board of Directors for a term of three years.
Staff Recommendation
Motion to follow the recommendation of the PATS Board of Directors and appoint the
above­named representation to the Pitt Area Transit Board of Directors for a term of three years.
Motion:
Motion to follow the recommendation of the PATS Board of Directors and appoint the John
Morrow, Melvin McLawhorn, James Rhodes, Tom Tysinger, Joyce Jones and Robert
Thompson to the Pitt Area Transit Board of Directors for a term of three years.
Motion made by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Eugene James.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Appointment to the Adult Care Home Advisory Committee ­ Susan Banks
Information Provided with the Agenda
Allison Phlegar with the Adult Care Home Advisory Committee is recommending that
Doris Ward be reappointed for another term, if appointed the term will expire 4/20/08. She is
asking that Sara Whitley be appointed to replace Stacey Hargrove, if Mrs. Whitley is appointed
she will be filling an unexpired term ending 4/19/08. It is also being asked that Kay Rouse be
terminated due to lack of attendance. She has not attending a meeting in the past year.
Staff Recommendation
Motion to follow the recommendation of Allison Phlegar with the Adult Care Home
Advisory Committee.
Motion:
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
102

Motion to follow the recommendation of Allison Phlegar with the Adult Care Home
Advisory Committee.
Motion made by Commissioner John Minges.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Melvin McLawhorn.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Appointments to the P.C.M.H. Board of Trustees ­ Susan Banks
Information Provided with the Agenda
A.A. (Dick) Adams and Randy Royal are both eligible for reappointment of a second fiveyear­term.
It is being recommended by Dave McRae, Chief Executive Officer, that these two
members be reappointed for another term. If appointed, the terms will expire 4/2/11.
**Randy Royal was serving as a county commissioner on this board. The board may
want to consider appointing a current commissioner to this position.
Staff Recommendation
Consider reappoint of A.A. (Dick) Adams and Randy Royal to another term on the
P.C.M.H. Board of Trustees.
Motion:
Consider reappoint of A.A. (Dick) Adams and Randy Royal to another term on the
P.C.M.H. Board of Trustees.
Motion made by Commissioner Melvin McLawhorn.
Motion seconded by Commissioner John Minges.
Discussion:
Vice Chairman Ward said there was a time when this position was a commissioner seat
but this was unofficially done. Commissioner Hammond offered to fill Randy Royal's seat.
Amended Motion:
Consider reappoint of A.A. (Dick) Adams to another term on the P.C.M.H. Board of
Trustees and to appoint David Hammond to PCMH Board of Trustees.
Motion made by Commissioner Eugene James.
Motion seconded by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Discussion:
Commissioner Bowen said there was no policy for a commissioner to serve in this seat.
Vice Chairman Ward said there was no official policy but just a recommendation.
Commissioner McLawhorn said he has no problem with Commissioner Hammond serving
but would like to check with Randy Royal first and see if he would relinquish his term.
Substitute motion:
Reappoint of A.A. (Dick) Adams and Randy Royal to another term on the P.C.M.H. Board
of Trustees, however, in the case that former commissioner Randy Royal chooses not to
accept the appointment, Commissioner David Hammond will serve in his place.
Motion made by Commissioner Eugene James.
Motion seconded by Vice Chairman Beth Ward.
Discussion:
Commissioner Hammond said Randy Royal is no longer a sitting commissioner. He
expressed concern about the discussion.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
103

Appointments to the Sheppard Memorial Library Board of Trustees ­ Susan Banks
Information Provided with the Agenda
Joe Sullivan's term expires on March 1, 2006. Mr. Sullivan has completed two three­year
terms on the Board and is not eligible for reappointment. Please find attached the list of interested
applicants.
Staff Recommendation
Motion to appoint a new member to replace Joe Sullivan on the Sheppard Memorial
Library Board Trustees.
Motion:
Motion to appoint Richard Ericson to replace Joe Sullivan on the Sheppard Memorial
Library Board Trustees.
Motion made by Commissioner John Minges.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Eugene James.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Commissioners' Comments
Meeting Notes
Commissioner Bowen expressed concern about the time and money being spent on
certain projects.
Commissioner Coulson spoke about the concerns of the Faulkner family (Silver Bullet
Club). He said understood when he voted on the Sexually Oriented Adult Business Ordinance
that this club would be grandfathered in. He said he does not understand why they have been
put out of business. He said this needs to be reconsidered by this board.
Commissioner Hammond said some of us have been in this county all our lives, have
seen lots of progress since being on this board, and hate seeing these petty issues that divide us.
He spoke of working in the downtown area as a disc jockey and winning honors and awards
during times of racial unrest. He said he put Greenville on the map with his radio show. He
stated his children were home visiting and they were having a great reunion. He said this board
needs to look at the big picture. He stated he goes around this county trying to help people. He
saved this county $163,000 during the flood helping out. He said he gives back to his community.
He has given free funerals to help others.
Closed Session
G.S. 143­318.11(a)(3)(6) ­ Scott Elliott
Information Provided with the Agenda
G.S. 143­318.11(a)
(3) to consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to
preserve the attorney­client privilege between the attorney and the public body, which privilege is
hereby acknowledged.
(6) to consider the qualifications, competence, performance, character, fitness, conditions
of appointment, or conditions of initial employment of an individual public officer or employee or
prospective public officer or employee.
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
104

Staff Recommendation
G.S. 143­318.11(a)
(3) to consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to
preserve the attorney­client privilege between the attorney and the public body, which privilege is
hereby acknowledged.
(6) to consider the qualifications, competence, performance, character, fitness, conditions
of appointment, or conditions of initial employment of an individual public officer or employee or
prospective public officer or employee.
Motion:
G.S. 143­318.11(a)
(3) to consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to
preserve the attorney­client privilege between the attorney and the public body, which
privilege is hereby acknowledged.
(6) to consider the qualifications, competence, performance, character, fitness, conditions
of appointment, or conditions of initial employment of an individual public officer or
employee or prospective public officer or employee.
Motion made by Commissioner Melvin McLawhorn.
Motion seconded by Commissioner John Minges.
Ms. Burgdorff cited the closed session statutes.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Return to Open Session
Staff Recommendation
Motion to return to open session.
Motion:
Motion to return to open session.
Motion made by Commissioner Melvin McLawhorn.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Eugene James.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Mr. Elliott reported on the reorganization of Emergency Management Department.
Name New Title New Grade/Step New Salary
Noel Lee Emergency Mgt. Director 79­5 $63,143
Sam Tyson Comm. Director 75­2 $50,548
Greg Beacham
3/9/2006 2:27 PM
Asst Comm Mgr/Training
Coord. 68­19 $44,442
Jack Cote Deputy Director – EMS 70­12 $44,977
Allen Everette Deputy Director –
Fire Marshal 70­14 $46,022
James McCotter Fire Marshal 67­11* $38,611
Vacant Paramedic Supervisor 68­10 $39,985
*James McCotter’s Step was incorrectly reported as 67­9.
Adjourn
Motion:
Motion to adjourn meeting at 9:55 pm.
105

Motion made by Commissioner David Hammond.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Eugene James.
Motion Passed Unanimously.
Respectfully Submitted,
Susan J. Banks, CMC
Clerk to the Board
106
3/9/2006 2:27 PM