Citizens Must Demand Transparency
This article was first published by The News and Observer on 14 March, 2009.
Jim Wise’s “Curious Eye” toward Durham County’s disappearing transparency (Durham News, Mar. 7) shouldn’t be taken lightly. The backroom dealings could set a dangerous precedent for NC, especially Triangle jurisdicSons and Jordan Lake. Let me elaborate...
AWer months of closed discussions regarding former Planning Director, Frank Duke’s illegal administraSve moving of criScal watershed boundaries, based on developer Neal Hunter’s 2005 Jordan Lake boundary survey (to permit the ‘751 Assemblage’ mini-city), the county commissioners submi^ed this survey (and an October, 2008 supplementary survey) to the DWQ (Division of Water Quality), and directed staff to solicit proposals for an independent survey of Jordan Lake’s boundary within Durham County.
On November 24 a public hearing was held to obligate money for the independent survey, as recommended by the county manager, county a^orney, county engineer and planning director. Since there was li^le public noSce, and all previous discussions were behind closed doors, only two ciSzens spoke at this meeSng. Manager Ruffin insisted “there are not enough reference points in those first two surveys to pass muster with DWQ,” but the board voted 3-2 to postpone further acSon unSl receiving DWQ’s decision.
DWQ’s Julie Ventaloro was inundated with requests, including a unanimous resoluSon by Chatham County Board of County Commissioners, to reject the survey based on conflict of interest or, at the very least, to give it the utmost scruSny. Ventaloro quesSoned the “relaSvely large gap” (665 feet) between two essenSal survey points and informed our Planning Dept. that DWQ staff “are not trained surveyors, so any explanaSons, no ma^er how basic, will be very helpful.”
On Feb. 4, DWQ approved Hunter’s survey. The public was officially informed when the item was placed on the March 4 JCCPC (Joint City County Planning Commi^ee) agenda. This delay is notable since an appeal must be filed within 60 days of DWQ’s decision. Fortunately blogs covered the story on February 6. A subsequent online peSSon accumulated over 1500 signatures within a week.
Though they had quesSons regarding how far the lake extends into New Hope Creek, DWQ staff was instructed to follow procedure. DWQ insisted they are not the last word and advised Durham to obtain a regional survey. To this day, neither DWQ nor Planning staff has visited the site.
At the county’s March 5 work session, the Jordan Lake boundary was added to the agenda aWer the meeSng began. This came as a surprise to some of the commissioners, but not to the developer’s a^orneys who were there and allowed to speak.
If the 751 Assemblage team succeeds, it will be the first Sme that NC watershed maps are changed based on a private developer’s parSal survey. CiSzens have every right to quesSon this precedent-making event. Should Durham County solely be permi^ed to make decisions affecSng the properSes and water supply of mulSple jurisdicSons? Should DWQ have more authority?
The 751 team is sSll demanding an administraSve change in Jordan Lake boundaries, without the planning commission and government public hearings required in our ordinance.
What are they afraid of? If they had confidence in their survey, wouldn’t they welcome validaSon by an independent survey? Had they done so from the get-go, the issue would already be se^led.
Contact commissioners and demand transparency and due process by a^ending the 3:30 March 23 work session. Let them know that, despite all a^empts to dissuade us, we are watching!
Note: In 2020, Durham government is STILL lacking transparency.
.
