What’s next? Court, Durham county attorney says
Durham County Commissioners met in closed session this morning to discuss next steps in the controversy around a debated petition that could have affected commercial and residential development around Jordan Lake.
County Attorney Lowell Siler told commissioners, essentially, that their hands are tied. If anyone wants to question a vote commissioners took last month to move the Jordan Lake watershed, it’s going to have to be an outside party in a lawsuit, he said. Commissioners cannot go back and revisit the vote they now believe they took, even though they have since learned they took the vote under now questionable circumstances.
“The central issue is, a vote has been taken and the only way to amend that is to go to superior court,” Siler told commissioners Thursday morning. “And we’ll defend that action.”
When Siler says the issue is to be resolved in court, he fails to fully explain, said Elaine Chiosso, director of the Haw River Assembly, which filed the petition. It means a small nonprofit group has to sue the county government and city-county planning department, which have broader resources and deeper pockets.
“We’re hoping to meet that challenge, but it’s a big challenge,” Chiosso said.
The controversy surrounds a petition filed last month by an environmental group whose members wanted to make it harder for county commissioners to redraw protective barriers around Jordan Lake. Had the petition been valid, commissioners would have been required to cast a 4-to-1 vote in favor of redrawing the lines, instead of the regular majority (3 votes to 2) they ended up casting.
But Durham’s planning department, led by Steve Medlin, initially ruled the petition was invalid, so only a 3-to-2 vote was required of commissioners when they heard the rezoning case Oct. 12. Whether the petition is truly valid is still debated. A memo released Wednesday shows Medlin believes the petition is valid, but Siler said he still questions the validity of the signature of John Gunter. Gunter, president of the Chancellor’s Ridge Homeowner’s Association, signed the petition in representation of some common areas at the development.
The rezoning of the protective watershed is a snafu all in itself (read more). The county and developer Southern Durham Development have been in a tug-of-war dating back to 2006 about where the watershed lines should be. When commissioners voted Oct. 12 to redraw the boundary, they cleared a major hurdle for Southern Durham Development, which wants to build a sizeable residential and commercial development right next to Jordan Lake.
County Commissioner Becky Heron called the situation regarding the petition a “fiasco” on Thursday.
“There were some mistakes made that we’re suffering for right now,” she said. “And the public is suffering for.”
8 Comments
PLEASE DONATE TO THE JORDAN LAKE PROTEST PETITION SUIT FUND TODAY! WE
NEED $10,000 BY MONDAY FOR OUR ATTORNEY TO START WORK ON THIS CASE
(which must be filed by December 11)!!!
Write a check (put ‘Jordan Lake Protest Petition Suit’ in the memo) to “Ragsdale Liggett
Trust Account” and mailing it to Ragsdale Liggett, PLLC, Post Office Box 31507,
Raleigh 27622
— Will Wilson 19 November 2009
Today, County Attorney Lowell Siler said, in effect, “We know we were wrong, but we don’t care, so sue us.”
Siler has made it clear that the only recourse we citizens have to correct the County’s string of errors is to take them to court—where the County will certainly lose.
Who wants to fund a lawsuit during the holidays? Nobody.
But sometimes you have to play the hand you’re dealt. Sometimes you have to ask the courts to stop a local government gone . . . well, kinda insane. That’s why I’m sending a check to the address in Will Wilson’s post.
The Monday deadline looms large, so time is of the essence.
— Steve Bocckino 19 November 2009
(FYI - my posting was a snippet from an email of Melissa’s)
WGW
— Will Wilson 19 November 2009
Durham County is making the old Soviet Union look progressive, democratic and competent by comparison. Can this county sink any lower? A few months ago, I thought not. Apparently I was wrong.
Count me in…I’ll be sending a check and encourage others to do likewise.
— Carol Young 19 November 2009
If I understand your report correctly, the county attorney has advised the board of commissioners that they are powerless to correct the problem they have created - only a court can fix it now.
This cannot be right. Courts cannot order us to do what we could not do if we wanted to. Courts can only order us to do what we can do, but refuse to do.
In this instance, the county can initiate another rezoning of this property and then do it correctly this time. The power to rezone property is vested in the county. It is a legislative power conferred upon the county by the General Assembly. It is the county’s duty to exercise this power for the public welfare.
Here, where the county has made one mistake after another, the county not only should commence a new rezoning, it must do so. It should not wait for a court order to do so. County government owes it to the people to correct its mistakes. It should not adopt a “so-sue-us” attitude. Durham County’s should be governed by the people’s representatives, not by a superior court judge and the few citizens who are sufficiently well heeled to be parties to a lawsuit.
The county does not need a court to tell it to do the right thing. Your reporter must have misunderstood what was said about the county attorney’s advise.
Tom Miller
— Tom Miller 20 November 2009
@Tom Miller - I did not fully investigate yesterday the other piece of advice from Lowell Siler. Please see today’s blog post for clarification.
— Samiha Khanna, Staff Writer 20 November 2009
It seems that what’s happening is a dispute between the planning department (saying the petition’s valid), and the majority-BOCC-appointed-without-search-county attorney (one signature is invalid).
Apparently, the Planning Director has lost the confidence of the BOCC-majority and their self-appointed attorney. Just like the last attorney shoved aside, who defends the planning director’s decisions when the county attorney asserts he’s wrong?
If that understanding is correct, Steve Medlin should be commended (despite his earlier mistake — I’ve made one or two, too). It now falls on the citizens to sue the BOCC to follow the laws of our democratic society. Any recall provisions for county commissioners?
Will Wilson
— Will Wilson 20 November 2009
[...] any option other than to brace themselves for a lawsuit regarding the Jordan Lake protest petition? We summarized yesterday that County Attorney Lowell Siler appeared to tell County Commissioners repeatedly that only a [...]
— UDO: Does it offer another possible option for commissioners? - Triangulator - Indy Week Blogs 20 November 2009