Fair / 71° F
Polk cuts controversial section from UDO
Published 7:26pm Thursday, September 13, 2012Public hearing restructured, moved to Polk high school
Polk County’s proposal to combine all its ordinances into one unified development ordinance (UDO) with changes to some regulations has caused controversy among many residents. The disagreements came to a head during the county’s Monday, Sept. 10 meeting held at the Polk County Middle School.
Commissioners ended the discussion by agreeing to delete a controversial section from the proposed UDO and to allow the Sept. 17 public hearing to include a question and answer session during which county officials will answer questions from the audience. The public hearing will be held on Monday, Sept. 17 at 7 p.m. In anticipation of crowds, the county has changed the location of the public hearing to the Polk County High School Auditorium.
The now deleted section 4.1.1 stated, “The administrator is hereby authorized to enforce the provisions of this ordinance. This official shall have the right to enter upon any premises regulated by this ordinance at any reasonable time necessary to carry out his/her duties. It is the intention of this ordinance that all questions arising in connection with enforcement and interpretation shall be presented first to the Administrator. Appeal from his/her decision may be made to the board of adjustment.”
The section did not include any verbiage about entering premises with a search warrant as section 1.8.3 does, so many residents have said the county is ignoring citizens’ rights under the fourth amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Advertisements paid for by PolkCountyLiberty.org have appeared in the Bulletin regarding section 4.1.1, urging residents to attend the Sept. 17 public hearing.
County attorney Mike Egan began UDO discussions on Monday by saying the second sentence seems to be one that is causing controversy and recommended deleting the sentence. Egan said he is not sure why that version was placed in the ordinance and said it’s not necessary.
“Regardless of what the ordinance says, a zoning administrator, just like a deputy, is sworn to uphold the constitution,” Egan said. “(Removing the sentence) may reduce the alarm in some folks about what the zoning administrator might try to do.”
Commissioner Tom Pack questioned why the section was put in there to start with and questioned why it is now that the county is trying to change it.
Commissioner vice-chair Renée McDermott said she requested from the planner’s office the procedure the administrator has to comply with for state and federal law. She said the county has to go to a magistrate with a sworn statement indicating why the administrator would enter someone’s premise in order to receive a warrant. McDermott also said the warrant is good for 24 hours and the administrator is allowed to search only things specified in the warrant.
Pack said words mean something and everything needs to be written down. He also said that concern over section 4.1.1 has been brought up before and it should’ve been taken care of already.
Pack also said he is concerned about a memo McDermott wrote to commissioners that he said attacked a citizen, William Day. According to Pack, McDermott said in her memo that Day shouted “liar” to her during a Republican Party meeting held in July. McDermott said she stood by what she said in her memo, and Pack responded he had a video to prove Day did not call McDermott a liar. Pack showed the video and asked that McDermott publicly apologize.
After the video, McDermott said that at some point during that meeting someone did shout “liar” and that while she was speaking Day did say “sophistry,” which she said means lying.
Following the video, Pack said he thinks the whole section of 4.1.1 should be deleted and asked why commissioners need to address it during the meeting when the county has a hearing on Sept. 17.
McDermott said one reason to address it is because there have been attack advertisements in the paper.
“I believe that now is the time to lay it to rest,” McDermott said.
She made a motion to delete the entire section of 4.1.1 from the UDO draft, which was approved unanimously. McDermott then read a statement regarding what she said was misinformation regarding the proposed UDO (see full statement, page 6).
In the statement, McDermott said that in 2008 when the UDO got going it was a bipartisan effort. The statement said Ted Owens seconded the motion to hire Holland Consulting to help the citizen group with the project and that Pack voted for and helped select committee members.
Pack disagreed with that part of the statement, saying he did vote for a comprehensive plan but did not vote for the UDO. Pack said his original take on the UDO was that the county was going to take existing ordinances and roll them into one, including charts so if a citizen wanted to do something they knew what to comply with.
“What we’ve got here is 400 pages of legalese,” said Pack. “They (officials in favor of the UDO) say it gives more and it doesn’t.”
McDermott said her statement said the UDO process got started then and that she took her information about the votes from exactly the same meeting minutes Pack referred to.
Pack mentioned that in the proposed UDO, Deb’s Mini Mart will not be a permitted use, but conditional.
“This needs a lot of changes. Otherwise, you’re going to shut down this county economically,” said Pack. “It’s wrong. You’ve got to stop it. Be honest with the people. Be honest with us.”
County staff will try to answer questions from the public concerning the draft UDO during the public hearing. The county has asked that any questions be submitted at or prior to the public hearing either in writing or by email and directed to Cathy Ruth at planning@polknc.org.
The draft UDO is available for public review on the county website at http://www.polknc.org/departments/development/documents/udo9.17.12draft.pdf. Copies are also available at the Polk County Library in Columbus and Saluda, or in the county manager’s office in Columbus.
Questions regarding the UDO can be directed to the Polk County Planning Department at 828-894-2732.
A full list of changes to the UDO is available at www.tryondailybulletin.com.
I get it. You try to get away with your scheme to have warrantless searches…to run it past people without their noticing. And when they do notice and they squawk, you claim that it was all a mistake. Nobody knows how the language got it there. Yeah, right.
Bottom line: If it’s really true that this provision was included in the document by mistake, then you’re incompetent to not catch it before you presented it…and got the blowback. Ever consider reviewing your monstrosities or do we just have to pass it to find out what’s in it??
If it were included on purpose, it says you intend to be in criminal violation of the 4th amendment to the Constitution…and you don’t care. That is reprehensible, but it would seem to qualify you for higher office these days, because everybody’s doing it…and getting away with it .
THE UDO AND CORRUPTION AND THE GROWTH OF CORRUPTION IS THE BIG ISSUE IN POLK COUNTY. The UDO has been born out of corruption with the use of a mudslide which was intentionally created at milepost 39 on the railroad and is there to be seen today where tracks hang in the sky near the Big Falls Bridge on the Saluda Grade. A leaking mountain water line was used and the course of a stream was changed, forming a lake above the railroad on steep slopes. Then when a storm came in and it collapsed the resulting surge caused slight damage at Harmon Field which was used as justification for a FEMA grant. Of course the grant was not used to repair the damage on the railroad subgrade and it remains today. This is corruption and it is one of the details in that report used as justification by those experts as the need for the restrictions in the UDO on slopes. It is only the tip of the iceberg and POLK has a long history of similar deception by its government. Our officials do not make much money and at least a few of them always have a sideline. What that sideline is………is why the UDO is being put in place and imposed on the county while a long, long list of folks are exempt from the UDO and especially the towns are exempt. This very example would still be free to happen again under the UDO. A town did it and is proud of it and they can do it again under the UDO because town activity and government activity is exempt from the slope restrictions of the UDO as proposed. The very corrupt officials who have done this in the past now plan to have the UDO in place to make SMOOZE of public officials a necessity in order to build anything in the county while the towns do as they please. The UDO is corruption planned on a large scale as a way of life with 400 pages of complex legal mumbo jumbo to make it easy for corrupt officials to fatten their pockets. You can be certain you will use and pay for whatever they say you need using whoever they say if you want to build in Polk after the UDO passes. And it WILL pass because the same corrupt officials who continually have tried to silence me about the MP 39 slide are the strongest proponents of the UDO and the party in power. And they have the 3 votes needed to pass the UDO. The UDO TAKES CORRUPTION IN POLK TO A NEW LEVEL WHERE EVERY CITIZEN WILL HAVE TO PAY EXTRA TO DO ANYTHING ON THEIR PROPERTY FROM CUTTING A TREE TO BUILDING AN OUTHOUSE, TO DRILLING A WELL OR A BARN. BRACE FOR MORE CORRUPTION IN AN ALREADY CORRUPT LOCAL GOVERNMENT WHICH DOES NOT PAY ITS OFFICIALS ENOUGH SO NOW THEY, THE OFFICIALS, DEMAND MORE MORE MORE MONEY BY THE BACK DOOR WITH THE UDO LEVER FOR CORRUPTION RAMPANT IN OUR POLK COUNTY.