Until now the Joint City County Planning Committee – JCCPC – was provided with lists of all filed annexation cases. This was done before the applications were considered by the Planning Commission and gave the public an opportunity for very early notice of developers’ plans to build on currently county land by having it annexed into the city. Now, the procedures are being changed to eliminate notice of annexation applications to the JCCPC. The public would not be informed until annexations were scheduled to be presented to the Planning Commission but only annexations proposed for land outside the Urban Growth Boundary would be placed on the BOCC agendas. Below is a letter I wrote to the Interim County Attorney asking for more information:
Questions re: JCCPC Procedure Change- both within and without the UGB
Dear Mr. Massey:
Along with Pam Andrews and other county residents, I am both confused and concerned about the pending changes to JCCPC procedures regarding annexations and rezoning. We are all hoping that you will advise us as to the current status of the proposed changes. For instance, will there be any additional opportunities for the public to be heard before the proposed changes are adopted? We, also, ask that you clarify the changes.
As I understand Sara Young’s September 4th written explanation of proposed new procedures:
1) The planning department will no longer present a listing of all annexation applications to the JCCPC. In fact, no annexation cases will be reported to the JCCPC. That means the public will be denied this early alert to annexations in the county.
2) In addition, the planning department will restrict annexation reports to the BOCC to those outside the UGB. No reports will be provided regarding annexations in the future growth area unless the current place type requires change.
3) BOCC involvement will be limited to listening to the annexation applicants’ descriptions of their proposed development. This will happen at work sessions only. Commissioners will be allowed to ask questions.
4) The public will not be able to comment after hearing the developers’ presentations. Therefore, the public will not be able to question what the applicant says. The public will be relegated to the general citizens comments at the beginning of the BOCC work session. See below.
5) Commissioners will not vote (no decision as a body) but will be allowed to make individual written comments which the planning department will include in the packet provided to the City Council prior to a public hearing there.
Please advise me if any of the points above are wrong and any points I missed.
I was quite confused by comments made by Sara Young and you regarding a perceived need to separate input by the public from the informational presentations of the applicants. Perhaps I missed something, but I have reviewed the UDO and NC 160A – 58.55, Procedure for Annexation, and find no authority for prohibiting public comments at “informational meetings.” To the contrary, Sec. 160A-58-55 (f) expressly provides that at Public Informational Meetings regarding annexations, following explanation of the proposed annexation by a municipal official, “all residents of the municipality shall be given the opportunity to ask questions and receive answers regarding the proposed annexation.” It seems all residents of Durham County should have the same opportunity to inquire and comment that is granted by state law. Again, if I am mistaken please share with me the applicable authority.
Thank you for any clarity you can provide.
Sincerely,
Katie Ross
SaveDurham.com
Save Durham 