About 50 Macon County residents were present Monday morning at a public hearing for the proposed changes to the county’s watershed ordinance. Twenty-three of them spoke, and opinions ranged from complete support for the changes to calling the entire process illegal.

The changes proposed by the Macon County Watershed Council would prohibit point-source discharges on the Little Tennessee (and its tributaries) below Lake Emory, limit construction density and limit the area that could be covered by impervious surfaces. The proposed changes stem from an application made by Randy Rusotti to build an RV park near Iotla Bridge that would include 175 RV sites and 24 two-bedroom cottages. The development would discharge 26,760 gallons of treated wastewater into the Little Tennessee each day. The changes would also include a new watershed designation of WS-EQW (excellent quality water).

George Sweet, chairman of the Macon County Watershed Council, called the section of the river between Lake Emory and Fontana Dam “the most biologically complete stretch of river in North Carolina.” Sweet pointed out that covering as little as 10 percent with impervious surfaces would cause a degradation in water quality (the proposal asks for a limit of 12 percent).

Macon County Board of Commissioners Chairman Harold Corbin asked Sweet if it was possible to exclude tributaries of that section of river from the ordinance. Sweet recommended against it but said other changes could be made. For instance, construction limitations would extend only 1,000 feet on either side of the river rather than the originally proposed 1/2 mile. Sweet said this would “substantially increase the amount of land not affected.”

Sweet also suggested that commissioners could increase the impervious surface limitation to 18 percent from 12 percent. Sweet said the Watershed Council “wants to protect the river, but also wants to work with landowners .... We have to live here, and people need to be able to use their property,” he said.

The original proposal also contains a 30-foot buffer zone on either side of the river, and Sweet said that zone could also be removed if necessary. Tributaries, though, are just as important as the river, said Sweet.

About 20 of the speakers supported the proposed changes.

Will Lucius, a college student who spends his summers working for the Great Smoky Mountain Fish and Safari, said, “If we treat this like a second-rate river, we’ll get second-rate results.”

Sue Waldroop said she is in support of the amendment, and also delivered a message from her son-in-law, David Tippett, who is currently among soldiers fighting in Afghanistan.

“Please tell the county comissioners that running sewage into the river is not one of the freedoms I am over here fighting for,” said Waldroup.

Mary McLaughlin said she represented the League of Women Voters which “promotes citizen participation in government” and supports clean water. She said the group is pleased that local government is working on the issue.

Aquatic biologist Bill McLarney said that the quality of water in the river is a “function of everything – tributaries included,” and that passing the amendments would be “wise and forsightful” on the part of the county.

Those against the changes — including Sandra Hann, Marty Kimsey and county comissioner candidate Norm Roberts — said the very scheduling of the meeting was illegal. Hann said she spoke for many people who could not attend because they worked during the day. She said nobody wants dirty water, but that a lot of ordinances are “overlapping.”

“We already have the Clean Water Act,” she said.

“If the environmentalists have their way, we’ll have to have permission to mow the grass and flush our toilets,” said Hann.

Kimsey said that the proposed ordinance changes were not needed, saying that a buffer zone is already in place for the flood plain ordinance.

“If you want back door zoning, vote for this,” he said.

Roberts distributed a lengthy press release which stated that the hearing was “illegal, because of the corrupt process which brought this ordinance to the public this morning.” He said the first map he was given of the proposed watershed changes showed the 1,000-foot proposal. A second map was given to him which showed the 1/2-mile proposal. He said that the “wrong map was displayed in the courthouse until Tuesday or Wednesday of last week.” The “correct” map was displayed after June 6, Roberts added.

Alan Allman owns 64 acres of land at the “head of Burningtown Creek” and that “with a 50-foot buffer ... I’d have roughly seven acres of land left which I could call my own.”

“The reason for this amendment is to put one fellow out of business,” said Allman. Wastewater from the RV park would be “almost pure enough to drink,” he said.

Corbin said he thought the hearing went very well, and that he wasn’t surprised by the folks who spoke out against the proposed changes.

“Those folks would be against springtime and motherhood,” he said.