<< Back 11/6/02 Jackson puts teeth into sediment law Problem addressed after fines dropped for planning chairman By Don Hendershot Questions about how to enforce Jackson County’s Sediment Control Ordinance have gained urgency after it was learned that the chairman of the planning board had been charged with violating the ordinance but did not have to pay a fine. Commissioners voted unanimously [chairman Jay Denton and commissioner Franz Whitmire were absent] on Oct. 17 to drop penalties against Mike Cooper and Ken Solomon that were assessed before July 25. That decision came after a proposed fine against planning board chairman and contractor Jack Debnam for violations cited between February and May of this year was also dropped. According to documents provided by Jackson County sediment control officer Jeff McCall, Jackson Land and Timber Inc. — of which Debnam is part owner — was first cited March 21. McCall’s report lists four violations: no approved plan, failure to provide adequate groundcover, insufficient measures to retain sediment on site, and failure to take all reasonable measures. The problems occurred at a subdivision the company is developing on Moonlight Drive. The company was cited again on April 5 and May 6. The first notice of the site being in compliance was McCall’s May 16 report. McCall said he was in regular contact with Debnam between March and May and the response he got was that Debnam was working on the problem. On April 5, McCall sent a memorandum to County Manager Ken Westmoreland suggesting a $7,450 fine for the violations. The memo states, “There are several more violations listed in the NOV, [Notice of Violation] but I think this would make a sufficient penalty.” Westmoreland said he had several meetings with Debnam and residents of Moonlight Drive (separately and together) in hopes of seeking a private settlement. Those meetings proved futile. Westmoreland and commissioners met in a closed session June 6 to discuss the problems. “We dropped the ball,” vice-chairman Stacy Buchanan said at the Oct. 17 meeting. Buchanan said when commissioners met in closed session to discuss a threatened lawsuit against Debnam which could involve the county, they discovered that no fee schedule had been adopted when the sediment ordinance was developed in 2000. Without the fee schedule, commissioners decided they could not impose any penalties. According to Westmoreland, the county subsequently passed a schedule of fines on July 25 that will be levied against the landowner or whomever is financially responsible for the development. “The way I look at these dates, if we couldn’t fine Mr. Debnam we can’t fine Mr. Cooper. There’s no use bringing any of these fines in here that happened before July 25,” Buchanan said. Betty Bradley and neighbors on Moonlight Drive were moved to contact the Sylva Herald after reading that paper’s story regarding a Sept. 19 work session between commissioners and the planning board. During the work session, Debnam and others suggested that the county consider holding contractors as well as land owners responsible for any sediment and erosion violations. “Jack Debnam dozed it off, left it bare and waited until it rained. The mud washed down into my spring, and I was without drinking water for six months. He knew all these rules and knew he wouldn’t have to pay a fine,” Bradley told commissioners at the Oct. 17 meeting. She said that having Debnam as chairman of the planning board was like letting the “wolf watch the sheep.” Bradley said that when she tried to talk to Debnam about the problem, “He laughed in my face and walked off.” Despite Bradley’s claim, Debnam declined to elaborate on the incident. “It’s not worth commenting about. The situation has gotten out of hand,” said Debnam. Debnam said he was advised by his lawyer not to comment on the incident. “When I learned they had a lawyer, I told them to talk to my lawyer,” he said. While allegations swirl, Debnam continues as planning board chairman. In that function, he chaired an Oct. 29 meeting between the planning board and area contractors to discuss the county’s sediment ordinance. Debnam said the meeting was for educational purposes. “A lot of these guys have never seen this plan [for disturbing less than an acre] and don’t know the procedures. Debnam told the 20 or so contractors gathered that the meeting was, “to find out what you think. This is not about fining grading contractors or penalizing anyone.” McCall said he thought the ordinance was having a positive impact but, “we have had a lot of bad publicity the last few weeks. No one wants to talk about the good jobs.” One primary concern of the contractors was legal liability. “What if the landowner doesn’t want to wait for a permit but wants the work done now? If I don’t do it, someone will. Who’s responsible?” asked Mike Cooper. “Our beef would be with the landowner,” McCall said. He said the only way a contractor would be liable was if he signed a financial responsibility form. Board members discussed other issues, including a grading permit for sites less than an acre, similar to a building permit, that would be required to be posted on the property before any land disturbance could begin. For areas an acre or larger, for which sediment and erosion plans are required, a permit is already required. McCall said he and Bentley Robinson of the Jackson County Soil and Conservation District were responsible for reviewing and approving sediment control plans. He said the ordinance provides 30 days for approval but most plans don’t take that long. Robinson explained some of the resources available to contractors and provided reference materials. He said his office was prepared to assist landowners wanting to disturb less than an acre but generally provided references and resources for larger jobs. The group also discussed licensing contractors to work in Jackson County. Many supported the idea. “What have we accomplished?” asked contractor Gary Buchanan after an hour or so of discussion. “This is the first time we’ve ever sat and talked. We just want you guys to help us out,” Debnam said. After the meeting, Debnam said there were some good ideas discussed and that a rapport had been established with contractors. He said there would probably be more meetings with contractors and commissioners before any recommendations were made. Asked about his position as chairman of the planning board, Debnam said he had no plans to leave. “But I was appointed by the commissioners and it’s up to them,” he said.