Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
43 <br /> DRAFT <br /> 1 SUMMARY NOTES <br /> 2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD <br /> 3 NOVEMBER 3,2021 <br /> 4 ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE <br /> 5 <br /> 6 NOTE: A quorum is not required for Planning Board Ordinance Review Committee meetings or Training Sessions. <br /> 7 <br /> 8 Due to current public health concerns, the ORC meeting/training session was virtual. Members of the Planning Board and staff <br /> 9 participated in the meeting remotely. <br /> 10 <br /> 11 MEMBERS PRESENT: David Blankfard (Chair), Hillsborough Township Representative;Adam Beeman (Vice-Chair), Cedar <br /> 12 Grove Township Representative; Lamar Proctor, Cheeks Township Representative; Kim Piracci, Eno Township <br /> 13 Representative; Carrie Fletcher, Bingham Township Representative; Statler Gilfillen,At-Large Representative; <br /> 14 Randy Marshall,At-Large Representative; Susan Hunter, Chapel Hill Township Representative;Whitney Watson,At-Large <br /> 15 Representative; Melissa Poole, Little River Township Representative; Charity Kirk,At-Large Representative; <br /> 16 <br /> 17 STAFF PRESENT: Perdlta Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; <br /> 18 Ashley Moncado, Planner II;Tina Love,Administrative Support <br /> 19 <br /> 20 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER <br /> 21 <br /> 22 AGENDA ITEM 2: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS — DECRIMINALIZATION OF ORDINANCE <br /> 23 VIOLATIONS-To review proposed LIDO amendments in response to Session Law 2021-138 (Senate Bill <br /> 24 300) which decriminalized violations of certain types of ordinances, including ordinance regulating <br /> 25 planning and development. <br /> 26 PRESENTER: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor <br /> 27 <br /> 28 Michael Harvey gave the Planning Board members background and information regarding the need to amend the UDO in <br /> 29 response to legislative changes regarding decriminalization of violations as it related to some planning and development land <br /> 30 use regulations and answered questions. <br /> 31 <br /> 32 Charity Kirk: We have to do this because the state has made a law change,we don't really have a choice. <br /> 33 <br /> 34 Michael Harvey: Correct, state law now says you can no longer do this(i.e. impose criminal penalties)to enforce a land use <br /> 35 regulation. We're engaging in an ordinance amendment to make sure we are consistent with state law. <br /> 36 <br /> 37 Lamar Proctor: You are still permitted to seek criminal charges for some violations, right? <br /> 38 <br /> 39 Michael Harvey: Correct,we still have legal authority to seek a criminal charge for a violation of erosion control and flood plain <br /> 40 regulations. <br /> 41 <br /> 42 Statler Gilfillen: This is mostly procedural and you've not had experiences in the past where you've ever had to formally file a <br /> 43 criminal charge. <br /> 44 <br /> 45 Michael Harvey: Correct, in 25 years as a planner and being an enforcement officer, I have never filed a criminal charge for <br /> 46 violation of land use regulations. <br /> 47 <br /> 48 Statler Gilfillen: As an extreme hypothetical, if someone had 100 acres and decided to bring in truckloads of nuclear waste and <br /> 49 dump it in the middle of the property and they do it consciously and willfully,where does something like that fall? <br /> 50 <br /> 51 Michael Harvey: We would seek an order of cessation and abatement through the court system. We could not seek criminal <br /> 52 charges any longer. The federal or state governments may be able to seek some sort of criminal redress but we cannot. <br /> 53 <br /> 1 <br />