Macon County commissioners vote to hold public hearing on taking direct control of local health department

Macon County commissioners voted unanimously July 8 to hold a public hearing in September on whether the elected Board of Commissioners should assume direct control of the county health department and convert the appointed Board of Health into an advisory committee.

The vote came after a two-hour joint meeting between the county commission and the Macon County Board of Health in which commissioners and health-board members aired recurring complaints from residents and county staff about communication, permitting backlogs and low morale at the health department.

Why it matters: Commissioners emphasized that elected officials are accountable to voters for county operations and said the current governance arrangement — in which an appointed health board and a health director manage day-to-day operations under state public-health rules — has left the commission with limited authority over personnel and operations. Health-board members warned that statutory limits and state oversight complicate governance and that more open communication is needed before structural changes are made.

At the meeting, Commissioner Barry Bridal framed the issue as one of county economic development and service delivery, saying county leaders must be able to act on complaints from residents and employees. Commissioner Gary Shields told the joint meeting, “The appointed Board of Health should be an advisory board to this elected body,” arguing the commission should have primary oversight of the agency.

Jerry Hermanson, who opened the Board of Health’s portion of the meeting and identified himself as representing the general public on that board, urged better channels for complaints and said, “If we don’t know there’s problems and we’re not communicated with, we can’t do our job to make sure things are run well.” Health-board members said they already meet regularly, have evaluation processes for the health director and are prepared to consider whether the body should assume a different advisory role if the commission seeks it.

Legal context and next steps: County legal counsel referenced North Carolina statutes governing local public health boards and county control, citing the state provision discussed at the meeting as “153A-77” and related membership rules described in the transcript as “138-35.” The attorney said that if the commission decides to assume direct control, state law requires appointment of an advisory committee with specific professional representation and a public hearing before the commission can act. The commission’s motion authorized staff to place a resolution on a future agenda and to advertise a public hearing; the board set that hearing for the September meeting to gather public comment before any final decision.

What commissioners said about operations: Several county commissioners and health-board members described practical problems that shaped the discussion. Environmental permitting had a significant backlog in earlier months but, per remarks in the meeting, had recently improved to “less than two weeks” wait time. Commissioners said animal services, morale and communication about internal complaints remain concerns. Board members and the county manager encouraged residents and staff to bring complaints to the health board or to the county manager so the appropriate body could respond.

No immediate personnel action: Commissioners discussed personnel concerns raised during the meeting but were advised by counsel that, because of the current governance structure and state rules, only the health board exercises certain personnel authorities for health-department employees. Commissioners said they were not seeking to address individual personnel matters in the joint public forum; instead the motion centers on examining the statutory governance model and hearing from the public.

Ending: The commission’s vote to advertise a public hearing sets a formal process in motion. If the commission moves forward after the hearing, any structural change would be taken following state statutory procedures and after a public-comment period. In the meantime, both bodies said they want clearer complaint pathways and more direct communication between county leaders, the health board and the health department to resolve operational problems.

Votes at a glance: During the same meeting the board approved several separate items by recorded vote; those outcomes were announced on the record.

- Health-board governance: Motion to consider adoption of a resolution to bring the county health department under direct county control and to make the Board of Health an advisory committee; motion approved; vote recorded as 5-0; public hearing scheduled for September.

- Macon County Library repairs: Approved a budget amendment and contract amendment with Wind River Construction to complete additional repairs and mold remediation at the county library; amount $52,281; motion passed, recorded vote 5-0.

- Recreation master plan design fees: Approved an amendment to contract with McGill & Associates for additional design fees for Phase 1A/1B (pickleball courts, shade structure and related work); amount not to exceed $19,910; motion passed, recorded vote 5-0.

- Lease for Auto Bar and Rescue: Approved a lease allowing Macon County EMS to house an ambulance at the Auto station; lease $2,000 per month (budgeted); motion passed, recorded vote 5-0.

- Highlands playground: Approved a $50,000 appropriation from fund balance toward a new Highlands recreation-park playground; motion passed, recorded vote 5-0.

- Dogwood Health Trust grant application: Approved applying for an invitation-only Dogwood Health Trust grant to support development of a local strategic plan around opioid-related funds; application amount $300,000; motion passed, recorded vote 5-0.

- Airport Authority appointments: Confirmed reappointments to the Airport Authority for Pete Hathcock and Janet Schuler; motion passed, recorded vote 5-0.

- Community funding pool: Commissioners discussed the county’s $75,000 community-funding pool (money carried into the 2025–26 budget). The board directed a subcommittee process to review applications and return recommendations to the commission; the board named commissioners to that subcommittee and approved the process on the record.

All votes listed above were announced on the record during the July 8 meeting; individual roll-call tallies and formal motion language appear in the official meeting minutes.