Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Roundup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press for clean water, school repairs and changes to animal-control rules
Summary
Public commenters urged the board to revisit a treated-water interconnection on Highway 421, prioritize maintenance for aging schools (citing $12.7 million in needs), and modernize county ordinance 6.6 to permit trap-neuter-return for community cats; several speakers also criticized recent property revaluations.
Several Pender County residents used the June 1 public-comment period to press the Board of Commissioners on water access, school facilities and local ordinances.
Cheryl Highsmith, a transplant recipient, described severe health risks from contaminated well water and urged the board to revisit a previously discussed treated-water interconnection from the Sampson County line to Highway 11/Highway 421. She cited a 2025 amendment that funded Hatfield Engineering for survey, design and permitting and asked the board and county manager to return with a report at the next meeting.
"We truly believe that each of you care about our water issue, and we are going to proceed," Highsmith told commissioners, asking for a prompt follow-up meeting.
Tom Brown criticized what he called the majority's "personal agenda," accusing the board of taking over a functioning EMS/fire nonprofit and drawing down fund balance for other projects.
Kaye Davis urged the board to prioritize reinvesting in existing school infrastructure rather than new construction, citing an identified $12.7 million in facility and site needs, including $5.3 million in deferred maintenance and $2.6 million for HVAC systems. "The fiscally responsible investment is to reinvest in the infrastructure we already own," she said.
Julie Roland asked the board to modernize Ordinance 6.6 to recognize community (feral) cats and protect caregivers who use trap-neuter-return (TNR) methods; she submitted a petition of more than 100 signatures and cited examples from other North Carolina counties.
Other commenters raised concerns about slow tax-appeal responses and sharp increases from the county's property revaluation. Staff said appeals are processed in batches and estimated roughly 150 per batch; one staffer said the list provided for retiree-related questions included about eight employees.
Board members responded by promising follow-up meetings and reports: the chair asked staff and the county manager to meet with Ms. Highsmith this week to schedule a solution, and commissioners said they would seek more information on appeals and revaluation questions at the June 15 meeting.
