All airport documents requested in lead up to runway lawsuit
An environmental group out of Asheville plans to sue the Macon County Airport Authority and other parties involved in the proposed extension of the runway.
The group, Wild South, wants to stop the runway from being extended, saying the project is unnecessary, will harm the rural character of the Iotla Valley and endanger Cherokee artifacts and burial grounds, as well as other historic sites.
Lamar Marshall of Wild South said a 60-day notice to sue the Airport Authority will soon be filed. Afterwards, Wild South will seek an injunction to stop the project from moving forward, Wild South attorney Stephen Novak said.
Novak said he is unclear at the moment who will be named in the lawsuit.
The organization has also filed a federal Freedom of Information Act request and state public records request to obtain documents related to the proposed runway extension. The records request seeks documents from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation in Washington, the Federal Aviation Administration, the N.C. Department of Transportation Division of Aviation, the state archaeologist, and the Macon County Airport Authority.
Novak said he hopes the public records will give Wild South a better idea of who should be named in the lawsuit.
The Airport Authority will comply with the records requests, said the board’s attorney Joe Collins.
“If it’s something they’re entitled to see, we’ll certainly give it to them,” Collins said.
Reviewing all the documents associated with the runway extension will give Wild South an understanding of “who said what to whom” in regards to the runway extension, Novak said.
Marshall with Wild South said the Airport Authority is “trying to brush us off,” but it won’t work.
“We’re taking them to court,” said Marshall. “We’re going to sue them.”
The hope is that “damning” information will be found through the public records requests, said Marshall.
The Airport Authority has “definitely not followed the letter of the law,” said Marshall.
Marshall asserts that the Airport Authority and other parties violated the National Historic Preservation Act by ignoring the archaeological significance of the airport site.
Marshall also charges that the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act were violated.
He claims that endangered species in Iotla Creek and the Little Tennessee River will be endangered by runoff from the airport.
An environmental assessment found that the runway extension would have “no significant impact” on the site. But Marshall said the environmental assessment was done without consulting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and based on out of date information.
Marshall said taxpayer money should be withdrawn from the proposed $3.5 million runway extension. The nation is facing an economic crisis, and there are better things to spend money on than extending an airport runway, said Marshall.
“Why dump money into this when it is only going to benefit rich people in Highlands?” Marshall asked.
Moreover, extending the airport runway is just laying the groundwork for more development to take place in the tranquil valley, said Marshall.
Jackson leaders grapple over ending fight with Duke
An effort to end a six-year-long dispute between Jackson County and Duke Energy failed in a 3-2 vote last week, as the county commissioners decided to move forward with the case to save the Dillsboro dam.
County Commissioner Tom Massie made a motion to end the legal fight against Duke, allowing the utility to dredge the river and move forward with tearing down the dam.
Massie has been the lone commissioner in favor of ending the fight against Duke, saying it is a waste of time and money for the county to continue. For the first time he was joined in that sentiment by Commissioner William Shelton.
By continuing to fight the matter, Jackson County is “squandering” taxpayer money on an “un-winnable case,” Massie said, adding that some $200,000 has been spent by the county so far on legal fees and technical assistance in the case.
County Commission Chairman Brian McMahan voted against dropping the case because he still thinks it is “winnable.”
Commissioner Mark Jones said the county might as well continue to fight the case because it has already invested so much money and it doesn’t look like much more will have to be spent to see it through.
“I am for the preservation of the Dillsboro dam,” said Jones.
Commissioner Joe Cowan also voted against stopping the fight.
Shelton, even though he voted to throw in the towel, also favors preserving the dam, but thinks it is a lost cause because Duke has so much more money and resources that it can bury the county.
“I agree with the fight in principle,” Shelton said.
Hedging its bets
There are basically three different tracks the county is pursuing to stop demolition of the Dillsboro Dam and to exact higher compensation out of Duke for its host of dams straddling Jackson County rivers.
One track is refusing to issue certain permits that the county says are necessary to tear down the dam. The county says it can’t issue the permits until the other matters are resolved, but Duke thinks the county is simply trying to delay the razing of the dam.
Another track involves a challenge to the state water quality permit needed to tear down the dam. According to the county, the permit is flawed for a host of reasons, from lack of public notice to the lack of a proper environmental review.
The county got word late last week that the challenge, which was previously denied a hearing, now has a green light to move forward under an administrative law judge (see related article).
The final track deals with a federal permit issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The county says that permit is invalid because it was granted based on the invalid state water quality permit. The county also claims that FERC has not required Duke to provide adequate compensation to the region and overlooked environmental issues related to Duke’s dams.
That case is now pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington.
Through the years, several decisions have been handed down against Jackson County, and Massie doesn’t think things will change.
“I am against a federal court challenge,” he stated.
Massie added that the county’s arguments against Duke are merely technicalities.
The permits the county refuses to give Duke deal with dredging sediment backlogged behind the dam. The county says the silt must be dredged to prevent it from rushing downstream and causing environmental problems when the dam is removed.
Duke says it may not even need the county permits because it already has a state permit. But Duke has said it will not move forward without the county permits. Meanwhile, the state permit Duke is relying on is what’s being contested by the county.
Massie sees no reason why the county should withhold the permits for Duke to dredge, saying dredging the river “benefits all.”
There are several reasons why some want to save the Dillsboro dam. The dam is seen by some as a water feature that draws tourists, while others think it has historical significance. The dam could also be used to generate hydroelectricity.
Re-licensing
Duke must have a federal license to operate it series of hydropower dams, but those licenses are up for renewal. In order to get the new licenses, Duke must give back to the area it has profited from.
Duke has profited from using the Tuckasegee River to generate electricity, and therefore should make some payment to Jackson County when it comes time to re-license its dams.
Duke has proposed that it can pay back Jackson County by tearing down the dam, which will open up the river. Whitewater enthusiasts, such as the American Whitewater organization, have favored this.
Shelton said rather than Duke giving something back that benefits the entire county, it is simply pleasing special interests.
Instead of tearing down the dam (which Duke is no longer using to generate power anyway), Duke could give back to the county by providing slope stability and conservation easements, Shelton said.
What Duke is proposing doing for Jackson County “pales in comparison” to what it and other utilities have done in other areas in re-licensing agreements, Shelton said.
Duke may be refusing to give in to the county because it doesn’t want to set a precedent of giving more than it wants to, Shelton said.
Also Duke has proposed to give Jackson County $350,000 over the term of the re-licensing — potentially 40 years. Massie and Shelton agree that $350,000 over 40 years does not come close to compensating Jackson County for what Duke has made off its series of dams.
Shelton said Duke has not acted in good faith and said it is giving “very little back.”
“Our area deserves to be compensated for our resource,” he said.
Shelton said another option is taking over ownership of the dam through condemnation. By giving into Duke, Shelton said he is waving his white flag of surrender but at the same time the flag says, “Shame on Duke.”
Duke sues Jackson County for holding permits hostage
Duke Energy filed a lawsuit against Jackson County and county Planning Director Linda Cable on Monday (Jan. 5) for failing to issue permits necessary for the removal of the Dillsboro dam.
Duke warned the county about a month ago that if the Land Development Compliance Permit and the Floodplain Development Permit were not issued within a month that further legal action would follow. Yet the county has continued to hold up the permits.
The state is requiring Duke to remove approximately 70,000 cubic yards of sediment backlogged behind the dam before tearing it down.
Duke already has state permits in hand for the dredging, but seems to need permits from the county as well. But the county refuses to grant them until an administrative appeal over tearing down the dam is resolved. It is unclear when the appeal may be resolved.
Duke believes the county is purposely delaying tearing down the dam. The county wants to save the dam and has been involved in a lengthy battle against Duke over the issue. (see article on page 8)
The lawsuit seeks damages in “excess of $10,000 for defendants’ illegal actions.”
The removal of the dam is required by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Duke notes in the lawsuit.
“Jackson County’s actions are utterly without legal foundation and taken for an improper purpose in violation of plaintiff’s constitutional rights and have and will continue to cause the plaintiff damage,” the lawsuit states.
Duke has met all requirements for the permits, and the county’s withholding of them is arbitrary and capricious, according to the lawsuit.
And the county’s refusal to grant the permits violates the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution and the equal protection and law of the land clauses of the N.C. Constitution, the lawsuit states.
Duke Business Relations Manager Fred Alexander of Franklin said Duke does not believe it needs the permits but in an effort to be non-confrontational applied for them. Duke applied for the Land Development Compliance Permit in July and the Floodplain Permit in November.
The normal practice of the county is to issue the permits within one week, the lawsuit states.
Duke received a state permit from the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources in June for the sediment dredging.
County Commission Chairman Brian McMahan had no comment on the lawsuit Monday, saying he had not read it.
Victim’s family sues REACH for negligence
REACH of Jackson County, a non-profit that aids victims of domestic violence, is being sued by the family of a woman shot and killed at a domestic violence shelter last September by her deranged husband.
Judge rules Realtors’ loss is not irreparable
A group of Realtors and developers challenging the legality of Jackson County’s five-month moratorium on new subdivisions lost the first round in court Thursday (May 24).
Lawsuit seeks lifting of subdivision moratorium
A group of Realtors and developers filed a lawsuit against Jackson County this week over a subdivision moratorium imposed by the county in February.
American Whitwater withdraws lawsuit on Chattooga paddling
American Whitewater has withdrawn its lawsuit challenging a paddling ban on the upper Chattooga River outside Cashiers.
Emergency room group sues HRMC
A long-time group of emergency room doctors in Haywood County filed a lawsuit against Haywood Regional Medical Center this week.
Lawsuit thrown out, paddlers pledge appeal
Hikers, fishermen and environmentalists won a small victory last week in an on-going tug-of-war with paddlers over the upper Chattooga River — a Wild and Scenic River that tumbles off the Cashiers plateau.
Macon superintendent departs amid harassment suit
By Sarah Kucharski • Staff Writer
Macon County schools personnel director Tamra Tisdale has filed a sexual harassment suit against outgoing Macon County School Superintendent Rodney Shotwell.
The filing brings to light the probable content of recent closed-door Macon County Board of Education meetings. Earlier this month the board hired the law firm of Helms, Mullis and Wicker to investigate two formal complaints from school employees. The law firm will report back to the school board at the conclusion of the investigation.