The Dare County commissioners let down their constituents at their meeting on Tuesday night.
Their inaction on the request of Avon resident Mark Rawl to allow temporary seafood sales as a conditional land use under the county zoning regulations appeared, well, just plain cowardly.
The commissioners took no action, effectively killing Rawl?s effort without even taking a vote. It appears that they took the easy way out on what is a very thorny issue.
Temporary seafood sales have been discussed off and on for several years in Dare County.
They are allowed in all of the other counties of North Carolina and in several nearby states.
However, Dare Board of Health regulations have prohibited them here, giving the commissioners a convenient response to a growing number of folks who are in favor of the temporary sales, especially at such venues as farmers? markets.
However, groups such as Coastal Harvesters, which sponsors a farmers? market on Hatteras Island, some commercial fishermen, and finally Mark Rawl persuaded the health board to change the rules to allow temporary sales under very strict conditions.
However, temporary seafood sales are not a permitted land use under the county?s zoning regulations.
So Rawl took his fight to the county Planning Board and eventually the Board of Commissioners, which would have to approve any changes in the zoning text to allow temporary seafood sales.
At its Dec. 3 meeting, the board kicked the can down the road and set a public hearing for its Jan. 22 meeting.
Also, two commissioners, Allen Burrus and Max Dutton, asked to be recused from the deliberations. Burrus owns a supermarket in Hatteras village that sells some seafood and Dutton works for Harris-Teeter, a much larger market that also sells some seafood.
Some observers thought that Burrus and Dutton were also taking the cowardly way out of the fight just by asking to be excused. An argument can be made that seafood sales are just a small part of the retail sales of each market.
However, Burrus says that the two commissioners were advised by county manager Bobby Outten, who is also the county attorney, that if they were profiting from seafood sales they should recuse themselves from the discussion and the vote.
And that is what the two did at the Jan. 22 meeting. No commissioner objected and Burrus and Dutton left the room.
The remaining five commissioners then heard speakers at the public meeting.
Seven people spoke in favor of Rawl?s plan to sell seafood under a canopy at a farmers? market and another location in Avon. They included a fish dealer, three commercial fishermen, and a representative of Coastal Harvesters.
Four spoke against the plan, all seafood retailers.
Those who favor temporary sales cite the fact that all other counties do it without incident. They say the county should encourage entrepreneurs and small businesses and not try to stifle competition. And they note that the more places visitors can see, buy, and appreciate fresh, local seafood, the better it is for the island, tourism, and commercial fishing.
Those who oppose the temporary sales say that having to compete with sellers who don?t have to abide by the requirements of operating a retail seafood business is unfair competition. They say that allowing temporary sales will bring in unscrupulous dealers who will sell an inferior product from the back of a truck, thereby endangering public health.
Personally, I do not have a problem with temporary seafood sales if the sellers are properly regulated and the regulations are enforced.
But that is beside the point here.
What has disappointed many in the county is not whether or not the sales will be allowed but that our commissioners did not do the job we elected them to do?make decisions, even the tough ones.
Rawl — who addressed the commissioners again after the hearing, has worked on his plan for almost a year, and was grilled extensively by the members of the board in December and again this week ? deserved to have his day in court, so to speak.
If the commissioners believe temporary sales are unfair competition or a threat to public health or whatever, they should have said so and voted the text amendment down.
If they still had questions that they wanted answered, they could have shelved any action until they got answers.
They could have approved the text amendment and added conditions that would make it so onerous for dealers to meet them that they wouldn?t bother.
They did none of those things.
After the hearing and the lengthy discussion and questioning, commission chairman Warren Judge asked for a motion.
There was a long ? and almost embarrassing ? silence in the board room.
No one said a word and Judge moved on to other business.
This is not why we elect these men and women to represent us. We elect them to take care of business, not take the cowardly way out.
Mark Rawl has obviously worked hard on his plan and made it clear that he intends to bend over backwards to meet all the requirements he has to.
He deserved an answer ? a ?yes? or a ?no? ? from the board.
In theory, he can come back again with another proposal, but I think this board has already made it clear that they want no part of this contentious and very thorny issue.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
You can view a video of the board meeting at www.darenc.com.
http://outerbanksvoice.com/2013/01/23/board-inaction-sinks-avon-seafood-vendors-plan/
