Chairman Nickelston turned the floor over to Commissioner Morris. Commissioner Morris read the following prepared statement: During the past few years Agri-Tourism has been a major thrust by both the state and local governments to boost tourism and to provide an additional source of revenue to farmers. Farmers have been hit especially hard during the Covid 19 virus due to low commodity prices, high labor cost and labor shortages. Stokes County has strongly supported Agri-Tourism to assist our local citizen farmers. To make Agri-tourism feasible for farmers new regulations have been developed where many requirements that normally apply to commercial business activities have been relaxed when using bonafide farmland, farm buildings and other farm facilities to stage Agri-Tourism events. I was at such an Agri-Tourism event this past Saturday in Stokes County and observed a situation that I think requires the attention of Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). I was quite surprised to see the arrival of a group of county building and environmental health inspectors to the festival just as the event organizers were attempting to get the event started. I was there early because I was working with the Ruritans to sell food at the event. For the record, I had no other involvement in the planning or preparation for the event apart from putting out a couple of directional road signs in King and displaying my antique tractor at the event. This event was widely advertised by road banners, on local radio, on social media outlets and it was mentioned by one of our commissioners two weeks ago at our last regular meeting. During the festival and afterward, I have been approached by several county citizens questioning me about the timing of the inspections and the disruption it caused at the beginning of the event. I told them I would investigate and get them an answer. As far as the actual inspections went, the inspectors conducted themselves in a very professional manner. They found some items that they asked the event organizers to address. I received no complaints from the Public about the inspectors or how they conducted their inspections. The complaints were just about the timing of the inspection and the disruption it caused, which was my concern as well. From a commissioner perspective, I have a larger concern which is policy. More specifically, do our local policies properly support Agri-Tourism? It is important that our policies facilitate Agri-Tourism events by preventing confusion and ensuring farmers feel they are supported by local government in staging these events. Things like last minute inspections that could totally disrupt an event could have a chilling effect on other farmers considering such events. Our job as commissioners is to provide sound policy that makes it as easy as possible for farmers to hold successful Agri-Tourism events in Stokes County. Below are some questions I would like answered for the board. The purpose of the questions is to answer the public inquiries on the timing of the inspections at the Foothills Festival and to gain information needed for a review of the county’s policies related to Agri-Tourism. My questions are not designed to criticize or put anyone on the spot. They are just to provide transparency to the Public and prevent future situations like the one at the festival that could damage the county’s Agri-Tourism component of economic development. My questions are: 1. Who specifically was involved in the decision process to send county building and environmental health inspectors to the Foothills Farm Festival? 2. Was there any suspicion by the decision maker(s) about the last-minute nature of the complaint just before close of business and only a few hours before the start of the event? 3. Was the person(s) who filed the complaint asked by anyone exactly when they became aware of the situation for which they were filing a last-minute complaint? 4. Was the county attorney involved and if so, what was the legal issue and who spoke to him? 5. Exactly what time was the decision made to send the inspectors out on Saturday morning? 6. When the decision was made to send inspectors on Saturday morning, was any consideration given to making a courtesy call to the event organizers to notify them of the impending visit and to inform them of the nature of the complaint? If not, why not since the county’s policy is to support and facilitate Agri-Tourism events, not intentionally disrupt them? 7. Was any consideration given to notifying the entire board of commissioners that the decision had been made to send inspectors out during the weekend to conduct the unannounced inspections? In summary, if policy changes are needed to address, facilitate, and encourage Agri-Tourism then I feel they should be made as soon as possible. Most of my concerns and those expressed to me by others are addressed in the 7 questions I have posed, though the responses may lead to additional questions from me or other board members. I would like to get written answers to the questions by next Monday so the board members can decide if additional information is needed for our policy discussions. I am especially interested in the responses to questions #3, #6 and #7. I think it is important that we can show the public that our policies do not allow an individual or group to weaponize county departments against other citizens or event organizers. If Stokes County is serious about promoting Agri-Tourism then its policies need to walk the talk and clearly demonstrate support for the farmers who want to assume the risk and make the financial investment to stage these type of events. Chairman Nickelston opened the floor for any discussion/comments/questions. Chairman Nickelston requested that Larry Lawson be allowed to address the Board regarding this due to the complaint was filed by him. Larry Lawson provided information to the Board on the nature of the complaint and his rationale for filing this due to he was concerned for the safety of the public and that his knowledge as a licensed electrical contractor led to him filing the complaint. He noted that he was in support of anyone trying to promote Stokes County, but that it did need to be done in a safe manner. County Manager Oakley noted that he would be glad to answer the questions asked tonight. He stated that he was in support of anyone having an event but due to the nature of the complaint that he was forced to act on this for the safety of the public. He noted that if the Board would like to discuss the policies and procedures surrounding events that he would be glad to gather any information and bring that back to the Board for future discussion. Chairman Nickelston noted that he was in support of farmers and anyone trying to have an event. He noted that he provided the information on the event and the complaint to the County Manager and the County Attorney and that the County Manager made the call on how to handle the situation. Commissioner Lankford stated that this issue had been discussed enough and that they should move forward with the meeting. Commissioner Morris noted that he agreed with the decision to go out and that his reasoning for wanting this on the agenda was to discuss the policy and the last minute calls. He requested that the written answers to the questions be put on the next agenda. Chairman Nickelston noted that he had a duty to report this information and that according to the violations that were found the complaint was legitimate. He stated that he commended the county employees for handling this in a professional manner and helping to be sure the event could proceed. Commissioner Walker noted that he did not see a problem and that he had not detected any ill intent in this situation. He stated that everyone seemed to be acting in good faith, and that he did not see a problem here, but rather an opportunity to learn from this and move on. |