{"id":2808,"date":"2013-12-09T00:52:19","date_gmt":"2013-12-09T00:52:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/?p=2808"},"modified":"2013-12-09T00:55:26","modified_gmt":"2013-12-09T00:55:26","slug":"jordan-lake-rules-face-legislative-challenge","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/2013\/12\/09\/jordan-lake-rules-face-legislative-challenge\/","title":{"rendered":"Jordan Lake rules face legislative challenge"},"content":{"rendered":"

The News and Observer reports about the Triangle’s upstream fight for the Jordan Lake rules in this Nov 19 story<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

RALEIGH<\/span> \u2014 The inter-regional political fight over Jordan Lake is churning again, and upstream legislators who want to delay or loosen environmental rules in favor of \u201ctechnological solutions\u201d may hold the advantage in the next phase.<\/p>\n

Elected officials from Greensboro and Burlington are the largest voting bloc on the legislature\u2019s Committee on Jordan Lake, making up half the panel that will guide a revamp of the multibillion-dollar Jordan Lake rules environmental program. <\/strong>The areas that use or plan to use Jordan Lake\u2019s drinking water will be outnumbered on the board, holding three of its 10 regular seats.<\/p>\n

To Elaine Chiosso, an environmentalist who heads the Haw River Assembly, the board\u2019s makeup doesn\u2019t adequately represent downstream users. Downstream representation is important, Chiosso said, because upstream cities are heavily affected by pollution-control rules and have greater incentive to undo them.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s an interesting watershed, in that the biggest city by far \u2026 is Greensboro, which sits at the headwaters,\u201d she said. \u201cSo they have always seen Jordan Lake as sort of a nuisance. \u2026 They\u2019re too far away to use it for drinking water, or even much for recreation.\u201d<\/p>\n

The new committee, named Oct. 29, is charged with analyzing Jordan Lake and other polluted waters, reviewing state law about watershed management, gathering comment and recommending a new clean-up strategy, which would need approval from the General Assembly.<\/p>\n

In all, five regular members represent the upstream cities, while three represent Durham, Chatham and western Wake counties, which draw water from the lake.<\/p>\n

Another member, Sen. Neal Hunt, comes from Raleigh and voted to delay the rules; and Sen. Thom Goolsby, also a delay supporter, represents Wilmington, at the end of the Cape Fear River downstream of Jordan Lake.<\/p>\n

\"\"Sen. Rick Gunn says members of the Triad delegation are just as determined as their Triangle colleagues to improve water quality in the 16-mile-long reservoir. He led the charge to repeal the rules this summer and now is a chairman of the study committee.<\/p>\n

Voting records show Gunn can expect support in the new group. In all, seven of the 10 regular members voted this summer to delay the rules for three years \u2013 a victory for upstream legislators and Triad developers who had pushed against the pollution controls.<\/p>\n

The vote also illustrated a regional split. Almost 80 percent of upstream legislators voted for the delay, while about 75 percent of the Triangle delegation voted against it.<\/p>\n

Pollution controls<\/span><\/p>\n

Gunn, of Burlington, is skeptical of the state\u2019s current approach to Jordan Lake, which relies heavily on pollution controls that aim to keep nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous out of the lake. Development of upstream land \u2013 grading, clear-cutting, and paving \u2013 allows more of these nutrients to flow into creeks and streams, feeding algae in the lake that make the water murkier and more alkaline, diminishing its quality.<\/p>\n

To prevent this, the current rules call for runoff control on thousands of new and existing properties, most often in upstream areas like the Triad. Gunn\u2019s hope and claim is that technology, such as a fleet of water circulators that churn the lake, can help clear the water.<\/p>\n

\u201cHigh nutrients in itself is not a bad thing,\u201d he said last week. \u201cHow we manage those nutrients is what\u2019s important. I have been, and I still am, very skeptical that the policies that were put in place in Jordan Lake would have a material effect.\u201d<\/p>\n

Rep. Tom Murry, a Republican who represents western Wake County, fought for the current rules during this year\u2019s debate, joining a counter-push by Triangle legislators that stopped a full repeal. Murry acknowledged that the board\u2019s geography may favor the Triad over the Triangle, with a caveat.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhile it might look like it’s an uphill battle based on the makeup of the committee, there\u2019s always a way to make sure that the interests of Cary, Morrisville \u2026 and western Wake County are well-represented,\u201d he said. His goals, he said, are to avoid \u201cwasting taxpayer dollars on technology that might not be effective,\u201d and \u201cto make sure that we’re not doing any harm to the quality of Jordan Lake at the same time through the relaxation of rules.\u201d<\/p>\n

Murry also pointed out that he had the backing of Rep. Nelson Dollar, a lead Republican budget writer from Cary.<\/p>\n

Rep. Rick Glazier, a Democrat representing Cumberland County, had harsher words about the new committee and the revision of the lake clean-up plan.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s not been a particularly transparent, fair or deliberate process, so it\u2019s not all that surprising to me that the committee\u2019s not all that balanced,\u201d said Glazier, who did not seek a seat on the committee.<\/p>\n

Like all such groups, the Jordan Lake committee is part of the legislative research commission, led by state Sen. Tom Apodaca and Rep. Tim Moore, both of whom are ex-officio members of all research groups. Neither legislator returned a call for comment.<\/p>\n

Gunn argued that his new group\u2019s mentality, not its geography, would determine its course. He said some parts of the current rules could make it into his committee\u2019s recommendation.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe are going to work together to find the best way to resolve, both from a quality-management and regulation standpoint, to do what’s best,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Start of a long process<\/span><\/p>\n

The committee will begin meeting in December, returning a report during the legislative short session next year, he said.<\/p>\n

That may only begin a long process. The current Jordan Lake program was debated for six years before Gov. Bev Perdue signed it into law in 2009.<\/p>\n

Sen. Floyd McKissick Jr., a Durham Democrat and committee member, says the new panel\u2019s work could affect the state\u2019s strategies for Falls Lake and other crucial water supplies. But the outcome, McKissick said, can\u2019t be predicted by the group\u2019s membership.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere\u2019s certainly what I would call a geographical, a careful geographical balancing\u2026,\u201d he said. \u201cBut the thing I\u2019d be concerned about more than geographical balance is ideological open-mindedness.\u201d<\/p>\n

Asked how that was looking, he laughed and said, \u201cYet to be determined.\u201d<\/p>\n

Kenney: 919-829-4870; Twitter: @KenneyNC<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Read more here: http:\/\/www.newsobserver.com\/2013\/11\/19\/3387832\/triangle-lawmakers-face-upstream.html#storylink=cpy<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The News and Observer reports about the Triangle’s upstream fight for the Jordan Lake rules in this Nov 19 story. RALEIGH \u2014 The inter-regional political fight over Jordan Lake is churning again, and upstream legislators who want to delay or loosen environmental rules in favor of \u201ctechnological solutions\u201d may hold the advantage in the next […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"post_folder":[],"class_list":["post-2808","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2808","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2808"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2808\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2812,"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2808\/revisions\/2812"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2808"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2808"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2808"},{"taxonomy":"post_folder","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bolincreek.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/post_folder?post=2808"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}