On May 7, The Beacon posted the following notice:

“Mark your calendars for Tuesday, May 19, at 9 a.m., if you would like to submit what appear to be your last public comments before the Town Council votes on approving an estimated $14 million to $16 million nourishment project of the entire Southern Shores coastline.”

Having now reviewed the videotape of the Town Council’s May 5 meeting, we are no longer certain that the Council will make a decision about a beach-nourishment project on May 19 or that May 19 will be the last opportunity for the public to comment.

The Council’s May 19 workshop, which will be held at 9 a.m. in the Pitts Center, will likely be devoted to a discussion of the desire and need for beach nourishment, the project options recommended by a coastal-engineering consultant, and potential funding for a project, but Council members may not take a vote on approving a specific project option. They may delay a vote until some time in June.

In fact, Councilman Matt Neal, who took the lead last week on pushing for a meeting dedicated to beach nourishment, suggested that the Council have a “good solid meeting and discussion” on May 19, looking at the “necessity” for nourishment in Southern Shores and some proposed municipal service district tax rates that have been prepared for funding it, but not take a vote.

He suggested instead that a two- or four-week period ensue during which the Town would “solicit public comments.”

Mayor Pro Tem Elizabeth Morey endorsed Mr. Neal’s approach, suggesting that the Town staff be “tasked” with figuring out “how to solicit public opinion.” She floated the idea of a townwide survey. Interim Town Manager Wes Haskett said he would bring options to the May 19 workshop session.

We want to “try to be proactive,” Ms. Morey said. We want to “push to try to get people to tell us what they think.”

Town Attorney Ben Gallop clarified that a public hearing does not need to be held on the issue of approving a beach nourishment project. It is strictly up to the Town Council to decide how it will receive public input, he said, when and by what means.

While The Beacon congratulates both Mr. Neal and Ms. Morey for taking the beach-nourishment bull by the horns, if you will—AT LAST—and for giving the public its due, we have to say that procedurally, their comments came up in an unusual manner, which contributed to the confusion of what was actually decided.

Councilman Jim Conners had just made a motion to amend the FY 2019-21 budget to spend $12,203 in unassigned funds on permitting-related work for a hitherto unapproved beach-nourishment project, and Councilman Leo Holland had seconded the motion.

Mayor Tom Bennett had turned to Councilman Neal to start a roll-call vote on the motion, and it was at this moment that Mr. Neal opened a discussion on the Council’s need to consider and either approve or disapprove beach nourishment before committing any more monies to a project.

The Beacon has been critical of the Council’s delay in making this decision, while going ahead with paying a consultant $4,970 to apply for a grant for an entire-coastline nourishment project and spending other monies, including $35,000 to a consultant to prepare preliminary financial data designed to be used to assess increased tax rates on property owners.

The $12,203 budget amendment that Mr. Conners motioned to approve—a revision by Mr. Haskett of a $47,599 amendment that he had originally requested—was another such expense.

“In our defense,” Mr. Neal said by way of explaining the delay, “we wanted feedback from the public.”

With Mr. Conners’s motion, Mr. Neal, who is a bright light on the Council, said he could no longer comfortably move forward “without making a decision” on beach nourishment—or at least defining a decision-making process.

THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT AND AN UPCOMING ONE FOR $450,000

The Beacon was critical in its Town Council meeting preview of the $47,599 FY 2019-20 budget amendment that Mr. Haskett brought to the Council.

The requested monies, according to meeting packet documents, were to pay consultant Coastal Protection Engineering of North Carolina (CPE-NC), formerly known as APTIM, $17,357 for “2020 annual beach profile data acquisition” and $18,039 for an “annual 2020 beach profile data analysis and report.”

It also included $12,203 for “inter-agency coordination” and permitting work related to an as-yet-unapproved 2022 beach nourishment project.

CPE-NC, whose president is the omnipresent Ken Willson, was selected by the towns of Duck, Southern Shores, Kitty Hawk, and Kill Devil Hills to represent them in jointly coordinating their 2022 beach nourishment/maintenance projects.

That the Town Council has not approved a project beyond the Pelican Watch beach maintenance did not stop the Council from fully joining the other towns, whose projects are much larger, in hiring a consultant/coordinator and sharing in expenditures.

Mr. Haskett described the $12,203 request as being for “our share, our 25 percent” of the costs for inter-agency coordination and permitting work.

The agencies with which Mr. Willson has been coordinating include all of the usual regulators, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, and the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.

Mr. Haskett said at the May 5 meeting that he has had “numerous conversations with Ken Willson over the past month,” but it was not until late April that the four towns selected CPE-NC to be their consultant coordinator, from among three applicants who responded to a Request for Qualifications.

Mindful of the fact that the Town has not yet committed to a large-scale beach nourishment project, Mr. Neal asked Mr. Haskett at last week’s meeting whether the Town would still have to pay to participate in the inter-agency coordination/permitting if it only went ahead with Pelican Watch maintenance.

Mr. Haskett replied: “I imagine we would have to pay our share of the costs for that part of it even though it would be on a smaller scale.”

The price “would probably change,” he said, but he didn’t indicate by how much it would be reduced. Only Mr. Neal seemed concerned.

Mr. Neal also questioned Mr. Haskett about the $4,970 fee that the Council had agreed to pay APTIM (CPE-NC not being known to the Council) to prepare two N.C. Dept. of Environmental Quality grant applications, one for money to apply to the Pelican Watch beach maintenance and another for money to apply to option four of the large-scale nourishment plans recommended by APTIM.

Mr. Haskett informed the Council at the budget workshop that the nearly $5,000 fee covered both grant applications. When he told the Council last week that Kitty Hawk had requested grant money for the Pelican Watch project in an application that CPE-NC prepared for it, Mr. Neal asked if the Town would receive some of its consultant fee back.

Mr. Haskett said no, seemingly contradicting the information he gave the Council earlier about APTIM’s fee.

***

In a previous post, The Beacon questioned Mr. Haskett’s description of the $47,599 budget amendment as being for “beach profile study” expenses only, when it obviously encompassed more. We also asked him to give an accounting of the $45,000 previously allocated in the FY 2019-20 budget for a beach study.

In response to Councilman Neal’s questions at the budget workshop about spring 2020 beach profiling, Mr. Haskett replied that the profiling had been done and the $45,000 appropriation had been spent.

At last week’s meeting, however, Mr. Haskett corrected himself to state that of the $45,000 previously appropriated, only $26,000 has been spent, which leaves enough money in the current budget to pay for the $17,357 that CPE-NC requested.

Mr. Haskett further reported that, according to Mr. Willson, the $18,039 request would not be spent by CPE-NC until fiscal year 2020-21, so this amount also was removed from the budget amendment. That left only the $12,203 expense that represents Southern Shores’ “share.”

After the Council decided to devote its May 19 workshop to beach nourishment, the roll call on Mr. Conners’s motion resumed, and the vote was unanimous to approve transferring monies from the Town’s unassigned fund balance to pay this amount.

Next up for the Council: A $450,000 permitting and design proposal from CPE-NC, which Mr. Haskett told members at the budget workshop would probably be submitted in late May.

Last week the Interim Town Manager did not mention timing of this proposal, only that the Town could expect to receive $250,000 from Dare County to alleviate some of the cost. Of course, until the County’s contribution is in hand, the Town is on the hook for $450,000—assuming it approves a large-scale beach-nourishment project.

When APTIM (now CPE-NC) recommended the four beach-nourishment project options it gave the Town, they ranged in cost from about $14 million to about $16 million. It is reasonable to expect costs to have increased.

As soon the agenda and meeting packet for the May 19 workshop are posted, The Beacon will share them with you.

ZOOM WORKING BETTER, OTHER PROTOCOL CONCERNS

We conclude our May 5 meeting report by noting that the audio for the Zoom video-conference was far superior to what we complained about previously. All Town Council members, including Mr. Neal, were easy to hear.

The only sound problems occurred when off-camera speakers, such as Police Chief David Kole and Fire Chief Ed Limbacher, gave their reports. We had to strain to hear what they were saying and were too often unsuccessful.

We also like the motion roll-call system that was initiated at last week’s meeting. We have never liked voice voting and do not see it used in other Dare County beach towns that are well run.

We do think the Town Council has to be careful about having Town Clerk Sheila Kane state motions, instead of one of them. Perhaps Mayor Pro Tem Morey should be delegated the task of restating motions, so as to ensure that Ms. Kane does not make any herself.

There was at least one time during the meeting when Ms. Kane actually framed the Town Council’s discussion into a motion, at the Mayor’s request, rather than just restate a motion that a Council member had made. Mayor Bennett is increasingly relying on Ms. Kane for support.

Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 5/11/20

 

The three Dare County residents who tested positive over the weekend for COVID-19 acquired the virus by direct contact, according to a Dare Emergency Management bulletin released today. (See The Beacon, 5/10/20.)

Their test results brought the total number of positive test results in the county to 21. There had been no new cases in Dare County for eight days before the weekend.

People who came in contact with these three individuals have been notified, according to COVID-19 Bulletin No. 59.

See https://www.darenc.com/Home/Components/News/News/6242/1483

The last six COVID-19 cases reported by Dare County are active, the bulletin said. Of these six, one person is hospitalized and the other five are recovering in home isolation.

“Active,” according to the bulletin, “means an individual currently has the COVID-19 virus and is being monitored daily by the health department.”

No other details were released about the three people who were infected. With whom did they come in contact? Where? There is no indication. The previous three people, cases 16-18, were reported to be in the same family and in home isolation.

Bulletin No. 59 also emphasizes face coverings as a “crucial part of the first line of defense against COVID-19.”

While Governor Roy Cooper has not required people to wear face coverings during Phase One, businesses may require them for their personnel and customers, the bulletin says. Dare Emergency Management is strongly encouraging local businesses to do so and to enforce a requirement on site.

STATEWIDE, North Carolina recorded only 281 new COVID-19 cases in the 24 hours since 11 a.m. yesterday, but the decline appears to be attributable to a decline in the number of tests completed. Only 3,730 tests were done in the same 24-hour period, which is far fewer than the 5,000 to 7,000 tests that the State would like to perform.

The all-important percent of positive tests results among the total completed tests increased to 7.5 percent today, up from 6.9 percent on Sunday and 6.5 percent on Saturday. This is not what public-health officials want to see.

North Carolina is 43^rd in the nation in tests administered per 1,000 residents through May 7, with only 15.7 people per 1,000 being tested, according to a report by the Kaiser Family Foundation.

The State was the 15^th overall, among 55 states and U.S. territories, in the total number of tests completed, through May 7, the report said.

The Kaiser Family Foundation analyzed data from the COVID Tracking Project, according to an article in The Raleigh News & Observer.

See article at https://www.newsobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article242594906.html.

North Carolina will have to ramp up its testing considerably if it is to achieve the data it needs to progress through the three-phase reopening plan outlined by the Governor.

Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 5/11/20

 

The number of positive COVID-19 test results in Dare County is now 21, an increase of two over yesterday’s total, according to today’s Dare Emergency Management dashboard.

Dare County has not posted a bulletin or videotape yet to explain the three new cases reported over the weekend. We expect it to do so tomorrow.

ON THE STATEWIDE BASIS . . . The number of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases reported during the 24 hours since 11 a.m. yesterday declined, but so did the number of completed tests. New cases numbered 404; tests totaled 5,773. The telltale percent of positive tests among the total increased to 6.9 percent from 6.3 percent yesterday.

Hospitalizations of COVID-19 patients declined during the past 24 hours, from 513 to 442.

The Beacon, 5/10/20

 

Recycling and Disposal Solutions (RDS) of Virginia has shown a willingness to be flexible with the proposed contract it presented to the Town for disposing of its curbside recycling and has offered better terms, Interim Town Manager Wes Haskett reported at the Town Council’s meeting last week.

Mr. Haskett said that he spoke with the president of RDS—whom he did not name—on April 24, and that the president indicated he could offer a contract for a term of one or two years, with an option to renew for five years, rather than insist on a five-year term.

Several Council members, including most vocally Councilman Jim Conners, objected to the five-year term offered in the draft contract.

Joe Benedetto, III, who is president of RDS, according to an online search, also offered a very generous truckload-contamination “threshold” of 18 percent, which is considerably better than the 12 percent threshold in the draft contract.

To protect itself against contamination, which is a serious and costly marketing problem for processors of single-stream recycling, RDS has provided that it would charge the Town for the removal and disposal of all contaminated materials in excess of a 12 percent threshold. Before it removes any of these materials, however, it would give the Town 24 hours to remove them itself and save the additional cost.

As The Beacon previously reported, a recycling specialist with the N.C. Dept. of Environmental Quality informed us that 14 to 15 percent is an average contamination threshold, and 12 percent is low. Eighteen percent is very attractive.

As a result of Mr. Benedetto’s new proposed terms and further discussion, the Town Council voted unanimously to task Mr. Haskett and Town Attorney Ben Gallop with negotiating with RDS to arrive at a contract that meets the Town’s needs and concerns—if possible. The expectation is that this “option” would be presented to the Council at its June 1 meeting.

A LOOK AT TERMS, COSTS, AND STANDARDS

The Beacon believes RDS, which has offered a reasonably priced fixed-rate contract, presents the Town with the best option it will get to bring true recycling back to Southern Shores. Currently, collector Bay Disposal & Recyling, of Powells Point, is hauling the Town’s curbside recycling to an incinerator owned by Wheelabrator in Portsmouth, Va.

Burning is not recycling, although The Beacon did learn from the N.C. DEQ specialist after the April 21 Town budget workshop—when the Council first considered RDS’s draft contract—that Wheelabrator is recycling all metal materials. If it were not, it would be illegal under N.C. law for Bay Disposal to transport the recyclables there.

Mr. Haskett reported at the May 5 meeting that he had heard from a “representative” of Tidewater Fibre Corp., which owns the Chesapeake materials recovery facility (MRF) that Bay Disposal previously used for disposal of Southern Shores’ curbside recycling. This representative told him that TFC would be willing to resume MRF processing at a rate of $95 per ton, excluding collection and delivery.

TFC stopped accepting Bay Disposal’s Outer Banks loads last December because of a high level of contamination. The Beacon has reported extensively about this problem.

RDS’s proposed rates are much more affordable than TFC’s $95/ton. They include:

• $57.50 per ton of single-stream recyclables, including glass
• $49.00 per ton of single-stream recyclables, without glass

(For more about glass, see the next section, below.)

Bay Disposal has said that it would charge the Town $23.80 per ton of curbside recycling for its pickup and delivery to RDS’s MRF.

The calculated annual cost of contracting with Bay Disposal to continue hauling curbside recycling to Wheelabrator for incineration is $189,500, which is the recycling expense in the proposed FY 2020-21 budget.

The annual cost of contracting with Bay Disposal to pick up and haul curbside recycling to RDS’s facility, according to Mr. Haskett, is $195,201, if glass is included; and $190,467, if glass is excluded. Per home, this would be $6.80 and $6.63, respectively, he said.

We were frustrated when the Town Council, with the exception of Town Councilman Matt Neal, who clearly knows how to read and negotiate contracts, did not appreciate the RDS opportunity and take action to make it happen. We thought it showed a consensus lack of foresight, enthusiasm, and commitment to publicly funded recycling, and we said so. We were fortunate that Mayor Pro Tem Elizabeth Morey intervened to save the RDS contract from rejection.

(On a personal note: Mr. Neal’s conversation last week with Mr. Gallop about defaults and termination was fun for me to hear. Mr. Neal has a creative mind. When I practiced law, I specialized in contracts.)

The Beacon surmised that the Roanoke, Va.-based RDS, a new player on the Outer Banks, would be eager to work a compromise deal with Southern Shores and other beach towns, and we were correct. Our contact with N.C. DEQ said the same.

Said Mayor Tom Bennett about the company at last week’s meeting: “They’ve shown some flexibility and willingness to negotiate. I think . . . this company is really anxious to establish themselves and get rolling, and they want to extend their operations, so I think they’re willing to work with us. I get that feeling.”

We also were frustrated by what we perceived as a failure to start the negotiating process earlier than the date of the budget workshop and by the absence of Mr. Gallop in the process.

Proposed contracts are merely offers. Counteroffers and negotiation are to be expected in  both private and public contractual business. To negotiate, you have to know with whom you are negotiating, and you cannot be the least bit intimidated by what some people call “legalese.”

We believe that town managers, interim or otherwise, should know how to read and vet a contract; identify the terms that are questionable or objectionable, from the Town’s point of view; and initiate contact/a relationship with the service provider who has proposed the contract.

We would have liked to have seen Mr. Haskett present RDS’s proposed contract with his own analysis, based on groundwork. We believe negotiating contracts is a key function served by a town manager.

Are our standards and/or expectations too high for Town government? Perhaps.

According to Mr. Gallop, he saw RDS’s proposed contract for the first time the day before the Council’s meeting. (We were wondering whether he had been consulted.) But he had no trouble doing a fast skim of the contract during the meeting and gleaning the gist of terms that troubled some Council members.

The proposed contract is lengthy, but the key terms, including the additional cost to the Town for the removal of rejected and/or contaminated recycling, are easy for people used to reading contracts to discern. Mr. Gallop quickly zeroed in on other issues that he would bring up in a negotiation with RDS.

As the Town Attorney said quite precisely: In a contract, “you’re putting different risks on one side or another. . . . Those risks have value.” What risks is the Town willing to accept?

Mr. Gallop brought much-needed clarity and direction to the Council’s discussion last week. We wish he had intervened earlier and saved some time.

WHAT MR. HASKETT OMITTED ABOUT RECYCLING GLASS AND EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ABOUT CONTAMINATION

On March 5, The Beacon met with Dare County Public Works Director Shanna Fullmer, Dare County Manager Bobby Outten, and Dare Solid Waste Superintendent Doug Huff, at the county’s public works facility in Manteo to interview all three about Dare’s recycling operation and to see a demonstration of its glass crusher.

According to Mr. Huff, Dare’s glass crusher handled 500 tons of glass in 2018, reducing bottles and jars to piles of fine sand and a pebble mulch that are free to the public.

Dare is the only county in North Carolina that has its own mechanized glass pulverizer—thanks to the influence of former N.C. Senate President Marc Basnight. (See The Beacon’s report on 3/12/20.)

The March meeting was at the invitation of Ms. Fullmer, who also invited Mr. Haskett and Southern Shores Public Works Director David Bradley to join us. We could bring whom we chose, so we invited Rod McCaughey, president of the Southern Shores Civic Assn., whose membership is keenly interested in continuing recycling–pursuing grass-roots solutions, if necessary.

Mr. McCaughey has publicly expressed the SSCA’s commitment “to do everything possible to work with local government entities on responsible recycling efforts.”

Before the meeting in Manteo, Mr. McCaughey met with both Mr. Haskett and Mayor Bennett–after Mr. Haskett invited the Mayor to a second meeting–to offer the SSCA’s assistance with addressing the recycling problems the Town was experiencing. He specifically brought up the possibility of glass-disposal bins being located on SSCA property. The SSCA owns and manages extensive open spaces in Southern Shores.

Mr. McCaughey was rebuffed by both the Interim Town Manager and the Mayor, neither of whom individually runs Southern Shores’ council-manager form of government.

After viewing a demonstration of the glass crusher, all meeting invitees retired to a conference room to talk further. Mr. McCaughey and The Beacon specifically asked Ms. Fullmer about how Southern Shores, possibly with the SSCA’s support, could arrange to have the Town’s glass recyclables disposed at a collection site and picked up by the county for crushing in its pulverizer.

Ms. Fullmer said the County could sell the Town a glass-collection bin for $20,000 and pick up the glass materials deposited there for transport to Manteo, free of charge. The Beacon later discussed with Mr. McCaughey the possibility of soliciting a business contribution to pay for the cost of one or more bins. A grant from N.C. DEQ is also a possibility.

Mr. Haskett heard every word of this exchange and has never mentioned this meeting in public until last week, when, as an afterthought, he alluded to Ms. Fullmer’s offer to sell the Town a bin, without mentioning the SSCA’s interest and possible participation.

Mr. McCaughey openly talked at the Manteo meeting about locating the bin(s) on the Hillcrest Beach parking lot, the SSCA tennis court parking lot, and/or other SSCA-owned properties, but Mr. Haskett failed to mention this brainstorming to the Town Council.

He also omitted the cost for a bin and put a negative spin on the idea. Mr. McCaughey had previously heard this same spin in a meeting he had with Mr. Haskett and the Mayor.

“We don’t have anywhere to put [a bin],” Mr. Haskett told the Council. “We would have to find somewhere to put it. It would have to be a fenced-in area. It would have to be paved, most likely. Someone would have to be there to attend to it.”

Problems, problems.

Who says? Who says the Town doesn’t have a place to install a bin or multiple bins? The SSCA’s president has offered its properties. What about the Town property behind the Pitts Center: How is it being used now?

Who says a bin needs to be fenced in, paved, attended? And why did Mr. Haskett fail to mention the possible involvement of the SSCA? The Chicahauk Property Owners Association also might be interested in participating.

I personally was shocked to hear our Interim Town Manager throw up all of these obstacles, knowing that he had attended the March 5 meeting. I was even more shocked when he responded to Town Councilman Leo Holland’s question, “Would we have to pay for [the crushing?]” that “I don’t think so.”

Of course not. Unequivocally no. This is a Dare County service. That Mr. Haskett would not know such a basic fact is troubling to us.

Are we being “mean-spirited”—Mr. Conners’s word—in pointing this out? Or are we merely fully disclosing facts that the Mr. Haskett did not disclose and offering fair criticism?

We were very dissatisfied with the discussion that the Town Council had about glass recyclables. Everyone, including the usually razor-sharp Mr. Neal, missed the point that the more glass that locals—forget about the seasonal vacationers—take out of the single-stream recycling picked up by Bay Disposal, the less the Town will spend on RDS’s processing fees. Glass is heavy, and RDS charges by weight.

The operative question is: Can the Town save money by setting up glass-collection bins on property somewhere in the Town limits? We believe it can. We believe it could get a donation or a grant to cover the cost, and that is where the focus should be, not on having someone attend to the bin(s) or fencing in an area.

Glass-recycling bins are stand-alone in multiple sites in the Washington, D.C. area and elsewhere in this country. They are familiar sights. The fear that a bin might be filled with trash, instead of glass, is not one that besets us. Also, Dare County’s mechanized glass pulverizer sorts out the glass from other materials that it does not crush.

Mr. Haskett further failed to share with the Town Council the literature and information that Ms. Fullmer gave us about the County’s campaign to educate the public about recycling do’s and don’ts, in an effort to reduce contamination.

Councilman Neal brought up at the meeting the need for an public-educational campaign in Southern Shores. This work has already been done by the County. Ms. Fullmer would be happy to provide literature to our town. We do not recall seeing stickers to put on recycling receptacles, as Mr. Neal suggested, but we would be very surprised if the County has not already manufactured them.

The Town does not need to reinvent this wheel. It just needs to reach out beyond the town limits. There may be grant money available for this effort, too.

As usual, we wrote more than we expected to write, so we will post again tomorrow or Tuesday with more news from the Town Council’s May 5 regular meeting.

Kudos to Mayor Pro Tem Elizabeth Morey for wearing a cloth face covering to the meeting. Others may have done the same, but she was the only one visibly wearing one at the beginning of the meeting videotape, which you may view here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6P7RUwuIiE&feature=youtu.be

Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 5/10/20

 

Today’s Dare Emergency Management COVID-19 case dashboard shows an additional positive COVID-19 test result, bringing the total in the county to 19.

This new COVID-19 case, for which no explanation is offered in the Joint Information Center, is the first new case reported in eight days. The previous three positive test results came from one Dare County family after one member was infected by direct contact outside of the area.

These three people have not recovered yet, according to the Dare dashboard.

The Beacon is hearing from readers concerned about the increased risk of contracting the novel coronavirus with the arrival of out-of-town visitors. One reader asked how Dare County residents would know if non-resident visitors were to test positive locally for the virus and possibly spark an outbreak.

The answer is we would not know about positive COVID-19 tests locally of non-resident visitors unless, we would speculate, the number reached critical mass and posed a threat to the local health-care delivery system and to the Outer Banks community.

The Dare County Dept. of Health and Human Services only reports the positive COVID-19 tests of residents and does not inform the public as to the area of the county in which the residents live, citing patient privacy.

It is extremely important to observe the three W’s cited by Governor Roy Cooper and N.C. Dept. of Health and Human Services Secretary Dr. Mandy Cohen for Phase One of 1) wear a cloth face covering; 2) wait six feet apart (avoid close contact with people outside of your household); and 3) wash your hands often or use hand sanitizer.

The statewide stay-at-home order is still in effect. The restrictions have only been loosened to allow more businesses to operate, with social-distancing and infection-control measures in place, and more outdoor activities to occur. If people neglect or refuse to take the three W’s seriously, we may see an uptick in COVID-19 cases locally. The danger is far from over.

Retired physicist Bob Bateman of Southern Shores is still busily making face shields on his 3-D printer for Outer Banks first responders, according to his wife, Ursula Bateman. Bob has made an estimated 120 face shields so far.

THE COVID-19 PICTURE STATEWIDE

After the number of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases hit a new single-day record of 639 on Thursday, the case reports for the next two days dropped below 500.

On Friday the NCDHHS dashboard reported an increase of 471 cases, based on 7,285 new completed tests, for a 6.5 percent positive rate; and today, 492 more cases, based on 7,749 tests, were reported, for a 6.3 percent positive rate. Hospitalizations also declined to 515 and 513, on each respective day.

The number of completed COVID-19 tests being done every day is well above the 5,000 to 7,000 tests targeted by Dr. Cohen for adequate surveillance.

BULK TRASH COLLECTION SET MAY 30

The Town’s spring bulk-trash collection has been scheduled for Saturday, May 30. The Town asks that you have your discarded items in the roadside right-of-way for pickup that day by 5 a.m. and that you not place any items in the right-of-way before May 23.

See https://www.southernshores-nc.gov/semi-annual-bulk-waste-collection/ for a list of the materials that can and cannot be disposed of.

While furniture is acceptable, building materials are not.

We often see lumber incorrectly placed in the right-of-way: We see it in the right-of-way before the collection date and we sometimes see it there for months afterward.

No roofing, windows, doors, carpets, toilets, demolition debris, or any waste left by a contractor will be picked up. The Town also will not collect tree stumps, and it will only take yard waste or vegetative debris that is bagged in clear bags or brown paper bags.

COMING TOMORROW: An update on curbside recycling.

Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 5/9/20

 

Mark your calendars for Tuesday, May 19, at 9 a.m., if you would like to submit what appear to be your last public comments before the Town Council votes on approving an estimated $14 million to $16 million nourishment project of the entire Southern Shores coastline.

Thanks to Town Councilman Matt Neal, who urged the Council at its Tuesday meeting to stop delaying a vote on whether the Town will undertake a project in 2022 beyond re-nourishment of the Pelican Watch beach, the May 19 workshop meeting will be focused on beach nourishment. The expectation is that the Council will select one of the four project options presented to it by its coastal engineering consultant.

Although Council members will likely address how to fund a large-scale beach nourishment project, the Town has not yet taken the steps required by N.C. law to designate municipal service districts and to hold a public hearing about them. Towns may create municipal service districts for the purpose of assessing different tax rates on property owners in order to pay for a beach nourishment project.

Interim Town Manager/Budget Officer Wes Haskett has submitted a proposed balanced budget for fiscal year 2020-21. You may access it at https://www.southernshores-nc.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Budget-FY-2020-2021-Filed-with-the-Clerk.pdf

The budget is balanced at $5,908,243 in revenues and expenses. A public hearing will be held on the proposed budget during the Town Council’s June 1 meeting, at 5:30 p.m. in the Pitts Center.

You may view a videotape of the Council’s Tuesday (May 5) meeting at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6P7RUwuIiE&feature=youtu.be

The Town Council will meet today at 5 p.m. for a special closed session to interview top candidates for the position of full-time, permanent town manager, which has been open since Peter Rascoe’s resignation last summer.

The Beacon will be taking most of today and tomorrow off. If important breaking news occurs, we will report upon it when we can, but otherwise, we will not be commenting again until the weekend. We will provide a report of the Council’s Tuesday meeting as soon as possible.

BREAKING NEWS, 11 a.m. NCDHHS COVID-19 DASHBOARD UPDATE: The COVID-19 case count in North Carolina hit a new single-day record, with 639 new laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases being reported since 11 a.m. yesterday. The new cases represent 9.3 percent of the total number of COVID-19 lab tests that were completed, which was 6,846. Hospitalizations also increased by nine, from 516 to 525.

Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 5/7/20

Dare, Hyde, and Currituck counties will lift restrictions on entry for visitors to the Outer Banks starting May 16 at 12:01 a.m., Robert Woodard, the Chairman of the Dare County Board of Commissioners, announced today in a videotaped message.

See bulletin and message at https://www.darenc.com/Home/Components/News/News/6226/1483

“As visitors prepare for vacation,” Mr. Woodard said, “it is important to remember that the coronavirus is not over. There are still State restrictions in effect to protect everyone’s safety that may impact the way you have vacationed on the Outer Banks in the past.”

This decision made by the three Outer Banks counties in coordination with each other is directly attributable to the Governor’s issuance yesterday of Executive Order 138, which initiates at 5 p.m. Friday Phase One of his three-phase reopening plan.

North Carolina’s stay-at-home order remains in effect during Phase One.

Executive Order No. 138, which is titled “Easing Restrictions on Travel, Business Operations, and Mass Gatherings: Phase 1,” expands upon the allowable activities in which people may engage outside of their homes and reopens some retail businesses, subject to restrictions, as The Beacon reported yesterday.

(See The Beacon’s report of the Governor’s press conference, 5/5/20.)

For the text of the order, which is very extensive, see https://files.nc.gov/governor/documents/files/EO138-Phase-1.pdf.

Having read the Executive Order, The Beacon believes it is important to distinguish between requirements that are being imposed, and are legally enforceable through criminal arrest and prosecution, and recommendations that are being advised.

Requirements come into play chiefly in relation to regulation of businesses.

When people leave their residences for “allowable activities” during Phase One, Executive Order No. 138 “strongly” advises them to take steps to reduce transmission of the coronavirus, but it does not require them to do so. Dare County also recommends the same measures, but it does not require them.

These steps, which are known in the Executive Order as “Recommendations to Promote Social Distancing and Reduce Transmission,” include maintaining six-foot social distancing; wearing a cloth face covering; carrying a hand sanitizer and using it frequently; and washing hands frequently.

The order advises people, but it does not require them, to wear a face covering whenever they leave home, including inside all public settings, such as grocery stores, pharmacies, or other “retail or public-serving businesses,” as well as outdoors when they cannot maintain at least six-feet distancing from other people who are not family or household members.

People may now engage in more “allowable activities,” subject to the recommendations on social distancing

ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES

According to the new executive order, people may now act:

• For health and safety: People may leave their homes to engage in health and safety tasks or activities for themselves, their family or household members, people who are unable to or should not leave their homes, and for their pets.
• To look for and obtain goods and services: People may leave their homes to look for or obtain goods and services from a business or operation that is not closed by the previous Executive Order that imposed the stay-at-home order. Attendance as a spectator at a sporting event, concert, or other performance is not allowed.
• To engage in outdoor activity: People are “encouraged” to engage in outdoor activities, provided they do not form prohibited mass gatherings of more than 10 people. State parks and trails may reopen, but public playgrounds remain closed, including those in state parks. Park operators must adhere to the same requirements that are being imposed on retail businesses. (See below.)
• For work: People may leave home, provided their place of employment is not closed by the new Executive Order (a restaurant or bar, for example).
• To look for work.
• To take care of others: People may leave home to care for or assist a family member, a friend, or a pet in another household, and to transport family members, friends, or pets, as allowed. This includes weddings and funerals, the latter of which are limited to gatherings of 50 people, who should observe the social-distancing recommendations.
• To worship or exercise First Amendment rights.
• To travel between places of residence.
• To volunteer, but only for organizations that provide charitable and social services.
• To attend small outdoor get-togethers: People may travel to another person’s home for social purposes, provided no more than 10 people gather, and the activity occurs outside.

People riding on public transit MUST comply with the social-distancing recommendations.

RETAIL BUSINESSES THAT CAN OPERATE

It is easiest to identify which retail businesses can operate during Phase One by identifying those that cannot. The following businesses remain closed during Phase One because of close contact among people:

• Personal care and grooming businesses: including, but not limited to, barber shops; beauty, hair, nail, and tanning salons; tattoo parlors; and massage therapists, except for those who provide medical massage therapy.
• Entertainment facilities without a retail or dining component, including, but not limited to, bingo parlors; bowling alleys; indoor exercise facilities (gyms, yoga studios, indoor rock climbing facilities, etc.); indoor/outdoor pools; live performance venues; movie theaters; spas; skating rinks; and gaming businesses and those that allow gaming activities, such as video arcades.

All other retail businesses may operate during Phase One, provided they meet safety requirements imposed by the Executive Order.

Social distancing that we have become accustomed to observing in stores remains in effect, as do requirements on business owners to clean high-touch areas, provide hand sanitizer, and conduct daily COVID-19 symptom screening of workers. The big change here is that the maximum customer occupancy has been increased.

Businesses are now being limited to no more than 50 percent of their stated fire capacity. If they do not have a stated fire capacity, then they must limit customer occupancy to 12 customers per 1,000 square feet of the business location’s total square footage, including the parts of the location that are not accessible to customers.

Open retail businesses are also “strongly encouraged” to ensure that their workers stay at least six feet apart from each other and from customers; to provide designated times for people age 65 and over and other high-risk populations to access services; to develop and use systems that allow for contact-free ordering (online, email, telephone) and pickup or home delivery, and contact-free checkout; and to use shields at cash registers, provide clear designation of entry and exit points and assistance with routing through store aisles.

NO CHANGE WITH RESTAURANTS AND BARS

There is a special section in Executive Order 138 for restaurants. Nothing has changed. They may remain open only if the consumption of food and beverages occurs off-premises through drive-through, curbside pickup, carryout, or other such non-contact means. Restaurants are encouraged, but not required, to comply with the social-distancing recommendations, particularly by requiring their workers to wear face coverings.

Secretary of the N.C. Dept. of Health and Human Services Dr. Mandy Cohen has determined that the seating areas of restaurants and bars “constitute an imminent hazard for the spread of COVID-19.” Restaurants remain restricted, and bars remain closed.

No sit-down food or beverage service is permitted in any business.

NO MASS GATHERINGS, WITH EXCEPTIONS

The Executive Order defines mass gatherings that bring more than 10 people together “at the same time in a single space, such as an auditorium, stadium, conference room,” etc., or “any other confined indoor or outdoor space.”

The prohibition against mass gatherings remains in effect, with some new exceptions.

The prohibition does not apply to mass gatherings for health and safety, for shopping and obtaining goods and services, for work, for worship, for the exercise of First Amendment rights, or for receiving governmental services.

Mass gatherings for worship may occur outdoors, provided participants observe social-distancing requirements.

The same is true of mass gatherings at airports, bus and train stations or stops, medical facilities, shopping malls, and shopping centers. They may occur, but people must observe social distancing.

Phase One will be in effect at least through 5 p.m. May 22.

KEY METRICS TRENDS

The Beacon had intended today to go over the metric trends in more detail that Dr. Cohen outlined at yesterday’s press conference. These trends, which she viewed as hopeful, but not perfect, prompted the Governor, in consultation with the NCDHHS Secretary, to initiate Phase One. We will save them for another day.

Asked by a reporter at yesterday’s conference what concerns him the most about Phase One, Governor Cooper answered: “people beginning to not take [COVID-19] seriously.”

If North Carolinians are lax about observing safety restrictions and recommendations, Phase One may last longer than two weeks, or the Governor, conceivably, could roll back the reopening altogether.

The 24-hour metric picture provided on the NCDHHS dashboard today shows that 502 new COVID-19 cases were reported, an increase of 94 over the previous 24 hours, based on 12,682 laboratory tests. Hospitalizations statewide dropped by 18, from 534 to 516.

The percent of positive tests among all tests performed in the past 24 hours is an encouraging 4 percent.

Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 5/6/20

 

Phase One of North Carolina’s three-phase economic reopening plan will go into effect at 5 p.m. Friday, Governor Roy Cooper announced at a 5 p.m. press conference today.

The statewide stay-at-home order will remain in place throughout Phase One, which will expire May 22 and be extended, the Governor said, if the COVID-19 data “indicators are not in the right place.”

During Phase One, which is designed for “limited easing of restrictions,” the Governor said residents will be allowed to leave home for more reasons, including for more commercial activity.

Most businesses that are not close-contact businesses, such as restaurants, bars, hair and nail salons, gyms and fitness centers, will be allowed to open, and all retail stores may have 50-percent capacity, provided social distancing is maintained, the Governor said.

Restaurants will continue to provide carry-out and delivery service, as previously established.

Mass gatherings will continue to be limited to 10 persons in Phase One, except for religious activities outdoors, where more than 10 people may gather, provided social distancing is observed.

State parks and trails will also reopen.

“We have flattened the curve,” Governor Cooper said, “but we haven’t eliminated COVID-19.” He stressed that State officials are being “cautious and methodical with plans to remove restrictions.”

Before the Governor announced his new executive order initiating Phase One, NCDHHS Secretary Dr. Mandy Cohen went over the trends of the four metrics that the State has been following, concluding: “We look relatively stable.”

The only metric that she said has not declined or leveled off is the number of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases, which have shown a “slight increase” in the past seven days. With increased testing, Dr. Cohen did not view this increase as significant.

“We are heading in the right direction,” Dr. Cohen said, “[but we’re] not perfect.”

The Beacon will go over Dr. Cohen’s report in more detail tomorrow. The Southern Shores Town Council meeting has already started, and we would like to join it. Dr. Cohen said a full report on surveillance will be posted on the NCDHHS website Thursday.

Both Dr. Cohen and Governor Cooper touted a 3-W message for North Carolina residents to remember when they go out. “If you leave home, remember,” Dr. Cohen said:

W—To WEAR a face covering

W—To WAIT six feet apart from other people

W—To WASH your hands often.

“We have to continue to protect our loved ones and our neighbors,” the Governor said. “But we still have a way to go.”

Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 5/5/20

 

About 51 percent of adults in North Carolina are at higher risk for a severe illness from COVID-19 because they are age 65 and over, have certain underlying health conditions, or both risk factors, according to a data analysis by the N.C. Dept. of Health and Human Services.

The underlying health conditions, which have been identified by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, are:

*Chronic lung disease

*Cardiovascular disease

*Severe obesity

*Diabetes

*Kidney disease

*Liver disease and immunosuppressive conditions, including cancer treatment

*Smoking

*Other immune disorders

The NCDHHS reportedly cross-referenced the CDC’s health conditions with its own data sources to identify the percent of North Carolinians who are at higher risk for serious illness, according to an NCDHHS news release.

The analysis concludes that an estimated 51.1 percent of adults in North Carolina have a higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19 because of one or both of the two risk factors.

The NCDHHS’s data sources do not contain every underlying health condition identified by the CDC, and their definitions of specific health conditions may not align exactly with the CDC’s, the release states, in describing “limitations to this analysis.”

According to the NCDHHS, 42 percent of people in North Carolina have at least one of the CDC’s underlying health conditions, and 52 percent of the people in North Carolina who died in 2018—the most recent complete year with data available—had one of the health conditions.

For more details about the data and the analysis, see: https://files.nc.gov/ncdhhs/documents/files/covid-19/Risk-Factors-for-Severe-Illness-from-COVID-19.pdf

Of interest, we believe, is the analytical breakdown of the percent of COVID-19 cases and patient deaths in North Carolina in which an underlying health condition was a risk factor.

Data about underlying health conditions “are obtained through case investigations, which take time,” according to the NCDHHS release. “Local Health Departments contact each person that has tested positive for COVID-19 to gather this data.”

Information about specific health conditions “will become more complete as case investigations are completed and information is entered into the North Carolina Electronic Disease Surveillance System,” it states.

Suffice it to say that information about underlying health conditions will never be available for all COVID-19 cases or COVID-19-related deaths.

Here is what available data reportedly show, as of May 4:

The percent of lab-confirmed COVID-19 cases with at least one underlying health condition, by patient age:

Patients 0-17: 7 percent have condition; 48 percent no condition; 45 percent unknown.

Patients 18-24: 13 percent have condition; 46 percent no condition; 41 percent unknown.

Patients 25-49: 19 percent have condition; 34 percent no condition; 47 percent unknown.

Patients 50-64: 38 percent have condition; 22 percent no condition; 40 percent unknown.

Patients age 65 and over: 51 percent have condition; 8 percent no condition; 40 percent unknown.

Overall, 31 percent of lab-confirmed COVID-19 cases have a known underlying health condition; 23 percent do not; and 46 percent are unknown.

The percent of lab-confirmed COVID-19 deaths with at least one underlying health condition, by patient age:

Patients ages 0 to 24: no deaths have been reported.

Patients 25-49: 63 percent have condition; 19 percent do not; 19 percent unknown.

Patients 50-64: 79 percent have condition; 10 percent do not; 10 percent unknown.

Patients 65+: 75 percent have condition; 3 percent do not; 22 percent unknown.

Overall, 75 percent of the people who have died because of lab-confirmed COVID-19 had an underlying health condition; 4 percent did not; and 21 percent were unknown.

The analysis also breaks down the incidence of a specific underlying health condition in people with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and among those who have died because of COVID-19. Although the data are incomplete, the most common underlying health condition is cardiovascular disease, followed by diabetes and chronic lung disease.

The full report is available at https://files.nc.gov/ncdhhs/documents/files/covid-19/Risk-Factors-for-Severe-Illness-from-COVID-19, pdf.

Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 5/5/20

Yesterday The Beacon published an item about the Outer Banks Visitors Bureau’s proposal that this summer be called “The Summer of Glove,” and we illustrated it with the Bureau’s logo, which depicts two gloved hands forming a heart.

Underneath the logo’s heart are printed the words: Be Safe. Be Smart. Have Fun.

This same sentiment, or slogan, was displayed yesterday on a sign held aloft by a face-masked person at the Wright Memorial Bridge checkpoint. OBX Today took a photo of this sign holder and two others who were welcoming non-resident Dare County property owners back to the Outer Banks.

We asked you yesterday what you think of the Visitors Bureau’s SOG theme and logo, and no one commented. Today we will tell you what we think.

We think they are in poor taste.

We think they trivialize a very serious public-health threat that has already claimed the lives nationwide of 70,000 people and will claim the lives of tens of thousands—if not hundreds of thousands—more before it is managed.

We think that if 85 percent of the people who were dying from COVID-19 were under age 50, instead of age 65 and over, no one on the Outer Banks would be exhorting vacationers to have fun during a worldwide pandemic.

Is the message of the logo, have fun, but be sure to wear gloves? Or are the gloves only on the health-care workers who are treating COVID-19 patients?

I wear protective gloves when I go into stores, but I never see other customers wearing them, just some store employees.

In short, we think “The Summer of Glove” is a tacky, witless, and embarrassing idea that should be scrapped.

If the Outer Banks Tourist Bureau wants to spin off of the hippies’ 1967 Summer of Love in the Haight-Ashbury district of San Francisco, we suggest it have “Another Summer of Love” and leave protective gloves and face masks out of it. Underneath a revised heart for “Another Summer” could appear the words: “Be Safe While You Enjoy the Beach.”

We all need fun in our lives, especially during times like we’re experiencing now. But we also need to understand that this summer the manner in which we have fun is going to be dramatically different. The Visitors Bureau’s witless “Summer of Glove” does not convey that message. It should be nixed.

A WORD ABOUT FACE MASKS AND CLOTH COVERINGS

The primary complaint that we hear from locals about out-of-towners is that they don’t face masks or other face coverings in grocery stores, as in: “I watched the people in the Harris Teeter parking lot, and no one driving a car with out-of-state license plates wore a mask into the store.”

Sound familiar? The implication is always that locals are being conscientious and responsible, and out-of-towners are not.

Our observation is that the majority of locals, as well as many visiting out-of-towners, do not wear masks or cover their faces in retail establishments.

For the record, we would like to state that the Dare County Stay Home-Stay Health emergency order requires people to wear masks or cloth face coverings in public settings “where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain.”

It is not an absolute requirement. There is discretion involved in deciding whether to wear a face covering. (The requirement is absolute, however, if you would like to enter the ABC Store.)

See https://www.darenc.com/departments/health-human-services/coronavirus/face-coverings

You no doubt have heard about the alleged murder in Flint, Michigan, of a Family Dollar security guard who refused to permit a woman to enter the store if she and her child were not wearing face masks. The woman left and returned with two adult male members of her family, one of whom allegedly shot and killed the guard.

When people complain to us about customers not wearing face masks and the need for police intervention to enforce mask wearing, we always speak of the potential for ill will that can escalate to rage and say it’s not worth a confrontation. We now, unfortunately, can point to Flint, Michigan.

We think wearing a face mask or cloth covering in public shows respect, concern, and empathy for others. Personally, I don’t want anyone to feel anxious near me because I have not taken protective measures. I want people to feel comfortable around me. But my judgments are only my own.

(Speaking of Harris Teeter, we learned Sunday that cashiers will not bag groceries in customers’ reusable bags because of the fear of coronavirus infection. The scientific jury is still out on whether the virus lives on cloth surfaces, but we strongly doubt it.

(Cloth is not typically a virus fomite: A fomite is an inanimate object that is capable of transmitting infection from one person to another. Of course, we pointed out to the cashier that gloves, which she was not wearing, would take care of any long-shot infection risk.)

KEY COVID-19 METRICS STATEWIDE INCREASE 

Four hundred eight new lab-confirmed cases of COVID-19 were reported to the N.C. Dept. of Health and Human Services over the past 24 hours, an increase of more than 120 percent over Monday’s case total, according to today’s NCDHHS dashboard.

The NCDHHS also reports that 5,361 laboratory tests were performed, making the percentage of positive tests in this test batch about 8 percent, up from 5 percent yesterday.

COVID-19-related hospitalizations statewide also increased by 36, rising from 498 to 534.

Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 5/5/20