Swain Commissioners Delay Roadless Rule Stance to Oct. 6 Deadline
Board of County Commissioners • Swain CountySeptember 15, 2026
Locunity is an independent informational service and is not an official government page for this commission. All information is sourced from public footage and an analysis of official agendas with the aid of responsible, fact-checked AI. to report an error or omission.
Swain County's formal position on protecting two Nantahala roadless areas will be decided on the last possible day. At their Sept. 15, 2026, meeting, county commissioners postponed a resolution on the federal Roadless Rule until their next meeting, which coincides with the Oct. 6 close of federal public comment. They also approved opioid settlement spending and a transit grant renewal while Needmore residents pressed the board to confront Duke Energy.
- Roadless resolution postponed to the next meeting, the final day for federal comments
- Needmore residents ask board to press Duke Energy after the utility sought dismissal of their state complaint
- Opioid settlement spending authorized through Aug. 31, 2027, by voice vote
- Five-year 5310 transit agreement renewed, so the county pays about 20% of new vans
- Almond resident urges a land inventory and land use plan update before any airport property purchase
Roadless Rule Decision Pushed to Deadline Day
The basics: The 2001 federal Roadless Rule limits new road construction in inventoried roadless areas. The federal administration has proposed rescinding it, and the public comment period ends Oct. 6.
Why it matters: Two of western North Carolina's 20 roadless areas sit in the Nantahala National Forest within Swain County's borders. Outdoor recreation drives $71.8 million in visitor spending in the county, according to Made by Mountains research cited by the presenter.
Where things stand: Kim Smith of The Wilderness Society asked commissioners to adopt a resolution that was already in their packets.
"That's 729 full-time jobs and $23.7 million in labor income just to the county off of outdoor rec," said Smith.
She said local waters supply drinking water to 2.54 million people. She added that Boone, McDowell County, Hendersonville, Henderson County, Franklin and Buncombe County have already filed comments as governing bodies. Smith said 99% of the roughly 190,000 comments filed so far oppose rescission. She also relayed comments from 80 Swain East Elementary students.
Two public commenters backed protection. "It's a thinly veiled attempt to put mining and other things that will despoil the public lands," said Kathy Peterson, public commenter. Bob Ferguson, public commenter, urged a return to more roadless areas.
The other side: The main pushback came from a commissioner who has often raised land and timber concerns. He noted how little of the county remains outside public ownership.
"Our county's down to 13, nearly 14% of land that we've got left," said the commissioner. He said Forest Service roads are already widespread, argued "we need the timber" and praised logged areas as wildlife habitat. His position was mixed, though: "I like to see things left alone too."
Smith countered that the rule adds clarity that can speed commercial timber harvest. "Removing this roadless rule would remove some of those clarities, which could delay timber harvesting," she said.
The presiding commissioner acknowledged he was new to the issue. "I did not know that this was even a thing coming down until it was shared with us," he said.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The commissioner proposed tabling the resolution for more reading and information. The board took no formal vote but agreed to bring the item back. That leaves recreation businesses, water users, timber interests and the students who commented waiting on a single-meeting decision with no room for revision.
What's next: The presiding commissioner promised an answer at the next meeting. Smith said that meeting falls on Oct. 6. "So that would be the last day for the county to be able to present this to the federal government as a public comment by this body," she said.
Needmore Residents Want Answers From Duke Energy
Why it matters: Duke Energy has moved to dismiss residents' state complaint over a transmission corridor through Needmore. At the same time, Duke has said it will contact affected property owners within weeks, which has raised eminent domain fears.
Where things stand: John Close, a Needmore Road resident, thanked commissioners for their past support. He said residents filed a formal complaint with the North Carolina Utilities Commission.
"Their response was denying everything and wanting to motion for dismissal," said Close.
Duke cited a September 2025 open house at Nantahala Village Resort as its public process. "That was nothing more than an open house," Close said. He argued the event was not a decision-making process.
Close said residents still do not know the route or which property owners are affected. He also disputed Duke's reinterpretation of the original deed right-of-way from north-south to east-west. He formally asked the board to seek "the environmental reports, the routing study, was there an alternative route down the highway?" He said he would email his questions.
Ron Allen, speaking as a private property owner, asked whether the county attorney had reviewed the legitimacy of the right-of-way. He also asked what the board could do if residents resist eminent domain. "What can you do? What are your options? And what are you willing to do?" he said.
Pearlene Allen, public commenter, said the board had twice been asked to consider a moratorium. She warned of rising power demand from AI and data centers.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Under its public comment rules, the board did not respond, so the residents' questions remain unanswered. The pressure is building in a coordinated way. Residents are now working through state regulators and asking the county to use its own standing as a local government.
What's next: Watch for whether commissioners formally ask Duke for the routing and environmental documents and for an update on the county attorney's review.
Opioid Money, Transit Vans Move Forward
Where things stand: The County Manager presented a resolution authorizing opioid settlement spending from Sept. 1, 2026, through Aug. 31, 2027. The money goes to the abatement consultant the board previously hired. Spending must stay consistent with the NC MOA, the settlement agreements and the approved professional services agreement. Staff will handle budgeting, pre-audit and reporting, including a local spending authorization report to the Community Opioid Resources Engine for North Carolina.
"Any future expenditure of opioid settlement funds for additional programs, services, grants, contracts, or other opioid remediation activities shall be separately authorized," said the County Manager.
A commissioner asked why a partnership with Graham and Cherokee never materialized. The presiding commissioner said each county is running its own program. The County Manager said the consultant has worked with Jackson and Graham counties and is regarded as a regional leader.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The commissioner moved to adopt the resolution. "If we can save one from ODing out, it's worth it," he said. The presiding commissioner seconded, and the motion passed by voice vote. Tallies were not announced.
The transit link: Minutes later, Jesse Camacho, Transit Assistant Director, presented the 5310 agreement with NCDOT. The agreement must be renewed every five years and covers capital, fleet match, ADA and planning costs, with matches typically split 80/20. Transit expects one van this year and three next year. It delivers about 87 home-delivered meals a day and takes several people weekly to clinics in Franklin and Waynesville for opioid treatment.
"$70,000 van will cost us $14,000 as a county," said the County Manager. He called transportation one of the biggest barriers to addiction services.
The commissioner asked whether opioid money could pay for transit. "I don't know the answer to that. It's worth looking at," the County Manager said, adding that the question should go to the opioid consultant. The commissioner then moved to accept the agreement, and it passed by voice vote.
What's next: Any new opioid-funded program, including potential transit support, will require a separate board vote.
Resident Challenges Airport Property Purchase
Cynthia Womble, an Almond resident, responded to prior discussion of buying the former airport property inside Bryson City limits. Citing county GIS data, she said the county already owns about 170 mapped acres, 65 of them within city limits, not counting school sites.
She warned the purchase would remove land from both county and town tax rolls. She said the former airport and car dealership site likely needs hazardous waste cleanup and lacks water and sewer. She also pointed to the failed septic system at the Southwestern Community College Almond campus.
"Swain County does have a checkered past with purchasing things and building things and then failing to include lifecycle maintenance costs in their budget for the future," said Womble.
She asked for a public inventory of county property and an update of the land use plan, which she said is more than 32 years old. She noted that NC Impact, the Appalachian Regional Commission and the Southwestern Commission offer free help. The board took no action.
- Agenda procedure: The presiding commissioner said he erred last meeting, and agenda changes now require a vote. The board approved adding Item F and a personnel closed session, which ended with no decision announced.
- Rec Park Board: Caitlyn Cornette, the only applicant and a youth program volunteer, was appointed unanimously.
- Health Department: Budget Revision No. 1 rolls over the rest of about $15,000 in state public health infrastructure money after an $11,000 to $12,000 autoclave purchase. The motion was called, but no result was announced.
- Collector's report: The county has collected $2,523,219.76 year to date, 38% of budget. The vehicle tax figure was blank during a finance officer transition, and no result was announced on the motion to accept.
- Kirkland Creek: A commissioner relayed complaints that a campground owner diverted creek water into his ponds. County inspections staff will check.
Looking ahead: The Roadless Area Conservation Resolution returns at the next meeting, which the presenter said falls on Oct. 6, the final day of the federal comment period.