Sale of building may have violated law

By NICOLE CARTRETTE
Staff Writer

Columbus County may have a little more cash in the bank soon but the deal it struck with Waste Management to sell a transfer station building at the closed New Hope Landfill was illegal, one commissioner says.

Commissioner Ricky Bullard, the only commissioner to vote no to selling the three-sided metal building to the company Monday in exchange for $200,000 in cash and $125,00 in gate credits plus a number of other discounts and credits said it is his understanding that in order to sell land the county must take bids.

“It’s going to have to be done right,” Bullard said. “It is county-owned property.

“We couldn’t choose one person. We have to take more than one bid to offer a contract,” Bullard said, although he had not received a definite answer from county attorney Steve Fowler on Wednesday.

Counties are subject to the same laws regarding the sale or purchase of property as cities and towns in North Carolina. Under N.C. Statute 160A-266, allowable methods of sale are described.

Real property of any value and personal property valued at $30,000 or more may not be sold by private negotiation and sale with the exception of property sold to a non-profit that is of exceptional historical or other value.

It may be sold by advertisement for sealed bids, a negotiated offer with advertisement and upset bid, public auction or exchange.
Another section of the law, Statute 160A-279 allows the sale of property to entities carrying out a public purpose but not to a for-profit corporation.

“Whenever a city or county is authorized to appropriate funds to any public or private entity which carries out a public purpose, the city or county may, in lieu of or in addition to the appropriation of funds, convey by private sale to such an entity any real or personal property which it owns; provided no property acquired by the exercise of eminent domain may be conveyed under this section; provided that no such conveyance may be made to a for-profit corporation,” the law reads in part.
Chairman James Prevatte said Wednesday that he had spoken to Bullard. “He did not indicate to me we had sold something we couldn’t,” Prevatte said. “He questioned if we had the legal right?”

“All we were trying to do was what was in the best interest of the county without spending $325,000. That’s all I can say about it,” Prevatte said. “If it’s something that was not done, our attorney was right there and he didn’t say anything about it.”
Prevatte said he was not aware anything was done incorrectly.

Prevatte explained that he had met with Waste Industries and that company had nothing better to offer the county and wanted a 10-year agreement.

“We could not get anything better than the old contract,” Prevatte said. “They were not really interested in coming unless we gave them a 10-year agreement.”

Despite confusion over who owned the building two weeks ago and the assertion that the county would have to buy it from Waste Management for $325,000 or renew a five-year contract, the board in a 6 to 1 vote agreed to sell the building but not the land to Waste Management. (See related story.)

“There was an error in the paperwork and it was county property,” Bullard said.

Greg Peverall, an executive with Waste Management, had maintained Monday night it was Waste Management’s property and through a “good faith” effort the company wanted to pay the county for the building Waste Management had built.