News

Local leaders push back on proposal to limit zoning authority

Flat Rock Mayor Anne Coletta discusses the village’s zoning map with part time resident Andy Satterfield.

By Amy McCraw, Published: April 21, 2025

Elected leaders in Henderson County and Flat Rock passed resolutions Monday pushing back on proposed legislation that if passed would put many local land-use decisions in the hands of the state.

During special called meetings, Flat Rock Village Council members and Henderson County Commissioners passed separate resolutions aimed at House Bill 765.
The bill being considered in North Carolina’s General Assembly makes substantial changes in state law that would prevent local governments from passing their own zoning regulations that limit density in many areas.
Village council members and commissioners both criticized the bill as a “one-size-fits-all” approach to land use across the state and wrong for the mountains.
“If this goes through, we essentially lose control,” Flat Rock Vice Mayor Matt Toner said during the council’s meeting Monday morning. “It’s pretty far reaching and wrests control from local representatives.”
A written statement the council made available to people who attended the meeting encouraged Flat Rock residents to contact state Senator Tim Moffitt and state house Representative Jake Johnson about the bill and others that would limit land-use decision making at the local level.
“If the bill passes as now written, our quality of life and our property values would radically change,” according to the statement. “One of the most egregious sections would require the Village to use a minimum density requirement of four houses per acre.”
A few people who spoke during public comment time at the meeting said they thought the bill was an important issue everyone in the community needed to be aware of and involved in opposing.
The council unanimously passed a resolution against the bill and several others pending in the legislature that also would move many zoning decisions to the state.
Flat Rock’s Village Council “has noted with concern those continuing and constant legislative proposals of the North Carolina General Assembly which aim to wrest land-use decisions from the duly elected local officials,” according the resolution.
The resolution went on to say that House Bill 765 “proposes that local governments be stripped of their authority over the use and development of land located within their legal boundaries, thus overturning 100 years of established State policy and procedures; negating the well-established notion that voters should have a say-through elections- in the governing of their communities.”
When County Commissioners considered House Bill 765 later on Monday, they also expressed concern about no longer having the ability to limit high-density development in the county.
County Attorney Russell Burrell cautioned commissioners that the bill “makes substantial changes” in the law, including minimum density requirements of four or five units per acre.
When Michael Edney, the board’s vice chairman, asked if passage of the bill would require changes to the county’s new Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Burrell responded that the bill would require the board to change its zoning ordinance.
Commissioner Rebecca McCall said the bill was trying to put everyone in the state “in a bucket.”
“We are not all the same,” she said.
Edney said he also did not agree with the bill.
But he said he proposed a resolution that acknowledges that the commissioners “are creatures of the legislature” while also identifying the bill as an important issue.
“I just don’t want to piss them off so they do something to us otherwise even worse,” he said.
Commissioners Jay Egolf and Sheila Franklin said they also understood the need to offer a polite response to the legislature.
But Franklin said the board should act in the best interests of Henderson County residents.
“We answer to the citizens. The citizens are begging that we put our foot down,” Franklin said.
Commissioners unanimously adopted the polite resolution Edney proposed.
The resolution “humbly” asks that the legislature consider several factors while making its decision on land-use. Those factors include the purpose of zoning laws and the rights and responsibilities of land owners.
It also addresses downzoning, development density and the micromanagement of zoning decisions among other topics. Downzoning is when a government agency rezones a parcel of land once previously zoned for a more intense use to a more restrictive use.
“Down zoning is an appropriate exercise of zoning authority when adopted in a reasonable and rational manner,” according to the resolution. “Zoning decisions should be made by local officials who are in a better position to amass the best and most information before making a decision. Zoning decisions are not a ‘one size fits all’ solution.”
Development density should also be part of comprehensive land-use planning, according to the resolution.
“Rules imposing specific development densities must bear a rational relationship to a duly adopted comprehensive land use plan for the area affected,” according to the resolution.
Commissioners also considered other proposed bills that would limit the ability of local governments to control land use in their jurisdictions.
In some cases, the board took no position while noting opposition to others.