It’s a wrap

In Part I, we discussed the tail that wags the dog and the frustration of some officials in county government with the dog. Of course, the dog represents county employees who slow-walk decisions made by the county commissioners. I also expressed my frustration that neither of the commissioners who brought this to my attention had done anything to remedy the problem.

You call?

In both cases where I was contacted by sitting commissioners, they both had some frustration with the county manager. After all, the county manager is responsible for carrying out the decisions made by commissioners as a body. I consulted the Currituck County Code of Ordinances, which is a bit wishy-washy. Currituck ordinances use the word “should,” rather than “shall,” and there is a big difference in law.  

Should vs. Shall

In the context of ordinances and legal documents, “should” and “shall” indicate different levels of obligation or instructions. Here’s a general distinction between the two:

1. Should: When “should” is used in an ordinance, it typically conveys a recommendation or strong suggestion. It implies that the described action is desirable or advisable but does not impose a mandatory obligation. It leaves some discretion or flexibility to the individuals or entities responsible for complying with the ordinance.
2. Shall: Conversely, “shall” indicates a mandatory requirement or obligation. When “shall” is used in an ordinance, the specified action or requirement must be followed or fulfilled. It leaves little to no discretion and imposes a binding obligation.

Road to Raleigh

So, when it comes to looking for teeth in enforcing the decisions made by county commissioners, we need to look closer to Raleigh. North Carolina General Statutes are not usually vague or wishy-washy. Instead, we find Statutes like the word “shall.” It didn’t take long to find an answer in Raleigh; it’s spelled out in simple, direct language.

NCGS § 153A-82a(4) Powers and duties of manager.

      He shall see that the orders, ordinances, resolutions, and regulations of the board of commissioners are faithfully executed within the county.

Now you see it, now you don’t

There we have it; state law says the county manager, the chief administrative officer of the county, shall faithfully execute the orders, ordinances, resolutions, and regulations of the board of commissioners. At this point, you might think this is the end; the manager has no choice but to end slow walking decisions and maybe even dock that tail wagging the dog. But no…

No crime here

There are no civil or criminal penalties for violating the state statutes governing the county manager. But this do loop pushes us back to the county code of ethics. The county’s code of ethics states, “County commissioners should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against a county employee for improper conduct of which the commissioner may become aware.” _{(Chapter 2, Article II Division 3 Sec. 2-88(3)d.)}

Conclusion

If county employees are, in fact, slow walking the decisions of the board of commissioners, then it is the county manager’s job by statute to remedy that concern. While there are no penalties under state law should the county manager fail to execute a remedy, it does violate the county code of ethics. Further, should a county commissioner not take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against a county employee for improper conduct of which the commissioner may become aware, they then violate the code of ethics.