County rosters place the same six people on both Camden land-use boards

Story Status: Ongoing
Last Updated: Aug. 13, 2026

Quick Take

• Camden County’s published rosters list the same six people on both seven-member land-use boards.
• The Planning Board reviews land-use policy; the Board of Adjustment hears certain appeals and other quasi-judicial matters.
• None of the six is a current commissioner, but commissioners appoint the members; the individual appointment votes and resolutions have not yet been established.

Board overlap at a glance

Planning Board seats: 7
Board of Adjustment seats: 7
Shared members: 6
Roster overlap: 6 of 7 names, or about 86%
Next major proceeding: Crouse appeal, Aug. 31

CAMDEN, N.C. — Camden County has two land-use boards with different responsibilities, but nearly identical membership.

The county’s published rosters place Ray Albertson, Steven Bradshaw, Wayne “Roger” Lambertson, Nathan Lilley, Marshal “Lee” Powell and George “Tom” White Jr. on both the seven-member Planning Board and seven-member Board of Adjustment.

David Bundy serves only on the Planning Board, while Briant Robey serves only on the Board of Adjustment. The result is that the same small group occupies 86% of the seats on each body.

None of the six is one of Camden’s five current commissioners. The county’s public staff directory also does not identify any of them as a current employee outside their board roles. Their connection to commissioners is appointment power: the county says Planning Board members are appointed by commissioners to staggered three-year terms, and state law generally places appointments to planning and adjustment boards with the governing board.

Policy review and appeals

The Planning Board reviews proposed zoning changes and recommends action to commissioners, who retain final legislative authority. County employees administer and enforce the Unified Development Ordinance. Challenges to certain staff decisions ordinarily go to the Board of Adjustment, which weighs evidence and must act impartially.

Camden therefore has two formally separate boards, but six commissioner appointees who review land-use policy may later judge a dispute over how county staff applied the resulting rules. Residents may reasonably ask whether this concentration produces enough independent perspective at each stage.

The distinction is especially relevant now. On Aug. 31, the Board of Adjustment is scheduled to hear an appeal challenging the county manager’s determination that Camden’s development moratorium blocks the proposed 387-unit Crouse project in South Mills. The hearing concerns the moratorium’s application, not final approval of the development plan.

Who made the appointments?

North Carolina law allows a planning board to perform duties ordinarily assigned to a board of adjustment, so the overlap alone does not establish illegality. State law nevertheless requires impartiality in individual quasi-judicial cases.

What Camden’s public webpages do not provide is the complete appointment trail: when each member was first appointed to each board, which commissioners voted, whether the action was taken by motion or resolution, how often each person was reappointed and when each term expires.

The county’s UDO Review Committee deepens the connection. Commissioners Jason Banks and Troy Leary vote on that committee; Planning Board member Lee Powell also votes, and Planning Board Chairman Steve Bradshaw serves ex officio. The committee sends recommendations back to the Planning Board and commissioners.

Why Camden residents should care

These boards influence what may be built, how land may be divided, whether a variance is granted and how certain staff decisions are reviewed. Their work can affect traffic, drainage, schools, utility capacity, rural character and property values.

According to the county’s published rosters, the two seven-member boards account for 14 listed positions. Because six people appear on both rosters, only eight individuals are named across those 14 positions. That leaves fewer independent perspectives to question assumptions, identify blind spots or bring a different viewpoint when a dispute reaches the quasi-judicial board.

Overlap does not automatically make a decision unfair. But two board names provide little additional separation when 86% of each roster is identical. The Tribune is seeking appointment votes and resolutions, terms, vacancies, attendance and recusal records to determine whether the concentration resulted from limited volunteer interest, deliberate policy, repeated reappointments or another reason.

What happens next

The county is advertising for volunteers for both boards. The Crouse appeal is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. Aug. 31 in the Camden County Boardroom at the Camden Library Building, 118 N.C. Highway 343 North. The case number is UDO #2026-06-273.

Sources: Camden County Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, County Commissioners and UDO Review Committee rosters; North Carolina General Statutes 160D-109, 160D-302, 160D-405, 160D-604 and 160D-310; and the county’s notice and records for appeal UDO #2026-06-273.