Questionnaire Responses – Ray Russell
1. Please share your overall professional and personal background and explain why you are running for seat on the Watauga County Board of Commissioners.
Watauga County has been home to my family for 35 years. It is where we raised our children, built careers, served our neighbors, and put down roots. Like many people who live here, we chose Watauga County not because it was easy or trendy, but because it felt like a place where community still mattered—a place that could truly be home.
My career has centered on public service, problem-solving, and accountability. I spent three decades as a computer science professor at Appalachian State University, including years as department chair, working with students, colleagues, and administrators to build programs, manage budgets, and make institutions work better. In 2000, I founded RaysWeather.com, which grew into the most widely read local media outlet in northwest North Carolina by focusing on accuracy, public safety, and trust. That work taught me what it means to serve a community day after day, adapt when conditions change, and earn credibility by getting things right.
I was elected to the North Carolina House of Representatives in 2018 and later served on the Watauga County Board of Commissioners from 2022 to 2024. In both roles, I took governing seriously—focusing on constituent service, careful policy work, and budgets that reflect real priorities. I worked on issues that directly affect people’s daily lives: affordable housing, childcare access, public schools, public safety, workforce stability, healthcare access, and transparent government. I served on demanding committees, did the homework, and showed up prepared, because public trust depends on competence as much as good intentions.
I am running now because Watauga County is at a turning point. Too many people who work here—teachers, healthcare workers, first responders, service workers— are being priced out of the county they serve. Families are stretched by housing costs and childcare shortages. Schools and public services are under increasing strain. At the same time, outside economic and political pressures are reshaping this community faster than many residents realize.
Government cannot solve every problem. But good government has a responsibility to act when inaction makes things worse. It must know when to lead, when to partner, and when to step back. My approach is practical and people-centered: use evidence instead of slogans, focus on outcomes instead of ideology, and make hard choices based on values rather than convenience.
My campaign’s theme, No Place Like Home, is not sentimental—it is foundational. When people can no longer afford to live where they work, when families lack childcare, or when public services erode, the idea of home starts to slip away. I am running to bring experience, judgment, and steady leadership back to the County Commission, so Watauga County remains a place where people can stay, belong, and build a future.
2. Candidates for County Commissioner seats this year are running to represent specific voter districts. How do you plan to bring a different and important perspective to the County Commission for your district?
I bring a deeply grounded, people-centered perspective shaped by long relationships and real service in this district.
I know this district because I have walked it—literally. I have knocked on doors from Poplar Grove Road to the Park Crest neighborhood. Many residents were my colleagues; some were my students. My wife, Rhonda, taught their children and grandchildren. We have lived in this district for 25 years and just across the street from it for nine more. Our children grew up together. Many here have voted for me before and supported me while I served in office.
This district is diverse—not racially or ethnically, but in life experience. It includes students, young adults starting out, professionals building careers, retirees, and families with generations of roots. What they share is a desire to call Watauga County home—safe, accepted, and connected.
That lived reality shapes how I govern.
As a progressive, I believe government can act to improve people’s lives. I put people first. I reject false choices and believe in pursuing “both…and.” I believe strong communities are built on healthy interdependence. I stand up to bullies. I value honesty, ethics, and public trust. I do my homework. And I believe success comes from hard work and clear priorities.
That combination—progressive and practical, human-centered, collaborative, principled, prepared, and disciplined—is the perspective I bring to the County Commission.
3. If you could eliminate or substantially reduce one line item inWatauga County’s budget, what would it be and why?
This is a difficult question precisely because Watauga County’s budget is lean and largely focused on core responsibilities. There aren’t obvious “throwaway” items, and I’m wary of naming a line item when real people and real services sit behind almost every dollar.
That said, if reductions were necessary, I would not start with people or essential services. I would start with overhead and timing.
My instinct would be to look first at one-time or deferrable capital spending, consulting services, or administrative costs that can be delayed or scaled without harming core functions. In tight times, it is often wiser to slow the pace of some projects or contracts than to cut public safety, education, human services, or support for vulnerable residents.
If required to cut one specific item in the current budget, I would point to the new special appropriation for the Watauga Heritage Museum. It may be a worthwhile cultural project, but it is not a core county responsibility. At the same time, the board reduced funding for Hospitality House, which provides essential services to people experiencing homelessness and housing insecurity. It was a choice of programs over people, the wrong choice.
Watauga County works best when we make disciplined, thoughtful adjustments— not symbolic cuts—and that is how I approached the budget when I served on the commission.
4. If elected, you will serve as part of the minority party on the Board. Please identify two decisions in which you would have voted differently from the current all Republican Board and explain why.
If elected, I would serve as part of the minority, but that does not mean serving without influence. I know how county government works. I have served on this board before, and I believe minority voices matter when they are clear, prepared, and grounded in shared goals. My approach would be to work constructively where possible and to be direct and principled when priorities diverge. This board knows that I will speak up when it matters, rather than go along simply for the sake of agreement.
There are several commission decisions in which my judgment would have led me to vote differently from the majority. Here are two examples.
First, I would have voted differently on the decision to cut the county’s $10,000 allocation to Hospitality House. Hospitality House provides essential support for people experiencing homelessness and crisis in our community. While $10,000 is a modest amount in the context of the overall county budget, it makes a meaningful difference to an organization doing frontline, people-centered work. The board’s decision reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of who Hospitality House serves and what it takes to address homelessness effectively. These are not people looking for a handout; they are human beings facing complex challenges who need stability, coordination, and trust to regain footing. Cutting support ignores what actually works.
Second, I would have taken a different approach to workforce housing. When I previously served on the board, I supported a workforce housing study and voted to move forward with initial planning for a county-led development—examining what could be built, what it would cost, and how it could be financed. That work produced a viable three-phase concept with both rental units and affordable homeownership, largely supported by federal grants. The remaining challenge was securing roughly $12 million in local or partner funding.
At that point, the effort stalled. I would not have walked away. We have seen this community come together to raise and invest comparable sums to restore and rebuild the Appalachian Theatre. If Watauga County can mobilize resources to save an important cultural asset, I believe we can also come together to house the people who make this community work—teachers, nurses, first responders, and the workers who support our local economy. Workforce housing is not a luxury; it is foundational, and it deserves persistence and creativity.
Serving in the minority requires leadership, preparation, and the willingness to speak clearly when it matters. Influence comes from being the most prepared person in the room, thinking ahead, and earning respect through persistence and sound judgment. That is how I would serve as County Commissioner.
5. If elected in November, please identify two or more issues you will commit to placing on the Board’s agenda within the first few months of taking office and for which you will commit to motion for a full vote of the Board.
Before answering the substance of this question, I want to clarify an important point about how boards actually function. Under Robert’s Rules of Order, which govern how the County Commission conducts business:
• The agenda is adopted by the full board.
• Once adopted, it belongs to the body—not the chair or any individual member. • Changes to the agenda require action by the board, either through unanimous consent or a formal motion to amend the agenda, suspend the rules, or alter the order of business.
• All of those actions require a vote of the board.
No individual commissioner can impose, change, or add an item to the agenda. All such actions require approval by a majority of the board.
That may sound procedural, but it matters. Effective service on a board, legislature, or governing body depends on understanding the rules of order in detail—because real influence comes from knowing how decisions are legally and procedurally made. I learned that the hard way early in my time in the state legislature, and it’s one of the reasons experience matters on the County Commission.
Since no individual board member can place an item on the agenda unilaterally, my approach would be to work with other commissioners to bring forward well- developed proposals that can earn majority support. In this case, I would focus on two practical items that directly address workforce constraints in Watauga County: expanding long-term housing availability and increasing childcare capacity. Both are achievable within the board’s authority and can be advanced thoughtfully through the normal agenda-setting process.
First, I would work with the board to explore low-cost ways to encourage landlords to convert some short-term rentals to the long-term rental market for local residents. Even modest incentives that make it more attractive for short-term rental owners to lease to locals could add meaningful housing supply without new construction, major public expense, or additional infrastructure demands. The goal would be simple and explicit: increase the number of existing homes and apartments available to people who work in Watauga County.
Second, I would support setting aside funds for competitive, one-time grants to childcare providers to expand capacity—whether the provider’s need is for space, playground equipment, or staffing. The criteria for awarding these grants would be goal-oriented, i.e., to grow capacity. The Chamber of Commerce already has an established funding and vetting process and could administer the program. I believe this is the fastest and most direct way for the county to expand childcare availability while maintaining a focus on measurable results.
6. High impact County housing developments like the Cottages of Boone and, more recently, The Retreat at Boone are choosing to dig wells and on-site septic systems to provide water and sewer for their developments instead of annexing and connecting to Boone’s water and sewer infrastructure. What action, if any, do you believe the Board of Commissioners should consider to regulate similar high impact housing development strategies in the County?
Under North Carolina law, a developer who complies with county and state regulations has the legal right to build outside municipal limits and to rely on private wells and on-site septic systems rather than annexing and connecting to city water and sewer. That legal right should be respected.
However, with that right comes a clear responsibility at both the county and state levels. For large, high-impact developments, government has an obligation to ensure that private water and wastewater systems are designed, managed, and maintained in ways that protect public health, water resources, and neighboring communities over the long term. In practice, that responsibility is complicated by the fact that the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is underfunded and understaffed.
We are fortunate in Watauga County to have the Riverkeepers actively engaged in monitoring and advocacy related to this project, helping ensure that proposed systems are adequate for the scale of development. The Riverkeeper’s involvement does not solve the larger issue, but it is a meaningful improvement over past experience and represents an important difference from when the Cottages of Boone were approved and built.
We have already seen the consequences when oversight and long-term planning fall short. The experience with the Cottages demonstrates the risks clearly: chronic management problems, building code violations, and failures of private wastewater systems that resulted in serious environmental harm, including raw sewage entering a nearby creek. Those impacts did not remain private; they affected surrounding residents and local waterways and ultimately required legal intervention and massive fines.
For that reason, the Board of Commissioners should consider clear, forward-looking standards for high-impact developments that rely on private water and sewer systems. While the county cannot impose requirements that conflict with DEQ regulations, it can and should explore other lawful tools to address long-term capacity, ownership and maintenance responsibility, environmental protection, and contingency planning in the event systems fail—all without unnecessarily delaying responsible projects. In a mountain county with steep terrain, fragile watersheds, and sensitive downstream ecosystems, additional safeguards are both reasonable and prudent.
All else equal, high-impact development is much better suited for municipal water and sewer—either within city limits or in areas planned for annexation. Public systems provide greater long-term reliability, transparency, and accountability. The county should welcome working with the Town of Boone and other municipalities to address the critical need for additional affordable housing in appropriate locations.
7. Do you support or oppose the County’s distribution of sales tax revenue to the County municipalities based on an “ad valorem” versus “per capita” formula? Please explain. If you support changing the distribution to the “per capita” formula, do you commit to putting a motion in front of the Board of Commissioners to change it?
I believe a per capita distribution of sales tax revenue is the fairest approach as a matter of principle. It allocates revenue based on people rather than property wealth and more closely tracks where service demand actually exists. As a general rule, ad valorem formulas tend to favor wealthier communities with higher property values, while per capita distribution treats residents more equally regardless of where they live. From an equity standpoint, per capita is the cleaner and more transparent standard.
At the same time, I am clear-eyed about political reality. With a Republican majority on the Board of Commissioners, a change to the distribution formula is highly unlikely in the foreseeable future. Any discussion of change must also explicitly protect funding for rural volunteer fire departments that now depend on the current structure. Those services are not optional, and destabilizing them would be unacceptable.
Given that reality, the most productive path forward is to focus on strategies that grow the overall revenue base, rather than engage in a redistribution fight that cannot succeed under current conditions. Supporting economic activity countywide, expanding housing supply where appropriate, and responsibly increasing property values within each municipality can benefit towns and the county alike—without creating zero-sum outcomes.
It is also important to note that the courts have already recognized memoranda of understanding (MOUs) as a lawful way to address distribution concerns. If the formula is ever reconsidered, responsible governance would require thoughtful agreements to address inequities in both directions and to ensure that no community—or essential public service—is harmed in the process.
As to whether I would place a motion on the agenda to change the distribution formula, I have faced this kind of decision before. While serving in the General Assembly, I was preparing to draft a bill to undo the 2012 law that banned the use of the latest scientific projections of sea-level rise in land-use decisions. Simply filing that bill would have made statewide news, but it had no realistic chance of passing. I spoke at length with leading sea-level-rise scientists, climate advocates, and county planners in coastal counties. Their advice stayed with me: You can file a bill that makes a statement, or you can do the harder work of improving conditions within the political reality you actually face.
That lesson applies here. While I believe a per capita distribution is the fairest approach as a matter of principle, I would not attempt to put a motion before the Board simply to make a symbolic point when it has no viable path to adoption. The motion to amend the agenda would fail. Effective leadership is about results.
At a time when our country faces profound challenges, I do not believe my role is to harden divisions through symbolic actions that cannot improve outcomes. Leadership means doing the hard, patient work of making conditions better where you can—clearly, responsibly, and with an eye toward long-term impact.
8. Would you support or oppose a comprehensive land-use plan to guideCounty development, even without zoning, to include recommended locations for workforce housing, environmental protections, and/or public facilities? Please explain.
As a matter of policy, I believe thoughtful planning—and even limited, carefully designed zoning—could improve outcomes around workforce housing, public safety, environmental protection, and infrastructure. But governing is not about pretending ideals can be imposed without regard to history, culture, or political reality.
A comprehensive land-use plan of the type implied in this question has a snowball’s chance in hell of being adopted by a Republican majority that will be in control for the foreseeable future. Watauga County rejected countywide zoning in the 1990s, and that underlying political and cultural reality has not changed. More importantly, comprehensive planning efforts immediately set off alarm bells for rural residents who fear “out-of-town do-gooders” telling them what they can and cannot do with property that has often been in their families for generations.
That skepticism is not irrational, especially in Appalachia. People who have lived their lives in towns and cities often do not understand this protective rural mindset. In Appalachia, that mindset was earned the hard way. Outside interests have repeatedly come in, extracted value from the region, and left local communities with the damage—from mining, to timber, to tourism and real estate speculation. Against that history, broad land-use controls are understandably viewed as another way for outsiders to dictate local outcomes.
At the same time, doing nothing is not a plan. We have real challenges that demand smarter decision-making. One of the clear lessons of Hurricane Helene is that we do not need to be developing deeper into valleys and steep terrain across the county. That kind of development increases risk during severe weather and makes EMS, fire, and rescue operations slower, more dangerous, and more expensive. If I had been on the Commission over the past year, I would have insisted on a serious study of what that catastrophic event exposed about our vulnerabilities—and how we can be better prepared next time.
We also need to think honestly about farmers. Watauga County is among the most vulnerable counties in the country to farmland loss. Farmers are rightly concerned about new neighbors who are unfamiliar with the smells, sounds, and realities of agriculture; frequently, these new neighbors object to the very activities that make farming possible. If we destroy the farm economy, farmland preservation becomes a fiction. Once farms are no longer economically viable, landowners will rationally sell to developers for far more money and far less work.
Environmental protection matters as well. Working with land conservancies to identify our most ecologically sensitive and vulnerable areas can help guide smarter decisions. Protecting headwaters, steep slopes, and fragile ecosystems also reduces downstream flooding, infrastructure damage, and emergency response challenges. Some form of land-use planning is required in these situations.
Given all of this, the best path forward may be to start in one place that clearly makes sense. Rather than attempting a comprehensive, countywide approach that will fail politically and deepen distrust, the county should bring together municipalities, landowners, developers, and the public to focus on areas where land and city infrastructure are available, transportation already exists, and AppalCART can support development. If we can do that well over the next five years, it can demonstrate real benefits, reduce pressure on rural land, and begin to ease fears rooted in long experience.
That kind of incremental success—grounded in collaboration, evidence, and respect for local culture—is far more likely to move this county forward than grand plans that never leave the paper they’re written on.
9. According to a recent study,Watauga County is approximately 1600 slots short of available childcare openings in local childcare centers. Would you support or oppose a county-funded childcare program and/or creating a county-funded subsidy program? Please explain.
I know this study well because I brought the relevant parties together to conduct it, and the County Commission, with my vote, paid for it. Its central finding is clear and sobering: Watauga County is currently short roughly 1,600 licensed childcare slots. This is not a future or hypothetical problem; it is a present constraint on our workforce, our families, and our local economy. I was the voice on the County Commission for two years pushing for more funding to support childcare.
It is also important to note that the county already subsidizes childcare in practical ways. Smart Start classrooms currently operate in school buildings and at the Old Cove Creek High School, but we need to do much more.
With some research, I found that only one county in North Carolina, Cumberland County, directly subsidizes childcare. They did this by using ARPA funds to renovate a former school into a childcare facility. In that case, the space is now provided and maintained at no cost, and a third-party provider operates the center. This model is worth visiting and studying, but it also illustrates how uncommon direct county involvement in childcare is across the state.
Any proposal for a county-run childcare system would raise conservative alarm bells immediately and would be dead on arrival. But there are other ways the county can subsidize childcare. What is achievable is a targeted, capacity-focused approach that avoids unnecessary bureaucracy and political gridlock. I would support setting aside county funds—administered through the Chamber of Commerce—to provide competitive grants to childcare providers for the explicit purpose of expanding capacity. This could include adding classrooms, staffing, or facilities. This approach keeps county overhead low and focuses on the real goal, increasing the number of children and families who have access to childcare. This in turn, lowers the cost of childcare. One last point: grant recipients must be held accountable for actually increasing childcare capacity.
Many of the other barriers to childcare are already being addressed through partnerships involving the Watauga Children’s Council, the Chamber of Commerce, the Department of Child and Family Studies at Appalachian State University, and North Carolina state grants. In fact, my wife, Rhonda, is currently a principal investigator on one of those grants. That collaborative ecosystem is a strength, and county action should complement it—not duplicate it or replace it.
I am not opposed in principle to deeper county involvement in childcare. But given a Republican majority that will be in control for the foreseeable future, the responsible approach is to focus on the goals: expanding childcare capacity and lowering costs to families.
10.What ideas do you propose to bring to the table to commit the County’s support for sustainability and conservation protection of Watauga’s waterways in undeveloped areas of the County?
I bring a deep background in environmental and sustainability policy to this work, including serving as a primary sponsor or co-sponsor of multiple state bills focused on clean water, pollution reduction, energy efficiency, and conservation. (A list of those bills is included as a separate attachment.) At the county level, the question is not whether sustainability matters, but how to pursue it in ways that actually work within local political reality.
One of the most important environmental issues right now comes from Hurricane Helene. We are still dealing with repairing damaged river and stream banks. The County should ensure the Soil and Water Conservation District has the resources it needs to continue stream restoration, bank stabilization, and erosion control work. This is among the highest priorities right now.
Affordable housing and transportation are the single biggest environmental lever available to the county. Roughly 6,000 people commute into Boone from outside the county each workday. (This is according to a UNC School of Government workforce housing study presented to County Commissioners in 2024.) Let’s imagine… If we built enough housing to allow those workers to eliminate long commutes and instead use AppalCART or drive short local trips, the county could reduce vehicle miles traveled by about 1.8 million miles per week—saving roughly 36,000 to 38,000 metric tons of carbon emissions per year, based on standard emissions assumptions. That is equivalent to the carbon emissions of 150 round- trip flights between New York and London, every single day for a year .
A second major sustainability issue is getting ahead of data centers being built in Watauga County. Data centers consume massive amounts of electricity, placing strain on the power grid. They use land and energy in extraordinary quantities. For cooling, they require enormous volumes of water and then discharge heated water back into the environment. That industry is simply not compatible with our mountains. The County should adopt high- impact industry standards that make data centers infeasible here. Other counties across the country have already addressed this issue; we do not need to reinvent the wheel, but we do need to act quickly. I know firsthand that inquiries are already being made about properties in Watauga County for data center development.
Beyond these major items, there are several areas where the county can act directly or in partnership with other agencies:
- Failing septic systems:Expand inspection, repair assistance,and targeted upgrades in sensitive watersheds to prevent groundwater and stream contamination.
- Stormwater management outside municipalities:Work with DOT to improve road drainage standards, culvert sizing, and erosion control to reduce sediment and flood damage.
- Forest and canopy protection:Partner with conservancies, the Forest Service, Cooperative Extension, and landowners to support forest stewardship and avoid unnecessary clearing in sensitive areas.
- Agricultural best practices:Support Cooperative Extension efforts to fence livestock out of streams, establish riparian buffers, and implement soil conservation measures that protect waterways while keeping farms viable.
- Hazard mitigation and resilience:Review and update hazard mitigation plans and focus future public investment away from flood-prone and landslide-risk areas.
- Illegal dumping enforcement: Strengthen enforcement, clean up efforts,and convenience-center access to protect rural land and waterways.
- Source water protection:Work with the state,Riverkeepers, and conservancies to protect headwaters and drinking-water sources before problems occur.
On energy, I strongly support efficiency as the area where environmental responsibility and fiscal responsibility overlap. I drive an all-electric vehicle, heat my home with a geothermal system, and have invested heavily in energy-efficiency improvements. At the county level, large renewable projects may not be politically achievable right now, but energy-efficiency upgrades for county buildings and operations are practical, cost-saving, and broadly supported.
The common thread in all of this is stewardship without overreach: protecting waterways and natural systems by reducing risk, supporting working lands, learning from disasters, and making smart, evidence-based investments. That is how a county makes real progress on sustainability—quietly, effectively, and with lasting results.