Category Archives: Morehead City

Morehead City Police Police investigating murder

David Isiah Godwin

David Isiah Godwin

Chief Bernette Morris, Chief of Police,  Morehead City Police Department

On July 5th 2016 the Morehead City Police Department responded to Country Club Apartments approximately 6:30pm in regard to a requested welfare check on Wendy Rae Tamagne, age 37. Upon arrival on scene it was determined that Wendy Tamagne, was deceased. Any and all unattended deaths are treated as homicides by our investigators.

The Morehead City Police Department, North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation, and District Attorney Scott Thomas are continuing to work diligently on this case. The investigation has revealed that this case is a homicide. Detectives and Agents have worked through the night and with the approval of District Attorney Scott Thomas, a warrant for arrest has been issued for an open count of murder for David Isaiah Godwin of Newport, North Carolina. Godwin is described as a W/M DOB: 03/22/1991, 5’8”, and weighing approximately185 pounds.
Godwin is thought to be driving a 1998 black Ford Ranger with a black vinyl type cover on the bed, displaying a North Carolina Registration Plate of DLT-6114.

Godwin is to be considered armed and dangerous.
This is not considered a random act. It is an isolated incident. If you have any information on the whereabouts of David Isiah Godwin, contact the Carteret Emergency Communication Center at (252) 726-1911 or call Crime Stoppers at (252) 726-4636.

Massive white marlin sets new state record



MOREHEAD CITY – The N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries recently certified a new state record for white marlin.

Neil Manning of Ashburn, Va. reeled in the 138-pound fish Nov. 16 while fishing off Hatteras. The fish measured 85 inches from the tip of the lower jaw to the fork in the tail. The girth of the fish measured 37 inches.

The former state record for white marlin was 118 pounds, 8 ounces. That fish was caught off the coast of Oregon Inlet in 1976. The world record for white marlin is 181 pounds, 14 ounces. That fish was caught off the coast of Brazil.

Manning caught his fish using live menhaden on a 30-pound test line with a Cape Fear Rod and Shimano TLD-25 reel.

Stop by Neuse River Bait & Tackle on Hwy. 55 in Alliance. We’ll give you our best guess on the techniques Neil Manning likely used to nab the big catch!

Underwater memorial planned for long-time Reef Coordinator

Jim Francesconi

Jim Francesconi

MOREHEAD CITY – The N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries is moving forward with plans to construct an underwater memorial in honor of the division’s former Artificial Reef Coordinator Jim Francesconi.

The vessel originally identified for sinking in Francesconi’s name is no longer available. An alternative vessel has been found, and efforts to contract for purchase, cleaning, towing and sinking the ship are underway.

The division will oversee sinking of the vessel on the Howard Chapin Reef (AR-330), about 12 miles outside of Beaufort Inlet. The vessel will be sunk near the wreck of the USS Indra, a 330-foot landing craft repair ship sunk on the reef site in 1992.

This reef is very popular with fishermen and divers, and the addition of another vessel will provide greater access and opportunity to both of these user groups.

Francesconi, who began working for the division in 1987, headed the Artificial Reef Program for 14 years before losing a battle with leukemia on July 18, 2014. In recent years, he worked closely with officials in the Town of Oriental to rehabilitate and expand an existing reef, which is just a few hundred yards off the town’s Neuse River shoreline.

Francesconi oversaw the deployment and sinking of several reef vessels including the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Spar, the tug Titan, the Captain Greg Mickey, the tug Pawtucket, the Captain Charlie and two Coast Guard Falcon Aircraft.

The project will cost about $120,000. About $70,000 will come from a special fund that receives money from the sale of SCUBA license plates.

For more information about the Artificial Reef Program or details of the ship’s sinking, contact division Habitat and Enhancement Section Chief Steve Murphey at 252-808-8046 or

Carteret Commissioners ban wind energy permits for 60 days

By John Droz Jr. | Special to the County Compass
Opponents of a proposed wind energy project outnumbered supporters during a ‘jam packed’ Jan. 2 public hearing at the Civic Center.

Opponents of a proposed wind energy project outnumbered supporters during a ‘jam packed’ Jan. 2 public hearing at the Civic Center.

Editor’s note: John Droz, a Morehead City resident, writes extensively on wind energy issues. He is a frequent contributor to The County Compass. Readers may reach him by e-mail: Mr. Droz attended a Jan. 2 public hearing at which the Carteret County Commissioners approved a temporary moratorium on the issuance of permits for a proposed wind energy facility.

MOREHEAD CITY — Some were concerned about how many people would show up on a poor weather night, in the holiday season, with the flu being prevalent. The answer: The Civic Center was jam packed.

Approximately 60 citizens spoke (each was allowed three minutes, which amounted to three hours). About 20 of those supported the Mill Pond wind energy project, and 40-plus opposed it. Many opponents cited our science-based position (see

Lets look at the main reasons given by the supporters, and a brief reality-check for each:

1 – That the current state wind approval process is good.

Its hard to understand that thinking since this is the first wind project to go through the new state process, governed by state legislation known as House Bill 484. How do they know its good? Simply reading H484 would show that the states process for assessing health impacts is woefully wanting. How is that good?

2 – We should give the state process a chance to work.

What that means is wait until all the approvals have been granted, and then object if we dont like the results. But, of course, at that time it would be too late to do anything!

3 – The Department of Defense banned wind energy in a NC offshore location.

That is a serious misunderstanding, as DOD has no such authority. The federal Bureau of Energy Management banned wind energy in certain offshore areas due to a variety of inputs but that has zero applicability to our onshore case.

4 – Cherry Point is a real part of the approval process.

Yes, Cherry Point is asked for their input. The reality of the current political situation is that their superiors have instructed them not to give any negative answer. No comment is not a true part of a meaningful process.

5 – Any military issue will be satisfactorily mitigated.

Mitigated means make less bad, which is not the same as fixed. Military spokesmen made it very clear that mitigated issues will be a negative score during a Base Realignment And Closing evaluation. It was also pointed out that one possible mitigation would be to close Cherry Point.

6 – We wont lose tourists as some will come to see turbines.

Indeed some tourists come to see something different. So if we built a local prison for terrorists, would these same wind advocates support that facility as a tourist draw?

7 – Wind has issues but it will replace coal, which is worse.

This type of claim is made by people who have no grasp of energy technical realities. North Carolina could have 1,000 turbines and the amount of coal used would not change.

8 – Wind turbines dont kill that many birds and bats.

Cats kill small birds, but no bats or raptors. The fact that these environmentalists so cavalierly ignore huge eagle and bat kills says volumes about their true agenda.

9 – NC is losing out by not jumping on the wind bandwagon.

This thinking reflects a media report that appeared in the paper last week. Elsewhere former commissioner Bettie Bell addressed that nonsense.

10- Wind energy just needs to be properly sited.

What is the proper siting for an energy source that does not make technical, economic or environmental sense? If this were their honest position, they would all be opposed to the absurdly poor siting that Mill Pond represents.

Note that every one of the project supporters main positions is FALSE! That is evidently why they employed a shotgun strategy which means to throw a lot of baloney against the wall and hope something sticks.

Ill give them credit for one success: A much larger percentage of the Mill Pond supporters got up and spoke.

Since many who opposed the project chose not to talk, it gave observers an erroneous impression of how the community is divided on this issue. From the speakers perspective, it appeared to be 33 percent in favor and only 67 percent against

The reality is that among those educated on this matter, about 90 percent are against it. We need to do better next time!

There were many very good comments opposing the wind project, which focused on bullet points available on the website and elsewhere.

After the public comment period ended, the Commissioners voted on the 60-day moratorium, which passed unanimously.  It passed unanimously.

This campaign will be finished when: A) Carteret County has a much better wind law; B) The Town of Newport passes its proposed wind law improvements; and, C) Torch, the wind energy developer behind the Mill Pond project, throws in the towel.


Presentation blows holes in Carteret County wind energy project

Special to the County Compass

Editor’s note: John Droz, a Morehead City resident, writes extensively on wind energy issues. He is a frequent contributor to The County Compass. Readers may reach him by e-mail: Mr. Droz offered the following remarks on Dec. 19 in Raleigh during a presentation to the Military Affairs Committee of the North Carolina General Assembly:

Good Afternoon.

I appreciate the opportunity to very briefly talk today about the proposed Carteret County Mill Pond wind project, plus a bit about wind energy in general. I want to thank Senator Brown and his energetic aide Darryl Black, for the invite.

This isn’t about me, but I’m a physicist (with energy expertise), who has worked for over 30 years on environmental issues, all on my own dime. I’ve given free energy and science presentations in some ten states now. For example, in October, I was sponsored by the U.S. House of Representatives Science & Technology Committee to speak for an hour to Congress.

This energy business is complicated stuff, so I often get asked “Can you condense the situation with wind energy down to a soundbite?

Yes, here it is: Wind Energy is High Cost, with Very Low Benefits.

My basic position is also simple: “We do have environmental and energy issues — and they need to be solved using genuine Science.”

That’s it.

But as logical as that sounds, it’s not happening. As our energy and environmental policies are not based on science. Instead our policies (like Senate Bill 3) are being dictated by lobbyists who are representing those with financial interests, or political agendas. That’s how we end up with problematic situations like the proposed Mill Pond facility

I strongly favor exploring alternative energy options, but, no alternatives should be allowed on the public grid until there is scientific proof, that they are a net societal benefit. That scientific proof would consist of an objective, transparent and empirical assessment of the technical, economic, and environmental consequences of the proposed energy source.

Those that passed such screening would join the quality ranks of “All of the Sensible” — as compared to the rogues gallery that results from the “All of the Above” self-serving energy policy, promoted by lobbyists. No such scientific proof exists for wind energy in general, and certainly no such proof exists for Mill Pond.

In fact, the evidence available indicates that Mill Pond:

will be a net technical loser,

will be a net economics loser,

will be a net jobs loser, and

will be a net environmental loser to our community.

I don’t have the time today to explain the details, but all of this is well-documented on our website:— just go to the NC menu. Note that these conclusions are before taking into account anything to do with Cherry Point MCAS! Unfortunately, the Mill Pond project is also a substantial threat to the operation of that major $2-plus Billion a year base.

Briefly this is due to two issues: Obstructions, and radar interference.

The numerous 500-foot (plus or minus) turbine obstacles are directly on Cherry Point’s main flight-landing glide-path: Runway 32, left approach. Despite the developer’s perfunctory assurances, during adverse weather, or when an aircraft has mechanical problems, these obstacles represent a serious peril. We have a good diagram showing this on our website.

And, by the way, for a variety of technical reasons, the right-hand approach to Runway 32 is not an acceptable alternative. Regarding the radar impact, here are two telling statements.

The firstis from the Airspace Coordinator of Marine Corps Installation East:

“Wind turbine blades can distort the radar image for both ground control and pilots. That distortion can make it difficult for Marine training exercises, as well as make it more dangerous to fly.” [Note that any radar retrofitting would have to be done to ground control and all aircraft.]

Second, consider this Canadian Air Force report, released just last month. (Note that those people are not burdened by the same political correctness constraints, as our military currently is.) Their official conclusion was:

“A wind facility will create areas where we can not reliably observe or control, military or civilian air traffic.”

So, in addition to Mill Pond being a net technical loser, a net economics loser, a net jobs loser, and a net environmental loser, we can also add to its resume that it has maybe put Cherry Point in BRAC jeopardy. Isn’t Senate Bill 3 great?

But, some may ask: “What about H484?” Good question.

As most of you probably know, H484mainly came about due to the Seymour-Johnson affair. H484 started out with lofty objectives, but it’s a classic example of how a lobbyist-influenced political process can undermine even the best of intentions. The politest way I can say it, is that H484 ended up being little more than a shell of what it should have been. On our website is a documentthat has a line-by-line explanation of its deficiencies.

I’ll wrap up here by giving just one example of a H484 defect:

1 – A significant problem with industrial wind energy facilities is the scientifically proven adverse health consequences to some nearby citizens.

2 – In the eight pages of 484, there is but one single sentence that addresses any human health concern, which is a requirement that there be: “A study of the noise impacts of the turbines associated with the proposed wind energy facility…”

3 – The first problem with this should be obvious: This is an undefined permitting condition.

4 – Then 484 was written so that it’s up to the developer to determine what noise tests are done for his project!

5 – It’s then eroded further because the developer is allowed to employ his favorite hired-gun to conduct such tests.

6 – If that wasn’t enough, the permit approval part of H484 lists all the reasons that an application may be denied — like, if the wind project has an adverse impact on fish, or wildlife, or cultural sites, or state park views. But, there is not a single word that allows a denial due to health and safety impacts on nearby citizens!

In my view this is woefully inadequate. Hopefully the H484 deficiencies will be fixed in the next session. In any case, I appeal to this committee to take a firm position against this detrimental project. I’ll be glad to try to answer any questions you have, or you can email me later. Thank you.