Showing posts with label greensboro government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label greensboro government. Show all posts
Another fait accompli ? ? ?
...Nobody, except the people who have already made the decision, know the fate of the Elm Street property south of Lee Street.
...Several out-of-area consultants have been brought in to help improve the area. Apparently none of their cookie-cutter plans suited the decision makers. The meetings that I have attended about the area have been unproductive and the plans presented by consultants haven't even been adapted to the needs of Greensboro. It must be easy to dismiss plans if they don't suit the decision makers agenda.
...Greensboro government and the so-called leaders here have been dismissing plans from local and out-of-town consultants and from citizen groups for as long as I have lived in Greensboro (about 40 years).
...Another hotel is needed in Downtown Greensboro. The pickin's are poor for tourists and convention accommodations in the Central Business District. A hotel at each end of Elm Street is a good idea.
...The right kind of hotel could enhance Downtown Greensboro. It could bring more conventions and tourists into the whole Greensboro area.
...I think that the reason there is resistance is because it could possibly take business away from "hotel row" near the Coliseum and from the Grandover complex out by I-85.
Some questions are • Will the people who run Greensboro let this happen?
• Who will pay for it? • Will the entire area be developed by one hand-picked "in current favor" developer? • Who will build and manage it? • Do the people who run Greensboro want to make Elm Street a nice gateway into Greensboro? •
More info:
News-Record
Piedmont Publius
Joe Guarino
Greensboro City Council District 4 Race
.....
Sure glad that I don't have to make a choice about which candidate to vote for in District 4. Both Mary Rakestraw and Joel Landau are personal friends of mine and I think the City Council could use both.
Mike Barber did a commendable job when he served as District 4 Representative. Although I am not in favor of opening the city dump to household trash, Mike's insistence that we could save money by re-opening that part of the dump started a conversation that I think should have been done before the decision to haul household trash out of our county.
Maybe something smart will be done by the new council (if we get some changes to the current reps). Some of the incumbents have been really unrealistic about the dump issue. And many people who support them don't fully understand the issues concerning our landfill operations.
Sure glad that I don't have to make a choice about which candidate to vote for in District 4. Both Mary Rakestraw and Joel Landau are personal friends of mine and I think the City Council could use both.
Mike Barber did a commendable job when he served as District 4 Representative. Although I am not in favor of opening the city dump to household trash, Mike's insistence that we could save money by re-opening that part of the dump started a conversation that I think should have been done before the decision to haul household trash out of our county.
Maybe something smart will be done by the new council (if we get some changes to the current reps). Some of the incumbents have been really unrealistic about the dump issue. And many people who support them don't fully understand the issues concerning our landfill operations.
Benches and Stupidity
....
Hey Zach,
Interesting that the same group of numbskulls who want benches along the so-called greenway (actually a cement path) are the same folks who wanted the benches removed from the Downtowners' Park on South Elm Street to avoid panhandlers and homeless folks from hanging out there. And the same group who opposes putting public restrooms in the parking garages because someone might use them for illicit purposes.
Now they want to remove the little greenway through the parking lot on South Elm and McGee streets downtown because nobody uses it. People used to use it to eat bag lunches and watch passers-by and enjoy the breeze and the flowers. Neighbors often sat on the benches and had friendly conversations and/or heated discussions.
There are lots of rules about downtown. One should be that there is no panhandling, (begging) in the Central Business District. There are enough police officers downtown to enforce the rule. Downtown has many rules that are different from other areas of the city. This is one that is needed.
Hey Zach,
Interesting that the same group of numbskulls who want benches along the so-called greenway (actually a cement path) are the same folks who wanted the benches removed from the Downtowners' Park on South Elm Street to avoid panhandlers and homeless folks from hanging out there. And the same group who opposes putting public restrooms in the parking garages because someone might use them for illicit purposes.
Now they want to remove the little greenway through the parking lot on South Elm and McGee streets downtown because nobody uses it. People used to use it to eat bag lunches and watch passers-by and enjoy the breeze and the flowers. Neighbors often sat on the benches and had friendly conversations and/or heated discussions.
There are lots of rules about downtown. One should be that there is no panhandling, (begging) in the Central Business District. There are enough police officers downtown to enforce the rule. Downtown has many rules that are different from other areas of the city. This is one that is needed.
Thoughts about Greensboro Bus Service
IN ANSWER TO RYAN SHELL'S POST:
Greensboro Should Strive to Provide Shelter for all Bus Stops
...
It might be difficult to put a shelter at every bus stop. But every one should have a solid place for one's feet when they get off the bus and a bench on which to wait for a ride.
At some stops riders are forced to step off the bus onto muddy spots or wet grass and then either cross a wide street at mid-block or walk down a busy street or through tall weeds to cross at a congested intersection.
These problems should be addressed first. Safety at stops and the location of convenient stops and dry places to step on when alighting are important to riders.
These were items on my agenda when I ran for Greensboro City Council. I have mentioned them to GTA and City Council Members, GDOT and others for many years.
I have lived in Greensboro since 1971. We have not had adequate bus service in all the time I have lived here. Interest in improving transportation options has been on-and-off with Greensboro Government. I am glad that you will be joining me in working on these problems.
Greensboro Should Strive to Provide Shelter for all Bus Stops
...
It might be difficult to put a shelter at every bus stop. But every one should have a solid place for one's feet when they get off the bus and a bench on which to wait for a ride.
At some stops riders are forced to step off the bus onto muddy spots or wet grass and then either cross a wide street at mid-block or walk down a busy street or through tall weeds to cross at a congested intersection.
These problems should be addressed first. Safety at stops and the location of convenient stops and dry places to step on when alighting are important to riders.
These were items on my agenda when I ran for Greensboro City Council. I have mentioned them to GTA and City Council Members, GDOT and others for many years.
I have lived in Greensboro since 1971. We have not had adequate bus service in all the time I have lived here. Interest in improving transportation options has been on-and-off with Greensboro Government. I am glad that you will be joining me in working on these problems.
Downtown Development Scams
In answer to a comment on the post Calling All Property Rights Advocates
I was not referring to the Wachovia Building; however, I believe that the Cement Park that was touted as a gift to the city, but is owned by a private non-profit, was built solely to help sell the Wachovia Building. Check out the biggest promoters of the park. I tried unsuccessfully for years to find out how much money the City of Greensboro contributed to the project, including lighting, curbs, sewers, sidewalks, etc. The park is maintained primarily with tax money.
Now, back to the original comment: One property to which I was referring was a city-owned, block-long area between McGee Street and Smothers Place that was sold to a developer for around $90,000 and I understand is now up for sale for around $400,000 because the project that he promised was never completed.
Another property sold without prior knowledge of the public was part of the parking lot in the 300 block of S. Elm Street and allowing the builder of the proposed development to rent specific parking spots for his tenants and customers. Other business owners cannot rent spaces there even on a "when available" basis, but this one building owner can rent individual spaces exclusively for his tenants.
Several downtown property owners have tried to purchase part or all of that lot. Their efforts were refused and then it was sold to a developer without public knowledge. A new building will be erected next to it on a lot where the old Mantleworks building stood before it was struck by "renovation lightning" and had to be demolished.
I think that if this builder wants parking for his customers, he could have incorporated it into the new building.
And did anyone notice that the new "guildelines" will not go into effect until this out-of-place building is completed?
Favoritism and underhanded deals are the rule rather than the exception in Greensboro.
One downtown success story is the old bank building on the corner of Washington and Elm streets. I think that it was purchased without incentives and has been renovated one floor at a time by the owners. Another is the building on the SW corner of McGee and S. Elm streets. An old building was renovated by one family and is now a bustling spot containing several restaurants and pubs. Another is the small business center in the old Blue Bell Building at the corner of Lee and S. Elm.
I was not referring to the Wachovia Building; however, I believe that the Cement Park that was touted as a gift to the city, but is owned by a private non-profit, was built solely to help sell the Wachovia Building. Check out the biggest promoters of the park. I tried unsuccessfully for years to find out how much money the City of Greensboro contributed to the project, including lighting, curbs, sewers, sidewalks, etc. The park is maintained primarily with tax money.
Now, back to the original comment: One property to which I was referring was a city-owned, block-long area between McGee Street and Smothers Place that was sold to a developer for around $90,000 and I understand is now up for sale for around $400,000 because the project that he promised was never completed.
Another property sold without prior knowledge of the public was part of the parking lot in the 300 block of S. Elm Street and allowing the builder of the proposed development to rent specific parking spots for his tenants and customers. Other business owners cannot rent spaces there even on a "when available" basis, but this one building owner can rent individual spaces exclusively for his tenants.
Several downtown property owners have tried to purchase part or all of that lot. Their efforts were refused and then it was sold to a developer without public knowledge. A new building will be erected next to it on a lot where the old Mantleworks building stood before it was struck by "renovation lightning" and had to be demolished.
I think that if this builder wants parking for his customers, he could have incorporated it into the new building.
And did anyone notice that the new "guildelines" will not go into effect until this out-of-place building is completed?
Favoritism and underhanded deals are the rule rather than the exception in Greensboro.
One downtown success story is the old bank building on the corner of Washington and Elm streets. I think that it was purchased without incentives and has been renovated one floor at a time by the owners. Another is the building on the SW corner of McGee and S. Elm streets. An old building was renovated by one family and is now a bustling spot containing several restaurants and pubs. Another is the small business center in the old Blue Bell Building at the corner of Lee and S. Elm.
Downtown Guidelines
"GUIDELINES" is an understatement and yet another intrusion on the property rights of the citizens of Greensboro.
These guidelines were not written or approved by the people who will be most affected by them - the people who took the risk of opening businesses or relocating businesses in Downtown Greensboro, the people who bought property in the Central Business District without incentives and the people who will suffer when over-regulation and bad judgment by city government ruins downtown, AGAIN.
History shows us that it has happened before.
Also see: Calling All Property Rights Advocates
These guidelines were not written or approved by the people who will be most affected by them - the people who took the risk of opening businesses or relocating businesses in Downtown Greensboro, the people who bought property in the Central Business District without incentives and the people who will suffer when over-regulation and bad judgment by city government ruins downtown, AGAIN.
History shows us that it has happened before.
Also see: Calling All Property Rights Advocates
Calling All Property Rights Advocates
-----
Please let your Greensboro City Council Member know that the you don't approve of the additional overlay restrictions that are being proposed for the Central Business District without the consent of a majority of the property owners and business owners. This is only for Downtown. It is unfair, unless it is applied to all areas of the city. And, not many of us want that.
DGI and others have prepared a 103-page document on design and other building restrictions for the CB. It is another instance of unfair treatment of the businesses operating downtown, especially small independent merchants and property owners.
Recently, the City Council approved selling a public parking lot to a developer who will put up a building that is out of character with the area. Plus, they gave him several perks and incentives that the rest of us didn't get when we moved into downtown and contributed to its revitalization.
This is not the first time that city property has been sold underhandedly to a developer without knowledge of the public and without an open bid process.
We, the people, can change the way business-as-usual is done in Greensboro. It might be too late for this stupid project; but, we should know what is happening in downtown and in other areas of the city that is unfair and sometimes illegal.
When one of our current city council members said that the businesses downtown want free parking and everyone else has to provide parking for their customers, she was wrong. She apparently didn't know that every bit of property in the Central Business District pays an additional 5% tax which is supposed to be used to help the downtown businesses. So, we do pay for parking and other amenities. (UPDATE: I was informed last night by a reliable source that the extra downtown tax is actually 9%)
And, downtown property owners are not the only ones being treated unfairly. It happens too often in all areas of the city.
Downtown needs your help. If you love downtown and you want open, fair government in Greensboro, do something. Find out what your present council person is doing and what his/her opponent in the next election plans to do. Go to forums, meetings, read the blogs and the news papers. And then, vote for a better Greensboro government.
Thank you.
Please let your Greensboro City Council Member know that the you don't approve of the additional overlay restrictions that are being proposed for the Central Business District without the consent of a majority of the property owners and business owners. This is only for Downtown. It is unfair, unless it is applied to all areas of the city. And, not many of us want that.
DGI and others have prepared a 103-page document on design and other building restrictions for the CB. It is another instance of unfair treatment of the businesses operating downtown, especially small independent merchants and property owners.
Recently, the City Council approved selling a public parking lot to a developer who will put up a building that is out of character with the area. Plus, they gave him several perks and incentives that the rest of us didn't get when we moved into downtown and contributed to its revitalization.
This is not the first time that city property has been sold underhandedly to a developer without knowledge of the public and without an open bid process.
We, the people, can change the way business-as-usual is done in Greensboro. It might be too late for this stupid project; but, we should know what is happening in downtown and in other areas of the city that is unfair and sometimes illegal.
When one of our current city council members said that the businesses downtown want free parking and everyone else has to provide parking for their customers, she was wrong. She apparently didn't know that every bit of property in the Central Business District pays an additional 5% tax which is supposed to be used to help the downtown businesses. So, we do pay for parking and other amenities. (UPDATE: I was informed last night by a reliable source that the extra downtown tax is actually 9%)
And, downtown property owners are not the only ones being treated unfairly. It happens too often in all areas of the city.
Downtown needs your help. If you love downtown and you want open, fair government in Greensboro, do something. Find out what your present council person is doing and what his/her opponent in the next election plans to do. Go to forums, meetings, read the blogs and the news papers. And then, vote for a better Greensboro government.
Thank you.
CHANGE ? ? ?
Zach Matheny must have changed his mind about his service on the Greensboro City Council. This quote about service on the Council appeared in the News-Record today:
"We've got to listen to and take up for our citizens. . ."
Up until now he has not followed that direction.
District 3 needs a representative who works FOR the people. Mr. Matheny has not been that person.
Maybe real change is in the air. I hope so.
"We've got to listen to and take up for our citizens. . ."
Up until now he has not followed that direction.
District 3 needs a representative who works FOR the people. Mr. Matheny has not been that person.
Maybe real change is in the air. I hope so.
Loop Holes in Protest Petition
It's wonderful that the right to protest rezoning has been legally restored to Greensboro with provisions that make it harder to pass the horrible rezoning that has been done in our city in the past. However; there are several loop holes that are used to to the advantage of some who ask for rezoning.
1. There is a provision in NC law which was requested in the Greensboro Legislative Agenda and a coalition of municipal governments several years ago. (I can't remember the the official name of the group).
The law prohibits small unincorporated communities to incorporate if they are within a certain distance of an already incorporated city.
2. NC Law allows large cities to annex any area adjacent to their city limits without any restraints that I know about.
Greensboro uses these two provisions to swallow up areas around its perimeter and inflict "original zoning." to the area.
The protest petition only applies to zoning map amendments. It arises either when neighbors object to the REZONING of a parcel or when the owner objects to a REZONING proposed by the government or the neighbors.
COUNTY RESIDENTS DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO USE THE PROTEST PETITION. The exception to this general rule is where the General Assembly has modified the generally applicable law as it applies to a particular city or county. For example, local legislation adopted in 1971 removed the protest petition for Greensboro, while local legislation adopted in 2003 extended the protest petition to Durham County.
The overwhelming majority of rezoning petitions are not subjected to a protest petition. . . .
Some of this Information provided by: David W. Owens, Gladys H. Coates Professor of Public Law and Government School of Government CB 3330, Knapp-Sanders Building University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, N.C. 27599-3330 919-966-4208 (voice) 919-962-0654 (fax) owens@sog.unc.edu
And:The Protest Petition Blog
http://protestpetitiongreensboro.blogspot.com
1. There is a provision in NC law which was requested in the Greensboro Legislative Agenda and a coalition of municipal governments several years ago. (I can't remember the the official name of the group).
The law prohibits small unincorporated communities to incorporate if they are within a certain distance of an already incorporated city.
2. NC Law allows large cities to annex any area adjacent to their city limits without any restraints that I know about.
Greensboro uses these two provisions to swallow up areas around its perimeter and inflict "original zoning." to the area.
The protest petition only applies to zoning map amendments. It arises either when neighbors object to the REZONING of a parcel or when the owner objects to a REZONING proposed by the government or the neighbors.
COUNTY RESIDENTS DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO USE THE PROTEST PETITION. The exception to this general rule is where the General Assembly has modified the generally applicable law as it applies to a particular city or county. For example, local legislation adopted in 1971 removed the protest petition for Greensboro, while local legislation adopted in 2003 extended the protest petition to Durham County.
The overwhelming majority of rezoning petitions are not subjected to a protest petition. . . .
Some of this Information provided by: David W. Owens, Gladys H. Coates Professor of Public Law and Government School of Government CB 3330, Knapp-Sanders Building University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, N.C. 27599-3330 919-966-4208 (voice) 919-962-0654 (fax) owens@sog.unc.edu
And:The Protest Petition Blog
http://protestpetitiongreensboro.blogspot.com
By Those Who Follow the "leader" ????
To Sue,
Did you read my post about the paved greenway? Your response post didn't seem as if you did. My questions have not been addressed.
Actually, I have been to several of the meetings. I did ask many questions which were not honestly or adequately answered. I have talked with city employees and officials about it.
At one of the meetings with one of the planners from another state who boasted of a greenway in his home town, I asked how often he used the greenway? It was within walking distance of his office. His answer was very evasive.
I am not against the so-called greenway. I just don't think tax money should be spent on it at the present time. There are more pressing issues which I mentioned in my post.
Also see:
More comments
Did you read my post about the paved greenway? Your response post didn't seem as if you did. My questions have not been addressed.
Actually, I have been to several of the meetings. I did ask many questions which were not honestly or adequately answered. I have talked with city employees and officials about it.
At one of the meetings with one of the planners from another state who boasted of a greenway in his home town, I asked how often he used the greenway? It was within walking distance of his office. His answer was very evasive.
I am not against the so-called greenway. I just don't think tax money should be spent on it at the present time. There are more pressing issues which I mentioned in my post.
Also see:
More comments
Green Money Pit
A green trail around Greensboro is a beautiful idea. We should secure the land needed but wait to build on it -- when we can afford it. Greensboro has real problems that should be addressed, first.
I looked at pictures taken at the "big celebration" of the start of the cement "greenway" around Greensboro.
I have some questions:
Who is so excited about this project?
Were there any folks there from the Warnersville community?
How safe will a trail be that runs behind industrial areas, and backyards and along deserted rail road tracks?
Will people on the trail be visible or behind high fences and dumpsters?
Will it be lighted?
Who will patrol the greenway?
Will there be benches for resting?
Will there be areas where the homeless will live? What about panhandlers?
Who will clean it and do general maintenance?
What is the "real cost" of building and maintaining it? Who will pay?
Where does it go?
Is it for recreation or for access to shopping, parks, restaurants, schools and other places where people want to go?
Will constructing this path use money that should be used for sidewalks?
Should Greensboro City Council continue to approve the use of so-called stimulus money for such a frivolous project?
How many long-term local jobs will it provide?
How many trees will be cut down to make room for this paved greenway?
Should Greensboro focus on solving real problems such as transportation and housing and green space and tree cover and water quality and clean air OR on feel good projects?
Can we afford it, now?
Should government money (our tax money) be used for this project?
Should it be totally financed with private money contributed by private citizens and groups that can afford to donate?
And my last question: Where can I find real answers to the questions above? Please don't suggest Action Greensboro.
I looked at pictures taken at the "big celebration" of the start of the cement "greenway" around Greensboro.
I have some questions:
Who is so excited about this project?
Were there any folks there from the Warnersville community?
How safe will a trail be that runs behind industrial areas, and backyards and along deserted rail road tracks?
Will people on the trail be visible or behind high fences and dumpsters?
Will it be lighted?
Who will patrol the greenway?
Will there be benches for resting?
Will there be areas where the homeless will live? What about panhandlers?
Who will clean it and do general maintenance?
What is the "real cost" of building and maintaining it? Who will pay?
Where does it go?
Is it for recreation or for access to shopping, parks, restaurants, schools and other places where people want to go?
Will constructing this path use money that should be used for sidewalks?
Should Greensboro City Council continue to approve the use of so-called stimulus money for such a frivolous project?
How many long-term local jobs will it provide?
How many trees will be cut down to make room for this paved greenway?
Should Greensboro focus on solving real problems such as transportation and housing and green space and tree cover and water quality and clean air OR on feel good projects?
Can we afford it, now?
Should government money (our tax money) be used for this project?
Should it be totally financed with private money contributed by private citizens and groups that can afford to donate?
And my last question: Where can I find real answers to the questions above? Please don't suggest Action Greensboro.
Negotiation Backlash
______
Thoughts on Zoning Protest Petition
I find the statement by Marlene Sanford, president of the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition who acts as TREBIC Representative to Greensboro City Council insincere.
According to the New-Record Feb. 14, Ms Sanford said: “The City Council asked us to work on a compromise,” . . . .“TREBIC came to the table to negotiate in good faith.”
When has TREBIC negotiated a real COMPROMISE in good faith?
Negotiation is defined as "try to reach an agreement or compromise by discussion with others."
Compromise is defined as "an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions."
Is TREBIC getting a taste of it's own brand of negotiating?
I find that most, if not always, the development industry in Greensboro only talks to those adversely affected by their policies to convince them that TREBIC is always right and negotiations are usually based on making minor changes to some development plans and do very little to change their "real plans."
Highly paid lawyers hired by developers with very little respect for good development and who are not people friendly, make a show of trying to work with residents adversely affected by their plans.
TREBIC, maybe the joke's on you this time.
-----
Thoughts on Zoning Protest Petition
I find the statement by Marlene Sanford, president of the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition who acts as TREBIC Representative to Greensboro City Council insincere.
According to the New-Record Feb. 14, Ms Sanford said: “The City Council asked us to work on a compromise,” . . . .“TREBIC came to the table to negotiate in good faith.”
When has TREBIC negotiated a real COMPROMISE in good faith?
Negotiation is defined as "try to reach an agreement or compromise by discussion with others."
Compromise is defined as "an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions."
Is TREBIC getting a taste of it's own brand of negotiating?
I find that most, if not always, the development industry in Greensboro only talks to those adversely affected by their policies to convince them that TREBIC is always right and negotiations are usually based on making minor changes to some development plans and do very little to change their "real plans."
Highly paid lawyers hired by developers with very little respect for good development and who are not people friendly, make a show of trying to work with residents adversely affected by their plans.
TREBIC, maybe the joke's on you this time.
-----
It's Not Just Parking
More thoughts on downtown incentives and parking in Downtowners Park (sometimes called panhandlers park)
Cara Michelle wrote:
I’m not a fan of incentives,. . . . . And I don’t think anyone offered incentives to Simmone (owner of M’Coul’s and Green Burro) or the other business owners in that area. If they add parking, Simmone better get some of it,
..........
It’s not just a few parking spaces. It is the idea that now that downtown is a good place to do business, why should an investor even have to ask for incentives. There were no incentives when most of us invested in property downtown or opened businesses there.
Why should the new guy get special parking privileges that no other business gets. Why should he be allowed to buy city property for a fraction of it's worth? What kind of scam is this? The whole thing stinks.
Why destroy one small park when the city spent so much to help build another park downtown that is privately owned by a non-taxpaying, so-called non-profit group.
I can’t understand how citizens can believe the web of lies that Robbie Perkins spews about no investment in downtown in years. Why is a new building a better investment for downtown than a rehab of an historic building in an historic district?
Simon Richy has improved the corner of Elm and McGee streets much more than this johnny-come-lately can ever do. And he hardly gets a thank you. Many others have invested in the area, also.
Cara Michelle wrote:
I’m not a fan of incentives,. . . . . And I don’t think anyone offered incentives to Simmone (owner of M’Coul’s and Green Burro) or the other business owners in that area. If they add parking, Simmone better get some of it,
..........
It’s not just a few parking spaces. It is the idea that now that downtown is a good place to do business, why should an investor even have to ask for incentives. There were no incentives when most of us invested in property downtown or opened businesses there.
Why should the new guy get special parking privileges that no other business gets. Why should he be allowed to buy city property for a fraction of it's worth? What kind of scam is this? The whole thing stinks.
Why destroy one small park when the city spent so much to help build another park downtown that is privately owned by a non-taxpaying, so-called non-profit group.
I can’t understand how citizens can believe the web of lies that Robbie Perkins spews about no investment in downtown in years. Why is a new building a better investment for downtown than a rehab of an historic building in an historic district?
Simon Richy has improved the corner of Elm and McGee streets much more than this johnny-come-lately can ever do. And he hardly gets a thank you. Many others have invested in the area, also.
Who Objects
Am I the only one who noticed that City Council Members who objected to the Zoning Protest Petition at the Jan. meeting are closely connected to the development, building or real estate industry?
Thank You News 14
-----
CANDIDATE FORUM ON-LINE
The League of Women Voters sponsored a forum for At-Large Candidates for Greensboro City Council. Around 75 citizens attended, including some media types and one media outlet that cared enough to actually tape the entire program.
If you were not able to attend the forum, you can view it on line at
Cable News Channel 14. I am thrilled that Channel 14 cared enough to send a camera crew and reporter. Now anyone with access to an on-line computer can see and hear the candidates answer questions and give their pitch to voters.
We no longer have to read edited versions of what candidates said. We can see and hear them at our convenience - and over and over if we care to. Anyone who actually attended the forum had an opportunity to write a question to be asked of the candidates.
Thank you News 14.
Cable News Channel 14.
CANDIDATE FORUM ON-LINE
The League of Women Voters sponsored a forum for At-Large Candidates for Greensboro City Council. Around 75 citizens attended, including some media types and one media outlet that cared enough to actually tape the entire program.
If you were not able to attend the forum, you can view it on line at
Cable News Channel 14. I am thrilled that Channel 14 cared enough to send a camera crew and reporter. Now anyone with access to an on-line computer can see and hear the candidates answer questions and give their pitch to voters.
We no longer have to read edited versions of what candidates said. We can see and hear them at our convenience - and over and over if we care to. Anyone who actually attended the forum had an opportunity to write a question to be asked of the candidates.
Thank you News 14.
Cable News Channel 14.
Mayoral Forum 2007
----
Hey Doug,
I was a bit disappointed in some of the answers during the LWVPT Mayoral Forum Tuesday.
Yvonne Johnson said that one of the reason we need economic incentives is to prepare sites for immediate occupancy by industries.
Greensboro has had several opportunities to use abandoned industrial sites within the city limits for new companies. They chose to rezone them for retail. One of the selling points made by the people who pushed the economic bond issue was that retail did not bring in the real estate taxes as well as industry.
Milton Kern talked about all the help given women business owners in the downtown central business district. I would like to know who those women are. Many of the small daytime businesses opened downtown in the past several years are gone. The primary push in the downtown has been for bars and restaurants that operate primarily at night and for residential units, some of which were build by a former City Council member and by Mr. Kern, himself.
Yvonne Johnson's answer to the question about a noise ordinance was questionable. She is in favor of having a citizen committee to investigate complains about excessive noise and report it. Citizens in District 5 have complained about noise and rowdy behavior at some venues along High Point Road for years, to no avail. People in District 1 and 2 have complained about the same places over and over; one on Lee Street and some on Phillips Ave. and others in Glenwood. What has been done? Who would Ms. Johnson assign to this committee. Would the committee include people in the neighborhood watches and neighborhood associations who are aware of the problems? And do we have the manpower to enforce the law?
And there are others. I just hit the high spots.
Watch Video at Channel 14
I would like to see some practical questions asked AND ANSWERED ! ! !
Hey Doug,
I was a bit disappointed in some of the answers during the LWVPT Mayoral Forum Tuesday.
Yvonne Johnson said that one of the reason we need economic incentives is to prepare sites for immediate occupancy by industries.
Greensboro has had several opportunities to use abandoned industrial sites within the city limits for new companies. They chose to rezone them for retail. One of the selling points made by the people who pushed the economic bond issue was that retail did not bring in the real estate taxes as well as industry.
Milton Kern talked about all the help given women business owners in the downtown central business district. I would like to know who those women are. Many of the small daytime businesses opened downtown in the past several years are gone. The primary push in the downtown has been for bars and restaurants that operate primarily at night and for residential units, some of which were build by a former City Council member and by Mr. Kern, himself.
Yvonne Johnson's answer to the question about a noise ordinance was questionable. She is in favor of having a citizen committee to investigate complains about excessive noise and report it. Citizens in District 5 have complained about noise and rowdy behavior at some venues along High Point Road for years, to no avail. People in District 1 and 2 have complained about the same places over and over; one on Lee Street and some on Phillips Ave. and others in Glenwood. What has been done? Who would Ms. Johnson assign to this committee. Would the committee include people in the neighborhood watches and neighborhood associations who are aware of the problems? And do we have the manpower to enforce the law?
And there are others. I just hit the high spots.
Watch Video at Channel 14
I would like to see some practical questions asked AND ANSWERED ! ! !
What Should City Council Do ???
I have been reading everything I can about City Council Candidates and talking to them whenever I get a chance. I talked with Donna Riechmann (sounds like REEKman) Wednesday (9/12) on 1070am Radio. I will talk with Janet Wallace on the air next Wednesday (9/12) and Tonya Clinkscale on Wednesday (9/26). I like to hear from challengers in local elections. We already know what the incumbents are doing. I like to talk face to face. I think that it is harder to dodge a question in person. Most of us had rather write a short report than give an oral presentation and answer direct questions. The candidates, especially new ones, probably feel the same way.
I will attend a mayoral forum Tuesday. I hope it will be more interesting and informative than the one I saw at the Demo Headquarters last week.
There is a discussion going on over at Joe Guarino's blog about the most important job of City Council. My comments about that follow.
Joe,
About your question and a little bit more:
1. What do you regard as the single most important function or purpose of local government?
I think that Government should provide essential services and amenities that are not easily done individually. It is the job of City Council to decide what level of local services will be provided with taxpayer's money.
It is the job of citizens to decide who makes these decisions. So, be careful how you cast your vote. These people will be making decisions for you.
I will attend a mayoral forum Tuesday. I hope it will be more interesting and informative than the one I saw at the Demo Headquarters last week.
There is a discussion going on over at Joe Guarino's blog about the most important job of City Council. My comments about that follow.
Joe,
About your question and a little bit more:
1. What do you regard as the single most important function or purpose of local government?
I think that Government should provide essential services and amenities that are not easily done individually. It is the job of City Council to decide what level of local services will be provided with taxpayer's money.
It is the job of citizens to decide who makes these decisions. So, be careful how you cast your vote. These people will be making decisions for you.
Thanks News and Record
-
The N&R finally gets it ! ! !
The new 2007 Election Blog is publishing questions and answers from local candidates.
I Hope this information will be published in the print editions, also.
I was not thrilled with some of the questions (and some of the answers), but I appreciate the fact that the candidates' answers, in their own words, are finally being published. This is a much better way to inform voters than the old way of publishing filtered information.
Editorial Opinions are fine, but should not be included in news articles about candidates, either intentionally or unintentionally.
See posts from October, 2005 and here
The N&R finally gets it ! ! !
The new 2007 Election Blog is publishing questions and answers from local candidates.
I Hope this information will be published in the print editions, also.
I was not thrilled with some of the questions (and some of the answers), but I appreciate the fact that the candidates' answers, in their own words, are finally being published. This is a much better way to inform voters than the old way of publishing filtered information.
Editorial Opinions are fine, but should not be included in news articles about candidates, either intentionally or unintentionally.
See posts from October, 2005 and here
Enough Candidate Forums
I am excited that there will be lots of chances to meet and evaluate candidates for Greensboro City Council. I am always amazed and amused at the reasons we vote for a particular candidate. I hope the voters will be more informed and selective in their choices in 2007.
Some ways I recommend to find out more about candidates:
Radio 1070 AM (available at WGOS.net) will have candidate interviews almost every morning on the Dusty Dunn show. A chance to call-in or e-mail your suggested questions to potential City Council Members. Phone: 454-5024.
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18:
Mayoral Candidate Forum:
noon
Chance to hear and ask questions of Yvonne Johnson and Milton Kern
Holy Trinity Episcopal Church, in Downtown Greensboro
Greene Street between Battleground Ave. and Smith Street
Sponsored by League of Women Voters. (Program Free, lunch optional $8)
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 24:
At-Large Candidate Forum (Pre-Primary}
7 p.m.
Greensboro College Family Center, 1115 West Market St.,
(Old YMCA Building at Tate and Friendly streets)
Sponsored by League of Women Voters
MONDAY, October 22:
At-Large Candidate Forum (Primary Survivors)
Greensboro Central Library
Sponsored by Greensboro Neighborhood Congress
WEDNESDAY, Oct. 24:
District Candidates Forum (Primary Survivors)
7 p.m. Greensboro College Family Center
(Old YMCA Building at Tate and Friendly streets)
Sponsored by League of Women Voters
Bring your questions.
And, of course, read local blogs.
Some ways I recommend to find out more about candidates:
Radio 1070 AM (available at WGOS.net) will have candidate interviews almost every morning on the Dusty Dunn show. A chance to call-in or e-mail your suggested questions to potential City Council Members. Phone: 454-5024.
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18:
Mayoral Candidate Forum:
noon
Chance to hear and ask questions of Yvonne Johnson and Milton Kern
Holy Trinity Episcopal Church, in Downtown Greensboro
Greene Street between Battleground Ave. and Smith Street
Sponsored by League of Women Voters. (Program Free, lunch optional $8)
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 24:
At-Large Candidate Forum (Pre-Primary}
7 p.m.
Greensboro College Family Center, 1115 West Market St.,
(Old YMCA Building at Tate and Friendly streets)
Sponsored by League of Women Voters
MONDAY, October 22:
At-Large Candidate Forum (Primary Survivors)
Greensboro Central Library
Sponsored by Greensboro Neighborhood Congress
WEDNESDAY, Oct. 24:
District Candidates Forum (Primary Survivors)
7 p.m. Greensboro College Family Center
(Old YMCA Building at Tate and Friendly streets)
Sponsored by League of Women Voters
Bring your questions.
And, of course, read local blogs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
