On May 7, 2008 at the Greensboro City Council meeting item #42 which was a resolution to approve additional items for the 2008 Legislative Program and requesting support thereof by the Guilford delegation. If you want to watch the video click here , it all starts around the 1:16 point in video.
Before the agenda could get started Trudy Wade made a motion to add this to the agenda,"That the City Charter be amended to provide that the Greensboro City Attorney be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the city council to be it's legal advisor", it was seconded by City Council member Mike Barber.
As you can see that the silence from the City of Greensboro to even bring up Protest Petitions is evident with this motion. Bringing back Protest Petitions to the citizens of Greensboro has been in the spotlight since February plenty of time for the City Council to actually bring this up as a motion or a resolution or an agenda item whatever it takes.
Allen Johnson from the Greensboro News and Record had this to say in his Op-Ed piece on May 25, 2008.
When the local legislators convened to take up the matter on May 15, it still hadn’t heard from the council. As it turns out, the council didn’t say yes or no to the idea. In fact, it didn’t say anything. It just sucked the life out of the bill — at least for now — by sealing its collective lips. “We should have had an open dialogue on the dais about this,” Councilwoman Sandra Anderson Groat said last week.
Please let us know when that open dialogue will occur?
Below is a piece on Ed cone's blog click here
Yvonne Johnson responds to my email query on protest petitions: "I'm still studying this and weighing the pros and cons." She says she's conferring with a lot of people, including "communities" and TREBIC, about Pricey Harrison's bill.
Mar 14, 2008 at 03:36 PM
Is the Mayor still weighing the pros and cons?The silence is deafening
At around the 1:18 mark on video City Council member Mike Barber had this to say, "Well over 100 jurisdictions in North Carolina have their attorney report to the elected body that is the absolute rule 99% only 2 in North Carolina Greensboro and High Point don't.There is a story behind Greensboro changing."
The next quote by City Council member Mike Barber is priceless to the argument for bringing back Protest Petitions to Greensboro. Here is what was said, "Coming in line and being consistent with virtually every jurisdiction in the state of North Carolina".That is what we have been saying since the beginning Mr. Barber. This exemption for Greensboro should have never taken place 37 years ago and now it is time to be consistent with the rest of the state as Mr. Barber has stated.
Now it is time to show you what City Council member Zack Matheny had to say about this, "I have studied this significantly and called David Owens and David Lawrence from the UNC School of Government, their experience through their research to quote them made it worthwhile.Research from David Owens and David Lawrence which I know we depend a lot on in numerous cases. They are considered experts in their field."
Since we now know that David Owens is a expert in his field of work let's see what Mr. Owens has to say about Protest Petitions in the State of North Carolina.
Key Legal Issues
Protest Petitions
David W. Owens, Professor, Institute of Government, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB# 3330, Knapp Building, UNC-CH, Chapel Hill, N.C. 27599-3330March 2006
The provision in North Carolina zoning law for a protest petition, G.S. 160A-385(a), is mandatory for cities. The protest petition is available in all cities, whether or not an individual zoning ordinance includes provisions for it. A city may not reduce the required supermajority vote required by local ordinance. Eldridge v. Mangum, 216 N.C. 532, 5 S.E.2d 721 (1939).
As you can see it is mandatory for cities and this exemption for Greensboro should have never taken place. There are many questions to be answered as to why this exemption happened in the first place.I hope that the Greensboro City Council can also see that David Owens is a expert in his field and states that Protest Petitions are mandatory for all cities in North Carolina.
City Council member Sandra Anderson Groat has talked with David Lawrence in the past at length. Maybe she can also talk with David Owens about Protest Petitions.
City Council member Trudy Wade says this,"We are responsible to the citizens". Let's see if you are going to abide by that and be with the citizens or will you take the side of the special interest which in this case is TREBIC.
City Council member Mike Barber at the end of the discussion on the Legislative agenda for short session 2008 had this to say," Let's stick to the facts we can look up, our North Carolina Legislature believes in the ability of local governments to manage our 100 counties up to 8 people. North Carolina General Statutes allow for that, the Legislature believes this is the right way to do it all other municipalities besides High Point around the state are doing this. We are not taking on more responsibility , we are accepting the responsibility we should have never given up."
As you can see from City Council member Mike Barber , there are North Carolina General Statutes that the states have and every other municipality abides by them like in regards to Protest Petitions. He also states that we should never have given away that right. The argument for bringing back Protest Petitions to Greensboro is that this North Carolina General Statute should also have never been given away either.
Since we know now that these 2 issues being city attorney office under the city council and Protest Petitions for the citizens of Greensboro are too controversial in the short session.We also know that the Greensboro City Council passed the city attorney issue with a 5-4 decision at the May 7th meeting.
It is time to see where the City of Greensboro stands on the issue of bringing back Protest Petitions to Greensboro.
May 26, 2008
May 25, 2008
Allen Johnson on DOA: How Opponents Nuked Protest Petitions While Council said .....Nothing
In the Greensboro News and Record May 25, 2008. Allen Johnson Editorial Page Editor writes a great article on how the Greensboro City Council is silent on the issue of bringing back Protest Petitions to the citizens of Greensboro which was taken away from them 37 years ago.
Click Here
Below is the article and in a future post there will be a case made by the Greensboro City Council at their May 7th meeting in regards to Protest Petitions while talking about another legislative agenda item. Stay Tune for that.
Allen Johnson: How opponents nuked protest petitions while council said ... nothing
Sunday, May. 25, 2008 3:00 am
They nuked it with silence.
A proposed bill that would have restored to Greensboro citizens what others already have in the state's other major cities went before it came on May 15.
The bill in question would have restored the right to use protest petitions in Greensboro.
A protest petition would require a two-thirds super majority (at least a 7-2 vote in favor) for the City Council to approve a disputed rezoning. To force such a vote, opponents would have to produce signatures from owners of at least 5 percent of the adjoining land.
Greensboro asked for and received an exemption to that state law that allows protest petitions in 1971. Despite the sheer reasonableness of the law, we as a citizenry have been without that right ever since, even as Charlotte, Raleigh, Winston-Salem and High Point seem to have gotten along just fine with protest petitions all those years.
They're without it still.
The new bill already had a willing sponsor in state Rep. Pricey Harrison. If the county's legislative delegation simply had asked, it likely would have been a shoo-in to pass in Raleigh. All it lacked was an official request from the City Council -- which never came.
When the local legislators convened to take up the matter on May 15, it still hadn't heard from the council. As it turns out, the council didn't say yes or no to the idea. In fact, it didn't say anything. It just sucked the life out of the bill -- at least for now -- by sealing its collective lips.
"We should have had an open dialogue on the dais about this," Councilwoman Sandra Anderson Groat said last week.
Groat questioned why the council heard a briefing on the protest petition bill but never actually discussed it. When asked why legislation that works elsewhere won't work here, Groat, who is a builder by trade, shrugged. "I don't know. I absolutely don't know."
Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw, a retired real estate agent, said she was surprised as well that there wasn't a public discussion of the issue. She also said she supports the idea of protest petitions but even if she didn't, she believes the council is obligated to discuss it and that it should revisit the subject. "If it doesn't," she said, "I'll certainly bring it up."
To hear some in the development community tell it, however, protest petitions are downright un-American. Marlene Sanford, president of the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition, not only opposes protest petitions in Greensboro, she opposes them everywhere. "Frankly," she wrote in a letter to Guilford legislators, "the protest petition is antiquated and should be repealed statewide."
Sanford argued as well that Greensboro -- and "only Greensboro" -- already allows a "Citizens Initiative Petition where citizens can take any ordinance (including rezonings) to a citywide referendum."
That's not exactly true. The city charter does empower citizens to overturn a City Council vote by petition and referendum. (In 2003, a local group used the maneuver in a failed attempt to block the downtown baseball stadium.)
But Greensboro is hardly unique in this respect. Nine other municipalities in the state include similar provisions in their charters.
Even if the council may oppose the idea of protest petitions, it would have been useful to hear why, in the light of day. After all, there are some valid concerns. For instance, is the 5 percent threshold too low? And is Greensboro by nature so contentious that it might abuse the option? (We have tended over the years to file more petitions than other cities in the state.)
So why not debate these concerns in the open?
"My read on it is that we had a lot of things going on and this was bigger to the bloggers than the rest of the community," Councilman Robbie Perkins, a developer, said, referring to the council's overflowing plate of hot issues.
But the council's silence only feeds the perception that it is predisposed to side with developers. And, even Perkins, after raising various questions about protest petitions, conceded that the issue deserved more than a conspicuous non-answer. "This is not over," he said. "This thing is going to be discussed again." As well it should be.
Love it or hate it, the bill never got a fair hearing. More discouraging than the squelching of the idea was the squelching of the discussion.
Mayor Yvonne Johnson agreed that the council would revisit the protest petition movement. That would only be fair.
After all, you don't build dialogue with silence. And you don't build trust without dialogue. We can only hope the council will follow through on its pledges.
If not, I'd protest. And you should, too.
How many more articles, letters to the editor, guest columns, and post in this blog will it take to get the Greensboro City Council to actually deny or pass a resolution or motion on this issue. The silence is deafening.
Here is the option for the Greensboro City Council:
Go on record as supporting a bill to make Greensboro comply with North Carolina General Statute 160a-385 and 386, which never should have been taken away from the citizens of Greensboro in the first place.That means 6 months till the 2009 long session begins.
or
Go on record as denying the rights of the citizens of Greensboro this North Carolina General Statute and to be on the side of TREBIC which will then show the citizens of Greensboro where your allegience really stands.
Take your pick.
Click Here
Below is the article and in a future post there will be a case made by the Greensboro City Council at their May 7th meeting in regards to Protest Petitions while talking about another legislative agenda item. Stay Tune for that.
Allen Johnson: How opponents nuked protest petitions while council said ... nothing
Sunday, May. 25, 2008 3:00 am
They nuked it with silence.
A proposed bill that would have restored to Greensboro citizens what others already have in the state's other major cities went before it came on May 15.
The bill in question would have restored the right to use protest petitions in Greensboro.
A protest petition would require a two-thirds super majority (at least a 7-2 vote in favor) for the City Council to approve a disputed rezoning. To force such a vote, opponents would have to produce signatures from owners of at least 5 percent of the adjoining land.
Greensboro asked for and received an exemption to that state law that allows protest petitions in 1971. Despite the sheer reasonableness of the law, we as a citizenry have been without that right ever since, even as Charlotte, Raleigh, Winston-Salem and High Point seem to have gotten along just fine with protest petitions all those years.
They're without it still.
The new bill already had a willing sponsor in state Rep. Pricey Harrison. If the county's legislative delegation simply had asked, it likely would have been a shoo-in to pass in Raleigh. All it lacked was an official request from the City Council -- which never came.
When the local legislators convened to take up the matter on May 15, it still hadn't heard from the council. As it turns out, the council didn't say yes or no to the idea. In fact, it didn't say anything. It just sucked the life out of the bill -- at least for now -- by sealing its collective lips.
"We should have had an open dialogue on the dais about this," Councilwoman Sandra Anderson Groat said last week.
Groat questioned why the council heard a briefing on the protest petition bill but never actually discussed it. When asked why legislation that works elsewhere won't work here, Groat, who is a builder by trade, shrugged. "I don't know. I absolutely don't know."
Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw, a retired real estate agent, said she was surprised as well that there wasn't a public discussion of the issue. She also said she supports the idea of protest petitions but even if she didn't, she believes the council is obligated to discuss it and that it should revisit the subject. "If it doesn't," she said, "I'll certainly bring it up."
To hear some in the development community tell it, however, protest petitions are downright un-American. Marlene Sanford, president of the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition, not only opposes protest petitions in Greensboro, she opposes them everywhere. "Frankly," she wrote in a letter to Guilford legislators, "the protest petition is antiquated and should be repealed statewide."
Sanford argued as well that Greensboro -- and "only Greensboro" -- already allows a "Citizens Initiative Petition where citizens can take any ordinance (including rezonings) to a citywide referendum."
That's not exactly true. The city charter does empower citizens to overturn a City Council vote by petition and referendum. (In 2003, a local group used the maneuver in a failed attempt to block the downtown baseball stadium.)
But Greensboro is hardly unique in this respect. Nine other municipalities in the state include similar provisions in their charters.
Even if the council may oppose the idea of protest petitions, it would have been useful to hear why, in the light of day. After all, there are some valid concerns. For instance, is the 5 percent threshold too low? And is Greensboro by nature so contentious that it might abuse the option? (We have tended over the years to file more petitions than other cities in the state.)
So why not debate these concerns in the open?
"My read on it is that we had a lot of things going on and this was bigger to the bloggers than the rest of the community," Councilman Robbie Perkins, a developer, said, referring to the council's overflowing plate of hot issues.
But the council's silence only feeds the perception that it is predisposed to side with developers. And, even Perkins, after raising various questions about protest petitions, conceded that the issue deserved more than a conspicuous non-answer. "This is not over," he said. "This thing is going to be discussed again." As well it should be.
Love it or hate it, the bill never got a fair hearing. More discouraging than the squelching of the idea was the squelching of the discussion.
Mayor Yvonne Johnson agreed that the council would revisit the protest petition movement. That would only be fair.
After all, you don't build dialogue with silence. And you don't build trust without dialogue. We can only hope the council will follow through on its pledges.
If not, I'd protest. And you should, too.
How many more articles, letters to the editor, guest columns, and post in this blog will it take to get the Greensboro City Council to actually deny or pass a resolution or motion on this issue. The silence is deafening.
Here is the option for the Greensboro City Council:
Go on record as supporting a bill to make Greensboro comply with North Carolina General Statute 160a-385 and 386, which never should have been taken away from the citizens of Greensboro in the first place.That means 6 months till the 2009 long session begins.
or
Go on record as denying the rights of the citizens of Greensboro this North Carolina General Statute and to be on the side of TREBIC which will then show the citizens of Greensboro where your allegience really stands.
Take your pick.
May 22, 2008
TREBIC propaganda letter to the State Legislators with comments
Below you will find the TREBIC propaganda letter that was sent to the North Carolina State Legislators on May 13, 2008 in opposition to letting the citizens of Greensboro have the right to a Protest Petition . The TREBIC modus operandi on this issue was pathetic to witness. .
In the Triad Business Journal January18-24 2008 in the Triad Talk section this is what was said. " Developers always have the upper hand in Guilford County" says Reid Phillips, an attorney with Brooks Pierce in Greensboro. They have boards packed with their people. They have experience. They are masters of divide and conquer. They can also wear people out with continuances.
It is hard for grass roots efforts to compete with this modus operandi.
The issue of Protest Petitions for Greensboro has struck a real fire into a lot of people who are amazed that they don't have this North Carolina General Statute to use . In a future posting , there is going to be a case made from how the Greensboro City Council during their talk about the legislative agenda for 2008 on May 7th made a compelling case for Protest Petitions while talking about another issue.
In the letter below from the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition "TREBIC", you will see comments made in red after some of the paragraphs. This will show you the other side of this issue on Protest Petitions for Greensboro.
From: Marlene Sanford
msanford@trebic.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:30
Subject: URGENT - Greensboro Protest Petition decision at the May 15 Guilford Delegation meeting
Importance: High
May 13, 2008
Senators Stan Bingham, Phil Berger, Katie Dorsett and Kay Hagan, and Representatives Alma Adams, John Blust, Katie Dorsett, Maggie Jeffus, Earl Jones, Pricey Harrison and Laura Wiley
RE: Greensboro Rezoning Protest Petition
Dear Senators and Representatives:
We are very concerned at the discussion of instituting rezoning Protest Petitions in the Greensboro . We urge you NOT to pursue this.
All through the original letter they use bold type settings trying to make a point but show their arrogance in the letter, for example with the word NOT
Greensboro was exempted from this in 1971, we think in part because only Greensboro has a Citizen Initiative Petition where citizens can take any ordinance (including rezonings) to a citywide referendum.
As you can see they use the 2 words "we think" , in reality they don't have a clue what happened. The editorial from Yes Weekly had this to say, " It was nullified in Greensboro amid a storm of property development in 1970", that sounds like more of what happened, then "we think".Please read the article in Yes Weekly from the front page of this blog posted on February 17, 2008.
Protest petitions were “born” in the early 1900s because getting information to the public was difficult. Now, nearly 100 years later we’re in a new century and the “information age” and the communication problem no longer exists. There are strict rules for public notice and most developers voluntarily meet with neighbors. "Infill" development and redevelopment was not an issue then, but it is now, and allowing protest petitions will make it even harder to achieve smart growth developments where neighborhoods generally oppose higher densities and mixed uses that fit into the "better land use management plan" that Greensboro adopted in 2003. Frankly, the protest petition is antiquated and should be repealed statewide.
Where can we start with this one 2 points first on how your hear them say "most developers voluntarily meet with neighbors". The key word is "most" it is amazing that there is not a requirement for the developers to meet with neighbors in Greensboro.David Wharton who is a member of the Greensboro Land Development Ordinance Committee had this to say"This might interest you: I and others tried hard to get a "meet and confer" requirement written into the new ordinance, which would require a developer seeking a rezoning to meet with the neighbors beforehand and to report to the zoning commission the outcome of the meeting.
The best we could get was a requirement that developers must report to the zoning commission on their efforts to confer with neighbors, which means that if they didn't try to meet, they have to say that."
NC’s protest petition process allows a mere 5% of property owners within 100’ of the subject property to petition for a 75% vote of the full council (not “those present”) to pass the rezoning. In Greensboro that’s 7, and it essentially gives just 3 Council members veto power over rezoning decisions. It is patently absurd that a mere 5% of neighbors can so severely curtail someone else’s property rights. A democracy is run by majority vote. You can change the constitution of the United States with a simple majority, or with only a 2/3 vote of those elected representatives (Congress) present.
You can't change the constitution with a simple majority,
Greensboro rezonings already require a 2/3 vote to pass (6 of 9 votes), or else a second reading at the next meeting, giving opponents 2 to 3 extra weeks to lobby the issue further.
In other words it still only takes a 5-4 decision.
The 100 counties in NC do not allow protest petitions. While some other states do allow protest petitions, it is not pervasive and we found no states that allow a mere 5% to lodge a protest.
This is factually wrong, you might want to do some more research.
Local news reports have quoted City Council members urging caution, and some neighborhood advocates who fear it will impede the implementation of neighborhood preservation efforts. Citywide neighborhood groups are not taking up this cause. Greensboro goes to great effort to balance business friendliness with neighborhood stability, and does a pretty good job of it. This is a local government issue, and the legislative delegation should not pursue it.
TREBIC, please go ask the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress where they stand on this issue. The reason why it has become a state issue is because the Greensboro City Council has done nothing, the silence is deafening. The exemption should have never been taken away from Greensboro citizens in the first place.
Ed cone wrote a column called "Power to the people may be restored". In it is a paragraph in regards to Greensboro City Council member Robbie Perkins and it states:Certainly it is hard to look at our landscape, our City Council, or our recent history and argue that neighborhoods couldn't use a little help when it comes to development issues. City Councilman (and developer) Robbie Perkins says his industry must work on its bully-boy image. "Greensboro developers need to reverse the perception that they get everything they want," he says. "Otherwise, the pendulum will swing and development in the city will be severely curtailed."
Thank you TREBIC for a letter that shows your true colors and self interest
Sincerely,
Marlene Sanford
President
In the Triad Business Journal January18-24 2008 in the Triad Talk section this is what was said. " Developers always have the upper hand in Guilford County" says Reid Phillips, an attorney with Brooks Pierce in Greensboro. They have boards packed with their people. They have experience. They are masters of divide and conquer. They can also wear people out with continuances.
It is hard for grass roots efforts to compete with this modus operandi.
The issue of Protest Petitions for Greensboro has struck a real fire into a lot of people who are amazed that they don't have this North Carolina General Statute to use . In a future posting , there is going to be a case made from how the Greensboro City Council during their talk about the legislative agenda for 2008 on May 7th made a compelling case for Protest Petitions while talking about another issue.
In the letter below from the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition "TREBIC", you will see comments made in red after some of the paragraphs. This will show you the other side of this issue on Protest Petitions for Greensboro.
From: Marlene Sanford
msanford@trebic.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:30
Subject: URGENT - Greensboro Protest Petition decision at the May 15 Guilford Delegation meeting
Importance: High
May 13, 2008
Senators Stan Bingham, Phil Berger, Katie Dorsett and Kay Hagan, and Representatives Alma Adams, John Blust, Katie Dorsett, Maggie Jeffus, Earl Jones, Pricey Harrison and Laura Wiley
RE: Greensboro Rezoning Protest Petition
Dear Senators and Representatives:
We are very concerned at the discussion of instituting rezoning Protest Petitions in the Greensboro . We urge you NOT to pursue this.
All through the original letter they use bold type settings trying to make a point but show their arrogance in the letter, for example with the word NOT
Greensboro was exempted from this in 1971, we think in part because only Greensboro has a Citizen Initiative Petition where citizens can take any ordinance (including rezonings) to a citywide referendum.
As you can see they use the 2 words "we think" , in reality they don't have a clue what happened. The editorial from Yes Weekly had this to say, " It was nullified in Greensboro amid a storm of property development in 1970", that sounds like more of what happened, then "we think".Please read the article in Yes Weekly from the front page of this blog posted on February 17, 2008.
Protest petitions were “born” in the early 1900s because getting information to the public was difficult. Now, nearly 100 years later we’re in a new century and the “information age” and the communication problem no longer exists. There are strict rules for public notice and most developers voluntarily meet with neighbors. "Infill" development and redevelopment was not an issue then, but it is now, and allowing protest petitions will make it even harder to achieve smart growth developments where neighborhoods generally oppose higher densities and mixed uses that fit into the "better land use management plan" that Greensboro adopted in 2003. Frankly, the protest petition is antiquated and should be repealed statewide.
Where can we start with this one 2 points first on how your hear them say "most developers voluntarily meet with neighbors". The key word is "most" it is amazing that there is not a requirement for the developers to meet with neighbors in Greensboro.David Wharton who is a member of the Greensboro Land Development Ordinance Committee had this to say"This might interest you: I and others tried hard to get a "meet and confer" requirement written into the new ordinance, which would require a developer seeking a rezoning to meet with the neighbors beforehand and to report to the zoning commission the outcome of the meeting.
The best we could get was a requirement that developers must report to the zoning commission on their efforts to confer with neighbors, which means that if they didn't try to meet, they have to say that."
As you can see David Wharton says the best we could get, because people like Gary Rogers with Starmount Company,Trip Brown with Brown Investment,Keith Price with Samet Companies,James Cox with Mid-City Urban,Jessica Marlies with Brooks Pierce Law Firm,Mike Fox with Tuggles Duggins Law Firm,Dick Franks with Koury Corp.,Gary Hill with McAlphine Company,Gary Wolf with SparrowWolf Law Firm, and Mary Skenes with Yost and Little. So 10 out of 14 are TREBIC members or close allies with TREBIC for the Land Development Ordinance Citizen Advisory Team. As said before by Lawyer Reid Phillips ,boards get packed with TREBIC all the time especially in Greensboro where as Mike Barber said at a Greensboro City Council meeting on April 1st "TREBIC has been contacted and TREBIC has some interest".
The other point has to do with TREBIC saying that " Protest Petition is antiquated and should be repealed statewide". It should be noted that Protest Petitions are not antiquated but the exemption of Greensboro from this North Carolina General Statute is antiquated. Let's have the State Legislators pass a bill to make Greensboro comply with this statute and then TREBIC can lobby to deny the citizens of the whole state of North Carolina their right to protest unwanted development in their neighborhood.Good luck with that endeavor.
It is also noted that they left out the condescending quote from Gary Rogers TREBIC chairman saying that Greensboro had the foresight to exempt themselves from Protest Petitions.No, Mr. Rogers, it was not foresight. It was an effort to take away a right of the citizens to use the power of petitions against unwanted development in established neighborhoods
NC’s protest petition process allows a mere 5% of property owners within 100’ of the subject property to petition for a 75% vote of the full council (not “those present”) to pass the rezoning. In Greensboro that’s 7, and it essentially gives just 3 Council members veto power over rezoning decisions. It is patently absurd that a mere 5% of neighbors can so severely curtail someone else’s property rights. A democracy is run by majority vote. You can change the constitution of the United States with a simple majority, or with only a 2/3 vote of those elected representatives (Congress) present.
You can't change the constitution with a simple majority,
Greensboro rezonings already require a 2/3 vote to pass (6 of 9 votes), or else a second reading at the next meeting, giving opponents 2 to 3 extra weeks to lobby the issue further.
In other words it still only takes a 5-4 decision.
The 100 counties in NC do not allow protest petitions. While some other states do allow protest petitions, it is not pervasive and we found no states that allow a mere 5% to lodge a protest.
This is factually wrong, you might want to do some more research.
Local news reports have quoted City Council members urging caution, and some neighborhood advocates who fear it will impede the implementation of neighborhood preservation efforts. Citywide neighborhood groups are not taking up this cause. Greensboro goes to great effort to balance business friendliness with neighborhood stability, and does a pretty good job of it. This is a local government issue, and the legislative delegation should not pursue it.
TREBIC, please go ask the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress where they stand on this issue. The reason why it has become a state issue is because the Greensboro City Council has done nothing, the silence is deafening. The exemption should have never been taken away from Greensboro citizens in the first place.
Ed cone wrote a column called "Power to the people may be restored". In it is a paragraph in regards to Greensboro City Council member Robbie Perkins and it states:Certainly it is hard to look at our landscape, our City Council, or our recent history and argue that neighborhoods couldn't use a little help when it comes to development issues. City Councilman (and developer) Robbie Perkins says his industry must work on its bully-boy image. "Greensboro developers need to reverse the perception that they get everything they want," he says. "Otherwise, the pendulum will swing and development in the city will be severely curtailed."
Thank you TREBIC for a letter that shows your true colors and self interest
Sincerely,
Marlene Sanford
President
N.C. State Senator Phil Berger transcript on Protest Petition
Mark Binker from the Greensboro News and Record has the audio of this exchange on May 15, 2008 with North Carolina Senator Phil Berger, click here
Below is the transcript from that exchange:
Mark Binker:
You are pretty much the no don't run the Protest Petition.
Senator Phil Berger:
My reason is because we haven't heard from the Greensboro City Council and I have gotten e-mails from a number of people on both sides.
Some people say we ought to do it, some say we should not do it and the short session is as I understand with reference to local bills limited to non controversial matters.
I don't think anybody would say that this is non controversial.
There are people who support, and there are people who oppose it, but it is clearly controversial.
Below is the transcript from that exchange:
Mark Binker:
You are pretty much the no don't run the Protest Petition.
Senator Phil Berger:
My reason is because we haven't heard from the Greensboro City Council and I have gotten e-mails from a number of people on both sides.
Some people say we ought to do it, some say we should not do it and the short session is as I understand with reference to local bills limited to non controversial matters.
I don't think anybody would say that this is non controversial.
There are people who support, and there are people who oppose it, but it is clearly controversial.
May 20, 2008
TREBIC VS. PROTEST PETITION Editorial by YES WEEKLY
The week of May 20 , 2008 Yes Weekly hits the stands with this Lead Editorial
TREBIC vs. Protest Petition. click here
If you want to comment click here
Below is the editorial and it really hits the spot where the true colors of the TREBIC CARTEL were shown for all to see with the e mail campaign they did last week to the State Legislators in opposition of bringing back Protest Petitions to Greensboro after a 37 year takeaway of the rights of the citizens of Greensboro. Great editorial by Yes Weekly.
Editorial:
TREBIC vs. protest petition
It came as news to most people in Greensboro when they found out earlier this year they do not have the same rights as every other municipality in North Carolina and haven't since 1971.
That's when the state legislature, by request from Greensboro City Council, stripped our citizens of our right to have a say in the land use of our neighborhoods.
North Carolina general statute 160A-385(a) gives residents of a neighborhood an opportunity to protest rezoning and land use requests by acquiring signatures of 5 percent of adjacent property owners, requiring city councils to then muster a 75 percent majority vote as opposed to a simple majority to pass.
It was nullified in Greensboro amid a storm of property development in 1970, but in the wake of development in the northeast quadrant of the city, interest has surged in getting the protest petition reinstated.
The movement has created some strange bedfellows, to be sure: NC Rep. Pricey Harrison is on board, as is Sen. Katie Dorsett and Guilford County Commissioner Bruce Davis - all Democrats, by the way. The Coalition of Concerned Citizens and the League of Women Voters have also expressed support for the change.
GOPers have gotten into the act, as well, including Jim Rumley, a Republican candidate for the NC House, NC conservative think tank the John Locke Foundation, former Greensboro City Council member (and it's most consistent conservative voice) Tom Phillips and a slew of conservative bloggers including Dr. Joseph Guarino and our old friend Bubbanear.
Noticeably inactive on the issue is Greensboro City Council, which made no mention of protest petitions in its state legislative agenda in March.
But the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition let their voices be heard last week with a letter to 11 area elected officials with the lede: "We are very concerned at the discussion of instituting rezoning Protest Petitions in the Greensboro. We urge you NOT to pursue this." The caps are theirs, not ours.
Protest petitions should not be reinstated in Greensboro, the letter holds, because we have in place a Citizens' Initiative Petition (which didn't seem to work so well in the case of the minimum wage campaign). Also, they fear that giving three city council members the power to override real estate development to be "patently absurd.
"But the meat of the argument is that, because we live in the "information age," protest petitions are no longer necessary.
"Frankly," the letter reads, "the protest petition is antiquated and should be repealed statewide.
"Good luck with that one TREBIC. We'd like to see a draft of the letter suggesting to the rest of North Carolina that citizens should have no role in the development of their neighborhoods, and that the benevolent hands of builders and developers should have unfettered access to our neighborhoods and communities.
YES! Weekly chooses to exercise its right to express editorial opinion in our publication. In fact we cherish it, considering opinion to be a vital component of any publication. The viewpoints expressed represent a consensus of the YES! Weekly editorial staff, achieved through much deliberation and consideration.
TREBIC vs. Protest Petition. click here
If you want to comment click here
Below is the editorial and it really hits the spot where the true colors of the TREBIC CARTEL were shown for all to see with the e mail campaign they did last week to the State Legislators in opposition of bringing back Protest Petitions to Greensboro after a 37 year takeaway of the rights of the citizens of Greensboro. Great editorial by Yes Weekly.
Editorial:
TREBIC vs. protest petition
It came as news to most people in Greensboro when they found out earlier this year they do not have the same rights as every other municipality in North Carolina and haven't since 1971.
That's when the state legislature, by request from Greensboro City Council, stripped our citizens of our right to have a say in the land use of our neighborhoods.
North Carolina general statute 160A-385(a) gives residents of a neighborhood an opportunity to protest rezoning and land use requests by acquiring signatures of 5 percent of adjacent property owners, requiring city councils to then muster a 75 percent majority vote as opposed to a simple majority to pass.
It was nullified in Greensboro amid a storm of property development in 1970, but in the wake of development in the northeast quadrant of the city, interest has surged in getting the protest petition reinstated.
The movement has created some strange bedfellows, to be sure: NC Rep. Pricey Harrison is on board, as is Sen. Katie Dorsett and Guilford County Commissioner Bruce Davis - all Democrats, by the way. The Coalition of Concerned Citizens and the League of Women Voters have also expressed support for the change.
GOPers have gotten into the act, as well, including Jim Rumley, a Republican candidate for the NC House, NC conservative think tank the John Locke Foundation, former Greensboro City Council member (and it's most consistent conservative voice) Tom Phillips and a slew of conservative bloggers including Dr. Joseph Guarino and our old friend Bubbanear.
Noticeably inactive on the issue is Greensboro City Council, which made no mention of protest petitions in its state legislative agenda in March.
But the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition let their voices be heard last week with a letter to 11 area elected officials with the lede: "We are very concerned at the discussion of instituting rezoning Protest Petitions in the Greensboro. We urge you NOT to pursue this." The caps are theirs, not ours.
Protest petitions should not be reinstated in Greensboro, the letter holds, because we have in place a Citizens' Initiative Petition (which didn't seem to work so well in the case of the minimum wage campaign). Also, they fear that giving three city council members the power to override real estate development to be "patently absurd.
"But the meat of the argument is that, because we live in the "information age," protest petitions are no longer necessary.
"Frankly," the letter reads, "the protest petition is antiquated and should be repealed statewide.
"Good luck with that one TREBIC. We'd like to see a draft of the letter suggesting to the rest of North Carolina that citizens should have no role in the development of their neighborhoods, and that the benevolent hands of builders and developers should have unfettered access to our neighborhoods and communities.
YES! Weekly chooses to exercise its right to express editorial opinion in our publication. In fact we cherish it, considering opinion to be a vital component of any publication. The viewpoints expressed represent a consensus of the YES! Weekly editorial staff, achieved through much deliberation and consideration.
May 18, 2008
Short Session NO , Long Session in 2009 Absolutely
It was a long shot to begin with but it seems like Senator Phil Berger thinks it is too controversial to bring up Protest Petitions for Greensboro in the short session in the North Carolina General Assembly.
But there is hope on the horizon when State Representative Pricey Harrison had this to say:
On the matter of Protest Petitions, members of the Guilford delegation met to discuss Greensboro-related legislation for the short session. I broached the idea of introducing a bill to restore the right of protest petition to the citizens of Greensboro . In order for local bills to be eligible for the short session, there must be unanimity among the delegation, and we just don’t have it, so I must wait to file it in January, 2009.
As she states that it will be filed in the long session starting in 2009. There are many angles to the issue of Protest Petitions that played out for a lot of us to see first hand. First being the e mail campaign the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition also known as the TREBIC CARTEL sent to the State Legislators. It will be fun to debunk and to show you plenty of problems with the TREBIC CARTEL e mail campaign in a future posting.
Also we plan on posting the whole transcript from Mark Binker of the Greensboro News and Record who interviewed Senator Phil Berger on why he opposed the bill. If you want to hear the audio from Mark Binker click here , plus if you want to see the article click here
It is time to thank everyone who has been a part of this process of restoring Protest Petitions to Greensboro . This defeat in the short session is just the first round of a 12 round fight.It will only be another 6 and a half months for finally the citizens of Greensboro will get their chance to pass a bill to have Protest Petitions in Greensboro.
Plus also there will be a future posting on showing how the TREBIC CARTEL and their Modus Operandi works below is the letter they sent to the State Representatives.
From: Marlene Sanford [mailto:msanford@trebic.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:30 PMTo: msanford@trebic.orgSubject: URGENT - Greensboro Protest Petition decision at the May 15 Guilford Delegation meetingImportance: High
May 13, 2008
Senators Stan Bingham, Phil Berger, Katie Dorsett and Kay Hagan, and Representatives Alma Adams, John Blust, Katie Dorsett, Maggie Jeffus, Earl Jones, Pricey Harrison and Laura Wiley
RE: Greensboro Rezoning Protest Petition
Dear Senators and Representatives:
We are very concerned at the discussion of instituting rezoning Protest Petitions in the Greensboro . We urge you NOT to pursue this.
Greensboro was exempted from this in 1971, we think in part because only Greensboro has a Citizen Initiative Petition where citizens can take any ordinance (including rezonings) to a citywide referendum.
Protest petitions were “born” in the early 1900s because getting information to the public was difficult. Now, nearly 100 years later we’re in a new century and the “information age” and the communication problem no longer exists. There are strict rules for public notice and most developers voluntarily meet with neighbors. "Infill" development and redevelopment was not an issue then, but it is now, and allowing protest petitions will make it even harder to achieve smart growth developments where neighborhoods generally oppose higher densities and mixed uses that fit into the "better land use management plan" that Greensboro adopted in 2003. Frankly, the protest petition is antiquated and should be repealed statewide.
NC’s protest petition process allows a mere 5% of property owners within 100’ of the subject property to petition for a 75% vote of the full council (not “those present”) to pass the rezoning. In Greensboro that’s 7, and it essentially gives just 3 Council members veto power over rezoning decisions. It is patently absurd that a mere 5% of neighbors can so severely curtail someone else’s property rights. A democracy is run by majority vote. You can change the constitution of the United States with a simple majority, or with only a 2/3 vote of those elected representatives (Congress) present.
Greensboro rezonings already require a 2/3 vote to pass (6 of 9 votes), or else a second reading at the next meeting, giving opponents 2 to 3 extra weeks to lobby the issue further.
The 100 counties in NC do not allow protest petitions. While some other states do allow protest petitions, it is not pervasive and we found no states that allow a mere 5% to lodge a protest.
Local news reports have quoted City Council members urging caution, and some neighborhood advocates who fear it will impede the implementation of neighborhood preservation efforts. Citywide neighborhood groups are not taking up this cause. Greensboro goes to great effort to balance business friendliness with neighborhood stability, and does a pretty good job of it. This is a local government issue, and the legislative delegation should not pursue it.
Sincerely,
Marlene Sanford
President
But there is hope on the horizon when State Representative Pricey Harrison had this to say:
On the matter of Protest Petitions, members of the Guilford delegation met to discuss Greensboro-related legislation for the short session. I broached the idea of introducing a bill to restore the right of protest petition to the citizens of Greensboro . In order for local bills to be eligible for the short session, there must be unanimity among the delegation, and we just don’t have it, so I must wait to file it in January, 2009.
As she states that it will be filed in the long session starting in 2009. There are many angles to the issue of Protest Petitions that played out for a lot of us to see first hand. First being the e mail campaign the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition also known as the TREBIC CARTEL sent to the State Legislators. It will be fun to debunk and to show you plenty of problems with the TREBIC CARTEL e mail campaign in a future posting.
Also we plan on posting the whole transcript from Mark Binker of the Greensboro News and Record who interviewed Senator Phil Berger on why he opposed the bill. If you want to hear the audio from Mark Binker click here , plus if you want to see the article click here
It is time to thank everyone who has been a part of this process of restoring Protest Petitions to Greensboro . This defeat in the short session is just the first round of a 12 round fight.It will only be another 6 and a half months for finally the citizens of Greensboro will get their chance to pass a bill to have Protest Petitions in Greensboro.
Plus also there will be a future posting on showing how the TREBIC CARTEL and their Modus Operandi works below is the letter they sent to the State Representatives.
From: Marlene Sanford [mailto:msanford@trebic.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:30 PMTo: msanford@trebic.orgSubject: URGENT - Greensboro Protest Petition decision at the May 15 Guilford Delegation meetingImportance: High
May 13, 2008
Senators Stan Bingham, Phil Berger, Katie Dorsett and Kay Hagan, and Representatives Alma Adams, John Blust, Katie Dorsett, Maggie Jeffus, Earl Jones, Pricey Harrison and Laura Wiley
RE: Greensboro Rezoning Protest Petition
Dear Senators and Representatives:
We are very concerned at the discussion of instituting rezoning Protest Petitions in the Greensboro . We urge you NOT to pursue this.
Greensboro was exempted from this in 1971, we think in part because only Greensboro has a Citizen Initiative Petition where citizens can take any ordinance (including rezonings) to a citywide referendum.
Protest petitions were “born” in the early 1900s because getting information to the public was difficult. Now, nearly 100 years later we’re in a new century and the “information age” and the communication problem no longer exists. There are strict rules for public notice and most developers voluntarily meet with neighbors. "Infill" development and redevelopment was not an issue then, but it is now, and allowing protest petitions will make it even harder to achieve smart growth developments where neighborhoods generally oppose higher densities and mixed uses that fit into the "better land use management plan" that Greensboro adopted in 2003. Frankly, the protest petition is antiquated and should be repealed statewide.
NC’s protest petition process allows a mere 5% of property owners within 100’ of the subject property to petition for a 75% vote of the full council (not “those present”) to pass the rezoning. In Greensboro that’s 7, and it essentially gives just 3 Council members veto power over rezoning decisions. It is patently absurd that a mere 5% of neighbors can so severely curtail someone else’s property rights. A democracy is run by majority vote. You can change the constitution of the United States with a simple majority, or with only a 2/3 vote of those elected representatives (Congress) present.
Greensboro rezonings already require a 2/3 vote to pass (6 of 9 votes), or else a second reading at the next meeting, giving opponents 2 to 3 extra weeks to lobby the issue further.
The 100 counties in NC do not allow protest petitions. While some other states do allow protest petitions, it is not pervasive and we found no states that allow a mere 5% to lodge a protest.
Local news reports have quoted City Council members urging caution, and some neighborhood advocates who fear it will impede the implementation of neighborhood preservation efforts. Citywide neighborhood groups are not taking up this cause. Greensboro goes to great effort to balance business friendliness with neighborhood stability, and does a pretty good job of it. This is a local government issue, and the legislative delegation should not pursue it.
Sincerely,
Marlene Sanford
President
Billy The Blogging Poet says Yes to Protest Petitions
Billy the Blogging Poet chimes in on Protest Petitions for Greensboro. click here
In Favor Of Protest Petitions For Greensboro
I just wanted to let my readers know that in considering me for Mayor of Greensboro in 2009, I am 100% in favor of returning to Greensboro's citizens the right to Protest Petitions.
It is simply wrong that Greensboro citizens and taxpayers do not have the same legal rights as every other citizen in every other city and every town in North Carolina. Discrimination based on the city of one's place of residence is just as wrong as any other form of discrimination and as long as North Carolina continues to deny Greensboro citizens their equal rights Greensboro will continue to suffer.
Might I remind you that Councilman Robbie Perkins continues to be in favor of denying Greensboro citizens their equal rights and has said so publicly. As Perkins has already been picked by the powers that be to be Greensboro's next mayor I thought that is something you'd like to know.If you don't already understand what protest petitions are and how they apply to you I highly recommend you read the work of Keith Brown at Protest Petition In Greensboro.And while I've got your attention, please don't forget that Robbie Perkins, our current Mayor Johnson and former Mayor Bobblehead Melvin were among those behind the Dam Scam.
We now return you to our regularly scheduled programming.
In Favor Of Protest Petitions For Greensboro
I just wanted to let my readers know that in considering me for Mayor of Greensboro in 2009, I am 100% in favor of returning to Greensboro's citizens the right to Protest Petitions.
It is simply wrong that Greensboro citizens and taxpayers do not have the same legal rights as every other citizen in every other city and every town in North Carolina. Discrimination based on the city of one's place of residence is just as wrong as any other form of discrimination and as long as North Carolina continues to deny Greensboro citizens their equal rights Greensboro will continue to suffer.
Might I remind you that Councilman Robbie Perkins continues to be in favor of denying Greensboro citizens their equal rights and has said so publicly. As Perkins has already been picked by the powers that be to be Greensboro's next mayor I thought that is something you'd like to know.If you don't already understand what protest petitions are and how they apply to you I highly recommend you read the work of Keith Brown at Protest Petition In Greensboro.And while I've got your attention, please don't forget that Robbie Perkins, our current Mayor Johnson and former Mayor Bobblehead Melvin were among those behind the Dam Scam.
We now return you to our regularly scheduled programming.
May 15, 2008
Guest Column on Protest Petitions for Greensboro
The Coalition of Concerned Citizens Member Keith Brown wrote a Guest Column to the Greensboro News And Record on Thursday May 15, 2008, click here to comment.
Greensboro residents want rights on zoning
By Keith Brown
Thursday, May. 15, 2008 3:00 am
The N.C. General Assembly can create new law and destroy old law. Cities such as Greensboro are subject to those laws, unless state legislators allow an exception.
In 1971, local elected officials supported a bill under a cloud of politics to exempt Greensboro from N.C. General Statutes 160a-385 and 386, which created what formally is called a "protest petition." This exemption never should have been made in the first place and is bad public policy.
Protest petitions are used if a certain percentage of property owners most affected by a zoning change object to the rezoning. These residents may petition for a super-majority vote of at least 7-2 to approve the rezoning.
Protest petitions level the playing field for residents, especially when pro-development members of the City Council are making rezoning decisions.
Professor David Owens of the UNC School of Government says, "The provision in North Carolina zoning law for a protest petition is mandatory for cities." His use of the word "mandatory" demonstrates that Greensboro is not following a law every other city must follow. As stated before, the General Assembly can destroy old law, and this exemption is definitely old law.
To hear Gary Rogers from the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition (TREBIC) say that Greensboro, back in 1971, had the foresight to exempt itself from this statute is condescending to citizens here. No, Mr. Rogers, it was not foresight. It was an effort to take away a right of the citizens to use the power of petitions against unwanted development in established neighborhoods.
Those who oppose protest petitions in Greensboro say they would discourage in-fill development. They say the current exemption aids growth, and not having the exemption would hurt growth.
Yet Raleigh and Charlotte have protest petitions, and both have grown faster than Greensboro since the exemption has been in effect.
Because I live in High Point, my neighborhood had the right to use a protest petition against a major developer not once, but twice, in a highly contested rezoning case off N.C. 68. I'm certain Greensboro citizens also would like to have this powerful tool as their voice against encroaching development.
Why not let the Guilford County legislative delegation push a bill to make the city of Greensboro comply with this state law? This would give Greensboro residents the same right as other North Carolina residents who live in cities.
Thirty-seven years is long enough. Let your state legislators know you would like to have protest petitions back in Greensboro.
I will leave you with a quote from a Greensboro resident who said it well: "It's time that citizens had a way to stop the business-as-usual crowd from developing our quality of life out of existence."
Keith Brown lives in High Point and is a member of Coalition of Concerned Citizens.
Greensboro residents want rights on zoning
By Keith Brown
Thursday, May. 15, 2008 3:00 am
The N.C. General Assembly can create new law and destroy old law. Cities such as Greensboro are subject to those laws, unless state legislators allow an exception.
In 1971, local elected officials supported a bill under a cloud of politics to exempt Greensboro from N.C. General Statutes 160a-385 and 386, which created what formally is called a "protest petition." This exemption never should have been made in the first place and is bad public policy.
Protest petitions are used if a certain percentage of property owners most affected by a zoning change object to the rezoning. These residents may petition for a super-majority vote of at least 7-2 to approve the rezoning.
Protest petitions level the playing field for residents, especially when pro-development members of the City Council are making rezoning decisions.
Professor David Owens of the UNC School of Government says, "The provision in North Carolina zoning law for a protest petition is mandatory for cities." His use of the word "mandatory" demonstrates that Greensboro is not following a law every other city must follow. As stated before, the General Assembly can destroy old law, and this exemption is definitely old law.
To hear Gary Rogers from the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition (TREBIC) say that Greensboro, back in 1971, had the foresight to exempt itself from this statute is condescending to citizens here. No, Mr. Rogers, it was not foresight. It was an effort to take away a right of the citizens to use the power of petitions against unwanted development in established neighborhoods.
Those who oppose protest petitions in Greensboro say they would discourage in-fill development. They say the current exemption aids growth, and not having the exemption would hurt growth.
Yet Raleigh and Charlotte have protest petitions, and both have grown faster than Greensboro since the exemption has been in effect.
Because I live in High Point, my neighborhood had the right to use a protest petition against a major developer not once, but twice, in a highly contested rezoning case off N.C. 68. I'm certain Greensboro citizens also would like to have this powerful tool as their voice against encroaching development.
Why not let the Guilford County legislative delegation push a bill to make the city of Greensboro comply with this state law? This would give Greensboro residents the same right as other North Carolina residents who live in cities.
Thirty-seven years is long enough. Let your state legislators know you would like to have protest petitions back in Greensboro.
I will leave you with a quote from a Greensboro resident who said it well: "It's time that citizens had a way to stop the business-as-usual crowd from developing our quality of life out of existence."
Keith Brown lives in High Point and is a member of Coalition of Concerned Citizens.
May 14, 2008
Greensboro News and Record #2 Lead Editorial on Protest Petitions
The Greensboro News and Record has a #2 lead editorial on restoring Protest Petitions to Greensboro, click here . I want to say that if this doesn't pass in short session then the long session will be the best chance for this to pass in the State Legislature.
Get on board protest petitions
Tuesday's No. 2 editorial.
Legislative short sessions are supposed to be short on business. Yet that doesn’t mean the N.C. General Assembly can’t tackle a thing or two.
There are some issues that shouldn’t be too complicated or controversial for the small amount of time allotted to these sessions. One is legislation that would restore to Greensboro residents the right to use protest petitions.
All other residents of North Carolina cities can use these petitions to challenge land-use decisions. But the General Assembly took this option away from Greensboro residents in 1971, upon the City Council’s request. It needs to undo what it did.
Rep. Pricey Harrison has sponsored a bill that would do that. But for it to pass, the Guilford delegation must back it. With unanimous support, the bill would go forward, as other legislators would defer to what the county’s delegation wanted for this local bill.
One potential problem, though, is the action, or, rather, inaction, of the Greensboro City Council. It did not include restoration of the protest petition in its requests to the legislature.It can be argued that the Guilford delegation shouldn’t act without a request by the council. But shouldn’t the widespread outpouring of citizen support in Greensboro for the protest petition, from individuals and neighborhood groups to the League of Women Voters, count for something?The truth is the majority of Greensboro residents appear to support restoring the right to use protest petitions while only a few in the city’s development crowd oppose it. They argue that use of the petitions could impede growth.
Rep. Maggie Jeffus, who heads the Guilford delegation, hopes to convene its members Thursday to discuss the issue. We hope they decide to support Harrison’s bill, even without the City Council’s stamp of approval.
For 37 years, Greensboro residents have had to fight zoning decisions with one hand tied behind their back. There is no reason for residents to continue to be restrained this way for another year
Get on board protest petitions
Tuesday's No. 2 editorial.
Legislative short sessions are supposed to be short on business. Yet that doesn’t mean the N.C. General Assembly can’t tackle a thing or two.
There are some issues that shouldn’t be too complicated or controversial for the small amount of time allotted to these sessions. One is legislation that would restore to Greensboro residents the right to use protest petitions.
All other residents of North Carolina cities can use these petitions to challenge land-use decisions. But the General Assembly took this option away from Greensboro residents in 1971, upon the City Council’s request. It needs to undo what it did.
Rep. Pricey Harrison has sponsored a bill that would do that. But for it to pass, the Guilford delegation must back it. With unanimous support, the bill would go forward, as other legislators would defer to what the county’s delegation wanted for this local bill.
One potential problem, though, is the action, or, rather, inaction, of the Greensboro City Council. It did not include restoration of the protest petition in its requests to the legislature.It can be argued that the Guilford delegation shouldn’t act without a request by the council. But shouldn’t the widespread outpouring of citizen support in Greensboro for the protest petition, from individuals and neighborhood groups to the League of Women Voters, count for something?The truth is the majority of Greensboro residents appear to support restoring the right to use protest petitions while only a few in the city’s development crowd oppose it. They argue that use of the petitions could impede growth.
Rep. Maggie Jeffus, who heads the Guilford delegation, hopes to convene its members Thursday to discuss the issue. We hope they decide to support Harrison’s bill, even without the City Council’s stamp of approval.
For 37 years, Greensboro residents have had to fight zoning decisions with one hand tied behind their back. There is no reason for residents to continue to be restrained this way for another year
May 13, 2008
JOE AND BUBBA SHOW ON PROTEST PETITIONS and the trebic cartel
There are 2 great posts today on Protest Petitions and the letter sent out by the trebic cartel on opposing any legislation to make Greensboro comply with North Carolina General Statute 160a-385 and 386.
Just to let everyone know that every other city in this whole great state of North Carolina abides by Protest Petitions . Let me reiterate that every other city abides by this and to see the opposition write this letter makes you think that getting this bill passed is the right thing to do for the citizens of Greensboro.
HERE ARE THE POST
Guarino
Bubba
Thanks for the posts.
Just to let everyone know that every other city in this whole great state of North Carolina abides by Protest Petitions . Let me reiterate that every other city abides by this and to see the opposition write this letter makes you think that getting this bill passed is the right thing to do for the citizens of Greensboro.
HERE ARE THE POST
Guarino
Bubba
Thanks for the posts.
Bob Kirnard Speech to the Guilford Delegation on Ethics on the Local Level
The speech below was for the Lobby the Legislator Meeting on Monday April 21, 2008 in front of the Guilford County delegation. Bob Kirnard from the Coalition of Concerned Citizens had the opportunity to speak about Ethics at the Local Level. Enclosed is the speech:
My name is Bob Kirnard. I would like to talk a little about the State Government Ethics Act and it’s possible acceptance by and application to the City of Greensboro. First of all, let’s talk a little about the definitions of ethics and morality. Ethics is the process of determining right from wrong as it relates to our everyday conduct. Morality is defined as a system of determining right and wrong that is established by some authority, in this case a governmental authority. People need to be taught right from wrong and hence the need for ethical education, not just in government, but in all cases where trust and protection of the public good is at stake.
The City of Greensboro’s “code of ethics” (which is about a page long) talks about “…protecting the integrity of governmental decisions…, promoting public confidence…, and impartiality and fairness in decision making.
I think much of this has been questioned recently by the residents of the City of Greensboro. You see Newspaper articles quite frequently relating to conflicts of interest in proposed development projects and questionable influences on some of those empowered with voting on these same projects.
I feel the time has come for the City of Greensboro to look for more in terms of ethical guidance and continuing ethical education. The State Government Ethics Act should be used as a model and be adopted by the City of Greensboro and other cities.
As Greensboro grows, our elected and appointed officials will have an even more challenging time trying to handle that growth in the best possible way for the common good.
Now, more than ever, we need to establish and maintain ethics educational programs for Greensboro’s public servants. They need to periodically take refresher courses in ethical conduct and standards relating to their day to day job activities.
A Commission needs to be established to enforce and oversee the rules of ethical conduct and resolve ethical conflicts. Without enforcement, reform will mean nothing.
A harder look needs to be taken at those members that are to be elected or appointed to the zoning commission and the city council.
In particular, fairness and impartiality need to be established and demonstrated through diversification of members sitting on both boards.
It does not look very fair or impartial to have active developers in real estate sitting on the boards and making decisions on development projects that may benefit the companies that they work for.
It also does not seem fair and impartial to know that the lawyers pleading their cases have made sizeable contributions to members empowered with deciding their cases.
In order to restore public confidence in local government, and have the citizens feel like they are being treated with impartiality and fairness, we need to expand the jurisdiction of the State Government Ethics Act to the cities as well.
My name is Bob Kirnard. I would like to talk a little about the State Government Ethics Act and it’s possible acceptance by and application to the City of Greensboro. First of all, let’s talk a little about the definitions of ethics and morality. Ethics is the process of determining right from wrong as it relates to our everyday conduct. Morality is defined as a system of determining right and wrong that is established by some authority, in this case a governmental authority. People need to be taught right from wrong and hence the need for ethical education, not just in government, but in all cases where trust and protection of the public good is at stake.
The City of Greensboro’s “code of ethics” (which is about a page long) talks about “…protecting the integrity of governmental decisions…, promoting public confidence…, and impartiality and fairness in decision making.
I think much of this has been questioned recently by the residents of the City of Greensboro. You see Newspaper articles quite frequently relating to conflicts of interest in proposed development projects and questionable influences on some of those empowered with voting on these same projects.
I feel the time has come for the City of Greensboro to look for more in terms of ethical guidance and continuing ethical education. The State Government Ethics Act should be used as a model and be adopted by the City of Greensboro and other cities.
As Greensboro grows, our elected and appointed officials will have an even more challenging time trying to handle that growth in the best possible way for the common good.
Now, more than ever, we need to establish and maintain ethics educational programs for Greensboro’s public servants. They need to periodically take refresher courses in ethical conduct and standards relating to their day to day job activities.
A Commission needs to be established to enforce and oversee the rules of ethical conduct and resolve ethical conflicts. Without enforcement, reform will mean nothing.
A harder look needs to be taken at those members that are to be elected or appointed to the zoning commission and the city council.
In particular, fairness and impartiality need to be established and demonstrated through diversification of members sitting on both boards.
It does not look very fair or impartial to have active developers in real estate sitting on the boards and making decisions on development projects that may benefit the companies that they work for.
It also does not seem fair and impartial to know that the lawyers pleading their cases have made sizeable contributions to members empowered with deciding their cases.
In order to restore public confidence in local government, and have the citizens feel like they are being treated with impartiality and fairness, we need to expand the jurisdiction of the State Government Ethics Act to the cities as well.
May 11, 2008
Mark Binker from N&R Highlights Protest Petitions in Short Session Article
Mark Binker of the Greensboro News and Record wrote a front page article called "Governor sets priorities for short session", click here .
Below is what was said about bringing back Protest Petitions to Greensboro.
Outside the budget, local legislators say they're bracing for a fast-paced session that could be over by mid-July. Although such predictions are perennially proved overly optimistic, they affect the types of bills legislators are willing to tackle.
For example, Rep. Pricey Harrison, a Greensboro Democrat, was preparing to run a bill that would have banned a certain flame-retardant chemical. But that legislation has been deemed too complex and controversial to handle in the next eight weeks.
Harrison said she was still eager to take up a bill that would give Greensboro residents the right to use protest petitions in land-use cases. If they were available, such petitions would force the City Council to approve changes to a property's legal designation by a 7-2 margin or better.
The tool is available in all other North Carolina cities but was taken away from Greensboro in 1971.
"Most of the people I talked to seem to think we need to do it," said Rep. Alma Adams, a Greensboro Democrat.
The legislation would be a local bill, a designation that usually means the rest of the General Assembly will defer to the judgment of the legislators who represent the area if there is unanimous agreement.
"Normally, with a local bill, you get a resolution from the local government that they're asking for it," said Sen. Phil Berger, a Rockingham County Republican who represents parts of Guilford County.
The council has not passed such a resolution.
"I don't want to say I would stand in the way, I'm just thinking in broad terms about how this would typically move forward," Berger said. "I would like to hear how the city feels about it."
Rep. Maggie Jeffus, a Greensboro Democrat, leads the 10-member Guilford County delegation. Jeffus said she hoped to call a meeting of the delegation this week to resolve the protest petition question and other items.
Bringing back Protest Petitions in a short session of the state legislature is tough to do but can be achievable. Hopefully there will be a bill drafted in the short session and a bill passed. If not then the long session starts in 2009 , and maybe the citizens of Greensboro can finally have the same right as everyone else has who lives in a city in the state of North Carolina.
Now is the time to let your Guilford County Legislators know that you want Protest Petitions sooner rather than later.In this blog there is a place to e mail your representatives. the first post in February is where you can contact the legislators.
Below is what was said about bringing back Protest Petitions to Greensboro.
Outside the budget, local legislators say they're bracing for a fast-paced session that could be over by mid-July. Although such predictions are perennially proved overly optimistic, they affect the types of bills legislators are willing to tackle.
For example, Rep. Pricey Harrison, a Greensboro Democrat, was preparing to run a bill that would have banned a certain flame-retardant chemical. But that legislation has been deemed too complex and controversial to handle in the next eight weeks.
Harrison said she was still eager to take up a bill that would give Greensboro residents the right to use protest petitions in land-use cases. If they were available, such petitions would force the City Council to approve changes to a property's legal designation by a 7-2 margin or better.
The tool is available in all other North Carolina cities but was taken away from Greensboro in 1971.
"Most of the people I talked to seem to think we need to do it," said Rep. Alma Adams, a Greensboro Democrat.
The legislation would be a local bill, a designation that usually means the rest of the General Assembly will defer to the judgment of the legislators who represent the area if there is unanimous agreement.
"Normally, with a local bill, you get a resolution from the local government that they're asking for it," said Sen. Phil Berger, a Rockingham County Republican who represents parts of Guilford County.
The council has not passed such a resolution.
"I don't want to say I would stand in the way, I'm just thinking in broad terms about how this would typically move forward," Berger said. "I would like to hear how the city feels about it."
Rep. Maggie Jeffus, a Greensboro Democrat, leads the 10-member Guilford County delegation. Jeffus said she hoped to call a meeting of the delegation this week to resolve the protest petition question and other items.
Bringing back Protest Petitions in a short session of the state legislature is tough to do but can be achievable. Hopefully there will be a bill drafted in the short session and a bill passed. If not then the long session starts in 2009 , and maybe the citizens of Greensboro can finally have the same right as everyone else has who lives in a city in the state of North Carolina.
Now is the time to let your Guilford County Legislators know that you want Protest Petitions sooner rather than later.In this blog there is a place to e mail your representatives. the first post in February is where you can contact the legislators.
May 4, 2008
Yes Weekly NC 28 Debate both candidates are for Protest Petitions
I would like to thank Jordan Green from Yes Weekly in asking the question to both Rep. Katie Dorsett and Bruce Davis about restoring Protest Petitions to Greensboro and how they feel about this issue. Click here
The candidates discussed their support for restoring the protest petition in Greensboro. The protest petition provides that if a certain percentage of adjacent property owners protest a proposed rezoning the city council is required to muster a 75-percent super-majority to approve the request. Greensboro lost the protest petition in 1971 by of an act of the General Assembly, and it remains the only city in the state that does not have this provision.
Dorsett: “I’ve heard a lot and had public hearings over in Greensboro and High Point, and they’ve been to Raleigh as well. And I have agreed to sponsor that legislation in the Senate to permit Greensboro the same as everybody else…. I don’t know a lot — I remember looking back in history when it started, and I don’t know the basis of which it started, but I do think it’s unfair for all other communities and cities in our state to abide by one law and Greensboro have exemption, when there’s, in my opinion, no real justification for it.”
Davis: “I would support it. I have no real problem with that. I would have to agree with the Honorable Katie Dorsett. We need to have consistency.”
Posted by Jordan Green on 5/04/2008
The candidates discussed their support for restoring the protest petition in Greensboro. The protest petition provides that if a certain percentage of adjacent property owners protest a proposed rezoning the city council is required to muster a 75-percent super-majority to approve the request. Greensboro lost the protest petition in 1971 by of an act of the General Assembly, and it remains the only city in the state that does not have this provision.
Dorsett: “I’ve heard a lot and had public hearings over in Greensboro and High Point, and they’ve been to Raleigh as well. And I have agreed to sponsor that legislation in the Senate to permit Greensboro the same as everybody else…. I don’t know a lot — I remember looking back in history when it started, and I don’t know the basis of which it started, but I do think it’s unfair for all other communities and cities in our state to abide by one law and Greensboro have exemption, when there’s, in my opinion, no real justification for it.”
Davis: “I would support it. I have no real problem with that. I would have to agree with the Honorable Katie Dorsett. We need to have consistency.”
Posted by Jordan Green on 5/04/2008
May 3, 2008
Rhino Times Open Letter to Mr. Hammer on Protest Petitions
The reason I post this e mail is because I have e mailed the Rhino Times 3 times with no correspondence , while I also went to their web site and did a letter to the editor about Protest Petitions to no avail. Maybe this might help with a correspondence.
Dear Mr. Hammer,
My name is Keith Brown, I am writing you today to see if I could get any time to talk about a issue that has risen to more than a whisper but to really get citizens talking about a blatant injustice to the citizens of Greensboro for the past 37 years. It happens to do with the right of citizens to have a Protest Petition in zoning cases. Jordan Green from Yes Weekly has written some great articles on this issue and also if you read March 2nd Lead Editorial in Greensboro News & Record Editorial page titled " The Right To Protest" and on page 3 of editorial it had answers to the question of the week about Protest Petition.I would love to have your paper do a piece on this issue. I started a blog on this , it can be reached by going to this page,
http://protestpetitiongreensboro.blogspot.com/
There are some great angles to this story that are playing out to see, especially if we can get a bill passed to make Greensboro comply with having Protest Petitions or is it going to be business as usual . To hear councilman Matheny say in editorial that Greensboro is "different" please explain to us how a North Carolina General Statute takes into account that Greensboro is different. It is not fair that every major city has to abide by Protest Petitions but Greensboro is exempt.If the Rhino would like to talk about this please let me know because I would love to get your angle on Protest Petitions and is it fair that Greensboro doesn't have to comply with a North Carolina General Statute.
I saw you at the Lobby the Legislator Meeting looking at the Drudge Report but also saw you write some notes. Do you plan on writing a article about that night?
As you saw at that meeting the TREBIC CARTEL was there to oppose bringing back Protest Petitions. It was laughable to hear Gary Rogers say that Greensboro had the foresight back in 1971 to exempt themselves from Protest Petitions. No Mr. Rogers, the City of Greensboro just screwed their citizens of a law that is there for a purpose . I know this purpose because we had to use the Protest Petitions not once but twice against Blue Ridge Companies in High Point go ask David Hampton or David Couch they can tell you all about Protest Petitions and Sutton Place.
It dissappoints me to see your paper keep your head in the sand on this issue. I have been a loyal reader for a long time back to the Laredo's Picture Page Days.
Thanks and have a great weekend.If you would like to talk to me please do and let me know when a good time to call you might be.A correspondence would be appreciated.
Keith T. Brown
High Point North Carolina
Dear Mr. Hammer,
My name is Keith Brown, I am writing you today to see if I could get any time to talk about a issue that has risen to more than a whisper but to really get citizens talking about a blatant injustice to the citizens of Greensboro for the past 37 years. It happens to do with the right of citizens to have a Protest Petition in zoning cases. Jordan Green from Yes Weekly has written some great articles on this issue and also if you read March 2nd Lead Editorial in Greensboro News & Record Editorial page titled " The Right To Protest" and on page 3 of editorial it had answers to the question of the week about Protest Petition.I would love to have your paper do a piece on this issue. I started a blog on this , it can be reached by going to this page,
http://protestpetitiongreensboro.blogspot.com/
There are some great angles to this story that are playing out to see, especially if we can get a bill passed to make Greensboro comply with having Protest Petitions or is it going to be business as usual . To hear councilman Matheny say in editorial that Greensboro is "different" please explain to us how a North Carolina General Statute takes into account that Greensboro is different. It is not fair that every major city has to abide by Protest Petitions but Greensboro is exempt.If the Rhino would like to talk about this please let me know because I would love to get your angle on Protest Petitions and is it fair that Greensboro doesn't have to comply with a North Carolina General Statute.
I saw you at the Lobby the Legislator Meeting looking at the Drudge Report but also saw you write some notes. Do you plan on writing a article about that night?
As you saw at that meeting the TREBIC CARTEL was there to oppose bringing back Protest Petitions. It was laughable to hear Gary Rogers say that Greensboro had the foresight back in 1971 to exempt themselves from Protest Petitions. No Mr. Rogers, the City of Greensboro just screwed their citizens of a law that is there for a purpose . I know this purpose because we had to use the Protest Petitions not once but twice against Blue Ridge Companies in High Point go ask David Hampton or David Couch they can tell you all about Protest Petitions and Sutton Place.
It dissappoints me to see your paper keep your head in the sand on this issue. I have been a loyal reader for a long time back to the Laredo's Picture Page Days.
Thanks and have a great weekend.If you would like to talk to me please do and let me know when a good time to call you might be.A correspondence would be appreciated.
Keith T. Brown
High Point North Carolina
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
