The Greensboro News and Record lead editorial today February 14, 2009 with the title "A Vote of Confidence" CLICKHERE or click on the title above.
Here are a few quotes from the editorial
As it stands now, Greensboro is the only city in the state that does not permit protest petitions. For reasons that are unclear, the city was granted an exemption in 1971
But those negotiations seemed pointless from the start. The existing statute is fine as written and does not need improving. More significantly, a local protest petition bill, without modifications, and without the council’s blessing, was almost certain to be passed anyway.
In particular, developers contend that the 5 percent threshold is too low and that the supermajority vote requirement is too high. They protest too much.
And they fail to present even one thread of evidence to support those notions.
The City Council ought to take the congress’ vote in good faith, endorse the bill as it stands and let the lawmakers do their thing.
Showing posts with label editorial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label editorial. Show all posts
Feb 8, 2009
Greensboro Neighborhood Congress No Need for a Compromise
Last week brought a lot of clarity to the process of restoring Protest Petitions to Greensboro.
On January 21, 2009 the Greensboro City Council completely convoluted the whole process by trying to get the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress and the special interest group called TREBIC which is the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition to come to some compromise on STATE LAW.
What part of STATE Law does the Greensboro City Council not understand. 5% rule is a STATE Law and to hear Robbie "Pave It "Perkins whine and complain about the 5% rule along with fellow developer on council Sandra Anderson Groat complain also really showed their true colors. They are not for you as a citizen of Greensboro to have the same rights as every other person in this state they want to keep their TREBIC BLINDERS ON and deny you this right.
Now we find out that this past week that our State Representatives have filed a bill in both the House and Senate to restore Protest Petition to the citizens of Greensboro.You can follow the bill online by going to the top left corner of this blog.
It would be beneficial for the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress to say to TREBIC thanks but no thanks a bill is introduced and on it's way for passage, no compromise needed.
Allen Johnson from the Greensboro News and Record had another great article in today's Ideas section for February 8, 2009 CLICKHERE with the title "Local lawmakers cut through haze on protest petitions".
Here is a few quotes from this article
The shortest distance between two points is a straight line.
Bearing that in mind, state lawmakers have decided not to wait for the Greensboro City Council to hem, haw, ruminate, speechify and attach wholly unnecessary asterisks and conditions to the question of protest petitions.
As they say in the over-priced sneaker business, just do it.
So, Guilford County legislators have moved ahead on their own and filed bills in the state House and Senate that would restore to Greensboro residents a right every other city in the state already has.
Good for them. The lawmakers have simplified a process that the council was making unduly convoluted and drawn-out.
Then later in the article Robbie " Pave It " Perkins had this to say
"Councilman Robbie Perkins on Thursday called the bill "The Lawyer Relief Act of 2009" and said it would hurt small developers and infill projects by making the development process more expensive."
Robbie 'Pave It "Perkins might want to rename it again to "The Isaacson Allen Relief Act of 2009", since those are practically the only 2 lawyers who do zoning cases in Greensboro.
You wonder why their should be a "DUMP THE DEVELOPER PARTY" on Greensboro City Council come fall because you have city council members like this who have their TREBIC BLINDERS ON and cannot see the big picture on a right that was taken away for no reason whatsoever from the citizens of Greensboro.This restoration of Protest Petitions to Greensboro should have been a no brainer but you can see that there is a certain special interest group called the TREBIC CARTEL who want to deny you this right.
There is still the process at the state level that barring some unforseen circumstance will work it's way through the process and give back this right to the citizens of Greensboro without all this confusion of a compromise.
It is time to let TREBIC and all it's minions play with themselves in the tree alone and looking stupid along the way.
On January 21, 2009 the Greensboro City Council completely convoluted the whole process by trying to get the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress and the special interest group called TREBIC which is the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition to come to some compromise on STATE LAW.
What part of STATE Law does the Greensboro City Council not understand. 5% rule is a STATE Law and to hear Robbie "Pave It "Perkins whine and complain about the 5% rule along with fellow developer on council Sandra Anderson Groat complain also really showed their true colors. They are not for you as a citizen of Greensboro to have the same rights as every other person in this state they want to keep their TREBIC BLINDERS ON and deny you this right.
Now we find out that this past week that our State Representatives have filed a bill in both the House and Senate to restore Protest Petition to the citizens of Greensboro.You can follow the bill online by going to the top left corner of this blog.
It would be beneficial for the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress to say to TREBIC thanks but no thanks a bill is introduced and on it's way for passage, no compromise needed.
Allen Johnson from the Greensboro News and Record had another great article in today's Ideas section for February 8, 2009 CLICKHERE with the title "Local lawmakers cut through haze on protest petitions".
Here is a few quotes from this article
The shortest distance between two points is a straight line.
Bearing that in mind, state lawmakers have decided not to wait for the Greensboro City Council to hem, haw, ruminate, speechify and attach wholly unnecessary asterisks and conditions to the question of protest petitions.
As they say in the over-priced sneaker business, just do it.
So, Guilford County legislators have moved ahead on their own and filed bills in the state House and Senate that would restore to Greensboro residents a right every other city in the state already has.
Good for them. The lawmakers have simplified a process that the council was making unduly convoluted and drawn-out.
Then later in the article Robbie " Pave It " Perkins had this to say
"Councilman Robbie Perkins on Thursday called the bill "The Lawyer Relief Act of 2009" and said it would hurt small developers and infill projects by making the development process more expensive."
Robbie 'Pave It "Perkins might want to rename it again to "The Isaacson Allen Relief Act of 2009", since those are practically the only 2 lawyers who do zoning cases in Greensboro.
You wonder why their should be a "DUMP THE DEVELOPER PARTY" on Greensboro City Council come fall because you have city council members like this who have their TREBIC BLINDERS ON and cannot see the big picture on a right that was taken away for no reason whatsoever from the citizens of Greensboro.This restoration of Protest Petitions to Greensboro should have been a no brainer but you can see that there is a certain special interest group called the TREBIC CARTEL who want to deny you this right.
There is still the process at the state level that barring some unforseen circumstance will work it's way through the process and give back this right to the citizens of Greensboro without all this confusion of a compromise.
It is time to let TREBIC and all it's minions play with themselves in the tree alone and looking stupid along the way.
Feb 7, 2009
Lead Editorial Saturday February 7, 2009 Protest Petition Clarity
The lead editorial in the Greensboro News and Record for February 7, 2009 with the title "Protest Petition clarity" CLICKHERE or click on the title above.
Below is the editorial .
The Greensboro City Council left confusion last month about its position on protest petitions.
Most of Greensboro's state legislators, in contrast, are perfectly clear.
"It's the right thing to do," Sen. Katie Dorsett said of the bill she filed Wednesday in the Senate to restore "the zoning protest rights of the citizens of the city of Greensboro."
"It's just a matter of equity and fairness," Rep. Pricey Harrison said. She introduced an identical measure in the House of Representatives.
Sen. Don Vaughan and Reps. Maggie Jeffus, Alma Adams and John Blust signed on in support.
Among Greensboro legislators, only Rep. Earl Jones did not. The bill is premature, he said Thursday.
"The City Council is right in the middle of trying to resolve this," he said. "It's a local issue, unique to Greensboro."
The situation is unique to Greensboro, and developers want to make sure it remains that way. In 1971, Greensboro was exempted from a state law that allows neighbors to petition against proposed rezonings. If they meet a threshold, the City Council must vote by a three-fourths supermajority to approve the zoning change.
That makes the issue simple to Dorsett and Harrison. Greensboro is the only one among more than 500 North Carolina municipalities whose citizens don't have this petition power. The exemption should be removed. Their bill would accomplish that. It doesn't affect any other municipality, so there's no reason why the General Assembly should object.
Jones, however, sees another issue: the role of the City Council, which last month asked local proponents and opponents to meet to come up with a compromise.
"We should allow the City Council and local folks to see what they can work out first," Jones said. "Let the City Council do their job and give us a recommendation."
Jones served 18 years on the City Council and respects that process. But it isn't necessary. Legislators represent the people, and they can and should take actions at the state level that serve the interests of their constituents -- no matter what the City Council says or does.
Introducing some "compromise," which would craft for Greensboro a different version of the state law, "probably would enter into more confusion," Dorsett said. No doubt.
If Greensboro interests want to change any part of the bill, Harrison added, they should do it for every city, not just Greensboro.
"It's clear Greensboro citizens want this," Harrison said. "I'm trying to move it pretty quickly."
There's no more reason to wait.
_______________________________________________________
It is great news to know that there is a bill already filed in both the House and Senate and if you want to follow the bill online there is a section on top left hand side of this blog to see the progress.
To hear State Rep Earl Jones think that this is a local issue unique to Greensboro. What part of STATE LAW does Earl Jones not understand. This exemption for Greensboro was purely political and was done for no reason whatsoever but to deny neighborhoods all over Greensboro the right to Protest Petition and to give the developers the upper hand in zoning cases.
Then you add the Greensboro leaderless City Council with this compromise on January 21st at the last minute to completely muddy the waters.
It was time to see our state representatives take the lead and give back Protest Petitions to the citizens of Greensboro without all this side show compromise crap that looked good but served no purpose.
Below is the editorial .
The Greensboro City Council left confusion last month about its position on protest petitions.
Most of Greensboro's state legislators, in contrast, are perfectly clear.
"It's the right thing to do," Sen. Katie Dorsett said of the bill she filed Wednesday in the Senate to restore "the zoning protest rights of the citizens of the city of Greensboro."
"It's just a matter of equity and fairness," Rep. Pricey Harrison said. She introduced an identical measure in the House of Representatives.
Sen. Don Vaughan and Reps. Maggie Jeffus, Alma Adams and John Blust signed on in support.
Among Greensboro legislators, only Rep. Earl Jones did not. The bill is premature, he said Thursday.
"The City Council is right in the middle of trying to resolve this," he said. "It's a local issue, unique to Greensboro."
The situation is unique to Greensboro, and developers want to make sure it remains that way. In 1971, Greensboro was exempted from a state law that allows neighbors to petition against proposed rezonings. If they meet a threshold, the City Council must vote by a three-fourths supermajority to approve the zoning change.
That makes the issue simple to Dorsett and Harrison. Greensboro is the only one among more than 500 North Carolina municipalities whose citizens don't have this petition power. The exemption should be removed. Their bill would accomplish that. It doesn't affect any other municipality, so there's no reason why the General Assembly should object.
Jones, however, sees another issue: the role of the City Council, which last month asked local proponents and opponents to meet to come up with a compromise.
"We should allow the City Council and local folks to see what they can work out first," Jones said. "Let the City Council do their job and give us a recommendation."
Jones served 18 years on the City Council and respects that process. But it isn't necessary. Legislators represent the people, and they can and should take actions at the state level that serve the interests of their constituents -- no matter what the City Council says or does.
Introducing some "compromise," which would craft for Greensboro a different version of the state law, "probably would enter into more confusion," Dorsett said. No doubt.
If Greensboro interests want to change any part of the bill, Harrison added, they should do it for every city, not just Greensboro.
"It's clear Greensboro citizens want this," Harrison said. "I'm trying to move it pretty quickly."
There's no more reason to wait.
_______________________________________________________
It is great news to know that there is a bill already filed in both the House and Senate and if you want to follow the bill online there is a section on top left hand side of this blog to see the progress.
To hear State Rep Earl Jones think that this is a local issue unique to Greensboro. What part of STATE LAW does Earl Jones not understand. This exemption for Greensboro was purely political and was done for no reason whatsoever but to deny neighborhoods all over Greensboro the right to Protest Petition and to give the developers the upper hand in zoning cases.
Then you add the Greensboro leaderless City Council with this compromise on January 21st at the last minute to completely muddy the waters.
It was time to see our state representatives take the lead and give back Protest Petitions to the citizens of Greensboro without all this side show compromise crap that looked good but served no purpose.
Jan 24, 2009
Lead Editorial Greensboro N&R "Filling In The Blanks" on City Council's Staged Compromise
Lead editorial in the Greensboro News and Record today Sunday January 25, 2009 with the headline "Filling In The Blanks", CLICKHERE or click on the title above.
Here is a few quotes from the lead editorial
"At least give the backers of protest petitions credit for finally budging the council on this issue. But they could have accomplished even more if they had stuck to their guns, called the council's bluff and forced a yes or no vote with no asterisks attached
The bad news is that the council's vote lacked clarity and is missing the most critical aspects of the law: exactly what it will say.
Sometimes a simple question deserves a simple answer. Either you are for the protest petition or you are against it. The council skirted making a clear-cut call and settled for indecision over leadership.
And ambiguity over clarity.
______________________________________________________
What part of state law does the Greensboro City notunderstand. I hope the Guilford delegation at the state level will see through this charade and pass a bill to make them comply with NCGS 160a385 and 386 then let the TREBIC CARTEL lobby the whole state to change the law .
This special compromise is a joke and needs to be called out. It is amazing to see that they don't like the bill and want it changed even though in the past 37 years they have never even had protest petitions and haven't even tried it in the zoning process. How can you as a council make the decision that the threshold is too low when you have never even done it in over 37 years.
Amazing and to think that Donna Newton and Marlene Sanford are experts in zoning laws and processes to come up with their so called compromise. The whole thing sounds fishy and am sure they want to delay the whole process before it goes to the state level.
It is my opinion that the Greensboro City Council muddied the waters with this so called compromise so that they want they state legislators to delay this bill to make Greensboro comply with STATE LAW. If they can delay this bill long enough then it will never makes it's way through the process and look who doesn't have Protest Petitions in Greensboro because it was sent in too late, you the citizens of Greensboro
The Greensboro City Council can now say that they are for restoring protest petitions to Greensboro but let's see how the state level reacts to this last minute compromise. It would have been political suicide to deny this right to the citizens but they were appeasing the TREBIC CARTEL with this so called compromise .
If you want your voice heard you can e-mail your state representatives and let them know you want what every other citizen who lives in a municipality has , which is North Carolina General Statute 160a-385 and 386, no delay . Below are the new e-mails for the Guilford delegation at the state level .
GUILFORD DELEGATION E-Mail Addresses
House
Alma Adams House District 58 Alma.Adams@ncleg.net
John Blust House District 62 John.Blust@ncleg.net
Pricey Harrison House District 57 Pricey.Harrison@ncleg.net
Maggie Jeffus House District 59 Maggie.Jeffus@ncleg.net
Earl Jones House District 60 Earl.Jones@ncleg.net
Laura Wiley House District 61 Laura.Wiley@ncleg.net
Senate
Phil Berger District 26 philbe@ncleg.net
Stan Bingham District 33 stanb@ncleg.net
Katie Dorsett District 28 Katied@ncleg.net
Don Vaughan District 27 Don.Vaughan@ncleg.net
Here is a few quotes from the lead editorial
"At least give the backers of protest petitions credit for finally budging the council on this issue. But they could have accomplished even more if they had stuck to their guns, called the council's bluff and forced a yes or no vote with no asterisks attached
The bad news is that the council's vote lacked clarity and is missing the most critical aspects of the law: exactly what it will say.
Sometimes a simple question deserves a simple answer. Either you are for the protest petition or you are against it. The council skirted making a clear-cut call and settled for indecision over leadership.
And ambiguity over clarity.
______________________________________________________
What part of state law does the Greensboro City notunderstand. I hope the Guilford delegation at the state level will see through this charade and pass a bill to make them comply with NCGS 160a385 and 386 then let the TREBIC CARTEL lobby the whole state to change the law .
This special compromise is a joke and needs to be called out. It is amazing to see that they don't like the bill and want it changed even though in the past 37 years they have never even had protest petitions and haven't even tried it in the zoning process. How can you as a council make the decision that the threshold is too low when you have never even done it in over 37 years.
Amazing and to think that Donna Newton and Marlene Sanford are experts in zoning laws and processes to come up with their so called compromise. The whole thing sounds fishy and am sure they want to delay the whole process before it goes to the state level.
It is my opinion that the Greensboro City Council muddied the waters with this so called compromise so that they want they state legislators to delay this bill to make Greensboro comply with STATE LAW. If they can delay this bill long enough then it will never makes it's way through the process and look who doesn't have Protest Petitions in Greensboro because it was sent in too late, you the citizens of Greensboro
The Greensboro City Council can now say that they are for restoring protest petitions to Greensboro but let's see how the state level reacts to this last minute compromise. It would have been political suicide to deny this right to the citizens but they were appeasing the TREBIC CARTEL with this so called compromise .
If you want your voice heard you can e-mail your state representatives and let them know you want what every other citizen who lives in a municipality has , which is North Carolina General Statute 160a-385 and 386, no delay . Below are the new e-mails for the Guilford delegation at the state level .
GUILFORD DELEGATION E-Mail Addresses
House
Alma Adams House District 58 Alma.Adams@ncleg.net
John Blust House District 62 John.Blust@ncleg.net
Pricey Harrison House District 57 Pricey.Harrison@ncleg.net
Maggie Jeffus House District 59 Maggie.Jeffus@ncleg.net
Earl Jones House District 60 Earl.Jones@ncleg.net
Laura Wiley House District 61 Laura.Wiley@ncleg.net
Senate
Phil Berger District 26 philbe@ncleg.net
Stan Bingham District 33 stanb@ncleg.net
Katie Dorsett District 28 Katied@ncleg.net
Don Vaughan District 27 Don.Vaughan@ncleg.net
Jan 20, 2009
Greensboro News & Record , Our Opinion Says Yes to Protest Petitions for Greensboro
The Greensboro News and Record Lead Editorial is on Protest Petitions for Greensboro and they say YES. CLICKHERE or click on the title above.
Here are a few quotes from the lead editorial
The right to file a protest petition is about as commonplace in North Carolina as sweet tea and barbecue
High Point has it. Winston-Salem has it. So do Charlotte and Raleigh.
But not Greensboro.
Local residents are right to wonder why they are they exception to the rule. And to be angry about it.
But an expert on rezoning, David Owens, of the School of Government at UNC-Chapel Hill, says that's unlikely. "If there is frivolous, parochial opposition to development that is good for the city," Owens says, "you're going to get a three-fourths council vote (for the development) anyway."
Further, there is scant evidence of protest petitions stunting growth in other cities.
At least some state lawmakers agree and could move forward with a protest petition bill even if the council opposes it. Said Rep. Maggie Jeffus of Greensboro in an interview last week: "I'm almost certain a bill will be filed."
The council should say yes to protest petitions, and state lawmakers should follow suit.
Here are a few quotes from the lead editorial
The right to file a protest petition is about as commonplace in North Carolina as sweet tea and barbecue
High Point has it. Winston-Salem has it. So do Charlotte and Raleigh.
But not Greensboro.
Local residents are right to wonder why they are they exception to the rule. And to be angry about it.
But an expert on rezoning, David Owens, of the School of Government at UNC-Chapel Hill, says that's unlikely. "If there is frivolous, parochial opposition to development that is good for the city," Owens says, "you're going to get a three-fourths council vote (for the development) anyway."
Further, there is scant evidence of protest petitions stunting growth in other cities.
At least some state lawmakers agree and could move forward with a protest petition bill even if the council opposes it. Said Rep. Maggie Jeffus of Greensboro in an interview last week: "I'm almost certain a bill will be filed."
The council should say yes to protest petitions, and state lawmakers should follow suit.
TREBIC Speaks To Greensboro News & Record on Protest Petitions
The Greensboro News & Record has let Marlene Sanford speak on the side of denying you the citizen of Greensboro your right under state law to use Protest Petitions in the zoning process. CLICKHERE or click on the title above.
Here are a few points that need to be addressed the were stated in the opinion from the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition, which is your local special interest group who likes to slam their members on boards and commissions all over Guilford County.
It is actually easier to change the U.S. Constitution than to get a rezoning approved under a protest petition.
Proponents argue that "everybody else does it." But none of the 100 North Carolina counties has it (legally).
Wrong, this blog has called you out on that point when you made it last year in May 2008 and still keep on pointing it out.
And if we're governing by the lemming model, then we have to get rid of anything else that is unique, like RUCO and the Citizen Initiative Petition (which some remember is why we got the protest petition exemption in 1971)
When you see TREBIC say in statement above that some remember that is because they don't know what happened but it looks to everyone else that they snuck this bill in to deny the rights of the citizens of Greensboro for political reasons, plain and simple . Hey Marlene Sanford who are those some remember.
Our zoning process isn't broken. We've made changes to give neighbors more effective involvement. Developers meet with neighbors (or suffer the consequences),
Are you kidding me, then why does TREBIC fight the mandatory meeting in other cities in Guilford County like you did in High Point to no avail. It is required to meet with the neighborhood in High Point that TREBIC fought but in Greensboro it is only voluntary to meet. There will be some changes in future to the meet and confer and let's see if TREBIC is on board.
Wow what an amazing opinion by Marlene Sanford at TREBIC
Here are a few points that need to be addressed the were stated in the opinion from the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition, which is your local special interest group who likes to slam their members on boards and commissions all over Guilford County.
It is actually easier to change the U.S. Constitution than to get a rezoning approved under a protest petition.
Wrong
Proponents argue that "everybody else does it." But none of the 100 North Carolina counties has it (legally).
Wrong, this blog has called you out on that point when you made it last year in May 2008 and still keep on pointing it out.
And if we're governing by the lemming model, then we have to get rid of anything else that is unique, like RUCO and the Citizen Initiative Petition (which some remember is why we got the protest petition exemption in 1971)
When you see TREBIC say in statement above that some remember that is because they don't know what happened but it looks to everyone else that they snuck this bill in to deny the rights of the citizens of Greensboro for political reasons, plain and simple . Hey Marlene Sanford who are those some remember.
Our zoning process isn't broken. We've made changes to give neighbors more effective involvement. Developers meet with neighbors (or suffer the consequences),
Are you kidding me, then why does TREBIC fight the mandatory meeting in other cities in Guilford County like you did in High Point to no avail. It is required to meet with the neighborhood in High Point that TREBIC fought but in Greensboro it is only voluntary to meet. There will be some changes in future to the meet and confer and let's see if TREBIC is on board.
Wow what an amazing opinion by Marlene Sanford at TREBIC
Jan 14, 2009
Greensboro City Council Members Perkins, Matheny and Barber Recuse Yourself , Yes Weekly Editorial
In this weeks Yes! Weekly editorial it talks about next week's vote of the Greensboro City Council to have this as a part of the legislative packet for the state of North Carolina on restoring Protest Petition's to Greensboro .
Here is part of the editorial and if you want to see the whole editorial CLICKHERE or click on the title above.
"But Perkins, Matheny and Barber, who rely on the Greensboro real estate industry for part or all of their livelihoods, are clearly conflicted between the wishes of that industry’s most influential professional organization and the interests of Greensboro citizens who want a say in the way their neighborhoods are zoned. As such, they should recuse themselves from the vote."
Jan 11, 2009
A Little Urbanity: More on Protest Petitions, Reversal of Fortune Thanks David Wharton
A Little Urbanity: More on Protest Petitions
David Wharton who runs a blog called A Little Urbanity CLICKHERE , has a great post on restoring Protest Petitions to the citizens of Greensboro.You can click on the title above to go to his site.
Here is a quote from David Wharton"Over the past year I've changed my mind on this issue. I used to think -- as the real estate industry does -- that the petition puts too much power in the hands of too few people."Then he talks about how fair it isn't and gives some great examples to ponder about a special interest group called TREBIC. It is great to hear David Wharton change his mind on the issue to bring back Protest Petitions to Greensboro.
Over a edcone's site CLICKHERE here is what ed had to say about David Wharton and his post.
"Whether you agree with him or not on this issue (I do), Wharton's opinion is one to take seriously, and I hope the media and the City Council will give his words due consideration."
With the help of the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress,League of Women Voters of the Triad, Coalition of Concerned Citizens of the Triad, residents from all over the Triad including High Point and support from those in the blogosphere who got this ball rolling on this issue close to over a year ago. It is time to speak up and be heard. January 21, 2009 is the start of this process but everyone needs to remember that this is a State of North Carolina issue and need to let your state representatives know how you feel that this isn't fair to the citizens of Greensboro that they don't have the right to a Protest Petition in the zoning process to have against unwanted development in established neighborhoods.
David Wharton who runs a blog called A Little Urbanity CLICKHERE , has a great post on restoring Protest Petitions to the citizens of Greensboro.You can click on the title above to go to his site.
Here is a quote from David Wharton"Over the past year I've changed my mind on this issue. I used to think -- as the real estate industry does -- that the petition puts too much power in the hands of too few people."Then he talks about how fair it isn't and gives some great examples to ponder about a special interest group called TREBIC. It is great to hear David Wharton change his mind on the issue to bring back Protest Petitions to Greensboro.
Over a edcone's site CLICKHERE here is what ed had to say about David Wharton and his post.
"Whether you agree with him or not on this issue (I do), Wharton's opinion is one to take seriously, and I hope the media and the City Council will give his words due consideration."
With the help of the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress,League of Women Voters of the Triad, Coalition of Concerned Citizens of the Triad, residents from all over the Triad including High Point and support from those in the blogosphere who got this ball rolling on this issue close to over a year ago. It is time to speak up and be heard. January 21, 2009 is the start of this process but everyone needs to remember that this is a State of North Carolina issue and need to let your state representatives know how you feel that this isn't fair to the citizens of Greensboro that they don't have the right to a Protest Petition in the zoning process to have against unwanted development in established neighborhoods.
"Protest Petition question's back in Greensboro but faces an uphill climb" Editorial by Allen Johnson
Greensboro News and Record's Allen Johnson has a Sunday January 11, 2008 editorial on Protest Petitions in Greensboro. To read the whole article CLICKHERE .
In the article Allen Johnson had this to say,"The Greensboro City Council will hear the case for and against protest petitions in less than two weeks.
Then it will say no."
Allen Johnson also said this"Greensboro is the only major city in the state that does not allow citizens to use protest petitions to oppose new development in their neighborhoods."You might want to take out major city and say all cities in North Carolina use Protest Petitions in the zoning process.
Our coalition wants everyone to think about one thing.
EVERY CITY IN THIS STATE HAS PROTEST PETITIONS IN THE ZONING PROCESS
If you as citizens of Greensboro will be happy with your Greensboro City Council members voting to deny you this right, fine. Just remember that if your neighborhood has a rezoning case come up in front of council you as a citizen of Greensboro are not having the same rights in the zoning process as every other citizen in this state who lives in a city.
Having Protest Petitions on the books has not hurt jobs or development in cities like Raleigh, Charlotte, Winston or every city in Guilford County.
How about this look all around Greensboro for example:
High Point has PROTEST PETITIONS
Jamestown has PROTEST PETITIONS
Oak Ridge has PROTEST PETITIONS
Summerfield has PROTEST PETITIONS
Pleasant Garden has PROTEST PETITIONS
Gibsonville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Let's also take a look at our state to see who has PROTEST PETITIONS
Charlotte has PROTEST PETITIONS
Durham has PROTEST PETITIONS
Raleigh has PROTEST PETITIONS
Cary has PROTEST PETITIONS
Fayetteville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Winston Salem has PROTEST PETITIONS
Asheville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Chapel Hill has PROTEST PETITIONS
Concord has PROTEST PETITIONS
Gastonia has PROTEST PETITIONS
Greenville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Jacksonville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Rocky Mount has PROTEST PETITIONS
Wilmington has PROTEST PETITIONS
It is time for neighborhoods all over Greensboro to say to the Greensboro City Council enough is enough and to deny us the right to a Protest Petition in the zoning process is a
TOTAL INJUSTICE TO THE CITIZENS OF GREENSBORO.
UPDATE
blogging on this issue at Allen Johnson's News and Record site
CLICKHERE
In the article Allen Johnson had this to say,"The Greensboro City Council will hear the case for and against protest petitions in less than two weeks.
Then it will say no."
Allen Johnson also said this"Greensboro is the only major city in the state that does not allow citizens to use protest petitions to oppose new development in their neighborhoods."You might want to take out major city and say all cities in North Carolina use Protest Petitions in the zoning process.
Our coalition wants everyone to think about one thing.
EVERY CITY IN THIS STATE HAS PROTEST PETITIONS IN THE ZONING PROCESS
If you as citizens of Greensboro will be happy with your Greensboro City Council members voting to deny you this right, fine. Just remember that if your neighborhood has a rezoning case come up in front of council you as a citizen of Greensboro are not having the same rights in the zoning process as every other citizen in this state who lives in a city.
Having Protest Petitions on the books has not hurt jobs or development in cities like Raleigh, Charlotte, Winston or every city in Guilford County.
How about this look all around Greensboro for example:
High Point has PROTEST PETITIONS
Jamestown has PROTEST PETITIONS
Oak Ridge has PROTEST PETITIONS
Summerfield has PROTEST PETITIONS
Pleasant Garden has PROTEST PETITIONS
Gibsonville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Let's also take a look at our state to see who has PROTEST PETITIONS
Charlotte has PROTEST PETITIONS
Durham has PROTEST PETITIONS
Raleigh has PROTEST PETITIONS
Cary has PROTEST PETITIONS
Fayetteville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Winston Salem has PROTEST PETITIONS
Asheville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Chapel Hill has PROTEST PETITIONS
Concord has PROTEST PETITIONS
Gastonia has PROTEST PETITIONS
Greenville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Jacksonville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Rocky Mount has PROTEST PETITIONS
Wilmington has PROTEST PETITIONS
It is time for neighborhoods all over Greensboro to say to the Greensboro City Council enough is enough and to deny us the right to a Protest Petition in the zoning process is a
TOTAL INJUSTICE TO THE CITIZENS OF GREENSBORO.
UPDATE
blogging on this issue at Allen Johnson's News and Record site
CLICKHERE
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 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
Mar 6, 2008
the right to protest editorial in News and Record
The lead editorial in the Greensboro News and Record on Sunday March 2, 2008 had to do with the rights of Greensboro citizens to use the Protest Petition that was taken away from them some 37 years ago. Please read this editorial from the Greensboro News and Record. It is very clear to the Editorial Board that the rights of Greensboro citizens were taken away and now need to be restored, enclosed is a link to the article
http://www.news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080302/NRSTAFF/803020304/-1/opinion0608
The right to protest
Sunday, Mar. 2, 2008 3:00 am
When Keith Brown's High Point neighborhood was threatened with an unwanted development next door, he turned to a state law for help."It's a great law," Brown said last week. "It's there to protect the people who own adjoining property."The law allows neighbors to file protest petitions against proposed rezonings. A successful petition requires a three-fourths vote by the City Council, rather than a simple majority, to approve the change. But it doesn't apply in Greensboro, denying residents a tool they ought to have to make sure land-use decisions are fair for everyone.The protest provision goes back to 1923 in North Carolina, when municipal zoning statutes were first enacted, David W. Owens, a professor at UNC-Chapel Hill's Institute of Government, said last week. Zoning was meant to establish a sense of certainty in land-use policy. Legislators also recognized that nearby property owners had a stake and gave them the opportunity to influence decisions in a powerful way.Then, in 1971, following a contentious rezoning case, Greensboro won a legislative exemption from the protest petition law. For decades, little attention was paid to the issue. Until now.Brown, a Greensboro native, has been pushing for reinstatement of the protest petition option for his hometown. He's winning supporters."I feel strongly that we need to restore that power to the citizens of Greensboro," state Rep. Pricey Harrison said last week. She'll try to get that done during the short legislative term that begins in May, although for procedural reasons action might have to wait until the next long session in 2009.But a Greensboro attorney who handles land-use cases throughout much of the state, Thomas E. Terrell Jr., warned that the law allows too much power, sometimes to a single individual who owns enough adjoining property to invoke a petition by himself."One person has the power to deny an elected body the right to decide an issue by majority vote," Terrell said. It's the "biggest stick any citizen can ever have" to control how another person uses his own land.Protest petitions don't always settle conflicts with a big stick, Owens at the Institute of Government said."They have the effect of encouraging the landowners and neighbors getting together and reconciling their competing interests prior to the issue getting to a vote of the City Council," he said.That was the case when people in Brown's neighborhood filed a protest petition: The developer eventually offered acceptable accommodations."I think it's going to make developers sit at the table," he said.Greensboro City Councilman Zack Matheny, however, worries about discouraging new developments. Although protest petitions haven't impeded growth in Charlotte or Raleigh, where they're used commonly, "Greensboro is not Charlotte and Raleigh. Greensboro is a different town," Matheny said.Yet, if developers make a compelling case, they still can win City Council approval with a three-fourths vote. And the council should give more weight to the objections of many residents than to one or only a few.Greensboro property owners are due the same right to petition state law allows residents of other cities
http://www.news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080302/NRSTAFF/803020304/-1/opinion0608
The right to protest
Sunday, Mar. 2, 2008 3:00 am
When Keith Brown's High Point neighborhood was threatened with an unwanted development next door, he turned to a state law for help."It's a great law," Brown said last week. "It's there to protect the people who own adjoining property."The law allows neighbors to file protest petitions against proposed rezonings. A successful petition requires a three-fourths vote by the City Council, rather than a simple majority, to approve the change. But it doesn't apply in Greensboro, denying residents a tool they ought to have to make sure land-use decisions are fair for everyone.The protest provision goes back to 1923 in North Carolina, when municipal zoning statutes were first enacted, David W. Owens, a professor at UNC-Chapel Hill's Institute of Government, said last week. Zoning was meant to establish a sense of certainty in land-use policy. Legislators also recognized that nearby property owners had a stake and gave them the opportunity to influence decisions in a powerful way.Then, in 1971, following a contentious rezoning case, Greensboro won a legislative exemption from the protest petition law. For decades, little attention was paid to the issue. Until now.Brown, a Greensboro native, has been pushing for reinstatement of the protest petition option for his hometown. He's winning supporters."I feel strongly that we need to restore that power to the citizens of Greensboro," state Rep. Pricey Harrison said last week. She'll try to get that done during the short legislative term that begins in May, although for procedural reasons action might have to wait until the next long session in 2009.But a Greensboro attorney who handles land-use cases throughout much of the state, Thomas E. Terrell Jr., warned that the law allows too much power, sometimes to a single individual who owns enough adjoining property to invoke a petition by himself."One person has the power to deny an elected body the right to decide an issue by majority vote," Terrell said. It's the "biggest stick any citizen can ever have" to control how another person uses his own land.Protest petitions don't always settle conflicts with a big stick, Owens at the Institute of Government said."They have the effect of encouraging the landowners and neighbors getting together and reconciling their competing interests prior to the issue getting to a vote of the City Council," he said.That was the case when people in Brown's neighborhood filed a protest petition: The developer eventually offered acceptable accommodations."I think it's going to make developers sit at the table," he said.Greensboro City Councilman Zack Matheny, however, worries about discouraging new developments. Although protest petitions haven't impeded growth in Charlotte or Raleigh, where they're used commonly, "Greensboro is not Charlotte and Raleigh. Greensboro is a different town," Matheny said.Yet, if developers make a compelling case, they still can win City Council approval with a three-fourths vote. And the council should give more weight to the objections of many residents than to one or only a few.Greensboro property owners are due the same right to petition state law allows residents of other cities
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
