Assuming a new city council reaches an agreement on what to do about solid waste early in the next term, the budget is likely to be the major challenge in the next two years. Revenues are likely to be lower than hoped for because of the depressed housing market, while services and infrastructure remain in demand. Mayoral challenger Robbie Perkins would like to move forward with the Downtown Greenway. At-large challenger Wayne Abraham wants to repair city roads. District 3 challenger Jay Ovittore wants to hire additional police officers.
No surprise that the four conservative incumbents on council, including Mayor Bill Knight, have pledged to not raise taxes or water rates, as documented in a video clip produced by Conservatives for Guilford County. At-large incumbent Danny Thompson and at-large challenger Chris Lawyer also took the pledge. Mayoral challenger Robbie Perkins has left his options open when asked the question.
“It’s a qualified maybe answer,” said Perkins when asked during a candidate forum hosted by the Greater Greensboro Republican Women’s Club on Oct. 25 if he would vote to raise taxes. Asked if he would raise water rates and if he would cut spending, he responded, “It depends.”
Abraham may be the only challenger that has campaigned against cutting taxes, calling the council vote in 2010 to cut property taxes by a quarter of cent, “a jobs-killing tax cut.” He argues that the reduction had an insignificant impact on taxpayers, but stripped the city budget with the result that council cut funding to the Greensboro Partnership, which works to recruit new businesses to the city.
Only one candidate has expressed active interest in raising taxes.
“I don’t believe we can move Greensboro forward if we keep our taxes the way they are,” District 2 challenger C. Bradley Hunt II told an audience at the downtown public library for a forum hosted by the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress on Oct. 24. “I am a citizen and I believe that everyone wants to keep taxes low. It makes us all comfortable. But in order for us to spur economic development, in order for us to improve our infrastructure and to improve our services we must look for new ways to generate income for the city. So I believe we have to look at new ways that we may increase our tax rate so we can provide services for our citizens. So I think that in order to improve our services and infrastructure, in order to increase our police department, fire services, and also to give small business owners and minority business owners a chance to compete, we must look at ways to raise taxes.”
Incumbent Jim Kee was happy to take the opposing side on the issue.
“Certainly I would not advocate raising taxes,” he said. “Matter of fact, I voted to lower taxes. In this type of economy, citizens could not afford any increase in taxes. The way we can expand the revenue in Greensboro is to bring more businesses, to create more small businesses right here in our city. And that’s exactly what I have been doing.”
Kee, a developer, said he worked with Kotis Properties to open the H&F cafeteria at the corner of Church Street and Pisgah Church Road, creating 60 jobs. He said he has also worked with Kotis Properties to open Pace Medical at the intersection of East Cone Boulevard and Summit Avenue, which employs 30 people.
“That’s the way we keep taxes low and keep services great in Greensboro,” Kee said.
Zack Matheny, a registered Republican seeking reelection to the District 3 seat, told the audience at the Greater Greensboro Republican Women’s Club Forum that he would not vote to raise taxes. One day earlier he gave a somewhat more qualified answer to the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress.
“I don’t know, quite honestly, what’s going to happen with taxes,” he said. “My goal would be to not increase taxes. I’ve said that and we’ve been able to accomplish that by not increasing and actually have a very small, slight decrease for the city. One of our major issues is going to be real estate valuations in the next couple years.”
Historically, home values have appreciated over all, with the result that local governments can cut the tax rate and maintain neutral revenue. Real estate is revalued every eight years, and Guilford County is due for a revaluation next year. If, as expected, property values have depreciated overall because of the foreclosure and housing crisis, then local governments will have to choose between increasing the rate to maintain neutral revenue or cutting spending to compensate for reduced revenue at the current rate.
After the candidate forum Matheny said in an interview that his ultimate objective is to keep the tax bill flat, whatever that requires.
Jay Ovittore, who is challenging Matheny for the District 3 seat, stressed spending needs.
“I don’t want to make promises that I can’t keep, so I don’t want to say that I’m not going to vote to raise taxes, if necessary,” he said. “We need 200 more police officers on our police force. We need more fire people. We need our roads taken care of. We need to upgrade the Osborne water treatment plan so we can handle a capacity that’s almost near full at this point and continue to bring clean water to our communities. So that money’s going to come from somewhere. We can either get creative and do something about the landfill: Keep it closed, make it a regional solution, maybe own a regional solution, maybe cut off some of that as a portfolio, do some waste to energy. And if we spend the money on waste to energy now, that waste to energy is going to make us back millions more. And if I can keep your tax rate flat, I’ll do that. But I simply don’t know until I have the numbers in front of me.”
Mary Rakestraw, the conservative District 4 incumbent, has consistently pledged that she will not vote to raise taxes.
“With the present economy that we have we’ve got to be good stewards of your money and my money,” she said. “And I pay taxes, too. And this is a situation, y’all, that we cannot go the well but so many times. You have a budget in your own home. And you have to look at how you spend your money. And when you don’t have enough money, what do you do?... And, you know, I bet you even if you go home this coming week and you say, ‘What could I cut out that would not hurt my lifestyle, what would it be?’ Surely there is something. And we’re going to have to look at that as we go into the next two years. We have to be smart. We have to be prudent. And again, y’all, I cannot say this enough: We cannot tax ourselves out of this situation that we’re in at the present.”
Like Ovittore, District 4 challenger Nancy Hoffmann emphasized spending needs, prefacing her remarks by saying she is “committed to sound financial stewardship.”
“No one can predict the future,” she said. “So we really have to see what the situation is next year or the following year, but we know that we have possibly deferred some very important maintenance in this city. Those things catch up with you sometime down the road, and when they do the cost may be greater. We bear the cost of training the police staff and the fire staff in this city. And if we lose them a year or two years after we train them, then we have lost the cost of that investment in those people, and they’ve gone to High Point, or to Burlington, or Reidsville for another thousand dollars a year.”
Hoffmann said that a city, like any business, must “drill down” to see what spending items are “not absolutely essential” during difficult economic times, and have an honest conversation with citizens about what services they want to maintain, what they’re willing to give up, and what they’re willing to pay for.
Trudy Wade, the conservative incumbent in District 5, said she would not raise taxes.
“There’s two ways not to raise taxes,” she said. “And no, I wouldn’t raise taxes. Two ways to do that. Either you’re going to have to cut things or you’re going to have to bring in more jobs, more people, and increase your base of people paying in. There’s only two ways to do it. I think we’ve tried as a council to bring more jobs here. And I think we’ve done a pretty good job of that. For 12 of 16 years the unemployment rate’s been going up. This last year it’s started to go down again.”
In fact, data for the Greensboro-High Point metropolitan statistical area posted by the NC Employment Security Commission indicates that the unemployment rate increased in eight of the past 16 years. The rate has been declining over all over the past two years, but has remained at above 10 percent since 2009 after bouncing between 3 percent and 7 percent during the period from 1996 to 2008.
Wade credited the city council’s efforts to keep property taxes and water rates low with what progress has been seen in reducing the unemployment rate. During her remarks the councilwoman linked the tax rate to efforts to reopen the White Street Landfill, which she favors.
“If we were using our own landfill, we could save $8 million a year,” she said. “We won’t talk about the $30- or $40 million we’ve lost over the past four or five years.”
The $8 million figure tossed around by Wade, Thompson and The Rhinoceros Times is at odds with the $3.1 million per year in annual cost savings estimated by the city’s solid waste consultant for the plan to reopen the landfill that was adopted by the conservative faction. The difference can be chalked up to closure costs once the currently permitted portions of the landfill are depleted. Those who cite the $8 million figure argue that closure costs should not be included because the landfill would eventually have to be closed anyway. But under the current arrangement, the permitted portion of the landfill accepts a miniscule amount of screening, allowing it to remain open indefinitely.
Wade blamed a group of citizens who filed suit against the city to prevent the landfill from reopening with scuttling the city’s ability to pursue a regional approach, recycling, waste-to-energy technology, investments in infrastructure and cost savings.
“And we tried to take a regional approach,” she said. “And we tried to take the companies on the cutting edge of waste management and bring them into an RFP, and say, ‘What can you do for this community with technology, with recycling, and do a long-range plan for us.’ This is the first council that really stood back and said, ‘Let’s take a look at that.’ What can we do to cut this $8 million-a-year cost? And, of course, we ended up in a lawsuit, so all that technology, infrastructure, all that additional money we were going to have for the city, of course that won’t be the case now.”
Showing posts with label Danny Thompson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Danny Thompson. Show all posts
Danny Thompson's specious landfill numbers
The question of what to do with Greensboro’s solid waste has receded somewhat as a campaign issue since Gate City Waste Services withdrew its proposal to operate the White Street Landfill in September. Yet the issue is far from settled: The city holds a contract with Republic Services to handle the city’s solid waste through the end of the year. And the six candidates vying for the three at-large seats on council hold different positions on the issue.During a forum hosted by the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress at the downtown library last night, moderator Marsh Prause asked some of the candidates to address a perception that Gate City Waste Services was preordained as the selected vendor to operate the landfill long before the vote was taken.
“The third proposal, the RFP that we went through based on five different companies — there was a myriad of five different rates that they proposed based on the quantity of trash that would go into the landfill,” said incumbent Danny Thompson, who was one of four sitting council members that attempted to reopen the landfill. “When the consultant got up and did his PowerPoint presentation he picked two out of those five to say, ‘Well, here’s some of the lower rates.’ As you probably may have read in the News & Record op-ed piece, what I have always stated is that we should take our own green garbage cans — household residential trash — put it in Phase III of the landfill. That would take up capacity [for] 15 years. And there would be only one fourth of the trucks that are going through neighborhoods. And at that rate, at that volume, DH Griffin was the lowest-cost provider. And you also have a flat rate where it’s not escalating with a percentage of rate increase over time. And so that’s the reason I then and continue to say that that was the best deal for Greensboro.”
Thompson’s statement that DH Griffin — a local demolition company whose executives are majority partners in Gate City Waste Services, a solid waste vendor pre-selected by city council to operate the White Street Landfill — was the lowest cost bidder is at odds with the views of the city’s solid waste consultant and staff, and at odds with the councilman’s own statement from the dais (background) before voting to initiate contract negotiations with the company.
After Councilwoman Trudy Wade made the motion, Thompson clarified, “The company that she mentioned, Gate City Waste Services, down at the bottom — their rank is second.”
Under the scenario referenced in Wade’s motion, as outlined by consultant Joe Readling, the city would accept 140,000 tons per year extending the life of the landfill to seven and a half years. That would equate to 11,167 tons per month. Considering that Gate City Waste Services offered the city fixed rate per ton, it could provide the lowest cost arrangement — but only if the landfill accepted less than 10,000 tons per month; other companies proposed to discount the rate as the volume increased. In other words, the model adopted by council in the motion contemplated a waste volume in excess of the tonnage at which Gate City Waste Services could provide the lowest cost.
While Thompson states that he favors the landfill accepting only household waste, he voted for a model that also includes city-collected commercial waste — totaling 140,000 tons per year. During a break at the forum, Thompson explained that the city could have negotiated with the Gate City to impose a transfer fee for every ton of commercial waste, which then could have been rebated to the city. That in itself would not have necessarily reduced the monthly tonnage of solid waste to make Gate City the most competitive bidder, but it’s conceivable that some commercial customers might have balked at the transfer fee and gone with a private service instead. In any case, Thompson’s assertion that Gate City was the lowest cost bidder is based on conjecture considering that the company withdrew its proposal before council had an opportunity to vote on a final contract.
Nancy Vaughan, who has served as mayor pro tem over the past two years, is effectively running against fellow incumbent Thompson on the issue.
“I think the reason why there is that perception out there is because whenever there was an opportunity to look at something else, such as talking to Republic Services, who, at that point said they could save us $3.5 million as opposed to $3.1 [million] without opening the landfill, it was voted down on a 4-3 vote,” she said. “And something like that is a little hard to defend. If there’s a possibility that you’re going to save more money and not open the landfill, why not have that discussion? I think it was things like that that contributed to the perception that this train was going to DH Griffin whether or not they liked it. I have to say that I think council contributed to that by not listening to staff and not taking their advice and doing things that they suggested that might have put us in another direction.”
Marikay Abuzuaiter, a challenger who has been active in efforts to keep the landfill closed, also criticized the process to select a vendor.
“We know that it’s taken staff time and energy,” she said. “We know that it has brought the community together, but the council didn’t listen. When you have three RFPs going out there, you have all of staff’s time, all of this energy, and our council did not even listen to the recommendations from city manager. So those things adding up, the perception is out there that the RFP was a done deal, but what wasn’t planned on was that several organizations in Greensboro, including the League of Women Voters of the Piedmont Triad, of which I’m a part, looked and this and said, ‘This is wrong.’ So many organizations in Greensboro pulled together and said, ‘This is wrong. This entire process is flawed.’”
The three other candidates outlined their thoughts about forging a solution to the city’s solid waste challenge going forward.
“The key to this is going to be good communication amongst all the members of the council and then communication with the citizens,” challenger Chris Lawyer said. “So in order to find the best solution we’re going to have to have good communication. I think we’re going to have to look at what’s going to be best for Greensboro…. Recycling has got to be one of our priorities to make our footprint less. If we’re not going to reduce our footprint then our waste problem is not getting better; it’s getting worse. So I think a top-flight recycling program, educating people on composting. I think that would be good. That would help reduce waste in our city. And then I think you have got to look at your plan. What is your short-term plan and your long-term plan? And look at each one of them and look at the cost associated. I think regional solutions are probably our best option. And then we’ve got to look at waste-to-energy plans that are maybe not right now, but they are going to be in the future — they are going to be beneficial for our city. Because those actually reduce your waste even further and it reduces your footprint even further.”
What Lawyer left unsaid is that he is on record in support of reopening the landfill.
Challengers Wayne Abraham and Yvonne Johnson put forward similar proposals for handling the city’s solid waste that emphatically reject reopening the landfill.
“Certainly I don’t think we need to reopen the White Street Landfill,” Abraham said. “I think we should take Republic Waste up on its offer. They offered us a deal where we could save three and a half million and not have to reopen the landfill. I think that’s certainly something we need to do. We could also, by implementing the Sustainability Action Plan, increase our recycling, reduce our own waste, reduce our costs and actually increase some of the income the city receives. And we would look for a regional solution. Randolph County is one possible option with a longer-term solution being possibly technology/waste to energy. But all of this would be done in cooperation with the citizens of Greensboro and listening to the citizens of Greensboro and coming up with a solution that suits all of us. Because there are solutions that do reduce our costs without having to make our neighbors live in trash. Because I personally do not want to force my neighbors to live in trash and have trucks going down the road and rodents running around and the horrible smell that they would have had to endure.”
Johnson said, “I think that we need a regional solution in the short term. I don’t think that the landfill should be reopened for some of the reasons I stated before — economic development. And no major city in North Carolina, no major city has a landfill in their city limits a few miles from your downtown. And so I think waste to energy is something I have proposed for a very long time. And I think it’s very possible to do it at our transfer station when the technology is ready or when we get a “godfather” deal where we don’t have to plunk down anything. But to have a regional plan in the short term is the best plan because even if the landfill’s open you only have about four years. Then where’s our trash going? What do we do? We’ll be in a pickle again.”
Candidates took different positions on the Sustainability Action Plan. The current council voted unanimously to accept rather than adopt the plan in January, and then promptly shelved it. Prause asked if candidates would implement the plan.
Vaughan said the reason council accepted rather than adopted the plan is because in the past the council had voted to implement neighborhood plans, and residents actually tried to hold the city to them when rezoning decisions came up.
“So we’ve stopped adopting and we’ve started accepting things,” Vaughan said. “But accepting things I think you can take the best parts out of it. I think it does demand that we have a further study of it, that as a council we need to sit down and review it, which we haven’t done. It doesn’t have to require a lot of money. My daughter’s school has won the ‘Green Cup Challenge’ two years in a row. They cut their utility bills by 30 percent, just by doing some basic steps. I think if we could educate our staff on certain sustainability things that they can do every day that we could take strides for it. So I do think it’s a plan that we have to look at and that we have to take it in small bites. I wouldn’t be willing to do the whole plan at this point. I think we need to look at it and prioritize it.”
Lawyer echoed Vaughan’s stance.
“I think we have to break down that plan and see what we can make work in that plan and what may not truly work in the long term,” he said. “I think that plan has some good components. But it’s also got some plans that may not [work] for long-term sustainability. I think that’s where we’ve got to look at this and make sure we’re looking at the pieces of this that are long term for us, not short-term gains. We need to look at long-term gains that we can potentially maximize in this. And that will hopefully save money in the long term for us.”
As mayor, Johnson established the Greensboro Sustainability Council, which drew up the plan.
“I’ve read this plan,” she said. “It is an excellent plan. I spoke in favor of this plan. And I would hope this council would take it and really study it. And we would talk about it. And if we want to begin at a certain point, fine. But if something’s going to save our city $20 million and it’s not going to cost us anywhere near that, it’s something I think we ought to pay attention to. And as much as I want green jobs to be a part of Greensboro’s culture, I think this is definitely a reason that I would definitely promote it.”
Since the campaign has gotten underway the emergency of Occupy Greensboro has highlighted mounting frustration with the failure of government to effectively address economic insecurity. And national media coverage this week singled out Greensboro as emblematic of a national trend of surging poverty in the suburbs.
Abuzuaiter and Abraham fielded a question about how they would address a crisis of “high unemployment, rising poverty and a feeling of despair among many of our citizens.”
“We need to listen to our community,” Abuzuaiter said. “There are brilliant minds in our community. We need to bring everyone to the table. We need to come together to try to solve these issues. We have 20 percent poverty rate in Guilford County. Another item is that 35 percent of the students in our schools are living in poverty. We really need to address these conditions that our people are going through. I would certainly propose and hope that we bring our minds together and come to some solutions in order to create the jobs that will eventually solve all this. Do we need to be promoting our sustainable community? Of course. Do we need to be trying to help our local community? Of course. There are several initiatives going on there. The Greensboro Currency Project. There are so many things that can help sustainability. But we’ve got to address the immediate needs at hand. We have people who are starving. If you haven’t noticed lately, there is an increase in the homeless population. Our homeless shelters do not have beds for women. They are taken up every night. We have nothing there for women to go to, to spend the night in a safe and warm environment. All of these things need to be addressed. Can we solve it with one council? Of course not. But I certainly hope that we can bring our community together, have everyone bring their ideas and suggestions, work with our nonprofits and churches. When we all come to the table there are brilliant things that can happen. And I do believe we are going to need to involve the community to make that happen.”
Abraham said, “I do agree that we’re in a crisis situation when we have rising unemployment and rising poverty, we see median incomes declining in our own area, when an article in The New York Times says, I think it’s an 83 percent increase in what is referred to as ‘suburban poverty.’ And we know that where we live is suffering economically. We have to do something about it. That is why I am focusing my platform on economic development. Because, in my opinion, we have to take whatever resources city government has available to it, and move them into restoring our own economic growth. And that’s why I’ve proposed the buy-local campaign and even redirecting some of the city’s spending. And looking at how we can pull together public and private capital. And looking at how we can restore funding or even increase funding for the economic development partnership. And restoring our infrastructure spending. If we are able to have savings from deals that we make for reducing our waste costs, those savings need to be redirected towards maintaining our roads. That will create jobs. People will get jobs working on our roads. So there are all kinds of things we can begin to do, and we need to do, because we’re in a situation that can’t wait.”
Gut punches at the Greensboro Partnership
Mayoral candidates Robbie Perkins and Bill Knight got rough with each other at an otherwise genteel candidate forum hosted by the Greensboro Partnership and SynerG.
“In terms of why I feel like I’m a better candidate for mayor, I have 16 years of experience in working under other mayors to know how to lead this city,” said Perkins, the challenger. “I think it’s been a problem the last couple of years that the mayor’s office has not had a lot of experience. For example, I never would have said that losing 1,600 jobs at American Express was a ‘blip’ on the radar screen.”
He ended his remarks abruptly to let the impact sink in.
For his part, Knight recycled attack lines from the Monday night mayoral debate at Guilford College.
“There are nine people on the council and they’ve got to work together all the time,” he said. “That means working together, paying attention; not sending out texts, not talking, not exhorting members of the audience to show disrespect. When we go on a retreat, it’s not a matter of getting in the mayor’s face and threatening an override if you don’t get your favorite commission appointment.”
Perhaps the question of most interest to the hosts was how the candidates proposed to support or work with the Greensboro Partnership, the city’s top economic and community development organization. The city council voted in June to cut $14,000 in funding to the partnership, along with other nonprofits. A last-minute effort to restore the funding failed, with council members Perkins and Nancy Vaughan on the losing end. Knight and Councilman Danny Thompson voted to maintain the funding cut.
“I think you’ve got to support the Greensboro Partnership,” Perkins said. “And I don’t think you can have a briefing session and have a 5-4 vote against retaining the full support of the partnership because you’re cutting advertising funding for the program…. So number one, you’ve got to support the partnership. Number two, you’ve got to support an environment in our city that small business thinks is stable, that we are going to support them, we’re going to be there for them. We’re going to give them the confidence to invest both money and time to make their businesses grow in our city.”
Vaughan said, “I currently serve on the board of the Greensboro Economic Development Alliance, so I’m very aware of what’s going on in the partnership and the chamber, and I support them 100 percent. This year, our funding was cut by 10 percent during our budget process. I advocated very strongly to restore that 10 percent. Unfortunately, I was not successful. In the city of Greensboro we do not have a large business office where we can be proactive; we’re reactive. We need people who are out there pounding the pavement and helping us find large employers. That’s something the chamber does.”
Knight said the council would continue to work with the partnership, and named a number of initiatives the city was pursuing to help small businesses. He added, “Our responsibility is municipal responsibility. Municipal government: providing for the healthy and safety and infrastructure and the other services that go with it.”
Thompson said he supported the partnership in two undertakings: An allocation of federal funding to create a small business revolving loan fund that will be administered by the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce, and an initiative to join the partnership in funding a national public relations campaign to attract attention to Greensboro.
Remarks from other at-large candidates:
Wayne Abraham: “As a candidate, I have already reached out to the partnership, and so obviously as a city council member I would do the same. I sat down with them to discuss what we can do to provide economic development in Greensboro, and their response to me was, in large part, what I proposed in my platform for economic development in Greensboro. And one of the items I proposed was restoring funding, perhaps even increasing funding for the partnership on specific projects so that we could promote our city and promote our own economic development in this area and in our city: Buy local, implementing our Sustainability Action Plan, restoring funding to our infrastructure, and increasing our funding to the economic development partnership.”
Marikay Abuzuaiter: “We must have those who are able to go out and seek economic development for Greensboro. The city council does not create jobs. It is up to us working with the partnership to make sure that they have the tools available where they can go out and seek these economic development opportunities for us. Now, we need to make sure we have in certain instances the infrastructure, the viability for our city. We need to make sure that we are creating that positive image that will help them help sell Greensboro and in turn bring jobs to Greensboro.”
Yvonne Johnson: “I really think it’s our duty as an elected official to partner and do all we can with the partnership, with the chamber, with all of the groups that are working for economic development. For goodness sake, every candidate at every forum said one of the most pressing needs in Greensboro is jobs, so how can you not do that? And it would also give you an advantage when you are talking to the citizens about what is going on in Greensboro in terms of the effort to recruit jobs so that they become shareholders in that information and proud of what the partnership and the council and all the entities are doing.”
Chris Lawyer: “I think when you have an economic development group you have to bring that group together in order to have sustainable economic development. And as an elected official you certainly are obligated to be part of that discussion because your constituents have brought you to the forefront to be a voice for them in economic development, so we have to work closely together as a city, and as a group with the Greensboro Partnership to find the best solutions. That means bringing businesses to the table, large and small, along with the economic development arms and also the city council and mayor and get the discussion going and talk about real solutions. It’s got to be a very dynamic and very fluid situation in order for this to be a successful process. And if we’re not going to do this, then I don’t think we’re giving our citizens the full economic impact we possibly could.”
An allegation has been circulating in conservative circles that the Greensboro Partnership submitted a question to the Triad Real Estate and Building Industries Coalition, or TREBIC, for a questionnaire on whether candidates would support a prepared food tax. Answers from the questionnaire have been used by an anonymous group claiming to represent the restaurant industry to characterize candidates positions. (See previous posts: 1 and 2.)
Jason Cannon, vice president of government affairs, flatly denied the allegation.
"That is not true," he said. "We did not submit any question to TREBIC about the restaurant tax."
Cannon added that he coordinated with TREBIC on the questionnaire, and he was the only representative of the partnership that did so. He said he saw a copy of the questionnaire just before it was finalized and did not ask to insert any questions.
"There was no formal discussion and no formal activity with us looking at a prepared food tax," he said, adding that he heard some idle talk about it and researched the law to satisfy his own curiosity. Cannon is registered as a lobbyist with the state of North Carolina representing the Greensboro Partnership.
Vaughan said Assistant City Manager Denise Turner Roth told council on Tuesday that a local prepared food tax would require the NC General Assembly to pass enabling legislation. The legislature's Republican leadership has taken a dim view of tax increases and has worked closely with the conservative members of Greensboro City Council on other issues. Mayoral candidate Perkins has called the matter "a made-up issue."
“In terms of why I feel like I’m a better candidate for mayor, I have 16 years of experience in working under other mayors to know how to lead this city,” said Perkins, the challenger. “I think it’s been a problem the last couple of years that the mayor’s office has not had a lot of experience. For example, I never would have said that losing 1,600 jobs at American Express was a ‘blip’ on the radar screen.”
He ended his remarks abruptly to let the impact sink in.
For his part, Knight recycled attack lines from the Monday night mayoral debate at Guilford College.
“There are nine people on the council and they’ve got to work together all the time,” he said. “That means working together, paying attention; not sending out texts, not talking, not exhorting members of the audience to show disrespect. When we go on a retreat, it’s not a matter of getting in the mayor’s face and threatening an override if you don’t get your favorite commission appointment.”
Perhaps the question of most interest to the hosts was how the candidates proposed to support or work with the Greensboro Partnership, the city’s top economic and community development organization. The city council voted in June to cut $14,000 in funding to the partnership, along with other nonprofits. A last-minute effort to restore the funding failed, with council members Perkins and Nancy Vaughan on the losing end. Knight and Councilman Danny Thompson voted to maintain the funding cut.
“I think you’ve got to support the Greensboro Partnership,” Perkins said. “And I don’t think you can have a briefing session and have a 5-4 vote against retaining the full support of the partnership because you’re cutting advertising funding for the program…. So number one, you’ve got to support the partnership. Number two, you’ve got to support an environment in our city that small business thinks is stable, that we are going to support them, we’re going to be there for them. We’re going to give them the confidence to invest both money and time to make their businesses grow in our city.”
Vaughan said, “I currently serve on the board of the Greensboro Economic Development Alliance, so I’m very aware of what’s going on in the partnership and the chamber, and I support them 100 percent. This year, our funding was cut by 10 percent during our budget process. I advocated very strongly to restore that 10 percent. Unfortunately, I was not successful. In the city of Greensboro we do not have a large business office where we can be proactive; we’re reactive. We need people who are out there pounding the pavement and helping us find large employers. That’s something the chamber does.”
Knight said the council would continue to work with the partnership, and named a number of initiatives the city was pursuing to help small businesses. He added, “Our responsibility is municipal responsibility. Municipal government: providing for the healthy and safety and infrastructure and the other services that go with it.”
Thompson said he supported the partnership in two undertakings: An allocation of federal funding to create a small business revolving loan fund that will be administered by the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce, and an initiative to join the partnership in funding a national public relations campaign to attract attention to Greensboro.
Remarks from other at-large candidates:
Wayne Abraham: “As a candidate, I have already reached out to the partnership, and so obviously as a city council member I would do the same. I sat down with them to discuss what we can do to provide economic development in Greensboro, and their response to me was, in large part, what I proposed in my platform for economic development in Greensboro. And one of the items I proposed was restoring funding, perhaps even increasing funding for the partnership on specific projects so that we could promote our city and promote our own economic development in this area and in our city: Buy local, implementing our Sustainability Action Plan, restoring funding to our infrastructure, and increasing our funding to the economic development partnership.”
Marikay Abuzuaiter: “We must have those who are able to go out and seek economic development for Greensboro. The city council does not create jobs. It is up to us working with the partnership to make sure that they have the tools available where they can go out and seek these economic development opportunities for us. Now, we need to make sure we have in certain instances the infrastructure, the viability for our city. We need to make sure that we are creating that positive image that will help them help sell Greensboro and in turn bring jobs to Greensboro.”
Yvonne Johnson: “I really think it’s our duty as an elected official to partner and do all we can with the partnership, with the chamber, with all of the groups that are working for economic development. For goodness sake, every candidate at every forum said one of the most pressing needs in Greensboro is jobs, so how can you not do that? And it would also give you an advantage when you are talking to the citizens about what is going on in Greensboro in terms of the effort to recruit jobs so that they become shareholders in that information and proud of what the partnership and the council and all the entities are doing.”
Chris Lawyer: “I think when you have an economic development group you have to bring that group together in order to have sustainable economic development. And as an elected official you certainly are obligated to be part of that discussion because your constituents have brought you to the forefront to be a voice for them in economic development, so we have to work closely together as a city, and as a group with the Greensboro Partnership to find the best solutions. That means bringing businesses to the table, large and small, along with the economic development arms and also the city council and mayor and get the discussion going and talk about real solutions. It’s got to be a very dynamic and very fluid situation in order for this to be a successful process. And if we’re not going to do this, then I don’t think we’re giving our citizens the full economic impact we possibly could.”
An allegation has been circulating in conservative circles that the Greensboro Partnership submitted a question to the Triad Real Estate and Building Industries Coalition, or TREBIC, for a questionnaire on whether candidates would support a prepared food tax. Answers from the questionnaire have been used by an anonymous group claiming to represent the restaurant industry to characterize candidates positions. (See previous posts: 1 and 2.)
Jason Cannon, vice president of government affairs, flatly denied the allegation.
"That is not true," he said. "We did not submit any question to TREBIC about the restaurant tax."
Cannon added that he coordinated with TREBIC on the questionnaire, and he was the only representative of the partnership that did so. He said he saw a copy of the questionnaire just before it was finalized and did not ask to insert any questions.
"There was no formal discussion and no formal activity with us looking at a prepared food tax," he said, adding that he heard some idle talk about it and researched the law to satisfy his own curiosity. Cannon is registered as a lobbyist with the state of North Carolina representing the Greensboro Partnership.
Vaughan said Assistant City Manager Denise Turner Roth told council on Tuesday that a local prepared food tax would require the NC General Assembly to pass enabling legislation. The legislature's Republican leadership has taken a dim view of tax increases and has worked closely with the conservative members of Greensboro City Council on other issues. Mayoral candidate Perkins has called the matter "a made-up issue."
Parsing differences between city council candidates, at large and district
A candidate forum last night at Congregational United Church of Christ drew aspiring public servants seeking to fill the three at-large seats, along with all five districts. In the at-large segment, discussion about sustainability and ties between council members and developers brought out the most interesting responses. The candidates’ answers shed some light on their level of familiarity with the issues and sense of priority about them — or lack of each, as the case may be.
George Hartzman, an unsuccessful candidate for the District 3 seat two years ago asked the candidates to address the possibility that a company called Land Port Investments LLC owned by local developer Roy Carroll might come before the council in the future with a request for incentives, and that Carroll has made substantial contributions to some candidates’ campaigns. Before the request was withdrawn, the city had considered granting $4 million to Carroll’s company.
Candidate Yvonne Johnson, who is among those whose campaigns have benefited from Carroll’s largesse, seemed to fumble in her response.
“When I talk about site-ready, I’m certainly not talking about any particular person’s business, except the city and the economic development council and the partnership needs to do that independently so that when people are interested in coming to Greensboro to build… that we have site-ready land,” she said, “not to benefit any particular person.”
Danny Thompson, who owns a personal care company said, “I’ve never received a dime from Roy Carroll, although I’d like to. I care for his mom.
Thompson told the audience: “The economic development bond project was a project that was brought before council just in the last several months by Andy Scott, our assistant city manager of economic development. It’s not a gift. What it is — it’s that economic bond money, and it will front the money to go ahead and put in the infrastructure – curb and gutter, and water and sewer. And then you, the taxpayers — correct me if I’m wrong — get the money back once a developer comes and buys — or they actually develop the project.”
In fact, Scott said that to date all projects approved by council have involved direct grants to developers for the purpose of improving infrastructure. With the Land Port Investments LLC proposal, which has been withdrawn indefinitely from council’s agenda, Scott said staff had envisioned that the city would make a direct grant to cover the cost of water, sewer and storm sewer, but loan money to the applicant for grading. The loan would be repaid upon sale of the property.
“I would say that the evaluation of whether to approve a project is, is it going to benefit the citizens of Greensboro as a whole,” candidate Wayne Abraham said. “And so that will be how I will make the decision. If it’s going to benefit Greensboro as a whole, and we’re going to come out ahead by putting some money into a project, then yes, it makes sense to do it. If it’s not, then it doesn’t make sense. Mr. Carroll has never donated a dime to me either, so I won’t have any conflict of interest in reviewing his proposals to us.”
One audience member was concerned about a proposal by city staff to dismantle the Greensboro Sustainability Council, which was established by Yvonne Johnson at the time she served as mayor. The current council voted to accept a Sustainability Action Plan earlier this year instead of adopting it. With the exception of Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Vaughan, who applauded recycling efforts at her daughter’s private school, no council members asked any questions or made any remarks about the plan.
Vaughan said last night that she would be surprised if the Greensboro Sustainability Council was dismantled, as proposed by staff.
“I hope it doesn’t get demolished,” Johnson said. “I think it’s a very important entity that we have here in Greensboro. I think it could be a catalyst for bringing green jobs and green-job training. I know when I was mayor we got $5 million from the federal government to do retrofitting and weatherization. One of the reasons is because we had a sustainability commission. I would definitely want it to remain. I think it has some great recommendations for Greensboro’s future.”
Marikay Abuzuaiter, an at-large candidate who is politically and personally aligned with Johnson said, “The sustainability action council was set up, and Mr. Joel Landau and Bob Powell are co-chairs of that. They worked very, very hard with the council to bring forward a plan to our city council.” She added that the four candidates who eagerly raised their hands to answer the questions — herself, Johnson, Abraham and Vaughan — would likely vote to bring the plan back and adopt it.
“I have not only been interested in keeping the sustainability committee alive; I’ve advocated from the very beginning that we have to implement the plan, look at all of its aspects and figure out how we can immediately start using some of the benefits that it provided for our city so that even the city government itself has means that it can use to save energy and reinvest our own money in ourselves,” Abraham said. “The plan itself says that if we could spend $9.3 million of our own dollars and then save $29 million of our own dollars. So to me, it makes perfect sense to use this revolving account that it talks about in order to do that because, in my opinion, we’re reinvesting our own money in ourselves.”
Thompson noted that he was among the council members who voted to accept the plan.
“The one little problem we had is we didn’t have $9.3 million to spend this past year,” he said. “That’s why the majority of council accepted it, gave it back to staff to break it down piecemeal to see what we can afford each and every year.”
Abraham challenged Thompson's statement today in a Facebook post: "If he had bothered to actually read the plan he would know that it does not call for an immediate expenditure of that amount. The city would start by refitting some buildings, bank the saved energy dollars, and then use those savings to do the next project, and then bank those savings and do the next project. The point was to create a fund that would cover these costs and in the end save us $29 million tax dollars."
One woman asked candidates what council could do to incentivize business investment in core areas of the city that suffer from high vacancy rates. The question seemed to be lost on many of the candidates, who instead discussed wage requirements in the city’s incentives policy. An exception was Johnson, who noted that many of the companies that bring large numbers of jobs to Greensboro prefer to invest in outlying areas.
“Part of implementing the Sustainability Action Plan will be to do exactly what you called for — looking at our land development ordinances, figure out ways to incentivize businesses to come and infill areas that we already have so that we’re not constantly expanding and then trying to send water and sewer yet further and incorporate more land,” Abraham said. “So obviously I would be in favor of that and I think it would be a wise investment of our own capital and our own resources.”
Thompson added, “When you’re referring to trying to incentivize a business to locate in a geographic area, typically that’s like an enterprise zone. In fact, last night, I was happy we unanimously voted for a small business loan for a specific area for businesses that are only in a blighted area where we need economic development, we need businesses to grow — along High Point Road, in the southeast Greensboro corridor area…. It is important because it’s less drain and drag on our services — police, fire et cetera when we have infill in a dense area.”
The $80,000 approved by council on Tuesday to help establish a small business loan pool will be drawn from federal Community Development Block Grant funds.
I'll have coverage of candidate statements in the district 1, 3 and 4 races in this space when time allows.
George Hartzman, an unsuccessful candidate for the District 3 seat two years ago asked the candidates to address the possibility that a company called Land Port Investments LLC owned by local developer Roy Carroll might come before the council in the future with a request for incentives, and that Carroll has made substantial contributions to some candidates’ campaigns. Before the request was withdrawn, the city had considered granting $4 million to Carroll’s company.
Candidate Yvonne Johnson, who is among those whose campaigns have benefited from Carroll’s largesse, seemed to fumble in her response.
“When I talk about site-ready, I’m certainly not talking about any particular person’s business, except the city and the economic development council and the partnership needs to do that independently so that when people are interested in coming to Greensboro to build… that we have site-ready land,” she said, “not to benefit any particular person.”
Danny Thompson, who owns a personal care company said, “I’ve never received a dime from Roy Carroll, although I’d like to. I care for his mom.
Thompson told the audience: “The economic development bond project was a project that was brought before council just in the last several months by Andy Scott, our assistant city manager of economic development. It’s not a gift. What it is — it’s that economic bond money, and it will front the money to go ahead and put in the infrastructure – curb and gutter, and water and sewer. And then you, the taxpayers — correct me if I’m wrong — get the money back once a developer comes and buys — or they actually develop the project.”
In fact, Scott said that to date all projects approved by council have involved direct grants to developers for the purpose of improving infrastructure. With the Land Port Investments LLC proposal, which has been withdrawn indefinitely from council’s agenda, Scott said staff had envisioned that the city would make a direct grant to cover the cost of water, sewer and storm sewer, but loan money to the applicant for grading. The loan would be repaid upon sale of the property.
“I would say that the evaluation of whether to approve a project is, is it going to benefit the citizens of Greensboro as a whole,” candidate Wayne Abraham said. “And so that will be how I will make the decision. If it’s going to benefit Greensboro as a whole, and we’re going to come out ahead by putting some money into a project, then yes, it makes sense to do it. If it’s not, then it doesn’t make sense. Mr. Carroll has never donated a dime to me either, so I won’t have any conflict of interest in reviewing his proposals to us.”
One audience member was concerned about a proposal by city staff to dismantle the Greensboro Sustainability Council, which was established by Yvonne Johnson at the time she served as mayor. The current council voted to accept a Sustainability Action Plan earlier this year instead of adopting it. With the exception of Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Vaughan, who applauded recycling efforts at her daughter’s private school, no council members asked any questions or made any remarks about the plan.
Vaughan said last night that she would be surprised if the Greensboro Sustainability Council was dismantled, as proposed by staff.
“I hope it doesn’t get demolished,” Johnson said. “I think it’s a very important entity that we have here in Greensboro. I think it could be a catalyst for bringing green jobs and green-job training. I know when I was mayor we got $5 million from the federal government to do retrofitting and weatherization. One of the reasons is because we had a sustainability commission. I would definitely want it to remain. I think it has some great recommendations for Greensboro’s future.”
Marikay Abuzuaiter, an at-large candidate who is politically and personally aligned with Johnson said, “The sustainability action council was set up, and Mr. Joel Landau and Bob Powell are co-chairs of that. They worked very, very hard with the council to bring forward a plan to our city council.” She added that the four candidates who eagerly raised their hands to answer the questions — herself, Johnson, Abraham and Vaughan — would likely vote to bring the plan back and adopt it.
“I have not only been interested in keeping the sustainability committee alive; I’ve advocated from the very beginning that we have to implement the plan, look at all of its aspects and figure out how we can immediately start using some of the benefits that it provided for our city so that even the city government itself has means that it can use to save energy and reinvest our own money in ourselves,” Abraham said. “The plan itself says that if we could spend $9.3 million of our own dollars and then save $29 million of our own dollars. So to me, it makes perfect sense to use this revolving account that it talks about in order to do that because, in my opinion, we’re reinvesting our own money in ourselves.”
Thompson noted that he was among the council members who voted to accept the plan.
“The one little problem we had is we didn’t have $9.3 million to spend this past year,” he said. “That’s why the majority of council accepted it, gave it back to staff to break it down piecemeal to see what we can afford each and every year.”
Abraham challenged Thompson's statement today in a Facebook post: "If he had bothered to actually read the plan he would know that it does not call for an immediate expenditure of that amount. The city would start by refitting some buildings, bank the saved energy dollars, and then use those savings to do the next project, and then bank those savings and do the next project. The point was to create a fund that would cover these costs and in the end save us $29 million tax dollars."
One woman asked candidates what council could do to incentivize business investment in core areas of the city that suffer from high vacancy rates. The question seemed to be lost on many of the candidates, who instead discussed wage requirements in the city’s incentives policy. An exception was Johnson, who noted that many of the companies that bring large numbers of jobs to Greensboro prefer to invest in outlying areas.
“Part of implementing the Sustainability Action Plan will be to do exactly what you called for — looking at our land development ordinances, figure out ways to incentivize businesses to come and infill areas that we already have so that we’re not constantly expanding and then trying to send water and sewer yet further and incorporate more land,” Abraham said. “So obviously I would be in favor of that and I think it would be a wise investment of our own capital and our own resources.”
Thompson added, “When you’re referring to trying to incentivize a business to locate in a geographic area, typically that’s like an enterprise zone. In fact, last night, I was happy we unanimously voted for a small business loan for a specific area for businesses that are only in a blighted area where we need economic development, we need businesses to grow — along High Point Road, in the southeast Greensboro corridor area…. It is important because it’s less drain and drag on our services — police, fire et cetera when we have infill in a dense area.”
The $80,000 approved by council on Tuesday to help establish a small business loan pool will be drawn from federal Community Development Block Grant funds.
I'll have coverage of candidate statements in the district 1, 3 and 4 races in this space when time allows.
Greensboro primary: at-large analysis
Color code:Yvonne Johnson — blue
Nancy Vaughan — purple
Chris Lawyer — orange
Danny Thompson — red
Wayne Abraham — aqua
Jean Brown — yellow
Tie — gray
Former mayor Yvonne Johnson dominated the electoral landscape in the at-large race in Greensboro's primary election on Oct. 11, carrying all precincts in east and south Greensboro except for two, along with the downtown area.
Nancy Vaughan, who currently serves as mayor pro tem carried a block of established neighborhoods stretching from Irving Park to Starmount.
Challenger Chris Lawyer and incumbent Danny Thompson, both conservatives, carved up the Cardinal, and Thompson carried the Grandover.
Marikay Abuzuaiter, who placed third overall in the primary, evidently rode Johnson's coattails, pulling most of her votes out of precincts carried by the former mayor.
Wayne Abraham carried one precinct by virtue of earning eight votes in G45, which covers UNCG.
Anticlimax after rumored recusal vote
District 3 Councilman Zack Matheny was playing coy tonight, but apparently wasn't playing ball with District 5 Councilwoman Trudy Wade.An expected (link) vote to recuse Greensboro Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Vaughan from taking part in a decision to approve a solid waste contract did not materialize during a city council meeting tonight.
Typically, motions that are not on the agenda or added as part of an addendum come up for a vote at the end of the meeting during a segment called "matters to be discussed by the mayor and members of city council." Members discussed 9-11 commemoration activities, emergency response planning and the Greensboro Grasshoppers' winning streak, but no motion was made to recuse Vaughan.
At-large Councilman Danny Thompson and District 4 Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw — two of the four members who have voted to reopen the landfill in the past — indicated after the meeting that they were unaware of any plans to seek Vaughan's recusal.
Interim City Attorney Tom Pollard declined to comment on whether any of the four pro-landfill council members had approached him to ask whether it was legal to recuse another member against her will, but he said he discussed the matter with Steven J. Levitas, a lawyer who represents Gate City Waste Services. The company has been preselected to operate the White Street Landfill.
Pollard said his research into the legality of what he has described as an extraordinary parliamentary procedure "was derived from that conversation."
Gate City Waste Services filed suit against the city, Vaughan and District 3 Councilman Zack Matheny today seeking an injunction to prevent Vaughan from voting and to force Matheny to vote in the selection of the contractor to reopen the landfill.
Just as the meeting was beginning, Pollard and members of council received an e-mail (link) from Chris Brook, a lawyer for landfill opponents, requesting that the vote be delayed. Brook's argument that requiring Matheny to vote on whether Vaughan should be recused "is the equivalent of giving him a vote on Gate City as a vendor" — a company that he is deemed to have a conflict of interest with — might have been read as a shot across the bow.
After a break earlier in the meeting, six members of council reconvened without Thompson, Rakestraw and District 5 Councilwoman Trudy Wade. Rhinoceros Times Editor John Hammer was also outside of chambers.
The six council members began rapidly moving through a motion to allocate funding for "downtown support activities" — an item expected to especially run counter to Wade's fiscally conservative, parochial proclivities. At-large Councilman Robbie Perkins, who was smiling mischievously with District 1 Councilwoman Dianne Bellamy-Small, made a rolling motion with his arms to urge the mayor to call for a vote. Everyone on the dais understood that as the three absent members were not excused their votes would count as yes.
Just then, Thompson, Rakestraw and Wade rejoined the meeting, looking stone-faced. Wade read the item on the screen and said, "I'm against it."
Matheny said he had been approached by a fellow council member, whom he declined the name.
"I was asked, 'What would I do?'" he said.
Asked how he answered, he said cryptically: "You'd have to ask them."
Presumably the reason the motion was not made was because the four did not feel confident that it would pass.
"I was waiting just like you were waiting," Matheny said.
Candidate profile: Danny Thompson
Greensboro at-large Councilman Danny Thompson, who is seeking reelection this year, visited the offices of YES! Weekly last week.“What happened five weeks ago is the kind of change rarely seen in a generation,” Danny Thompson said, after being sworn in as an at-large Greensboro City Council member in December 2009. “I’ve been asked more than once: How did we do it? And it’s simple, really. You see, we knew then what we know now: That the real powers of this city are non in this council, but rather they’re out there in the historic neighborhoods, and yes, the annexed communities. They’re the real estate agents, insurance agents, the preachers and the teachers.”
Thompson, a personal care company owner with no previous experience in elected office, had won his seat by placing third in the at-large balloting as a political conservative with a friendly demeanor.
The November 2009 municipal election did signal dramatic change in Greensboro: Bill Knight, a retired CPA running on a conservative platform defeated mayoral incumbent Yvonne Johnson. Nancy Vaughan, a former councilwoman with support in both conservative and progressive camps, was sworn in as mayor pro tem on the basis of receiving the largest number of votes in the at-large balloting. And Jim Kee was elected to fill the seat opened in District 2, which covers the northeast section of the city, through the retirement of Goldie Wells.
A resident of the Cardinal area near Piedmont Triad International Airport, Thompson found in Kee someone who was interested in building relationships across the city, and the two have often remarked about their mutual respect. And though no one doubted Thompson’s conservative credentials, his personal approach seemed to be something of a departure from the contentious governing style of council members on both sides of a bitter political fight earlier that year that was resolved with a decision to fire a former city manager.
Thompson’s first act as a council member was to make a motion to rescind a financing arrangement to use hotel-motel tax funds to pay for a new aquatic center that had been made by the previous council only hours earlier. Ultimately, the financing arrangement was approved, with Vaughan casting the tie-breaking vote.
Thompson said in a recent interview that he didn’t think it was the right time for the city to go into debt by financing the aquatic center, which is part of the Greensboro Coliseum Complex. Yet Thompson breaks ranks with fellow conservatives who call for the coliseum to be privatized or complain that it constantly runs deficits.
“There’s other things that we fund that we don’t bring the value to the stakeholder,” Thompson said. “Like a neighborhood pool: It’s not going to pay for itself with the fees that we charge. Or the golf course at Gillespie Park.”
Early in his first term Thompson angered some conservatives by withdrawing support for Knight’s initiative to move the speakers-from-the-floor segment of beginning of the council meeting to the end.
“Danny Thompson is a complete disappointment,” complained Tony Wilkins, a Republican active in municipal politics, in a February 2010 blog comment. “I apologize for my mistake in supporting him. A goose on a duck pond from the first meeting…. Watch for the lefties, even in this blogosphere, to start going goo goo gaga over him.”
Still later, Thompson made the successful motion to move speakers from the floor back to the end of the meeting, fulfilling the mayor’s original wish.
Later in 2010, Thompson provided leadership to try to win a contest among cities to land a Google Fiber project that would bring ultra-high-speed internet to Greensboro. The effort failed, but earned the councilman some goodwill among a wide range of constituents. More controversial was a lengthy inquiry into whether computer users were using downtown library computers to view internet pornography.
Yet in the past year, all of those issues have been overshadowed by a polarizing fight on council about whether the White Street Landfill should be reopened to municipal solid waste. Thompson has taken a series of votes, along with Knight, Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw and Councilwoman Trudy Wade, to reopen the landfill, squaring off against at-large Councilman Robbie Perkins, District 1 Councilwoman Dianne Bellamy-Small and Kee, his old ally.
Then, as now, the landfill was a major issue in the municipal election.
“I would not be in favor of opening the White Street Landfill to household waste,” Thompson told voters during a candidate forum sponsored by the Guilford County Unity Effort two years ago. He added that he was also uncomfortable with continuing to transport Greensboro waste out of town. It was the latter point that he stressed in paid political advertisement in The Rhinoceros Times, a newspaper with a conservative slant and a track record of helping candidate win office through its endorsements.
Asked in an interview whether his actions in office compared with his statements on the campaign trail should be viewed as breaking a campaign promise or misleading voters, Thompson ignored the question.
“It looks like what we can do is for a short time we can use White Street,” he said. “That leverages our position where we can show Rockingham and Randolph that we do have the will to use our assets for leverage. I do believe that if we can find a regional equity solution where we can still have control over the byproducts of our waste stream that would, that’s what we should pursue.”
Randolph County Public Works Director David Townsend has told YES! Weekly that he expects the county’s regional landfill to be open in 18 months to two years.
Thompson expressed skepticism about Randolph County’s ability to get a landfill permitted in a timely fashion when asked to explain why he is intent on reopening the White Street Landfill instead of immediately entering talks with the neighboring county. The councilman has said in the past that he would prefer to be an equity partner rather than a customer of a regional landfill.
At one point in the interview, he expressed disinterest in the idea altogether, stating, “I don’t think it does us any good to move the landfill from Montgomery County from to Randolph County.”
Thompson dismissed concerns that reopening the landfill will adversely affect the health of residents who live nearby, stating, “The state and the county checked it out.”
In fact, a study released by the NC Division of Public Health in June stated that “no known release from the White Street Landfill has been identified that explains the elevated rate of pancreatic cancers in the community.” In July, the Greensboro Human Relations Commission issued a resolution recommending against reopening the landfill, based, in part, “on inconclusive health information related to the White Street Landfill.”
Thompson also rejected any correlation between business openings and closings in the area of the landfill. For example, the Carolina Circle Mall closed while the landfill was open, and a Wal-Mart Supercenter and Lowe’s store opened nearby after the landfill closed.
“Businesses came and businesses left while the landfill was open,” Thompson said.
Thompson also cast aside the notion that he needed the votes of District 2 residents to win reelection in a citywide contest.
“If you get ’em all from one district, good luck with that,” he said.
As to the outpouring of anger among residents in both east and west Greensboro over the proposed reopening of the landfill, Thompson said he is not convinced that it represents disunity in the city, and sidestepped a question about how the next council – whomever is elected – should begin a process of healing.
“Let’ see how the voters — they can voice their appreciation or lack thereof,” he said. “I’m going to let the voters judge me.”
The candidate said part of council’s role is to provide leadership on land-use planning, and in this regard he said he values input from stakeholders such as developers and residents.
“There’s no doubt it’s easier to service a higher-density area,” Thompson said. “You have to weigh that with the rights of property owners.”
As an example he noted that homeowners objected to part of the new Land Development Ordinance approved by the council.
“They didn’t want to have so many cul de sacs,” Thompson said. “The residents like cul de sacs, and they’re willing to pay a premium for them.”
The idea of a special tax on prepared foods, which has stirred up anxiety in some circles of the development community, provides a window into Thompson’s philosophy on revenue.
“I’m not going to vote for a tax increase unless people want to impose it on themselves,” he said.
Despite the current controversy over the landfill, Thompson said he should be recognized in his first term for building alliances and engineering compromises.
In 2010, for the first time in years, the city council voted to cut property taxes. Thompson said he built an alliance with Vaughan to create a majority in support of the decrease, which was initially opposed by some members who didn’t support funding for an economic development group while others gave the budget a cool reception because they didn’t want to reduce spending.
On the management of the Greensboro Farmers Curb Market, Thompson initially supported a time-out when he discovered the two finalists for the contract strongly correlated with two factions that have been fighting over the direction of the market. Ultimately, Thompson joined Vaughan and fellow at-large Councilman Robbie Perkins in approving a nonprofit established by longtime market customers to operate the market, disappointing Mayor Knight and Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw, who favored a group led by farmers to run the market.
Thompson found himself on the losing side of a vote to approve a weatherization program funded by the US Energy Department. But concerns raised by council members resulted in changes to the program, and a revised proposal was unanimously approved by council in June.
“I didn’t see that as a viable program [initially],” Thompson said. “It was through my efforts that we changed it around. Now, more than a thousand people will get grants. The Obama administration said the new plan was a better plan that than the original plan.”
The current council has taken some heat for not passing a resolution outlining its position on a bill in the NC General Assembly that ultimately outlawed the city’s proactive rental inspection program.
“I don’t get into the General Assembly,” Thompson said. “I don’t know that that’s our charter to take positions pro or con on General Assembly legislation.”
Thompson said he draws a distinction between the rental inspection legislation and the city of Greensboro’s efforts to obtain a delay in implementation of the Jordan Lake Rules, which will impose costs on the city and on developers to restrict nutrient runoff into the Haw River for the purpose of cleaning up Jordan Lake.
“We and many other cities were asking for relief,” he said. “One is a law; the other is pending legislation. We were asking for some time. Do you understand the difference?”
As an individual council member, Thompson has not been shy about taking positions on pending legislation before the General Assembly, typically siding with fellow Republicans.
“Having studied both sides of the issue, I will stand with President Pro Tem Senator Phil Berger (my state senator) and Senator Tillman (co-sponsor) in proudly promoting this legislation which 1) provides for more tree planting funds along state highways, 2) includes stiffer penalties for sign owners who cut down trees without a permit, 3) creates jobs and economic development – 2 of the 3 priorities of our city council, 4) reduces burdensome state regulations on business and 5) is supported by the NC Wildlife Habitat Foundation, Duke Children’s Hospital and the ALS Association,” Thompson wrote in a March 2011 e-mail to fellow council members.
Vaughan, who is married to a Democratic state senator, retorted, “Danny, I believe this is an issue of sovereignty and the state’s willingness to overreach in its control over our (the city of Greensboro’s) ability to shape and enact ordinances that we deem reasonable and proper.”
Thompson said he also takes pride in an effort, though ultimately unsuccessful, to persuade the University of North Carolina to locate a pharmacy school in Greensboro.
“The good book says we’re there to fight the battle,” he said. “The outcome doesn’t matter as much. The victory will be in the serving.”
Brother, can you spare $12.50?
Greensboro property owners: Are you willing to pony up $12.50 per year to keep the White Street Landfill closed?
That's how much the city manager's office estimates that a homeowner could save on their taxes assuming their house is assessed at $100,000 of valuation, based on the "push and pack" option to reopen the landfill that was approved by council last week.
The tax rate reduction that could be realized is 1.25 cents.
Staff ran the numbers in response to a question posed by Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Vaughan at yesterday's briefing session.
That said, no promise has been made that the savings realized from reopening the landfill will be realized. To the contrary, at-large Councilman Danny Thompson has been talking up the idea of plowing the savings from reopening the landfill into a solid waste enterprise fund to purchase an equity stake in a future regional landfill.
Ed Cone has also explored that idea.
That's how much the city manager's office estimates that a homeowner could save on their taxes assuming their house is assessed at $100,000 of valuation, based on the "push and pack" option to reopen the landfill that was approved by council last week.
The tax rate reduction that could be realized is 1.25 cents.
Staff ran the numbers in response to a question posed by Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Vaughan at yesterday's briefing session.
That said, no promise has been made that the savings realized from reopening the landfill will be realized. To the contrary, at-large Councilman Danny Thompson has been talking up the idea of plowing the savings from reopening the landfill into a solid waste enterprise fund to purchase an equity stake in a future regional landfill.
Ed Cone has also explored that idea.
And then there will be two
Opponents are expected to fill Greensboro City Council chambers this evening in anticipation of a vote to select a company to privately operate the White Street Landfill. Those who support reopening the landfill are also being encouraged to attend the meeting.
Although there is little doubt about the course set through this process, this may not be the last stop. Robbie Perkins tells me he received a phone call from Danny Thompson — both Perkins and Thompson serve at large — notifying him that the four council members who comprise a majority on this issue plan to vote to eliminate Advanced Disposal from consideration, and then ask the other two vendors, Gate City Waste Services and Waste Industries, to address the council in a briefing session next week.
Soon after, a final selection could be expected.
Although there is little doubt about the course set through this process, this may not be the last stop. Robbie Perkins tells me he received a phone call from Danny Thompson — both Perkins and Thompson serve at large — notifying him that the four council members who comprise a majority on this issue plan to vote to eliminate Advanced Disposal from consideration, and then ask the other two vendors, Gate City Waste Services and Waste Industries, to address the council in a briefing session next week.
Soon after, a final selection could be expected.
Greensboro trash politics
Greensboro City Council will be interviewing five private companies proposing to handle the city’s solid waste on Tuesday, beginning at 1 p.m.
Consultant Joseph Readling told council earlier this week that the five proposals basically provide three options: Three proposals would reopen the White Street Landfill to municipal solid waste, one would essentially continue the city’s present arrangement of trucking garbage down to Montgomery County, and one would operate an advanced pyrolysis facility at the present at the city transfer station on Burnt Poplar Road.
According to the city’s current schedule, which is considered “aggressive,” the city would negotiate a contract by May 31 and the new arrangement would be in place by July 1.
The conventional wisdom about the politics of the decision is that there are three automatic votes against reopening the landfill: at-large Councilman Robbie Perkins, District 1 Councilwoman Dianne Bellamy-Small and District 2 Councilman Jim Kee. Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Vaughan has said she will have to be recused from voting as long as Waste Industries, which receives legal representation from her husband, remains among the proposers. Vaughan noted during the 2009 campaign that she was on the city council when the vote was taken to close the White Street Landfill and favored a regional solution to the city’s solid waste needs.
That leaves five other council members who are undecided about whether or not to open the White Street Landfill. Mayor Bill Knight, at-large Councilman Danny Thompson, District 4 Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw and District 5 Councilwoman Trudy Wade are considered more fiscal conservative and more likely to place a premium on the immediate cost savings that would be realized by reopening the landfill. District 3 Councilman Zack Matheny is considered more moderate and a potential swing vote.
During his campaign for city council in 2009, Thompson could be counted in the don’t-reopen-the-landfill column, and also in the don’t-continue-to-send-waste-down-the-road column. Like former Mayor Yvonne Johnson and future District 2 Councilman Kee at the time, he favored a third way of utilizing alternative technology. Eighteen months later, the third way is looking less viable.
“I would not be in favor of opening the White Street Landfill to household waste,” Thompson told voters during a candidate forum sponsored by Guilford County Unity Effort in September 2009, adding that he was also not in favor of continuing to transport waste out of the county. “Now, I think what we can do is, as has been stated before, technology has advanced to where we can turn our trash into treasure, be it an incinerator, be it covering it and tapping the methane gas, or be it contracting out and allowing miners to go in to be able to dig through the trash and do whatever miners do with trash. We need to start that discussion now on a regional basis instead of just trucking our trash down the highway because we’re going to be — when our contract comes up for renewal, it’s going to be a matter of if it’s going to be double, triple or quadruple the price. And so just wiping our hands from it and charging the taxpayers $2 million a year to truck it down the highway — it’s not an easy solution, but I don’t believe the solution is opening the landfill.”
Asked about his previous position today, Thompson noted that in his 2009 campaign ad in The Rhinoceros Times he spoke out against transporting the city’s solid waste to a landfill in Montgomery County.
“I still believe that the first part I campaigned on: We’ve got to quit trucking our trash to Montgomery County,” he said. “It’s too expensive. We’re going to see that this summer. It’s going to put a crimp in our budget. As I have made the transition from being a candidate and looking at doing some research on the [alternative] technology, it doesn’t appear that technology is the most cost effective, nor is it something that’s being utilized on a regular scale here in the United States.”
Thompson said another alternative floated last fall — to dispose of the city’s solid waste in a regional landfill in neighboring Randolph County — also looks unviable.
“There is no Randolph County regional landfill,” he said. [The NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources] is permitting less and less landfill. We don’t have that many options. We either continue what we’re doing or we look at for a short-term we open up the landfill and we do things that don’t impede the neighborhood as much as used to whether it’s buffers or coming in from the backside of Cone Boulevard or US Highway 29 or…. It looks like gas prices are going to continue to rise, and that’s a very long way. Montgomery County is a poorer county than Guilford County, so we shouldn’t pat ourselves on the back and say, ‘We’re doing the right thing by continuing to send it there.’”
Other council members on the record:
Mayor Knight, League of Women Voters candidate forum, Sept. 15, 2009: “I would want to explore outsourcing — having an outside contractor own and operate the landfill.”
Perkins, Guilford County Unity Effort candidate forum, Sept. 22, 2009: “This issue has torn the guts out of this city. The city council made a decision — Ms. Vaughan was a part of it, and I was a part of it — to not open the White Street Landfill to municipal solid waste. And it wasn’t based solely on the numbers. It was based on the fact that it was the right thing to do for this community.”
Bellamy-Small, Guilford County Unity Effort candidate forum, Sept. 8, 2009: “I will not support opening the landfill for any reason.”
Wade, March 15 council meeting: “I don’t think any of us have made up our minds.”
Look for more coverage of Greensboro solid waste politics at the YES! Weekly blog over the weekend, particularly comparative analysis of the five proposals, in the run-up to Tuesday’s interview session.
UPDATE: Vaughan tells me that if, through some fluke, Waste Industries were eliminated from consideration, she would then be allowed to vote on the final proposals. It's an interesting twist, considering that Vaughan has made a point of saying that she was on the council that original voted to close the WSL and would presumably be against reopening. It will be interesting to see if Perkins & co. try to maneuver to get Waste Industries eliminated from a short list of proposers under final consideration under the expectation that they'll be able to corral an extra vote for keeping the landfill closed. Conversely, I would expect Wade & co. to strenuously object to the same. Or am I way too paranoid?
Consultant Joseph Readling told council earlier this week that the five proposals basically provide three options: Three proposals would reopen the White Street Landfill to municipal solid waste, one would essentially continue the city’s present arrangement of trucking garbage down to Montgomery County, and one would operate an advanced pyrolysis facility at the present at the city transfer station on Burnt Poplar Road.
According to the city’s current schedule, which is considered “aggressive,” the city would negotiate a contract by May 31 and the new arrangement would be in place by July 1.
The conventional wisdom about the politics of the decision is that there are three automatic votes against reopening the landfill: at-large Councilman Robbie Perkins, District 1 Councilwoman Dianne Bellamy-Small and District 2 Councilman Jim Kee. Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Vaughan has said she will have to be recused from voting as long as Waste Industries, which receives legal representation from her husband, remains among the proposers. Vaughan noted during the 2009 campaign that she was on the city council when the vote was taken to close the White Street Landfill and favored a regional solution to the city’s solid waste needs.
That leaves five other council members who are undecided about whether or not to open the White Street Landfill. Mayor Bill Knight, at-large Councilman Danny Thompson, District 4 Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw and District 5 Councilwoman Trudy Wade are considered more fiscal conservative and more likely to place a premium on the immediate cost savings that would be realized by reopening the landfill. District 3 Councilman Zack Matheny is considered more moderate and a potential swing vote.
During his campaign for city council in 2009, Thompson could be counted in the don’t-reopen-the-landfill column, and also in the don’t-continue-to-send-waste-down-the-road column. Like former Mayor Yvonne Johnson and future District 2 Councilman Kee at the time, he favored a third way of utilizing alternative technology. Eighteen months later, the third way is looking less viable.
“I would not be in favor of opening the White Street Landfill to household waste,” Thompson told voters during a candidate forum sponsored by Guilford County Unity Effort in September 2009, adding that he was also not in favor of continuing to transport waste out of the county. “Now, I think what we can do is, as has been stated before, technology has advanced to where we can turn our trash into treasure, be it an incinerator, be it covering it and tapping the methane gas, or be it contracting out and allowing miners to go in to be able to dig through the trash and do whatever miners do with trash. We need to start that discussion now on a regional basis instead of just trucking our trash down the highway because we’re going to be — when our contract comes up for renewal, it’s going to be a matter of if it’s going to be double, triple or quadruple the price. And so just wiping our hands from it and charging the taxpayers $2 million a year to truck it down the highway — it’s not an easy solution, but I don’t believe the solution is opening the landfill.”
Asked about his previous position today, Thompson noted that in his 2009 campaign ad in The Rhinoceros Times he spoke out against transporting the city’s solid waste to a landfill in Montgomery County.
“I still believe that the first part I campaigned on: We’ve got to quit trucking our trash to Montgomery County,” he said. “It’s too expensive. We’re going to see that this summer. It’s going to put a crimp in our budget. As I have made the transition from being a candidate and looking at doing some research on the [alternative] technology, it doesn’t appear that technology is the most cost effective, nor is it something that’s being utilized on a regular scale here in the United States.”
Thompson said another alternative floated last fall — to dispose of the city’s solid waste in a regional landfill in neighboring Randolph County — also looks unviable.
“There is no Randolph County regional landfill,” he said. [The NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources] is permitting less and less landfill. We don’t have that many options. We either continue what we’re doing or we look at for a short-term we open up the landfill and we do things that don’t impede the neighborhood as much as used to whether it’s buffers or coming in from the backside of Cone Boulevard or US Highway 29 or…. It looks like gas prices are going to continue to rise, and that’s a very long way. Montgomery County is a poorer county than Guilford County, so we shouldn’t pat ourselves on the back and say, ‘We’re doing the right thing by continuing to send it there.’”
Other council members on the record:
Mayor Knight, League of Women Voters candidate forum, Sept. 15, 2009: “I would want to explore outsourcing — having an outside contractor own and operate the landfill.”
Perkins, Guilford County Unity Effort candidate forum, Sept. 22, 2009: “This issue has torn the guts out of this city. The city council made a decision — Ms. Vaughan was a part of it, and I was a part of it — to not open the White Street Landfill to municipal solid waste. And it wasn’t based solely on the numbers. It was based on the fact that it was the right thing to do for this community.”
Bellamy-Small, Guilford County Unity Effort candidate forum, Sept. 8, 2009: “I will not support opening the landfill for any reason.”
Wade, March 15 council meeting: “I don’t think any of us have made up our minds.”
Look for more coverage of Greensboro solid waste politics at the YES! Weekly blog over the weekend, particularly comparative analysis of the five proposals, in the run-up to Tuesday’s interview session.
UPDATE: Vaughan tells me that if, through some fluke, Waste Industries were eliminated from consideration, she would then be allowed to vote on the final proposals. It's an interesting twist, considering that Vaughan has made a point of saying that she was on the council that original voted to close the WSL and would presumably be against reopening. It will be interesting to see if Perkins & co. try to maneuver to get Waste Industries eliminated from a short list of proposers under final consideration under the expectation that they'll be able to corral an extra vote for keeping the landfill closed. Conversely, I would expect Wade & co. to strenuously object to the same. Or am I way too paranoid?
Loan program at heart of weatherization controversy
The Greensboro City Council voted 6-3 on Tuesday to accept $5 million in federal stimulus funds for weatherizing buildings reflected. Some members such as District Councilman Zack Matheny and District 4 Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw signed on with strong reservations that the money wouldn’t reach its target demographic of the poor and old.
“I don’t fundamentally agree with this,” Matheny said before reluctantly agreeing to vote to accept the funding. “I don’t fundamentally agree with the money not going directly to the poor, the needy and the elderly.”
At-large Councilman Danny Thompson, who voted against the funding, expressed even graver reservations.
“If even a dollar of the ten dollars would actually go to service and labor to the people who need it, I would support it wholeheartedly. It’s like bailing out our financial institutions. It’s not like Washington, DC had $5 million that they found under the seat cushion.”
Most of the debate centered on $2.3 million — not quite half of the allocation — designated for “contracted construction,” or “actual building retrofit work,” estimated to range from $2,000 to $10,000 for single family homes or upwards of $50,000 for multi-family residential, commercial and institutional buildings.
A Sept. 28 memo drafted by community sustainability manager Dan Curry states that “because of the 5 to 1 leverage requirement imposed by the Dept. of Energy, a large portion of the $2,291,963 of BetterBuildings grant funds allocated for construction are likely to be used as a loan loss reserve fund with a lender or pool of lenders. In this way the grant funds will leverage a much larger pool of below-market funding available to property owners who choose to undertake energy efficient upgrades.”
Some council members questioned whether poor people who wanted their houses weatherized would end up trapped in loans they couldn’t afford to pay.
Assistant City Manager Denise Turner acknowledged, “The loan portion of the program is not for poor people.” Turner added, “The great thing about this is its one of the few programs that actually benefits businesses.”
District 5 Councilwoman Trudy Wade, who also voted against the funding, said, “There seems to be a misconception that this is going to help poor people. It’s going to help businesses, landlords and consultants.”
The program offers modest services free of charge to low-income homeowners. According to a recent memo drafted by Turner, a number of items would be installed at no cost during an initial outreach visit, including CFL light bulbs, water-saving faucet aerators, programmable thermostats and HVAC filters.
Turner told council members that the program would not work directly with homeowners, but rather would engage a number of partner organizations to undertake the work. Among the organizations that have expressed interest in collaborating with the city to implement the program are Habitat for Humanity, Housing Greensboro and Affordable Housing Management. According to the Turner memo, Habitat for Humanity “is interested in working with their roughly 200 homes built pre-2003 to determine potential utility cost savings for their property owners,” Housing Greensboro “has set a goal of repairing 100 homes in 2011,” and Affordable Housing Management “has indicated they have 81 rental units undergoing rehabilitation where they would like to partner with the city in making them more energy efficient.”
The memo also indicates that households under 200 percent of the area poverty level already have the opportunity to have homes weatherized at no cost through the State Weatherization Assistance Program, which plans to retrofit 600 homes in the Greensboro area.
A parade of speakers urged council to approve the funding, and representatives of the Greensboro Community Sustainability Council and the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress said their respective organizations had passed resolutions of support.
Former Mayor Yvonne Johnson told the council: “I ask you to consider keeping this money so that many of our low-income residents can have some cost savings and comfort.”
Katie Scherzer, who spoke to council, elaborated on that theme.
“I’d like to ask each council member to raise their hand if they turned up their heat on one of these cold nights recently without giving it a second thought,” she said. “The majority of our elderly and poor can’t have that luxury of turning on their energy and heat. I know the majority of them are sitting in their homes in jackets and sitting on their hands. When we’re giving this money, we’re giving it back to them in savings on their heating bills. We’re not likely to get another chance to do this.”
District 1 Councilwoman Dianne Bellamy-Small drew from Holy Scripture in an attempt to win over her skeptical colleagues.
“This is akin to two fish and five loaves — what we call leveraging,” she said. “If a long time ago a dude cold take two fish and five loaves and leverage it to feed all those people, we ought to be able to take $5 million and make it $25 million.”
“I don’t fundamentally agree with this,” Matheny said before reluctantly agreeing to vote to accept the funding. “I don’t fundamentally agree with the money not going directly to the poor, the needy and the elderly.”
At-large Councilman Danny Thompson, who voted against the funding, expressed even graver reservations.
“If even a dollar of the ten dollars would actually go to service and labor to the people who need it, I would support it wholeheartedly. It’s like bailing out our financial institutions. It’s not like Washington, DC had $5 million that they found under the seat cushion.”
Most of the debate centered on $2.3 million — not quite half of the allocation — designated for “contracted construction,” or “actual building retrofit work,” estimated to range from $2,000 to $10,000 for single family homes or upwards of $50,000 for multi-family residential, commercial and institutional buildings.
A Sept. 28 memo drafted by community sustainability manager Dan Curry states that “because of the 5 to 1 leverage requirement imposed by the Dept. of Energy, a large portion of the $2,291,963 of BetterBuildings grant funds allocated for construction are likely to be used as a loan loss reserve fund with a lender or pool of lenders. In this way the grant funds will leverage a much larger pool of below-market funding available to property owners who choose to undertake energy efficient upgrades.”
Some council members questioned whether poor people who wanted their houses weatherized would end up trapped in loans they couldn’t afford to pay.
Assistant City Manager Denise Turner acknowledged, “The loan portion of the program is not for poor people.” Turner added, “The great thing about this is its one of the few programs that actually benefits businesses.”
District 5 Councilwoman Trudy Wade, who also voted against the funding, said, “There seems to be a misconception that this is going to help poor people. It’s going to help businesses, landlords and consultants.”
The program offers modest services free of charge to low-income homeowners. According to a recent memo drafted by Turner, a number of items would be installed at no cost during an initial outreach visit, including CFL light bulbs, water-saving faucet aerators, programmable thermostats and HVAC filters.
Turner told council members that the program would not work directly with homeowners, but rather would engage a number of partner organizations to undertake the work. Among the organizations that have expressed interest in collaborating with the city to implement the program are Habitat for Humanity, Housing Greensboro and Affordable Housing Management. According to the Turner memo, Habitat for Humanity “is interested in working with their roughly 200 homes built pre-2003 to determine potential utility cost savings for their property owners,” Housing Greensboro “has set a goal of repairing 100 homes in 2011,” and Affordable Housing Management “has indicated they have 81 rental units undergoing rehabilitation where they would like to partner with the city in making them more energy efficient.”
The memo also indicates that households under 200 percent of the area poverty level already have the opportunity to have homes weatherized at no cost through the State Weatherization Assistance Program, which plans to retrofit 600 homes in the Greensboro area.
A parade of speakers urged council to approve the funding, and representatives of the Greensboro Community Sustainability Council and the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress said their respective organizations had passed resolutions of support.
Former Mayor Yvonne Johnson told the council: “I ask you to consider keeping this money so that many of our low-income residents can have some cost savings and comfort.”
Katie Scherzer, who spoke to council, elaborated on that theme.
“I’d like to ask each council member to raise their hand if they turned up their heat on one of these cold nights recently without giving it a second thought,” she said. “The majority of our elderly and poor can’t have that luxury of turning on their energy and heat. I know the majority of them are sitting in their homes in jackets and sitting on their hands. When we’re giving this money, we’re giving it back to them in savings on their heating bills. We’re not likely to get another chance to do this.”
District 1 Councilwoman Dianne Bellamy-Small drew from Holy Scripture in an attempt to win over her skeptical colleagues.
“This is akin to two fish and five loaves — what we call leveraging,” she said. “If a long time ago a dude cold take two fish and five loaves and leverage it to feed all those people, we ought to be able to take $5 million and make it $25 million.”
Danny Thompson explains
Greensboro City Councilman Danny Thompson, at-large, on his somewhat variable position on placement of speakers from the floor on the council's agenda: "The mayor has a few prerogatives: Boards and commissions, seating arrangement and the agenda. While I have a personal preference, that doesn't mean anything. I'm not going to usurp or overrule the mayor on a minor prerogative."
Previously.
Previously.
Danny Thompson's quick switch
What happened to at-large Councilman Danny Thompson on the move to push speakers from the floor to the end of the meeting?
First, he tells WFMY's Julia Bagg: "It's not going to cut anybody out. Let's see how it goes. Let's give it a shot."
Then, after hearing public comment opposing the change, Thompson says from the dais that he has elderly constituents who go to bed early and asks the mayor to reconsider the move.
Talk about changing horses....
First, he tells WFMY's Julia Bagg: "It's not going to cut anybody out. Let's see how it goes. Let's give it a shot."
Then, after hearing public comment opposing the change, Thompson says from the dais that he has elderly constituents who go to bed early and asks the mayor to reconsider the move.
Talk about changing horses....
Thompson, Nixon and Abuzuaiter receive Hardy's endorsement
I previously reported that Danny Thompson received DJ Hardy's endorsement in the at-large contest for Greensboro City Council. What I didn't report is that Gary Nixon and Marikay Abuzuaiter, the other at-large candidates who are neither incumbents nor candidates who have previously served, also received Hardy's endorsement. (My source was Thompson, who didn't mention the other endorsements, and I wasn't able to reach Hardy on the phone until today.)
Enough of the excuses.
DJ Hardy, who did not survive the Oct. 6 primary, says he wants change and a greater voice for young people in Greensboro politics. The low turnout in the primary and the inability of candidates under the age of 40 to gain traction is evidence of a failure of the city's past and current leadership to establish a connection with young residents.
Hardy said he supports Thompson's vision of economic development.
"The main reason is I think his approach in terms of advocating for lower taxes and his experience with small business coincides with the way I see things," Hardy told me. "I think that's what the city needs right now. We disagree about the gang unit. There are some other things, principally on the social side where we disagree."
"Gary Nixon and Danny Thompson are more aligned on economic development. Marikay is more aligned with me on the development of the east side of the city. She's also a small-business person."
Hardy said he didn't exact any commitments from the candidates in exchange for his endorsement.
"We did discuss the fact that I have a dear spot in my heart for the east side of the city," he said. "I think it's important to be open minded abut that and to make sure we bring a greater focus to the area in any sort of vision of the east side of the city that is considered."
Robbie Perkins and Sandra Anderson Groat have traditionally performed well with the electorate in east Greensboro, but Hardy thinks it's time for them to go.
"When I look at Danny next to Robbie Perkins, Robbie Perkins has been in office for awhile. As much as he likes to tout east Greensboro, he knows all the players but they haven't really accomplished much. I'm thinking his vision of east Greensboro doesn't go much further than Murrow Boulevard."
Hardy said he might consider running for city council again in 2011, but for the moment he's more focused on finding ways to get younger voters to participate in the political process, with the possibly by putting together a board of young political leaders with representatives from the Democratic and Republican party.
"We don't really have any young representation for the city," Hardy said. "We don't have the right candidates to really rally the 18-44 range. If we really want to be sitting at the forefront that's responsive and proactive we've really got to have a way for the younger generation and creative people to not have to go through a vetting stage and do an effective job but not really get the votes to make it through the primary. We have to be able to make it possible for a newcomer to get in there and get the votes. It shouldn't revolve around money, which at this stage it seems its does."
"If I can't get the demographic that I appeal to to show up [in future elections], I couldn't make it. Ryan Shell couldn't make it. Jorge couldn't make it. Max Benbassat couldn't make it. If you look at the primary results, the four young guys didn't make it. The gap between was quite well defined."
Enough of the excuses.
DJ Hardy, who did not survive the Oct. 6 primary, says he wants change and a greater voice for young people in Greensboro politics. The low turnout in the primary and the inability of candidates under the age of 40 to gain traction is evidence of a failure of the city's past and current leadership to establish a connection with young residents.
Hardy said he supports Thompson's vision of economic development.
"The main reason is I think his approach in terms of advocating for lower taxes and his experience with small business coincides with the way I see things," Hardy told me. "I think that's what the city needs right now. We disagree about the gang unit. There are some other things, principally on the social side where we disagree."
"Gary Nixon and Danny Thompson are more aligned on economic development. Marikay is more aligned with me on the development of the east side of the city. She's also a small-business person."
Hardy said he didn't exact any commitments from the candidates in exchange for his endorsement.
"We did discuss the fact that I have a dear spot in my heart for the east side of the city," he said. "I think it's important to be open minded abut that and to make sure we bring a greater focus to the area in any sort of vision of the east side of the city that is considered."
Robbie Perkins and Sandra Anderson Groat have traditionally performed well with the electorate in east Greensboro, but Hardy thinks it's time for them to go.
"When I look at Danny next to Robbie Perkins, Robbie Perkins has been in office for awhile. As much as he likes to tout east Greensboro, he knows all the players but they haven't really accomplished much. I'm thinking his vision of east Greensboro doesn't go much further than Murrow Boulevard."
Hardy said he might consider running for city council again in 2011, but for the moment he's more focused on finding ways to get younger voters to participate in the political process, with the possibly by putting together a board of young political leaders with representatives from the Democratic and Republican party.
"We don't really have any young representation for the city," Hardy said. "We don't have the right candidates to really rally the 18-44 range. If we really want to be sitting at the forefront that's responsive and proactive we've really got to have a way for the younger generation and creative people to not have to go through a vetting stage and do an effective job but not really get the votes to make it through the primary. We have to be able to make it possible for a newcomer to get in there and get the votes. It shouldn't revolve around money, which at this stage it seems its does."
"If I can't get the demographic that I appeal to to show up [in future elections], I couldn't make it. Ryan Shell couldn't make it. Jorge couldn't make it. Max Benbassat couldn't make it. If you look at the primary results, the four young guys didn't make it. The gap between was quite well defined."
Campaign notes: Greensboro City Council at-large race
With two weeks to go before Election Day, at-large candidates for Greensboro City Council are making their best effort to differentiate themselves from their opponents.
Nixon vs. Perkins and Anderson Groat
“I want to point out the differences between the incumbent councilman at large and myself,” said Gary Nixon, who placed fifth in the Oct. 6 primary, during a candidate forum at the downtown public library last night that was hosted by the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress. “One, I have no conflicts of interest. One council member is perceived to have a conflict of interest, and I’ll let you judge whether there’s a conflict of interest or not. Another one is uninformed and does not know even the basic operations of the city, and numbers that are given to her because she can’t understand it.”
The first shot was intended for Robbie Perkins, who finished second. Nixon has ground to make up in order to win one of the three at-large seats. The two incumbents — also including Mayor Pro Tem Sandra Anderson Groat, who finished third — are appealing targets for a challenger such as Nixon.
After the forum, Nixon elaborated: “He’s in land development. It could be perceived that he has a conflict of interest. I didn’t run for city council before I retired from my engineering firm because it could have been perceived that I had a conflict of interest. I’ll let the voters decide if he has a conflict of interest.”
Perkins seemed unfazed when I followed up with him this morning to ask him to respond to Nixon’s criticism.
“A lot of people can have conflicts of interests; it’s how you handle conflict of interest,” he said. “The state statutes are very clear that if you have a financial stake in a matter you abstain from voting.
“Anyone who’s in business in this city can have a potential conflict,” he added. “If you want business people to serve on council — and I think that’s a good thing — the question is how you handle conflicts of interest. If you want to exclude city council from people unless you’re retired or unemployed, you can do that, but I don’t think that’s good idea…. Gary is clearly trying to differentiate himself between other candidates, but I think the experience that I bring to the table and ability to continue pushing for jobs instead of learning what a council member does is invaluable.”
Groat showed up to the forum late, and did not hear Nixon’s remark. When I told her that Nixon characterized her as being uninformed, she laughed.
“It just goes to show you how much he knows,” she said. “He took his shot. He was in my group at the News & Record, and he took some shots then. Beating up on someone else might be a way to elevate himself, but I don’t think so. I think it probably comes back to haunt you.”
Hardy endorses Thompson
After the forum, candidate Danny Thompson told me he is receiving DJ Hardy's endorsement. Hardy appeared and shook Thompson's hand. I asked him if it was true, and he nodded and smiled. Thompson said a press release will be distributed today.
As the fourth-place finisher, Thompson is in the best position of any of the second-tier candidates to capture an at-large seat. Thompson performed well with voters in west Greensboro, but placed only sixth in District 1, which covers much of southeast Greensboro. Hardy garnered more votes than Thompson, Marikay Abuzuaiter and Nixon in District 1, and carried G74, a politically active precinct whose polling place is Bluford Elementary.
Thompson and Hardy took differing positions on the Greensboro Police Department gang unit during the campaign. Thompson has said on several occasions that he supports the gang unit, while Hardy said previously that the city should not continue to fund the unit unless the department can make a case for its effectiveness.
As a resident of southeast Greensboro, Hardy made a case for more equitable development across the city during his primary campaign. His choice to endorse Thompson is notable in that Abuzuaiter has the closest ties to east Greensboro of all the successful challengers in the at-large race. Abuzuaiter's husband operates a gas station on East Market Street.
As a resident of the newly-annexed Cardinal neighborhood on the city's northwestern fringe, Thompson has displayed some cognizance of the challenges in east Greensboro.
During a Sept. 22 candidate forum he said, "The city can go a long way in helping in development of under-utilized, under-growth areas by providing incentives to developers, whether it's a major grocery store chain or whatever, by saying, 'Look, we have a group of people in our city that don't have a grocery store on the east side — a large supermarket — so what would it take, Food Lion, Harris Teeter, Lowe's, for us to work with you to get a supermarket there?'"
I left a message this morning for Hardy, asking him to explain his reasons for supporting Thompson. I also left a message for Thompson, noting that I will be looking for the press release in my e-mail inbox. I'll provide updates when I heard from them.
Vaughan and Burckley
Nancy Vaughan, the front-runner in the at-large race, noted in her opening statement that "it appears that over the last few years our city has become more polarized regarding things around the police department and development issues."
I've been meaning to ask her over the course of the campaign why she is paying for the services of Bill Burckley, a Republican consultant who is a bit of a polarizing figure himself. Earlier this year, he showed up drunk at a city council meeting and got arrested for being disruptive. He lobbied council members to vote against a motion to express regret over the 1979 Klan-Nazi shootings and complained to Mayor Yvonne Johnson during a break that she hadn't taken his advice to fire former City Manager Mitchell Johnson.
Vaughan has said that she pinpoints many of the troubles in the police department to the moment Mitchell Johnson locked former police Chief David Wray out of his office, but she doesn't agree with Burckley on everything.
"It doesn't mean that I have to listen to everything he says," Vaughan told me. "He does have a good strategic mind and he's great with numbers. He knows the districts well."
The candidate continued: "I have formed my own opinions and have formed my own issues and certainly if I hired him to tell me what my opinions are I wouldn't be a very good candidate.... The main thing I want to emphasize is he is helping me get my message out — and it's my message. There are some things on which we agree to disagree."
UPDATE: Thompson sent out the press release yesterday formalizing Hardy's endorsement. The press release erroneously states that Hardy resides in District 2; in fact, he lives in District 1.
The press release quotes Hardy as saying his endorsement is premised on "Danny Thompson's ability to bring civility, common sense and a fresh perspective of efficiency and effectively running city government."
Triad Elections '09
Nixon vs. Perkins and Anderson Groat
“I want to point out the differences between the incumbent councilman at large and myself,” said Gary Nixon, who placed fifth in the Oct. 6 primary, during a candidate forum at the downtown public library last night that was hosted by the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress. “One, I have no conflicts of interest. One council member is perceived to have a conflict of interest, and I’ll let you judge whether there’s a conflict of interest or not. Another one is uninformed and does not know even the basic operations of the city, and numbers that are given to her because she can’t understand it.”
The first shot was intended for Robbie Perkins, who finished second. Nixon has ground to make up in order to win one of the three at-large seats. The two incumbents — also including Mayor Pro Tem Sandra Anderson Groat, who finished third — are appealing targets for a challenger such as Nixon.
After the forum, Nixon elaborated: “He’s in land development. It could be perceived that he has a conflict of interest. I didn’t run for city council before I retired from my engineering firm because it could have been perceived that I had a conflict of interest. I’ll let the voters decide if he has a conflict of interest.”
Perkins seemed unfazed when I followed up with him this morning to ask him to respond to Nixon’s criticism.
“A lot of people can have conflicts of interests; it’s how you handle conflict of interest,” he said. “The state statutes are very clear that if you have a financial stake in a matter you abstain from voting.
“Anyone who’s in business in this city can have a potential conflict,” he added. “If you want business people to serve on council — and I think that’s a good thing — the question is how you handle conflicts of interest. If you want to exclude city council from people unless you’re retired or unemployed, you can do that, but I don’t think that’s good idea…. Gary is clearly trying to differentiate himself between other candidates, but I think the experience that I bring to the table and ability to continue pushing for jobs instead of learning what a council member does is invaluable.”
Groat showed up to the forum late, and did not hear Nixon’s remark. When I told her that Nixon characterized her as being uninformed, she laughed.
“It just goes to show you how much he knows,” she said. “He took his shot. He was in my group at the News & Record, and he took some shots then. Beating up on someone else might be a way to elevate himself, but I don’t think so. I think it probably comes back to haunt you.”
Hardy endorses Thompson
After the forum, candidate Danny Thompson told me he is receiving DJ Hardy's endorsement. Hardy appeared and shook Thompson's hand. I asked him if it was true, and he nodded and smiled. Thompson said a press release will be distributed today.
As the fourth-place finisher, Thompson is in the best position of any of the second-tier candidates to capture an at-large seat. Thompson performed well with voters in west Greensboro, but placed only sixth in District 1, which covers much of southeast Greensboro. Hardy garnered more votes than Thompson, Marikay Abuzuaiter and Nixon in District 1, and carried G74, a politically active precinct whose polling place is Bluford Elementary.
Thompson and Hardy took differing positions on the Greensboro Police Department gang unit during the campaign. Thompson has said on several occasions that he supports the gang unit, while Hardy said previously that the city should not continue to fund the unit unless the department can make a case for its effectiveness.
As a resident of southeast Greensboro, Hardy made a case for more equitable development across the city during his primary campaign. His choice to endorse Thompson is notable in that Abuzuaiter has the closest ties to east Greensboro of all the successful challengers in the at-large race. Abuzuaiter's husband operates a gas station on East Market Street.
As a resident of the newly-annexed Cardinal neighborhood on the city's northwestern fringe, Thompson has displayed some cognizance of the challenges in east Greensboro.
During a Sept. 22 candidate forum he said, "The city can go a long way in helping in development of under-utilized, under-growth areas by providing incentives to developers, whether it's a major grocery store chain or whatever, by saying, 'Look, we have a group of people in our city that don't have a grocery store on the east side — a large supermarket — so what would it take, Food Lion, Harris Teeter, Lowe's, for us to work with you to get a supermarket there?'"
I left a message this morning for Hardy, asking him to explain his reasons for supporting Thompson. I also left a message for Thompson, noting that I will be looking for the press release in my e-mail inbox. I'll provide updates when I heard from them.
Vaughan and Burckley
Nancy Vaughan, the front-runner in the at-large race, noted in her opening statement that "it appears that over the last few years our city has become more polarized regarding things around the police department and development issues."
I've been meaning to ask her over the course of the campaign why she is paying for the services of Bill Burckley, a Republican consultant who is a bit of a polarizing figure himself. Earlier this year, he showed up drunk at a city council meeting and got arrested for being disruptive. He lobbied council members to vote against a motion to express regret over the 1979 Klan-Nazi shootings and complained to Mayor Yvonne Johnson during a break that she hadn't taken his advice to fire former City Manager Mitchell Johnson.
Vaughan has said that she pinpoints many of the troubles in the police department to the moment Mitchell Johnson locked former police Chief David Wray out of his office, but she doesn't agree with Burckley on everything.
"It doesn't mean that I have to listen to everything he says," Vaughan told me. "He does have a good strategic mind and he's great with numbers. He knows the districts well."
The candidate continued: "I have formed my own opinions and have formed my own issues and certainly if I hired him to tell me what my opinions are I wouldn't be a very good candidate.... The main thing I want to emphasize is he is helping me get my message out — and it's my message. There are some things on which we agree to disagree."
UPDATE: Thompson sent out the press release yesterday formalizing Hardy's endorsement. The press release erroneously states that Hardy resides in District 2; in fact, he lives in District 1.
The press release quotes Hardy as saying his endorsement is premised on "Danny Thompson's ability to bring civility, common sense and a fresh perspective of efficiency and effectively running city government."
Triad Elections '09
Danny Thompson transcript
The following is a transcript of Greensboro City Council at-large candidate Danny Thompson’s answers at a Guilford County Unity Effort forum on Sept. 22:
Introductory statement
Good evening. Thank you for allowing me to come tonight. Appreciate you hosting this. My name is Danny Thompson, and I am proud to say that I was born and raised in Greensboro. I have lived here most of my life. And seven years ago I had a vision of starting a business to provide care to seniors in order that they could remain in their home. Today, we’ve helped over thousands of families and we employ over a hundred people. We care for veterans, for the poor and for the elderly, and the sick. During that time, I’m proud to say that we’ve never borrowed a penny; we do not owe a dime. We meet payroll and exceed seven figures on an annual basis. I’m running for city council because as a businessman who understands business sense and common sense I want to bring that to the city council. We have an opportunity to move forward with a clear vision of a sound economic prosperity, but only if we get past the status quo and only if we get past the bickering and divisiveness we see on Channel 13. It’s more than just about Irving Park and Gillespie Park; it’s about industrial parks, business parks, medical parks and biotech parks. The job of city council is to cast a vision and take responsibility, and I believe I can do that. I would appreciate your support.
Do you support continued funding for the Greensboro Police Department gang enforcement unit. If so, do you think it should possibly be restructured?
Thank you. I do support continued funding of the gang unit in the police department. Many people in this room know that many candidates run for city council do not run because they have all the answers, but they should be running because they can ask the tough questions. And that’s what I will do on the city council: Ask the tough questions of the police department and finding out, do we need to restructure the gang unit, whether it’s resources and manpower, where they need to be and how they’re allocating their financial resources.
Would you be in favor of reopening the White Street Landfill to household waste? Why or why not?
I would not be in favor of opening the White Street Landfill to household waste. You know, several years ago some of you may remember that New Jersey was the laughingstock of the nation when it could not deal with its trash, and it put it on barges and floated it up and down the east coast looking for a state to take their trash. Well, it made the cover of a lot of news – that’s going to be us in a few years if we continue just to say, “Not in my backyard,” and trucking our trash down to some other county. First of all, it’s not a good environmental solution, I think we could all agree. Now, I think what we can do is, as has been stated before, technology has advanced to where we can turn our trash into treasure, be it an incinerator, be it covering it and tapping the methane gas, or be it contracting out and allowing miners to go in to be able to dig through the trash and do whatever miners do with trash. We need to start that discussion now on a regional basis instead of just trucking our trash down the highway because we’re going to be – when our contract comes up for renewal, it’s going to be a matter of if it’s going to be double, triple or quadruple the price. And so just wiping our hands from it and charging the taxpayers $2 million a year to truck it down the highway – it’s not an easy solution, but I don’t believe the solution is opening the landfill.
Economic growth and development have not occurred in east Greensboro to the same extent as in other areas of the city. If elected, what would you do to ensure that there is balanced economic growth and development across the various parts of the city?
Economic growth, to the greatest extent, is at the whim of a developer or a business owner that wants to build or to transfer or to develop. The city council can go a long way in helping in development of under-utilized, under-growth areas by providing incentives to developers, whether it’s a major grocery store chain or whatever, by saying, “Look, we have a group of people in our city that don’t have a grocery store on the east side – a large supermarket – so what would it take, Food Lion, Harris Teeter, Lowe’s, for us to work with you to get a supermarket in there? That takes someone who is a business owner, that understands business owners. Business owners want to know how they can get the best value for the least amount of cost. So that’s what we need to do. I’m very much in favor of incentives for growing in areas where we can balance out the city, and that’s what I mean in my campaign on my website at votefordanny.com, where I talk about responsible growth in all areas of the city.
Candidates say they will represent their constituents. This means they need to know their constituents’ wishes and perspectives. What, in your experience prior to running for office, can you point to that tells us you are person who is in touch with your constituents?
As I stated in my opening statement, my vocation is geriatric care. That means that I work with families, helping them with their elderly parents navigate through the long-term care process, which is oftentimes not very easy. Throughout the business I’ve been able to interview, employ and create jobs — hundreds of people, both people making high salaries, marketing, sales people, administrative people and frontline CNA, certified nurse assistant caregivers…. It keeps me humble and keeps me in touch with those that maybe need an advance on their paycheck, maybe need a loan, maybe need a ride to work, maybe need a little bit of gas money. My wife is sitting in the audience. She and I, we’ve done this for eight years. It also puts us in touch with those who are grieving or those who have burdensome situations that are just beyond their control. I hope that answers that question.
How do you plan to include immigrants and refugee communities in the city council?
Great question. In our discussion, Jordan, in our interview, we talked about race relations and the diversity within Greensboro. It seems that we’re stuck in the 1980s when we talk about race relations; we still talk about black and white. Our Greensboro city schools superintendent [SIC] recently said that we have 100 ethnicities and nationalities and 88 dialects in our city schools. It’s unfortunate that on our boards and our commissions we do not have a more diverse face in leadership positions. We do not have the deaf or the blind, the gay or the lesbian, the brown or the Asian, or the Persian-American or the Indian-American or the Native American. They’re all in our community, but we are not bringing them forward with appointed positions, whether it’s boards or commissions, or even, unfortunately, sadly, they don’t want to — and maybe they can’t — to run for office. But as a city councilman, I will look aggressively to try to find those other people, groups to try to encourage them to step up. And I will ask the city council and those who are appointing people to boards and commissions to, let’s look at something more than just black and white.
Closing statement
One hundred and fifty years ago, John Motley Morehead, a great Greensboro resident, a North Carolina governor who is known as “the father of modern North Carolina,” he saw to it that railroad tracks came through Greensboro, as opposed to Asheboro, on the way from Raleigh to Charlotte. An advocate of sustained growth and bringing in business. A few years later Moses and Caesar Cone, helped by rail, set up business here so they could distribute those goods and products. And I think that we can do that again 150 years later. If we have leadership and vision we can lay the groundwork and get on the track for economic development with the Piedmont “aerotropolis.” As your city councilman, I will look for ways to reduce the tax burden. Right now if you move to Summerfield you can pay property taxes of zero. If you move to Oak Ridge, you pay a property tax of eight cents. If you move to Greensboro, one of the highest municipalities in North Carolina, you pay 63 cents for $100 of property tax. I will combine the Guilford County and Greensboro planning departments. I will ask that the sports authority commission… naming rights for the coliseum… And I want to be your city councilman. Thank you.
Triad Elections ’09
Introductory statement
Good evening. Thank you for allowing me to come tonight. Appreciate you hosting this. My name is Danny Thompson, and I am proud to say that I was born and raised in Greensboro. I have lived here most of my life. And seven years ago I had a vision of starting a business to provide care to seniors in order that they could remain in their home. Today, we’ve helped over thousands of families and we employ over a hundred people. We care for veterans, for the poor and for the elderly, and the sick. During that time, I’m proud to say that we’ve never borrowed a penny; we do not owe a dime. We meet payroll and exceed seven figures on an annual basis. I’m running for city council because as a businessman who understands business sense and common sense I want to bring that to the city council. We have an opportunity to move forward with a clear vision of a sound economic prosperity, but only if we get past the status quo and only if we get past the bickering and divisiveness we see on Channel 13. It’s more than just about Irving Park and Gillespie Park; it’s about industrial parks, business parks, medical parks and biotech parks. The job of city council is to cast a vision and take responsibility, and I believe I can do that. I would appreciate your support.
Do you support continued funding for the Greensboro Police Department gang enforcement unit. If so, do you think it should possibly be restructured?
Thank you. I do support continued funding of the gang unit in the police department. Many people in this room know that many candidates run for city council do not run because they have all the answers, but they should be running because they can ask the tough questions. And that’s what I will do on the city council: Ask the tough questions of the police department and finding out, do we need to restructure the gang unit, whether it’s resources and manpower, where they need to be and how they’re allocating their financial resources.
Would you be in favor of reopening the White Street Landfill to household waste? Why or why not?
I would not be in favor of opening the White Street Landfill to household waste. You know, several years ago some of you may remember that New Jersey was the laughingstock of the nation when it could not deal with its trash, and it put it on barges and floated it up and down the east coast looking for a state to take their trash. Well, it made the cover of a lot of news – that’s going to be us in a few years if we continue just to say, “Not in my backyard,” and trucking our trash down to some other county. First of all, it’s not a good environmental solution, I think we could all agree. Now, I think what we can do is, as has been stated before, technology has advanced to where we can turn our trash into treasure, be it an incinerator, be it covering it and tapping the methane gas, or be it contracting out and allowing miners to go in to be able to dig through the trash and do whatever miners do with trash. We need to start that discussion now on a regional basis instead of just trucking our trash down the highway because we’re going to be – when our contract comes up for renewal, it’s going to be a matter of if it’s going to be double, triple or quadruple the price. And so just wiping our hands from it and charging the taxpayers $2 million a year to truck it down the highway – it’s not an easy solution, but I don’t believe the solution is opening the landfill.
Economic growth and development have not occurred in east Greensboro to the same extent as in other areas of the city. If elected, what would you do to ensure that there is balanced economic growth and development across the various parts of the city?
Economic growth, to the greatest extent, is at the whim of a developer or a business owner that wants to build or to transfer or to develop. The city council can go a long way in helping in development of under-utilized, under-growth areas by providing incentives to developers, whether it’s a major grocery store chain or whatever, by saying, “Look, we have a group of people in our city that don’t have a grocery store on the east side – a large supermarket – so what would it take, Food Lion, Harris Teeter, Lowe’s, for us to work with you to get a supermarket in there? That takes someone who is a business owner, that understands business owners. Business owners want to know how they can get the best value for the least amount of cost. So that’s what we need to do. I’m very much in favor of incentives for growing in areas where we can balance out the city, and that’s what I mean in my campaign on my website at votefordanny.com, where I talk about responsible growth in all areas of the city.
Candidates say they will represent their constituents. This means they need to know their constituents’ wishes and perspectives. What, in your experience prior to running for office, can you point to that tells us you are person who is in touch with your constituents?
As I stated in my opening statement, my vocation is geriatric care. That means that I work with families, helping them with their elderly parents navigate through the long-term care process, which is oftentimes not very easy. Throughout the business I’ve been able to interview, employ and create jobs — hundreds of people, both people making high salaries, marketing, sales people, administrative people and frontline CNA, certified nurse assistant caregivers…. It keeps me humble and keeps me in touch with those that maybe need an advance on their paycheck, maybe need a loan, maybe need a ride to work, maybe need a little bit of gas money. My wife is sitting in the audience. She and I, we’ve done this for eight years. It also puts us in touch with those who are grieving or those who have burdensome situations that are just beyond their control. I hope that answers that question.
How do you plan to include immigrants and refugee communities in the city council?
Great question. In our discussion, Jordan, in our interview, we talked about race relations and the diversity within Greensboro. It seems that we’re stuck in the 1980s when we talk about race relations; we still talk about black and white. Our Greensboro city schools superintendent [SIC] recently said that we have 100 ethnicities and nationalities and 88 dialects in our city schools. It’s unfortunate that on our boards and our commissions we do not have a more diverse face in leadership positions. We do not have the deaf or the blind, the gay or the lesbian, the brown or the Asian, or the Persian-American or the Indian-American or the Native American. They’re all in our community, but we are not bringing them forward with appointed positions, whether it’s boards or commissions, or even, unfortunately, sadly, they don’t want to — and maybe they can’t — to run for office. But as a city councilman, I will look aggressively to try to find those other people, groups to try to encourage them to step up. And I will ask the city council and those who are appointing people to boards and commissions to, let’s look at something more than just black and white.
Closing statement
One hundred and fifty years ago, John Motley Morehead, a great Greensboro resident, a North Carolina governor who is known as “the father of modern North Carolina,” he saw to it that railroad tracks came through Greensboro, as opposed to Asheboro, on the way from Raleigh to Charlotte. An advocate of sustained growth and bringing in business. A few years later Moses and Caesar Cone, helped by rail, set up business here so they could distribute those goods and products. And I think that we can do that again 150 years later. If we have leadership and vision we can lay the groundwork and get on the track for economic development with the Piedmont “aerotropolis.” As your city councilman, I will look for ways to reduce the tax burden. Right now if you move to Summerfield you can pay property taxes of zero. If you move to Oak Ridge, you pay a property tax of eight cents. If you move to Greensboro, one of the highest municipalities in North Carolina, you pay 63 cents for $100 of property tax. I will combine the Guilford County and Greensboro planning departments. I will ask that the sports authority commission… naming rights for the coliseum… And I want to be your city councilman. Thank you.
Triad Elections ’09
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)