Methinks we protest too little
This week's column.
The Greensboro City Council will hear the case for and against protest petitions in less than two weeks.
Then it will say no.
I could be wrong. But if I were you, I wouldn’t bet against me.
Greensboro is the only major city in the state that does not allow citizens to use protest petitions to oppose new development in their neighborhoods. The provision allows citizens who live near a proposed development to request a special City Council vote. Simply put, it would raise the bar for approving a disputed rezoning.
If opponents of the zoning manage to produce signatures from owners of at least 5 percent of the adjoining land they would force a super majority (at least a 7-2 vote in favor) of the City Council to approve the rezoning.
The council will decide on Jan. 21 whether to ask Guilford County lawmakers to seek legislation that would revive protest petitions in Greensboro.
Mayor Yvonne Johnson said late last week that she has not made up her mind on the issue. So did council members Trudy Wade and Mary Rakestraw. “I want to hear what everybody has to say,” Johnson said.
Yet she added: “I don’t want to be detrimental as far bringing in businesses.”
Wade said she’ll approach the discussion with an open mind but questioned why one of the biggest advocates for protest petitions in Greensboro is a High Pointer, Keith Brown. “I want to know why it originated in High Point,” she said. Noting High Point’s luring away of the La-Z-Boy headquarters from Greensboro in 2006, Wade said she wanted to make sure Greensboro doesn’t lose a competitive edge.
Update: This e-mail came from Donna Newton of the Neighborhood Congress Saturday night:
"Allen, we had a great turnout for the Congress meeting this morning and attendees were more incensed than ever that Greensboro would have had this state right of redress taken from its residents with no record in Council minutes of a rationale for it. We can only conclude that since it was simply lumped with a group of items on the legislative agenda, it was not clear to those voting as to what they were doing."
The economic implications will loom large.
Said Marlene Sanford, president of the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition: “We’ve got a lot of people in a bad way,”
Of course, TREBIC vigorously fought protest petitions even when times were better. “Even if it weren’t for the horrible economy, we’d oppose them,” Sanford said.
If anything, she said, the General Assembly should rescind protest petition laws in other cities, not add one in Greensboro. “You can change the constitution with a smaller majority than that,” Sanford said of the required super-majority vote. She also believes the threshold for petition signatures is too low.
As for the council, it has greeted the notion of protest petitions with tepid interest ever since the idea resurfaced.
In May 2008, the legislation had an eager sponsor in Rep. Pricey Harrison of Greensboro. And the Guilford delegation was poised to add the issue to its legislative agenda. But the council never asked.
This, despite strong support for the legislation from such corners as the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress and the League of Women Voters of the Piedmont Triad. “It’s a right of recourse for citizens that was taken away from Greensboro for reasons no one understands,” said Donna Newton, adviser to the Neighborhood Congress.
Newton said she once expected the council to support the protest petition. Now she isn’t so sure. “It’s a justifiable concern that we don’t want to impede development,” Newton said. But she said the rest of the state’s cities aren’t rushing to rescind protest petitions simply because the economy soured.
She has a point. A bad development is a bad development, in good times and bad. Citizens’ right to be heard shouldn’t ebb and flow depending on the economy.
Neither Charlotte nor Raleigh, nor Winston-Salem nor High Point has seen the Apocalypse yet, but all have allowed protest petitions since before the invention of television.
Also, who among us is against businesses and jobs, especially now?
The right to protest a rezoning by petition in North Carolina was first granted in 1923. It was intended to help level the playing field between developers and citizens.
But for some reason, in Greensboro, we’re not worthy?
In 1971, the city asked for and received an exemption to that state law that allows protest petitions. Despite the sheer reasonableness of the law, we as a citizenry have been without that right ever since. Why?
If the 5 percent threshold is too low, change it (but not the super-majority vote). The law not only would empower citizens, but would encourage developers and citizens to collaborate.
Meanwhile, expect a big turnout on Jan. 21 in support of protest petitions, said Newton of the Neighborhood Congress. Even if the council says no on Jan. 21, she said, protest petition supporters then will go straight to the legislative delegation.
“I think people are not happy about this,” Newton said. “I don’t think they’re angry, but they are ticked off.”
Comments (11)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I wish you did deeper into the eminent domain laws in NC. I understand next to NJ we have the county's worst. I know it was voted down by the democrats in Raleigh to give the land owners any say in the stealing of their land.
If I remember right your paper was in agreement that folks should have no say so in the state stealing their land. Seems me and Mark Binker had a little go on this.
Posted on January 11, 2009 7:51 AM
"“You can change the constitution with a smaller majority than that,” -- Marlene "Constitutional Scholar I'm Not" Sanford
Wrong.
Posted on January 11, 2009 12:17 PM
That's all we need--more spurious "rights" that allow disaffected malcontents to impede the march of progress.
This is John C. Calhoun on steroids: 5% of some tiny "affected" minority (and I'm sure the courts will have a good time deciding who, precisely, is "affected"--see Will column) have the ability to radically rearrange the policies and operations of a democratically elected government. What if the other 95% want the Walgreen's, and 6 of 9 City Council members, along with the zoning board, agree? Too bad for them: they've been Nullified.
Posted on January 11, 2009 10:54 PM
Doug:
Not true. We opposed the Supreme Court ruling granting eminent domain powers even in the case of the government seizing land for use by private businesses.
Posted on January 12, 2009 10:25 AM
Brian:
I agree that the 5 percent may be too low.
On the other hand, if 95 percent of residents agreed with a rezoning, they could voice their views at a council meeting before any vote is taken.
The council does pay attention to numbers.
Posted on January 12, 2009 10:28 AM
it would have been nice to get a call on my motives , thanks for asking.
Posted on January 12, 2009 1:41 PM
Hi, Keith. Sorry your views weren't included.
You're welcome to explain your motives here and now.
Posted on January 12, 2009 1:52 PM
see http://greensborometro.blogspot.com/2009/01/
wade-has-choice-words-for-keith-brown.html
Posted on January 12, 2009 2:28 PM
Allen,
It is a total injustice to the citizens of Greensboro that they had this exemption shoved secretly into a bill back in 1971 to screw them in the zoning process.
Who in this whole scheme of things has used the Protest Petition , Sutton Place Neighborhood Association where I live in High Point against a major developer. It was a case last year off of friendly avenue where this started and it all took off from there. Robbie Perkins was the savior for fellow mover and shaker Mike Winstead Guilford County Commissioner.A good friend of mine was a part of that case and I mentioned to him that if he had lived in any other city even ride down the road 5 miles you could have used a protest petition.
Our coalition got together to make a difference and here we are a year later.
No thanks to you and your prediction , this has always been a state issue. January 21, 2009 in front of Greensboro City Council we want their support for this issue but State Rep. Pricey Harrison will introduce a bill no matter what.
Posted on January 12, 2009 4:20 PM
Having Protest Petitions on the books has not hurt jobs or development in cities like Raleigh, Charlotte, Winston or every city in Guilford County.
How about this look all around Greensboro for example:
High Point has PROTEST PETITIONS
Jamestown has PROTEST PETITIONS
Oak Ridge has PROTEST PETITIONS
Summerfield has PROTEST PETITIONS
Pleasant Garden has PROTEST PETITIONS
Gibsonville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Let's also take a look at our state to see who has PROTEST PETITIONS
Charlotte has PROTEST PETITIONS
Durham has PROTEST PETITIONS
Raleigh has PROTEST PETITIONS
Cary has PROTEST PETITIONS
Fayetteville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Winston Salem has PROTEST PETITIONS
Asheville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Chapel Hill has PROTEST PETITIONS
Concord has PROTEST PETITIONS
Gastonia has PROTEST PETITIONS
Greenville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Jacksonville has PROTEST PETITIONS
Rocky Mount has PROTEST PETITIONS
Wilmington has PROTEST PETITIONS
It is time for neighborhoods all over Greensboro to say to the Greensboro City Council enough is enough and to deny us the right to a Protest Petition in the zoning process is a
TOTAL INJUSTICE TO THE CITIZENS OF GREENSBORO.
Posted on January 12, 2009 6:25 PM
Allen: "if 95 percent of residents agreed with a rezoning, they could voice their views at a council meeting before any vote is taken.
The council does pay attention to numbers."
Well, let's hope at least 7 of them do, since only 6 of 9 wouldn't be enough to thwart the will of the 5% superminority of whinging luddites who have grand plans for other peoples' property, plans doubtlessly involving free-range tofu farms or other scenic, environmentally loving uses. So what would you jack that number up to? How about 50% (to approximate the mechanics of normal democracy)?
Posted on January 13, 2009 12:48 AM