News-Record.com

At Monday's High Point City Council meeting. Shugart Management is proposing a 55-home development on about 20 acres straddling the northeast Davidson/Forsyth County border.

City planners and the city Planning and Zoning Commission have recommended rejecting the project because the land is too far from the city's edge to annex it into the city. Among the issues, according to planners: the proposed development is 1.5 miles from roads used by city vehicles, which would make it tough to provide city services like police and fire protection.

As always, the fun and games begin at 4:45 p.m. inside council chambers on the third floor of City Hall at 211 S. Hamilton St.

For a look at the full agenda, look here.

(From the office of Greensboro Rep. Howard Coble)
APRIL 2, 2005

MOTHER OF CONGRESSMAN COBLE DIES

(GREENSBORO, N.C.)----The elderly mother of U.S. Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC) died today, Saturday, April 2, 2005. Mrs. Johnnie Holt Coble was 95 years old when she died in her sleep this morning at her residence at Friends Homes on New Garden Road in Greensboro.

Johnnie Holt was born to John and Elma Holt in rural Guilford County on December 7, 1909. She was graduated from Nathaniel Greene High School. She was married to the late Joe H. Coble for more than 65 years. "Uncle Joe" Coble - as he was affectionately known - died in 1999 at the age of 91. Both were lifetime members of Alamance Presbyterian Church, and Mrs. Coble was a member of the Ruth Millard Circle.

Congressman Coble, the co-chairman of the Congressional Textile Caucus, often mentions his mother when discussing his role as a key supporter of the textile and apparel industries. Rep. Coble proudly informs those listening that his mother was employed by Standard Hosiery Mill of Alamance, and Blue Bell, Inc., in Greensboro, and because of her working career, that he understood from an early age the importance of the textile industry in North Carolina's economy and history.

In addition to Rep. Coble, Mrs. Holt is survived by her other son, Ray Coble, a well-known area Realtor, and his wife, Barbara, their four children, Dr. Ray Coble of High Point, Mark Coble of Raleigh, Bryan Coble of Greensboro, and Amanda Ratliff of Greensboro, along with nine great-grandchildren. In addition, Mrs. Coble is survived by a sister, Helen Euliss of Burlington, and a brother, Gordon Holt of Greensboro.

Visitation will be Monday, April 4, from 7-8:30 p.m. at Forbis and Dick North Elm Chapel on North Elm Street in Greensboro. The funeral will be Tuesday, April 5, at 11 a.m. at Alamance Presbyterian Church, 4000 Presbyterian Road in Greensboro. Internment will follow in the church cemetery. The family requests that in lieu of flowers that memorials be made to the Alamance Presbyterian Church Capital Building Fund.

This morning, we write about the legal question of whether local governments in North Carolina can offer health and other benefits to the unmarried domestic partners of their employees.

While there are many religious, moral, business and practical reasons for or against such policies, the following are examinations of the legal ramifications of offering the benefits.

Greensboro's request: (read the entire letter here)Deputy City Attorney Becky Peterson-Buie asks Attorney General Roy Cooper for an opinion on whether the city can legally offer the benefits.

Charlotte's decision: The state's largest city explored offering the benefits in 2003, but city attorneys ruled in this memorandum that the city wasn't given the authority by state lawmakers to offer benefits to people other than employees' dependents.

That reasoning was disputed by proponents of the benefits, who pointed out that while state law doesn't specifically say cities can do it, it also doesn't say they can't. You can read the Mecklenburg Gay & Lesbian Political Action Committee's response here.

Durham County: After a long debate there, Durham County officials took a middle route, offering benefits only to the same-sex partners of employees, not heterosexual ones. In this memo, County Attorney S.C. Kitchen writes that as a part of becoming eligible for the benefit, the employee would have to affirm that he or she was living with his or her significant other as a couple. According to state law, a man and a woman living together in such a manner is a Class 2 misdemeanor, the crime of "fornication and adultery."

The same prohibition does not apply to homosexual couples, because state law does not make it a crime for two people of the same sex to live together as a couple. Kitchen notes that while sexual relations between two people of the same sex is illegal, a "crime against nature" as the law states, merely applying for the benefits wouldn't require a homosexual couple to admit to breaking the law.

While reporting about the city's move to annex an eight-mile stretch of the Urban Loop, several opponents have compared the annexation to a "mouse tail" or a finger (Scoop is not sure which one). While Greensboro has picked up parcels here and there, this annexation would be the longest "appendage" of the city sticking out into Guilford County. Click here to see a map of the proposed annexation area.

In the interest of perspective, Scoop looked around to other cities and gave the following awards for innovative city boundary design:

First Place, Shotgun Award: Tobaccoville (Forsyth County)


This golden leaf town north of Winston-Salem seems to have left a lot of room for growth. Within.

Second Place, Shotgun Award: Walkertown (Forsyth County)


Also in Forsyth County, Walkertown also has peculiar appendages and large gaps. Now you're in, now you're out...

First Place, Alien Crop Symbol Award: Mt. Gilead (Montgomery County)


Presumably concerned with symmetry, this small town south of Greensboro only has two small dimples in their perfect circle.

First Place, Thin Blue Line Award: Cary (Wake County)

Like Greensboro, Cary annexed the width of two roads, Ten Ten and West Lake, to reach a development it wanted to bring into the city.

The city council is scheduled to vote on the loop annexation at their meeting Tuesday. It is items 14-16 on the agenda.

That's the question High Point City Council will ponder now and in the coming weeks as they grapple with how to pay for $73.65 million in bond projects approved by voters last November.

Council members took a look at two options at a Tuesday briefing: raise taxes 3.9 cents per $100 of assessed value next year (fiscal 2006) or raise taxes a total of 5.1 cents per $100 of assessed value from fiscal 2007 through fiscal 2009. For the owner of a $200,000 house, that would add $78 or $102 to their tax bill, depending on which option is chosen. The upfront option costs less because the city would be able to invest some of the money earmarked for the bonds before spending it to issue the bonds.

My full story is here.

So let me pose this question to my fellow High Point residents: which option do you prefer and why?

This afternoon, Greensboro's Community Resource Board met to recommend how the city will dole out $907,793 in federal housing grants. Every year, the CRB makes a recommendation to the City Council about which programs to fund in the annual budget, which is approved in June.

The city asks housing developers and nonprofits to put in their proposals, and the board decides which ones will get to drink from the limited kettle of money.

This year, the CRB recommended funding for the following projects:
-$506,131 for an affordable rent housing complex off McKnight Mill Road called Windhill Court. The money would help leverage state and federal tax credits to build another 64 units there. It is being developed by Affordable Housing Management, Inc.
-$291,662 to subsidize down payments for about 23 homes to be built by Habitat for Humanity.
-$110,000 to Housing Greensboro Inc. to buy and repair two homes, which will be resold to Habitat for Humanity for affordable housing.

Losing out are three requests: another 46-unit affordable rent housing project directed by Beacon Management, $490,000 for site development costs at a Habitat for Humanity development along Flemingfield Road and $45,900 for operational support for Housing Greensboro Inc.

The council will vote on the recommendations on May 3, when they will have the option of adopting or changing the CRB's recommendation.

Scoop was scanning through a database of Greensboro business licenses when it came upon a very interesting item:

Category: Escort/Dating Service
Business Name: Confidential Affairs
Address: 124 Horneytown Road

Update: Housing Director Andy Scott said the city plans to board up the property on Tuesday. Contrary to reports by the Fire Department, the complex is still legally owned by the St. James Housing Board, the nonprofit affiliated with the St. James Baptist Church. The city council voted to foreclose on the property in January, but the property hasn't legally changed hands yet.

Fire investigators said squatters broke into and set fire to part of the St. James Homes II apartment complex Sunday evening. The ill-fated apartments are soon to be owned by the City of Greensboro after the original owners, the nonprofit St. James Housing Board, failed to keep the property maintained and occupied. The city loaned St. James nearly $1 million to fix up the apartments, a debt that was written off when the city decided to foreclose earlier this year.

The fire only did minimal damage to one of the three buildings, and the apartments are officially vacant. However, a quick inspection of the property found that most of the apartments in the three buildings had their windows broken, wide open or the doors were not closed. Local Ordinance Chief Danny Nall said that despite their condition, the city lifted all the condemnation orders on the property right before the city decided to foreclose. Therefore, there was no legal requirement that the property be kept secure, as is normally the case with abandoned buildings.

Read more about the fire here.

If a N.C. House committee gets its way, the Lexington Barbecue Festival will be "the official food festival" of North Carolina.

This bill passed the House state government committee unanimously Wednesday morning after a bit of diplomacy so as not to aggravate those folks in the vinegary east of the state.

The bill had originally declared the event "the official barbecue festival" of the North Carolina. The sponsors changed the name so as to avoid the appearance that the legislature was endorsing one BBQ style over another.

"We didn't want to get into a battle over whose barbecue is best," said Rep. Hugh Holliman, a Democrat from Lexington. A Senate version of the bill hasn't gotten the once over yet, but the House bill should head to the floor Thursday or next week.

House Bill 1006 is headed to a vote after getting a unanimous recommendation by the State Government committee today.

The bill, co-sponsored by Greensboro Democrat Rep. Earl Jones, would require companies doing business with the state to search their records for evidence that they profited from slavery. The company would then certify that they couldn't find evidence that they participated in the slave trade or disclose documents showing they had.

Jones said the bill was modeled on a similar California law that led insurance companies to acknowledge their involvement in slavery. The goal, Jones said, would be to prompt those companies to either make apologies or prompt them to donate to or participate in local nonprofits that benefit the African American community. However, the bill doesn't require any specific sort of redress.

There's no Senate version of the bill yet.

Back in February, our cops reporter Eric J.S. Townsend wrote about Greensboro Police Chief David Wray's request for 40 more police officers in next year's budget:

It's the answer top Greensboro police officials often give for crime-related questions: "TSET." Why did the homicide rate decline last year? In part because of TSET, short for Tactical Special Enforcement Teams. Why have fewer complaints been lodged about drug activity? TSET. Where do we want to focus future resources? Again, TSET. As elected leaders begin debating the city's annual budget, police Chief David Wray has made clear he wants to expand not only the unit's size, but also its mission. Doing so requires 16 additional officers, included among the 40 new sworn positions sought by the agency in the coming year. TSET's expansion is the centerpiece of Wray's request to City Council.

In response, the head of the Greensboro Police Officers Association, Eddy Summers, wrote about how Wray's plans wouldn't actually put more badges on the street answering 911 calls or patrolling. This is an e-mail sent to city council members:

I was recently interviewed by Eric Townsend with the News & Record concerning the article he did on February 14th concerning Chief Wray's request for 40 new positions within the Department. I had first heard Chief Wray's pitch for additional officers as I sat in the January 25th Budget meeting to Council.

For those of you who haven't heard, Chief Wray has asked for 16 positions for two new TSET squads, 9 positions for SOD/ Traffic, 8 positions for two additional CRT officers per district, 3 positions for the newly expanded walking squad (Center City Resource Team), 2 positions for training, one position for a forensic computer detective and one new lieutenant position as a "special projects coordinator."

My statement to Eric went something like this.
Last year Chief Wray went to the City Council requesting 100 additional officers to be added to the ranks. He justified the request with the manpower study that showed our response time of 7 minutes 51 seconds for Priority 1 calls. It also showed Greensboro officers devoting only 45 minutes in an 11-hour shift to proactive patrolling. Both are far less than officers in Raleigh, Durham and Winston Salem. The study also stated adding 32 officers would increase proactive patrolling by 10%. Greensboro also had fewer officers per capita than those cities.

Next Tuesday, the council has scheduled a discussion over whether to endorse the Greensboro Truth and Community Reconciliation Project. After a month or two of emails asking the council to endorse the investigation into the 1979 Morningside Homes shooting, emails are trickling in from those that are opposed to the TRC, as it is referred to.

In the "Don't Endorse" pile, we have Jack McIntire, who says "from what I have read in the newspaper it does not appear that the project has drawn much local public support so I guess they want your endorsement to give them some kind of validation."

And from John Tasker, we have an email explaining why the mayor and other TRC opponents have done a bad job explaining their opposition:
"I am so sorry the mayor and others picked such a weak argument as describing this committe as making the city look bad, or the possiblity of creating liability. Those arguments fall squarely into the hands of those good debaters because they are subjective arguments. Not only are they too subjective, if making the city look bad is one of the goals, in order to obtain national publicity, then those kind of arguments are like putting the rabbit in the briar patch."

In the "Please Endorse" pile, we have Terry Austin writing to the mayor "as one white Quaker to another" asking him to support the investigation

"Racism is not over in Greensboro (or anywhere else). Just because many white people do not recognize it does not mean it doesn't exist. In general, you know that women can spot sexism that men are oblivious to, people with handicaps notice the barriers that we temporarily able-bodied people don't, etc. Similarly, people of color are a more reliable guide on whether racism is a factor than white people are. Unfortunately, we white people don't know that we don't know, and think our perspective about racism is equally valid. "

We also have Suzanne Plihcik, who writes, " The Truth and Reconcilation Process is a step toward the common understanding and healing we need to move forward reversing the effects of that which has divided us."

I'll post the entire messages in the "continue reading" part of this post.

The House passed several amendments to the High Point City charter today (HB 1028) that will next be considered by the Senate.

What do the changes do? Why don't I let former council member and current Rep. Laura Wiley, a High Point Republican, tell you:

Click here for Wiley 'splaining things to the rookie legislative reporter.

Scoop has received several phone calls about Guilford County's proposed noise ordinance. We wrote about the proposal, which is now available here.

For all you noisemakers out there, the ordinance would regulate car stereos, barking dogs and loudspeakers, among other things.

County commissioners tabled the proposal at their April 7 meeting. They'll take it up again at a May 5 public hearing.

Greensboro City Councilman and attorney Don Vaughan this week pointed me to a state Court of Appeals decision he said might invalidate the city's decision to annex and zone an 8-mile stretch of the Urban Loop south of the city.

Vaughan voted for the annexation but against the zoning of the highway two weeks back after questioning whether the city had the legal authority to take in the ribbon of land without the permission of the state. Landowners along the loop suspected the move was designed to prevent billboards and other commercial buildings from being built along the road. The city zoned the highway "residential," and a lot of things like billboards or factories can't be within a certain distance from "residential" land, even though it's already a highway.

You can read the entire decision here. The court decides whether the Rocky Mount Board of Adjustment (set up by the city) has the authority to tell the Nash-Rocky Mount School System (schools are considered state property) whether it could use a plot of land for a bus parking lot.

The judges on the court say that while cities are allowed to control the use of land and buildings held privately, they are only given a say in where and how the state puts its buildings. The court says that cities zoning powers don't apply to state owned property unless the state is putting up a building. Under that reasoning, the city could do nothing to stop the state from using their land to build a parking lot, landfill, runway, or say an interstate highway loop.

The nut of this case for Greensboro is that the court says that the city can't zone a highway. Therefore, if a landowner feels injured by the city zoning the land, they might sue arguing the city exceeded its authority. Vaughan said he may raise the issue at the next council meeting.

Update: The legislature may have fixed this pickle when it changed the statute effective last October to give cities zoning powers over state buildings and land. The Rocky Mount case was decided based on the old language, so it's not clear whether the outcome would be different under the new law.

Guilford County commissioners will talk about buying the Independence Center, a downtown Greensboro office building, in closed session at Thursday night's business meeting. The entire agenda is available here.

In December, the board authorized County Manager Willie Best to pay as much as $4 million for the building at Market and Eugene streets.

The plan was to move the tax and planning departments there from the County Courthouse. The county also wanted the building to house the tax collections unit, which now sits in a county-owned complex at Eugene and Lindsay streets. That property, located just across the street from First Horizon Park, could eventually be sold to a developer.

But the plan hit a hiccup when mold was reported in the Independence Center. Best said in late March that the county was testing the building to determine the extent of the problem.

Available for tonight's High Point City Council meeting.

The agenda includes a possible end to the debate over proposed changes to Piedmont Crossing, a 277-acre development in north High Point. Neighbors (and a few City Council members) have objected to one change: allowing offices with second-floor housing along the west side of Barrow Road near Willard Dairy Road.

Neighbors are concerned about increased traffic and the size of the buildings. They also don't believe offices should be located in a spot where they'd be surrounded on three sides by homes.

Developer Faith Properties has volunteered a host of restrictions on the offices, including a limit on the size of buildings. Faith Properties anticipates having an entrance to the development at the intersection of Barrow and Willard Dairy roads and believes the offices would serve as a transition into the residential section of the development.

No one seems to have a problem with any of the other proposed changes, and at least three City Council members - Latimer Alexander, Owen Strickland and John Faircloth - want to vote on the offices separately so they can vote against them while voting in favor of the rest of the development changes.

Outside agencies will also make their pitches for city funding in the 2005-2006 budget during a public hearing.

The meeting starts at 4:45 p.m., with public hearings kicking off at 5:30 p.m. If you want a good seat for the floor show, you may want to come early - with furniture market in town, parking anywhere other than the City Hall parking lots will be tough.

Tuesday update: The offices proposed by Faith Properties have been removed in favor of condos and townhomes. My full story is here.

Knowing that many of our readers were likely tucking in Tuesday night and missed the Greensboro City Council's debate on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Scoop has made audio available for you to sample anytime.

We've parsed the nearly two-hour debate into parts so you can pick what you would like to listen. We'll list the files in the order they took place Tuesday night. The files are in .mp3 format and can be saved to your computer or listened to live.

First are the nine statements made by council members initially on the issue:

- Keith Holliday: (18:39, 3.2MB) Holliday voted to oppose the project.

- Don Vaughan: (1:12, 212kb) Vaughan voted to oppose the project

- Yvonne Johnson: (7:23, 1.2MB) Johnson voted to support the project.

- Claudette Burroughs-White: (4:54, 862kb) Burroughs-White voted to support the project.

- Dianne Bellamy-Small: (7:10, 1.2MB) Bellamy-Small voted to support the project.

- Tom Phillips: (1:41, 296kb) Phillips voted to oppose the project.

- Florence Gatten: (12:44, 2.18MB) Gatten voted to oppose the project.

- Sandy Carmany: (2:15, 397kb) Carmany voted to oppose the project.

- Robbie Perkins: (2:56, 516kb) Perkins voted to oppose the project.

One of the speakers from the floor was the Rev. Nelson Johnson, who organized the "Death to the Klan" rally that was involved in the 1979 incident. His statement is here.

Finally, Burroughs-White moved that the council adopt a resolution that didn't specifically endorse the project but called upon the city to remember the events of 1979 and encourage participation in the project.

The debate that ensues can be heard here.

We'll have more on the Truth and Reconciliation debate in tomorrow's edition of the paper.

(The following is a press release from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 21, 2005
TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION THANKS CITY COUNCIL

GREENSBORO, N.C. - The Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission, whose history-making work has been the subject of local debate culminating with the City Council's action on Tuesday, April 19, remains committed to completing its work with transparency and impartiality.

The Council's 6-3 vote against endorsing the Commission's work of seeking the truth and working for reconciliation around the shootings of Nov. 3, 1979, will do nothing to stop it.

"We deeply appreciate the vote and accept the enormous challenge it represents," said Bob Peters, Commission co-chair. "We are challenged to more effectively communicate to the City Council and the community about the work we are doing and the spirit in which we are doing it, and to produce an end result that will speak for itself."

The Commission assures the community, in response to concerns raised by Councilwoman Florence Gatten, that answers about our finances are readily available from members of the Commission, its staff and the Community Foundation of Greater Greensboro, which manages our funds. Also, our research team is completely impartial and interested in hearing from as many people as possible and from all points of view.

You know the Guilford County commissioners aren't getting along too well when it takes them two tries to pass the consent agenda.

But that's what happened Thursday, when the board's five Republicans voted "no" on the first motion to pass the agenda, normally a group of non-controversial items that are voted upon together at the start of a meeting. The majority Democrats wanted to approve the agenda but faced one problem - they were without Melvin "Skip" Alston and had no numerical edge.

The 5-5 vote meant that the motion failed.

The ensuing argument between Democratic chairman Bruce Davis and Republican Billy Yow covered familiar territory. In this case, Yow and other Republicans were miffed at Davis for pulling an item off the consent agenda without consulting them first.

"Mr. Chairman, this was done purposefully, for an example," Yow said.

He talked about a "level of respect" before Davis banged the gavel.

"If you're going to speak to the motion, speak to the motion," Davis told Yow. "If you're going to take your cheap shots, then I would prefer you take them somewhere else.

"But this is a business meeting for the citizens of Guilford County, and to play games with the citizens is unethical and should not be allowed in this meeting or any other meeting for the purpose of making your point."

Later, a motion died for lack of a second, which was noted by Yow.

"You're not chairing the meeting, Mr. Yow," Davis said.

"I oughta be," Yow replied. "We'd get something done."

Davis called for a five-minute recess. When the meeting resumed, the consent agenda passed 6-4 as Republican Mike Winstead joined the Democrats.

I had a request from a reader for the document discussed in our story on Saturday, "Two, not five, headed hockey ownership team." I've posted a PDF of the "Confidential Offering Information" here.

We obtained the document from the N.C. Secretary of State, which regulates securities offerings. More discussion of the story at Greensboro is Talking and Gate City.

The High Point City Council will get together today at 4 p.m. to continue their discussion of how to pay for $73.65 million in bonds approved last November by voters.

At a meeting earlier this month, council members were presented with two options: one tax hike next year or smaller increases over three years.

The first option would raise taxes 3.9 cents per $100 of assessed value next year. For the owner of a $150,000 home, that would add $58.50 to their tax bill.

The second option would raise taxes a total of 5.1 cents per $100 of assessed value from fiscal 2007 through fiscal 2009. That plan would add $76.50 to the tax bill of the owner of a $150,000 home.

Increasing taxes upfront would cost taxpayers less because the city could invest the money and accumulate interest to offset the cost of issuing the bonds.

All the voter-approved bond projects are scheduled for completion by the end of June 2009.

I'll have a full report in tomorrow's paper and online about their discussions.

That's the question High Point City Council will wrestle with as they determine how to pay for the $73.65 million in bond projects approved by voters last November. The projects include new recreation centers, several road widening projects and a renovated and expanded library.

My report from last night's City Council briefing on how to pay for the bond projects is here.

City staff recommended a 3.4-cent tax increase next year to begin paying for the bonds and building the projects over seven years. That option would add $51 to the tax bill of the owner of a $150,000 home.

Other options presented to council would postpone tax increases to future years and spread the increases over several years - but the tax increase would be higher.

Which option do you prefer? A tax increase next year or tax hikes spread out over several years in the future?

Students at Guilford County's many institutions of higher learning may have another number to remember if a bill, HB 387, becomes law. It passed the N.C. House Tuesday afternoon and is expected to cruise on through the Senate. The change would take effect in the Fall 2007 semester.

So why stop using the federally issued 9-didget numbers to identify students? Class? Anyone? Bueller?

Well, one of the big reasons is to curb identity theft. Student ID numbers are used in a number of places - like identification cards that can go missing - increasing the chance they could fall into the wrong hands and exposing the students in question to trouble with crooks.

So for all you students out there: Can you handle one more number? Do you think this change is needed? Is your student ID number something different from your SSN already? Take me to school via the comments or e-mail links below.

We here at Scoop tend to be consumed by politics and stuff like like tax rates and budgets. We don't take enough time to stop and smell the roses or, say, the Venus flytraps.

You heard me. Apparently, it's time to pay homage to the insect-eating plant if you're the NC Senate.

And to give the flytrap it's due, may we present Senate Bill 116, sponsored by Sen. William Purcell of Laurinburg.

It would make the Venus Flytrap the official carnivorous plant of North Carolina. The full Senate is scheduled debate the bill Wednesday.

Something becomes the official state whatever by getting added to the list of items contained in Chapter 145 of the General Statutes, where you can also find the official state mammal, shell, tartan, historic boat, dog and two official state watermelon festivals.

And yes, North Carolina even has an official state insect: the honeybee.

For all you lottery watchers out there: the Senate committee handling that chamber's version of the bill met this morning but took no action. After hearing from a smorgasbord of lobbyists and one lottery industry official Sen. Tony Rand gaveled the meeting over. Rand, a Democrat from Fayetteville, said he expected a lottery bill to take a couple more weeks to get done.

Meanwhile, Sen. Phil Berger, an Eden Republican and the Senate minority leader, had this to say about the lottery bill's prospects: Click here for audio. Berger is on the lottery committee.

"If I had money for every time I've been told a lie, we would not have to ask for appropriations." - N.C. Elections Director Gary Bartlett, speaking Wednesday to the House Election Law and Campaign Finance Reform committee

Apparently those scoundrels in South Carolina passed a state law that declares Shagging and Clogging as their official state dance.

Not to be outdone, the North Carolina Senate has just done the same thing, asking the state House to concur.

"This is really a declaration of war with South Carolina," said Sen. Walter Dalton, a Rutherfordton Democrat. "They are not only stealing our heritage, they are making millions of dollars off that."

South Carolina, it seems, regularly holds clogging and shagging festivals.

"The shag was invented in North Carolina on Carolina beach," Dalton told his fellow Senators Wednesday. "We need to reclaim our heritage."
Senate Bill 128 joins that fight. It will next go to the House.

By the way, Senate Bill 116 is also headed to the House. That bill would make the Venus flytrap North Carolina's official carnivorous plant.

Both passed 47-0.

(This email was sent from Greensboro City Councilwoman Claudette Burroughs-White to the rest of the council last Thursday. More on this topic here)

I have found the feedback via newspaper, community comments and Sandy's Blog to be very interesting. There seems to be an assumption that I was a part of an agreement not to move this matter further. Which is not the case. I met with Keith last week and endorsed the idea of a win-win resolution. I left the meeting with the impression that this resolution would be discussed with other Council members. I was never contacted again and came to the Council meeting Tuesday expecting to vote on the resolution. It was just before the meeting that I found that this was not the case. I advised the Mayor at that point that I would move to vote on the issue. Your gentleman's agreement was presumed and I am concerned that Sandy cannot trust me and that others of you who have verbalized that to the News & Record, etc. That being the case, it's unfortunate. I am not aware of trust being a factor when people vote their opinion. It's always been my choice and I never comment negatively when persons don't agree, that's your right. I will move forward as always, hearing your concerns, sharing feelings, but always doing what I think is the right thing for me and my constituents.

The record will show that quite often we do vote along racial lines when it comes to sensitive issues involving social challenges. And Tom, I am always thankful for the vote on the landfill, but I do remember the years it took to get there. At 65 years old, I also live the history of disparity and division. That history still prevails in many ways. I am always bothered when that notion is rejected. It would be nice to acknowledge it so people could move forward. It's hard to resolve challenges if people refuse to acknowledge them and it's hurtful to be discounted because your experience and perceptions are different. Thus Greesnboro has to deal with this.

Again, I believe: