INC NEWS - perhaps this issue is a different one...

[bragin at nc.rr.com]

As i read the article, tonight's vote is for a rezoning, which can certainly be rejected for any reason. Additionally, according to Ray Gronberg: "Rezonings under local and state law are legislative matters, which means that elected officials can reject an application for almost any reason. State law also allows people in most cities to file a formal "protest petition" that forces supporters to muster support from three-fourths of the city's governing board.

Neighbors of the Fairfield project have filed such a petition, which means at least six City Council members have to vote for the zoning for it to pass."

Barry Ragin
---- Melissa Rooney <mmr121570 at yahoo.com> wrote: 

=============
Well said, Randy. Over the years, there have been
numerous such cases down here in Rural/Suburban South
Durham, where the PC overwhelmingly voted against and
the governing bodies approved anyway...to the point
that members of my neighborhood listserv quite
literally couldn't believe the facts that I
presented....they said, 'what do we have a Planning
commission for, if we citizens then have to truck up
to City Hall in order to hope to be heard...and even
then it's just a hope.'

It's often argued that the gov't can't legally vote
against a development for one reason or another.
That's when I say, 'change the local ordinances to
reflect real citizens' concerns.'

Melissa

--- RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com> wrote:

> Reading in todays Herald Sun, I saw where City
> Council will be voting
> tonight on a new development in the Hillandale Road
> area. In it, the
> article stated that the Planning Commission (that's
> the citizen folks we
> keep talking about in these development equasions in
> wanting a NA or
> something else to get our voices heard) had voted
> 10-1 in favor of
> REJECTING the development proposal. But the article
> went on to say that
> City Council would probably approve it...
> 
> Well, it seems to me that our elected officials
> really are the ones who
> are at fault here if they do not listen to those in
> our community who are
> charged with dealing with development issues as the
> Planning Commission
> is. And as it is with every decision made it seems,
> regardless of what is
> suggested, Council always has the last say and can
> vote it either way
> regardless of the recommendations of the citizens
> who work tirelessly to
> make those recommendations. I can't see how having a
> NA (or what ever they
> would be called) could trump what ends up being the
> ultimate decision that
> Council, and Council only, has the power to make. If
> they don't want to
> listen to the Planning Commission, to whom do you
> think they'll listen?
> It's not like a 10-1 vote by them was a decision
> that one could read any
> other way but to reject the plan. It's not like a
> 6-5 vote where maybe
> some further study would be necessary.
> 
> It spits in the face of every citizen, when, after
> spending countless
> hours volunteering our time (this is the collective
> time spent by all
> citizens that sit on committees, commissions, and
> authorities in our
> community), making recommendations to do this or
> that, to have all of that
> time wasted when decisions are made that contradict
> those citizens
> efforts. Maybe if we'd all quit doing all of this
> volunteering for a
> awhile, we could send a message that someone needs
> to hear us! Otherwise
> it just seems as if we're all wasting our time on
> deaf ears...
> 
> RWP
> 27 Beverly
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> INC-list mailing list
> INC-list at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
> 



      
_______________________________________________
INC-list mailing list
INC-list at rtpnet.org
http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list