[Durham INC] last thoughts on the Meals Tax
Reyn Bowman
Reyn at Durham-cvb.com
Fri Jan 9 06:56:37 EST 2009
Randy, I think everyone gets your point.
But what you don't seem to accept is that it would have been impossible for them to mimic the outcome without a crystal ball or some expensive tracking polls.
Current events impacted the outcome...not popularity. That is clear because before the sudden and unpredicted downturn, scientific polls showed the measure with nearly the reverse result.
You'll see next time it is on the ballot. But judging INC for not being clairvoyant is something people are free to do but they made the best decision they could with full information...that's what leaders do
-----Original Message-----
From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org] On Behalf Of RW Pickle
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 12:45 AM
To: inc-list at durhaminc.org
Subject: [Durham INC] last thoughts on the Meals Tax
If you go and look at the votes that were cast (you can do it online via
the Board of Elections website), and you match up the precincts with the
neighborhoods of INC (for some, not all), you'll see that very few members
of INC represented their neighborhoods. Their neighborhoods (as voters)
didn't support it. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, it may be that
the Associations of INC really do not represent the majority of any
particular neighborhood. In some cases, they represent 10% or less of the
neighborhood. So how is it fair to say they represent any neighborhood,
when in fact they do not? They can't. Their association represents only a
small minority of their respective neighborhood and can't possibly
represent all of it as HOA's do. I believe this is why there was such a
difference. It may even be that the Boards of these Associations are out
of touch with their neighborhood...
It's easy to see why most of those (see Bill's list) who supported the tax
did so; they would have directly benefited from the passing of the tax.
Even the print media who supported it would have generated more revenue
from the spending of those listed. But INC, we didn't have a dog in that
race. They wanted INC behind it because of what INC has come to stand for
over time; a unified voice of the citizenry. The citizenry wasn't behind
it, but somewhere in the process, that never made it to those who are
charged to represent them, and never made it to INC (or vice versa).
That's the point here. You can rationalize it any way you want, but it is
what it is and ended up the way it did because those citizens voted the
way they did. INC on the other hand went the other way...
I didn't ask many folks how they voted, but those that I did opposed the
tax. I voted against it and I sit on the committee (CCIP; representing
INC) that would have seen the biggest benefit from it. Every year we go
through the budget process with the departments of the City, Budget and
Finance, and the 26 other Durham citizens representing a slew of other
organizations (CAN, the PAC's, Duke, NCCU, DDI, etc.). And if you think
INC stuff moves slow... But I hope to get 10 minutes sometime in the
future at a monthly meeting so I can tell you what we have done in the
last 3.5 years that I've been involved (maybe I can stretch it for 10
minutes with Q&A...). Like I said, when you're working with government,
there is no reason to get in a hurry because they are not. Long range
planning is just that. Twenty years really isn't considered long range
just to give you some idea. What we worked on for this budget cycle we
hope will bear fruit in 10-15 years. So as you begin to see, this is a
slow process.
Progress is slow, but we've made some substantial strides in the process.
And the funds raised by the tax would have gone toward the capital
improvement projects we look at every year (or at least some of the
money). Last year we had about $30M and that would have only gotten us
through 19 of our top rated projects (17 of our projects were in the
City's top 20 just so you can see that we're all on the same page; CCIP
and City staff). But that left us short by about the same amount it does
every year; $90-110M. So the tax would have helped close that gap. Most of
those organizations that supported the tax were somewhere past the 19th
project (on a two page list of them) and would have been funded out of
that tax pool (over time I guess).
It's easy to see why they would be for it, but my reasons for not voting
for it were simple. I don't mind a new tax if it is directed toward a
specific use; this wasn't. It had a broad paint brush with no specific
use. It had no sunset clause; it could have gone on forever and even
increased in percentage of collection over time. And lastly, the folks who
would have to bear the burden of collecting it didn't want it; they saw it
as a fly in their soup. It's easy to see why voters thought it was a food
tax because it was; prepared food. Meals... food; that's a duck that looks
like the same duck. I don't think the opposition ever said ALL food would
see the tax. But you'd have us believe that that the voters couldn't see
what they were talking about. That rotisserie chicken from Harris Teeter I
get on Sunday, that slice of pizza at Costco when I go there to shop, that
Loco Pop on a hot sunny stroll through downtown, my favorite bread at the
church bake sale; those as well as your meals at any bar/restaurant in
town. It was a food tax... It walked like a duck, quacked like a duck, so
everyone saw it as the duck it was. To say anyone muddled the waters by
calling it what it wasn't is just an excuse (and a poor one at that). And
to think that voters were confused and those who come to INC meeting are
more "knowledgeable" is giving very little credit to the citizenry for
being able to think for themselves. Or you could blame it on the
"knowledgeable" folks of INC for keeping it to themselves about what a
good thing it was (since it was overwhelmingly supported) and not being
the messengers they should be to their hoods. But the fact that >73% voted
against it is still there. Maybe the <27% who voted for it are just those
folks "in the know" who supported it or those folks on the list (Bill's
listed supporters) who might get some of the cash from it. The only time
before the vote I listened to anything about it, it was an "in the know"
messenger who just didn't know what he was talking about. His was a poor
message...
Perhaps with the new leadership, looking back at the history and charting
a path to our future, INC will once again begin to focus on it's core
values. INC once was the group that directed the leadership of this City
in decision making that made it a better place for all citizens; for some
items and against others. Maybe it can get back to it's roots... Hardly an
Executive Board meeting went by (when I was involved) that I didn't stress
the need for some sort of resolution that the delegates could engage their
own neighborhoods in. At least that way, it looked like INC was doing
something positive to make our City a better place to live. City Council
and County Commission vote on issues every month they meet. There's no
reason (except we've slipped away from what INC once was) why INC couldn't
do the same thing.
RWP
27 Beverly
>
> Randy is right that most government stuff is so slow, there is certainly no
> need to slow it down.
>
> Everyone at that meeting will attest to a better explanation of the vote at
> hand than I provided below.
> There was no change of process, just the utilization of a rarely used
tool
> that INC has always had in the box.
> It allowed the proponents of the Meal Tax to add INC's name to a long
list
> of 31 organizations, so the vote didn't carry earth shaking
consequences.
>
> Regardless of how big an issue is, our process is extremely important,
as
> Randy points out, and is (as stated) one of the reasons I accepted a
seat
> on
> the board again.
>
> There was no deviation from process of the Meals Tax vote, but Randy is not
> wrong to scratch his head at the disparity of the INC unanimous vote,
and
> the
> results of the general election.
>
> Wonder what these other organizations thought of the outcome.
>
>
> Organizations Endorsing the Prepared Meals Tax
> African American Dance Ensemble
> American Tobacco Trail Group - Triangle Rails To Trails
> Board of Trustees of the Carolina Theatre of Durham Incorporated
Cultural Master Plan Advisory Board
> Downtown Durham, Inc.
> Duke Chronicle
> Durham Appearance Advocacy Group
> Durham Arts Council
> Durham Art Guild
> Durham Central Park, Inc.
> Durham Civic Center Authority
> Durham County Stadium Authority
> Durham Open Space and Trails Commission
> Durham Savoyards
> Durham Tourism Development Authority
> (DCVB Governing Board)
> Durham Workforce Development Board
> Eno River Association Board of Directors
> Friends of Durham
> Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce
> Herald-Sun
> Independent Weekly
> InterNeighborhood Council
> Keep Durham Beautiful
> Museum of Durham History Steering Committee
> Museum of Life and Science
> New Hope Creek Advisory Board
> Parrish Street Advocacy Group
> Peopleââ'¬â"¢s Alliance
> Preservation Durham
> Spectacular Magazine
> St. Joseph's Historic Foundation/Hayti Heritage Center
>
> Bill Anderson
>
> In a message dated 1/6/2009 6:28:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> randy at 27beverly.com writes:
>
> Bill Anderson said:
>
> "The type of people who attend INC meetings are on the most part,
better
> informed than the general populous, and in my opinion, that's why those
present voted for this progressive effort."
>
> My point exactly. If the INC reps were in touch with their communities,
then INC should have never overwhelmingly supported the Tax. The
community
> voted >73% against it. As it appears, the reps that come to INC can
just
> vote the way they want and to heck with the folks they represent.
Otherwise, INC would have voted it down as well. That's where the
disconnect is here. Either word isn't getting out or ear wax and
bedfellows are in the way...
>
> I still maintain our old way (as long as it takes sometimes) is the
tried
> and true way the system works. If something is so critical, that INC
voting one way or another interupts that process, then perhaps it was
because of poor planning. There never should be a sense of urgency that
is
> so great that it changes the process. Most of the dealings of INC is
with
> government. And slowing it down is hardly necessary. It moves at a very
slow pace. So what if INC doesn't have time to digest the particular
issue, it's INC's fault that it has a process in place for dealing with
issues in a timely fashion. Having a process and sticking to it is not
a
> bad thing. I can't think of an iron hot enough to make it any
different.
> To put INC into a position where the process necessitates a change because
> of some sense of urgency is a disservice to INC. INC meets every month.
You can't get much more regular than that... And it's been this way
(except maybe for a year or two of a summer break) since I've been
involved.
>
> RWP
> 27 Beverly
>
>
>> As Nancy points out, organizations change over time, often effected by
>> how
>> our method of communication changes.
>> 20 years ago, the primary means of neighborhood communications were
newsletters. Today, much more is done over the neighborhood listservs,
and
>> eventually
>> that may become our primary means of communication.
>> As a returning board member of INC, I've witnessed the changes INC has
experienced over the past years.
>> Our new President seems dedicated to a better understanding of the
>> past,
>> and
>> a more thought out plan for the future. I'm greatly encouraged by his
more
>> holistic approach.
>> My personal goals include making sure the INC process is better explained
>> and adhered to. The downside of that process is it is frustratingly slow.
>> Generally, that would be; an issue is brought up in say May, and a
>> program
>> around
>> it is planned for (at the earliest) the June meeting. The information
would
>> be gathered there by the reps, who would take it to their individual
neighborhood's next meeting and return in July with that
neighborhood's
>> collective
>> opinion.
>> Some issues don't allow for that three month minimum process, and such
was
>> the case on the Meals Tax.
>> In cases like that, the board can provide a provisional vote that can be
>> ratified at the following meeting, which is what was done for the
Meals
>> Tax.
>> Durham was provided almost no leeway except that it could put the
issue
>> on
>> the ballot. That provided far too little time to inform the general
public, and
>> partly thanks to opponents who muddied the waters calling it a food
>> tax,
>> the
>> general population cast too many votes under a cloud of
>> misinformation....
>> and that's why it failed.
>> The type of people who attend INC meetings are on the most part,
better
>> informed than the general populous, and in my opinion, that's why
>> those
>> present
>> voted for this progressive effort.
>> The short window (six week?) might have been enough to inform the voters,
>> had it not been for all the misinformation that opponents were
spewing.
>> If
>> you
>> doubt this, take your own private poll.
>> Ask folks how they voted and why. You'll hear a lot of them who
thought
>> the
>> tax was on all food, not just prepared food.
>> We can only learn from the past, and prepare for the future. Our current
>> President is doing just that, first by calling a meeting of all the
>> past
>> Presidents last month. INC's first President was in attendance and
provided history
>> back to the '80s. I've seen incoming Presidents plan for their year in
office, Craigie Sanders is the first President I've seen working on a
five
>> year
>> plan.
>> If you consider the listservs are a better means of communication, and
feel
>> that careful planning produces better outcomes, then I think great things
>> should be expected.
>> Bill Anderson
>> In a message dated 1/6/2009 11:25:14 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>> scrapping.nancy at verizon.net writes:
>> Randy brings up a thread that I too have pulled at as a new rep for Hope
>> Valley Farms. I am not allowed to vote because my neighborhood does not
>> currently have a way to effectively convey information and receive
adequate
>> input in order for me to vote in a representative way.
>> I would really like us to look at this issue -it is not unique to
INC,
>> I'll
>> give a PTA example. A controversy occurred at a school - PTA leadership
>> purported to speak for all PTA members but they had not taken a vote and
>> if
>> they had, they would have needed to share four bits of info - total
school
>> population, how many members they have - how many voted for and how many
>> voted against the proposal.
>> As a newbie - I have been very surprised that INC has taken votes before
>> they have taken the information back to their membership.
>> Finally, I can imagine there are issues that not all INC members should
>> vote
>> on -things particular to a region - my beef - no secret here -is the
>> effects
>> of development on SW Durham and other regions of Durham with rural
areas.
>> This issue's impact just isn't felt to the same degree by someone who
lives
>> outside of SW Durham although I am sure they can and do empathize and of
>> course want what is best for all of Durham. Nevertheless...
>> The start of a new year is a good time to revisit mission, goals
etc.
>> Nancy Cox
>> writing just as me not as rep of HVF
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <inc-list-request at rtpnet.org>
>> To: <inc-list at rtpnet.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 7:43 AM
>> Subject: INC-list Digest, Vol 49, Issue 7
>>> Send INC-list mailing list submissions to
>>> inc-list at rtpnet.org
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>> inc-list-request at rtpnet.org
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>> inc-list-owner at rtpnet.org
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of INC-list digest..."
>>> Today's Topics:
>>> 1. what happened... (RW Pickle)
>>> 2. Re: what happened... (Reyn Bowman)
>>> 3. 50% CUTS IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH BUDGETS
>>> (pinnaclecdc at aol.com)
>>> 4. Re: County Manager's Proposed Budget Actions (Reyn Bowman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
>>> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 03:06:04 -0500 (EST)
>>> From: "RW Pickle" <randy at 27beverly.com>
>>> Subject: [Durham INC] what happened...
>>> To: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>>> Message-ID:
<1162.71.111.250.165.1231229164.squirrel at www.patriot.net>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>>> Melissa brings up another point:
>>>>> But I do not think this museum needs any additional improvements at
>>>>> this time, particularly a new and larger gift shop...and many Durham
>>>>> citizens did not vote for the prepared food tax because they
didn't
>>>>> want the money used toward this end.
>>> This brings up something that has been a topic of conversation for a
number of people; both associated with INC and outside of it. But I
>>> have
>>> yet to hear it discussed in an open forum.
>>> How could INC reps be bringing information back to the meetings, and
vote
>>> overwhelmingly for the Meals Tax, only to have it defeated by >73%? It
>>> just doesn't seem like the neighborhoods and their reps are even
>>> talking
>>> about the issues. Otherwise the INC vote wouldn't have been so positive
>>> in
>>> favor of the tax. (I don't believe anyone voted against it when the
vote
>>> was taken). Obviously there is a problem here somewhere in the
>>> communication paths. Otherwise you'd expect the vote to be reflected
similarly by INC as it was by the voters. Yet it was so far off, you
have
>>> to wonder why.
>>> Or is it that only the HOA's that are members of INC truly have a
membership of ALL of their neighbors while some Associations that
>>> make
>>> up
>>> INC have as little as 10% (or less in some cases)
>>> membership/participation
>>> in them? For example, INC currently has Board member that has
claimed
>>> to
>>> represent a neighborhood for years. Yet, last year when I mentioned
>>> them
>>> to the long-term President of that Association, she didn't even know
them.
>>> Maybe it's that type of lack of neighborhood
>>> conversations/involvement
>>> that led INC to support something that clearly had little support by
>>> the
>>> people it claims to represent. It's hard to believe that INC is that
out
>>> of touch, but the Meals Tax vote is a clear sign that something is
wrong.
>>> The last couple of years INC has moved further away from the core
values
>>> that made it work so well for so long. It has taken on some
>>> bedfellows
>>> that perhaps it's time to kick out of bed. These are hard things to
>>> think/talk about, but it's necessary if votes are to be taken on issues
>>> that clearly the community INC purports to represent believes the exact
>>> opposite.
>>> RWP
>>> 27 Beverly
>>> ------------------------------
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 06:45:35 -0500
>>> From: Reyn Bowman <Reyn at Durham-cvb.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] what happened...
>>> To: RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com>, "inc-list at durhaminc.org"
>>> <inc-list at durhaminc.org>
>>> Message-ID:
>>> <1CCD4AA8608B1148A080E953C1A2EEA60F00D820CC at EXCHANGE-2008.durham.cvb>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>> Here is another viewpoint.
>>> Polls indicate the meals tax failure had everything to do with the
economy, not popularity of the measure. Prior to the economic
turndown
>>> the measure was more than 2 to 1 in favor.
>>> I wouldn't read too much into it or judge those who had much more time
>>> to
>>> study the pros and cons...voters were given an artificially short
>>> window
>>> for voter education by virtue of the state legislation.
>>> It was also clear in analysis that had the measure been on a local
election ballot as is more typical vs. forced into a presidential,
the
>>> more than 35,000 votes it received would have given it more than any
>>> other
>>> measure or candidate for that matter on the previous local election.
One thing is clear. If it had passed, we'd see 2/3rds of the costs
of
>>> many things transferred to non-residents, opening up millions in the
>>> general fund to soften the impact of these cuts on core services.
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org
>>> [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org]
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of RW Pickle
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:06 AM
>>> To: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>>> Subject: [Durham INC] what happened...
>>> Melissa brings up another point:
>>>>> But I do not think this museum needs any additional improvements
at
>>>>> this time, particularly a new and larger gift shop...and many Durham
>>>>> citizens did not vote for the prepared food tax because they
didn't
>>>>> want the money used toward this end.
>>> This brings up something that has been a topic of conversation for a
number of people; both associated with INC and outside of it. But I
>>> have
>>> yet to hear it discussed in an open forum.
>>> How could INC reps be bringing information back to the meetings, and
vote
>>> overwhelmingly for the Meals Tax, only to have it defeated by >73%? It
>>> just doesn't seem like the neighborhoods and their reps are even
>>> talking
>>> about the issues. Otherwise the INC vote wouldn't have been so positive
>>> in
>>> favor of the tax. (I don't believe anyone voted against it when the
vote
>>> was taken). Obviously there is a problem here somewhere in the
>>> communication paths. Otherwise you'd expect the vote to be reflected
similarly by INC as it was by the voters. Yet it was so far off, you
have
>>> to wonder why.
>>> Or is it that only the HOA's that are members of INC truly have a
membership of ALL of their neighbors while some Associations that
>>> make
>>> up
>>> INC have as little as 10% (or less in some cases)
>>> membership/participation
>>> in them? For example, INC currently has Board member that has
claimed
>>> to
>>> represent a neighborhood for years. Yet, last year when I mentioned
>>> them
>>> to the long-term President of that Association, she didn't even know
them.
>>> Maybe it's that type of lack of neighborhood
>>> conversations/involvement
>>> that led INC to support something that clearly had little support by
>>> the
>>> people it claims to represent. It's hard to believe that INC is that
out
>>> of touch, but the Meals Tax vote is a clear sign that something is
wrong.
>>> The last couple of years INC has moved further away from the core
values
>>> that made it work so well for so long. It has taken on some
>>> bedfellows
>>> that perhaps it's time to kick out of bed. These are hard things to
>>> think/talk about, but it's necessary if votes are to be taken on issues
>>> that clearly the community INC purports to represent believes the exact
>>> opposite.
>>> RWP
>>> 27 Beverly
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> INC-list mailing list
>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>> ------------------------------
>>> Message: 3
>>> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 06:50:02 EST
>>> From: pinnaclecdc at aol.com
>>> Subject: [Durham INC] 50% CUTS IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH
>>> BUDGETS
>>> To: inc-list at rtpnet.org
>>> Message-ID: <d43.30f1e350.36949f6a at aol.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>> Hello,
>>> Many providers of substance abuse and mental health services funds
>>> received
>>> cuts of up to 50% before January 2009. This was not about poor
>>> performers,
>>> etc. It was an across the board decrease. I am sure that it was not an
>>> easy
>>> decision for the Durham Center, but, my first concern was for
those
>>> needing
>>> treatment. Our funding was cut also, (pending availability and
State
>>> budget
>>> issues) and we had to become creative quickly. There are still people
>>> who
>>> need
>>> services.
>>> NOT ASKING FOR MONEY!!! - MEETING ANNOUNCEMENT - NOT ABOUT MONEY!!
To that end, I am writing to you on behalf of Durham Together for
>>> Resilient
>>> Youth, Drug Free Community Coalition. We are a hard-working coalition
>>> that
>>> decided to take action a few years ago after researching the
>>> relationship
>>> between substance use and incarceration, illness and even death. It
shows
>>> that
>>> substance abuse exacerbates problems such as domestic violence,
>>> child
>>> maltreatment, and homelessness.
>>> We highly respect and actively support the great work currently being
>>> done
>>> by local government agencies, and treatment providers
>>> Our membership includes parents and youth as well as valued community
>>> partners. We believe that if we collaborate, we will have a greater
impact on
>>> strengthening our families here in Durham and on building
resiliency
>>> in
>>> our youth.
>>> To that end, we would like to invite you to our monthly Community
Coalition
>>> meeting on January 9, 2009 at the Durham Public School Staff
Development
>>> Center, located at 2107 Hillandale Rd Durham, NC 27705 from 6:00 PM
>>> ?
>>> 8:00 PM.
>>> You will hear reports from business, youth, parents, faith, local
>>> university
>>> representatives and from North Carolina Prevent Underage Drinking. We
>>> will
>>> discuss the Strategic Prevention Framework that guides our work and
>>> how
>>> these
>>> important steps can lead to substance abuse prevention.
>>> Please RSVP at _www.DurhamTRY.org_ (http://www.durhamtry.org/) ?
click
>>> calendar. Attendees who join the coalition will receive a binder full
>>> of
>>> great
>>> information. This meeting is free and open to the public.
>>> Thank you for all you do to support children and families in our
community.
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Wanda Boone
>>> Wanda Boone, Chief Executive Director
>>> Durham Together for Resilient Youth
>>> Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America MemberNorth Carolina
Prevent
>>> Underage Drinking Grant Award Recipient
>>> **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making
>>> headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>> URL:
> <http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/private/inc-list/attachments/20090106/ad1d9d71/attachment-0001.htm>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> Message: 4
>>> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 07:41:17 -0500
>>> From: Reyn Bowman <Reyn at Durham-cvb.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] County Manager's Proposed Budget Actions
To: "mmr121570 at yahoo.com" <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>,
>>> "inc-list at DurhamINC.org" <inc-list at DurhamINC.org>
>>> Message-ID:
>>> <1CCD4AA8608B1148A080E953C1A2EEA60F00D820CE at EXCHANGE-2008.durham.cvb>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7"
>>> I'm not certain but I believe the Museum does all it can to offset
>>> expenses with earned income like it generates from the gift shop.
>>> So
>>> those who have all the facts are probably making cuts in expenses where
>>> they know it won't also result in cuts in revenue...
>>> Last information I had the Museum has a very high degree of
>>> popularity
>>> and
>>> support from residents and especially important, more than 60% of
>>> the
>>> visitors to the Museum are visitors who are bringing tax dollars
into
>>> the
>>> community that help fund other services.
>>> The meals tax certainly wasn't a referendum on the Museum... From:
inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org
>>> [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org]
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of Melissa Rooney
>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:14 PM
>>> To: inc-list at DurhamINC.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] County Manager's Proposed Budget Actions
Our schools cannot afford any more cuts. In fact, they need
>>> significantly
>>> more money to accommodate the supposed increase in people moving
here
>>> (one
>>> of the arguments for all the new development we're seeing in the
>>> suburban
>>> and rural areas). Many of our schools are still overcrowded,
>>> particularly
>>> those in the rural and suburban areas, and their trailers are now
considered permanent fixtures.
>>> Don't mean to be barking up the same tree, but our local gov't needs to
>>> kick and scream and demand the ability to vote on NEW DEVELOPMENT
impact
>>> fees specifically for public school funding. We citizens have been
>>> begging
>>> our state reps and senators for this ability for years, to no avail.
Meanwhile Orange County is still benefiting from these fees which
>>> Durham
>>> County is prohibited from imposing. In the meantime a referendum to
>>> impose
>>> land transfer impact fees toward this end should be included on any
ballot
>>> from here on out... even if it is unfair to our long-term and senior
>>> residents, it's the only thing we've got...there must be some way
we
>>> can
>>> offset this unfair effect somehow. Colin, didn't you have some ideas in
>>> this regard?
>>> I love the Museum of Life and Science, and all the improvements
>>> they've
>>> made. I am in full support of the new outdoor section and the Dinosaur
>>> trail, which are supposedly already funded via bonds. But I do not
think
>>> this museum needs any additional improvements at this time,
>>> particularly a
>>> new and larger gift shop...and many Durham citizens did not vote for the
>>> prepared food tax because they didn't want the money used toward
this
>>> end.
>>> Just my ten cents...
>>> Melissa
>>> --- On Mon, 1/5/09, RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com> wrote:
>>> From: RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com>
>>> Subject: [Durham INC] County Manager's Proposed Budget Actions To:
fhna-list at fhnanews.com
>>> Cc: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>>> Date: Monday, January 5, 2009, 6:27 PM
>>> Press release from Durham County.
>>> Today, the Durham County Board of Commissioners met for their first
Worksession meeting of the New Year. County Manager Mike Ruffin
presented
>>> a plan of recommended actions to accommodate the declines in the
economy
>>> and its impact on County operations. The report used a decline in
>>> key
>>> revenues as the basis for an overall FY 2009-09 Revenue Shortfall
of
>>> $14.25 million dollars. To make up that difference, the County Manager
>>> recommends substantive cuts to county departments? budgets to
capture
>>> $8,951,100 and proposes 3% cuts to other county funded agencies
>>> including
>>> Durham Public Schools, Durham Technical Community College, Museum of
>>> Life
>>> and Science, various non profits and more to
>>> make up the remaining
>>> $5,291.587.
>>> Dawn D. Dudley
>>> Public Information Specialist
>>> Durham County Manager's Office
>>> 919-560-0008 desk
>>> 919-475-4411 cell
>>> ddudley at co.durham.nc.us
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> INC-list mailing list
>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>> URL:
> <http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/private/inc-list/attachments/20090106/710a9c48/attachment.htm>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> INC-list mailing list
>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>> End of INC-list Digest, Vol 49, Issue 7
>>> ***************************************
>> _______________________________________________
>> INC-list mailing list
>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>> **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is
>> making
>> headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)
>> _______________________________________________
>> INC-list mailing list
>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
>
> ====================================================================
This e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s)
or
> entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of
this
> e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
> dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly
prohibited.
> If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify
> me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic mail
> (pickle at patriot.net)
> immediately.
> =====================================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making
headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)
>
==================================================================== This
e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) or
entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify
me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic mail (pickle at patriot.net)
immediately.
=====================================================================
_______________________________________________
INC-list mailing list
INC-list at rtpnet.org
http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
More information about the INC-list
mailing list