| Moderated by: Steve Adkins | Topic closed | |
| Author | Post | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
ff12 Member 
|
At the Jan. 19 council meeting during the rezoning hearings some of the members gave the appearance of being somewhere else. Also when the rezoning on the Wilson property came up for vote only John Flynt asked questions. Mr. Berry made the motion to approve the rezoning so discussion would take place, the mayor called for a vote immediately and he cast the final vote against after meeting with Trevorrow and whispering then he cast his vote against and the rezoning failed 3 to 2. other than John Flynt we dont know why it failed to pass, they moved on at the speed of light to avoid discussion(?). John had major reservations about cluster housing even though the Self rd property which joins this and was to be part of same development has the very kind of zoning that they denied last night. |
|||||||||||
|
ff12 Member
|
When the mayor and Trevorrow had their discussion should that had been so everyone could hear since it obviously dealt with this rezoning? open meeting law or something? |
|||||||||||
|
Jim Flynt Member
|
ff12 wrote: the Wilson property came up for vote and the rezoning failed 3 to 2. Who cast the 3 votes against the rezoning and/or who cast the 2 votes for it? |
|||||||||||
|
Waytago Member 
|
ff12 wrote: Mr. Berry made the motion to approve the rezoning so discussion would take place, the mayor called for a vote immediately and he cast the final vote against after meeting with Trevorrow and whispering then he cast his vote against and the rezoning failed 3 to 2. other than John Flynt we dont know why it failed to pass, they moved on at the speed of light to avoid discussion(?). I wasn't at this meeting, so forgive my ignorance. I am having trouble following this concern. Did the mayor not ask for commentary from proponents & opponents? Was the public not asked to speak? |
|||||||||||
|
Vicki White-Lawrence Member 
|
ff12 wrote:At the Jan. 19 council meeting during the rezoning hearings some of the members gave the appearance of being somewhere else. Also when the rezoning on the Wilson property came up for vote only John Flynt asked questions. Mr. Berry made the motion to approve the rezoning so discussion would take place, the mayor called for a vote immediately and he cast the final vote against after meeting with Trevorrow and whispering then he cast his vote against and the rezoning failed 3 to 2. other than John Flynt we dont know why it failed to pass, they moved on at the speed of light to avoid discussion(?). John had major reservations about cluster housing even though the Self rd property which joins this and was to be part of same development has the very kind of zoning that they denied last night. ff12: As you probably know, I've attended the Stokesdale Town Council meetings for almost 7 years now. I was at this meeting on Thursday night. I didn't see it being any different than others. I didn't feel like they "moved on at the speed of light to avoid discussion". Maybe I missed something? The meeting itself lasted an hour and 45 minutes, and my guess is that this topic took almost half of that. (I sometimes make note of the time of beginning and ending of topics on my agenda but didn't do that this time, so I can't say for certain.) Council doesn't usually discuss business after a vote; they move on to the next item on the agenda, as they did this time. Jim asked who voted for and against this rezoning. Voting in favor of the rezoning were Bobby Richardson and Mickie Halbrook; against were Fred Berry, John Flynt and Randy Jones. |
|||||||||||
|
ff12 Member
|
other than John Flynt no one gave a reason why they voted the way they did. This question is to Jim Flynt, Does all discussion between council members and Trevvorrow during the meeting have to be revealed or can they turn their backs and discuss something in private? |
|||||||||||
|
Jim Flynt Member
|
ff12 wrote: This question is to Jim Flynt, Does all discussion between council members and Trevvorrow during the meeting have to be revealed or can they turn their backs and discuss something in private? ff, I'm really not the person to ask. I've only attended one meeting of the Stokesdale Town Council in my life. Frankly, that was one too many. Other than the power to zone property (and the unexercised power to impose taxation), the Stokesdale town council is mostly irrelevant to most Stokesdale citizens. And becoming increasingly more so with each passing day. The members nothing more than paper tigers: a blight on community, an affront to real leadership. Most of the good things that ever get done in Stokesdale get done in spite of (not because of) the town council. That's not just a personal opinion, ask the movers and shakers. Most Stokesdale zoning decisions are decided and locked up behind the scenes well in advance of any public hearings, and those with the right connections (political or financial), always seem to get what they want. TC generally doesn't follow their Planning Board recommendations nor the Town land use plan (or even the town mission statement for that matter). So go figure. (On several occasion some big landowners and developers here have bragged they had the TC votes in their pocket and 'sewed up' well before a rezoning hearing). One last thing: That was not the way we handled land use matters when I was a member of the Guilford County Planning Board nor what I observed of the GC Commissioners and GC Board of Commissioners meetings over an almost 20 year period. There's been some strange shenanigans going on down there in the smoke filled back room of the STC and one of these days folks around here will wake up and get tired of it. And when they do: WATCH OUT. Some dirty hands are going to get caught in the cookie jar. Last edited on Jan 22nd, 2007 02:47 pm by Jim Flynt |
|||||||||||
|
macca Member 
|
Jim Flynt wrote:Other than the power to zone property (and the unexercised power to impose taxation), the Stokesdale town council is mostly irrelevant to most Stokesdale citizens. And becoming increasingly more so with each passing day. The members nothing more than paper tigers: a blight on community, an affront to real leadership. Jimbo, I know I'm not the most politically active person in town, but what do you mean by all this? I wasn't aware that Stokesdale had problems you are describing here.....  |
|||||||||||
|
Jim Flynt Member
|
macca wrote: Jimbo, I know I'm not the most politically active person in town, but what do you mean by all this? I wasn't aware that Stokesdale had problems you are describing here..... Macca, which part of my comments did you not understand? My statements were intended res ipsa loquitur. (Latin for) it speaks for itself. I don't mean to be curt nor cute, but I'm not sure what you're asking. Last edited on Jan 22nd, 2007 09:47 pm by Jim Flynt |
|||||||||||
|
macca Member
|
Well, I guess I'm just not getting it, Jimbo. I hate to sound dense, but what does it mean that the TC is irrelevent? They are a blight on our community? Paper tigers? Good things get done in Stokesdale in spite of them, not because of them? Most zoning decisions are made before the meetings ever occur? Who are these big landowners and developers who always get what they want? What are the strange shenanigans going on? It sounds as though we need to be educated!!! |
|||||||||||
|
Jim Flynt Member
|
macca wrote: Well, I guess I'm just not getting it, Jimbo. I hate to sound dense, but what does it mean that the TC is irrelevent? Macca, if you wish to break down my assertions and statements one by one and then discuss each in depth, that works for me (up to a point). In some instances, I can only suggest that you talk to some of the movers and shakers as I suggested, as well as to some of the contractors, developers, large landowners, leaders of some of the civic groups, and the business community in Stokesdale. I think if you do that, you will hear from many others who share my thinking as evidenced in my statements. Over a cup or coffee or a cold beer one on one, I would be willing to suggest some of the folks it would be worthwhile for you to talk to, folks who I believe would echo my earlier statements. Especially in a small town, it is sometimes difficult to name names and tell stories too, so I have elected to tell the story and will let others fill in the blanks of naming names as they may wish. Things told to me in confidence simply must remain in confidence. While many others may keep their ears close to the ground as I do, I am not aware of anyone who has their ears any closer (and I don't mean that arrogantly. I just work hard at staying abreast of what is going on, both on the surface level and at the deeper level of what is really driving some of these actions). Again, I don't mean this arrogantly, but let's face it, it doesn't hurt that I have known some of these folks since they were toddlers and many for more than 50 years. Long term relationships do engender some greater degree of trust that more relative newcomers might not expect or be afforded. And Stokesdale is no different than many other small towns, there are a lot of family relationships which extend beyond one generation or just first or second cousins. Understanding the long history not only of a town but it's families as well, sometimes can at least give pause to why some things work the way they do. Even something as seemingly innocent and insignificant as the church one attends in Stokesdale can have a significant impact on whether one receives the blessings of Stokesdale town government and whether council acts favorably or unfavorably on rezoning and other political decisions; even entry into the inner sanctum of town council power and decision making. The other problem with disclosing everything that I hear, discover or know, is that I the run the very real risk that the name of a source may be uncovered which would immediately close avenues to sharing knowledge further down the road. A risk I am not willing to take. Just as one example, landowners and developers who have told about securing promises from town council members in advance of a public hearing would never speak to me again if I posted their names. But if you ask around, you can find out who they are. I have heard that story from at least 3 property owners who went through the Stokesdale rezoning process, but I have never heard those stories without there being other disinterested parties around when those statements were made. I am sure that you can understand, and that Patti and Sandra could confirm, the importance of protecting inside sources (who have historically been deemed and proven reliable) close to the decisions and/or actions taken by individuals and organizations. Having said that, let's go back and take a look at my first assertion: Other than the power to zone property (and the unexercised power to impose taxation), the Stokesdale town council is mostly irrelevant to most Stokesdale citizens. Since you would (seem to) argue that the statement is False, why don't you make the case for HOW or IN WHAT WAY the Stokesdale Town Council IS RELEVANT to MOST Stokesdale citizens. Last edited on Jan 23rd, 2007 12:46 am by Jim Flynt |
|||||||||||
|
macca Member
|
Jimbo, I'm just surprised by what you say. It seems to me that, while we hear about antics of County Commissioners, and sometimes of TC members in other towns, I have just figured we sail along here in Stokesdale. We have a deputy sheriff assigned to our town, we have a water system, trash and recycling pickup -- all with no taxes. I don't know how to go about proving or disproving what you assert.... It just seems easy to say things are corrupt and unsavory when you just allude to what makes you say they are.... |
|||||||||||
|
Jim Flynt Member
|
Macca, to respond, my suggestion would be as earlier, go out and talk to the movers and shakers and examine their views for consistency with my own. A little research and keeping your eyes open will uncover so much of what I have suggested. These are not secret actions known but to a few. Ask around among the right folks and I think you will see or begin to see what I'm saying. |
|||||||||||
|
Jim Flynt Member
|
macca wrote: It just seems easy to say things are corrupt and unsavory when you just allude to what makes you say they are.... Macca, I did not use the word corrupt in any of my earlier posts, as that would constitute a value judgment. A judgment best served for others to make or not make for themselves. While I did not use the word unsavory, it is not an entirely inappropriate description for how many would describe the actions and process of town government in Stokesdale. Change will only occur when a majority find decisions and acts distasteful, unsavory, inappropriate, unfair or whatever other generic label one would attach to the decisions and indecision of the town council. Last edited on Jan 23rd, 2007 01:42 am by Jim Flynt |
|||||||||||
|
macca Member
|
So, who are the "right folks" to ask? |
|||||||||||
|
Jim Flynt Member
|
macca wrote: So, who are the "right folks" to ask? A good start would simply be to walk down Main Street from stop light to stop light and talk to the business and property owners. Pick out the 5 or 10 largest land owners within 2 or 3 miles of town hall and go talk with them as well. The records at Town Hall would provide you with a complete and full history of town rezonings since Stokesdale was incorporated, and that wouldn't be a bad place to start looking either. It wouldn't hurt if you ask yourself and understand deep enough to know, why any (and each) particular council member voted for or voted against that particular rezoning. Those zoning records will begin to provide you with the roadmap to understanding the reward/punishment patterns of which property owners and/or developers get what they want and which don't. Compare council zoning votes with the comprehensive land use plan and with the planning board recommendations and votes if you want an eye opener. Find out which developers are riding around with which town council members and see if any answers fall into your lap. I suggest they will. Finally, find someone in Stokesdale who is at least third generation, to translate and interpret for you the deeper family or marriage or social or business relationships that exist between petitioner parties and members of town council and their extended families and you will begin to see the answer to questions similar to what FF12 was originally asking. I think if you do those things, you will uncover some pretty interesting stories. Obviously, the 'wrong folks to ask' would be someone who just moved here AND who has not interfaced either directly or indirectly with town government, or not been the recipient of either their blessings or curse. Or those willing to accept the surface viewpoint without the willingness to dig deeper than the first inch or so to discover what is really going on and why. Last edited on Jan 23rd, 2007 02:21 am by Jim Flynt |
|||||||||||
