Julie for Cary campaign mailer

[dhyatt]

Here's the latest from the Julie for Cary campaign...
<hr>
<IFRAME SRC="http://carypolitics.org/images/robison_card1_front.jpg" width=500 height=550 scrolling="yes" ></IFRAME>
<IFRAME SRC="http://carypolitics.org/images/robison_card1_back.jpg" width=500 height=550 scrolling="yes" ></IFRAME>

[dhyatt]

Mailer #2 from the Robison campaign...
<hr>
<IFRAME SRC="http://carypolitics.org/images/robison_card2_front.jpg" width=500 height=550 scrolling="yes" ></IFRAME>

<IFRAME SRC="http://carypolitics.org/images/robison_card2_back.jpg" width=500 height=550 scrolling="yes" ></IFRAME>

[Cathy]

What does "Growing better..." mean exactly, in Julie's opinion??

These kinds of unqualified statements are meaningless and dangerous as far as whether the Town grows the way the citizens would like it to.

We can all say we want it to grow 'better', but what is is better?

Is 'better' more high density?

Is 'better' more greenways forced through property owners back yards?

Is 'better' having road infrastructure sacrificed to the religion of rail transit and pedestrian pathways?

Is 'better' having more ordinances that restrict property owners and small business owners?

Is 'better' having the Town absorb more and more unwilling property owners into the corporate limits and added to the responsibility of the Town for providing services?

What does 'better' mean Julie??

[StanN]

Received Julie's latest mailer today. Although I have disagreed with several of her decisions in recent months, I liked the mailer. Its about time she started calling attention to Mr. Curran's inconsistencies and scurrilous campaign tactics. It was revealing to me that Curran, who has lived in the area 18 years, did not bother to vote until his particular ox was gored in 2003. Sounds familar.

Also sounds like she will give no further approval to still lower impact fees...
I agree.

stan