Annexation effect??? [Archive]

Rono

07-25-2004, 02:53 PM

In Saturdays N & O

ANNEXATION OPPONENTS CHEER:

Opponents of Cary's involuntary annexations declared victory after Tuesday's primary.

On Wednesday, leaders of anti-annexation efforts touted a precinct-by-precinct analysis that showed about 70 percent of District 36 Republicans who live outside Cary voted against Rep. David Miner.

Miner, a six-term incumbent, helped defeat efforts by Swift Creek residents to incorporate in the 1990s and supported existing annexation laws.

After last year's redistricting, much of the area south of Cary was added to his district, including voters still smarting over the failed incorporation bid.

Miner was philosophical about his loss to political consultant Nelson Dollar, who won 64 percent of the overall vote according to the uncertified tally Tuesday night.

"I felt the same way the day before the election, and I feel the same the day after," he said. "I do not think Wake County should have another municipality."

Dollar, who now faces Libertarian Gary Goodson, promised to oppose involuntary annexations and sponsor a bill incorporating Swift Creek if elected in November.

Anonymous

07-25-2004, 06:38 PM

yes...but at the end of the day, this is another special interest group looking for special treatment in order to keep their taxes down...and if they are successful, your (assuming you live in Cary or some other city) taxes will go up to pay for the services they use. It is the democratic process- but it is being used for selfish purposes. How long will it take for those of us who live in Cary to realize that we will wind up paying higher taxes so that they can pay less. The only alternative is for those of us who live in Cary to be denied essential services - because the folks across the street don't want to pay for them.

Rono claims that all he wants is for Cary to live within its budget and that he doesn't want to pay for non-essential services. I agree but in the meantime I am paying for the road improvements and parks/rec. that those who live in Dutchman Downs use. The issue of Cary's spending sprees is a separate issue. One way of solving it is to annex DD and let them use their organizational skills to lobby against those services.

Stan

hollyL

07-25-2004, 07:00 PM

Can't speak for Rono but I drive in Durham. You probably do to on occasion. Should we pay taxes to use Durham's roads too? I work in RTP so I drive on Morrisville's roads everyday. Should Morrisville annex my land in Cary for I can pay for their road I use to get to work?

I know...maybe we can set up a big gate around Cary and anyone that wants to come it has to pay a "toll" to use our roads. And we could all get "Cary" arm bands so the park police could identify nonCary people invading our parks. Dammit I think I just gave them an idea :wink:

While we're at it...I don't have kids so I shouldn't have to pay for your kids to go to school with my tax dollars. This is obviously a very dumb argument.

Seriouly, this argument that people use Cary's roads so they should be part of Cary is downright ridiculous. But I guess if you can't come up with anything better...

-holly

Cathy

07-25-2004, 08:49 PM

Thank you Holly.
Stan must have received new marching orders that it was time to re-insert the lame party line on why annexation is such a good thing.

Cathy

Rono

07-25-2004, 10:16 PM

DELETED

johnb

07-26-2004, 10:33 AM

Rono, good points, except your contention that Donkeycrats "care" about the common man. I spent many years up north in an area dominated by the Donkeycrats and their allies in the Steelworkers Union, my father being president of his local. The platitudes about "Caring" are nonsense, they are interested in the exact same thing the Republicans are, using government to reward their friends and whack the snot outa their enemies.

Cathy

07-26-2004, 11:02 AM

Let's look at a few choice postings from the WRAL web forum on the topic of annexation.
http://forums.ibsys.com/viewmessages.cfmsitekey=ral&Forum=334&Topic=9503

Is this a bad joke or is it real??

smythe21 03-03-2004, 12:55 PM

I am against annexation. Why? Because it will bring poor people into our lovely town. Let us face it..Cary has the misfortune to be surrounded by communities that permit "manufactured" housing. No good can come of Cary annexing such areas into our good town. It simply won't do. My dear wife, Greta, shrieked when she learned of the proposed annex. The poor dear then took to bed for two days! I have had quite the time trying to calm her nerves. She shrieks when she hears of mobile homes or cars that aren't brand new. I implore the good citizens of Cary to NOT allow annexation!

cary_snob 06-29-2004, 3:52 PM

MPSoldier, I happen to agree with smythe21..Cary has for many years built itself into a community that others in the area can envy and hope to emulate. To annex any of the other surrounding communities would be counter productive, simply because of the type of 'lifestyle' that these other communities have promoted over the years. Fuquay Varina for instance..well known for it's 'trailer courts'...and Apex, well that's just as bad. Holly Springs is somewhat more desireable, but not ready for annexation for many more years to come. Now while the type of housing that a person may live in doesn't necessarily deem them 'unclean', I do believe that if one were to become a part of Cary, one would need to adhere to the image that Cary promotes, and simply put, none of the surrounding areas of Cary are ready for that type of challenge. Quite honestly, I am not sure that there are any areas in this state that quite measure up to Cary's standards. So, smythe21, I do agree with your notion that Cary should not annex any additional communities.

cary_snob 06-30-2004, 3:55 PM

MPSoldier wrote: Give these people a chance to contribute, one may be surprised at what the outcome may be.
...giving "those" people a chance certainly WOULD have a surprising outcome, should just 'anyone' be allowed into the better areas of Cary...an outcome of increased crime and lower property values, just to name two. I mean really..how much WOULD someone pay for a home that has a trailer next to it with some 1990 Camaro up on blocks in the driveway? Would I frown upon a policeman living next door to me if he was going to save me and my family from a burglar? No, but since I live in a gated community, there would be no NEED for a policeman to live next door to save me. Besides, my homeowner's association most likely wouldn't appreciate a police cruiser in plain sight anyway..they are somewhat tacky you know.

Now I don't want anyone to get the idea that I look down on people with less affluence than me. Just yesterday I sent TWO of my household staff to volunteer at a poor children's camp for the day! I think that speaks volumes about how much I DO care for underprivileged people.

And since MPSoldier has indicated that he is in the Army, I am going to assume he lives in Fayetteville or Spring Lake. My gardener AND florist have both told me that both of those areas are very distressing, both in appearance and overall pedigree of the residents. Perhaps that is why you criticize those of us who want nothing more than to keep the type of lifestyle that we worked so hard to inherit?? Think about it.

MPsoldier 07-02-2004, 2:32 AM
Cary_snob. How overly pretentious of you to assume so much. I am happy for you that you should live in a gated community, thus saving you the burden of living next door to a 1990 Camaro on blocks. Since you are obviously unaware, those of us who do live in less than affluent areas have similiar standards when it comes to trailer parks and neighborhoods. The price of the homes may be less (70,000-100,000), but still nice, nontheless. A police car is considered tacky? What about an unmarked Crown Victoria? I know it is not a Porshe, or BMW, but I have been told it is still a nice car. I am sure the under privileged thank you for sending your "help". Try getting your hands dirty for once. I am sad for you and others like you. I will pray for you and hope maybe someday, you will be enlighted. Have a nice day!

JakeSnake 07-15-2004, 1:25 PM
I'm sure Smythe 21 was just kidding; I certainly hope so. I cant imagine anyone would be so shallow.

Me too.

Rono

07-26-2004, 12:16 PM

DELETED

StanN

07-26-2004, 09:27 PM

HollyL,

Let me reframe the argument you have made and cut through the rhetoric by offering some facts.

1. Over the last five years 25% of the net migration into NC has been into Wake County (~9% 0f NC's population). This obviously puts stress on the road network including in Cary.

2. Many of those moving in have been drawn to the unincorporated areas of the county by the lower property taxes. Many of those in the ua share Cary's (and Raleigh's and Durham's road network.)

3. By NC law cannot build or improve the major arterial roads e.g. Penny, Walnut or Kildaire Farms or Harrisson. Those roads are owned by the state.
NC law allows the municipalities such as Cary to build and improve such roads. As a result residents of the ua are exempt from paying for such road improvements through their property or sales tax paid to the county - even though they share the road network with the residents of the muni's.

4. NC has largely defaulted on its responsibility to build or improve such roads as the population increases. The General Assembly has chosen to distribute the gasoline taxes we all pay for improving such roads to rural, often slow growing or non-growing areas - not on need. (Our gaoline taxes are used by the state to pay for the interstate system and the loop roads such as 440 and 540 - but again not based on need.)

5. Municipal governments such as Cary are faced with the choice of not improving these arterial roads and seeing the level of service go down - (along with the profits and eventually the jobs for those in the muni's and the ua provided by the businesses relying on these roads - not to mention the dissatisfaction of their citizens with the congestion) or of improving the state's roads. Most of the large muni's have bitten the bullet and chosen to tax their residents and citizens and improve the roads.

To sum up - the roads in question are used by all but the needed improvements are paid for by the residents of the (larger) muni's not the residents of the ua - even though they are used by all. And roads are not the only area where the citizens of the muni's subsidize those in the ua. For example, Wakes budget director did a study detailing the subsidy of the sheriff's patrol.

Does this strike you as fair and equtitable? There is no other comparable offsetting situation where the residents of the ua subsidize those in the muni's. Some in the ua point to schools which are rarely built in the ua - but that is the county's and school boards decision and has nothing to do with the muni's.

Annnexation is one way of resolving this inequity. There are other good reasons for the current law allowing annexation - but I have gone on too long already.

If Rono, or the county commissioners wanted an equitable taxation system they could lobby the state for a special tax district for the ua so that the citizens there could pay their fair share. But the motivation of Rono and others in the ua is to keep their subsidy. As to the county comissioners - they want to get re-elected and try to avoid tax increases - and count on the inattention and ignorance of those in the muni's.

Undoubtedly Rono and others will try and rationalize these inequities away - but thats how I see it.

stan

hollyL

07-26-2004, 10:01 PM

Stan...my fellow democrat hohum...

It is unreasonable for ever person that drives on a road to pay for it. Should I pay taxes in Morrisville? I drive on their roads everyday. They can drive on my roads as long as I can drive on theirs. It would make for a very difficult driving life if you could only drive where you paid taxes.

Property taxes.
I'm looking at my tax bill right now (now I live across from what I believe to be the only trailer park in Cary so maybe it's different than others):
13.27% Gen administration
9.7 Development services
16.74 Police
17.67 Fire
15.72 Public works
5.61 waste/recycling
5.99 parks/rec
15.30 debt

I don't see how this is going to help build roads.

Heck how do you even *know* that they use Cary's roads anyway? I bet $ that anyone Cary is trying to involuntarily annex wouldn't step foot into Cary anyway except to protest.

Maybe if Ron and the others like him PROMISE not to drive in Cary then they could remain unannexed (if that's a word). Ron - what do you say? Promise not to drive on any Cary roads not paid for by the state if they leave you alone? I think they've got a Lowes/Target/Harris Teeter over there right?

Why don't they take that ugly *** statue of some limbless, faceless silver dude that is on Harrison & Chatam and get their $ back and use that for the roads!

Cathy

07-26-2004, 10:13 PM

Holly,

It's not the least bit difficult to never drive into Cary and still easily obtain anything that I could ever need. I do that all the time.
The only thing that has caused me to have to drive into Cary over the last several months is to attend meetings of the Council and other Boards in order to keep an eye on what they're doing since I am forced to no longer ignore it.
(Oh, and I took my car in to be repaired by Don Frantz once,_ shame on me for that I suppose, eh Stan?.)

Cathy

Don

07-26-2004, 11:04 PM

(Oh, and I took my car in to be repaired by Don Frantz once,_ shame on me for that I suppose, eh Stan?.)

Cathy

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is perfectly ok cathy. :wink:

Rono

07-26-2004, 11:48 PM

DELETED

johnb

07-27-2004, 12:06 AM

Heck how do you even *know* that they use Cary's roads anyway?

Holly,

I'm not a big fan of involutary annexation, but cut the crud. That is nonsense and you know it.

How about if Stan and I show up on Kildaire farm road at the edge of Cary with a back hoe and rip the road out, then take out all the roads connecting those unincorporated areas into the city. Every single county resident would squeal like a poked pig.

Rono

07-27-2004, 09:12 AM

DELETED

hollyL

07-27-2004, 09:57 AM

Cut to the Crud?
add to animal control to enforce dog and cat limits

This law was repealed in 2001...unless they slipped it back in :? It had to be challenged in the courts though...good thing because I have more than 2 dogs.

pick up more dead deer

I had a buck (big one), doe and fawn in my backyard! I live 2 blocks off Maynard! Buck and doe escaped but the fawn was injured following the adults trying to jump over my 5 foot fence and had to be put down.

StanN

07-27-2004, 11:45 AM

Holly,

You asked how I "know" that residents in the UA use municipal (not just Cary's) roads. I'll take your question seriously and assume you do not understand the nature of the UA. Do you understand that there are very, very few jobs in the UA? Ditto for shopping, hospitals, schools, theaters and so on. The UA is primarily residential + farms and vacant land. What do you think the people in Dutchman Downs do all day? Sit in their homes and lobby for their subsidy? (Perrhaps Rono does.)

And if it is impractical for people who drive on the roads to pay for them - who will? Do you think the money falls from the sky? Either the state will shell out the $'s from money collected from gasoline taxes - or if the state spends most of the the money elsewhere - as is the case - then the municipalities will spend the money - largely from property taxes. The property and other taxes that goes to the county from those who live in the UA cannot, by NC law, be spent on road widening and improvements.

John is absolutely right - if Wake's residents in the UA were prohibitted from driving on roads improved by municipalities - first they would scream then they would move out of the UA.

YOU are subsidizing those in the UA. They want you to continue to do so. That is what RONO and Stop NC Annexation is all about. Does that give you a warm feeling?

PS - even Morissville, who in the past has pleaded poverty when it comes to improving roads, is planning to do so.

stan

StanN

07-27-2004, 12:07 PM

RONO,

New residential development over $240K is "profitable" for Cary. The revenues from same pay for all the services you note. The new "rooftops" attract other businesses which provide jobs. Many studes show that school and road infrastructure is key to attracting new employers and keeping the ones you have from going elsewhere. The jobs provide employment for those in Cary and in the surrounding communities - including the UA - or don't you care about that? Probably not - you are a single issue lobbyer who has lost sight of anything except keeping your subsidies.

If Cary did not build new infrastructure for the developers who want to build on the fringes, they would simply develop elsewhere and that revenue would be lost.

Your proposal is for Cary to stay static - not grow. Just let the growth take place all around it. That may allow you to keep your subsidies but for the rest of us who live in Cary that is bad news.

Stan

hollyL

07-27-2004, 12:10 PM

I must not be understanding.

If someone who doesn't live in Cary and drives in Cary they need to pay for the roads? Is that what you are saying? My dad was over here today....he lives in Rocky Mount. Should he pay too? You're arugment has a double standard if I can drive on Morrisville, Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill etc. roads and not pay why should it be the other way around? I think that is the point I'm missing here.

johnb

07-27-2004, 01:14 PM

Holly,

This is unusual and I find it odd to actually say this, but Stan has a point and he's right.

There are only two political jurisdictions in the state that can fund road projects. The state itself and your municipality. Countys cannot, HOWEVER, due to the makeup of the NC legislature unincorporated areas get an inordinate share of the state road money. You and I pay for the roads in the unincorporated areas of Wake County. You and I also pay for the roads in the city of Cary. There are practically no jobs in the unincorporated area of Wake County. People move there to avoid munincipal taxes and rules. I can't blame them for that, hell, who wants the Cary City Council inflicted upon them? The point is this, the people outside Cary are in fact getting subsidized quite heavily by the people inside of Cary (and Raleigh and Apex and Holly Springs etc ad nauseum). I'm not saying the whole county should be annexed, but this issue of annexation and road costs should be dealt with from a basis in fact not fantasy.

The unincorporated area residents need Cary taxpayers far more than Cary taxpayers need them. Stan and I can get a backhoe to demonstate that point quite effectively. Ban county residents from munincipal roads and they'd all be begging to be incorporated.

This problem is one that exists because of the law blocking countys from building roads. This is a problem on a county by county basis. Wake's problem is within Wake county. Your father's road problem is within the county he resides in. Our problem has nothing to do with him and his problem has nothing to do with us.

StanN

07-27-2004, 01:24 PM

Holly,

the road system is a network. All or most of the towns you mention contribute to the cost of improving their part of the network for all of us to use. Most of the people in the muni's share the burden. ...except for those in the UA who are subsidized by the rest of us. (Visitors are a welcome exception)

This goes back to the old days when the UA was primarily farms that were largely self sufficient. But the UA in an urban county like Wake is virtually indistinguishable from the residential areas in the muni's it abuts - except it is somewhat less dense because it has no sewer system. The UA in an urbanized county is almost totally dependent on some muni or muni's nearby.

Dutchman Downs, where Rono lives, and Lochmere across the street, where I live, share many of the same services including roads and parks. I don't want to subsidize RONO which is what he wants me to do. We pay higher taxes so that they can pay lower taxes - it is as simple as all that.

What is it that you don't understand???

stan

johnb

07-27-2004, 01:50 PM

The solution to this is simple. NC countys should be responsible for the construction and maintenance of all non interstate and non US highway roads within their borders. THAT would have the residents of Dutchman's Down screaming bloody murder.

Rono

07-27-2004, 02:48 PM

DELETED

Rono

07-27-2004, 03:11 PM

Johnb wrote

There are practically no jobs in the unincorporated area of Wake County

I wrote

Funny how when RTP grew, Cary began to grow. What was the population in Cary in 1975?

YOU DECIDE!

and BTW...many of the roads were once cow paths between farms. Of course North Carolina was not a part of the 40 acre grid national land survey.

How the road structure, payment for and maintainence of has little impact on the big picture of involuntary annexation.

It is just one of those smoke screens that tha American Planning Association and the League of Municipalities use to detract from the real question of property rights and real costs!

johnb

07-27-2004, 03:24 PM

Rono,

Here's the deal, would you exchange immunity from annexation in perpetuity in exchange for the unincorporated areas of Wake County being made to fund their own roads? Do you really want that trade off?

I get the feeling that in this one instance Stan is right. You want the rest of us to subsidize your roads PLUS you want immunity from annexation.

I'm all in favor of giving you folks immunity from annexation, but ONLY if you pay your own way.

hollyL

07-27-2004, 03:41 PM

So who pays for the roads in Dutchman Downs now?

Rono

07-27-2004, 03:55 PM

Deleted

johnb

07-27-2004, 05:25 PM

You can find a pretty basic overview of it here Rono:

http://www.ncdot.org/financial/fiscal/Enhancement/Powell_Bill/partrequirements.html

Munis get 1.75 cents per gallon back from the state. Funny, the state should be giving all of the gas tax, minus the money necessary for Interstates, US highways, and maybe even NC highways but that isn't what they do. Even worse, places with higher population densities and high gas tax revenues should be seeing those roads built and maintained in a manner commensurate with the amount of gas tax revenue generated. Yet we don't. Rural areas west of here get highway 64 widened to become a four land divided highway while highway 54 through Cary and Morrisville is a nightmare.

The munincipalities are getting financially short changed. You want to be free of annexation, fine, you eat the $1 million per mile to construct rural roads, such as Olive Chapel Road, and leave the residents of the city of Cary out of the funding of it. You and all the other Wake County residents in the unincorporated areas need to put your money on the table and pay for your own local roads without sticking the rest of us with the bill. Much like we shouldn't be stiffed subsidizing the County school system, the Sherriff's department, and so on and so forth.

A while back I argued with Stan that there was no point in Cary taxpayers complaining about funding the Sherriff's department as it was such a small expense and our own city council is so irresponsible anyway. Well, you anti-annexation folks have made me see the light. We city dwellers in Cary need to pull out of the Wake County Public School System. That way Cary can guarantee a quality education to all Cary students whether they live in Wake or Chatham County. Then we can properly fund our schools without being a burden on the unincorporated areas of Wake County.

Do you support state legislation to relieve Cary residents from paying county taxes contingent upon the establishment of a Cary city school system?

Look here: http://www.ncdot.org/planning/development/TIP/TIP/Trans/division5map.htm

Oh, there is this matter of highway 55 in rural Wake County. The state is taking 15 million dollars to widen a road through the unincorporated area of Wake County and we are all getting stiffed with the bill. Since the unincorporated areas are so self-sufficient, you guys think you can take care of that and stop throwing the burden on the rest of us?

Rono

07-27-2004, 05:34 PM

Deleted

johnb

07-27-2004, 05:37 PM

The same group in the legislature that are going to standby and smile while you get annexed. It's a process in which decisions are made for political reasons, not reasons of need or merit.

johnb

07-27-2004, 05:41 PM

Rono,

Do you support state legislation to relieve Cary residents from paying county taxes contingent upon the establishment of a Cary city school system?

Let's liberate each other. Cary won't involuntarily annex land in the unincorporated areas of Wake County and you all stop asking us to pay county taxes. Fair deal? We each pay our own way and leave each other alone. What could be fairer?

Rono

07-27-2004, 06:04 PM

DELETED

johnb

07-28-2004, 01:38 AM

Rono,

The roads funding scheme currently in place disadvantages Cary and places like Cary a great deal It isn't fair, it isn't equitable, it isn't based on need or usage, the decisions are purely political.

Cary is, from a governmental perspective, a cash cow. Combine that with my basic desire to treat people like adults and leave them alone and I think the the "divorce" idea is a d@mned good one. We, in Cary, subsidize the begeebers out of road construction projects in unincorporated areas all across the state. If it were roads of national or statewide importance that would be fine. But NOT for local roads. If you guys in the unincorporated areas really don't want to be annexed you really have no right to lay claim to the property taxes the citizens of Cary pay for your local roads and other "services". Yet you do. That's not right. If you are unwilling to put your own money on the bar don't order a beer my friend.

...That is laced with overtones of past south...

When are you people going to get over the past? Government mandated segregation is a dead issue. It seems that as long as some Donkeycrat can wring some benefit out of being a racist, whether pushing Jim Crow or AA quotas the left will keep flogging that horse. You guys need to realize the horse is dead and that type of rhetoric merely offensive now.

Local school districts keep the control closest to the parents and prevent the abuses present in involuntary assignments. Parents who care will take whatever steps necessary to provide their kids the best education they can. If the left continues it's assault on family choice more and more students will be enrolled in private schools.

Rono

07-28-2004, 08:58 AM

Johnb wrote a re-quote

That is laced with overtones of past south

As the one who wrote the above as explanation to why I could not support your ideas, to the one who seems to have found that my convictions and stand hit one of his sensitive nerves, I offer only the following.

Democracy is established for the good of the many.....the majority will of ALL the people of this country. It is not to be bought off and paid for as some of your previous posts suggest. It is also not just for special interests and those who can afford to pay.

With that, I end this discussion and will pull my previous posts. My only goal in life is to see that the good of the many is served in our country. I believe in ONE America, not the TWO Americas, one of the rich and one of everyone else.

As was stated the other evening, your side, the "other side" needs controversy to survive. As for me, I refuse to engage in running down your ideas and instead opt to look for solutions to the complex issues our county and our homeland faces and put them out for the people to choose.

So let’s cut to the chase. Annexation locally is a complex issue. I am the messenger for what I firmly believe is the overwhelming majority of citizens who, while not being extremely politically savvy,(and who by the way don’t desire to be) understand that this law violates the very rights our forefathers laid down for us. I stand with proof of this support by the signatures on petitions. Your side that supports annexation can neither gather the support of the people annexation is supposed to serve and even worse, cannot show its belief is of the majority will.

Here is my real challenge for YOU to belly up to the bar with:

Advocate a referendum of BOTH INSIDE CARY AND THE AREAS UNDER ANNEXATION CONSIDERATION WITH THIS QUESTION

“SHOULD PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE ON ANNEXATION?”

After all they both are affected. You even have the upper hand…You can sell what your shoveling in support of involuntary annexation by simply telling those inside Cary that by taking taxes from people outside of Cary, it will probably prevent THEIR town taxes from raising…FOR NOW.

You tax cut hose noses should be able to get the majority support for that right?

I don’t believe so. I believe that the vast majority of American citizens are honest decent people who know right from wrong and will, when asked, do the right thing…. understand that this law is un democratic and un American So, I fear not this challenge.

Don’t forget I’m a Wisconsin boy and I will take the challange any day of the week to “drink” you under the table when it comes to the will of the majority.

So, advocate to put it to the test by advisory referendum!. I don't beleive you and your kind will do it because you know you are in the minority! Go sell what you are shoveling and see what it gets you. I will continue to sell the will of the majority. I think in this country, unless the right wing extremists have changed this too, the majority will still get me elected every time (except of course if I was Al Gore in 2000)

The challange is here..take it or leave it. I end discussion and end debate.

johnb

07-28-2004, 10:37 AM

I owe Stan Norwalk a huge apology.

He was right about you anti-annexation folks.

I let my guard down, I bought y'alls argument that this was solely about "freedom", ie, you not wanting to be annnexed. I was wrong. It really is about you folks wanting other people to pay your bills. Nothing more.

As an aside, I spent a lot of years in the upper Midwest, I know your type Rono. Praire populists, demogoging against business with a heavy dollop of socialism thrown into the mix. You follow in the grand tradition of Robert (LaFollette) the Fraud. The hillarity of it is that you guys all think you can pass the bill to someone else every time. You could win an election in Chapel Hill but if you spoke honestly and told people exactly what you stand for your chances in Wake County are slim to none.

To Stan:

Mea Culpa compadre, I saw a cat and you saw a leopard. You were right.

hollyL

07-28-2004, 11:27 AM

johnb

07-28-2004, 12:02 PM

Holly,

You are correct, the city does not. You and I do however. You see, Wake County, like all countys in NC, cannot own or repair roads. It is prevented from doing that by law. The state owns and repairs the roads in the unincorporated area. There is a formula called the Powell Funding Bill that regulates how much money the state returns to munincipalities for their roads since all the gas tax money goes to Raleigh first, then back out.

Unfortunately, the decisions on the money spent on the roads int he unincorporated areas are not made on any established formula for you and I to discuss. The decisions are political. Which is why Marc Basnight could get highway projects in Dare county done while I-40 is a mess. We need to have the tax money going to road projects in unincorporated areas being divided up based on need/usage, not on politics. But that is a second issue. It matters here only to show that we all pay for Olive Chapel Road in rural Wake County, a road with only local significance.

The point of it is this, you and I and Rono all pay for the Wake County roads. You and I pay for the roads in Cary. In some cases this is fine, ie, if it is a road of national or statewide importance (an Interstate or a US highway, maybe even an NC highway), but why local roads? What Rono, et al, want is to be free of the higher taxes Cary imposes to build roads (we use bonds plus gas tax money to deal with our roads) but yet they still want the people of Cary to be paying to build their local roads while simultaneously being exempt from the annexation that would burden him with the cost of paying for the Cary roads he uses daily.

I would have no problem, personally, having the legislature give people in the unincorporated areas of Wake County a guarantee or immunity against involuntary annexation, providing those people then assume the financial burden for their own services (roads, police, etc..). We pay our way, they pay their way. That is what set Rono off like a bomb. The humorous side of it is that Rono was making arguments that he didn't want to pay for the added luxuries Cary spends money on. Initially he fooled me, I thought he meant junk like Regency Park and the Aquatics Palace. I now realize he meant roads and utilities. 8)

dhyatt

07-28-2004, 12:16 PM

I'm trying to understand this issue - really. From what I can see Cary doesn't pay for any of the roads outside the city limits - at least they are not suppose to:

"These funds shall be expended only for the purpose of maintaining, repairing, constructing, reconstructing or widening of any street including bridges, drainage, curb and gutter, and other necessary appurtenances within the corporate limits of the municipality" (HB 1661- don't know the statue).

So...the unincorporated areas are paying for the roads through the gas tax but only the munis get the money?

If munis can only maintain their roads then why would they pay for Olive Chapel road? I think that the county is getting some of this money too to pay for the unincorp areas??

Also, the $ is distributed by population not land area so it would be interesting to see how benefical it would be to Cary to, for example, annex 10 acres with only 2 people living on it. It would increase the property taxes of course but it wouldn't really increase the money for roads esp. compared to a more densley populated area.

I appreciate that this is a "hot" issue and it may seem I'm asking silly questions but I think it is so complex and important to understand.

Thanks
Holly

Holly,
First let me say thanks for joining in the discussion AND taking the time to try and sort through the issues. I wish more citizens would do so - even though there will always be disagreement.

As you've seen by now, annexation is a heated and complex issue. I'll try to summarize where most of the controversy really is (at least from my vantage point).

First of all, to help put things in perspective; are you aware that Cary is loaning the NC DOT $14,000,000 to expedite the widening of Hwy 55? Are you aware that Cary is widening roads throughout town that are technically the states responsibility? Are you aware that our state highway fund is routinely raided to help pay for such things 'More at Four' - a glorified taxpayer-funded daycare? Are you aware that that certain powerful NC House & Senate members get roads built in their own rural districts even as more heavily traveled municipal roads suffer?

The facts are these:
No one wants to pay any more in taxes than they have to.There are numerous county and state-wide services used by all citizens - including many that are only provided at the county level.There are some ammenities provided by municipalities that are used by those living in UAs. Some of these are direct (parks for instance) and some are a bit more abstract (having multiple Lowe's & Home Depot's near by). Both are primarily a result of the higher density population that's more typical of a municipality.Municipalities, on average, are far more regulatory than either the county or the state.Citizens living in a municipality pay twice (roughly) what those in UAs pay for essentially the same (or sometimes worse) quality of life.Access to city water and sewer isn't enough to justify the tax disparity, even though, IMO, I believe it to be more environmentally sound. FWIW - I have more concern over the proliferation of wells than I do with modern septic systems.
I think the combination of substantially increased costs with limited benefits, coupled with additional unwanted regulations, is what drives most of the anti-annexation fervor. There also the "I just don't like being told what to do" factor thrown in for kicks.

What really complicates things from a public policy perspective is that while some areas are "cheaper" to annex than others, annexation mostly results in short term revenue increases for a town and long term higher costs. According to every study I've read, Cary is pretty close to 'optimum' size all ready. Making it too much bigger will only result in higher taxes - sooner or later.

johnb

07-28-2004, 12:35 PM

Holly,

This may help:

Counties in North Carolina do not own or maintain roads. Any road/street
will either be in a municipal system, state system, or private. Here are a
few links to web sites concerning roadway construction projects:

http://www.ncdot.org/projects/ and

http://apps.dot.state.nc.us/quickfind/tipsearch/data.asp

For specific questions about projects or maintenance contact the

Wake County District Engineer -
http://apps01.dot.state.nc.us/apps/directory/1839.html

Maintenance Engineer - http://apps01.dot.state.nc.us/apps/directory/1912.html

hollyL

07-28-2004, 12:45 PM

Thanks! This is very helpful.

-h

Don

07-28-2004, 12:56 PM

Why are all of Rono's posts deleted?

Rono

07-28-2004, 01:01 PM

To set the record straight, the below post from an Imperial Cary resident set me off Holly

...That is laced with overtones of past south...

When are you people going to get over the past? Government mandated segregation is a dead issue. It seems that as long as some Donkeycrat can wring some benefit out of being a racist, whether pushing Jim Crow or AA quotas the left will keep flogging that horse. You guys need to realize the horse is dead and that type of rhetoric merely offensive now.

I live on the beleif of "liberty and justice for all" I will not stand up for ideas that have, in my opinion, overtones that will seperate one group from another or treat one group different than another. That is NOT SOCIALISTIC, that is just being fair. The majority will decide what is fair.

Watch the spin Holly. When you have a member of the right, aligning themselves with professed democrats who supports annexation, but who also blasts a North Carolina Democratic Legislator who got some roads built he did not like, but that same legislator also SUPPORTS ANNEXATION (Basnight) be aware of the "out of both sides of the mouth speak"

Also take notice the avoidence of the simple suggestion of majority rule, the very foundation our democracy is built on. Special interests hate this foundation because it does not support there agenda. They get very angry, spit out statements such as above, and they avoid at all costs wanting a show down by a vote of the populace. They never say this publicly, but they also never say..."yes lets put it to a vote and settle it our countries way, the democratic way by rule of majority" No, they won't do that because they think they know better than the majority.

As a former public servant, I saw this all the time and can tell you that they invented the phrase "look out for number #1" and to h*ll with the rest

Also be aware that when things get heated here look for the following type of hints that are a 'round up the kin folk" battle cry:

"I bought y'alls argument"

Thats a hint that it is time to bring out the North / South divide. Fortunately, in and around Cary, that does not draw too many to the cannons anymore. The United States is one big county, but sometime in the heat of a arguement, that gets forgotten here along the way

Your a smart lady Holly, I know you will come to your conclusions by listening to all sides and then standing up for what is right

Rono

Rono

07-28-2004, 01:08 PM

Don H wrote

I think the combination of substantially increased costs with limited benefits, coupled with additional unwanted regulations, is what drives most of the anti-annexation fervor. There also the "I just don't like being told what to do" factor thrown in for kicks.

What really complicates things from a public policy perspective is that while some areas are "cheaper" to annex than others, annexation mostly results in short term revenue increases for a town and long term higher costs. According to every study I've read, Cary is pretty close to 'optimum' size all ready. Making it too much bigger will only result in higher taxes - sooner or later.

Thanks Don, I could not have said it better myself!

Cathy

07-28-2004, 01:16 PM

Don,

FWIW - I have more concern over the proliferation of wells than I do with modern septic systems.

Please explain.

What really complicates things from a public policy perspective is that while some areas are "cheaper" to annex than others, annexation mostly results in short term revenue increases for a town and long term higher costs. According to every study I've read, Cary is pretty close to 'optimum' size all ready. Making it too much bigger will only result in higher taxes - sooner or later.

Thanks for saying that and clarifying the truth of the impact on the Town.

Cathy

kellyc

07-28-2004, 01:35 PM

Why are all of Rono's posts deleted?

I was wondering the same thing

johnb

07-28-2004, 01:44 PM

Because he threw a hissy fit. Go back and re-read Stan's posts Kelly. He nailed Rono right between the eyes. What Rono wants is for Cary taxpayers to subsidize his local infrastructure/utilities while also being guaranteed immunity from forced annexation. I'm against forced annexation as staunchly as he. It appears Rono and I disagree on this matter of local political jurisdictions paying for themselves and not demanding subsidies from others as he(Wake County) does to us(Cary) today.

johnb

07-28-2004, 01:50 PM

I live on the beleif of "liberty and justice for all" I will not stand up for ideas that have, in my opinion, overtones that will seperate one group from another or treat one group different than another.

...and yet...

Also be aware that when things get heated here look for the following type of hints that are a 'round up the kin folk" battle cry:

"I bought y'alls argument"

You are a purveyor of that very bigotry. Fascinating. What's next? A crude accusation of the native Southerns being toothless 'shine runners? You believe there's a Klansman around every corner do you Rono?

kellyc

07-28-2004, 01:58 PM

This has got to be one of our best discussions yet. I happen to agree with Stan on this as well...especially when people buy homes that are within the ETJ or butt right up to the Cary City Limits. Im sorry but, I do think you are letting me pay for your roads....

Kelly

Don

07-28-2004, 02:02 PM

What Rono wants is for Cary taxpayers to subsidize his local infrastructure/utilities while also being guaranteed immunity from forced annexation.

No he doesn't. Driven through Medfield lately? I don't see Cary Water and Sewer there, nor do I see Cary paving the streets. The only infrastructure that Cary provided they "might" use that I can think of are parks. But if they want to participate in a city league or something, they pay extra. I will never buy the "they use our roads to shop" arguement. I drive to raleigh to shop but don't pay to use their roads so what's the difference? Those in the UA's chose to live there knowing Cary WOULD NOT provide them utilities or roads - they would have to rely on the county.(which is REALLY slow) Now someone is trying to change the rules - that's wrong.

Don

07-28-2004, 02:09 PM

Rono

07-28-2004, 02:10 PM

The reason I deleted them is because I felt that this discussion had turned personal. I had just, in the last few days, answered to some what I thougt were cheap shots, of why I was doing the things I am doing etc. I prefer to stick to the issues, but because of the personal shots I decided to explain what I do publicly. It became very clear that this was not getting any better and became a attack on me personally. I decided, that since I don't know much about everyone else here, I did not feel that my offer of explaination of what I do needed to be left on the board

It became very clear that this has become a pick a fight thing, and I finally said "end of decussion" and deleted what I posted. No sense trying to debate issues when others will not answer the questions. I will put forth my/our stand and let those who are interested decide what is right. I will not stoop to questions of my motive or intent.

Furthermore, If I stand on my opinion based on concerns of how it effects others, only to be blasted for making such such stand, it is time to move on to other, more productive ventures.

Cathy

07-28-2004, 02:31 PM

Perhaps I'm an anomoly, but I bought into Medfield because of it's lot sizes, older homes, woodsy ambience, private water and sewer, and it's easy proximity to I-40 and the airport, not it's proximity to Cary. Sam's Club and the new Harris Teeter are the only offerings that Cary has come up with that are too close to me to ignore shopping there. I'll bet the business owner's appreciate that even if the Town citizens think they are being taken advantage of.

Our household income is coming from a company that is located in Denver CO. They have Apartment Communities that my husband oversees in Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Durham, Raleigh, one in Cary, and one in Greenville. How dependent on Cary am I for my quality of life?? Not much.
C'mon, convince me otherwise.

I have never once been to a Cary Park. I've never been to Regency Amphitheatre, or ever attended any Cary festivals. I haven't taken any art classes at Jordan Hall, and if I wanted to, would be glad to pay the higher fee because I was not living inside the city. I've never joined any sports leagues and don't intend to. If I did I would gladly pay the fee.
I don't walk the pedestrian trails the Town is providing, don't intend to. One exception might be that when they put in that Town Hall Art, I might take visiting friends from out of town down there to see it just for a laugh.

I don't long for Cary to maintain Medfield's roads. Most of us here don't want Cary's water, or sewer, or streetlights, or curbs & gutter, or sidewalks, or trash collection. We also don't want their "connectivity" or their sign ordinance. Or their stormwater run-off from the higher density housing Cary encourages. We don't want Cary to use Reedy Creek any further for their storm drains either.
"We got along without ya before you encroached us, and we can get along without you now."

Cathy

Rono

07-28-2004, 02:47 PM

Cathy wrote

John, you know when you chose to move into the city limits you volunteered to become a part of all that the city chooses to spend money on.

Johnb wrote

Yep. That's why I don't support involuntary annexation. I don't believe in inflicting the J@ck@$$e$ on the Cary City Council on anyone involuntarily. However, that said, what's going on now ain't fair. It ain't right that Cary residents subsidize the unincorporated areas while we have to listen to their activists fight annexation on financial grounds. Our taxes go to build their local roads, but they fight annexation on the grounds that they don't want to pay for the bonds used to build Cary roads. I see a problem and it's correctible.

I'm also against involuntary annexation.

Personal? It got there after I said I decline Johnb offer to trade no annexation for road costs and didn't think that Cary should have it's own public school system. (my opinion, no attack) I add to this statement that both of these ideas had overtones of old south.....that DID NOT SUGGEST JOHNB FELT THAT WAY...IT WAS JUST MY INPRESSION OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THE SUGGESTION.. Johnb came back with a attack on my concern suggesting it (race) was used in some sort of wrong way.

Yes Johnb...thats when the bomb blew up. If I want you to put words in my mouth, I will let you know....in the mean time, you still refuse to answer the will of the majority question...why is that?

dhyatt

07-28-2004, 03:03 PM

First of all, to help put things in perspective; are you aware that Cary is loaning the NC DOT $14,000,000 to expedite the widening of Hwy 55? Are you aware that Cary is widening roads throughout town that are technically the states responsibility? Are you aware that our state highway fund is routinely raided to help pay for such things 'More at Four' - a glorified taxpayer-funded daycare? Are you aware that that certain powerful NC House & Senate members get roads built in their own rural districts even as more heavily traveled municipal roads suffer?

So Cary CHOOSING to invest in roads for the sake of those who live in Cary is reason enough to justify forced annexation of those who do not???

Nope. Just trying to point out reasons why it's such a contentious issue. If you really want a warped way of looking at it then try this: when our local officials decide to invest heavily in new roads, it mostly benefits those that don't acutally live in Cary, therefore one could say they are doing a better job representing UAs and other municipalities than they are us!

dhyatt

07-28-2004, 03:08 PM

Don,

FWIW - I have more concern over the proliferation of wells than I do with modern septic systems.

Please explain.

[snip]

Cathy

Do I really have to :? OK - nothing more than basic knowledge that aquifers take a really long time to fill and too many wells can drain them relatively quickly. We would have to have many more wells than we do currently before a real problem existed (or we're in trouble now depending on whom you believe) but I still see a potential problem down the road.

johnb

07-28-2004, 03:16 PM

johnb

07-28-2004, 03:19 PM

I don't long for Cary to maintain Medfield's roads.

Unless it's a private road, I and every other Cary resident pays to maintain Medfield's roads through our state taxes.

StanN

07-28-2004, 03:23 PM

John and Don (with some help here) have nailed this subject and Rono squarely in the middle. Stop NC Annexation and Stop Cary Annexation are special interest groups who want to preserve their subsidized position - i.e. subsidization of urbanized areas in the UA by those of us in adjoining municipalities. Specifically, those of us in Cary (and Raleigh) and other cities in Wake County) either pay higher taxes to cover the costs of road improvements or, alternatively, suffer a reduced level of services from the use of those services by those in the UA. The latter harms our economic development effort which benefits all - including those in the UA.

In addition, we in Wake pay for services we don't use or benefit from - e.g. the patrol portion of the County sheriff's services; the necessary regulatory infrastructure for wells, septic systems, small subdivision water and wastewater utilities, the county subdivision approval infra-sructure and most of the planning department - a partial list. These services are focused on the UA and are either unused or duplicated by municipal services. Believe it or not we, in Cary/Apex, even pay for Raleigh's and Eastern Wake's future water supply.

We, the taxpayers in the muni's, pay for these services because of a (deliberately) archaic accounting system that makes no connection between the cost of services supplied by the county and who benefits from those services. The county commissioners know how to correct these inequities (e.g. special tax districts in the UA) but because of the fear of losing vtes in the UA - and ignorance of the facts among citizens in the muni's) ignore the problem. Who pays and who benefits is the essence of government.

The county commissioners also know the simple means of minimizing future donut holes to avoid or minimize the pain of future annexations. They won't take that action because the development community objects. (One way is to require new developments to hook up to muni-utulities when it is economically practical to do so and when the muni agrees. Instead we have developers like those in Birklands deliberately develop in a donut hole and then advertise "located near all the ammenites of Cary without the taxes." )

Annexation is the relief valve to resolve these inequities. However, it is a releif valve with problems. The problems include the sudden shock of connection fees and impact fees. Annexation also relieves the added costs and inefficiencies of delivering services to donut holes in the ua by the county.

Now we have the spectacle of three Wake county commissioners, Chairman Kenn Gardner, Tony Gurley and Phil Jeffries, supporting the anti-annexation movement while refusing to lift a pinky to resolve the subsidy issue. They are elected by all of us - including the majority of us in the muni's - but act like their sole constituency is in the UA. (Note -Chairman Gardner is up for re-election this November.) They are counting on our ignorance and/or our not paying attention.

Consider furher the spectacle of one town council person (I'll protect the guilty) supporting the anti-annexation movement. Does he represent us or those in the UA, or is it simple ignorance of the facts?

RONO and his supporters obfuscate the issue of subsidies. He certainly is smart enough to understand the issue. Instead we get his life history, a critique of Cary government and his philosophy of government. Wanna bet what would happen to his broad citizen support if he looked for any sort of compromise that would involve higher taxes in the ua?

As to his political support - many of those e.g. Senator Richard Stevens, are using him and the stop annexation movement as a means of gaining political support for themselves. No one like higher taxes and our instinctive support is for those in the ua.

Ron Thoreson has every right to change the law and tilt the table in favor of those living in UA's around the state. And I admire the great job he has done in organizing the effort. But never once has he mentioned the issue of fairness and equity in taxation from the standpoint of the majority living in the muni's. Never once has he mentioned support for easing future annexation problems. To boot he labels those who oppose him as "socialists". Its the pot calling the kettle black.

stan

johnb

07-28-2004, 03:36 PM

We, the taxpayers in the muni's, pay for these services because of a (deliberately) archaic accounting system that makes no connection between the cost of services supplied by the county and who benefits from those services. The county commissioners know how to correct these inequities (e.g. special tax districts in the UA) but because of the fear of losing vtes in the UA - and ignorance of the facts among citizens in the muni's) ignore the problem. Who pays and who benefits is the essence of government.

The situation is even more corrupt than I thought possible.

I did not know that the county could create special tax districts to protect munincipal residents from paying to subsidize the unincorporated areas "services".

Great. I pay the same tax rates as Rono in order to keep his property taxes artificially low.

Who is going to defend that?

Stan, got a statute number on that authority?

StanN

07-28-2004, 05:42 PM

John,

Regarding special tax districts - we have them such as for fire and rescue squads. But first the commissioners have to request the authority from the general assembly. If there were anyone who wanted to broker a deal this is a possible direction.

stan

johnb

07-28-2004, 05:45 PM

Also take notice the avoidence of the simple suggestion of majority rule, the very foundation our democracy is built on. Special interests hate this foundation because it does not support there agenda. They get very angry, spit out statements such as above, and they avoid at all costs wanting a show down by a vote of the populace. They never say this publicly, but they also never say..."yes lets put it to a vote and settle it our countries way, the democratic way by rule of majority" No, they won't do that because they think they know better than the majority.

So you would have to say then that Government of the people, by the people, and for the people was lost on July 3, 1864 at the battle of Gettysburg wouldn't you? In 1861 the people assembled and voted for delegates to constitutional conventions in the various states and initially 7 states seceeded. After Lincoln demanded troops from all states still in the union in order to quell "the rebellion" the people in four more, including NC, voted to secede.

Somehow Rono, I would have to wager your bellicosity on the subject of majority rule is pure bull$hit. You believe it when it suits your cause, we'll see if you believe it when it contradicts your self-interest. That's the old rub on consistancy being a hobgoblin now isn't it?

Don

07-28-2004, 06:01 PM

Cathy

07-28-2004, 06:22 PM

No he doesn't. Driven through Medfield lately?

You just proved my point. The roads that you drive on, unless they are private, in any unincorporated area ARE paid for by you and I and everyone else in Cary and the state of North Carolina. They are state roads built and maintained by state money.

I will never buy the "they use our roads to shop" arguement.

I didn't make that argument. The roads in the unincorporated areas are state built and state maintained. In Cary the city handles our local roads theoretically, however, the city even loans money to the state so the state will work on their own roads through Cary. We pay our way for our local roads. We subsidize the state for state highways (55). Our state taxes pay for local roads in the unincorporated areas. Residents of the unincorporated areas don't pay for Cary's local roads. There is something of an imbalance there. I don't have a problem with the state funding road construction/maintenance of Interstates, US Highways, and maybe even NC highways but even their local roads? What these people are arguing against is basically being compelled to pay the full cost of their own roads (gov't "services").

I'm all for giving them what they want, permanent immunity against forced annexation, but d@mn, not when Cary city residents are on the hook to pay to keep their property taxes artificially low.

That is theft.
I have asked people who have lived here since the beginning of Medfield, and the State has never come into this neighborhood to maintain the roads until this year. And they made a mess that I would have gladly declined had they asked me. Up until this it was people in the neighborhood who filled in potholes or cleaned out clogged gutters.

The fact they came in here and resurfaced the road when it wasn't needed and made a mess, makes me very angry and I would still like to find out what was behind it. The only thing that I can think of is that it is part of Easley's 'Moving On' thing and he thinks it wll help get him votes. This mess won't get my vote.

John, half of what Stan is saying is over dramatized and speculative for the sole purpose of denigrating the attempt to put a stop to involuntary annexation.
If you believe the BS he is blowing and don't investigate this further on your own, I will lose ALL respect for you Johnb.

The things that Stan has listed as the "subsidies" that your County taxes are paying is a miniscule portion of your tax bill! And quite a bit of the Wake Co taxes collected are for the benefit of EVERYONE, especially THE CHILDREN (77%)!!!! (you can go vomit now John)

Rono

07-28-2004, 06:42 PM

So
you would have to say then that Government of the people, by the people, and for the people was lost on July 3, 1864 at the battle of Gettysburg wouldn't you? In 1861 the people assembled and voted for delegates to constitutional conventions in the various states and initially 7 states seceeded. After Lincoln demanded troops from all states still in the union in order to quell "the rebellion" the people in four more, including NC, voted to secede.

Somehow Rono, I would have to wager your bellicosity on the subject of majority rule is pure bull$hit. You believe it when it suits your cause, we'll see if you believe it when it contradicts your self-interest. That's the old rub on consistancy being a hobgoblin now isn't it?

Still can't answer the question? Does majority rule?

Why can't you just stand up for what you beleive instead of the put donws???

Tell everyone you don't belevie majority rule. That's all. The rest of your BS is just that...BS

Cathy

07-28-2004, 07:18 PM

Do I really have to :? OK - nothing more than basic knowledge that aquifers take a really long time to fill and too many wells can drain them relatively quickly. We would have to have many more wells than we do currently before a real problem existed (or we're in trouble now depending on whom you believe) but I still see a potential problem down the road.

I will agree that in order to supply everyone with water, we can't rely on drawing from the aquifer.
But I don't think that the number of individuals around here on wells is the main problem with ending up with a depleted aquifer.
If the environmentally minded were truly concerned about the health of the aquifer, then they would ask for an overhaul of the building ordinances that demand wide streets, curb and gutter, and such high density development that it can't be avoided to have high amounts of impervious surface.
If we encourage lower density, allow neighborhoods to be built without curb and gutter, using run off swales instead, like Reedy Creek Rd is for the most part, then we would be doing so much to recharge the aquifer with every available rainfall.
People who think curb and gutter looks so much "neater" and more "civilized" need to become more aware of the damage done by the wide streets and the "collect, pipe and dump" method of handling stormwater run off that the ordinances limit development to.
More innovation with permeable hard surfaces should be made more of a priority.

johnb

07-28-2004, 07:34 PM

So then no land in North Carolina should be unincorporated? It should all fall under the jurisdiction of a muni?

Not my point. I don't care whether or not all or any land in any given county is incorporated. However, there is something inherently wrong about forcing the residents of a munincipality to subsidize the tax bill for the residents of an unincorporated area for local "services" such as roads.

You don't seem to be catching the point Don. Currently there is no big fuss over you and I, as Cary residents, subsidizing road construction in the unincorporated areas around us. Mainly because there is a chance, a likely chance, those areas will eventually be annexed into Cary. We then have an interest in the roads and police services in those areas. If annexation is taken off the table those areas will NEVER become part of Cary. Then neither you nor I nor any other Cary resident has that same interest in the infrastructure of the unincorporated areas.

We don't pay taxes to build the roads in the Greenville city limits. We don't have an interest in it. The residents of Greenville pay. It would be unethical for them to come along and demand we in Cary pay an additional assesment on our property taxes to build their local roads, fund their police department, and other such "services". Why is it any different when the residents in the unincorporated areas demand we pay higher property taxes to subsidize their government "services"? Make no mistake, that is exactly what is happening now.

johnb

07-28-2004, 07:46 PM

Cathy

07-28-2004, 07:48 PM

johnb

07-28-2004, 08:03 PM

Still can't answer the question? Does majority rule?

It's ashame you have to rely on such cheap theatrics and demogoguery Rono. Majority rule in 1932 put Hitler in the German Chancellory. No Rono, I am not a fan of "majority rule" for the same reason the founding fathers of this Republic were not. They, like I, were believers in the rule of law. Law impartially applied to everyone, everytime whether the law is flawed or not. "Democracy" in the orginal Greek was an insult, one our Founders understood. It was synonymous with mob rule, government by hysteria and illogical passion. Your "majority rule" credo is a joke, the hobgoblin, consistancy eludes you. You cannot favor "majority rule" absolutely for if you did you would have to conclude you live in an occupied foreign nation occupied by a hostile power. One that was "readmitted" not by popular vote, your beloved "majority rule" but by Federal troops holding guns to the heads of legislators in Raleigh in the aftermath of the war. "Majority rule" ignited the Final Solution. "Majority rule" was the means to enact the Jim Crow laws. It was the rule of law that demanded the overthrow of "separate but equal". It was the rule of law that brought the misreants to trial at Nuremberg.

In ancient Greece the demogogue was the tyrannt who appealed to the base instinct of the people through passionate rhetoric.

Why can't you just stand up for what you beleive instead of the put donws???

I have been quite articulate detailing the problem and the solution. You feel threatened because your only appeal is to demogoguery.

Tell everyone you don't belevie majority rule.

Never said I did. I believe in the Rule of Law. That's what this nation is founded on. Are you one of these people that thinks Algor should be president because he recieved more "popular votes" than Bush did in 2000? I suspect you do, which explains a lot.

That's all. The rest of your BS is just that...BS

The members of the Cary city council need to read your posts. If there is any justification for ignoring you and your arguments they'll see it here. Get that annexation process completed.

If you had made a principled stand, ie, no annexation and relieving municipal residents of Wake County of the burden of subsidizing your property taxes you and I would be on the same side of this fight. That's not what you want. You want the immunity from annexation PLUS the right to burden muninicipal residents with the cost of subsidizing your property taxes. That is unethical and I cannot abide it.

Just a thought Rono, do you believe this nation is a democracy?

johnb

07-28-2004, 08:08 PM

What happens when what the majority wants violates the rights of the minority?? Is it just their tough luck??

Tell it to the Jews that went to Sobibor. Oh, wait, they're dead because the the Nazis became the dominant party in the Reichstag in the 1932 elections.

That's a b!tch ain't it? Majority Rule run amok.

Majority Rule does not protect minority rights.

Cathy

07-28-2004, 08:24 PM

And quite a bit of the Wake Co taxes collected are for the benefit of EVERYONE, especially THE CHILDREN (77%)!!!! (you can go vomit now John)

I disagree. Most of what the county collects ain't for my benefit. I'd be happy to shut down entire departments of the county government just as quickly as I'd shut down a huge chunk of the state and city government. I'm a veteran and had no idea the county had a "veterans affairs" department. Terminate it.

That is a classic case of bad money being thrown after lost money.

I'd be quite happy Cathy to pull the tentacles of this octopus out of all the crevices it now occupies. Let everyone see EXACTLY what these "government services" cost them. You guys don't see that because munincipalities with higher property valuations are artificially keeping your tax rates lower than than should be to fund the "services" Wake County has that are directed solely at the unincorporated areas. And I know, the biggest chunk goes to the schools. Break that up too. I doubt any munincipality would opt out except Cary, but, then Ramey Beavers, Bill Fletcher, et al wouldn't be burdened with the ABC crowd and all those other Cary parents they seem to hate.

Let the people pay for their own local government and let's stop hiding the true cost of government by playing the games we now play. This monster gets bigger and bigger in part because the cost of Leviathan is hidden. The people that CLAIM to want cheap and thin government but yet demand others subsidize it for them will be the ones to squawk.

77% is not a number that I, unlike some people, pulled out of the air.
I am taking that percentage right off of my tax bill. Are you saying that you can show me that this is not how the money is spent?

And I sincerely wish that you could "fix" all of the inequities to your wallet that exist in the current system, too John. I don't understand how someone like you has not moved as far away from these spendthrift thieves as he can, long ago. I don't know what it would take to remove the smoke and mirror tactics that cloud our judgement about the true cost of government supplied amenities. It won't be tackled because too many people are actually afraid of freedom. They want to talk about it, use it when it suits them, but they sure don't want to face life without the "nanny state" that protects them from cradle to grave.
For me, it isn't just about my wallet.

Cathy

"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville

"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that
of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others,
who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill,
is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association,
the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and
the fruits acquired by it." --Thomas Jefferson

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated: but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -C.S. Lewis

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." --James Wilson

johnb

07-28-2004, 08:38 PM

I don't understand how someone like you has not moved as far away from these spendthrift thieves as he can, long ago.

I used to live in the prettiest town in the South, Winchester, Virginia. Unfortunately I had a one hour commute to work. If traffic was good. So after a number of years of spending over 2 hours on the road each day I left, 10 years ago. Since moving to Cary I've had an average commute of 10 minutes. It's easy and I'm currently lazy. I'll be far from a munincipality, at least part time, in a few years. Besides, I don't sweat the leftists. There is one guy who reads but does not post on Cary Politics that figured out why I post here. It's amazing no one else has. Prior to the last election cycle I laid it out for Shiney Don and if he figured it out he hasn't said anything. And he won't, cause he'd never cross his future campaign manager. 8)

I don't know what it would take to remove the smoke and mirror tactics that cloud our judgement about the true cost of government supplied amenities.

I think it was British Prime Minister Pitt who said security was the call of tyrannts and the creed of slaves.

It won't be tackled because too many people are actually afraid of freedom. They want to talk about it, use it when it suits them, but they sure don't want to face life without the "nanny state" that protects them from cradle to grave.

I was happy as I could be the other day when my daughter, home from college for the summer, left a book she picked up for summer reading where I could see it. ...... Anthem ....... She'd already read Atlas Shrugged. I didn't raise a fool. :-D

You nailed it though, most people are afraid of freedom. They're terrified of it. The biggest lie in America is some slight variant to "I just want to be treated like everyone else." That's not what Rono's Majority wants at all.

Rono

07-28-2004, 08:41 PM

Thank you Johnb

You have answered the question, and I beleive you did so honestly. Let's agree to disagree. I do not want to continue down the path of personal attacks and I appoligize if you feel that I over stepped those bounderies.

That was not my intent and I admit I got alittle caught up in the "spirit" of the debate. I have a passion for what I believe and so do you. Let's leave it at that and agree to disagree.

Time for a new topic OK?

johnb

07-28-2004, 08:42 PM

By the way Rono, wanna answer now about your "Majority Rule" credo?

You would have to say then that Government of the people, by the people, and for the people was lost on July 3, 1864 at the battle of Gettysburg wouldn't you? In 1861 the people assembled and voted for delegates to constitutional conventions in the various states and initially 7 states seceeded. After Lincoln demanded troops from all states still in the union in order to quell "the rebellion" the people in four more, including NC, voted to secede.

Somehow Rono, I would have to wager your bellicosity on the subject of majority rule is pure bull$hit. You believe it when it suits your cause, we'll see if you believe it when it contradicts your self-interest. That's the old rub on consistancy being a hobgoblin now isn't it?

johnb

07-28-2004, 08:50 PM

No need at all Rono, you've not upset or angered me. My hide is as thick as my head. Consequently, don't think I have a personal animus against you, I don't. I'm just not one for trying to hide where I stand or what I believe in order to get people to like me.

I am not much for euphemisms or tip toeing around touchy subjects. Get it out in the open, throw it on the ground and call a duck a duck. Candor and transparency are what I value in politician and in political discussion.

That's why there are certain Cary City Council critters, WCPSS board members, and assorted other elected j@ck@sses that I find particularly despicable. If they have to hide what they stand for / believe in in order to get elected we have a problem.

Rono

07-28-2004, 09:13 PM

Johnb wrote

I am not much for euphemisms or tip toeing around touchy subjects.

In hind sight I see why you reacted as you did to my statement of "old south" I can trulyy say that I wrote that as a basis for MY decision to not agree with your proposition of roads for annexation, and did not mean to insinuate ANYTHING about your idea or intention on, race, or the like.

I won't and don't jump an a band wagon before I weigh things out. and that was a statement of what I weighed out...not what I though was your intent. When you responded, I took off as though you were accusing me of intentionally trying to egg on a discussion, which in hind sight is not what I should have done.

Where I do have problems is with when I think others try to put words into my mouth. As you can see by review, we both went into the reading between the lines mode, and that, in my opinion can and perhaps did cause the debate to degrade and the ugly ness to get uglier.

Once again my apoligies

StanN

07-29-2004, 08:57 AM

We don't know the exact amount of the subsidy because of the way the county books are kept, i.e. with some exceptions no attempt is made to match up the recipient of the service with the cost. Based on a lot of assumptions I have calculated it is about $200/municipal household./yr. Since there are many more households in the muni's the costs to the ua households of paying their fair share would be several times that amount. In the end the annual tax bill differential would be far smaller than it is today and fewer people would choose the UA as there place of residence. This is all to the good in reducing the total cost of providing services and also reduce the stress on the environment.

Here's a suggestion: With the exception and the statutory requirement of servicing the court system, let each muni decide whether or not it wants to provide the service the county now supplies - and accept the costs. For example - restaurant inspection, human welfare and health services, the sheriffs patrol, the county planning board.

What you would find is that the county would continue to provide the services it most efficiently provides. I think there would be a huge debate about k-12 schools but in the end the cost to individual muni's would be so high that they would leave the existing system alone. Ditto for the community college system.

I believe the county supplies services most of us don't care a fig about and the total cost of muni+ county costs would be forced down.

stan

johnb

07-29-2004, 09:34 AM

Here's a suggestion: With the exception and the statutory requirement of servicing the court system, let each muni decide whether or not it wants to provide the service the county now supplies - and accept the costs. For example - restaurant inspection, human welfare and health services, the sheriffs patrol, the county planning board.

That is not unreasonable. It might also force an issue I think we need to look at and that is munincipal consolidation. It would serve us all to examine the possibility of merging Cary and Morrisville specifically and secondarily Cary and Apex. A munincipality of that population and compact of a size compared to a whole county could probably deliver a lot of the basic functions of gov't as cheap if not cheaper than the county.
A Capexville would be quite unique in retaining a very high property valuation, solid mix of residential/business property, non-existant slums within it's borders, and a host of other very favorable economic factors.

I think there would be a huge debate about k-12 schools but in the end the cost to individual muni's would be so high that they would leave the existing system alone.

I disagree. Since Cary is crossing County lines we are in a different boat than Raleigh. All Raleigh kids go to WCPSS schools if in the public school system. It's okay for a public school system but it's still just a public school. Cary now has kids in Chatham County. Given time Capexville will be moving south as well towards Lee County. Cary has an incentive to have a munincipal school system other munis in Wake County don't have, ie, the interest in ensuring all kids in the public schools get the same, level, crappy public school education. That cannot be attained with kids districted in multiple public school systems. Just a thought. Besides, if the public schools were worth a d@mn we wouldn't have to rely as much on the community college system to pick up the slack. The second is required because the first is such a mess.

hollyL

07-29-2004, 10:02 AM

I think that one point missing here is that regardless of the problems there seems to be only one main solution presented - annexation. Annexation is a possible (although I don't think the most fair) way to resolve these issues. It may be best to work the problem forward - i.e. road costs - through to a solution and not make it an annexation - let's justify it backwards process.

I don't think it is "fair" to pay for other's road (agree with Stan) but I think it is more unfair to unvoluntarily annex them (agree with Rono). There has to be a different and more fair solution.

Or so I think anway...

Rono

07-29-2004, 10:20 AM

I have a sincere, no harm intended question for both you (Stan and JohnB)

Have you considered running for Pulbic Office? You both have ideas for changes, would not "getting in the game" help bring these ideas to the forefront for debate and possible change?

I as of now, am a one issue messanger (annexation) I know that both of you will tell me that your issues dove tail with annexation. But I liken it to pro life /pro choice, there are many underlying issues, but it is still described as a two sided event For or Against

That being said, you two don't have a single "one issue" as I do. So I hope you see that my question is sincere.

I know that lot's of people get into politics because of passion for working for or against an issue or many issues. That also being said and to answer the question before I get it, I have been in politics before, and if I ever decide to go there again it will not be on just one issue. Now is not the time for me, but I will not rule out the possibility in the future.

I pesonally believe that everyone should get involved at some point in there lives, but in reading and watching both of you with your concerns and ideas, running for office is a question that I think is fair.

If you want to tell me to MYOB, thats fine. I am just curious.

Rono

johnb

07-29-2004, 10:46 AM

Holly,

I have two gripes against Cary's forced annexation scheme.

1-it seems to me that it is being done in order to fund financial commitments already made, ie, I get the impression annexations are planned out some years in advance and bonds/budgets are made with the implicit assumption that "x" value of property will be getting annexed. Thus the city is assuming the property taxes off that soon to be annexed land will be available. This violates the old "don't count your chickens before they hatch" philosophy in real dramatic fashion because the city has to have it happen regardless of the desires of the homeowners, regardless of all other issues, it has to happen no matter how many corners the City cuts with the law etc...

2-it seems to me that it is being done, from a geographical perspective, so randomly as to guaranttee the creation of more donut holes, thus ensuring we're gonna have more fights later. It should be done to solve border issues, not to create more.

The whole process is rotten as is the before and after situation. Ron, I'd never win. Libertarians are almost guaranteed to be electoral loosers. If you're unwilling to rob Peter to buy Paul's vote, why the hell would Paul vote for you?

kellyc

07-29-2004, 11:41 AM

I have a sincere, no harm intended question for both you (Stan and JohnB)

Have you considered running for Pulbic Office? You both have ideas for changes, would not "getting in the game" help bring these ideas to the forefront for debate and possible change?

I as of now, am a one issue messanger (annexation) I know that both of you will tell me that your issues dove tail with annexation. But I liken it to pro life /pro choice, there are many underlying issues, but it is still described as a two sided event For or Against

That being said, you two don't have a single "one issue" as I do. So I hope you see that my question is sincere.

Rono

No way I am letting John or Stan kiss my dog so they can be an official in the Town of Cary. I would love to see John run. I'd probably help him with his campaign as long as the other candidate wasnt some real kick *** hottie or something like that.

Celebate John For Cary

Kelly

johnb

07-29-2004, 12:16 PM

Oh? So you'd pull the pins on the grenades then hand them to me to throw at City Hall ?

kellyc

07-29-2004, 12:23 PM

Most definitely. If for no other reason than to see the fireworks at the council meeting. Heck...we could solve our budget problems by selling tickets for admission. John I think you have great ideas (at times) but I think sometimes they scare people. Sometimes ignorance is bliss. You are generally on the right track..but its kind of that if I cant see it it wont hurt me mentality that abounds in the electorate. Thats what would hurt you in an election.

Kelyl

Rono

07-29-2004, 12:32 PM

Kelly wrote.

real kick *** hottie or something like that

please, forgive me in advance, but when I read the above, I broke out laughing....not at you personally, but in wonderment of what "kick *** hottie or something like that candidate is. Mind you, I am assuming this "candidate" you are refering to with this description would be a male. (Probably because you are female) Perhaps I am way off base, so, not that it is any of my business (and tell me to MYOB if you want) but would you care to elaborate? [/quote]

kellyc

07-29-2004, 01:20 PM

Well since you asked..

Hotties (good looking guys) fall into one of 3 categories....Hottie, Oh My Hottie, and kick *** hottie.

A hottie is someone that is of good looks and just catches my eye. Often time men in uniform just instantly fall into this category (like a cop). Also a nice fitting suit can make just about any guy a hottie. Emphasis is on the nice fitting part.

An oh my hottie, is going to get me to stop what I am doing to watch him. This guy from Sex and the City falls into this category for me.
http://www.hbo.com/city/cast/character/aidan_shaw.shtml . So they would be like a 5 on the hottie scale.

A kick *** hottie not only will get me to stop what I am doing to watch him, but also gets me to keep my eye on him until I cant see him anymore. My hubby fits in this category. So does this guy from Sex and the City.
http://www.hbo.com/city/cast/character/jack_berger.shtml Both of these guys are 10's on a 5 point hottie scale.

But one thing to keep in mind...a personality has as big of an impact on the hottie scale as looks. A bad personality will cause a kick *** hottie to become a turd, where as a really great personality can make a hottie a kick *** hottie?

How's that for an explanation? Minds are spinning I am sure.

Kelly

johnb

07-29-2004, 01:24 PM

Can open........worms everywhere....

Rono what the hell were you thinking?

kellyc

07-29-2004, 01:26 PM

Why whaddda ya mean John?

Kelly

Rono

07-29-2004, 01:37 PM

I must say I am glad I asked.....You never know what your going to learn on Cary Politics now do you!

Thank you for your openness!

Rono

hollyL

07-29-2004, 01:43 PM

John Edwards = hottie :wink:

kellyc

07-29-2004, 01:45 PM

Oh yeah....he's a hottie.

Rono

07-29-2004, 01:45 PM

kellyc

07-29-2004, 01:51 PM

Johnb wrote

Can open........worms everywhere....

Rono what the hell were you thinking?

Wasn't fishing, but now got a lot of bait. I have no intention of catching anything with it (not into guys) but something I suppose I could pass along to female friends.

I does raise another question though...when hubby and another kick *** are in the same room, what happens to heart rate? Double or Trouble?

Rono

You know that really depends. My hubby is cool. He knows I am going to call someone a hottie if they are. But he also knows that I am going home to/with him. And it works the other way too. Im sure in other relationships it can cause a lot of problems. I think its a matter of a comfort level with one another.

Kelly

kellyc

07-29-2004, 01:58 PM

John Edwards = hottie :wink:

You know the whole Edwards family is cute. Its almost scarey how cute they are.

Kelly

dhyatt

07-29-2004, 02:04 PM

Since I don't dare touch the 'hottie' portion of this thread, I'll ask a more general question...

Jennifer Ronbinson (District 'A'), Jack Smith (District 'C'), and Julie Robison (at-large) are all up for re-election next year. Who should stay and who should go and why? Let's have some specifics (even if you feel the need to post anonymously). Somebody else go first ;-)

kellyc

07-29-2004, 02:06 PM

I think this is a thread of its own....but

I think as of now they should all stay, although I think they need to have be seriously challenged, and experience the fear of losing their seats. Kind of like a wakeup call.

Kelly

Rono

07-29-2004, 02:08 PM

Kelly Wrote

You know that really depends. My hubby is cool. He knows I am going to call someone a hottie if they are. But he also knows that I am going home to/with him. And it works the other way too. Im sure in other relationships it can cause a lot of problems. I think its a matter of a comfort level with one another. Kelly

I like your honesty Kelly. and it looks like trust and commitment play a big part as well.....but have to admit, if my wife used the term "kick *** hottie" I would have to ask her if she recently attended a Buffet concert without my knowledge. (although come to think of it...we have Toby Keith tickets coming up and she has never been to a Country Jam before...best she's done is Neil Diamond...hummm I wonder...???)

In any event the next time I need the blunt straight forward "female" perspective explaination, I will know who to turn to.

Rono

kellyc

07-29-2004, 02:16 PM

if my wife used the term "kick *** hottie" I would have to ask her if she recently attended a Buffet concert without my knowledge. (although come to think of it...we have Toby Keith tickets coming up and she has never been to a Country Jam before...best she's done is Neil Diamond...hummm I wonder...???)

In any event the next time I need the blunt straight forward "female" perspective explaination, I will know who to turn to.

Rono

Rono

Yes I am a pirate, 200 years too late. Toby Keith is great...

Kelly

Rono

07-29-2004, 02:43 PM

test

Don

07-29-2004, 07:11 PM

Can open........worms everywhere....

Rono what the hell were you thinking?

LOL!!!!!!!!!

Brent

07-31-2004, 09:31 AM

New residential development over $240K is "profitable" for Cary.

Correction...such new residential development WAS above a reasonable payback period break-even point, when the famous study was done...at the THEN-CURRENT impact fee levels (which have now been reduced).

Brent

07-31-2004, 09:57 AM

I think as of now they [Jack, Jennifer, Julie] should all stayKelly

On what basis? Because all of their names begin with 'J'? Because 2 of the 3 voted down those bad old elementary SROs and those cursed neon signs? :roll:

StanN

08-02-2004, 04:49 PM

Since I never will be a "hottie" let me take us back to annexation.

It might interest you to know that a few years ago the Wake County Manager was meeting with muni governments to discuss how the muni's could provide services (like fire, police, emergency medical) in donut holes.
(I was on the Wake Planning Board at the time.) The reason for this activity is that donut holes are costly to service. It is inefficient and costly to service a piece of UA here and another there when they are often small islands engulfed by the growth of muni's. This should be intuitively obvious, but in case it is not, consider the inefficiencies of the sheriff's patrol crossing through municipalities for which they have no official function, in orer to get to another piece of the UA.

Why do growing muni's exude around the UA to form donut holes? Consider the political fight and resultant ill-will each time this happens. Dutchman Downs is the perfect example. Further, the cost of supplying the utilities and services mandated by NC law may not be worth the added revenues. (This latter problem can greatly eased by requiring developers who choose to develop close to muni's to hook-up to their utilities when it is economically practicable to do so and when the muni agrees. )

In essence, the existing law encourages a land use pattern that is inefficient and costly - and under the existing accounting system we all bear the cost- including the majority of us in Wake who live in the muni's.

Still worse, providing an artificial tax advantage (i.e. a subsidy) to folks to live distant from their jobs, schools, services, stores, etc. requires someone-sometime to build roads (and in the long run water and sewer) to service the folks in the UA. It is more economically efficient for to develop areas that can be serviced by modest extensions to existing infrastructure.

Consider the analogy of someone who wants to build a home three miles from the neareast power line. Do you thin CP&L picks up the bill to hook them up?

Having said that, I am all for the freedom for anyone to locate their home in a more countrified area than in cities in towns. But many/most of them want "all the amenities of Cary (or someother muni) without the taxes" - to quote the developers the MacMansions on Penny and Holly Springs Roads.
There is no way that can be fair or right.

I agree that the very few who bought way out in the country 20 years ago and now have a muni at their doorstep have more of a case. (Consider that the average time in a residence is only seven years.) In part they have been compensated by the increase in housing values resulting from the developing muni. And in part their are winners and losers for any policy or ordinance. In the end laws have to be written that benefit the majority while still not trampling all over the minority. There is no question in my mind that annexation benefits the majority in Wake County - whether or not it tramples all over the minority who don't see it that way is the question at hand.

The loudly "squeaking wheel" of the minority (in Wake) has gotten the attention of the politicians. The politicians and the heads of this special interest group are counting on the inattention and and ignorance of the 3-1 majority subsidizing them.

stan