|
Hartbarger, Walker vie for Dillsboro’s top elected job
By Lynn Hotaling
|
|
|
|
Hartbarger
|
Walker
|
|
Dillsboro incumbent Mayor Jean Hartbarger faces a challenge from a town businessman.
T.J. Walker, who has not held public office before, has entered the race against the one-term mayor.
Chartered in 1889, Dillsboro traces its history back to 1883 when railroad lines reached the site of the present-day town. Dillsboro was named for William Allen Dills, who surveyed the town and owned much of the property it occupies.
Hartbarger, the town’s present mayor, is 68 and co-owns The Jarrett House, a Dillsboro landmark for more than 100 years. She has lived in Dillsboro for 31 years and served on the town board for eight years prior to running for mayor four years ago.
Walker, her challenger, is 52 and has lived in Dillsboro for the past 10 years. He owns and operates the Dillsboro Inn and has never held an elected office.
In written responses to three questions, Hartbarger and Walker discussed their views on Dillsboro and the issues facing the tourist-centered village and the qualities each can offer the town if elected mayor.
The questons they were asked and their answers follow.
Could you state your position with regard to the Dillsboro Dam?
Hartbarger: My focus has always been on what is best for the residents and business people of Dillsboro. I have no personal agenda, and I am not running against T.J.’s ideas for the dam.
I attended almost two years of stakeholders’ meetings where I fought for the dam. In any press releases from Duke, the power company is not going to say that the Dillsboro board voted to sign the agreement as a “four” – which definitely says that Dillsboro officials did not support removal of the dam.
It doesn’t make sense that a board that is so interested in the historical restoration of the town would want to tear down a part of Dillboro’s and Jackson County’s history.
When Ted Alexander, the mayor of Shelby and the regional director of Preservation N.C. visited at our invitation, I had the opportunity to show him the dam and powerhouse and its potential as a museum.
We all pay taxes to Jackson County for the commissioners to represent every citizen. The Dillsboro board felt that Jackson County was in a far better position financially to take on Duke Power than we are.
If we all win, then we keep the dam; if we lose, then we keep the land.
Walker: It is quite extraordinary that Duke Power and their supporters have almost cast a spell on this community in to thinking that the Nantahala/Tuckaseigee Stakeholder Agreement is the final decision made on dam removal and that it is a one-sided endorsement for removing the dam, when, by far, it was not.
This Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ball game is the real court of law to determine what shall happen, and it is still open season. We still have opportunities to do more than wish the Dam be saved, and there are many other Jackson County issues at stake.
This compromise agreement is the better alternative and addresses the management of the Tuckaseigee Watershed. For Dillsboro, our economy and riverfront neighborhoods, the better shape our watershed is in, the better off we all will be. The experts tell us “to look upriver, to look for what is coming down, from upriver.” The alternative agreement is by far a better action plan that deals with those issues of sediment, erosion and flood control. In that more complete pie, the slice about the town of Dillsboro and our dam being restored will be served. It now appears as if the Western Carolina University-owned Cullowhee Dam and power plant is going to be restored also.
Renewable energy sources like these dams are little treasures in today’s world, not just historic icons. We are very fortunate to have them in our unique mountains landscape and that Jackson County is fighting for them.
However, if elected, I would certainly have to serve the people of Dillsboro and not be reckless about prior commitments with Duke Energy regarding their stakeholder agreement. There are things Dillsboro should be doing to lend more support to Jackson County. We should at least be interveners, as observers, and address the issues from within the FERC process, and assist them when opportunities allow. We haven’t given up those rights, and there is still time. I don’t blame our mayor for everything though. The Town of Dillsboro was deceived and overwhelmed during a long and lengthy process. From that we stumbled into a weak position and have had questionable legal advice. Some of the deception, however, is self-inflicted with regards to this issue.
How do you feel about Dillsboro’s purchase of the Monteith property and current plans to develop it?
Hartbarger: The Monteith purchase was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for the town. We were able to buy the 16 acres for $110,000.
We received a grant from AdvantageWest for $10,000, with a match of $7,000 from Jackson County and $3,000 from the Economic Development Commission. With this money, we hired McGill and Associates (engineering firm) to come up with a plan for the best use of this property.
Parking was our first priority, and we wanted to include a park, the greenway, a much-needed community building, a natural amphitheater for local artists to perform, restoration of the house and a place for Kudzu to call home.
We received a Park and Recreation Trust Fund grant of $250,000 to begin our dream.
The ideas began to grow, and we felt this would be a wonderful place for all Jackson County residents.
It would provide a much-needed economic boost for Dillsboro by giving our visitors something to stay more than a day for – a stay in our bed and breakfasts or motel accommodations; shop in our unique shops; dine at our restaurants; enjoy the music of local performers; ride the train; attend a play; take an historic walk ...
Walker: This historic home and its preservation project and future park is a very positive thing for our community. It’s a great goal and direction for our town, but to an extent. I understand there are three phases to future planning and the town of Dillsboro has already put the cart before the horse and attempted to rush into all three at once. I am grateful to Emma Wertenburger in that she took the bull by the horns and set priorities on the historic designation and is already working on grants for the preservation of the Monteith home first thing. At one point it looked as though that might not be a primary goal with this property. During the last board meeting I attended, a preservation official praised the quality and condition of the 1910-built home and said that it was a special place to save. We do have a historical treasure.
From a planning and financial standpoint, certain realities have set in with the first cost estimates and bids from contractors for Phase 1. A lot of time was spent on rushing into grand plans and approvals for Phases 1, 2 and serious consideration as to what Phase 3 should encompass. Well, guess what – initial cost estimates for Phase 1 are said to be twice as much, as much as $60 thousand more than what the engineering consultants estimated it would be.
In my estimation, that reality made it clear that we need to back up, slow down, and have open discussions about future plans.
I think we should review our plans and simplify Phase 1, work on the historic preservation of the farmstead and make sure that item and those grants are administered well first.
Both the Montieth property and FERC relicensing are examples where we need to have local government in the sunshine with open planning and participation. Such important growth potential needs open lines of communication internally and with our neighbors. In my opinion, we have had poor supervision and delegation over town employees in these matters.
I have been involved as a contributor, landscape contractor and board of director of a major historic home/trading post turned historic landmark, preservation effort before – the Stranahan House in Broward County, Fla. I will lend my experience and energy to this open, community-wide project as a historic farmhouse and park.
Why do you think you would be the best choice for mayor?
Hartbarger: As I said, I’m not running against T.J. I’m running for the opportunity to continue what we have started.
I’m proud of our four-year record. In addition to the PARTF grant, we received a $20,000 study grant from the Rural Center to help the businesses affected by last fall’s flooding.
We are in the process of working with the Rural Center on a grant for a loan that, when paid back, would come back to the town to use for economic development. We are working on re-applying for a community development block grant that would help the residents of Hemlock Street improve housing and infrastructure.
We are applying for a Blue Ridge Heritage grant for the restoration of the Monteith house.
We have paved streets, added new street lights, voluntarily annexed a new residential area and so much more.
I promised four years ago that I would do everything I could to keep Dillsboro “unique” and not become an “Anyplace, USA.”
I hope my grandchildren will be able to say I kept my promise and that I did a good job.
Walker: I have lived here 10 years now, and it’s my time to be involved and help Dillsboro get to the next level as a village with a feeling of belonging and sense of community. Also, I know that it is a very important time for the town of Dillsboro in the areas of managing our resources and finances.
On the town’s docket at this time are agenda items that will have far-reaching consequences. There are some serious and calculated decisions that I don’t think have been thought out properly and, in some cases, addressed appropriately.
I am very optimistic about our future if we step back, observe our past and see how we have been functioning. It does take a village, we know.
First, I should explain that I am recently married for the first time, and my wife has graciously agreed to allow me to run for mayor. This gives me free time that I didn’t have before. Also, my business renovations are more complete, so I can delegate more time to the necessary political chores that are ahead of this town, rather than building renovations for Dillsboro Inn. I figure at this point that a better town of Dillsboro is very much in the best interest of my business and the lives and businesses of my neighbors.
I need to be frank about my experience with the town, and how I feel about my community. That is a requirement for my participation in this election, as is being above board, carefully saying what I feel and having things out in the open.
And I think it is obvious that we do not have open government in Dillsboro, and this has finally created too many problems. I don’t think it’s necessary to go into all problems of the past and make personal accusations, with the exception of this certain question that’s before us.
With all due respect, should not a town employee, who happens to be a town administrator (in Dillsboro’s case), who is supervised by the town board and mayor, be on track with that board and not plan or act too far ahead or too far behind? It is my humble opinion that the boundaries of our mayor and our board have regularly been compromised. There are a number of issues, including the one before us this week, where this type of misunderstanding has created division within the town of Dillsboro. I feel a more friendly and open government will foster cooperation.
(Editor’s note: This is the second installment in a series on Jackson County’s upcoming municipal elections. Next week’s paper will include discussion of Webster candidates; Sylva candidates will discuss issues in the Oct. 29 newspaper.)
|
