|
Commissioners should be more careful with taxpayers’ money
To the Editor:
When the June 22 Herald arrived, so had my monthly Social Security payment, and I was getting ready to write a check for $181.14 to pay county property taxes for three vehicles (two more than five years old). Thus I read with interest the news article on the 2006-07 Jackson county budget, approved unanimously on June 19.
Imagine my puzzlement when I learned that the budget, already $54 million-plus, had grown by another $150,000 in the last two months. Imagine my disgust when I examined the list of added budget items, many of which seem to be luxuries, not necessities. Plus there were a couple of non-budget quick decision outlays ($15,000 for a sprinkler system for a playing field at Smoky Mountain High School; $1,000 for travel for a youth baseball team which apparently has only a lone Jackson County player).
Then I compared our freehanded commissioners with the thoughtfully frugal Sylva town leaders, whose extended wrangling over cutting a single $20,000 budget item by 90 percent was reported in the same issue.
It would be wrong to say that our county commissioners spend money like drunken sailors, since that is really a slander on such sailors, who at least have the excuse of being drunk. But I would suggest that the commissioners aren’t always thinking soberly about us county taxpayers, who involuntarily provide many of the dollars they allocate.
Maybe in the future, they could try just saying “no” now and then to “nice to do, but not necessary” funding requests – or even do some serious budget trimming here and there. If they can’t do either, then they are clearly qualified to join the U.S. Congress, where they can be wastrels on a grand scale.
Jim Nicholl
Cullowhee
Road wash-out lowers property value, raises blood pressure
To the Editor:
With the severe storms of autumn 2004, we all witnessed a great deal of flood and erosion damage throughout the area. While the N.C. Department of Transportation generally did a very good job in making important repairs to local roads in a timely manner, some of their follow-up work was, in my opinion, not as well-executed.
A section of the N.C. 281 right-of-way washed out and has created an island in a branch sitting just above a waterfall located on my property. Without its removal it is only a matter of time before it washes over the falls, making a very nasty mess which will be difficult and costly to repair.
Giving DOT time to make the most important repairs to local roads, I called them several months after the storms to inform them of this problem area. I was told that they would take a look at it and get back to me. After their examination of the area they agreed that it was their right-of-way which had washed off and they would send a crew out to clean it up. Following up, I was told they did some work, but “Environmental” had said they could do no more. In actuality, the area did not appear to have been touched.
I decided to do some checking myself and made some calls to state environmental agencies and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. What they told me was contrary to what DOT had stated and, in fact, both the Federal Government and the State of North Carolina had made grant money available for stream reconstruction due to the storms. Unfortunately, with all the delays from the DOT’s inaction, the federal money was already gone and little of the state’s funds remained.
A meeting of state and local environmental officials was set up at the wash-out site to see if it was eligible for a grant for clean up. While these officials met at the property, a DOT truck stopped by and the driver told them that it was the DOT’s responsibility and they would clean it up. The officials agreed it was DOT’s responsibility and this effectively killed the possibility of a state grant for cleanup.
Learning from these officials that DOT had agreed to clean it up, I made a call to the DOT division office in Sylva to follow up. They had no idea who had told the officials they would clean it up, but they agreed to take a look at the site again. This resulted in DOT placing some large unsightly boulders on the bank above the branch to stabilize the right-of-way, but absolutely no clean-up was done. When I asked why no more was done, DOT flatly told me that they would do no clean-up. The engineer in charge said they were not responsible for the dirt after it left their right-of-way.
If DOT had told me this in the beginning there would still have been time to obtain a federal or state grant for the cleanup. Unfortunately, all their stalling and misinformation took so much time that the grant money is no longer available.
The waterfall on my property, the feature which convinced me to buy this property in 1988, is in danger of being virtually buried from a wash-out of the N.C. 281 right-of-way. Yet at the same time the DOT has spent, I was told, about $500,000 of the taxpayers’ money to clean up a similar wash-out only a few hundred yards down the road at a dry site on another person’s property who apparently has more influence than I do. His property value has been greatly enhanced at taxpayers’ expense, yet mine has greatly declined due to DOT’s failure to meet their responsibility of maintaining a sound right-of-way.
When will the favoritism of government officials end and all citizens receive the equal consideration guaranteed under the law?
Greg Walter
Tuckasegee
Organization remains committed to downtown Sylva
To the Editor:
In response to the editorial in the June 22 Sylva Herald, having been involved with Sylva Partners in Renewal (now Downtown Sylva Association) since 1993, I know firsthand that the directors of DSA are united in their resolve to carry forward the organization’s mission. While individual members of the board will of course offer the organization their own individual perspectives regarding Sylva’s decision to reduce funding, the body as a whole remains steadfast and intact.
Secondly, saying that living in the town limits or owning a piece of property there is the overriding criteria for caring about the future of the town of Sylva doesn’t consider the fact that property values throughout Jackson County are affected by the economic viability and aesthetic presentation of Sylva’s downtown. Indeed, all citizens of Jackson County and our many visitors are stakeholders in downtown Sylva.
It should be recognized that each member of the DSA board is a volunteer who is unselfishly giving many hours of their time in order to make downtown Sylva a better place for everyone. Six members (of 17) of the DSA board are property owners of one or more pieces of property in the town of Sylva and three other board members represent the county’s largest employers, where many of the town of Sylva’s citizens work. All DSA board members, regardless of whether they own property in the town, own a business in downtown Sylva, or are caring citizens of Jackson County, are volunteering their time for the greater good of the town, county and region.
Downtown Sylva is blessed to have a number of wonderful restaurants, several of which have received DSA facade grants. I applaud the very important part Sylva’s restaurant community plays in the overall economic vitality of downtown Sylva. The editorial specifically cited Meatballs, Lulu’s and Meriweather’s as examples of “being here before SPIR.” True, they were here before SPIR, but Meatballs is now gone, replaced by Mill & Main; Meriweather’s is gone, replaced by Main Street Sports Bar & Grill: and Lulu’s ownership changed after the retirement of the former owner. This is important to note as changes in these businesses has been driven, at least in part, by the revitalization project. For example, the building which houses Mill & Main recently underwent extensive renovations, Lulu’s has redecorated and added the outdoor dining area and the Sports Bar and Grill is currently being renovated – all post DSA. Would the owners of these and the other new businesses in downtown Sylva have invested their dollars if they were not riding the wave of a revitalized Main Street and Mill Street? If you have ever owned a business, you already know the answer – they probably would not. Would they be here if downtown looked like it did before the revitalization project? And, should the town of Sylva not be lauded for playing a major role in the revitalization of downtown, for investing in the infrastructure of its own historically unique downtown, and for supporting its own Main Street organization? It has been a real blessing to have the town’s support and partnership.
The problem in downtown Sylva pre-SPIR/DSA was not simply that there were a few storefront vacancies – it was more of a combination of the lack of building maintenance, which ranged from peeling paint, dirty windows, unattractive window displays, and mattresses in second-story windows; to a mix of retail stores that no longer carried desired merchandise; to lack of capitalizing on the historic and unique nature of downtown Sylva.
However the Main Street program, which is run by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, is much more than a band-aid for a few storefront vacancies or peeling paint, it is a proven model of economic development that has greatly benefited a number of our nearby communities. We can find examples of the Main Street approach as close as Waynesville, Hendersonville, and most recently – for the second time – Franklin. In fact, in nearby Franklin, it took town leaders allowing their Main Street program to die before they understood the program’s value. Recently, Franklin’s elected officials have not only revived their program, but they are currently funding and fully supporting the program and have hired and are paying a part-time executive director.
In summary, I don’t know who gave the Sylva Herald a “gloomy picture” of Sylva or the DSA, but don’t you believe it. DSA, along with its numerous partners and supporters, is and has been working to make sure that we are always proud of Sylva.
Linda Gillman
Sylva
(Editor’s Note: Gillman is DSA administrator and a member of the DSA board. The “gloomy picture” quote she refers to can be traced both to DSA board member and Sylva Town Board member Maurice Moody’s comments during Sylva’s budget discussions (“We need to allow the organization to exist. We need to fund them to allow them to exist. We all were here before the Main Street renovation. We all can remember how many empty storefronts there were. If we don’t continue the work, in 15 years Main Street will look like it did 15 years ago.”) and the DSA statement, which said the group was “shocked and disappointed” at the funding cut and termed that decision “incomprehensible.”)
Catman can’t meet every need
To the Editor:
In the past week I have had more than 20 calls from people, in and out of Jackson County, asking me to take their cat or cats into my shelter. I would like to let people know more about my shelter and what I can and cannot do.
Although I have a very large facility, I can only shelter about 60 cats. This number is set by my state license and by the amount of effort my volunteers and I can give. Catman2 in essence is a “mom and pop” operation. My wife and I, with the help of some very dedicated volunteers must do all the work. It is a seven days a week, 365-days-a-year operation. I have not had a vacation in the past nine years.
The mission of Catman2 is to rescue stray cats, take cats from people who must give them up and take as many cats from the Jackson County Animal Shelter as my space permits. About one-third of the cats I take each year, an average of 50 to 60, come from JCAS. I find new homes for about 150 each year.
I cannot board cats. People who board animals must have a license from the state and follow strict guidelines. If I boarded cats I would be breaking the law as well as taking business away from local kennels. Please don’t ask me to board your cat.
I cannot accept more cats than I have space. If I exceed my limits I could be in trouble with the state and I would also reduce the level of care for all cats in the shelter. I am committed to giving my residents the best care possible and I cannot do this if I allow my numbers to grow. If I were never to say “no” to the many people who ask for help, I could have a thousand cats in a very short time. My life and the life of the cats would be in ruins.
I hope you understand my situation and if you call asking me to help please don’t get mad and accuse me of not caring. I care and it hurts me every time I have to turn a cat away, but I can only do as much as I am able.
Harold Sims
Cullowhee
Sylva board members made right call in DSA funding cut
To the Editor:
In the recent bashing of Sylva board members Harold Hensley, Danny Allen and Ray Lewis in letters to the editor, newspaper comments and comments from “old guard” fellow board members, these men stood firm.
Not only has Lewis stated his position on the use of taxpayer’s money in an impartial and equitable way; fellow board members Hensley and Allen have in public statements and actions signified their intention to make judgment calls on the same basis.
Instead of speculating on the Downtown Sylva Association’s cut in funding, like the sky will fall on the town because of it and other dire predictions, let us talk about reality: money and responsibility, and when enough is enough.
Let us talk about money, or the lack of it, facing the town of Sylva, the guiding principle that prompted Hensley, Allen and Lewis to dig in their heels instead of raising taxes higher later. The town has many debts, and one of the largest is a $100,000 loan repayment to Jackson County on the yet-to-be-built library – an agreement to be paid in increments of $5,000 annually. The county can afford to contract nearly $60 million in debt, yet Sylva officials agreed to this when the town has poor streets, and lacks storm water drains and other basic necessities. This is an agenda project for downtown Sylva. Allen wanted to rethink this amount and was promptly invited to shut up; it was time to vote and it had already been agreed upon. Democracy in action. Was this a fair decision for homeowners who pay double taxes while county residents pay a single rate?
Exactly how much money has been expended on downtown Sylva? Incomplete figures will have to be given from some research I have (major amounts). Due to grant changes in UDAG funding, Sylva officials could have elected to use part of the $350,000 to repair our streets, storm drains, etc., but this amount was spent on Main Street. Constant digging on bad sewer and water lines which were known to be under the new paving probably increased the Main Street cost to half a million. Lack of storm drains on Jackson Street made it necessary to spend about $40,000 on repairs. If anyone wants to see what a half-million dollars looks like, go to the courthouse and look down Main Street. Consider this took place while some of us had to put up with a street that had no pavement for 46 years and several streets pouring water into their property. This is known as equitable and fair treatment for homeowners.
DSA (formerly Sylva Partners in Renewal) has received $20,000 per year in funding from 1997 to 2005. This time period would have enriched them by $180,000 to promote their business interests. If property taxes go up, the business interest can raise their prices on either their rental property or their services and goods, as the case may be. As ordinary taxpayers and patrons we have no economic means of recouping and letting someone else absorb the increase.
As time permits, I want to continue to discuss responsibility (is it needed?) and when is enough, enough? Do homeowners deserve consideration from other business interests as part of fair and equitable government?
In the interim I salute Hensley’s, Allen’s and Lewis’ courage to represent Sylva taxpayers as a whole, consistent with their concept of fair and equitable government.
Marie Leatherwood
Sylva
Business owner takes issue with Herald editorial
To the Editor:
I am writing in response to the editorial of June 22, 2006.
I found the piece to be eye-opening. I must say I was surprised to learn that the local paper holds its downtown neighbors in such low esteem. It was also insulting to read the newspaper’s opinion that the retail shops downtown owe their successes to one or two restaurants, (of which two named no longer even exist).
I’d like to state that we do own the two buildings our store is in, and pay town taxes on them both. What is more, my husband and co-owner of Blackrock grew up as a fourth-generation town resident who still owns and pays taxes on that property. Therefore, I feel quite confident we have done our part in helping to “foot the bill” when it comes to tax dollars being spent.
It is disappointing to think that the attempts by downtown business owners to create a more attractive downtown area are seen as nothing more than a burden on the town itself. One that is apparently heavy enough to elicit a seething resentment from The Herald and several town commissioners.
The editorial of last week implied downtown had never experienced a “run down” period. I have lived in this community for almost 40 years. I’m not sure what type of rose-colored tinting you’ve got on your windows at the paper, but to say downtown Sylva is no better than it has ever been is simply a misstatement.
Yes, the Mill Street project was expensive. However, wasn’t it, in truth, the responsibility of our town to provide decent sidewalks, parking spaces and better traffic flow, when these improvements were so plainly needed? And, not only was the project a success, but it readies business owners to update their Mill Street side of our buildings over the next weeks and months.
Though I have a hard time understanding why town leaders saw its accomplishments as liabilities, it is not the loss of funding for DSA that concerns me. It is the failure to see Sylva’s downtown as important that does. When you think of other towns in our area, what comes to mind? Is it their Wal-Mart? Or is it their unique downtown?
My experiences in working with the public tell me it is unequivocally the latter. That is why town leaders and The Sylva Herald must not see downtown as merely an incidental along the road to Sylva’s big corporate stores, but as a quaint and historic area that is the centerpiece for the community.
I believe our downtown, with its beautiful, old Courthouse and unique design, could surely serve as the true heart of Sylva. A place where residents and visitors alike could share the type of community, fellowship, and commerce that only a small town like ours can offer. A place we could all enjoy and be proud to call ours. A place that could be a fine legacy for future generations.
Therefore, I feel DSA or any other group that exists solely to improve our town deserves at least a small amount of decency, if not some respect.
Holly Hooper
Blackrock Outdoor Co.
Sylva
|
