|
Time to speak against Southern Loop
To the Editor:
The Southern Loop in Jackson County is being advanced under the guise of “regional” transportation planning.
The Rural Planning Organization is under the Southwestern Commission, which represents six Western North Carolina counties.
The RPO was created in December 2001 to “develop long-range local and regional multi-modal transportation plans in cooperation with NCDOT ... (and) to provide a forum for public participation in the regional transportation (planning) process...” This is quoted from the RPO’s Memorandum of Understanding.
The current RPO priority list contains 31 transportation projects – not one is mutli-modal, which is supposed to consider alternative approaches to auto-centric highways (e.g. greenway promotion or mass transit).
For the purpose of argument, let us suppose that Jackson County Greenways actually had a representative on the County Transportation Task Force, and it made a request for a separate study for the preservation of the Tuckaseigee River corridor (for greenway development between Cullowhee and Dillsboro) from the perspective of multi-modal transportation planning. The Task Force could conceivably place this on the RPO’s priority list.
Could such a greenway be compatible with a “multi-lane freeway,” adjacent to the river? It could also be argued that such a greenway has more public support than the Southern Loop because it enhances “quality of life” and decreases sprawl. Would such a greenway (as the only multi-modal project) be given equal consideration by the regional planning committees, or be relegated to a paragraph within a more comprehensive plan?
The so called “forum for public participation” in the regional planning process began Sept. 19, when RPO planner Ryan Sherby called a public meeting to review a priority list for projects. Naturally the Southern Loop was never mentioned in a press release that appeared one week before the meeting, in apparent violation of the “sunshine laws.”
In 2003, after a great deal of public participation, municipalities in Jackson County endorsed resolutions against the Southern Loop; and there was considerable public comment to remove it from the Transportation Improvement Plan. Despite this and without any public mandate, funding was accelerated by DOT (after 2003) for the project. By whose authority did DOT advance this project; or does it reign supreme?
These resolutions are now being undone by the pressure from DOT to “prioritize” its list. Naturally nobody is admitting that this amounts to an “endorsement” of the Southern Loop. But make no mistake about this: the Southern Loop is clearly being advanced from the regional to state level for more funding. It is no longer a “concept.” It is a concept with a project number R-4745 A/B on the NCDOT Web site for transportation planning.
It is a concept with “accelerated” funding for right-of-way acquisition.
So we currently have multiple layers of bureaucracy: a technical coordinating committee and a transportation advisory committee at the regional level; and a transportation task force at the county level – all which are overseen and guided by DOT in a public process that is largely accessible only by computer and discussed in daytime meetings when most of the “public” is working. This is not an “open” public process.
I’m not a cynical person, but Jackson County really needs to explore the use of an “independent” traffic consultant (DOT-recommended, but not on its payroll) as it develops its long-range comprehensive transportation plan. This is essentially what Waynesville is wisely doing for its corridor study of Russ Avenue. As Commissioner William Shelton noted during the Oct. 1 transportation board meeting – “...this will be a highly contentious issue.”
I agree. It’s all the more reason to consider “alternative” consultants.
A lot of folks in Jackson County believe in the current commissioners – that they will do the “right” thing. Over the past year they have embraced a bold and farsighted approach to comprehensive land-use planning. They have listened to their citizens, not just the special interests.
Developing a comprehensive transportation plan will be thorny and flawed by political scheming. The commissioners should stay open to ideas and concepts that run counter to what DOT offers.
It is time for people to voice their opinion to Conrad Burrell, District 14 NCDOT representative; and to Chairman Brian McMahan – both are members of the regional Transportation Advisory Committee. Mr. Burrell’s Sylva phone number is 586-4301; Mr. McMahan’s is 586-5451 and his e-mail is brianthomasmcmahan@yahoo.com. I’m sure they would appreciate hearing from you.
As this project advances it will only increase the “inevitability” of the Southern Loop. Only our silence will allow this to happen.
Roger Turner
Sylva
Spay/neuter law could do more harm than good
To the Editor:
I am writing to voice my concerns about the proposed mandatory spay and neuter program. Unfortunately, the number of unwanted pets nationwide is an enormous problem. As an animal lover I am constantly saddened by the dogs running loose in my community or along the road. The concept of a mandatory spay and neuter law sounds like the answer, but statistics show that it does not work and may create more problems.
One of the reasons I oppose the implementation of mandatory spaying and neutering is because of the lack of affordable, convenient spay and neuter facilities. The average citizen cannot comply with such a law. Earlier this year I had my cat spayed at a local veterinarian clinic; my bill was $80. I could not believe it cost that much, I had purposely not purchased one of the low-cost certificates because I felt it could be better used by someone less fortunate. However, when I got ready to pay I realized that the cost placed me in financial straits. Statistics indicate that most people will alter their pets if they have the means to do so. However, veterinarian costs in the area are prohibitively expensive for working families. Unless adequate, affordable services are in place and accessible to everyone, a mandatory sterilization law is not enforceable and punishes otherwise law-abiding citizens who have no alternative. This actually increases the number of animals destroyed in the shelters because low-income owners will relinquish their pets or abandon them to keep from paying the fines associated with having an unaltered pet.
Statistics show that targeting every animal owner and attempting to limit breeding seems to result in decreased compliance. It also requires a costly permitting plan that is difficult to maintain. These laws do not appear to achieve the long-term goals of reducing the number of pets in shelters or euthanasia numbers. Instead, local governments need to concentrate their resources in programs that work. An example would be a county funded, low-cost sterilization program that takes in consideration the cost of living in our area compared to the salaries earned by many families. Animal rescue groups need to assess this proposal carefully before promoting a law that may divert valuable resources from effective solutions.
Also mentioned in the article last week was banning people from selling puppies in public parking lots such as Wal-Mart. I agree with this wholeheartedly, as most of the people who buy these dogs do so on impulse. I have heard countless tales of people buying these puppies and them dying several days later or being extremely sick and needing serious medical attention. I received a call one morning from a friend who was devastated because she had stopped to look at some puppies that were being sold in Wal-Mart’s parking lot. She told me the pups looked awful and smelled bad, she begged me to come and see them. I agreed to come out and saw that the pups were no more than four weeks old, they were a small breed dog and they smelled horrible. If you ever smell a dog that is sick with parvo, you never forget that smell. The woman was selling the pups for $150 and said she would mail the papers to buyers once they came back from the AKC. The truth is that the pups were not purebred and there were no papers. I know because my friend bought a pup with me begging her not to. She never heard from the woman again, and the pup died two days later at the vet’s office where they were trying desperately to treat it for parvo virus. If you are looking for a purebred puppy, you should find a reputable breeder or better yet go find a rescue that specializes in the breed you want. If you are looking for a best friend, then try the animal shelter; most mixed breed dogs are healthier and easier to train than purebred dogs.
To see the data I used, go to Google and type in “mandatory spay and neuter laws.”
Sonny Lambert
Cullowhee
Restoring Courthouse, adding library makes ‘perfect sense’
To the Editor:
On the front page of last week’s newspaper were two articles that did not appear to be related at first glance. One was on the use of a restored Jackson County Courthouse; the other was about the Dillsboro Dam. With a little forward planning, the Courthouse could be renovated to include exhibits on the area’s history and local energy production, advancing both preservation and energy conservation. Such in-town exhibits – plus an energy-producing dam nearby – would give eco-minded travelers a unique place to visit. Add in the Green Energy Park and we’ve got a destination unlike any other in the Carolinas.
At some point soon, some United States town or county will be the first to focus its identity on green energy. It may as well be Jackson County. Dillsboro has a head start with the Green Energy Park, which is already using landfill-captured gases to fuel a blacksmith forge and make biofuel. An interpretive waterside greenway beside the picturesque dam could serve as another demonstration project while, at the same time, filling local energy needs.
Jackson County’s Courthouse is a shining jewel, a beacon for all to see. It makes perfect sense to restore it to its previous glory. Rehabilitating it as a library and museum would maximize its public use. While a library would attract local residents, a museum would open it up as a tourist destination. Americans traipse all over Europe to see old buildings, too often ignoring what we’ve got right here at home. It’s not that America doesn’t have historic buildings, we just don’t promote them as sites to see. It does take a bit of interpretation, but visitors are willing, if only a welcome is extended.
Anna Fariello
Cullowhee
Readers wonders at choice to locate library by Courthouse
To the Editor:
Is my memory totally gone or what? It seems I remember not so long ago when we had a Courthouse that was condemned and we had to build another one. Now here we are talking about spending nearly $7 million dollars on a library for a handful of people that go there. And we are going to add it on to a building that is supposedly not fit for use. What’s the deal?
Jesse Franklin
Sylva
|
