County leaders turn 'blind eye' to 'long-term residents'
To the Editor:
I wrote my first letter to the editor five years ago. One of the recently-elected
commissioners was quoted as saying that he had 'hit the ground running"
in an attempt to find new sources of revenue.
I thought this was a dangerous mentality and certainly not an appropriate
cornerstone for a philosophy of government, so I sat down and wrote
a letter that talked about what I thought local government ought to
be about.
In the ensuing years I've watched while we absorbed a 38 percent tax
increase hidden behind revaluation. I've watched while our rural communities
were attacked by those who would use land-use measures such as extraterritorial
jurisdiction, not to protect, but to exclude. I've watched while useful
tools like soil and erosion control were buried under political maneuvering
so that the well-heeled were able to manipulate the system to escape
both responsibility and accountability.
I've listened while we were fed a line about economic development programs
that failed to focus on development of our traditional resources but
instead championed attracting more and greater outside development.
We are told, 'Build it and they will come," which seems to embrace
a philosophy that says we are not good enough or smart enough without
the guidance of outside influence.
I've watched as our political leaders have become addicted to and seduced
by the revenue generated by development without any recognition of the
consequences. Yes, all this new revenue has built the finest schools
and a new jail and new county offices. It has purchased land for even
more facilities. Yet when all these facilities are built and when we
have built something they can come to, I wonder if the folks who paid
for all these things still be able to afford to live here. Will their
children?
We face another revaluation in the near future. It is likely that for
many this will again mean a significant tax increase. Many would face
an increase even if the county were committed to the principle of revaluation
being revenue neutral, but current budget projections do not reflect
such a principle.
Throughout all this there has been a failure to articulate any kind
of a long-range vision that anticipates preserving some semblance of
our native traditions and communities. It is reasonable to predict that
with current federal and state budget trends, local governments will
increasingly be put under strain, and it is obvious that the solution
to this strain will be to raise property taxes. We are under even greater
strain because our current model of development relies heavily on part-time
residents and second-home development, which contributes little via
state income tax but puts increasing pressures on property tax through
spiraling property values and the demand for ever increasing services.
And yet we have not taken one step toward developing or lobbying for
programs such as homestead exemptions, which might mitigate these pressures.
Instead we turn a blind eye towards our communities and long-term residents
while pursuing our addiction to revenue.
Perhaps this is best illustrated by the county's response to a resident
of the new Cashiers Commercial District.
A woman wrote the county asking if anyone had researched the impact
of the new ordinance with respect to its potential costs to homeowners
within the district. Those supporting the ordinance had claimed it would
raise property values, and the woman was concerned it could result in
higher taxes.
County government, after discussing the matter with the consultant hired
to develop the ordinance, responded that the woman should contact the
zoning administrator from Buncombe County for information on this matter.
We didn't do the research, we didn't have the answers to a reasonable
question and our response was to tell the citizen to call another county
for the information. I think this speaks volumes about where our leaders'
priorities lie.
I have been told that because of my views and the manner in which I
have expressed them a majority of the commissioners feel I am no longer
suitable to serve as a volunteer on the Smart Growth Task Force. Initially,
when I voiced my reservations and opposition to the Cashiers ordnance,
I was told by Mr. (Eddie) Madden that I didn't have his permission to
speak on that subject. I spoke up anyway and must accept the consequences.
Perhaps my views are out of step with both the commissioners and general
public opinion, but I've always believed that the key to successful
representative government is a vigorous and sometimes contentious public
dialogue. The public will cannot be known unless it is expressed; otherwise
our direction will be determined by an elite few or those with special
interests or a narrow agenda, those who would be willing to equate silence
with acceptance.
Mark Jamison
Cullowhee
|
Explaining history of Sons of Confederate Veterans
To the Editor:
In view of the recent events involving the display of the Confederate
flag by students at Cullowhee Valley, the intervention of the Jackson
Rangers – Camp 1917 of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and the
subsequent reactions of "concerned" citizens, I feel it is
necessary to shed some much-needed light on the role and mission of
the SCV.
This noble brotherhood was founded in 1906 by Lt. Gen. Stephen D. Lee
in New Orleans. At this reunion of confederate veterans and their heirs,
General Lee issued the charge that has become the very battle cry of
this proud organization: "To you, Sons of Confederate Veterans,
we will commit the vindication of the cause for which we fought. To
your strength will be given the defense of the Confederate soldier's
good name, the guardianship of his history, the emulation of his virtues,
the perpetuation of those principles which he loved and which you love
also, and those ideals which made him glorious and which you also cherish.
Are you also ready to die for your country? Is your life worthy to be
remembered along with theirs? Do you choose for yourself the greatness
of soul? Not in the clamour of the crowded street/Not in the shouts
and plaudits of the throng/But in ourselves are triumph and defeat."
The message is clear – the SCV inherited the guardianship and protection
of all these brave defenders fought and died for. Among those ideals
and history entrusted to the heirs of the confederate veteran are the
symbols and monuments that serve to remind all Americans of the valiant
struggle by a people determined to shed the shackles of an oppressive
central government – the same struggle that their forebears had
died for only two generations before. But this isn't the platform for
a discourse on the causes of the war between the states; rather, now
is an opportune time to enlighten those unfortunate folks among us who,
either out of habit or stubborn closed minds, choose to continue to
associate the battle flag of the Confederate States of America with
slavery.
The banner in question never flew for any period of time over slavery
or a slave state while 'Old Glory" flew for more than seven decades
over the peculiar institution.
The banner in question was proudly carried by the soldiers in gray as
they fought to defend their sovereign states and values. And those soldiers,
as in today's 40,000-plus members of the SCV, were composed of all races
and religions – whites and blacks (both free and slave) fought
side by side against tyranny with Native Americans as well as those
of both Christian and Jewish heritage – and it is our duty to see
that their symbols and values persist.
In the words of (Confederate) President Jefferson Davis, "all we
want is to be let alone…..," but just like our forebears,
if we are riled we will fight to the end to ensure that the true history
of our people is told and that the cause of our plight is understood
– whether it be in the classroom for the right of our young people
to proudly display their history, or in congressional actions established
to protect our monuments on a national scale. And just as strongly we
will fight to keep our symbols out of the hands of those who use them
as vehicles of hatred.
We will not stand to see our banners unfurled by those who seek to oppress
others for any reason. I would ask the readers to open their minds and
not attack the banner which brave men fought under; rather, cast your
derision upon those groups who out of ignorance use that flag for their
own self-serving means. Just as importantly, the SCV will continue to
persevere in our educational ventures so that the cause of our forefathers
will be vindicated. It is a sad state of affairs in our educational
system that the truth of this valiant struggle for independence by a
proud people goes untold – until our history books reflect the
facts of this trying time in our nation's history, the ignorance will
continue – and we as a free people can make that change.
As a nation we have lost touch with our family histories and values
- many of us literally "don't know where we came from" - and
I would ask our readers - if you don't know where you came from, how
do you honestly expect to know where you are going? In this day of political
correctness and the very dismantling of constitutional freedom, it might
do us all well to reflect on the families and lineages that have brought
each and every one of us to our present circumstances. To paraphrase
Orlando Sentinel columnist Charles Reese: if the people of our great
nation have lost the will to honor their ancestors or have become so
ignorant that the past is meaningless, then they truly deserve the fate
that is in store for them.
The SCV is open to male descendants 12 years of age or older - regardless
of ethnicity or religious persuasion - of a Confederate veteran who
fought with honor. We would be proud to have you among our ranks and
will gladly research your genealogy for you. Information regarding the
SCV at the national level can be found at www.scv.org. For information
on the Jackson Rangers and other local camps, contact Commander Mike
Parris via e-mail at jacksonrangers@yahoo.com or Adjutant Ron Huff at
rangersadjutant@yahoo.com.
Mike Parris
Dillsboro
|
Downtown drivers should slow down
Dear Editor,
I will probably make a lot of enemies with this letter, but it needs
to be written.
Traffic on main street is bad enough without all the people who are
in such a hurry they can't follow traffic safety rules. Instead, they
endanger themselves and everyone else by passing in the left lane, even
when the vehicle in front of them is most likely already exceeding the
speed limit, which is 20 miles per hour and not 55.
I think maybe (Sylva officials) should install speed bumps, or, if worse
comes to worse, maybe a radar with a camera attached. Oops, maybe I
should not have said that, but I would rather have to pay a fine than
see someone – maybe one of our loved ones – hurt or killed
because we couldn't leave early enough to get through town safely.
Thanks for listening to one of my pet peeves.
Jesse Franklin
Sylva
|
Setting the historical record straight
To the Editor:
I'm writing in response to the ongoing "Pagan v. Christian"
debate. I am a Christian, as well as an historian.
My present point of contention is of a historical rather than a theological
nature. Last week's article quoted CERES president Byron Ballard as
saying the Scots-Irish people of Western North Carolina 'have been practicing
what we practice for 250 years." Speaking as someone who knows
a thing or two about the Scottish people and their religion, I have
to say that this statement is utterly and completely false.
One of the hallmarks of the Scots-Irish people was their religion, Presbyterianism.
These people fiercely clung to their faith in Northern Ireland, where
they felt isolated by both the majority Irish Catholic population and
the powerful Anglican government. When they came to the Appalachian
frontier, the first buildings they built were Presbyterian churches.
Finding Presbyterian ministers proved more difficult, so many of the
Scots-Irish joined the less formally structured Methodist and Baptist
denominations, better suited to the frontier environment.
Adherents of all of these faith traditions would be shocked to learn
of their 'paganism" from CERES.
The Calvinist Presbyterianism practiced by the Scots-Irish was brought
to lowland Scotland in 1560 by the military force of 2,000 Scottish
Protestants aided by 11,000 English soldiers. Prior to that, like the
rest of pre-Reformation Europe, Scotland was Catholic (many of her citizens,
especially in the Highlands, still are).
Scotland's history as a Christian land spans back to her wholesale conversion
in the sixth and seventh centuries by missionaries such as Sts. Columba
and Ninian. Quite a pedigree.
Wicca, by comparison, is only first mentioned in the writings of Gerald
Gardner in the 1950s. Gardner, an Englishman, claimed he learned about
"wica" (his spelling) from a secret coven of witches (which
has never been found). In reality, what he wrote was based largely on
19th century occultism and the rituals of Freemasonry. He also based
much of his information on the studies of Margaret Murray, a prominent
British Egyptologist of the 1920s who claimed to have discovered a goddess-based
religion that was a medieval competitor to Christianity. Her archaeological
data has since been thoroughly discredited.
To put it bluntly, the Scots-Irish ancestors of the southern Appalachian
people would never have heard of Wicca and would recognize nothing about
it as native to their culture. Wicca has made a lot of inroads by falsely
associating itself with 'ancient Celtic traditions." I will gladly
accept the Sylvan Hearth's invitation to dialogue.
Ultimately, if someone chooses to be Wiccan, that is their prerogative.
But I hope it is a decision based on fact, and not on false revisionist
histories. The 'neo" of neo-pagan is there for a reason. It's new.
Matthew Newsome
Sylva
|
Library plans need more public input
Like Dottie Hoche, I have been following the progress of the new Jackson
County Public Library Task Force. It has been given a very limited scope
of action – solely to determine if moving the public library to
the campus of Southwestern Community College is feasible. If that is
all it is permitted to consider, it will be a waste of the members'
time.
Of course, building a joint use library is feasible – but is it
a good thing for our community? Building an airport on the top of two
bulldozed mountains was feasible, but what has it contributed to the
good of the community? It was built only because a few powerful people
had sufficient money and influence to override common sense and public
opinion.
What the task force has not been allowed to do is to address the issue
of community involvement. Some of the reasons given for ignoring public
opinion seem to be the following:
Several members of the task force have argued that the 3,000 people
who signed the petition against moving the library were coerced by hysterical
merchants, or simply did not understand how much money was available
for the project and how big and fancy a building could be built for
all those dollars. I think this is wrong. Most of the people who signed
the petition initially, along with many others, would sign it again
if given the opportunity.
Some library administrators believe that only people who have a library
card should have any say in the matter. But this ignores the fact that
the library is supported by all of our taxes. A public library is not
a private club, and many people have an interest in it who don't currently
hold a 'membership card." People who do not have library cards
today may have them tomorrow; they may well have children or grandchildren
who have library cards.
Over and over, I hear the comment that Sylva shouldn't have any say
in the fate of the Library because it doesn't support it. This is not
true. Residents and taxpayers in Sylva have been paying double taxes
for many years to support the library.
And why shouldn't simple good manners make this an issue for all of
us to decide? There is an uncomfortable arrogance when a few people
say, "We know what is best. You just be quiet and let us decide
how to spend your money."
As a person who has been involved with books and the science of information
for many years, I believe that the way we gather information will continue
to undergo major changes. Our personal computers will play increasingly
important roles in how we do research and find out about the world around
us. This will have an important impact on how we interact with our libraries.
I believe that public libraries that do not place people and the cultural
life of their community at the center of their mission will become obsolete.
In the discussion of the joint library, nearly all the emphasis has
been put on physical improvement – square feet, parking, access,
technical issues or institutional advantages – great for Southwestern
Community College and Fontana Regional Library. The people of this community
are not high on the list of important issues for those people who are
pushing for the joint library. A library can be a structurally fine
place, but if is not a relevant and welcoming place, it will not be
well used.
Proponents of the joint library say that economic development of downtown
Sylva should not be an issue is this discussion, but this ignores an
economic issue that is integral to the joint library proposal. Public
bond money is to be spent at SCC to build not only a library, but also
a bookstore, a cafe and a fitness center, in direct competition with
existing businesses. This is not only unethical, but under the Olmstead
Act, it is an illegal use of public money.
Many of the people who want to see the library moved from downtown are
relative newcomers to this community. Others have forgotten or were
unaware of the process of revitalization that has taken place in Sylva
during the last decade. It is easy to take the current health of the
downtown business community for granted.
But its recent return to health was hard won, and it is still fragile.
There are storefronts that are empty and have been empty for some time,
and when a business closes, there is not a long line of folks clamoring
to replace it.
The businesses in downtown do not have the deep corporate pockets that
the new businesses opening along N.C. 107 have.
Downtown Sylva doesn't have the same tax impact that Wal-Mart does,
but how many tourists have been lured to our town by the uniqueness
of Wal-Mart? They may spend money there, but you don't find Wal-Mart
featured in the tourism brochures. Without the unique charm of downtown
Sylva and Dillsboro, Wal-Mart would be hard pressed to attract them.
The casual destruction of downtown by those who fail to see its value
will affect far more than the downtown businesses themselves.
There are ways to keep our library in the downtown area. There are ways
to add grant monies and other private funds to the public funds the
county would be adding to the SCC construction to build a very fine
library in Sylva. This is an issue that will change our community for
generations to come.
I find the unwillingness to include more than token public comment in
the process a sign of seriously flawed government of our community.
Joyce Moore
Sylva
|
Back to Archive: 10/16/03.
|
