U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-08-2014, 06:56 PM
 
451 posts, read 609,360 times
Reputation: 248

Advertisements

What's the deal with Union County and how decisions are made across the county whether it be the local bills, BoCC, the BOE or local municipalities for that matter?

Words matter and actions matter.

Where to start with the local bill??? Indian Trail approves apartments despite school overcrowding issues, Waxhaw approves it's developments despite overcrowding, BoCC defers approving developments yet approves tax increases (and will probably approve the development at the next meeting God willing) and the BOE just changed redistricting.

I have no problem with canned motions, but I have problems with garbled and missing video and when things are changed after the fact and then are changed to clean up other sht.

It's wrong.

The video of the tax increase from the BoCC is missing online and garbled when you try and watch it on TWC.

And the BOE just conveniently cleaned up it's sh*t tonight.

There were no minutes for the redistricting. But Crowder's motion refers to the plan "approved" by the Facilities committee. That plan was approved at the 1/14/2014 facilities meeting according to minutes and sent up to the full board for "review and action". The only "maps" approved by the Facilities committee were the ones discussed at the 1/14/2014. The 3/4/2014 maps are different from those "approved" by the Facilities committee. Either the 3/4/2014 maps were wrong and should be corrected back to the 1/14/2014 approved boundaries but for the Millbridge amendment or CAPS was technically correct that the lines moved from the "approved" maps.

They cleaned that up tonight and it is wrong how they did it.

Is Union County forever doomed to be a banana republic just like our friends to the north or is there hope in county commissioner retreads, BOE populist bully candidates and the like?

Last edited by SunshineCJ; 07-08-2014 at 07:33 PM..

 
Old 07-08-2014, 08:56 PM
 
43 posts, read 46,609 times
Reputation: 83
So much is wrong with how this has all gone down, & with how it continues to spiral downward. It seems to be a combination of idiocy on the part of the towns approving more residential development, a pi**ing contest between the two boards warped by a whole lot of CYA, & of course the litigious bunch thrown into the mix. I honestly don't know whose behavior peeves me more (oh wait, maybe I do)

It sure would be nice if there was more a focus on long-term planning & working together *cooperatively*....but that seems oddly difficult for these folks
 
Old 07-08-2014, 09:06 PM
 
2,103 posts, read 3,584,646 times
Reputation: 2061
UC leadership is a typical example of old/small town thinking incompetent to deal with the overwhelming new reality.

New times calls for qualified leaders willing to grasp and aptly respond to present requirements.
 
Old 07-10-2014, 08:18 AM
 
547 posts, read 536,886 times
Reputation: 218
Yep. There is no way I'm going to be convinced that the video not working is merely a coincidence. I wouldn't want a video of me voting to raise taxes out there either if I was a commissioner. That would be sure to come back to bite you next time you ran for an office.

Honestly though, they didn't have any real choice other than increasing the tax rate.
 
Old 07-10-2014, 08:43 AM
 
Location: Union County
5,787 posts, read 8,430,740 times
Reputation: 4818
What's funny is that many of us were ranting in the infamous redistricting thread about the facilities committee "process". The net net of those debates back then was that this was the administration's plan - Webb drew the lines under cover of the law stating the Superintendent can redraw lines as required. Anything Stewart, Collins, Yercheck, Guzman, and Pigg did finalizing the maps that came out of that committee was what Webb told them needed to be done. We'll never really know how the sausage was made.

The "clean up" was still 7-2 which I find hilarious... way to vote smart Savage and good luck getting votes beyond your CAPS friends. How do you vote NO to amending Millbridge? LOL

It's been amateur hour from the outset and continues to deliver. I wonder what other little clean-up made it through.
 
Old 07-11-2014, 08:05 AM
 
547 posts, read 536,886 times
Reputation: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunshineCJ View Post
And the BOE just conveniently cleaned up it's sh*t tonight.

There were no minutes for the redistricting. But Crowder's motion refers to the plan "approved" by the Facilities committee. That plan was approved at the 1/14/2014 facilities meeting according to minutes and sent up to the full board for "review and action". The only "maps" approved by the Facilities committee were the ones discussed at the 1/14/2014. The 3/4/2014 maps are different from those "approved" by the Facilities committee. Either the 3/4/2014 maps were wrong and should be corrected back to the 1/14/2014 approved boundaries but for the Millbridge amendment or CAPS was technically correct that the lines moved from the "approved" maps.

They cleaned that up tonight and it is wrong how they did it.
I do recall UCPS staff being directed to clean up the maps and it was my understanding that the Superintendent could make changes to the district lines without Board approval. For the most part, I think the changes make sense. I think the BOE trusted UCPS staff to make the adjustments and hadn't given them a second thought. I don't think there was any vast conspiracy.

From what I can tell, a large number of the residents affected by the changes are actually some of our poorer residents. Only one area stuck out to me as odd, but perhaps there is a logical explanation based on bus routes or something I don't know about.

I have no idea why CAPS thinks churches care about which district their property is located within or why CAPS thinks it matters that raw land was included in the exceptions. This is only a five year plan; so by the time the land is developed (and some of it may never be), we will probably be looking at redistricting again or building additions.

I certainly don't think CAPS' complaint about minor adjustments to the maps (even if the making of those adjustments somehow violated Open Meetings law) is going to stop redistricting. CAPS' story sure has changed over time. First, the whole redistricting plan was made in secret and should be voided. Now, the story has changed to secret adjustments were made to the approved plans. What next? It is just starting to seem like CAPS is just sour grapes wasting citizens' money and giving them false hope.

http://citizensforadequatepublicscho...ion_Motion.pdf
http://citizensforadequatepublicscho...laint_Scan.pdf
 
Old 07-11-2014, 08:16 AM
 
547 posts, read 536,886 times
Reputation: 218
School board reaffirms redistricting decision | The Enquirer Journal
 
Old 07-11-2014, 02:37 PM
 
451 posts, read 609,360 times
Reputation: 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaHelms View Post
I do recall UCPS staff being directed to clean up the maps and it was my understanding that the Superintendent could make changes to the district lines without Board approval. For the most part, I think the changes make sense. I think the BOE trusted UCPS staff to make the adjustments and hadn't given them a second thought. I don't think there was any vast conspiracy.
I'm not saying there is any conspiracy. I'm not drinking that Kool Aid yet but I think some more may start taking some sips. In the end, Ellis and Webb were asked to clean up the lines at the 2/18/2014 BOE work session, 1:54:30...


Board of Education Work Session PDC, February 18, 2014 - YouTube

and obviously they did that along with Millbridge. They just didn't tell the public until a gotcha moment which leads to further mistrust about the process which is a common problem in Union County.

This isn't about maps. The real issue here is how our leaders communicate fully about what is really going on in Union County. That needs to be done at all levels with the County, UCPS, and the municipalities. The map thing and clean up resolution are just indicative of this larger systemic problem that leads to the mistrust. If the maps were changed they should have said that the maps were cleaned up at the request BOE and because of the Millbridge change. That should have been communicated on March 6 when the maps were finalized and not on July 8 in a clean up resolution.

Just look at the recent budget fight which first looked like there was going to be some compromise between the BOE and BoCC, then the BoCC got the upper hand with the initial bill proposal prohibiting any BOE litigation so no deal with the BoE, then a few folks make a few calls and you get House Bill 292-Ratified mandating school funding for the next 2 years directly leading to the tax increase. In the end there were no public hearings, no discussion, nothing but a number coming out of Raleigh not Monroe. I'm not sure there is a lot of trust between the the BoCC and BOE after the games that were played on both sides.

I think I'm like many these days who really are not sure who to trust or believe at this standpoint on any local issue because I don't think anybody is fully telling the truth. People may say they are transparent but they really aren't. It's just another term that is thrown around. Collaborative is the next throw away term. The level of cynicism is fairly high right now. This is especially disturbing when you start talking about tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars and Tuesday night we got the long awaited Community Construction Equity Plan ("CCEP") aka the 2016 or 2017 Bond Referendum, County schools begin work on five-year plan | The Enquirer Journal

So we are spending how much on schools this year ($17.9M), next year ($19.5M) and in 2016 ($19.8M) and we are now probably going to get teed up for at least a $100M+ bond issue by these same players? Yep. And if you hadn't watched the 2/18/2014 BOE session your head would have probably exploded right around around the 28:00 mark when you hear Ellis talk about "... now we need to get ready for a plan that gets thru 2020 and the growth we see coming at us again" then Webb starts talking about "capacity", "community and family input", "funding mechanisms", Hodges comments, Savage's comments...


UCPS BOE Meeting 08 July 2014 - YouTube

Where have I seen this before?

Then a minute later we got "transparency" after the fact with the "clean up" Resolution http://www.ucps.k12.nc.us/links/BOE%...20July%208.pdf.

Our leaders, administrators and elected officials, need to stop publicly dancing around the issues. If there is overcrowding say there is overcrowding and that redistricting is required to alleviate the problem for 3-5 years until new schools can be funded with a bond issue and built because there isn't a really a bubble there is growth (just don't do it on a few soap boxes in a work session). If you don't want trailers, say you don't want trailers and why. If lines needed to be cleaned up, say the lines were cleaned up in March and not in July when faced with an injunction. If schools aren't equitable, say they aren't equitable and why that needs to be fixed. If you are going to "upgrade" SVHS, do it and don't spend money to repair it. If the schools need to be repaired then fund the repairing of the schools even if it may involve a tax increase and don't go to Raleigh to try and get out of it. Don't sit there and say "I wasn't elected to raise taxes" and act like one of my snowflakes, if something needs to be fixed, fix it. If the county doesn't have an appropriate tax base say that there needs to be commercial growth, even in Marvin, or personal property taxes will continue to go up. Say it over and over and over again because in today's Internet/FB world everyone has ADD and things quickly spin out of control. It's not just about being "transparent" or "collaborative" it's about being "honest". The game playing needs to stop across the county. Right now, there is no way a bond issue would ever pass. I don't care how collaborative the process may be or who is or isn't on the BoCC or the BOE. I'm not even sure it would pass in a couple of years when the schools start crowded again.

I forgot how interesting the 2/18/2014 BOE work session was especially starting around 1:30 to about 1:59. That session didn't get enough play by the way.

Last edited by SunshineCJ; 07-11-2014 at 02:51 PM..
 
Old 07-11-2014, 10:40 PM
 
547 posts, read 536,886 times
Reputation: 218
I totally agree with almost everything you said.
 
Old 07-11-2014, 10:48 PM
 
547 posts, read 536,886 times
Reputation: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunshineCJ View Post
Collaborative is the next throw away term. The level of cynicism is fairly high right now. This is especially disturbing when you start talking about tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars and Tuesday night we got the long awaited Community Construction Equity Plan ("CCEP") aka the 2016 or 2017 Bond Referendum, County schools begin work on five-year plan | The Enquirer Journal

So we are spending how much on schools this year ($17.9M), next year ($19.5M) and in 2016 ($19.8M) and we are now probably going to get teed up for at least a $100M+ bond issue by these same players? .... Right now, there is no way a bond issue would ever pass. I don't care how collaborative the process may be or who is or isn't on the BoCC or the BOE. I'm not even sure it would pass in a couple of years when the schools start crowded again.
Agreed. While I like that we are now interested in construction equity, I have no idea how we are going to be able to fund it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top