Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 2:31 PM
To: Scott, Andrew
Subject: Re: Urban Development Guidelines
please send the incentive guidelines the project didn't qualify for.
.
.
http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/index.aspx?page=2772
George:
Both the Economic Development Incentive Guidelines (for which the Willow Lake Property did not qualify for) and the Urban Development Guidelines (for which the Willow Lake Project did qualify for) can be found on the web page referenced above.
Andy
Andrew S. Scott, III
Assistant City Manager, Economic Development
City of Greensboro, North Carolina
.
.
The "provision" looks like it was at the sole "discretion of City Council".
The property is/was not within "the corporate limits of Greensboro".
 |
| http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentID=18832 |
One of City Council's victims.
By subsidizing a gas station and fast food restaurant in favor of a connected crony, council and Greensboro's taxpayers through their elected representatives, harmed this business located inside city limits, on a deal that didn't meet incentive guidelines.
City Council Members who voted to spent Greensboro taxpayer money to favor one business at the expense of others, in return for campaign cash, sign placements and billboards;
ROBBIE PERKINS, Mayor
YVONNE J. JOHNSON, Mayor Pro Tem
NANCY VAUGHAN, At Large
MARIKAY ABUZUAITER, At Large
T. DIANNE BELLAMY-SMALL, District One
JIM KEE, District Two
ZACK MATHENY, District Three
NANCY HOFFMANN, District Four
TONY G. WILKINS, District Five
1 comment:
Let's see. You say harmed. Past tense. Land has not yet been developed and no competitive businesses are operating. Business depicted is also operating Express Lube bays and mechanical service. Are these slated to come in? A relatively new Subway is featured. Suppose Kotis property ends up with KFC or Taco Bell. Healthy subs are a different market than these food choices. And if a CVS or Walgreens ultimately comes in? There are shopping centers within the city which host 2 matress stores, 2 sandwhich eateries, etc. All under the same landlord. Are you saying that the city is charged with ensuring no duplication or competition on adjacent or nearby properties. That sounds awfully protectionist. When the loop is completed thete will be a huge increase in traffic flow and the market for services. As to the campaign signs, what if all candidates were allowed placement. As to contributions, what if the were a cap on contributions from citizens with biz before the council. If the city is annexing this land, what ia the combined sales tax, property tax, and income tax that will be realized as new revenue. What is the prospective utility to the community of the price normalization that may occur due to new competition? What is the value, utility, and benefit neighbors will have by having access to new services not previously available? When the business pictured was built, what was the city investment to extend water and sewage to them? Surely the Earth wasn't created with those pipes in the ground. I think you are objecting to development for the sake of objecting and bearing false witness against what is at most the appearance of petty ethical violations of municipal campaigns.
Post a Comment