Representatives of the real-estate and development industry sat in Greensboro City Council chambers listening as an advocate of restoring the protest petition assailed their influence over municipal politics. (photo by Jordan Green)
The
Greensboro city council voted unanimously on Jan. 21 to request the
restoration of the protest petition to Greensboro, albeit with a rider
asking the NC General Assembly to give the city a unique statute
allowing for higher thresholds for neighborhood opposition before the
three-quarters supermajority requirement kicks in. Supporters of the
protest petition brought a wide array of constituents to the meeting,
and faced down a disorganized consortium of real-estate industry
representatives. Led by Greensboro Neighborhood Congress advisor Donna
Newton, the supporter displayed nervy brinksmanship by refusing to
agree to any compromise on the thresholds before council approved
restoration. At-large Councilman Robbie Perkins, a developer, put up a
valiant defense of the status quo, but with a clear majority favoring
restoration, Perkins and other holdouts folded, allowing the measure to
pass unanimously.
Supporters of the protest petition, a tool
enjoyed by residents of every other city in North Carolina, argue that
it forces developers to consult with neighbors and make compromises.
Earlier
in the meeting the council had voted to continue a rezoning request to
accommodate a self-storage facility, after neighbors complained that it
would be intrusive, and that the applicant did not consult adequately
with them. Rezoning opponents frequently complain that continuances
have the effect of wearing down resistance, while neighbors are rarely
satisfied with the outcome.
“The process did not work
tonight,” said Mary Burrett, a northwest Greensboro resident who joined
the chorus of neighbors denouncing the self-storage facility. “Parents,
children and old people have to come back a second time. We have jobs,
ailing parents, children, homework, houses, where it’s a hard contest
between a slick lawyer whose full time job is lunch with you guys,
contribute to political campaigns, and study zoning laws and pretty
much have their way. I’m sorry that’s the way it looks…. People want a
level playing field. That’s what your constituents are asking for.” The
comment drew a rebuke from Mayor Yvonne Johnson.
“I really
take offense at that because one of the things that this council tries
to do so often is to have people talk and try to work out an
agreement,” she said. Protest petition supporters directly challenged
the legitimacy of the inordinate political influence of the real-estate
and development industry, led by theTriad Real Estate and Business
Industries Coalition, to neutralize its effectiveness.
Their
case was made by David Wharton, a UNCG professor and member of the
city’s Land Development Ordinance Citizen Advisory Team, who made a
PowerPoint presentation to council.
“The real estate and
building industries account for about five percent of gross receipts in
North Carolina, but they have a disproportionate representation on our
land-use boards and commissions,” he said. “For instance, the LDO team,
of which I was a member, had 11 members in the real estate or building
industry and four in other occupations…. On the RUCO board it’s seven
to three and on the board of adjustments it’s four to three.
“Somehow
the five-percent minority have managed to get majority representation
on these key boards,” he continued. “The industry also has exceptional
political access and clout through its lobbying organization, TREBIC,
which sponsors events such as these like ‘Pork, Poultry and Politics.’
TREBIC also has legal clout.
Some of TREBIC’s members are influential law firms, so the industry has access to the area’s top legal talent. TREBIC is very well funded. Nearly a third of TREBIC’s members are regional or national firms, some worth billions of dollars. Their funding allows TREBIC to pay a staff of talented and hardworking lobbyists, who busily monitor and intervene in land use matters on a full time basis.
“To sum up, the real-estate business has deep-pocketed funding from major businesses,” he concluded. “It has effective lobbyists. It has the best political connections in town. It has a majority on boards and commissions. It has access to top legal help. Now let’s consider what the resources are of a typical neighbor are facing an unwanted rezoning.”
At that, he turned to a slide showing a pair of clasped hands praying. Prior to the vote, TREBIC Chairman Ron Guerra had tried to lobby District 1 Councilwoman Dianne Bellamy-Small in the hallway outside council chambers, complimenting her on remarks in support of the city manager. The councilwoman was agitated about a proposal to create a police review board with subpoena power, and walked away without giving the TREBIC representative a hearing.
The industry representatives looked nervous pleading their case. “We are probably the most heavily regulated industry that there is,” Guerra said. “We have to answer to the federal government, the state government and the local government. We meet with our neighbors…. Everyone knows that if you want to be a good developer, you have to meet with your neighbors and take their input.”
Perkins outlined his concerns about the protest petition, garnering applause from the industry representatives. “You make it harder to do the infill development and infill development doesn’t get done, and you have a deterioration along the major corridors, and the deterioration creeps into the neighborhoods were trying to preserve,” he said. Three council members — Mayor Johnson, at-large Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw and District 4 Councilman Mike Barber — prodded the neighborhood congress to negotiate new thresholds for the protest petition before council sends a recommendation to the Guilford County legislative delegation for restoration, but supporters held the line. They decried the fact that council had requested that the General Assembly exempt Greensboro from the protest petition in 1970 without any recorded discussion. “We, the congress, are certainly willing to discuss the particulars after the council votes to send the approval to the state,” Newton said. “Our whole position is one of principle. This was taken away from the citizens and we want it back.” The neighborhood congress and the League of Women Voters had met with the TREBIC earlier in the day at the industry group’s request, and Newton indicated that they would be willing to negotiate in good faith, but only after council approved restoration.
Some
protest petition supporters indicated that they would readily agree to
raise the threshold for neighborhood opposition required to trigger the
75percent supermajority.
“We’re fine with compromising, said
Robert Kirnard of Hillside Homes, who lost a battle to block Mega
Builders from erecting three-story apartments next to his property in
the Hillside Homes area in February 2008. “Forty percent would be fine,
even fifty. We had one-hundred percent of the adjacent neighbors on
record as opposing that development. The main point is that it will
force developers to negotiate with us. We could have used the protest
petition to get Mega Builders to reduce the apartments to two stories.”
