by Elissa Yount
The process of ending joint ventures with the county may be miserable, but a miserable end is better than the endless misery that the city taxpayer faces when forced to unfairly pay a disproportionately large part of these projects.
It might be understandable that the county residents will resist ending the contracts that are so overly favorable to their pocketbooks. It might be understandable that the county commissioners want to play ignorant and not acknowledge the gross unfairness of the present system, even though it greatly affects Henderson’s prosperity. It might be understandable that the city government would try to avoid the headache of getting this issue resolved fairly because it is going to take diligence and diplomacy. But it is clearly understandable that it is past time for elected officials to act on behalf of the city taxpayer in righting these financial wrongs.
There are pressing questions looming over joint ventures that need to be answered. For instance, the public should know how much money is owed on the library, when that property is to be deeded to the city, and what the Local Government Commission dictates about the debt. The public needs to know who exactly owns the land that the Aycock Recreation Complex facility sits upon, and if the contract for paying off the debt on the center is valid. (Unless there has been a recent change, the School Board owns the land and the contract states that revenue from the schools’ use of the facility is projected to pay off much of the loan.) The public needs to know how much revenue 911 receives from the taxes we pay each and every month on our cell phones and land lines, and we need to know if that money is being used in the most profitable way. The public needs to know who is paying the operating costs on McGregor Hall and who is going to pay these costs going forward. These are pressing questions, and only when these questions are answered honestly and openly can the best decisions be made to end the present funding for the joint ventures.
Many possible solutions to ending the joint funding have been offered. One choice is to have line items on every tax bill in the county for the joint funded projects. Another idea is to combine the city and county governments. Yet another solution that has been proposed is for the city to reduce its funding proportionately for the next five years until it no longer fund the projects. None of these solutions even remotely suggests or even hints at closing the library, the Rec Center, or 911. It is absurdity on stilts to even consider this. When you hear that argument, know that it is a complete smoke screen to dupe you and deflect you from the fact that the city taxpayer foots a huge percentage of the costs of all the joint ventures.
Logically, the city and county should have been meeting regularly to discuss the issues surrounding joint ventures and proposing equitable solutions, but they have not — or, at least they have not done so in the public eye. So, how can the over-burdened city taxpayer require their elected officials to act the behalf of the taxpayer to do what is right? We can’t! But there is something else we can do, and we can do it now.
You may not know this but, Henderson’s City Charter was changed by an act of the legislature to allow the city to give property (money) to the Embassy Foundation. This was a huge change in our way of governing, and, to my knowledge, this change to our charter was made with no public hearing, no public notice, and no public input. Most might consider this an underhanded maneuver on the part of the city government. Does it concern you to know the law to change our city charter started out as a littering bill?
Regardless, it is important to know that the people do have the legal right themselves to initiate a referendum on proposed charter amendments without the city, county, or state legislature acting. This is what we can do to address the issue of joint funded projects. You can read about this in Chapter 160A-104 of the North Carolina General Statutes. It will not be as easy as getting the Legislature to pass a bill, but it is legal, fair, ethical, and feasible. We would need 10% of the whole number of voters who are registered to vote in the city election to petition. That would be around 770 people. So, 35 people getting 25 registered city voters to sign a petition would safely meet the requirement. An initiative petition can ask for a referendum to be placed on the ballot for the voters to say “YES” or “NO.” What could be fairer than this?
A referendum is an event in which voters cast votes for or against ballot questions other than the election of candidates to office. Possible referendum issues could be: Henderson taxpayers shall pay no more than county taxpayers for equal services and projects; or, the city must put all jointly funded projects to a vote of the people. Another possible referendum issue could be: city money may not be given to non-profits without a vote of the people.
In a democracy, it is the people who are suppose to govern. If you think a local municipal referendum committee should be formed to explore the idea of coming up with referendum issues that will give our city back to the taxpayers, please let your voices be heard. Remember, presently neither our city nor our county nor our state elected officials and governments can stop the people from putting a referendum on the ballot when a legal petition is presented.
What do you think?