FONCitizen | Indy Week

FONCitizen 
Member since Feb 3, 2011


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Lipstick on a Pig: Fifty-three Weeks of HB 2, and the Day That Gave Us HB 2.0

The dems who voted for this fake repeal keep saying the LGBT community now has the protections back that they had before HB2 trying to convince people that there are some locations in NC with job protections and public accommodations regulations protecting LGBT community members. This isn't really true. As this article points out, the pre HB2 protections only protect city employees and employees of city contractors. The citizens of these locations have no protections. There is no place in NC where the LGBT community is protected against discrimination in public accommodation. There is no place in NC where the LGBT community is protected from discrimination in housing. There is no place in NC where the LGBT community is protected is protected from being fired from a job outside of some city employees. No matter how politicians like Duane Hall want to spin it, this being a step forward is just not true. Worse yet, the governor and his Democratic accomplices gave away the only leverage we had. HB2

Posted by FONCitizen on 04/05/2017 at 3:50 PM

Re: “ACC: North Carolina, Thanks to HB 2 Deal, Will Be Considered for Tournaments

I hope the NCAA makes the right decision, stays out of NC until after Dec 2020 and shames the ACC into re-thinking their decision. Cooper and the dems who voted with him gave up the only piece of leverage the LGBT community had without asking the community just so straight people could have hometown basketball while the LGBT community continues to be discriminated against. Cooper decided he could support discrimination through his full term as governor as long as straight people didn't have to drive out of state for basketball.

4 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by FONCitizen on 03/31/2017 at 7:36 PM

Re: “Raleigh State Representative Duane Hall Defends His Vote for HB 142: “This Was the Toughest Vote I've Ever Had”

Really? He can't understand how people can think we aren't better off today than yesterday? Because now we have lost the issue on the national stage to use to continue to put pressure on the legislature. Already the ACC has rolled over and said, despite the continued discrimination, they will now bring back sports to NC. The NCAA will probably do the same next week. The leverage the LGBT community had in place to make non-LGBT North Carolinians feel some pain over this discrimination is now gone because of your actions. You have no way of moving the issue forward now. The Republicans got what they wanted. They have control over bathroom FOREVER. They have the right to continue to discriminate for AT LEAST 4 more years. Nothing will stop them from extending that after 2020 either. And, they are getting the sports orgs and businesses to come back to NC. It's a win-win for them and a lose-lose for the LGBT community. Both national and state LGBT organizations worked their butts off to get Cooper elected and this is the thanks we get in return. It would have been far better to leave HB2 in place and leave the pressure it was applying in place with it. Instead, everyone EXCEPT the LGBT community is back to normal while the LGBT community is still being discriminated against. And you can't even guarantee it will get better after Dec 2020.
If you considered this vote to be "tough", it's apparent you don't live with discrimination on a daily basis. The vote shouldn't have been a tough choice at all. You gave up the only leverage the LGBT community had in this fight. And, it wasn't yours to give up especially since you or Gov Cooper didn't bother to ask the LGBT community it they wanted to give up the only leverage they had. You and Cooper made that choice for the LGBT community and you showed a failure of leadership in doing so.

7 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by FONCitizen on 03/31/2017 at 7:06 PM

Re: “David Cox questions new guidelines for video presentations to Raleigh City Council

Appbrad11.... your assertion is not completely accurate. City Staff is "supposed" to publish their presentation data on the city website by 5pm on Friday. That's one day later than they are now requiring of citizens. They don't always do it on time anyway. And, they have been allowed to modify their data after publishing it which they are not going to allow for citizens. So, this new requirement will give staff a 24 hour period to review citizen input and modify their own presentations to counter the citizens prior to their publishing deadline of Friday at 5pm.

7 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by FONCitizen on 12/31/2015 at 9:17 AM

Re: “David Cox questions new guidelines for video presentations to Raleigh City Council

It's nice to see a councilor who shows concern for the citizens and their needs over taking steps, probably unnecessary steps, that add a burden to citizens who are only trying to participate in the community. The city should be taking steps to make it easier for citizens to make their case to the city instead of more difficult.

14 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by FONCitizen on 12/30/2015 at 8:01 PM

Re: “David Cox questions new guidelines for video presentations to Raleigh City Council

So, will citizens be given the same access 5 days ahead of time to any arguments the city staff plan to make on an issue. And, will city staff also be unable to update their presentations after Thursday at 5pm? Or, does the city merely want to have a 5 day lead time in order to prepare a rebuttal to arguments that will be made by citizens?

12 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by FONCitizen on 12/30/2015 at 7:45 PM

Re: “Raleigh’s City Council adopted the UDO Remapping

at every step throughout this process the residents told the council they didn't want the property at Dunn Rd rezoned. First the citizens presented a petition with over 3,700 signatures asking that the land not be rezoned. Then there was an historic vote at the CAC where 522 residents voted against the rezoning. Next came a historic meeting at the Planning Commission where for the first time EVER the entire 3 hour meeting was spent on this one rezoning and a packed auditorium told the commissioners they didn't want the land rezoned. Then, the rezoning case came before city council in May and once again, the citizens filled the council chambers and told council not to rezone the land. And, in May, the council voted unanimously to deny the rezoning request and received a standing ovation from the crowd. Then came the public hearings for the remapping and once again the residents pleaded with the council to uphold their vote from May and deny the remapping. Finally, the election was held. David Cox defeated John Odom because Odom told his constituents he planned to approve remapping the land to the same zoning code that he voted to deny in May. The election also saw the defeat of J B Buxton based on the fact that he voted to approve the rezoning in his role on the Planning Commission.

For two years now, the citizens have pleaded again and again with the council not to rezone this property. We thought we won the battle when the rezoning request was unanimously denied in May. We thought we won when we defeated John Odom in the election. But, the mayor had her own ideas. And, out of nothing but pure spite, she defied the will of the people and gave the landowner a massive increase in entitlements on his land. She even refused to let anyone from the public or on the council speak against the proposed remapping at the work session. The work session which was intended for the council to discuss the issue in a public forum. But, no, the mayor didn't even allow a public discussion of the issue. Instead she jammed through a vote to approve the most dense development zoning that has ever been requested for this piece of property. In 2008, Nancy McFarland voted to deny a 20,000 sq ft development on this same property. That's 5,000 sq ft per acre for this 4 acre plot. In May of this year she voted to deny a development which was 4,850 sq ft per acre for a larger property which included this 4 acre plot. But, today, she forced a vote without public discussion to approve a development for 30,000 sq ft or 7,500 sq ft per acre. The most dense development proposal ever requested for this property.

The citizens lost today at the hands of a mayor who wouldn't listen to them.

12 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by FONCitizen on 11/17/2015 at 12:01 AM

All Comments »

Extra Extra!

Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.

  • Weekly Newsletter (Wednesday) - The stories in this week's issue
  • Weekly Events Newsletter - Our picks for your weekend and beyond

Login to choose
your subscriptions!

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

© 2017 Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation