Barden Monday, October 01, 2007

Politics

Election Focus: Bond Referendums

Earlier in the year, the city council decided to turn the issue of financing a new set of park improvements over to the citizenry. This is not the first time the city has given way to referendums (My Latin teacher is rolling in her figurative grave). In the past twelve years, voters have approved three bond packages aimed at developing open spaces and expanding greenways. In fact, due to the rising cost of developing greenways, this 2007 bond will also go towards financing improvements meant to be covered under the 2003 bond.

Some of the new proposed projects will include:

  1. Completion of the Neuse River Greenway from Falls Dam to Johnston County
  2. Extension of Walnut Creek Greenway toward the Neuse River
  3. New carriageway bridge at Pullen Park
  4. Retrofitting the carousel building at Chavis Heights Park for a new use
  5. Development of an interpretive center at Mordecai Historic Park
  6. New signage package for use by the parks system

The city’s website lists the other projects this bond will cover, as well as the reasoning behind this method of financing for city improvements.

I am encouraging everyone to vote YES on this bond. Feel free to disagree or comment, but I believe this is a great opportunity to expand open space and further the ability of Raleigh residents to enjoy an excellent trail-way and park system.

Read More Politics

Filed Under:

  • David10/02 10:47 AM

    http://www.belowthebeltline.org/frames-lane/lane-blogs.htm#pinkhotel

    http://www.horseshoefarm.org/

    The Park Bond is more than meets the eye.  Below the Beltline claims that it will mean nature parks are replaced with baseball fields and community centers. 

    “But then comes Wake Audubon Society, much more cautious - why is there $9 million for ball fields at unspecified sites in Northeast Raleigh? Both Audubon and BTB.org know the answer � the unspecified sites are nature parks.

    Then People for Parks speaks� what�s up with $9,000,000 for a Northeast Raleigh Community Center and $2,000,000 for a Northeast Raleigh Active Recreation Partnership, at unspecified locations? Both People for Parks and BTB.org know the answer � the unspecified sites are nature parks.“

     

  • Barden10/02 11:57 AM

    I believe that Below-the-beltline is only using the parks bond as an issue to attack Talifiero (justified or not).

    It should also be noted that BTB would find out rain was wet and use it to attack Talifiero.

  • RaleighRob10/02 12:09 PM

    ^ Well, BTB did get their info from Wake Audubon…and their October newsletter (http://www.wakeaudubon.org/pdf/wb_oct_07.pdf) does lay out some of their concerns with the park bond.  They’re worried about some vague language that’s been inserted in there regarding a “community center and gymnasium somewhere in Northeast Raleigh” and worried that, depending on who’s on the council, that wording would put Horseshoe Farm and/or Durant Nature Park as targets for those proposed facilities. 
    Is it a big enough worry to vote down the bond?  I dunno yet.  IF I thought Koopman was going to easily beat Taliaferro hands-down, then I’d not worry so much and vote for the bond, no problem.  Otherwise, I still have my misgivings about it all.

  • Mark10/02 01:10 PM

    They should have stopped with: “Parks bonds are pretty much no-brainers…“

    I have my radical leftist moments as much as the next guy, but declaring war on an individual on city council seems a bit silly, particularly when you are trying to persuade voters.

  • erin10/02 01:31 PM

    why are community centers such a bad thing?

  • David10/02 01:51 PM

    Its not that they are a bad thing at all.  Below the Beltline’s point is that we have very little green space in this city, and this bond will actually decrease that available green space. And honestly Taliaferro is worth waging war on. Her allegiance to developers is repulsive.

  • erin10/02 01:57 PM

    i agree that taliaferro has got to go.  i wish i lived in that district so i could vote for koopman! 

    but, voting NO for the bonds just because it means a baseball field and community center instead of a nature preserve is backwards.  community centers encourage people to be active and get outside, which will make more citizens aware of the lack of green space.

  • Barden10/02 02:12 PM

    Exactly Erin. Thank you!

    Look, North Raleigh is crap to start with, what’s wrong with throwing some baseball fields now there?

    I am probably the most “pro-development” on this blog, and find it very amusing that there is such an anti-developER tone. Yet we are all fighting for a better and more vibrant downtown.

    I’ve seen how this zero-sum behavior become pervasive in Charlotte and we see the kind of development that happened there. Load em up and ship em out.

    Purists never get accomplished. People trying to take the dirty out of politics is like trying to take the fun out of sex. Good luck!

Welcome to New Raleigh. We welcome your participation in the ongoing discussion. Before posting we ask that you read our Comment Policy and we invite you to register with our site. If you want to keep up with the news on our blog, subscribe to the RSS feed or get emailed every time we post.




Remember my information for next time I comment

Send me an email of follow-up comments?