Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.


Expand Messages
  • Dana Atkins
    Hi. Dana Atkins here. And I serve on the Historic Commission. Just wanted to respond to a few of the things that you guys have posted and make some
    Message 1 of 3 , Aug 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi. Dana Atkins here. And I serve on the Historic Commission.

      Just wanted to respond to a few of the things that you guys have
      posted and make some clarifications.

      I am not a political crony and never will be. I was a homeowner on
      Sunset Drive, in the historic district and moved about 6 months ago
      because we were having another baby and our house was not large
      enough. I serve on the board because I have an honest interest in
      the preservation of historic properties. If you were to meet the
      folks on the commission and ask them why they serve I think they
      will all give you the same answer.

      And to reconfirm...just as with ALL government positions, you must
      be a resident of the state to be allowed to serve. Tammy cannot
      serve because her and her husband remain residents of Texas. Their
      cars are still registered in Texas. This means that they are not
      paying tax on their cars to NC, but rather to Texas. This means
      that the money is not going back into NC, but back into Texas.

      Tammy has repeatedly said that she knows the law and has expressed
      many concerns over the historic district that you all live in. I
      have never read a letter from Tammy. I have been at her neighbors
      house and our children have played together. I have never heard her
      express discontent with our group nor have I ever seen Tammy attend
      a historic preservation meeting. I know that her excuse is that her
      husband is not here right now, but her husband was here for a while
      because he did attend one meeting that I can recall. My husband
      travels a great deal and many nights when I have a meeting scheduled
      for historic preservation, he is not here. I get a sitter. It can
      be done.

      And finally, I just want to point out that the commission does not
      just serve your neighborhood. It is for the city of Sanford and it
      serves Rosemount-McIver, Jonesboro, Hawkins Ave and the downtown
      districts. We hear cases for both Rosemount-McIver and downtown.

      And on a more personal note, Tammy, just because you are a Yankee
      and can be rude and ugly does not mean that you have to be. I know
      many people who have moved here from up north and I have never had
      them use their heritage as an excuse for being mean. Most are quite
      happy that they now live in a place where people are kind to one
      another and aware that we are all just trying to make things better
      in this great town. I was born here and have spent 29 years here
      and only hope that one day you will see what I see...and will be


      --- In historic-sanford-nc@yahoogroups.com, "Diana" <kidsnut@...>
      > I'm with you, woman. I wish I could volunteer, but I'm not as
      good as
      > I should be in political situations. If political cronies are
      > managing the illegal set up, who accepted them for
      those "voluntary"
      > seats? Some even appear to have conflict of interest, according
      to my
      > limited knowledge. I guess they will count you out because "you're
      > not from around here". I got a lot of that in Rockingham for
      > 10 years. Now that the neighborhood is being taken care of by
      > "outside" owners, what is the scoop that may be happening behind
      > dragging-of-feet? Old history "this is how WE do it" and not
      > at today "this is how it is NOW"?
      > I'm just wondering if they may think we are just butting into their
      > stuff and calling them on their "mistakes".
      > Diana
      > --- In historic-sanford-nc@yahoogroups.com, "tx_duke_fans"
      > <tx_duke_fans@> wrote:
      > >
      > > I just felt that this should be addressed and corrected. First
      > > I am not on the board but have a vast amount of knowledge as to
      > > their rules, regulations, guidelines and ordinances. More so it
      > > seems than the board members or their chairman.
      > >
      > > There are two boards. These boards - the Historical
      > > Commission and the Appearance Commission were enacted in 1997.
      > > are bound by ordinance 1996-10 which makes them certainly two
      > > different boards. They have different and specific duties to
      > > Myself and others have researched this in an argument with city
      > > officials and Mr. Montgomery specifically. We have had the city
      > > attorney research and we have written verification that the two
      > > indeed two separate commissions and have always been that way
      > > that the appearance commission has never set forth any
      guidelines to
      > > follow in the 9 years they have been established.
      > > Also, in this 9 years we have had the same people sitting on
      > > boards which in itself is illegal according to city ordinances
      > > state you may not sit on more than one board.
      > >
      > > The funny part is that this has been going on for some time and
      > > mere residents know the guidelines and the ordinance better than
      > > officials that set them into motion and the board members that
      > > on the two boards. I know these guidelines better than the
      > > of this group. It seems a lot of what the chairman posted on
      > > was completely incorrect. We have checked into all of it with a
      > > city council member and they confirmed the incorrect statements.
      > >
      > > So, people here is my problem. We are being "guided" by a board
      > > members with a chairman himself who doesnt' know the rules. And
      > > before even researching anything got on here and posted that we
      > > wrong. I have my research and don't post unless I am certain of
      > > something. And, now I am supposed to call upon this board with
      > > questions and concerns I might have. Why ? Will they even know
      > > answers? Or will they just ignore me as it has been for 3 years?
      > >
      > > I am going to ask City Council to put the old 6 members onto the
      > > Appearance commission and to put 6 more residents onto the
      > > historical board. I just think it only right to be held
      > > on my property by others who are held accountable to the same
      > > standards and also I'd feel much more comfortable having
      > > looking out for the best interest of our neighborhood.
      > >
      > > Otherwise there has been a bunch of talk among residents over
      > > that maybe we should just ask that the historical board and the
      > > guidelines be abolished and let residents take care
      > > of their neighborhood on their own....might work better. We
      > > been told by the planning department that they'd just like
      > > McIver to just go away. So, if city council doesn't deem it
      > > their while, and planning dept doesn't and our own staff and
      > > commission don't deem it important enough to have done anything
      in 9
      > > years than maybe it would be better off run by the neighborhood
      > > it's own.
      > >
      > > I will say I am angry right now with the constant changing of
      > > stories to cover a problem that has been going on for 9 years.
      I am
      > > tired of the new spin that is put on it whenever it arises and
      > > city officials don't want to deal with it. I and others from our
      > > area are going vocal. We have calls into the state level, the
      > > national level and more. We want this problem taken care of..
      > > We want a commission that is fair, consistant and respectful of
      > > residents. We don't have that with this board and quite frankly
      > > won't have it unless the whole system is overhauled. The
      > > relationship is just too far gone to fix with this group. They
      > > been on numerous occasions non-consistant, unfair and have shown
      > > blatent favortism. This has to stop.
      > >
      > > tammy hebert
      > >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.