btoy

New 160 Acre West End Park

Recommended Posts

It's case by case, so I find (the article) what the lawmakers are doing unfortunate. In the Greenville case, the city did what was right for the greater good of all. That may not be the case each and every time, so each case should be judged independently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


One of the bills would allow property owners to seek compensation by local governments if zoning action devalued their property.

This has potential to cause some serious problems for local governments. I can't imagine something like this possibly getting passed. There are already growth issues in Greenville. This will only compound the problem by taking away one of the only tools local government has. I doubt that it would stand up in court when it is challenged, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something here? The article said that the law would protect property owners from the government taking their property to give to someone else. How could that possibly be a bad thing?

Frankly, I thought the Supreme Court got it badly wrong last year, and apparently, so do alot of other people. There are a number of states who are working on similiar laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something here? The article said that the law would protect property owners from the government taking their property to give to someone else. How could that possibly be a bad thing?

Frankly, I thought the Supreme Court got it badly wrong last year, and apparently, so do alot of other people. There are a number of states who are working on similiar laws.

It could be a bad thing becuase the bill also says that if a zoning changes affects the value of a property then the city must compensate the land owners. Effectively this bill could kill zoning and historical districts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something here? The article said that the law would protect property owners from the government taking their property to give to someone else. How could that possibly be a bad thing?

Frankly, I thought the Supreme Court got it badly wrong last year, and apparently, so do alot of other people. There are a number of states who are working on similiar laws.

The Supreme Court did get it wrong last year. But that only dealt with Emenient Domain. It had nothing to do with Zoning. However the knee-jerk, brainless reactions of legislatures everywhere have gone beyond the emenient domain issue to other property issues.

The SC legislators are demogaguing the emenient domain issue to give billboards powers greater than any other property owner, to the point of making it nearly impossible to remove one.

This is just the next step in this over-reaction. It will be much more difficult to prevent negative intrusions to any neighborhood. Strip bars, pornography shops, junk yards, industrial sites, etc. will have an easier time operating where ever they choose, because to use zoning laws to prevent such actions will be cost prohibitive to local governments.

This will have enormous unintended consequences, if allowed to become law and the courts uphold it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dining Tax for Parks Mostly Found Palatable

Six on council say they'd likely back 2-cent hike on food at county eateries.

FULL ARTICLE

What are your thoughts on this? Would you vote for it if you were on the Greenville County Council?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would support it.

The BETTER alternative would have been to have approved the 1 cent sales tax in 2002. The taxes would already have been collected and stopped years ago by now, and all the construction work would be finished and we could enjoy the fruits of our investment NOW (and for a few years already in some cases). Instead (assuming this passes), we will pay a PERMANANT tax and pay an additional $20 million (plus interest) for the construction inflation since 2002.

Yet another example of penny-wise-dollar-foolish Greenville County conservatism.

P.S. I don't think this as a done deal either. The Right wing nuts that just forced the poor to subsidize the rich homeowners property taxes, will weigh in soon enough.

Edited by vicupstate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have enough information to say whether I agree with it or not. Without a doubt, the county's parks need to be renovated and new ones built.

But I don't know the present state of the county's budget. As I read this article, I understand that the hospitality tax will not just apply to parks, but to things like the libary, auditorium district, etc.

I really need to know more information, the G'new article gave the basic idea and a few quotes, but I can't tell much of it beyond that, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S. I don't think this as a done deal either. The Right wing nuts that just forced the poor to subsidize the rich homeowners property taxes, will weigh in soon enough.

It was more fear of the school board that anything. People in Greenville County are sick of being backdoored by the spend happy school board and were most likely afraid it would happen again.

The rich have been subsidizing the poor for years, do you REALLY think this is going to change?

I know that I myself am sick of taxes. I would not be surprised if over half of my income goes to pay taxes, whether directly or indirectly. What is the government going to do when they get it all, and it is still not enough!!?

Edited by Chickenwing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears the last two posts are confusing two different things.

The hospitaility tax has NOTHING to do with libraries, the school board or the auditorium district. The REASSESSMENT issue does.

A hospitality tax would be collected by the county for the use disgnated by the referendum (in this case recreation). The school board, library commission, Auditorium district, fire districts, etc, would not get a penny. A hospitality tax would be a new tax levy that would be added to motel rooms in T.R., Fountain Inn and all the unincorporated areas of the county. It is already levied in the other cities including Greenville.

REASSESSMENT is a state-mandated readjustment based on property values. This has been law for decades and is already one year beyond it's original schedule. The County Council's actions will prevent higher-appreciating properties from seeing the full adjustment in their taxes. That revenue loss will be made up by properties that did not increase as much as the average. For the most part that means the rich will get a break, and the less affluent will pick up the slack.

The rich may subside the poor at the federal level but that is NOT the case at the state and local level IMO. I base that on the fact the the state income tax is basically not graduated by income, the sales tax on basic essentials is the same (currently) as non-essentials, sales taxes on cars are stopped after $6,000, and none of the property tax breaks are adjusted by income. IMO, this is one reason why SC has so much poverty.

As for the school board, you can't spend $1 billion in new construction and expect taxes to be flat. The cost of growth is experienced by the school board to a much larger extent than the county council. Schools, teachers, buses, gas for school buses are all expensive and property taxes do NOT cover the added expense of new residents with children. That is why school taxes go up frequently and county taxes don't. The county isn't require to keep up with growth in recreation (and it hasn't) but a school can't send a new student back to it's parents. It must find a classroom and a teacher for it.

Edited by vicupstate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I was confused. The PS, I think, was in reference to the recent reassessment vote, and that is what I was talking about in my reply.

I am not sure where I stand on the hospitality tax; however, I do think that we need more county parks. I also realize that the money must come from somewhere.

My biggest issue with the hospitality tax, as pointed out in the article, is that it could be used for any number of different projects, not just parks, including the Bi-Lo Center. I would rather be assured that the money is going for something more appropriate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't confusing the issue, I don't think, as presented again, by what I called a not so great greenville news article:

But Councilman Bob Taylor said the problem with a hospitality tax is that there is normally no guarantee that a particular agency gets all the money. Everyone from the Bi-Lo Center to the Convention and Visitors Bureau could end up vying for a slice of the revenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, the only way the BiLo center or any group would get the money is if the County Council voted to do so. The County would levy the tax and decide where it is spent. The Auditorium District (Bilo Center) has taxing authority but only over the millage that it already gets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, the only way the BiLo center or any group would get the money is if the County Council voted to do so. The County would levy the tax and decide where it is spent. The Auditorium District (Bilo Center) has taxing authority but only over the millage that it already gets.

The Arena District?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, Skyliner. I believe the correct term is "arena district."

Sorta confusing names I guess.

The Bi-Lo Center still refers to being run by the Greenville Auditorium District:

"PUBLIC PARTNERS:

Greenville Memorial

Auditorium District

City of Greenville

County of Greenville"

http://www.bilocenter.com/content/arena-info/default.asp

But a state statue in 2000, passed and signed, says its been renamed the Greenville Arena district:

http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess113_1999-2000/bills/4937.htm

I've heard local media use both terms before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news on the park! :thumbsup:

Why the name Meadowbrook though? What meaning does that name have. Is the area aroud it called Meadowbrook or is this just a madeup name?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news on the park! :thumbsup:

Why the name Meadowbrook though? What meaning does that name have. Is the area aroud it called Meadowbrook or is this just a madeup name?

Of all the names we've heard thus far, "Meadowbrook" does make the most sense to me. This park, unlike Cleveland Park, will have far more expansive open greenspace (hence "meadow"), and will include a portion of the Reedy River, which is considerably smaller along that stretch (hence "brook"). I don't know if the name will stick or not, but I believe it is endearing enough to outlast any initial apprehension. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never knew the course of the Reedy River was moved back in the 30's. :o

Edited by Galley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea...me neither until they first began to talk about this park. What I'd like to know is: where was it's course to begin with (i.e. where will it be after they move it back)? Anybody know or have an old map or something to share with us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

USC hosts some of the old Sanborn Fire Insurance maps. The availablility varies from city to city depending on what they've scanned and what they can find I assume. Greenville has a pretty wide selection. These are the oldest and most accurate maps I've been able to find online of any city in SC except Charleston. If anyone has found any that are better, please share!

Just pick Greenville and the year:

http://www.sc.edu/library/digital/collections/sanborn.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, those are very cool. I found the street layouts interesting. Buncombe came all the way down (diagonally) to Coffee Street. Interesting stuff. Thanks for sharing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meadowbrook Park is a historic name. The old Greenville Spinners used to play at Meadowbrook Park, which was either at the specific site or near to the site of the new Meadowbrook Park.

Here is a mention of it in an article about the Northgate Soda Shop (Nolan Ryan used to eat at the Northgate when he was a minor-leaguer playing at the old Meadowbrook Park).

Northgate soda shop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.