In this letter to the editor in the Lexington Dispatch, John Frank criticizes Rep. Hugh Holliman for inventing the “noble course of conflict of interest” when he said he would not vote on an annexation moratorium because he lives in the “wealthy Sapona neighborhood” that is targeted for annexation by the City of Lexington:
(Holliman) thus removes the voice of the 81st District from having its say on this important issue. Knowing full well that he will be in trouble with the League (of Municipalities) if he votes yea on the moratorium and in trouble at home if he votes against it, Representative (Hugh) Holliman invents the noble course of conflict of interest.
The issue here is moratorium. What possible conflict can there be to just voting the overwhelming mandate of his constituency? If the people you represent favor a moratorium, that is how you vote no matter where you live or what your personal agenda may be. It’s that simple.
Speaking of the League of Municipalities, spokesperson Margot Christensen e-mailed a statement regarding an annexation moratorium.
Municipal officials across the state, all elected by and as representatives of the people of our cities and towns, believe by a strong consensus, based on compelling evidence, that the current municipal annexation statutes have served North Carolina well. The ability to annex adjacent areas that become urban and need a higher level of urban services is one important factor that has helped to keep our cities and towns strong and vibrant. N.C. municipal officials oppose a moratorium on annexations because they do not believe a moratorium is justified. They are working to address any reasonable concerns with the state’s annexation statutes
Our municipal officials certainly respect the opinions of some citizens who disagree, and who do not want their property to be annexed as urban development occurs in and around their neighborhoods.
