The City Council approved three annexation and original zoning requests at the Tuesday, Oct. 17 meeting.
There was no one present to oppose any of the annexation and rezoning requests. However, there was opposition to one of the three annexation and original zoning requests and that came primarily from District 1 City Councilmember Sharon Hightower over a request to annex 0.8 acres at 3900 Randleman Road and zone it Conditional District-Light Industrial (CD-LI)
Both the annexation and original zoning request passed by 7-2 votes, with Hightower and At-large Councilmember Hugh Holston voting against both motions.
Now that the property has been annexed, it is in District 1, represented by Hightower, and Hightower has a long history of voting against original zoning and rezoning requests in the district she represents.
Holston did not give a reason for voting against the annexation and original zoning request but did express concerns that because the area is sparsely populated, not many people were notified of the annexation and original zoning request. According to city staff, 48 notices were sent to property owners that were within 750 feet of the property at 3900 Randleman Road.
Hightower appeared to struggle to find something wrong with the annexation and original zoning request.
It seemed like a fairly simple request. Daymond Milam had the adjacent piece of property annexed and zoned CD-LI in 2021. At the time he said he intended to use an office on the property to do tax returns during the tax season and the rest of the year he planned to use the property for an auto detailing business.
Milam’s representative at the meeting said the adjacent property owner approached Milam about buying the adjacent lot and he did. Now he was requesting that the property be annexed and zoned CD-LI so that he could expand his business.
Milam’s representative noted that he was a “minority entrepreneur.”
Hightower responded, “I know him. I’ve met him. It’s interesting that I haven’t had any conversations with him about this. Yes, he’s a black entrepreneur, not just a minority entrepreneur, so he’s a black person, so I get that, don’t get me wrong. And I certainly support black entrepreneurs and growing their businesses. It’s just a little concerning I haven’t heard from him and I checked some of his other businesses and they aren’t office and auto detailing.”
Lol…more racism.
Would you please look into the stalled Construction of the proposed Weston hotel and parking deck. I am assuming the project has died and the city is stuck again.
You have got to be kidding! Ms. Hightower, you vote against a rezoning for a minority business when all you have done is ask for minority businesses. And your reason is because he didn’t reach out to meet with you. That’s not a legal requirement. Your vote against the zoning was illegal and a good attorney would have told you. Meeting with everyone in your district is not a legal requirement. Do you want to go in everyone’s homes too? There are NC State Statutes as to why you can vote against a rezoning. Meeting with you is not in there. The owner was giving you everything you have been asking for from everyone in the City. Why do you not support people in your own district. The people you represent and more importantly to you, minority businesses. Is there anyone you thrust because you have a treacherous record of not trusting your own constituents.
Sharon Hightower didn’t give any reason for voting against the rezoning. But, she notes that she knows the owner and twice mentions he didn’t talk to her about it. Sounds like she feels disrespected.
Disrespected, or something else…
Hightower said. . . .”It’s just a little concerning I haven’t heard from him and I checked some of his other businesses and they aren’t office and auto detailing.”
To reduce that down so everyone can understand, she’s saying she should have been the first person to be contacted “before” anyone on the council. I guess it’s part of need to be seen as the queen of her district.
He didn’t bend the knee