Dear Ned

Dear Ned,

Thanks for recognizing that Livable Raleigh is “dedicated to maintaining the city’s leafy character despite its rapid development.” We are, indeed, pro-development consistent with strong environmental policies, tree conservation and respecting the built character of existing neighborhoods.

We also advocate that, where larger development projects are appropriate, they should include some units of affordable housing, so that development in Raleigh ceases to serve only the well-off.

Livable Raleigh was formed in response to city elections in 2019 that resulted in a new 7-1 majority on City Council, a majority that quickly showed itself to be in favor of whatever developers wanted, wherever they wanted it.

That Council rubber-stamped developers’ proposals without any regard to:

• • the scraped-off trees
  • the scrape-offs of existing affordable housing
  • the absence of new affordable housing units, even in the 20- and 40-story buildings that the Council majority rushed to approve
  • the resulting traffic congestion, burdens on water and sewer systems, and escalating property taxes.

That council was elected due to enormous campaign expenditures by development interests. David Knight, in particular, unseated an incumbent Council member who was smeared repeatedly in expensive mailers sent by a dark-money group linked to the development industry.

That Council, of course, was notorious for cancelling the scheduled city elections in 2021, conniving in secret with Republican leaders in the General Assembly to give themselves an extra, unelected year in office.

When elections finally occurred in 2022, Knight was ousted by the voters, and for good reason. Four new members of Council were elected, each with Livable Raleigh’s support. The four take a balanced approach to growth and community concerns. Which we applaud.

Now Knight is back with a new group, which he calls – and this is interesting—Sustainable Raleigh.

But, “sustainable” for whom?

No sooner did Knight announce the group than he sent out a fundraising appeal for donations of up to $6,000, and $500 minimum. Sounds like an exclusive club.

Laughably, Knight is pitching his group as one that “protects fair elections,” despite his record of cancelling them.

He also says they will “foster city-wide public engagement.” Really?

Knight, as part of the former Council majority, voted to abolish Raleigh’s city-wide network of Citizen Advisory Councils. And he went a step further, saying he would never meet with the CACs that continued to operate privately despite that vote.

Ironic that when Knight was ousted by the voters, he accused Livable Raleigh of being a dangerous dark-money group with vast powers, despite the fact that our total spending in all of the city elections that year was a fraction of what Knight spent on his own campaign—only to lose.

“Dark money?” That moniker fits Sustainable Raleigh all too well.

Livable Raleigh Editorial Team