David Dotson is a Big Fat Idiot Who Doesn't Understand Economics

Monroe is at a critical turning point, and choosing a platform of "less" is nothing short of an admission of defeat by candidates who aren't prepared to meet the moment in our growing city.

David Dotson is everything his own campaign signs warn against.

As a transplant from Charlotte, he lives in the exact type of newly built neighborhood that created the infrastructure deficits he now rails against. These developments increase the cost of public services, which will eventually outpace the tax revenue they generate. Furthermore, his need to drive a massive truck to haul his large hat and even larger campaign signs adds significant wear and tear to our roads. By his own logic, the Charlottean transplant should have never been allowed to move here.

I don’t actually think this way. I believe Monroe should be an inviting city—even to people like David Dotson, who try to close the door behind themselves. We should embrace inevitable expansion with careful thought and strategic planning. Thankfully, previous City Councils didn't share his restrictive mindset. The population expansion in Monroe and Union County has breathed new life into the city I was born in, providing ample opportunities for families like mine to live, eat, play, and work.

Instead of building on this momentum, David wants to halt economic expansion and hang a "NO VACANCY" sign on our city. Prospective businesses looking to invest in our booming area will certainly recoil at that sentiment from a sitting City Council member. Young couples looking to put down roots won't feel welcomed knowing David is wagging his finger at them as their cars clog up intersections. Worst of all, current Monroe residents will be left holding the bag when their taxes increase anyway, because our infrastructure needs won't be divided among a larger pool of taxpayers.

Monroe deserves leadership that plans for the future, not politicians who want to shut out the very growth that sustains us.

“Less traffic, Less Houses, Less Taxes”

Now, to his credit, he does at least attempt to lay out what some uninterested passers-by could mistake as policy positions; that’s more than I can say for some. But for anyone paying attention, or for those who own calculators, you quickly realize how vapid and abysmally unserious these proposals are. It’s standard, boilerplate rhetoric that’s meant to induce a tribal response of frustration with outsiders… of which he is one, I’ll again remind you…

So let's break these idiotic proposals down one by one...

“Less Houses”  Means Closing the Door to Future Generations

One might expect a mayoral candidate to inspire hope and welcome the growth necessary for our city to thrive; instead, his anti-growth platform should be considered disqualifying. This stance is especially hypocritical given his background. He moved here just over a decade ago into a neighborhood built for the expansion that accommodated his retirement from the big city of Charlotte. All of which he now shuns. Like I said, he ain’t smart. Imagine being a young couple looking to plant roots here, only to hear a message from our highest elected office that your family isn’t welcome simply because you might add to traffic. Not a good look, sir.  

So let’s examine the policy positions of Councilman Dotson’s and how they’ve historically condemned otherwise thriving municipalities to stagnation and, paradoxically, the exact opposite of what they promise. 

A freeze on new housing does not stop people from moving into our general area, but it does stop them from moving into Monroe. Further, it turns our existing housing market into a high-stakes game of musical chairs. When we stop building while demand keeps growing, home prices and rents skyrocket. The devastating reality of this approach can be seen in the late 1960s and 1970s, when commuter suburbs outside major hubs like Boston and New York implemented "The Big Downzone" to preserve their suburban character. By mandating huge minimum lot sizes and banning multifamily apartments, they artificially restricted supply. In fact, President Johnson’s National Commission on Urban Problems found that a staggering 99.2% of vacant land in the New York suburban area was zoned to strictly ban anything except expensive single-family homes. Data from The Eviction Lab proves that these anti-housing laws weaponized demand, causing local rents to spike aggressively and turning vibrant communities into exclusive enclaves.

We must learn from history so we do not repeat it. "Less houses" means your adult children will be priced out of the neighborhoods they grew up in, and it forces our local teachers, first responders, and nurses to endure exhausting commutes from miles away. High demand is not a crisis—it is a massive compliment to our exceptional school district and local safety. The contrast to our vibrant growth is a dying town where jobs vanish, schools shut down, and the future stagnates. Our goal is not to slam the city's doors shut, but to manage our growing pains through smart, well-planned, mixed-use neighborhoods. This approach preserves our beautiful green spaces while keeping homeownership accessible for the next generation.

“Less Traffic” Means Less Economic Activity

While our daily commute has undoubtedly increased, we must understand what that congestion truly represents. Historically, the only places completely devoid of traffic are ghost towns suffering from systemic economic flight—dead local economies where businesses fail, storefront windows are boarded up, and young people flee for more vibrant communities. Traffic, by contrast, is an unmistakable sign of economic energy. Cars on the road mean people are driving to work, spending money, and supporting our local merchants. Trying to lessen traffic by completely halting growth is like trying to lose weight by cutting off a limb. Instead of strangling our city's economic momentum, we should be effectively managing it. Instead of offering real policy solutions, Dotson relies on a gimmick and an oversized cowboy hat, stoking the frustrations of the fearful and risking economic flight rather than fixing the root issues.

Furthermore, simply blocking local housing does not solve the transportation crisis. Modern traffic studies show that stopping construction in a commuter suburb fails to keep cars off the road; it merely shifts growth further out, worsening regional gridlock. When workers are priced out and forced to move to more distant exurbs, they still must drive directly through our town to reach major employment hubs. Our local intersections clog anyway, but because those drivers live elsewhere, our city receives zero dollars in tax revenue to fix and expand the roads.

Successful modern suburbs address these challenges not by banning new neighbors, but through "Smart Growth" investments that shift the narrative from stopping cars to moving people efficiently. Forward-thinking cities invest in synchronized traffic grids, smart traffic lights, municipal parking hubs, walkable town centers, and better public transit options. We can ease the burden on commuters while keeping our economy moving. We do not need a leadership that slams the door shut, turns off the lights, and shrinks from success. We need proactive, visionary leadership that welcomes our city's achievements and designs the smart infrastructure necessary to handle them.

“LESS TAXES” Means Nothing Gets Fixed

True leadership means choosing to manage growth rather than blindly blocking it. New developments can and should pay for themselves. Through strategically structured impact fees and an expanded property tax base, growth pays for growth, directly lowering the financial burden on our current residents. By building smartly, we can maintain our community's character, stabilize living costs, and ensure that the people who make our town run can actually afford to live here.

We all want to keep our hard-earned money in our pockets, but a blanket promise of "less taxes" in a city of more than 40,000 residents is a nonsensical and untenable proposition that will inevitably force deep budget cuts. When the tax base shrinks, the city budget shrinks with it. This directly translates to unfilled potholes, crumbling roads, closed or neglected parks, and weakened police and fire departments. As emergency response times crawl upward and local schools suffer, a suburb with breaking infrastructure loses its property value overnight. Blindly slashing revenue doesn't save money; it destroys the very amenities that make our community a desirable place to live.

Anti-growth candidates frequently argue that a growing population inevitably drives up infrastructure costs, claiming that taxes must rise to match. However, urban economists have long known that municipal infrastructure scales alongside population growth. When a city grows, its physical needs, such as water mains, roads, and power lines, do not increase at a 1-to-1 ratio. According to urban data researchers infrastructure costs scale roughly to the 0.8 power of population growth. This means every new household added actually reduces the per-capita cost of maintaining our town. Spreading the price of essential assets like a fire truck or a water treatment plant across 45,000 people is mathematically cheaper for individual taxpayers than splitting it across 40,000.

A growing population expands our tax base naturally without raising individual tax rates. More residents attract commercial investment and new restaurants, generating localized revenue to fund top-tier public parks, state-of-the-art community centers, and elite emergency services. Research from the Urban Institute reveals that adding diverse housing and smart developments generates higher long-term economic output and tax revenue per dollar spent than almost any other form of public infrastructure. Growth is the engine that most effectively funds our community amenities, allowing us to enhance public services while keeping individual tax rates low.

So now you know why David Dotson is a big fat idiot who doesn’t understand economics… He’s all hat, no cattle…But What Does Monroe Need?

Monroe is at a critical turning point, and choosing a platform of "less" is nothing short of an admission of defeat by candidates who aren't prepared to meet the moment in our growing city. When leaders campaign on stopping development, they are admitting that they're incapable of managing success, choosing instead to manufacture an artificial decline. Stagnation is a choice, and we only need to look at dying towns across the country, where jobs vanish, schools shut down, and public services crumble, to see where that path leads. We don't need leadership that hides under a big, dumb hat, demonizes progress, and glares at prospective new residents with contempt. We need proactive, visionary leaders who reframe growth as a sign of a thriving, desirable community, and who promise to manage our growing pains rather than hiding from them.

The reality is that growth pays for growth. Well-planned new developments pay for themselves through localized impact fees and an expanded property tax base, which actually lowers the financial burden on current residents. Managing our future ensures we have the resources to invest in modern infrastructure, smart zoning, and diverse housing choices that protect our kids' futures. If we stay silent, the loudest voices of stagnation will make these decisions for us, turning a vibrant suburb into an exclusive, declining enclave.

Don't let fear dictate our town's future—take action today to demand a plan for managed success. You can make a massive difference right now by sharing this post with your neighbors, family, and local Facebook or Nextdoor groups to spark an honest conversation about smart growth. Next, show up and speak out by attending the upcoming City Council meetings to advocate for the infrastructure investments our community deserves. Finally, when you head to the ballot box, reject the illusion of "Less" and vote for progress. Let’s choose a city that boldly invests in its future rather than one that shrinks from it.

And, Dotson, if you’re reading this…Lose the hat. You’re not fooling anybody.