Home Care In Burlington, NC

BURLINGTON, N.C. — How much candy is too much? After a few days of munching on the Trick or Treat candy, you may want to get it out of the house. A Burlington Dental practice is buying back the sugary sweets.

"We buy the candy back from the children. We give them $2 a pound up to five pounds per child," said Dorothy Corbett of Crisp & Associates Pediatric Dentistry.

Crisp and Associates in Burlington will buy back your unwanted and unwrapped Halloween candy on Monday, November 4, and Tuesday, November 5, from 4 pm to 6 pm at 3154 S. Church Street in Burlington.

" It serves two purposes. The first one is obviously to keep our kids healthy, you know, obviously thinking about their teeth, but also healthy diets, and they can get some cash for it. The second is for our troops. The candy is going to the troops overseas. It really allows us to support our troops and, you know, just let them know that we're thinking about them," said Dr. Jennifer Crisp of Crisp & Associates Pediatric Dentistry.

My question was, is it hard for kids to give up Halloween candy for cash?

"They are willing to give out the candy for the money and then the mom's taking them to the Target, the Walmart and they're getting to buy something that they really want to buy. So they're really excited about, uh, getting up that candy," said Corbett.

MORE WAYS TO GET WFMY NEWS 2

Subscribe to our daily newsletter Let’s Get 2 It!

Download the WFMY News 2 APP from your Apple or Google Play store.

ADD THE WFMY+ APP TO YOUR STREAMING DEVICE

ROKU: Add the channel from the ROKU store or by searching for WFMY.

Amazon Fire TV: Search for WFMY to find the free app to add to your account. You can also add the app directly to your Fire TV through your Amazon account.

Related Articles

[Editor’s Note: North Carolina General Statutes 163-278.6(84): A referendum committee is two or more individuals or entities, or two or more business entities, which has the primary purpose of supporting or opposing the passage of any referendum on the ballot.

[North Carolina’s Campaign Finance Laws regulate contributions received by referendum committees and expenditures made by referendum committees, but there are apparently two groups, that are advocating for one or both Burlington bond referendum questions on the Nov. 5 ballot, but without divulging organizers, contributions, or expenditures.]

Over the past several weeks, many area roads have turned into a kaleidoscope of political ads, as the various candidates in next month’s election have struggled to get their names out to the community’s voters.

But one set of placards has stood out from the rest of this visual explosion since, somewhat unusually, it doesn’t promote anyone who’s running for office this year.

These green and blue yard signs, which encourage residents to “Vote Yes” on “GO Burlington,” may seem a little cryptic to voters who haven’t kept up with the goings on in Burlington’s municipal government. Nor, in all likelihood, is their confusion cleared up by the tag line that “Quality of Life Matters!” which appears below the main text of the ad.

But to those in-the-know, these signs will readily reveal themselves as a promotion for a bond referendum in Burlington that aspires to raise $47 million for three recreation-related ventures.

One of two sets of general obligation bonds on Burlington’s ballot – the other being a street repair package for $21.5 million – these bonds have been enthusiastically pushed by the city’s elected leaders. Yet, under state law, city resources and staff cannot be used to sell the bonds to Burlington’s voters. As a result of this prohibition, the city’s own bond-related outreach has been ostensibly limited to the dissemination of factual information about the two bond packages to the local electorate.

In addition to the blue and green “GO Burlington” placards, another set of pro-bond yard signs has begun to pop up this week, urging residents to “Vote Yes! for Bonds” in order to “Make Burlington Better.”

Suffice it to say, the city’s administrators have been quick to absolve themselves of any connection to either of these clearly-promotional yard signs.

“It is not the city,” Burlington’s city manager Craig Honeycutt assured The Alamance News on Tuesday. “There’s some people out there who made up these signs on their own.”

Honeycutt was studiously silent on the identities of the “people” behind these campaigns. Equally mum were Burlington’s mayor Jim Butler, mayor pro tem Harold Owen, and city councilman Ronnie Wall – although all three admitted that “someone” had planted the signs in their yards.

As it turns out, the guiding force behind the blue and green yard signs is someone who’s not altogether unfamiliar to city officials.

The Alamance News has learned that the signs are actually the brainchild of Lisa Wolff, the retired assistant director of Burlington’s recreation and parks department, who now works for the BerryDunn consulting firm.

Wolff told newspaper that she took it upon herself to make up the placards precisely because state law prohibits the city from launching its own promotional campaign for the bonds.

“My heart’s in parks and recreation,” she explained in a phone conversation on Wednesday. “I felt the need to get the word out about the bonds. So, I designed them myself and had them printed.”

Wolff noted that a total of 300 yard signs have been printed so far at a cost of roughly $2,000 – which she said has been covered by other referendum supporters in the community.

Wolff added that she has no idea who’s behind the second set of pro-referendum signs, which have proliferated rather quickly since they began to make their appearance earlier this week.

Wolff went on to underscore the need for the three projects that would be funded if the recreation bonds get a greenlight from the city’s voters. These projects include a proposed expansion of Burlington’s Paramount Theater, a new structure to house the Maynard Aquatic Center, and a $30 million “sportsplex” in the western part of the city, which Wolff says would be a godsend to parents who now have to shuttle their children across town for sporting events.

Should voters approve either of the two proposed bond packages, the city’s taxpayers will inevitably bear some additional costs to pay off the debt on these bonds. According to the actual text of the ballot questions, the debt on $47 million in recreation-related bonds would have a tax liability of $34 a year for every $100,000 property while the liability on $21.5 million for street repairs and improvements would come to $23 a year.

It may seem a bit pat to say that the retired city staff member has been a “lone Wolff” in her campaign on behalf of the recreation bonds. Yet, Wolff is emphatic that her efforts have been unconnected with any formal campaign committee – the likes of which have been involved in previous bond referendums in Alamance County.

Under state law, a committee which forms to support a particular referendum is subject to the same financial disclosure requirements as a political candidate. Among other things, such a committee must file documents within 10 days of its organization. It must submit periodic reports to either the state or local elections office detailing its expenditures as well as the contributions it takes in.

State law imposes a less stringent set of requirements on an unaligned individual who makes expenditures on behalf of candidate or referendum. Under the relevant statute, such individuals aren’t required to file any financial documentation as long as they spend no more than $100. If their expenditures exceed $100, they must file a report within 30 days of crossing that threshold or at least 10 days before the election.

Wolff, for her part, insists that none of these requirements apply to her efforts on behalf of Burlington’s bond referendum. She stressed that her expenditures on the yard signs have been negligible, while the cost to have them printed was borne entirely by donors who made payments directly to the printing company.

“I was not required to do the reports,” she said. “This was strictly done through a grassroots effort, and there weren’t any expenditures from me.”

Wolff added that she has received the assurance of the city’s bond attorney that there’s no need for her to file any paperwork for her pro-referendum yard signs. Nor has the local election office received any documentation from a pro-referendum campaign, according to Dawn Hurdle, the county’s election director.

There is apparently no problem, however, with the absence of a “disclosure legend” – the brief “paid for” clause which graces campaign billboards and mailers – from any of the various pro-referendum yard signs in Burlington.

According to the N.C. Board of Elections, these formulaic disclaimers aren’t required on yard signs, posters, or magnetic signs as long as their surface area doesn’t exceed 50 square feet.