The first statement you find on Matt Czajkowski's web site is:
"It is very clear that the property tax burden has become unsustainable. Many of the very people who have contributed to making Chapel Hill a special place are now being forced to consider leaving our town, counter to our cherished goal of preserving diversity at all levels."
Being an engineer and a numbers person I wondered two things. What was the data used to support the statement that diversity in the town was declining and, if so, what is the basis for connecting this to the property tax?
Each year the school district publishes a report that provides ethnicity data for the pupils. Here is the data for 2001 to 2008 in percentages
Asian Hispanic Black White
2001 9.1 5.9 15.7 66.0
2002 10.0 6.4 15.3 64.4
2003 10.5 7.5 15.3 62.3
2004 11.0 8.3 14.8 61.2
2005 11.7 8.7 14.3 60.4
2006 12.1 9.6 14.1 58.6
2007 12.7 9.7 14.0 57.8
2008 13.5 10.4 13.7 56.0
I would submit that this data is fairly indicative of the populaiton of the town and not a compelling data set to show that our town is becoming less diverse in any measurable way. Furthermore, our mayor and town council have been very successful over the last few years in maintaining services with only modest tax increases.
Am I missing something?
Issues:
Comments
The Point
I think that the diversion on which stats are the right stats is missing the import of the assertion:
The people who "contributed" are not captured in the summary data being discussed. Is there disagreement that this assertion has validity? If so, how do we use the data set to support or refute? Clearly, there seems to be anecdotal info out there.Does that statement say that diversity is declining or does it say that this trend will be counter to preserving the diversity gaols?
Fair enough, Fred.
Fair enough, Fred.
I am glad to see an
I am glad to see an acknowledgement in this forum that what happens in our community affects more people than just people who reside within the city limits. There are a lot of people--like Terri, like Mark M, and like Mark Z--whose employment, businesses, health care, recreation, and so forth are affected by the decisions made in Chapel HIll. I welcome hearing all those opinions, not just the ones I agree with.
Affects outside Chapel Hill
The decisions that Chapel Hill/Carrboro make have huge affects on Orange County residents both in and outside the city jurisdictions. Every time the city needs land in the county (even though we see no benefits) (ie town maintenance center, the reservoir) land is taken out of the tax roles that would have productively contirbuted to the Orange county budget. We have to make up the difference. Every time a new school is built in Chapel Hill school district from bond money we Orange county residents are forced to contribute towards building these schools even though we can't use these schools.
Example of Town's effects on County
Look no farther than the Council's ill-advised decision to take the very best site transfer station sites off the table. The Millhouse Rd. sites are by far the best choice in terms of location by the interstate, reduction in environmental impact, location near the largest waste generators, use of land in what is basically a commercial/semi-industrial zone, and lower costs all around. And, in reality, it is not in the Rogers Rd. neighborhood. As an aside, I support siting a landfill in one of our Economic Development Districts and making it the hub of an eco-industrial park. I am greatly disappointed that we may collectively be dumping our trash on some poor community over the horizon.
i agree with your thoughts
i agree with your thoughts about the Milhouse Road site, I don't understand why the Council did not at least agree to receive more information before making that decision.
County Site Still An Option
Mark,The Council decided that it wouldn't consider either of the Millhouse Road sites but as Mayor Foy pointed out, the County owns one of those sites and can still consider it if it wishes.
Who says they are best
Both the Millhouse Road sites are right next to current landfill, old capped landfill, construction landfill, Chapel Hill Maintenance and recycling/waste drop off site. There are more than just Rogers Rd residents that have to contend with all this stuff. Why should they bear the brunt of all Orange Counties bad stuff. They've more than contributed there share. I think until you know where the trash will go you can't make a cost statement about location. For example if the waste where to go to Alamance county landfill, the site in your neighborhood might be the most cost affective.Those poor communities you refer to make a boatload of money (which goes directly into their county budgets) off trash shipped in to there county frorm outside. Much of this moneygoes into improving their schools. Thx
Transportation costs
Most of the transportation costs are for the daily trips to the transfer station. That's where the miles, pollution, & cost build up.I would encourage people to walk, drive, or bike from Rogers Rd. to the town maintenance building on Millhouse and observe the landscape, the various types of buildings, and the distance from the landfill to the Millhouse Rd. site. Also, there has been some confusion about the impact of a transfer station. It seems that many are thinking more of a landfill's impact when they consider a transfer station. It seems a little disingenuous to say that some poor community somewhere else will welcome our garbage because it may make some money their school system while saying that we shouldn't handle our own. I'd also guess that the big waste handling corporations are the big winners.
Cost efficient site
If I have the geography right, the town's site on Millhouse is more appropriate than the county's site since it's closer to Hwy 86 and could reduce the amount of truck traffic passing the school (one of the selection criteria). The best possible site is the one across from the Home Depot/Wal Mart in Hillsborough--right on the interstate--except that Hillsborough has said they will annex that property if the county pursues it. So we have two towns standing in the way of efficient waste disposal, and serving as living proof that this is as much a decision of the towns as it is of the county. The Hwy 54 site is completely inappropriate from any aspect of sustainability you want to apply. It will cost Chapel Hill and Hillsborough more in fuel costs and (I think) that it will force Chapel Hill to purchase new trucks (just as the decision to combine with Durham would do). The distance will impact the towns' carbon footprint at a time when they are looking at how to reduce the impact of transportation for all other aspects of town life/operations. And from a social justice perspective, the individuals living in that portion of the county have borne the cost of the Cane Creek reservoir and OWASA's and Burlington's sludge disposal. There are as many failed wells and health concerns in that small community as there are in the Rogers Road community. The problem is that the consultants don't know enough about the history of that area to understand the injustice and the residents aren't as vocal or as well represented by the rest of the community.
Thx for the put down
I am not saying we shouldn't handle our own. I am saying that no one in Orange County wants a landfill in thier back yard (proven in the last site search in 90's) so the alternative is to ship it out. It's pretty obvous that you don't want the transfer station in your neighborhoos nor would I. But I don't think it's fair to advocate for putting it in someone else's neighborhood unless you can say your willing to take it in yours. Their are 2 schools within a half mile of the Millhouse sites (the new elementary on Eubanks with a roundabout ,how will that look with a bunch of garbage trucks driving through the roundabout and also the Waldorf school by the Heartwood development). I also bet their are more residential houses tucked all around the Millhouse area than around the 54 site. Aren' they building a huge apartment complex across from the Eubanks park and ride lot?? And again those people in the Millhouse area have had more than ther fair share of garbage and maintenance related stuff. Disingenuous or not it is a fact that communities that take out of county trash do get a hit off every ton that comes in that goes directly to thier county budgets. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the Orange County budget does not get 1 dollar form tipping fees at the current landfillUntil you can see a real cost analysis of shipping from Millhouse vs 54 to a real named site vs building our own landfill you cannot make accurate assumptions about cost effectiveness. Thx
54 site vs. Millhouse vs. smart policy
From a strictly personal, geographic standpoint, I'm not averse to the Hwy 54 site. A transfer station out there would have a small impact on the area. However, as a citizen of Orange County I have to say it's pretty stupid to site it so far from town. The whole transfer station idea is bad. We wll get hooked on a service provided by a waste handling corporation that will have us by the nose in the future and will raise rates when it wants too. It's environmentally & fiscally dumb.The solution to the truck routes is to designate one way in and one way out. Come in from 86 & down Millhouse and back out agin. No trucks on west Eubanks, no trucks on Rogers Rd., no trucks on north Millhouse.Also, the early 90's landfill search process was flawed in so many ways that its failure in no way indicates that we cannot site a landfill in Orange County. Our leadership failed us then by not listening to the public input and now the conventional wisdom is that it was really the citizens' fault.
Sorry if this duped. I
Sorry if this duped. I repeat until we see real cost numbers you can't make a rational statement about the stupidity of putting it anywhere.Geez I don't remember any public input expressing a willingness to have the landfill in the 90's in their back yard including you. Thx
The 90's process was a failure of leadership
If the commissioners had adopted our recommendations in the early 90's landfill search they would have:1) Suspended the landfill search. They said time was running out and the current landfill would be full by 1996. We said we had until at least 2003. Actually we now know we had until at least 2010.2) Allowed the site search committee to include waste reduction as a factor in considering landfill size. The commissioners said this was verboten.3) Immediately set up a process to identify how to institute an aggressive waste reduction program.4) Then, with new waste volumes in mind, look at siting two small, state-of-the-art designed landfills. We never got close to that because the county commissioners utterly failed to change course. Given that their approach was so flawed, the fact that no community "volunteered" is an irrelevant point and indicates that you were not aware of the details of the process or the history of the issue.
Waste Reduction
I served on a waste reduction task force back in 1988/89 for just the purpose you are describing, Mark. I believe those recommendations were instituted although I'm not sure since I left for grad school before the report was submitted.
Eventual waste reduction
Waste reduction was instituted in the early to mid-90's to meet, I believe it was a 1996 deadline, a deadline by the state to reduce waste by 40%. We knew that was coming & that's why we knew the current landfill would last longer. We were very involved in the process, yet the commissioners refused to link waste reduction to the site seracj process so they ended up proposing these 1000 + acre mega-landfills - an approach that was doomed to failure because every targeted community was overwhelmed at the prospect of this acreage. Believe me, it was a total failure.
Landfill big or small 90's
Boy I wonder if people would accept any size landfill in their backyard,. I know I wouldn't. I don't think acreage was an issue for the people living near the sites in the 90's search. I think it was the fact that I am going to possibly have a landfill in my backyard and that was pretty evident at the landifll meetings.
Size and design matter
1500 acre landfill sites were proposed with no factoring in of future waste reduction. No discussion of design features to minimize impacts. It was a ham-fisted and simplistic process that was doomed to fail. There is no doubt that an intelligent process that had minimizing waste, landfill size, and impacts would have resulted in an entirely different process.
Millhouse: No way No how
No matter where the trucks come or go, no matter what skin you put on this thing, what colors it gets cloaked in, it is another trash facility in the Rogers/Eubanks roads community. This neighborhood deserves and unambiguous end to any garbage facility in it or near it. No other community in Orange County has been subjected to almost 4 decades of trash. No other community in Orange County has fought so long, so courageously and gotten so thoroughly kicked in the teeth time and time again by almost every local politician and many of the residents.
There is no rationale for putting this facility on Millhouse that trumps these facts. This would be a just another decision of 100% pure environmental injustice and just another broken promise in a never ending string of broken promises.
No way, No how. No Millhouse.
Not logged on...
This post was mine... Not meant to be annonymous
Would you like fries with that Whopper
From Orange Chat In an ad in tomorrow's Chapel Hill News, mayoral candidate Kevin Wolff calls on fellow candidate and current council member Matt Czajkowski to withdraw from the race. "If you want another moderate voice on Town Council then ... Please join me in asking Matt to please drop out of the race for mayor ... ......
flash, I just needed 5% more too
more from OC: "Woff has run for mayor twice before, winning about 30 percent of the vote. ... He now says with just 5 percent more votes, he can win in the four-person field." newsflash: With just five percent more of the vote, I would have been elected Mayor in the 1979 three-person field. But I didn't get it.
Czajkowski charged with insider trading in 2005 lawsuit
In 2005, Matt Czajkowski was named in an insider trading suit from his time as the chief Financial Officer of Pozen, Inc. Because the case was dismissed on a technicality and not on the merits, it will never be known if Matt Czajkowski is guilty of insider trading. What is known is that he profited $425,000 on information that he was privy to as the CFO of a major corporation. Is this the type of behavior you will tolerate from the mayor of Chapel Hill?
The opinion of the judge can be found here: http://www.ncbusinesscourt.net/opinions/2005%20NCBC%207.htm#_ftnref1
The suit was dismissed, so
Are you saying the judge was incompetent? I think this is a bit of a stretch.
Judge didn't rule on the merits.
The judge's competence is not in question, as he did not rule on the issue of insider trading. I just read through the opinion, and the judge dismissed the case "because plaintiffs failed to make a pre-suit demand on Pozen’s Board of Directors, as required by Delaware law." From what I understand, the plaintiffs' lawyers did not follow proper procedure in the filing of the case, and that's why it was dismissed...not because they were innocent. I'm a lawyer-in-training...not quite there yet. Any real lawyers want to weigh in as to whether that's correct?
Dismissed with prejudice
Isn't the definition of the legal term "dismissed with prejudice": "When a case is dismissed for good reason and the plaintiff is barred from bringing an action on the same claim"?
Not necessarily.
Dismissed with prejudice only means that the case cannot be brought again. It might or might not reflect on the merits of the claim.If a case is dismissed once because it was filed in the wrong jurisdiction and then is dismissed again because it is filed in yet another wrong jurisdiction, then it would (typically) be dismissed with prejudice and be barred from being filed a third time - without regard to the mertis of the claim.That said, I have no idea what happened in the case you are discussing.
Facts of the case = ?
Some of you obviously know what was dismissed with prejudice; I don't, Mark doesn't, so would someone please inform us?
case cite
try http://www.ncbusinesscourt.net/opinions/2005%20NCBC%207.htm
Brave Aren't You
You are bold enough to make these charges, but unlike those who brought the suit, you aren't brave enough to identify yourself. Is this the type of behavior we should tolerate in a Chapel Hill election? For those familiar with such suits, typically everyone gets named but what does it mean in the end?Sadly, we have see it in previous CH mayoral elections and we all know it had an impact. I am disappointed that OP plays a role in this and lets people post this kind of stuff anonymously. Sad all around.
FYI
I hear you, Fred. I debated whether to publish that comment. Ultimately I decided to because the link is verifiable information and it seemed relevant, but everyone should keep in mind that anonymous comments are inherently less credible.
I Hear You,
but research would show that it wasn’t specifically him that was accused of insider trading – it was the entire senior management team – as is always the case with these kinds of suits.And of course the credibility question comes into play because of the challenger you support for mayor.
There was specific mention of $425,000 to Matt Cz
The legalese is sometimes hard to figure out. I hope that a local journalist realizes that - in conjunction with Matt Cz's two real estate deals involving his home and another house on Pinehurst Dr. at the general time of this court case - where there is smoke, it is essential to find out if there is fire. What does that reference to $425,000 from insider trading actually refer to? After all, Matt Cz is a newcomer to the comunity and came from the Wall Street culture that had a lot to do with torching our economy. I certainly don't know what he exactly did in that realm before getting so involved in local CH politics. I hope that local journalists do their job on this. At minimum, It is an issue that he should be expected to publicly explain before the election.
11 years of residency
That may be a "newcomer" by your standards Mark, but I hardly think it's a standard most people would agree with.As for the "Wall Street Culture", since you are a developer, does that mean we get to hold you responsible for all the developers in this country?
Are you asking that on
Are you asking that on behalf of the University's development team? Obviously not. And Marcoplos is a general contractor, not a developer.
Why are you asking
about the University development team? I have no connection with that group. I stand corrected that Mark M is a general contractor, rather than a developer. But that doesn't change the point of the question. If someone works in a field, such as financial services, does that mean that they take on group qualities? Does Mark M have anything in common with Ryland Homes, Clancy & Theys, or Resolute? They're all general contractors that I assume Mark M wouldn't identify with.
I hear Marcoplos decry the
I hear Marcoplos decry the antics of Ryland etc. all the time.
Developer?!!??
I remodel homes and build custom homes, one at a time. It's a modest community-oriented way to do business. Developers operate on an entirely different level - but you know that. Developers buy large tracts of land and facilitate the subcontracting of construction of multiple homes - but you know that. My understanding is that Matt Cz showed up on the local scene in 2004, ran for Council in 2007, voted for the first time in 2007 when he was running for Council (for himself - as I would have done), and went to his first council meeting during the campaign. If that's acceptable to the Chapel Hill voters, then they get what they deserve.
Oh, so you're different
from the other general contractors. Point made.Matt has lived in town for 11 years. Please check your facts.
Matt Cz helped run a national Wall St. company
He made $425,000 off of one transaction. As a local builder, I make about $55,000 a year. You think it's fair to compare my local business to Ryland Homes? Check out their web-site. The are - with due apologies to ZZ Top - "bad, they're nationwide."
It's not a fair comparison Mark
That's the point. It's no more fair to compare your business to Ryland Homes than for you to label someone, like Matt, who works in financial services as a member of some vague and overgeneralized Wall Street culture.
So
make the election about the issues instead of this kind of BS. Voters are smart enough to make their decision without the fear and character smears like this, right Marks?
I'm not sure what Matt Cz was involved in
I hope the media do their job and ferret out the facts.
Reading is Fundamental
Read the case and the answers are there. The facts are clearly stated in the court docs. Is this not enough for you?
Rule of Thumb
Just a reminder (not aimed at any one person) of the on-line commenting rule of thumb: Before you hit "send" or "post" read what you wrote and picture yourself saying it to the person you are responding to. If you wouldn't say it out loud, don't post it. The digital age need not mark the end of polite discourse.I think this case is important not becuase it indicates that Matt did something illegal, but because in the current economic climate, and with the extremity of income inequality in our country, people are wary of windfalls to corporate executives. Matt should take this opportunity to explain to the community what really happened. Why were the stockholders upset enough to file suit? What did they think happened? What really happened? Why doesn't he work there anymore? Under what conditions did he leave, and does it have anything to do with this? For example, Fred gave a simple explaination of Matt's real estate dealings that a person would not know from looking at the public records at the Register of Deeds. Sometimes legal documents need plain language clarification. Matt should calmly explain what happened. I'd love to hear him out.
Fairness Dictates...
If you're suggesting that Matt be required to bare his personal financials for all to see I think you should suggest that all candidates for public office in Chapel Hill do the same. Personally, I do not support this idea nor do I think it is at all necessary. But if you're suggesting that Matt needs to do this because of a possible "financial windfall" he obtained, how do you know that no one else has experienced such financial windfalls? Anyone working for a privately-held company could experience such a windfall with no public record at all. This sort of finger pointing is IMHO not representative of the best that Chapel Hill has to offer.
Clarification.
I am not suggesting that any candidates for public office bare their personal financials. I am suggesting that any candidate for public office who was named in an insider trading lawsuit explain why they were implicated. It is his stockholders who pointed fingers. I am simply asking why.
Citizens versus Government Officials
I think there is a big difference in lawsuits brought by citizens as opposed to those brought by government officials. I believe that the chance of the former being frivolous is much higher. Your choice of the word 'implicated' already conveys a sense of guilt (Merriam-Websters: 1. implied; 2. involved [e.g., implicated in a crime]).
Anyone can bring a lawsuit
I think this is a red herring. Anyone can file a lawsuit, regardless of merit. Matt and his family moved to Chapel Hill over a decade ago. I'd say that should be long enough not to be considered an outsider. I am still amazed at the reaction over this, his website, and the fact that he is a loner on the council. Hopefully in the future he will become a leader.Matt's assertion that Chapel Hill has changed over the years resonates with me. It's more and less diverse in different ways. Chapel Hill is a lot less economically diverse than it used to be. Having dealt with the building process and the town council, it's very expensive to build here as compared to other communities. That's just an observation, not a critique, but it means that it takes more money to live here and as property values rise it becomes harder for people on fixed incomes to pay their taxes (and those of us not on fixed incomes). One of the ways Chapel Hill is exceptionally diverse is the above average number of foreigners living here, although they would not be voting. They bring a lot to the community.I don't agree with everything Matt does, but Matt appears to be transparent. I believe that his crime is that he tends to vote as a moderate democrat.
when did you stop beating your wife?
What you're insinuating is exactly the same. Without facts (of which I know none either), you are insinuating there must be something there that needs to be investigated. Must be nice to be able to be so perfect that you can throw stones.
Pages