November 2003
It's the day after Halloween and even though I was downtown 'til past midnight I went running early and other than the people who were still up there weren't many others about..........I found two cell phones, many shoes (no pairs), pieces of costumes, diapers and lots of beer bottles. I find that either "lite" beer drinkers litter more than traditionally caloric beer drinkers or "lite" beer has taken over the market; yet another sign of the distressing decay of the IQ level in our society.........I digress, I guess.........Four more days 'til this election is over. What I want to know is: who is going to win and why? If you post the right answer here, just think of the glory! The world will be your bivalve!
This seems to be an unfortunate first in Chapel Hill elections. The Daily Tarheel reports that Dianne Bachman, that paragon of moral purity, has run ads attacking Cam Hill for insinuating that she might not be totally fair when it comes to decisions about UNC development.
A few ridiculous things about this:
Just in from Carrboro --
Someone is running around town defacing Joal Broun's (incumbent candidate for Alderman) signs claiming she is, among other things, for high-rises, high-taxes, and against affordable housing and is a friend of developers.
Can someone explain this? Who would do this? Putting the merits aside, Broun is likely to be #1 in the vote tally. If a challenger is responsible, one would expect them to go after a weaker candidate.
On to the merits…Broun has been Carrboro’s most outspoken advocate for affordable housing . . . one of the most outspoken officials in the county! And as for building heights and taxes – they all voted for new heights (except for Gist) and Broun is one of Carrboro’s biggest tax impact sticklers during the annual budget process.
I predict these tactics backfire and Broun is the #1 in Carrboro.
Polls are open from 6:30 am to 7:30 pm today. Here are some links to resources at the Orange County Board of Elections.
It's good to see the Board of Elections has partially gotten their website together. In the past, the process of getting the returns was clumsy at best. Now, presumably, you can go to this page and watch things happen after the polls close.
Find your precinct. (That page isn't nearly as helpful as it should be.)
This is neat, they also have voter registration statistics for each precinct. That should make post-election analysis even more fun.
I just voted at Hargraves and then walked down Franklin Street from the Post Office to the Carrboro town line shortly after lunchtime. I didn't see a single person with an "I Voted" sticker. I did have a number of people speak to me because of my sticker: a few friends asked who to vote for, one woman in a minivan asked me for directions to her pollsite, and I was interviewed for WCHL's "On The Street" program. (Listen for that on 1360AM tomorrow at 7:39am, 12:39pm, 4:39pm, or 5:39pm.)
The papers all say they expect low turnout. I don't get why they think it would be lower this year than others. If anything, I would think Big Merger Madness (thanks Jay) and the deluge of Town Council candidates would bring more voters out this year. The poll workers said I was voter number 78 so far. According to the Board of Elections, there are 1,479 in my precinct (Northside) - so they may be right. Time will tell...
Enfranchisement and its dissing is an interesting problem. Consult the Federalist Papers and you will learn that the Founding Fathers were concerned about the "tyranny of the majority" under a pure democracy which might lord it over (or disenfranchise) a minority that nonetheless had the vote. Of course, the minority they were concerned with were the wealthy people who owned the country ("The people who own the country ought to govern it"--Hamilton). Today, we see that they crafted the system very well as 215 years later the wealthy remain firmly in charge.
The situation in Carrboro could be very similar to that feared by the Federalists in terms of the nature of the majority and who it is tyrannizing over.
...the people of Orange County! Sorry for the cheese, it's been a good night.
So here's your quick-and-dirty results, for much much more info check the Board of Elections site (which was a huge flop on election night, but is back up now).
CHAPEL HILL:
Town Council: Sally Greene, Bill Strom, Cam Hill, Jim Ward
Mayor: Kevin Foy
Bonds: Yes on all 5
CARRBORO:
Board of Aldermen: Mark Chilton, Joal Broun, Alex Zaffron
Mayor: Mike Nelson
Bond: Yes
SCHOOL BOARD: Elizabeth Carter, Ed Sechrest, Michael Kelley, Gloria Faley
What does this election truly tell us in Carrboro/Chapel Hill and what do folks think is going to happen first in the Chapel Hill Council and Board of Alderfolk?
To continue the discussion started in this thread about about endorsements and this thread about the school board race, let's discuss the politics of education in southern Orange County.
Many people including the local NAACP have long complained about the stratification in our schools, asserting that there are really two systems: one for affluent and/or gifted children and another for low-income and/or African-American students. (I know everyone doesn't fall into these categories, please allow me this generalization for the sake of discussion.)
Just got this Carolina North update from Tony Waldrop in my e-mail:
You will recall that the four Carolina North Advisory Groups which comprise the Carolina North Advisory Committee met during the first half of 2003, with each Advisory Group issuing a report of recommended planning principles and criteria to the Carolina North Executive Committee. That input has been used to develop a DRAFT concept plan for Carolina North. As planned, we will present this draft concept plan to the full Advisory Committee first.
Thus, we are pleased to invite you to attend the Carolina North Advisory Committee presentation of the DRAFT conceptual plan for Carolina North on Tuesday, December 2, from 5:00 to 7:00 pm. The meeting will be held at the Friday Center.
I don't know if this is a public meeting. Probably not.
By popular demand, here's a thread for discussing the significance, or lack, or potential of student votes. Let's start with recent posts by John A.:
From the Town Data Book:
Table 21: UNC Population 1990-2002: Student Body, Employees, & Hospital Employees
Year /Students /UNC Staff/ UNC Hospital Staff
2002 /26,028 /10,115 /5,473
Don't know where all the above folks live, but even if only half lived in Chapel Hill, they would in fact be a powerful voting bloc. And if they voted as a bloc, would these "citizens" be discounted as tools of UNC? What if they voted "Chapel Hill First" as a bloc?
I think the uncertainties of Carolina North is a shared feeling among employees too, but I still think the well organized campaign against Bachman was wrong because there as not been anything to show a conflict of interest. I still wish I had a dollar for every vote that has surprised me because I assumed that someone would vote another way.
And Simon Spero:
I had almost completed a long comment to an existing post and my finger slipped and I deleted the entire thing; so I'm going to post this separately so I can use the "Save" function. I've been reading everyone's comments and I agree with all of them pretty much.......my own experience differs only by degrees.
My association with Chapel Hill politics began two years ago in July when I was running through campus one rainy morning and I found my way blocked by yet another new construction project on campus. My endorphins were stimulated and it was a full moon so I decided to run for mayor. I felt that some different positions besides go-go growth and go growth needed to be voiced. I feel that I shifted the dialogue somewhat. After eight weeks of sitting between Lee and Kevin I became terrified that Lee would become mayor, so I withdrew and threw my support to Kevin. That campaign left me branded as an anti-leaf blower, no-growth wacko.....
Smile next time you drive on 15-501. According to the Chapel Hill Herald they'll soon be taking your picture at the intersection with Europa Drive/Erwin Road as well as at Sage Road/Old Durham-Chapel Hill Road.
If you think this is as silly as I do, please join Will Raymond to support his petition at The Chapel Hill Town Council meeting Monday night at 7 pm. (It's early on the agenda!) If you can't make it, drop them an e-mail instead.
For the month of October, a total of 32 citations were issued for red-light violations that the cameras caught at the Airport Road/Estes Drive intersection, and 121 citations were issued for the U.S. 15-501/Sage Road intersection, according to a report from the town.
To move away from the heat of the recent campaign but keep the focus on the relevance of campaign spending on local races, I’d like to look back at 1995. After that election, the Herald did an analysis of spending per vote for all the candidates. The results are pretty instructive. (Note: we can’t do that analysis for this year until February when the final spending reports are in.)
First and third place Chapel Hill finishers, Capowski and Andresen, spent almost the same amount per vote: $1.34 and $1.32 respectively
Second place finisher Chilton was low-spender among the winners at only $0.46 per vote. That helps explain his reputation as a savvy campaigner. (Chilton was also a strong proponent of the voluntary spending limits initiated that year by the Greens and Sierra Club).
The N&O reports that UNC is considering getting much more involved with commercial properties downtown. It sounds promising, but it raises some serious concerns. And I'm still a litle suspicious about the Mayor's hand-picked "steering committee" that has superceded the long-standing Downtown Commission.
As Chapel Hill officials focus on revitalizing downtown, UNC-Chapel Hill administrators are floating an idea that could give the university a large role in where shops, restaurants and businesses would go. ...In recent weeks, Nancy Suttenfield, vice chancellor of business and finance at UNC-CH, has been touting the concept of using a university foundation to invest in commercial real estate, with the notion of keeping the properties on the tax rolls and creating an opportunity to control how key buildings are used.
The Chapel Hill Herald had this take on the Chapel Hill Town Council's discussion of TTA merger last night.
Consider this a thread for the general discussion of regional transit, with special emphasis on what merger with TTA would mean for Chapel Hill. Would it mean greater interconnectivity with the other transit systems? (That is, would it be easier for me to take the bus to Durham?) Would it be not much of a change at all? Would it be easier or harder for TTA to implement some of it's long-term plans (guideways, light rail, etc.) if the region's bus systems were joined, or would it not make much of a difference?
What's more progressive: regional transportation that works but isn't free and may be less "flexible"; or local public transportation that's free, reliable, convenient, but doesn't get you very far outside the town?
When they adopted the Land-Use Management Ordinance in 2002, the Chapel Hill Town Council created a new way to protect residential areas, it's called the Neighborhood Conservation District. The first community to develop an NCD is Northside, where I live. If you are unfamiliar with it, Northside is a historically black and working-class neighborhood downtown (north of Rosemary Street, south of Bolin Creek, east of Carrboro, and west of Columbia Street). Low prices and convenient location have made the neighborhood increasingly attractive to student renters and their investor-landlords who can afford to pay more than many families and contribute less to the community in my opinion.
I have lots more I'd like to say about this, but what I want you to know right now is that the Town is holding a public forum to discuss the recommendation of the citizen committee that is working with the Planning Board to develop this Neighborhood Conservation District for Northside. Here's the scoop:
NORTHSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY FORUM
Well some folks are starting to get pretty worked up over the story of Cam trading property with the University. So let's discuss. I know emotions are high around this issue, please keep it civil!
The Chapel Hill News reports today that Town Council Member-Elect Cam Hill made a deal with the University to trade his house on Cameron Avenue for a nicer one on Rosemary Street. I think there are two issues here (correct me if I'm wrong). (1) Is Cam being hypocritical for criticizing the University and it's associates, and then cutting a deal with them? And (2) should this deal have been disclosed before the election?
Many folks, including Eric Muller at IsThatLegal.org, have taken issue with the fact that this deal was kept quiet for six weeks leading up to the election. However, I'm not convinced that this constitutes a "conflict of interest." (And yes Eric, there is a recall provision, ask Joe Herzenberg about it.)
Breaking news! UNC has announced that they will begin an 8-year clean-up process for the former chemical waste dump at the future site of Carolina North. I would suggest we should take this announcement (below) with a grain of salt since it comes straight from the horse's mouth.
From a UNC press release:
The universitys consultants, Arcadis Inc., will plan and manage the soil clean-up efforts expected to take up to eight years and cost an estimated $10.4 million as part of the Registered Environmental Consultant (REC) Program managed by DENRs Inactive Hazardous Site Branch. Under the program, the university and DENR enter into a three-part administrative agreement with Arcadis, which supervises the clean-up according to state standards.
Bias is a loaded word that gets thrown around indiscriminately now to characterize the purveyors of news we don't like, and to express frustration with the news choices of editors and program directors whose jobs are little-understood by most, and who can't be voted out of office when they piss us off.
That is to say, I don't think much of the word "bias" as a term of media criticism, and I tend to think of people who use it as folks who, well-meaning enough, don't really understand how the news business works.
But, someone asked for a thread on local media -- ahem -- bias, and so let's pick that one apart. A few thoughts and questions:
In a move that could have surprised only those residents who live under rocks, The Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board voted last night against discussing a merger with the county schools. According to the Chapel Hill Herald:
The Chapel Hill-Carrboro city school board approved a resolution Thursday night that supports collaboration with the Orange County Schools instead of merger.
The resolution -- which passed unanimously -- also calls for a special district tax in the county schools, similar to the one currently paid by city school district residents. It also asks that the county school board meet with the city school board to discuss ways in which they can collaborate, and how the process should be supported financially.
Board members barely discussed the resolution, which city schools Superintendent Neil Pedersen presented at a meeting earlier this month. Instead, they talked about three proposals that the Orange County Commissioners brought forth last week.
This is just plain wrong. It's impossible to say whether the minor arson attack at Orange County Commissioner Margaret Brown's house was political or random. The fact that she believes it was intentionally directed at her makes me seriously concerned about the state of political discourse in our community.
"I've been getting a lot of e-mails," she said. "They're very aggressive with a lot of emotion behind them."
The e-mails have been mostly about school merger, Brown said. They have said things like, "You'd better not do this or you'd better think before you do this," Brown said.
Who would think this was an appropriate (or effective) form of expression?
This leads me to two major thoughts about OrangePoltics.org:
For those of you who may have missed it, orangepolitics made page B1 in today's News & Observer
Intrepid reporter Anne Blythe draws generalizations from comments made here without any specific attribution and characterizes her anonymous source as "the town's political insiders."
Does Blythe know that A Voter, Winston Smith, or Coyote, to name a few, are political insiders? If so, how?
Surely there is a long tradition of anonymous attribution in the news business but I think it used to go like this: a reporter tries to find someone to go on the record on a story. She can't but she finds a potent statement from someone who wishes to remain anonymous and is called something like "an informed source" in the article. The readers then place as much confidence in that quote as they have in the writer's and editor's ability to find and vet a credible source.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 22, 2003
Cam Hill to Explain UNC’s Pursuit of his Cameron Ave Property
Cam Hill, newly elected member of the Chapel Hill Town Council, is in negotiations with UNC regarding the possible sale of his property at 606 Cameron Avenue to the university.
The sale of Hill’s house to the university has caused much discussion, confusion and misinformation. With this in mind, Hill is announcing a press conference to explain all details of the deal and to answer questions about his negotiations with the university. The press conference is scheduled for 3:00 pm on Monday, November 24 at Hill’s 606 Cameron Avenue property.
Briefly, in Hill’s own words, this is the story: “Negotiations started about 5 years ago when the university approached me about buying my Cameron Ave. property, which is located between two parcels owned by UNC. Negotiations ended when I rejected the university’s offer. At that time, UNC officials told me they wanted the property for a future inter-modal transport station, a place where people would get off trains and onto buses.
Looks like the IFC is going to be homeless again. All the Chapel Hill News says is that they're having trouble finding a new place. Shock. Fortunately, the Chapel Hill Herald actually bothered to tell us what's going on.
Apparently the Town (who owns the building) is "temporarily" kicking out the IFC to do some renovations on the building. Considering that the Downtown Commission et al have been moaning about those unsightly beggars scaring the shoppers for years now, it seems quite possible to me that somehow the IFC won't get to move back in.
IFC has already had to relocate some of their services since the Town denied their request a few years ago to expand the facility at the corner of Rosemary and Columbia Streets. For example, they moved their women's shelter to Homestead Road - miles away from the walkability, the jobs, and the community downtown.
As if folks haven't already heard enough about elections and politics... a new and interesting development has taken place in terms of redistricting for the state house and senate in Orange County. Though it's too early to really bet on these districts due to the amazing amount of litigation that's likely to take place by Republican detractors of the maps, it might be worth talking about the implications of the new map if it is implemented.
Happy Thanksgiving all!
This may go down as one of the least effective protest tactics ever. The Chapel Hill Herald reports that a group of parents in the county school system (ie: northern Orange County) are calling for a boycott of businesses in Chapel Hill (ie: southern Orange County) to protest the disparity in school funding.
Now I sympathize with their cause, but
- local businesses have nothing to do with the special district tax on homeowners that raises more money for the southern schools,
- they pay the same amount to the county - who funds both systems - as any other business in the county, and
- is anyone going to notice that these 20 people and maybe a few of their friends aren't schlepping down 86 to come shopping here? How often do they shop in Chapel Hill and Carrboro anyway?
Am I missing something? Is there a reason why anyone should care about this? Why are they leaving Carrboro out? (Someone must love Weaver Street Market.) Couldn't they think of a better name than "Rural Orange Boycotts Chapel Hill?"
About Us
OrangePolitics is a not-for-profit website for discussing progressive perspectives on politics, planning, and public policy in Orange County, NC. Opinions are those of their authors. Learn more.
Community Guidelines
By using this site, you agree to our community guidelines. Inappropriate or disruptive behavior will result in moderation or eviction.
Zircon - This is a contributing Drupal Theme
Design by
WeebPal.
