Rearranging the Deck Chairs

Mark,

I was using data reported by others which was sloppy. If you look at the percentages of voters (on election day) from Coles Stores and North Carrboro, each of the winning candidates got about 31% of their votes from those two precincts. By contrast, 44% of Katrina's support came from them. Not a mandate, but a pretty obvious statement.

Can't there be a "non-binding" vote to see who the citizens would like & then the appointment could be made?

This is where preferential voting is useful. If all voters had listed their preferences in order, then the 4th place finisher would have been the authentic choice of all voters.

Ryan, good article in the DTH, but as to your statement: "I think having the fourth person come on seems the likely choice as that was the will expressed by the voters at that particular time", how do we know what the will of the voters was? Objectively, it was the will of the voters that the person NOT serve on the board if there were only three seats available. We have no idea what the will of the voters would have been if voters could have voted for four candidates (and perhaps more people would have filed if there were four seats open) Now, it may be that in the name of inclusiveness it would be a good idea to appoint the fourth person, or some person with the same background or philosophy or from the same neighborhood.

from Mark:

"Can't there be a “non-binding” vote to see who the citizens would like & then the appointment could be made? "

not in any legal sense involving a government conducted poll. North Carolina HAS allowed non binding refernda in a dozen or so cases in the last 20 years, but all with prior approval of the General Assembly.

I wonder if any thought has been given to asking Diana McDuffee to stay on?

The State Leg needs to be sued for anti-democratic policies...

So, surely in the land of the free a citizen's group could take a poll that would be strikingly similar to an election and that could be verifiable?

As a relevant aside:

I think that achieving home rule status for municpal governments in NC is the most important political action that can be taken to ensure a sustainable future.

Katrina, you say, "Technically, The NTA is the area withing Carrboro's planning district, but not in town limits. In this discussion, I believe it has morphed into a synonym for Carrboro neighborhoods north of Homestead Road."

Therefore, Lake Hogan Farm is not in the NTA, correct?

Katrina, it is important to me that you not make statements like, “However, the one thing that is NOT at issue is whether or not I am the preferred representative of the Northern Transition Area.”

Can you at least be accurate and say, "However, the one thing that is NOT at issue is whether or not I am the preferred representative of some Carrboro neighborhoods north of Homestead Road."

You are confusing people by 'morphing' definitions, and you mislead people when you say that you represent the NTA which did not vote.

You cannot know how many of us in the NTA you truly represent because we did not vote. Had we been able to vote and run for office, it is highly debatable how you would have fared. Perhaps you would not have even run.

Mark,
Thanks for the February 1, 2006 date. Sorry that I posted a false date. I'll be more careful.

"Mark M, clearly an election would be the most democratic resolution, but our attorney says that we have no power to call an election for this purpose. I know you will just be shocked to learn that NC law prohibits the most democratic solution- absolutely shocked!" (Mark Chilton). "

Didn't we just have an democratic election less than a week ago in which the voters of Carrboro expressed their preferences for the candidates who were interested enough in serving on the BOA to actually run?

I do not think we would be having this discussion if Katrina were more philosophically in line with the existing BOA. The fact that she isn't doesn't negate her 4th place finish. At least some of the citizens of Carrboro felt that she best represented their interests and cast one of their three votes for her. I think the BOA should listen to that message.

I don't have a personal relationship with any of the folks involved, but as a voter, I want to be sure that selection processes for representation are as objective and transparent as possible. I have a hard time understanding how an application/appointment process by a seven member board is a more democratic way to fill such an important vacancy than the choices of the 2300 people who cared enough to get out and weigh in. After all, it is how the first three vacancies got filled.

The articles that Jennifer Ferris (see above) and I (http://www.dailytarheel.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/11/10/4372d70f8bfae) wrote about this issue answer several questions that have been raised.

In answer to the question of a special election, town attorney Mike Brough wrote in his memo to the aldermen that it can't happen: "However, the Board has no authority to call a special election to fill a vacancy."

The aldermen will make an appointment. The first question seems to be when, then whom.

Anita, do you think that anyone in the NTA who wanted to run should have gotten a temporary apartment in Carrboro so that they could run?

Anita,

A whole lot of voters who actually voted are not represented by just considering the 4th place finisher. Those voters voted for the three that they wanted. They should not be disenfranchised.

I don't think that it is an issue of Katrina being philosophically out of step with the board so much as she is philosophically out of step with Carrboro. Garnering only 731 votes with the intensive campaign Katrina ran (no one can say that Katrina didn't work her tail off on this election) tells me that the voters really did not want her on the board. I was really surprised with the kind of effort that Katrina put in that she didn't hit at least four figures. I guess that why we have the elections after all.

Mary,

I realize you do not believe Katrina truly represents residents of North Carrboro, and are therefore against the BOA appointing her to the open seat. So in an appointment process, what criteria should the BOA use to evaluate applications? Or should they skip applications and just appoint someone they want?

The new board seems rather equally split between growth/no growth. Will position on growth be the determining factor? How about political support/endorsements during the election? Service on advisory boards? Previous service on the BOA?

How were other appointees received by members of the board? 100% endorsement or was there a split?

Gerry,
Can you take a closer look at the Coles Store Voter Turnout statistics.

Many, like myself, vote at Coles Store, and could only vote for the BOE. If you look at the BOE voter total at Cole's Store , the number is 264.

Next, look at the Carrboro Voter turnout #. That number is also 264.

One of those numbers is wrong. I think the number of Carrboro voters is much smaller. I would guess the number is closer to 114 (the number of votes cast for mayor). If we use 114, that would make Carrboro voter turnout around 16%, not 38%.

What do you think?

Terri,
I agree with Katrina on some things.
I diasagree with Katrina on some things.
My objection to Katrina is her approach to conflict. I find her personal political style divisive. I have said before that when Katrina is less angry about annexation, she may be more effective.

See my 9:23 am post.

Thanks Mary for your question. I was taking my stats directly from the County Board of Elections websiite, which reports 264 carrboro voters casting ballots at Coles Store precinct. if their numbers are wrong, then the premise of my mathematical analysis is totally wrong. I have no way to audit their numbers, however.

Anita wrote: "Didn't we just have an democratic election less than a week ago in which the voters of Carrboro expressed their preferences for the candidates who were interested enough in serving on the BOA to actually run?"

This is an important point. However, and I am just wondering out loud, aren't you assuming that we would have had the same result if it were a pick four race instead of a pick three race?

Also, aren't you (and some others above) assuming that the field would have been exactly the same six candidates if there had been four seats available? There were quite a few people mentioned here and elsewhere as possible candidates who ultimately decided not to run, perhaps because they felt the field was getting too crowded considering that there were only 3 seats available.

In other words, a pick four election would have involved a different field of candidates and it would also have involved a different order of finish among them. How many people would have cast their fourth vote for David or Catherine or someone else? How would that have affected the order of finish? Obviously we cannot know for sure, but it seems like these questions are worth pondering.

I'm not trying to rule anything out by saying all this, but as I said during the campaign, we should make some effort to read the tea leaves from the election in making a determination about how to proceed.

Mary,

My question was what criteria would you (and others) recommend for making the appointment.

Terri,
I shall ponder you question all weekend while I am camping in the mountains. I must go pack. I will report back to you.

Mark, I appreciate you wondering out loud. That's some of what I was doing too in my post.

I guess my next "wonder aloud" is how we know if the process of application/appointment will more effectively represent the intended will of the citizens of Carrboro than a tallied vote. I seem to recall from my graduate school days that greater and greater extrapolation from raw data reduces the reliability of the results (I am sure some statistician can explain what I am trying to say). I just wonder how far is too far in adding interpretive layers of meaning to the election results.

I think many of the points that others have made are quite valid in this discussion and should be considered in a dialogue about this issue.

And Mary, I think renting an apartment to be eligible to run isn't a whole lot different than buying a house in a state you've probably never spent the night in AFTER you've announced a Senate bid to represent that state (oops, different election, different state!). The big difference, Katrina lost.

I just asked Steve, all he would say is "It's nice to know they remember my name"

Steve also has the advantage of previously having served on the Carrboro town board. (in his first political life, he was one of the leading progressive activists in Carrboro. I worked with him in organizing the Carrboro Community Coalition in the late 1970s with folks like Braxton Foushee, Errnie Patterson and Doug Sharer) I know that in his second political life, Steve was seen in a totally different light. Many of you may know only the second Steve.

Katrina will NEVER be the next Frances Shetley.

Coles Store voters voted 61 for and 91 against the County School Referendum; these were Cole Store voters who are not Carrboro voters, but Orange County voters. The BOE total includes both.

Lake Hogan Farms was built after it became mandatory that all new subdicivions petition for annexation before receoving their CUPs. Lake hogan Farms was built in Phases and each Phase, as it was completed, petitioned for annexation. There has been, therefore a rolling increase in Carrboro residents from Lake Hogan Farms over the last many years.

if i were a member of the Board of Aldermen to take office December 6th, I would be asking to review the list of attendees at the Facilitated planning meeting for the Small Area Plan. Among these attendees are many citizens who have taken a strong interest over many years in the process for citizen participation from which the Small Area Plan was agreed upon, the writing of the voted on plan and the procedures the Board of Aldermen had to follow to get the plan accepted by the County. Many of the attendees would make excellent and knowledgeable candidates for the seat to be vacated by Mark.

This debate is very disturbing to me.

My understanding is that the BOA has 2 (maybe 3) choices:

1 - Appoint the next-highest vote-getter.
2 - Appoint someone of their own liking.
3 - Request authorization (from the legislature, I assume?) for a special election.

It is distressing to me that there would be any consideration for option number two. Any appointee besides the 4th-place finisher will appear (with some credible reason) to be selected simply to quell debate on the BOA by choosing someone that will support the opinions of the majority. For all intents and purposes: a power grab.

The government of Carrboro has long enjoyed a reputation as an open, transparent entity noted for its progressive, democratic process. Any attempt to appoint someone by the arbitrary decision of the BOA reeks of a desire to leverage political power to consolidate further political power.

Only options 1 and 3 seem to me to be at all forthright or honest. It would anger and disappoint me to find that Carrboro's government fails to live up to our expectations as a group that holds a deep and abiding respect for the democratic process. I see from the comments here that there appears to be an issue that the fourth-place finisher (Katrina Ryan) may not be considered suitable in spite of her finish due to a dislike of her positions or her political style by some of the Board members. It is unfortunate that such issues are even under discussion as it furthers the perception that the BOA is considering means by which it could avoid dissent or opposition.

I hated to see the amount of legal wrangling that took place in our last two presidential elections. Elections are meant to exercise the will of the people, not the will of those in power. This discussion of what powers the BOA possesses to choose an appointee of their liking sickens me as it reeks of the corruption that has become all-too-common at the national level. Please tell me the Board would NOT actually consider such a move!

It's normal... it's traditional... it's legal.

That doesn't make it RIGHT.

No one knows what the wishes are of the majority of Carrboro citizens, the majority of eligible voters, nor the majority of eligible voters who actually voted this time. No amount of analyzing, guessing or soothsaying based on previous elections is going to magically summon the correct answer. If that were the case then pollsters would always be right.

Good for you Kevin, you nailed the ethical answers with either (1) or especially (3) - even if they aren't normal, traditional or convenient.

It's my understanding that progressive politics is about reform rather than following tradition just for the sake of tradition. I, too, think Kevin's got it right. Principle over popularity.

I confess ... I'm truly amazed at Ruby's comment -- about all the comment. Geez, isn't this the stuff of OP.org?!

It's too bad that the law wan't written flexibly enough to accomodate what must be a fairly rare situation ... the certainty of that fourth seat.

That said, it would have been helpful if the BOA had simply announced on October 1 that the fourth place finisher would get the seat. That would have gotten around the legal problem and, as Mark points out, the voters might have voted differently with that knowledge.

Ruby's right ... the appointment arrangement is routine, but it really invites the pushing away of dissent. Nobody should be in favor of that.

okay -- apologies for the O P.org link. What I thought was just shorthand for Orangepolitics.org linked to an actual site about the Order of Preachers. Yikes.

But, Jean, the problem with that is that it isn't the current BoA that decides on the new member, but the BoA that takes office in December. Half of the October BoA was up for election; how on earth could it have been their place to decide on this seat? They could all have been voted out.
It is not the responsibility of the current office holders to make this decision. And, on October 1, it would have been too late for folks to decide to run; if there was an automatic fourth spot available, perhaps more would have. Finally, just because a person came in 4th doesn't mean they were the 4th choice of a majority of citizens. If we had had a fourth spot on the ballot, the results may have been different.

I have no problem with the BoA choosing not to appoint as their peer someone who has been openly hostile to the current members of the BoA and the citizens of Carrboro. Indeed, I would argue that the BoA is not representing me if they automatically go with number 4. From her first quotes after the election, Katrina has talked as if she earned that spot, but she hasn't. She did not win.

The top three finishers were pretty close; the bottom three finishers were pretty close as well; but there was a substantial gap between the top and the bottom. That's meaningful. If Katrina was a very close 4th, I think you could make a better argument for appointing her.

Ultimately, it is the people of Carrboro who need to express to their representatives how we feel on this matter. I want the BoA to appoint someone who reflects all of us. As a Carrboro resident, I feel very comfortable with the BoA process.

Perhaps the Board will choose to appoint someone who lives in northern Carrboro. If that's the case, I hope they choose someone who can work with the current members. Frankly, I think Katrina would be a disruptive presence who would argue on everything just for the sake of arguing. I'm not convinced she could make her points heard given her rhetoric. Any good ideas might be lost in her anger.

Or perhaps the BoA will choose to consider underrepresented groups in Carrboro, and I don't mean NTA residents. Perhaps they will choose someone who couldn't have afforded to run, but who would make a great Alderman. I hope we get someone as groovy as Carrboro deserves.

Of the folks here who are angry about this: do you live in Carrboro? If not, then really, the BoA doesn't need to listen to you; indeed, they shouldn't!

As to option #3 "3 - Request authorization (from the legislature, I assume?) for a special election." the General Assembly next meets May 9, 2006. If a request was made for special legislation, the earliest time for an election would probably be November 7, 2006, for a one-year term.

Joan, you're exactly right, but hadn't the current board made that promise just before the election?

My choice of October 1 was arbitrary ... just to make the point that it be long enough to get the word out and make this issue a real part of the campaign.

As to personalities on boards, I'll just say this ... I ran for the Orange School Board in '94 - the year of the so-called Republican revolution. When David Kolbinsky was elected, there were comparisons drawn that essentially suggested that it was David vs. me and that the "Christian Right" had turned out to put David in that seat. There was a lot of talk about what the "Christian Right" domination of politics and the school board might mean. To me, what it meant was simple -- enough voters spoke to put David in that seat. These were voices that needed representation and they got it. Good for them.

School board seats became avaialble after that through appointment to replace a departing member. I never thought about applying. It's a whole different process. I only wanted to compete for the votes of parents and citizens at large.

That said, let me close by saying that I covered the BoA for the newspaper in 1999-2000. I really liked them as a working group. I think they' were all fine people. I think the current board and the new board will do well. If a dissenting voice comes along, I'd expect that they will do what Carrboro does so well, so often -- include everyone fairly. Not just the squeakiest wheel --everyone.

James, I'd vote for Jacquie twice!

Just because it's standard practice for the BoA to appoint a candidate of its liking doesn't mean it's RIGHT. I'm not saying the board should appoint Katrina -- there WAS quite a gap between 3rd and 4th -- but the idea that the board just ought to go ahead and appoint someone close to its political worldview seems like petty politics.

Also, saying the BoA shouldn't listen to someone simply because that person doesn't live in Carrboro is just flat-out silly. Should the United States not listen to our European neighbors on the issue of the Iraq war? Yes, that's absurd -- as absurd as saying only Carrboro residents' opinions matter to the Board of Aldermen.

As the charming and delightful Terri Buckner once pointed out, to acurately interpret any set of facts, one has to interpret them in context. When talking about the disparity between 3rd and fourth this election as opposed to 2003, or even 1995 when Diana McDuffy was appointed, both Steve Rose and Ms. McDuffy had a distinct advantage. Their friends and neighbors could vote for them. Does anyone think that if annexation area residents could vote, that I wouldn't be a "close fourth" or even higher ?

And in those previous elections there were fewer candidates across which to spread the votes, so that dilutes the margin of victory arguement as well.

I won't try and arbitrarily extrapolate the numbers, but I got over 700 votes the hard way. I knocked on doors and talked to people about my ideas. I didn't have the luxury of a built in constituency.

The margin of victory arguement is entirely arbitrary. I respect the Board's right to do whatever the law allows them to, there is a different in having the right to do something and doing the right thing.

I believe a minority contingency of 32% is a large enough group of resident to deserve representation in a board containing seven members.

But as I've said, the board will do what it will do, and that will be for a future set of voters to evaluate, not me.

Ideally this argument shouldn't really mention Katrina or her politics. That's not the issue at hand -- the policy (or lack thereof) is.

Also, I keep hearing support for arbitrary appointment couched in terms of other potential candidates just not having the gumption to run.

So I'm interested to hear someone stand up and say that they would have run had there nominally been (as well as what we ALL knew to be de facto) a fourth seat on the ballot.

Come on. It's even easier to stand up and say something like that after the fact. It's a pretty low bar to meet in order to punch a huge hole in my case.

This thought just occurred to me. If, the fourth place finisher with 731 votes receives a seat equal to the first place finisher with 1549 votes, then each of Jacquie's voters votes is only equal to less than one half the value of one of Katrina's voters votes. Maybe, Jacquie really deserves both seats since if you divided her votes directly in half she would be both the third and fourth place finisher. Just thinking outside the box here in downtown Carrboro.

Here's the thing Katrina: if NTA folks had been voting, the whole election might have been different. A whole different group of folks may have run. Further, I don't think it's fair to assume that your neighbors would have voted for you. Perhaps another NTA candidate would have run and won. We can't know.

Chris, of course this is about politics. I don't think anyone here is pretending it isn't.

Chris says:
"So I'm interested to hear someone stand up and say that they would have run had there nominally been (as well as what we ALL knew to be de facto) a fourth seat on the ballot."

OK here goes. If I had lived in Carrboro and there was a fourth seat, I would have run.

It was obviously a good year for former Chapel Hill Council member to run for things (Thorpe/Chilton)

James-

The seat in question is only good for half of a normal term. Seems kinda shaky to equate it as being just as good as Gist's. Also, it's not to say that any votes count more than others. Otherwise we'd have three 1st place finishers right now, which would just be silly to say.

Joan, if that's the case, hey -- more power to your side of things. I don't agree, but to the victors (two of which I voted to endorse when I was at the DTH, I must point out) go the spoils.

Thank you Gerry. But *do* you live in Carrboro? The comment was mainly directed at those who either live in Carrboro or would have gotten a residence there in order to run legally.

Joan,

I didn't ask anyone to assume anything. Please note that the situation was posed in the form of a question. I believe you're being disingenuous when you posit that a large majority of Annexation area residents wouldn't vote for me. The results at Coles Store just seem to point in that direction, as would the level of financial support I got from annexation area residents.

I'm just pointing out that this justification "margin of victory" has the same type of smell to it as the timing of the annexation. Every single member of the board has said as often as they can that they did not deliberately deprive area residents of the vote. John Herrera's poll worker at Cole's Store was telling people he voted against the annexation because he thought it was unfair.

This is an opportunity for the board to walk the walk instead of talk. This isn't about my character, it's about theirs.

And James, you bring up an excellent point. Jacquie gets a four year term for her 1549 votes, so a two year term for my 731 seems just sbout right, doesn't it ?

No. I live in Raleigh. I was just trying to spark the conversation.