This is a thread for posting results and also for looking at the aggregated totals from our Pundit of the Year contest. (A winner won't be announced until results are final.)

I'll be watching this page for Orange County election results (be sure to page through as it does not show all races on one page).

Here's what our pundits think:

 County Board of Education (choose 3)
Al Hartkopf11
Eddie M. Eubanks7
Jeff Michalski3
Stan Morris1
Stephen H. Halkiotis13
Tony McKnight7
 County Commissioner, At-Large
Bernadette Pelissier14
 County Commissioner, District 2
Leo L. Allison4
Luther K. Brooks1
Steve Yuhasz8
Tommy T. McNeill1
 District Court Judge, District 15B
Glenn Gerding1
Page Vernon13
 Land Transfer Tax
 NC Senate, District 23
Ellie Kinnaird11
Moses Carey3
 US Congress, District 4
Augustus Cho3
William (B.J.) Lawson11




A few intersting things in the result so far - keeping in mind that ZERO precincts are reporting. There's a surisingly strong showing for Mary Wolff. Something is going on there...

Moses Carey, Jr. (DEM)
Ellie Kinnaird (DEM)





Tommy T. McNeill (DEM)
Steve Yuhasz (DEM)
Leo L. Allison (DEM)
Luther K. Brooks (DEM)


Augustus Cho (REP)
William (B.J.) Lawson (REP)


Glenn Gerding
Lamar F. Proctor, Jr.
Page Vernon





Well that changed quickly. Here's the latest: 

Moses Carey, Jr. (DEM)
Ellie Kinnaird (DEM)

Neloa Barbee Jones (DEM)
Bernadette Pelissier (DEM)
Mary M. Wolff (DEM)

Tommy T. McNeill (DEM)
Steve Yuhasz (DEM)
Leo L. Allison (DEM)
Luther K. Brooks (DEM)

Tommy T. McNeill (DEM)
Steve Yuhasz (DEM)
Leo L. Allison (DEM)
Luther K. Brooks (DEM)

Glenn Gerding
Lamar F. Proctor, Jr.
Page Vernon

Eddie M. Eubanks
Stephen H. Halkiotis
Al Hartkopf
Tony McKnight
Jeff Michalski
Stan Morris


Looks like all but 7 of the Chapel Hill & Carrboro area precincts have reported, but only about 5 of over 20 precincts in the county have reported.
41 of 43 precincts reporting now.

Keep in mind that some of these races include districts beyond Orange County, but it doesn't appear that the rest of the districts will change the results.

Moses Carey, Jr. (DEM)
Ellie Kinnaird (DEM)

Neloa Barbee Jones (DEM)
Bernadette Pelissier (DEM)
Mary M. Wolff (DEM)

Tommy T. McNeill (DEM)
Steve Yuhasz (DEM)
Leo L. Allison (DEM)
Luther K. Brooks (DEM)

Augustus Cho (REP)
William (B.J.) Lawson (REP)

Glenn Gerding
Lamar F. Proctor, Jr.
Page Vernon

Eddie M. Eubanks
Stephen H. Halkiotis
Al Hartkopf
Tony McKnight
Jeff Michalski
Stan Morris


This N&O article raises the interesting q of whether Leo Allison could/would request a runoff with Steve Yuhasz for D2, given that Yuhasz apparently didn't meet the 40% threshold.

For those that like the horserace aspect of politics, a runoff for the D2 seat might be fun. If nothing else, it might focus some attention on the greatest area of the county, that generally gets the least attention.

Of interest:

"Yuhasz’s 10-percent margin over Allison, which was 4,057 votes to 3,021, came from various areas among eligible voters. Yuhasz received the majority of the vote in 11 of the county’s 16 eligible precincts, with Allison winning Cheeks, Hillsborough and Coles Store precincts and Brooks winning West Hillsborough and Tolars precincts, according to information on the state board of elections Web site. McNeill did not carry any precincts."

Be interesting to see what pans out with the far lower turnout of a summer runnoff. If the runoff winner's margin turns out to be even slimmer, is it a fairer representation because it'll consist of those who really care about the issue, or a much worse representation due to narrow interest groups being the only ones likely to vote?

it would happen on June 24th!  How many would pay attention, let alone vote?

<chuckling> Yeah, but Fred, don't you think that's precisely why it would be so interesting? It would focus attention, at a time when nobody is paying attention to any distractions, on a single very local race. Whose base is really stronger if there is no other reason to turn out to vote? How many people cast a vote in that D2 race merely because it was another option on the ballot, versus how many are so truly grateful to finally even have somebody representing the interests of rural Orange that it is so important to them that they would show up again to vote on that single seat?

The interests of rural Orange? Don't they still get elected by the whole county? Which makes it someone who *lives* in rural Orange but represents the interests of Chapel Hill and Carrboro? Or maybe I'm wrong and only us rural voters get to vote on District 2?
Yes, the entire county will vote in November, but do you really think there can be any viable alternative to the Democratic nominee? Experience has shown that the Democratic Primary is the deciding race in Orange County, even when there is a progressive alternative.

and in this case, it is not just all but assured, but in fact assured, that the Democrat will win in Nov. in D2 because no there is no GOP candidate.



46% turnout in OC, 10% above statewide average. Almost 40000 voted in the Dem primary for President. That's almost as many votes as Kerry got in 2004 general election.

The D2 runoff will indeed be interesting. I think lots of the new voters (at least new to primary elections) coming out for Pres. may have just punched a name for downballot races, although there was a large falloff of voters downballot: some of the COS races drew as little as 27,000, about 1/3 fewer votes than were cast for President. The US Senate race saw a signficant falloff too and there were more votes cast in the state Senate race than US Senate.

Almost half of OC voters went to vote in a primary. Is this a record?

Actually, if you look at the voter turnout on a precinct by precinct basis, another fascinating story emerges. Chapel Hill had some areas with abysmal voter turnout down in the single digits, whereas rural Orange turned out in the 30-45% range. The highest turnout was in:

Cedar Grove (44.84%)[very rural],

Tolars (43.73%)[very rural],

Coker Hills (42.41%)[CH],

White Cross (42.15%)[rural],

Carr (40.94%)[rural],

Efland (40.40%)[rural].

The lowest turnout was:

Country Club (6.25%)[CH]

Mason Farm (8.36%) [CH] 

East Franklin (8.90%) [CH]

Lincoln (12.18%) [CH]

Granted, some of those really low voter turnout precincts are populated primarily by students, but if this years exciting primary didn't draw out the student vote, then what would?

This raises the interesting question of whether rural property owners are more likely to be involved in voting for their representation and taxation than others.  



because I notice that some of the highest early voting turnout (in absolute numbers) was in the student precincts of Country Club, Mason Farm, Lincoln and East Franklin?

For the students in those precincts they had to have voted early.  The residence halls are closed now except for graduating seniors.

I imagine the early votes are included, but also remember that the number of voters in those precincts are inflated by non-purged registrants who moved from those residence halls long ago.

is not included in these numbers right?
Only votes cast on election day count toward precinct-by-precinct turnout. I know for example that Efland had 201 early voters, but that is only because the judge told me how many bar code labels were missing from her list, thus indicating those who already voted. So even though Efland is listed as having 40% turnout, it was actually over 50%. Whether the BOE will break down early voting numbers by precinct, I don't know. They have not in the past.
Under a state law that took effect in 2007, early votes and absentees will be allocated back to the precincts, but the county has 60 days to do this. They have to take all the ballots from early voting, sort them by precinct (the precinct was written on the ballot just before it was handed to the voter or mailed) then run each precinct batch back through the tabulator.  So if you look at the election day results from Country Club now, it wil not show those votes. The BoE DOES know how many votes were CAST by early voters for each precinct, as that is coded when you vote.

I was an Orange County election judge. There wouldn't have been bar code labels missing from the book that the judge had on election day because those voters all remain in the book-- the early voting sites don't even have those books, they look people up on the computer. You have to go through manually as the judge and mark which have voted "absentee" (early voting) from a list delivered on election morning. The early voting sites would not have gone to that precinct's book, they would have just printed a label. The only possible explanation for missing labels is that the chief judge could have gone through the night before and taken all those labels off, but that makes no sense because those labels could have been used for fraud and should have remained in the book to be returned to the Board of Elections.

Another q, how can the BOE report 47.81% voter turnout countywide, if they are reporting no single precinct above 45%? As others have suggested, what role did early voting play in this?

Edit: Thanks, Paul. You explained it. 

The precentages in the downtown Chapel Hill precincts are a bit misleading. Many people who are still listed as registered no longer live in the area. I live in Lincoln, and know that there are at least two people registered at my residence that haven't lived there in a year. The on-campus precincts like Country Club have even higher turnover than my precinct does.

Orange County has more registered voters than residents. I was at the Northside polling place for most of the day yesterday, and they had 317 voters.  As others have already mentioned, yesterday's percentages do not include early voters, of which Northside had over 400. Their actual percentage is close to 33%.

If you check the Orange County election turnout map you will see that the one stop numbers are included as a percentage total turnout for that polling place.

As chief judge in Coker Hills we had a turnout of 59.5% including 216 early voters. In the past rural precincts have always out performed the city precincts but 70% of the voters live in the city. 

Very few voters bought the "Independant Newspaper" in to help them vote. On the other hand the newspaper that the democrat party was handing out was used alot and voters were taking 5, 10, or even 15 minutes refering to it. As the result show there were a number of elections skipped by voters. That will be reduced in the fall when voters can vote straight party in state and local elections. Some will miss voting for president because the straight party block doesn't apply to the presidental race. 

I guess we can expect our property taxes to rise, again.
I think you could have expected that regardless.
they'll go up more now
Maybe people will be motivated to tell the commissioners to be better stewards of tax money.

You mean by $0.01? Seems a little hypocritical to suggest that a small group's share of the tax burden should have been dramatically increased instead of you having to pay a tiny increase.

Regardless, raising taxes is not the only way to address budget issues. Adding usage fees in some areas as well as tightening belts in others can accomplish exactly the same thing the TT would have without being  prejudicial and without having to enact new methods of taxation that would likely baloon over time along with propert taxes.

I'm pretty sure I pay MORE than my fair share in property taxes. Orange's property tax rate is already the 3rd highest in the state so any increase is too much. I agree the powers that be should spend more wisely, but that's not reality. Raising the property tax is also a tax on a "small group" that have mid-size homes & land, who will end up with a significant increase compared to most, & who plan to stay put forever. I guess the realators got their way so they can continue to rake in the profits.
Tax burden calculations must include relative housing values as well as tax rates. In Orange county and the towns, the high tax rates combined with the high home values put a very heavy burden on the home owner.

We wouldn't need another election day on June 24 if we had instant run-off voting.


Since we don't, we'll waste time & money and less voters will participate.

Chapel Hill Herald reported this morning that Steve Yuhasz won the Democratic nomination in District 2 and therefore the election since there is no GOP candidate.

That is incorrect, as Yuhasz only received 37%, meaning Leo Allison can call for a runoff, which he very likely will do.   


Yup, Leo is quoted in the N&O this morning saying he believes he would likely garner the most votes in a runoff.

I'd say he's correct that it's highly probable that he'd pick up a lot of the votes cast for McNeil and Brooks. And, it's highly probable those voters might be more motivated to turn out for a runoff.  

Brooks won the precincts with the highest % black voters, including West Hillsborough, which has the highest %, which he won 3-1 over Allison. He also ran ahead of Allison in Carr Store, Cedar Grove and Tolars, quite a bit ahead in the latter two, which have the largest % of black voters after West Hillsborough. Allison's margin over Brooks was mainly from in Coles Store, Patterson, Orange Grove, St. Marys, Hillsborough and Eno, where Brooks did very poorly, running 4th in a three of these, generally the southern and eastern portions of District 2. Allison ran first in Hillsborough and Coles Store. Allison also ran ahead of Brooks by a combined 75 or so votes in the Efland and Cheeks precincts, (the latter had the largest election day turnout in D2), his home base. Yuhasz got only about 22% in Cheeks, which Allison won, although not by a large margin (31 votes) over Brooks.

Yuhasz best precincts by % were Caldwell (where Allison ran last), St. Marys, Grady Brown, Cameron Park and Eno, not necessarily in that order. He also won Carr (by 2 votes over Brooks), Cedar Grove (by 33 votes over Brooks, Allison was last), Efland (by 53 votes over Allison), Patterson (by 4 votes over Allison, Brooks was last here), Orange Grove (2nd largest turnout) by 89 votes over Allison (again Brooks was last).

The fourth candidate, Tommy McNeill, ran 4th in most precincts and no higher than 3rd in any. He got about 13% overall, his best precinct was his home precinct of Eno, where he got about 18%.  


Ellie Kinnaird's campaign manager, Lee Rafalow, told me to go to the Cheeks polling site because he had determined that it was the precinct with the least number of voters casting early ballots. I was skeptical, but he was right on it. The place was jumping.

Also, Leo Allison spent a good bit of time there.



Had this not been a Presdential election year with a hotly contested Democratic primary for President, I would tend to agree with you.  However, most people got out yesterday to vote for Obama ... especially African Americans.  The county stuff was just gravy.

Voter turnout in a June runoff will be low.

It's hard to tell if there was a good student turn out or not.  Many of them may vote at their permanent addresses. 


surprised I'm not seeing much "reaction", some discussion, but not really reaction?  WRAL site has it...but it's basically a Rep V Dem slag fest

I was surprised Hartkopf was defeated, I was really surprised he was defeated so handily

I was not surprised Halkiotis won, had he lost I would have been shocked with is history in the area

I also expected Yuhasz to win, and would have been amazed had he lost...his signs were everywhere, and someone even altered a good deal of them (adding a "Common sense candidate" tag to the top of them) were even altered a week or so before the election, to ensure that anyone who had gotten too used to them, would take a second look...the signs I think paid off, I'd be amazed if even half of the people that voted for him, knew any of the candidates beyond name recognition (no, obviously there's no way to test that...and it doesn't just apply to this race...just speculating)

I was slightly surprised that Obama took it with the margin he did, I expected him to take it, just not so handily.

on the flip-side, I saw that Ron Paul came in second for OC, but Huckabee came in second for the state overall...thought that was interesting.

Not surprised by the Hartkopf lost. What with the lack of leadership that has been on the school board for the past 2 years and the high black turnout voting for Eubanks and McKnight and Dr. H. Hartkopf was left out of the mix. This should be a wake up call to the 4 incumbents to step up and listen to the parents and ask hard questions of school staff instead of being a rubber stamp.

I was surprised by the amount of lost for Carey. I thought with the Obama impact it would be a boost for him. 

"I was surprised by the amount of lost for Carey. I thought with the Obama impact it would be a boost for him. "

While the Orange County bloc of African American voters is strong, it isn't strong enough to stand on its own.  Their candidates have to have the support of the progessives in Chapelboro and the liberals in Hillsborough.  Clearly, when offered a choice between Kinnaird or Carey, those two sizeable ideological entities will vote for Kinnaird.

And don't forget about Person County.  Carey was an unknown in Person County even to the African Americans that live there.

that Hartkopf lost. He was one of the few who did show leadership. The students of Orange County lost a good voice Tuesday.

You also have to remember that both of these men are tied to HES and there was a price to pay for that. There are number of parents who are tried of hearing about HES. HES parents may have been standing up for there school but it didn't play that way on the outside. They looked like spoiled children wanting to be a school district of one.

The point is this school district is made up of many children and problems and how would they deal with problems unrelated to HES where there children attend.

Is there an assumption here that the African American vote went for Carey? It is my understanding that the Rogers Road/Eubanks community does not see Carey as a friend. Maybe a number of folks looked at character as the most important attribute and then decided to support Ellie.

Thank you so much for giving reasonable people in northern Orange County an outlet to voice our opinions!  I've been so troubled by the scare tactics of the SAVE HES group led by Allan Scott.  He has organized a team of conservative HES parents in an attempt to scare the School Board!  It's revolting.  HES is nothing more than a school that's population is over 80% white.  The parents have done their best in the past to keep it that way.  You can see the postings on to see Mr. Scott's not so hidden agenda.  HES has taken so much money from the coffers of Orange County Schools that it's infringed on the SES disadvantaged students who could use additional services.


Thanks again for all of your efforts. 




I guess you needed an outlet you couldn't get on my blog.  At least over here you you haven't resorted to name calling and making comments about how people look.

Or is that still yet to come? 

I remember that your comments on my blog started more reasonable and actually added to the debate (that is why I published them), but then quickly degenerated into childish accusations and personal attacks.

Do these little jewels sound familiar?

"Halkiotis will pander to the black people--he's done that for 30 plus years."

"Jeff, who is missing something between his temples, looked like a person you see at the post office."

"OMG--is Jeff a professional jarhead wanabe? He looks like an idiot!" 

That said, I won't dismiss your comments as out of hand as you would do mine.  As I have written here before, my blog has an agenda, and I make no effort at all to hide it, nor do I apologize for it.

As for attempting to "scare the School Board" or as Liz Brown accused me of, "intimidating" it, that is simply ridiculous.  To think that a group of parents peacefully speaking out during the "public comment" portion of school board meetings, sitting quietly through long Board meetings, writing letters to the editors of local papers and expressing their opinions on a blog would "scare" someone who spent 7 months in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp is beyond ridiculous.

To say that "HES is nothing more than a school that's population is over 80% white. The parents have done their best in the past to keep it that way" begs the question:  What then is Pathways Elementary?  It too is over 80% white.  Are those parents to blame also?  How about New Hope?  It has the lowest percentage of African-American children.  Are New Hope parents to blame for that?

Finally, your comment that "HES has taken so much money from the coffers of Orange County Schools that it's infringed on the SES disadvantaged students who could use additional services" just is not true. 

HES receives no more money per child than any other school in the district.  In fact, until this coming year, Efland Cheeks and Central were the only schools to receive additional funds simply because they had a higher number of low income children than any other elementary schools.  It was this Board, that decided to take away over $300,000 that was used to directly pay Reading Recovery teachers and fund at-risk student programs, and create a district-wide Pre-Kindergarten program, at among other places, Pathways Elementary - that other "white" school.

Come on out of the shadows E.  I am willing to put my name on what I write, aren't you?



 As I've told you before, E stand for Equality.  I am a teacher at Cameron Park, and I'm a progressive that actually believes that we should help all kids.

 I understand that you are not comfortable being with different subgroups--not saying that's ok, but I understand your cause.  You have been highly critical of the Board's solution to CES's problems.  There is a moral problem when one school has a Free/Reduced Lunch % greater than 65% and a school that is 2 blocks a way hovers around 15%.

 I'm not sure what you are talking about those comments.  What is a jarhead?  I would have used more intelligent terms like "Jeff wants status quo and refuses to allow HES to be tainted by CES".  I plead to you, again, to show compassion for those of need.


I think that maybe you should register on my blog, because either you have a short memory about the insults and name calling you submitted, or someone has hijacked your "E" moniker.  Of course, that is always a risk if you refuse to identify yourself.

I have comments from "E", I have not published that include all the comments I quoted above, and more.

So, I guess you didn't say that HES stood for "Hillsborough's Elitist Society"? And the comment naming a specific HES parent and calling her a "slut" wasn't yours either?  How about the one saying I was a "pussy" for not publishing that earlier comment?

You are right that I have been "highly critical of the Board's solution to CES's problems", of course, so were most parents of children at CES.  I actually attended the Board's "listening session" at CES when they overwhelmingly rejected the Board's merger plans.  I watched Dennis Whitling ask them to raise their hands if they supported the Board's plan, only to have two hands go up in a room of 100 parents.

I also attended the meeting at HES which included a large number of CES parents, who again spoke out against the Board's plans.

I agree that there is a problem when there is so much disparity between schools, however, I do not feel the solution is to take choices away from the parents at the poorer school, cut resources specifically earmarked for low-income children at that school, and force other children to leave the only school they have ever known.

As you once argued (and I published) and I have consistantly argued, the answer is to create schools where parents want to send their children.  The Board needs to create magnet schools to attract parents to struggling schools rather than resort to futile attempts to force them where the Board wants them to go. 

The "stick approach" will do little to correct the problem, but will do a great deal to create animosity between parents and the Board.

I will readily admit that I stated that HES means "Hillsborugh's Elitist Society".  From reviewing the voting results, it appears that the majority of Northern Orange County agrees.

 I did not at all call you the other names--that would have been offensive.  There were some comments that were posted this winter with "E" that was not mine.  I suspect it's one of your cronies trying to make me look bad.

 Why do I not register on your site?  Probably because I don't want to be subjected to your tactics.  The insults hurled at anyone who goes against you is sad.  It's really sad because it caused Al to lose his seat on the School Board.  I do not believe that Al harbors resentment towards the CES community--I just believe he has done little to improve their school.

 I found your comment about the "stick approach" amusing.  It's ok if you use that approach, but if anyone else does, their causing animosity.  Do you really want to improve education?  Prove it.



By the way "E" since you won't register here on OP, we have no way of knowing that you are even from Orange County, or that you are not a member of the school board, or maybe you are a high school student, or Allan Scott himself.

It's especially unfair when Allan has taken the time to put his feelings out publlicly with his identity quite clear. If you are going to make such pointed criticism, it would be taken much more seriously coming from someone with a valildated identity (you don't have to reveal your actual name to register - at least for now).



Community Guidelines

By using this site, you agree to our community guidelines. Inappropriate or disruptive behavior will result in moderation or eviction.


Content license

By contributing to OrangePolitics, you agree to license your contributions under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License.

Creative Commons License

Zircon - This is a contributing Drupal Theme
Design by WeebPal.