Welcome to the jungle

The editorial on this subject the Herald published back in 2003 remains valid. In it, we called for 4 millions square feet of housing -- twice the proposed allotment -- and 3,000 beds for students.

The case for student housing covered both graduates and undergraduates and flowed from the distorting effect they have on the off-campus rental market. We thought the success of private-sector student housing like Chapel Ridge blew the distance-based argument against locating student housing at Carolina North out of the water.

The "mill village/socialism/Marxism" argument on both student and employee housing is a bit tougher but is answerable by reference to the fact that nothing says UNC has to build or own the units. The general intent of the administration as I understand it is for the campus to spin off the work to private-sector developers, maybe letting them assume some or most of the risk. This has worked elsewhere (I want to say at Appalachian or UNC Asheville) and there doesn't seem any reason to believe a similar approach would fail here. For employees, buy-in would be voluntary and the only restrictions might be a tie to UNC and ownership/value appreciation limits similar to those now imposed on the clients of OCHCLT or Empowerment.

I'm wondering what the problem with that approach would be.

Good point, Ray.

You need to be very clear about housing at carolina north.

there will be no undergraduates there.

probably less than 500 graduate students.

that's why housing for low income workers (which otherwise will continue to commute in from alamance, chatham, etc...) is so vital to minimizing congestion, traffic, and air pollution.

Even if the town had a tax rate of zero UNC landscapers and janitors would not be able to afford to live in CH. Unless someone running for council wants to devalue everyone's homes the fact is without town involvement certain segments will never be able to otherwise afford housing here even with a tax rate of zero.

If unc wants to provide housing for all levels of employee on caronorth it would not be in the best interests of town residents to oppose this. I can't believe one of the town council candidates opposes housing for low income employees on caro north.

the student housing for undergrads and the vast majority of grad students should be on the main campus where they will be. It's just plain nuts to engineer commuters by design and have students swamping chapel hill transit between caro north and the main campus.
Humanities and social science students will never have anything to dot with caro north.

I've noticed Candidate Cutson has not answered Mark Markoplos' or my questions about specifics.

I find it interesting that a website advocating specifics and not sound bites hasn't answered any specific questions.

Helena,
You state, “We all know UNC is doing some things that probably every one would disagree with, but I thought the only legal authority the town had over UNC was zoning authority. It seems you really should be running for state representative where you could have legal jurisdiction to regulate funding for UNC. I thought we already dealt with people running on issues they couldn't control with diane bachmann regulating school merger via the town council.

ONE. The topics and comments on OP cover many issues including national and state actions that affect our daily lives but that we cannot control at a local level. I don't believe there is a rule that people are precluded from commenting on a topic not controlled at a local level simply because they are running for a local office.

TWO: Local government officials send up legislative requests to the General Assembly on matters that are decided at the state level but impact at the local level. Are you saying local elected officials should not lobby for or against state laws or funding distribution when they deem it necessary? Because, if so, then the keg registration issue, gay marriage issue, Medicaid funding issue, Umstead Act issue, increased funding for firefighters issue, state curtailment of local zoning power issues and a host of other issues that have been addressed by elected officials, the Chamber of Commerce and other local leaders through lobbying, meetings and legislative requests at the state level w be inappropriate under your reasoning.

THREE: You state “If somehow you were to get elected why would they cooperate at all with you to pay more of their share for things (like buses) or want to work with someone that continually says they suck?”

Obviously I have never used your terminology (i.e. they suck) in any of my criticisms. But that aside, whether someone criticizes university actions and policies or bends over backwards to curry favor is irrelevant at the end of the day in terms of cooperating on bus service because cooperation in this case is just good sense. 92% of all weekday bus riders are UNC students and employees. And UNC has stated that without the free bus fare system they could not proceed with expansion plans. So UNC needs the bus service and it benefits the Town by relieving traffic congestion. And personally I support the weekday service to UNC and would even recommend increasing it because the buses are full on some routes making it harder for students to make their classes on time; and I support funding that helps our students.

Reasonable people can disagree and criticize each other strongly on some issues and still put aside their differences and cooperate in situations where they do agree and it is clear that cooperation benefits both.

BTW, my website does contain detailed explanations on my position on many issues and more will be added throughout this election process for those who have questions that I have not yet addressed----so keep checking and reading.

News of Orange coverage of Hillsborough Mayor's race:

http://www.aconews.com/articles/2005/08/03/noc/news/news02.txt

Candidate cutson, thanks for the response. I am sorry to imply that comments about UNC in general or genetically modified foods are not invited. I didn't mean that.

I just meant as a CANDIDATE for Town Council a big theme from reading your website is "fiscal responsibility". Given that NO ONE advocates "fiscal irresponsibility" I'd like you to elucidate IF elected as a council member what exactly would you cut to bring about fiscal responsibility. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IS A BUZZ WORD much like support our troops - no one advocates not supporting our troops yet no one defines it. In fact one might argue that the "group" accused of not supporting our troops supports it the most by advocating for increased benefits etc.. For example, what are the health benefits, quality of life in CH benefits, and benefits to property values if the bus system cost something but in the long run makes CH a better place to live? Sure you can save taxpayer dollars by getting rid of all busses in CH but in the long run is it best? How do you calculate energy and air pollution savings?

there is a lot more detail on this thread about my question of what non-profits are in your crosshairs....

http://orangepolitics.org/2005/08/election-central/#comment-26011

Given that you advocate detailed positions and ask the press not to settle for soundbites (on your website) I'd like you to explain how you'd deal with and which non-profits.

I have read your web site in detail, and in my humble personal opinion you set up a lot of STRAW MEN TO KNOCK DOWN. For instance,

"I AM AGAINST THE PURSUIT OF SECRECY BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND PUBLIC AGENCIES. WE NEED TO PUT A STOP TO THE PURSUIT OF SECRECY BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND PUBLIC AGENCIES"

How does this relate to Town Council? Is anyone currently on the council advocating double secret government? Can you name someone on council you generally disagree with or generally are in agreement with. As Mark Markopolos asked who are the locally elected politicians you admire and what are controversial decisions you agree or disagree with.

Maybe this is just another thought of yours about issues in general, but as a voter I'd like to know what law or other means would you address CH town council secrecy - that carries any realistic legal impact - as a council member. Personally I thought Chapel HIll council was fairly open and not-secretive. Your views on genetically modified foods are very interesting - and also not that uncommon - but frankly I don't see them carrying much weight as a council member. If you have an easy to follow web page that specifically addresses what you'd cut to save money I'd love to see it. The one example I've heard is that you'd cut all spending on public art and the downtown commission budget - I think this brings in 105,000$. Maybe enough to save residents 1 penny a day or about 3-4$ a year for residents. (Actually maybe less given the resident number in Chapel hill. It's like skipping one expensive coffee a year.)

Last point - I somewhat disagree with you that when you insult a party to a negotiation, they will cooperate with you and you will get just as good a deal for the Town as if you were pleasant. The phrase I always heard was you catch more bees (?) with honey than vinegar.

www.chapelhillnews.com/opinion/story/2653766p-9090609c.html

I think essentially implying that UNC is worse than walmart is not going to negotiate the best deal for Town residents nor is it going to garner trust from a negotiation partner. and quite frankly now that your on record as calling UNC wallmart lite how hard would it be for them to discount you to the legislature to people from garner and franklin and all these other counties where they may not share your views on gender equity and genetically modifed foods.

Robin are you sure you're an advocate for fare free transit?

http://robincutson.com/parkinglanduse.html
"Why this new initiative to cut parking spaces even more? To force people to stop driving their cars and to use public transit. Verkerk is an outspoken advocate of the concept; Sally Green is also along with Bill Strom and many others—including UNC.

Why do they want to force you to use public transit? Because most citizens aren't using it voluntarily. Not only is the bus service free but the Town also pays to advertise the free bus service to attract more riders. But it's not working. In short, citizens' tax dollars are being used to fund public transit even though many times these buses are merely careening around empty and spewing diesel (or biodiesel) pollution."

does this mean you generally disagree with Sally Green and Bill Strom?

It is interesting the old saw that the buses are often careening around empty. Back in the late 1970s, there was one vociferous opponent of the bus system who had "documented" that even at rush hour the buses were totally empty half the time. His example was the bus route in front of his house. I got up early several mornings, camped out in front of his house and found the "problem" -- at a.m. rush hour, the buses going INTO campus were totally full (in fact jamp packed), but the return route outbound was totally empty. (Chapel Hill did not have a reverse employment pattern of thousands of people living downtown but working on the outskirts of town who would fill the return routes) This gentleman thought that somehow the empty buses returning to the Eastgate area to pick up another jam packed load could somehow be used somewhere else to pick up riders. I tried unsuccessfully to explain that these buses were deadheading (or some such word) to the beginning of their route again.

Man, this thread takes a long time to load now. :)

I'm late to the student-housing-at-CNorth party. Blame it on that blasted CCI laptop of mine. But if I can make a few points:

Of course the students at places like Chapel Ridge don't mind the 1 1/2-mile bus ride. But put yourself in the student mind for a bit: For many students, there would be a world of difference between: a. Living off-campus in an apartment that you chose; b. Living off-campus in a dormitory that you didn't choose. For the average student, off-campus housing in Chapel Hill equals freedom: You likely have your own room instead of sharing one. You can have a full kitchen, a well-stocked fridge. You can park your own vehicle without paying for a spot on campus.

Yes, off-campus housing is popular; yes, those students don't mind the bus ride. But the minute you start putting undergrads there in dorm rooms, they are going to pitch a fit. The entire point of moving off campus for most students is to get out of the dorms; living at CNorth and taking that bus ride would just be an inconvenience. I'm not saying Dan and Ray are wrong. I do, however, think y'all are underestimating many students' desire to get the heck out of the dorms. (I am fully aware of the irony of calling it an inconvenience when so many people oppose the entire CNorth development. And I, personally, don't think a 1.5-mile bus ride is a big deal. But I'm trying to play devil's advocate here. Hang with me.)

Here's an idea: What if we did what Duke's done, or what Northwestern and other schools have done, and make CNorth home of every Carolina freshman? Upperclassmen would have the advantage of living on campus if they wanted. It would immerse the youngest students in a research-intensive environment. They could even become better town residents, since they'll actually get off the main campus every once in a while. Students couldn't complain about it, since they'd know where they'd be living if they got into Carolina. It would essentially force us to solidify transportation between the satellite tract and the main campus. And it would have the very beneficial effect of helping to regulate the off-campus housing business. (Caveat: I have no idea if this is even practical. But I'm throwing it out there because nobody's yet mentioned it in this thread.)

One final point. I'm not saying all students would mind living on the Horace Williams tract. I certainly don't think the handful of us who post here on OP would mind. But for the average student coming to campus who has no idea about the CNorth debate, who might not be as civic-minded as others, who has looked forward to finally settling down on campus, who wants to love the place like all of us here love it (even when we hate it), it might be a major disappointment.

Chris - there won't be any undergraduates on caronorth - why in the world make them use gasoline to get to their classes... sorry but its nuts...

they are building more dorms on main campus and if you've seen the building boom between mason farm road and manning there is no lack of space..

put people in walking distance of class when possible...it's not that hard.

but I agree undergrads for my reasons or yours will not want to live on caronorth surrounded by commercially leased space - paricularly if it has as many parking decks as originally planned.

I think the counterargument is that long-term -- we're taking 50 years down the road, when CNorth might actually be close to completion -- you are still going to need more space for student housing, even with the boom down on Mason Farm. So putting grad students or undergrads at CNorth could help prevent another housing boom when all of our kids or grandkids are headed to Carolina. And like that Herald edit said, that could have a beneficial effect of keeping the housing market steady for a long while.

I guess the bottom line is that there are solid arguments both for and against all types of housing down there. I'm just glad we're having a discussion about it.

there's lots of land that the U. owns on southern campus..
Of course all the beautiful trees will get cut down either there or on horace williams, but really even in 50 years there's space on the southern part of campus - it's really just a matter of whether the U. wants to provide student housing and for how many..

IMHO the housing students on caronorth is kinda like the leafblower ban (no offense Cam) it sounds intriguing but any benefits are not going to be as large as you think and it creates a lot of problems.

One of the arguments initially made by UNC for building CN was that they needed the additional space to accomodate their rapidly-expanding research efforts. From 1999 to 2003, the National Institutes of Health doubled their research budget and during that same time, the amount of NIH-funded research awarded to UNC increased from ca. $149 million to ca. $271 million (an increase of about 82% or 13%/yr). From 2003 to 2004, UNC-CH's NIH-funded research increased about 6.9% to ca. $290 million. This slowdown coincided with the slowdown in NIH budget increases by congress. In FY 2005, the NIH budget increase was only 2% (well below the 3.5% inflation increase associated with scientific research). Thus far this year, the House has approved only a 0.5% increase in the NIH budget for FY 2006.
Since so much of research at UNC (and just about all other universities as well) is dependent on federally-funded support, what is the likelihood that UNC-CH will need additional research space anytime in the near or not-so-near future? With the cutbacks in federal support, I think many universities will be struggling to find sources of support to cover the overhead charges on the facilities they already have. Perhaps UNC plans on private industry to fill the gap but many of the major pharmaceutical and biotech companies have, in the last several years, already built new research centers in locations like Boston, San Diego, or San Francisco. It will be interesting to hear what UNC's current strategy is.

Helena,

You state, “Your views on genetically modified foods are very interesting - and also not that uncommon - but frankly I don't see them carrying much weight as a council member.”

I began my website and paid for it out of my own pocket not only as a campaign website but as a way to provide information on topics I was concerned about and thought others might be interested in (what I call my “headliners”). I know organic farmers, environmentalists, and those who object to localities losing zoning authority are very concerned about genetically modified crops and trees and so am I. In researching this issue and posting my concerns on my website I wasn't really concerned about the “weight” it would carry if I were a council member---I was just concerned and thought I could provide some information.

You note that I have said I am against the pursuit of secrecy by government officials and public agencies and then ask how does this relate to the Town council. And this IS explained on my website. The town, along with UNC, formed and funded with taxpayers' money the downtown economic development corporation and shortly after being formed this corporation voted to hold closed meetings. The town could have included explicit stringent protections for openness when helping devise the by-laws, they could have called for the resignation of those who voted for secrecy, or cut funding. The town sent a resolution requesting that OWASA adopt a one percent for art fund (OWASA was not legally allowed to do this) but sent no resolution asking for a continuation of the open record policy after OWASA voted not to release information on water usage. The Chapel Hill News ran an editorial condemning OWASA's act and called for open records. The town pays dues to the League of municipalities and the league supported a law that would allow governments and public agencies to sue citizens requesting information or access to open meetings. The town provides funding for Habitat and yet when Habitat refused to reveal financial records on a pending project at a citizen's request, the Chapel Hill News condemned the secrecy but not our elected officials; nor did our officials state that grants of taxpayers' money would be contingent on compliance with sunshine laws. The Chapel Hill News reported that Kevin Foy quietly lobbied other council members to have himself appointed to the downtown economic corporation without public input. The Chapel Hill News also ran an editorial stating this should have been open to public discussion. If you don't think that any of this is a matter of concern then you are entitled to your opinion and we can just agree to disagree.

You state, “I somewhat disagree with you that when you insult a party to a negotiation, they will cooperate with you and you will get just as good a deal for the Town as if you were pleasant. The phrase I always heard was you catch more bees (?) with honey than vinegar.”

I reiterated what our papers reported—that studies found that UNC was discriminating against women, minorities and paying low wages to certain employees. And I pointed out that this was similar to complaints about Wal-Mart and that it was surprising we haven't heard as much protest about as UNC's record. If cooperation with UNC on issues such as transit buses depends on currying favor and not speaking out against injustices then we are in pretty sad shape and we have already become the dreaded company mill town. There are always people who will remain silent in order to ingratiate themselves with those who are wealthy and powerful. If you believe this is best, especially for politicians, then, once again, you are certainly entitled to your opinion and we can agree to disagree.

As to the bus service, I really don't know how much clearer I can be—I am for increasing free bus service on weekday mornings and afternoons when and where it is needed and for cutting service when and where it isn't being utilized and I am against cutting parking to force people to ride the bus because this will only harm our local businesses. I believe this is a common-sense approach.

As to the budget, the citizen budget advisory committee identifying some cost savings and some waste and so have other citizens. I have pointed out some on my website and will be posting more in the near future. Due to time constraints and the need to work on website and attend meetings I will be off line at OP for a time and those who want more information should read my website.

interestingly, while there has been concern above expressed about reducing off peak hour service, the result of this from a transit management perspective is more split shifts and part time employment for bus drivers. I believe the transit workers have been lobbying for LESS split shifts. Of course split shifts become more and more necessary as you concentrate more and more on peak hour service (a split shift is when you get paid from 6 to 10 and then again from 3 to 7, you get 8 hours of pay and are full time, but from 10-3 you are "on your own" and off the clock, or people get hired part time to just work morning rush or just work afternoon rush with little or no beenfits. So the goal of maximizing transit expenditures conflicts with the goal of the public employer not treating employees like they worked at Wal Mart, with poor wages, poor working conditions, and poor benefits.

You are right gerryc

"So the goal of maximizing transit expenditures conflicts with the goal of the public employer not treating employees like they worked at Wal Mart, with poor wages, poor working conditions, and poor benefits."

Unless the Town has bus drivers perform another function during mid-day (becoming office workers?, meter maids? etc...) it sounds like the workers are faced with lots of split shifts or working 7 days a week. I guess throwing out buzz words like "fiscal responsibility" while treating workers as you'd like to be treated are not as easy as they first appear. News flash government work is not that easy nor is being an elected official.

A platform is not just a long list of complaints, but offers a philosophy and hopefully is backed up by some former service that provides proof of following up your words. It's really easy to say you are for everything good (e.g. fiscal responsibility) and against everything bad, but when it gets down to it the choices aren't that simple. Being for fare free but then saying how the busses are riding around empty spewing diesel suggest a complicated philosophy or one that is contradictory at heart. I'm still waiting to hear which "proliferating non-profits" candidate Cutson is going to cut off the public dole.

In the end very mundane but important functions of town council are more relevant to TOWN RESIDENTS than what UNC pays its workers or what commerical farms in chapel hill are doing.

If one wants to increase the general use of public transit in Chapel Hill then cutting service during the less-utilized time periods makes little sense. It's not hard to fill the buses during the early morning and late afternoon rush hours when students and employees are headed into town or back home. However, if you want to discourage people from using the bus to go downtown during the mid-day hours the fastest way to do that is to create a schedule in which a person who just misses a bus will have to wait another 1-1.5 hours for the next bus to come along. Frequent scheduling, which insures riders that they will never have to wait too long for the next bus, encourages greater ridership. While many buses may initially run with few passengers, you have to be committed to the long term development of the system and to be prepared to wait it out as riders get more comfortable with what the system can provide them.
Also, FYI, CHT buses run on kerosene, which is cleaner than diesel.

Tanya Riemer filed for Chapel Hill Town Council today. Looks like we're going to have a barn burner this fall.

Barn-burner this fall -- hardly. Instead, unless some good candidates come forward, we're going to have the beginnings of a torch job.

It's not surprising that an economic demagogue like Robin Cutson could curry a lot of support among the disaffected overtaxed residents of the wealthy subdivisions. This council has been so unresponsive to legitimate concerns about providing a better climate for business to provide a little better balance.

No, I don't feel sorry for those wealthier-subdivision folks who have to pay higher and higher property taxes -- sort of including me. But my point is that she's able to attract the uglier instincts of that crowd by pointing to the arrogance of council members who pushed through this ridiculous business-tax increase.

Once those folks get a footing, you're going to see the nature of Chapel Hill change, and not for the better. As of now, Cutson looks like a clear winner, so I hope somebody out there reading this -- such as an Andrea Rohrbacher or Jim Protzman -- will step forward and give us a pragmatic-progressive alternative.

Laurin Easthom? What does she stand for? If she has as difficult a time getting to the point in expressing her views on issues when on the council working against a clock as she does with no time limit on her web site, she'll be totally ineffective, even if she does have something to offer.

And watch out for tomorrow, I think there are a few other Cutson-type candidates (can anyone spell Doug) waiting out there to file at the last minute and sweep the incumbents out as well.

Please save Chapel Hill. HELP! I wish I had the time to run, even though I don't have the resume or connections, because I'm really worried about the conservative direction I think this town is bound to tilt towards.

The last council race had a MUCH STRONGER field, so the fact that a few of the flake candidates did as well as they did in terms of getting out the vote is scary, given the dearth of quality candidates this time. If the vote gets split among a bunch of weak but not dangerous candidates, then Cutson will make it in, in a breeze.

That's why I fervently hope that some recognized quality candidates will step forward -- perhaps you, Ruby? I certainly don't agree with all your positions but I also think you're extremely bright, and open-minded enough to not go in with a fixed agenda --unlike some of the current first-term council members who were solidly elected but have proven themselves to be totally dogmatic, rather than pragmatic.

One thing I do like about Easthom is that unlike one first-term council member, she's not running on a rant against Carolina North, but rather a stance of vigilance to make sure that what's done is right for the town and UNC. At least that's how I read between the lines that she's so abstractly filled in.

Hey Alan-

I actually disagree with you about Laurin. She is exactly the kind of candidate who I AM looking for to run in this election. She has devoted a ton of time to the town, and has done very good work in her service on the Transportation Board and the Horace Williams Citizens Advisory Committee.

She's also very progressive, and her work on Carolina North shows that she will be vigilant about ensuring that there is responsible development there- since that will almost definitely be the most important issue this Council addresses, this is important to me. I'm sure all the non-incumbents will SAY that they will ensure responsible development at CN, but Laurin is one whose RECORD already shows that to be the case.

I think she's clearly the most qualified candidate among the challengers, and I'm sure as the campaign comes along we will hear more of the specifics that you ask for from her. But I'm glad she's running, and I think she will do very well.

I'm breaking my rule to take care of some other work to go on-line one more time.
So let's see:
I'm against secrecy by government officials and public agencies—that makes me a conservative? I thought democrats/liberals were against secrecy.

I'm against nonprofits that cater to wealthy and support those that cater to those who are poor and in need—that makes me a conservative? I thought democrats/liberals were against subsidizing the wealthy.

I'm for reigning in UNC's obsession with expansion that caters to corporate (usually pharmaceutical/ biotech) interests—that makes me a conservative? I thought Republicans/conservatives supported wealthy pharmaceutical/biotech corporations. Hey, you do realize that these university sponsored public/private partnerships means we pay for the medical research through federal income tax dollars dispersed by NIH and then we get charged outrageous prices for pharmaceutical drugs and the pharmaceutical companies get rich while illogically claiming they have to charge high prices because they have to spend so much on research.

I'm against increasing the cost of health insurance for Town employees and for adequate pay raises—that makes me a conservative? I thought this was a liberal interest.

I had the gall to speak out against UNC discriminating against women and minorities—that makes me a conservative?

I spoke out against genetically modified foods and Monsanto's track record of disenfranchising farmers—this is conservative? Really?

I spoke out against eminent domain for economic gain—that makes me a conservative? They're throwing poor and modest income people out of their homes to make way for upscale wealthy development.

I spoke out against biostitutes who use “fake” environmental programs to cater to development interests and money-making pollution credit buying and selling schemes—this makes me a conservative?

I've spoken out against red-light cameras, worked as a volunteer for wildlife rescue , volunteered for the humane society animal shelter, advocated for animal rights, and worked for wetland conservation—-wow, I guess this makes me a regular right winger.

Well, I did speak out for business in order to provide a healthy tax base and keep housing affordable for those with moderate incomes and the elderly on fixed incomes. And I have spoken out against wasteful and excessive spending for the same reason. Because you may not be aware of this but when taxes and fees increase, everyone pays them—not just those wealthy people that seem to trigger so much automatic hatred (bigotry) by some on OP.

Geez, people, I don't know what you consider “liberal” and “progressive” but something seems way, way off here. So when Allan says, “As of now, Cutson looks like a clear winner” it may be because many people feel the same way.

Alan,
I agree with Tom about Laurin. I've worked with her on the Transportation Board and I can tell you that she is very hard working and diligent - she really does her homework. She spends a lot of time researching an issue before she makes her decisions. Given some of the concerns expressed here recently about hastily-made decisions by elected officials, that wouldn't seem to be a bad quality to have as a councilperson.

Alan -

You are half right. There is always an automatic "economic demagogue like Robin Cutson" as you say is true. That's why I asked some of the questions like how are you going to cut taxes and provide more or the same services? And what services are you going to cut? It's the oldest campaign platform ever "I'm for everything good and against everything bad, AND I'll lower your taxes".

On the candidate field, I don't think it's as bad as you think. Harrison is probably no worse than Ward (which may not knock your socks off) - hopefully Mark K. gets reelected and Laurin Easthom would probably vote very similarly to Strom and Sally Green on most issues.

If you did not hear the WCHL forum with Chancellor Moeser you should listen to it. Laurin was on the panel and some UNC folks including perry tried to bait her into the "anti-UNC" sentiment and she refused to take the bait. I believe the term Laurin used was "vigilant". Unfortunately, Candidate Cutson - with that walmart comparison to UNC will be dismissed out of hand in any negotiations with UNC IMHO. Public perception is important and I think politicians can be pleasant and inoffensive but still be a tough negotiator for town residents - who they are supposed to represent after all. Easthom has done a good job on the HWCC from what I've seen and there are people on the Transportation board who've seen her deal with a lot of issues.

For the fourth slot, it's a little more unclear? Will someone else who brings a voting block file? Anyhow, on the issues ONLY none of the contenders so far would be any different than wiggins.

It's awfully early in the (not-yet-started) race to be making such sweeping statements as "the last council race had a MUCH STRONGER field." Both incumbents are strong IMHO and Laurin Easthom is outstanding. I've also been very impressed by Jason Baker's contributions here on OP and the write up on Tanya Riemer today sounds like she would bring an entirely new set of knowledge and skills to the current council.

Where I find the weaknesses is in the public's identification of issues. Is Carolina North the only issue anyone on this forum cares about?

Although I can't vote in Chapel Hill, one of the issues I'm going to be following closely is the town's (non) use of technology. So far, Laurin Easthom is the only candidate who has expressed any interest in or understanding of how information technology can 1) improve citizen communication with local government and vice versa, 2) improve operational efficiences, and 3) provide a positive impact on economic development. See my blog for more information on e-democracy and how Laurin get's it.

Terri-

Vonage will role out wi-fi phones (to replace cell phones) by the end of the year. You can use wifi phones in your house with out the need to have any phone wires AND if chapel hill had wifi around town (or wimax) (very feasible - chapel hill is very small) we could get rid of our cell phones for emergency local use.

Remember the telcos said they needed to charge whatever they could to help poor people have internet access - whatever happened to that? I would gladly pay on my property tax (a progressive way) to get rid of timewarner and cingular..

Helena,

The CHCCS schools are moving to VOiP right now. They estimate that they will be saving about $3,000 per month once its fully tested and ready to go. The town of Chapel Hill is supposed to be following suit sometime this year, but I haven't seen a business plan yet.

Some members of the IT committee have been promoting the concept of municipal network for the past or so. Rather than just a downtown wifi we want to look into the feasibility of rolling telephone, internet, and cable into a single package. Other communities have lowered citizen/business communications costs to anywhere from $20-$30 a month by either forcing the telcos to be competitive, creating a new utility, or forming a public-private partnership. I currently pay about $150 a month for all three services.

Helena, Time Warner may be positioning itself to go into the wi-fi phone market. See http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/CA525341.html?spacedesc=Departments

Terri, I read your blog and I agree with you completely. I may even take it a step further than you. I don't know. The transition from a representative democracy to a direct democracy can only happen through the use of emerging technology. These are exciting times for pure democracy movements in that respect. I am interested in the larger issue of whether such use of techology should be relied upon or even desired. My take on this is that while "Tyranny of the Majority" arguments might be salient at the state or national level, local government can only benefit by direct democracy. Citizen participation in municipal decision-making (or input) can only be improved if near future town leaders have the vision and courage to bring this technology forward. I personally would like to see a website where people have the ability to vote on specific issues concerning them. Yet, the technical aspects of preventing gaming, cheating, or manipulation of this system are daunting.

"As to the bus service, I really don't know how much clearer I can be—I am for increasing free bus service on weekday mornings and afternoons when and where it is needed and for cutting service when and where it isn't being utilized and I am against cutting parking to force people to ride the bus because this will only harm our local businesses. I believe this is a common-sense approach."

On your website, you also discuss the possibility of eliminating bus service certain times during the day.

Obviously there are a lot of students, including myself, who need to get to class between 8 and 11. But when our classes/study time in the library/lunch on Franklin St. end are pretty staggered. I've already spent more hours than I'd care to count waiting on buses and have to drive&pay for parking on Franklin St. if I have a meeting/work/doctor's appointment after class because of the irregularity of the bus system (and I live right on MLK/Airport, so I can't imagine what the other students do who live in less-served areas). My question to you is this: if we increase bus service in peak times and decrease/eliminate bus service when it is less frequently used ... how do I get home?

Ginny & Jason,
It's much easier to say that bus routes should be more closely matched to peak usage than to actually bring that about. If the limitation is equipment (which it often is) then there isn't a lot you can do without making a major capital expenditure (i.e., $350-500 K for a new bus). CHT has had a shortage of equipment because ridership has steadily increased over the last few years. That shortage should be partially (at least for a while) aleviated with the 13 CHT buses (not previously suitable for service) that are (in stages) being refurbished.
Schedule changes are another issue. CHT maintains ridership records for the various routes and looks at these several times a year to consider route scheduling changes. But as you both pointed out, it's important to maintain reasonable scheduling during the off-peak times to handle riders' variable schedules as well as to maintain service for those with limited transportation options. Also, as I pointed out in an earlier post, the quickest way to discourage bus ridership is to create long wait times between buses. Often buses may appear to be running with few riders (and perhaps they are) but that is probably a necessity if we want to commit, as a community, to increasing bus ridership in CH as we go forward.

BUSES:

I think the bus situation here is great. Perhaps my experience is an anomaly, but I find riding the bus easy and enjoyable. I take the NS or V bus to work everyday and then home again. When I want to meet my wife at her work (Meadowmont) I plan it out and catch the V bus again. The V line is usually busy to and from Southern Village and Meadowmont. Now, there are days when I am the only one riding to Meadowmont from campus, but the Harris Teeter pickup almost always has a large group of riders waiting for the return trip.
I've taken the bus from the hospital to downtown, to Eastgate, and to Foster's on airport road. I have various routes bookmarked on my computer and a quick glance ahead of time is enough for me to figure out when and where I will need to catch the bus. So, maybe it is just me, but I find the bus situation fantastic.

Robert,
I'm sure that the staff at CHT (as well as the three partners) would be very pleased to know that you enjoy the service they provide. As in so many situations, they usually hear about the problems but much more rarely hear the accolades.

I'm relieved to see that Riemer and Thorpe both seem to be quality candidates who also have built-in constituencies that desperately need more voice in Chapel Hill -- particularly the Hispanic community's. And Tom, Terri, and GeorgeC, thanks for the comments on Easthom -- which makes me more hopeful.

But I can tell you now that Cutson is a dangerous candidate -- because it's clear she won't hesitate to speak to her consituency without regard to the overall liberal tenor of the town. In other words, she's going to play a numbers game of playing into the fears and prejudices of enough of her type of folks. Such campaigns can easily survive the strongest condemnation; it happens regularly around the country, and now that enough of the country has moved to this area, it could well happen here.

That's why it's imperative that the more progressive candidates speak in an equally clear and forceful voice about their principles and goals, without worrying about placating those who would vote for Cutson out of those fears and prejudices. At the same time, they need to show a recognition that the current council has made a few monumental blunders that are as bad for their policy as they are for all the time wasted on them (e.g. leaf-blower law) when there are so many more important issues.

Finally, Raymond seems intriguing to me, despite his theatrical grandstanding on the red-light issue. If you saw the Times the other day, Tom Friedman wrote one of his better columns on the need for widespread public wireless. But one-issue candidates aren't my cup of tea, even if the issue is as broad as the full scope of improving technological capabilities in the town.

Alan: "At the same time, they need to show a recognition that the current council has made a few monumental blunders that are as bad for their policy as they are for all the time wasted on them (e.g. leaf-blower law) when there are so many more important issues."

I guess I'm prejudiced against "monumental blunders," which must be the prejudice Cutson is appealing to. If Cutson is dangerous -- to your preferred candidates -- it's because they have done and promise to do more bad government. We could start with the $19 million+ subsidy to high-end condos downtown -- we all know which direction that will take taxes. Oops, taxes as an affordability issue, must be another prejudice/link of mine?

There was some discussion around here recently about logical fallacies. One could do a whole undergrad logic course based on the OP data set of logical fallacies.

As I suggested Jeff, this time around, you wouldn't have pulled the vote you did the last time. You tapped into prejudices regarding art and the flag -- and a bit of antipathy towards Nelson for more visceral reasons. Not to mention a bit of the contrarian in Carrboro citizens in actually making write-in voting be taken seriously.

But the more you say about issues such as taxes, and dismiss the obvious prejudices implied by Cutson's statements, the more it reminds people why you're not what Carrboro is about.

Alan - is this Alan Spalt?

If Alan's supporting Robin as a "dangerous" "economic demagogue" (to appeal to prejuidices) , she's in trouble.

No one needs to legitimize Robin's candidacy. By choosing to run, she has exercised her own legitimacy and I'm horrified that anyone on a 'progressive' forum would question that. She's not an insider and she has different views than some of us, but in a democracy, we should respect those differences rather than mock them.

For what it's worth, I don't see Robin as conservative or as an economic demogogue.

And Alan, Will Raymond is far from a one-issue candidate.

Can we please try to quit negatively characterizing candidates before the race even gets started?

Take my word for it---'Alan' is not Allen Spalt (note the spelling). Allen is a longtime Carrboro resident, former Alderman and activist. As such, 'Alan's' expressed regret that he won't run in the Chapel Hill due to time commitments is further evidence that he's somebody else.

On another matter altogether, I'm delighted to see my old friend Bill Thorpe jumping back in!---Bill will add a wealth of experience and candid talk to the discussion.

Cheers,
Alex

Unfortunately, Cutson is a legitimate candidate -- if you define legitmate as having a legitimate chance to win. I'm trying to sound the alarm that you'd better take her seriously. I suspect she's going to be pretty well-funded by the anti-tax "landed gentry" who are relatively new to this town and live in its newer, wealthier subdivisions.

Progressives would do well to solidly line up behind two of the non-incumbent candidates -- assuming they're going to support the two incumbents -- because if the vote ends up spread fairly evenly across four or five of them, mark my words, Cutson will sit on the next council.

My favored two as of now are Thorpe and Riemer, although I'm waiting to find out more about Riemer than her impressive resume and record of involvement. As the whole MLK Boulevard episode indicated, the African-American community needs a continuing strong authoritative voice, preferably more, on the council. And the Hispanic community needs a voice, period. While I'd much rather see a reasoned voice such as Easthom's to replace the ranting voice of Hill's on the Carolina North issue, that isn't a choice this time around. Meanwhile, Hill will serve to keep the council focused on that issue, so the representative needs served by Thorpe and Riemer -- not to mention their overall strengths -- outweigh the plusses Eashom can bring right now.

Maybe my google searches are off or I'm mis-spelling something..but
alan-

I can't find a single google hit of Tanya having served on a single Chapel Hill or Orange County Municipal board? It is through these boards that current council members and the general public gets to know what these people think and HOW they actually vote on recommendations to council. It is also through this municipal service that candidates become familiar with the day to day issues council will deal with. Help me out if I missed it.

I didn't get any hits with
townhall.townofchapelhill.org or
www.ci.chapel-hill.nc.us/ABC/transportation.htm in them or anything that shows a RECORD of serving in Chapel Hill as I did with at least one of the other challengers who wasn't a former council person.

I guess we will see how much views, Chapel Hill service and voting records matter as opposed to other factors a candidate can't control.

Helena:

In this case, the fact of Riemer's experience with the Hispanic community is far more important than her experience in Chapel Hill, itself. The needs of this community can be seen everywhere you look: Laura Wenzel's excellent new excellent but financially needy non-profit serving local Hispanic youth, Palante; Hispanics everywhere you turn in low-wage jobs that keep our community going -- yet not able live here in the numbers they should due to affordable-housing issues; UNC hospitals' basic-Spanish education program for all of its employees; Maria Palmer's (former) popular and growing congregation.

Working in banking for this community, which has unique needs tied to extended-family responsibilities and a lack of experience with formal financial institutions, makes her an important voice to reflect the reality of their lives and how their presence impacts Chapel Hill. Time is too precious to worry about how much Chapel Hill experience she has, as long as she's clearly willing and able to advocate effectively for that consituency and demonstrates the overall wherewithal to deal with overall council issues. For example, it would have been great to have her there during the leaf-blower debate to talk about how many family's lives would have been severely impacted economically had the blowers been banned.

another wild-card, in the voting bloc debate is:
1) will students vote in Chapel Hill in number more like the 300 in the 2003 municipal election, like the 5000+ in the 2004 presidential election, or where in between?
2) if students do vote, how will the appearance of two student (or student like candidates) affect this (Jason Baker, (a junior,) and Walker Rutherford (just graduated)
3) if they do vote, will they vote for one of those two, or both, or cast a full or almost full ballot (Jason posted a while back that he would NOT advocate a single shot, but that students also look to vote for other candidates who share their interests and/or philosophies).