Carrboro election: maps and graphs

The maps below show the percentages of votes by precinct garnered by each candidate for the Carrboro Board of Aldermen. I have also provided links to additional maps and graphs.

A couple of observations:

Additional maps and graphs:



The PDF referenced above speaks mostly on a statewide level and says that 58% of NC's Hispanic population are non-citizens and therefore, presumably, can't vote.


You asked me to assure you that I "understand that a fourth place finisher in a three seat race does not extrapolate to knowing who the fourth place finisher would be in a four seat race." Technically, I do understand. But I don't think this is a technical issue. Both Alex and Mark filed their intents to run for mayor far enough in advance of the closing date that we all knew there was going to be a 4th seat. Thus there was a clear understanding that four seats would be filled rather than three. The only real question was the method that would be used for filling that seat, and precedence pointed to the 4th place finisher. It was my clear understanding from talking to you, Catherine, and Katrina that you all assumed the 4th seat was part of the election. I also contend that many voters understood that as well even though I'll never be able to prove it.

As for representation, qualified voters had the opportunity to elect their representatives. The point some of us are making is that those who will be qualified voters in three months should have the right to be represented as well.

added into that math to get from 58% to " vast majority"

Here is an exerpt from our 2004 campaign planning demographics:

Voter registration lags at every age. Latino and Asian citizens are considerably less likely to register to vote than whites and blacks, at every age. If Latinos had registered at the same rate as white citizens, the result would have been approximately one million more Latino votes cast in 2000. Asians would have had 500,000 additional voters if they had registered at the same rate as white citizens. Without significant changes in registration patterns, it will continue to be a factor in 2004. Bringing Latino registration levels up to those of whites could add 1.3 million votes in 2004; doing the same for Asians could add almost 700,000 votes.

Lower turnout also translates into loss of potential votes. Latino citizens who register are less likely to vote than whites. If Latinos had turned out to vote at the same rate as white citizens, the result would have been almost 700,000 more Latino votes cast in 2000 (and up to 800,000 in 2004). Asian turnout levels are higher, but turnout as high as whites would still have added about 200,000 new Asian voters in 2000 (and in 2004)

Terri, when a ballot says "pick three" I don't think that the voter, whether she knows about the empty seat or not, will do otherwise! How does that knowledge change your decision-making?

I'm glad you technically understand this important distinction. I hope you come to see that foreknowledge of the future empty seat doesn't in any way change the circumstances.

Katrina, I don't find it insulting to say that John represents the Hispanic interests here in Carrboro. On the contrary, I, as a Hispanic, am very proud of John's leadership in the latino community. Some have criticized John for a number of things, but for those of us who know his true contributions to the latino community, we will be forever grateful for his leadership. One day, when history is told in the bright light of hindsight, John Herrera will be remembered in legendary ways for his courageous contributions in a time when Hispanics were despised and treated as second-class citizens. No matter how hard the rest of us try to change the substance of our society in clearly meaningful ways, I doubt we will be thus remembered. The Enlightenment and the wisdom of the founding fathers, especially represented in a flexible constitutional amendment system, is our political legacy. Yet, Hispanics continue to be treated in ways that are abhorent, I have to believe, to the better nature of the mass of humankind. We Hispanics understand that we must earn our own destiny, and we shall: with hard work, close-knit families, profound religious beliefs, a love and respect for others, and all the other values we bring to this community, for that is our way. John will help us with this and that will be his legacy. Part of that legacy was an accident of timing and place, but how many of us would answer the clarion call for justice if we truly knew the hidden dangers of prejudice and discrimination, and have witnessed first-hand the ugly face of hatred?

Colin, thank you for better articulating the problem, and for the introduction of the less awkward phrase "proportional representation".

It is, indeed, a quirk of the precinct voting system that results are interpreted in geographical terms, and often a self-serving manipulation that these results are then re-interpreted in demographic terms.

In truth, at the real core of this discussion is the rational interpretation of data. I am constantly surprised by the number of people who can manipulate data in ingenious and clarifying ways, and yet fail to understand the deeper assumptions underlying these statistics. (It''s what Frost meant, I think, when he wrote "We dance around the ring and suppose, but the secret sits in the middle and knows").

The pitfalls are many, and we are constantly blinded, it seems, by our own visceral beliefs of reality, our own perceptions of what constitutes truth. I say this with the humility of knowing that I must constantly remain vigilant to these errors. Which is why you have seen me apologize on this forum on a number of occassions when the truth is revealed to me.

There is a cynicism that abounds in all things political, that those who call attention to half-truths, misinformation, disinformation, and fallacious argumentation are themselves guilty of some kind of a hidden agenda (Can you tell I just got a hate e-mail?). This is unfortunate because it serves to mute the truth by intimidation. "The emperor has no clothes" must be stated unambiguously, without fear of censorship.

Many, I understand, find the assumptions too entrenched and the discourse too strident to enter into the fray. But to those lurkers out there who have bitten their tongues for fear of retribution I say, fear not, you have the power of truth and the company of peers for comfort.

One truth I am positing, and not opining, is that representation is a far more complex notion than has been so far summarily expounded in this blog. I challenge everyone to take a step back and be clear of their positions and presuppositions, and of the possible red herrings, false assumptions, and illogical artifacts that commonly invade the human mind.

For the hate mailer, let me just say that you are a coward for hiding behind an anonymous address. You are a malignancy in a town filled with rational and compassionate people. I just hope your poison doesn't metastatisize.

And for those who question my agenda, and in the spirit of full disclosure, let me state that I do not yet know whether I will apply for a seat on the Board of Aldermen, if indeed the new board opts for an application process. That is why I'm asking the hard questions now. If I could feel reasonably sure that Katrina represents the best interests of all of Carrboro, and not just cater to the legitimate, yet one-dimensional cries of a disaffected few, then I would quietly turn away and return to my calm life, to my daughter, to my books, to my contemplations of God and existence, to still evenings and a glass of wine and Beethoven and Bach and the better personal life that awaits me outside of politics. I would content myself with a position on an advisory board, the intellectual pursuits of sudoku and the law, my passing hobbies of rocketry, boomeranging, and the thousands of natural joys of living.

According to the town of Carrboro website, the total population of Carrboro is 16,782, 2,062 of whom are Hispanic/Latino, for a total of 12.3% of the population of Carrboro. I think these numbers come from the 2000 census.

There's a good chance this is an undercount, especially if we are talking about non-citizens. What I couldn't find, though (at least not quickly), was how many of these folks are citizens.

I don't think the PDF from the state supports the argument that the "vast majority" of local Hispanics aren't citizens.

I agree Gerry: Coles Store's concerns are legitimate. But ultimately their disenfranchisement is nothing like that suffered by African Americans, obviously. And Eric's post tries to draw some sort of parallel there that is just absurd in my view.

I didn't criticize John. I merely said it wasn't the Hispanic population that decided that John represented them. That's a cool, dispassionate, non-biased interpretation of the data at hand.

I'm growing to resent this characterization of Northern sub-Carburbans as disgruntled or disaffected. If the annexees had been allowed to vote, that might factor into the equation. Every vote I got was from people who think the Board can do a better job. Some I know voted primarily for the solar energy and alternative fuels intiative. Some voted for me because they think they aren't getting a lot of value for the amount of taxes they pay. Still others feel that the Board of Aldermen don't understand their priorities. I know one woman who voted for me because I worked for Bill Bradley and she always thought he was brilliant.

The only thing that one can discern is that Coles Store voters are distinctly different, and clearly the vast majority of them feel that I best represent their interests.


I didn't say the vast majority "aren't citizens". I said they "can't vote". The Hispanic population in NC is disproportionally young. About 35% are under the age of 18 and CAN'T VOTE. Only about 45% of NC Hispanic citizens are registered, so the other 65% CAN'T VOTE.

When you add up those numbers you get to a vast majority of Hispanics who CAN'T VOTE.

If you're a citizen but not registered, wouldn't that be more accurately characterized as "don't vote"?

> Only about 45% of NC Hispanic citizens are registered, so the
> other 65% CAN'T VOTE.

> When you add up those numbers you get to a vast majority of
> Hispanics who CAN'T VOTE.

Granted. But when you add up those numbers, you also get 110%. :)

Make that 55% ..and Colin, I supposed you could characterize them as don't vote, but on election day, those who don't register can't vote.

Jason, you're a hoot!

Lessee... total Hispanics = 100%
58% not citizens leaving 42% as citizens
35% of the whole under 18, leaving 65% over 18. 65% of 42% is 27% citizens over 18.

So 73% are non-citizens or under 18 and therefore can't vote. The remaining 27% either do vote or choose not to. (Assuming these statistics are accurate, which is not something I'd recommend.)

So I guess we're still left with the question of representation and whether or not it is important. If you haven't looked at a map of Carrboro/Chapel Hill and other areas inside the rural boundary lately, I suggest you do so. What you will see is that the majority of all future growth inside the boundary will occur in the northern section of Carrboro. Do we really want the folks who live up there to feel even more disaffected (thanks for the word Gerry--much better than disenfranchised)?

There's been a lot of claims for 'critical thinking' thrown around in this discussion. Critical thinking in the technical sense includes thinking forward in order to determine if short-term actions could create future problems. The data in this situation is broad, including more than votes cast. It includes all the disaffection demonstrated by single shot voting, Brian Voyce's Carballeros columns, the angry speakers at the annexation hearings, and much more. There isn't a right answer here, but I hope those who will be making the decision will think forward and consider the impact over the next several years of NOT appointing Katrina.


What is the impact over the next several years of NOT appointing Katrina? Are you suggesting that we have reason to fear, and that we should act on those fears?

Mark, you're missing the point of my thought experiment. Its point was not to draw a parallel between Coles Store voters and the voters in a predominately African-American or Latino precinct.

The point was to draw a parallel between the kinds of arguments people are making here in response to the visibly evident disaffection of voters in the Coles Store precinct. (I say "visibly evident" because you can see it so clearly on the maps.)

It would at least be honest if people were to say, "They're rich folk up there; they're represented enough at every key point in society and don't need their own seat on the Carrboro board in order to be 'represented.' They have the means to lobby, to show up at meetings and complain, to buy nice lunches for aldermen and mayors and press their case, and so we really don't need to appoint a 4th alderman who will have their concerns specially at heart." (Incidentally, I think there's more than a little bit to be said for that argument.)

But instead, people here are making arguments that are offensive to the idea of representation. They're saying (or saying between the lines) (and I imagine this was the point of posting the maps in the first place, until Gerry turned it on its head), "Look, Ryan's big support was all just in this one precinct, not broad-based, so those folks up there aren't really representative of all of Carrboro," and, "Let's solve the problem of the 4th seat democratically, with a general election for all of Carrboro (in which, naturally, Coles Store voters would (again) be swamped by the rest of the town's voters)."

Those are just the sorts of arguments that people trotted out for years to ignore and subvert minority voting precincts. They were dishonest, manipulative arguments. They were not about representation, and not about democracy, but about controlling the outcomes of elections and maintaining a comfortable status quo.

The fact that this precinct is not made up of minorities, but of rich folk, does not change the nature of the arguments that are being trotted out here. They are dishonest and manipulative, and designed to suppress rather than give voice to whatever this precinct is pissed off about. (And by the way, I have no idea what that even is. I'm not a Carrboro voter, and don't know what the issues are.)

That was the point of the thought experiment.

Third sentence should read:

"The point was to draw a parallel between the kinds of arguments people are making here in response to the visibly evident disaffection of voters in the Coles Store precinct and the kinds of arguments people made (and sometimes still make) in response to the visibly evident disaffection of voters in minority precincts in many places."

oops. left on the italics. lemme turn it off

Thanks for clarifying your point, Eric. But it still is not that persuasive. I'm not trying to ignore anyone here. I'm trying to figure out who to listen to.

You see, about 2165 people voted (assuming as Mary R pointed out that the Coles Store turnout number is erroneous) and of them 731 voted for Katrina Ryan.

So which is more significant: that about 34% of voters chose Katrina or that 66% of voters passed her over?

Compare third-place finisher John Herrera who got 1241 votes of 2165 available. 57% chose John and 43% didn't.

Which result subverts democracy? Rejecting the person who came in fourth or appointing a person who was explicitly rejected by 2/3 of the voters?

I'm not sure there is an objectively correct answer to that question.

JB, I think the point is more that they don't have to, not that they can't. But considering the ugliness of this year's race, it might be productive to look outside the group of contenders for a fresh start.

North Carolina's total and Hispanic populations by age and sex reveals some striking contrasts. It is immediately apparent that the Hispanic population is much younger than the total population. Thirty-seven percent of the Hispanic population is under age eighteen compared with 25 percent of the total population. –
UNC Instititue of Government, “A profile of Hispanic Newcomers in North Carolina”

While turnout by Asian and Pacific Islander citizens (43 percent) and Hispanic citizens (45 percent) remained unchanged, the number of these voters increased about 20 percent. This reflected growth in the voting-age and citizen population of these two groups. (The voting rates for Asian and Pacific Islander citizens and Hispanic citizens were similar.)

US census “ Registered voters in the 2004 election”

Mark C. -

your argument basically means that the alderpeople can not consider anyone else who ran - just to be consistent.

Mark, I think it depends on how you're envisioning "democracy." If by it you mean just a system that counts up votes systemwide and awards victory to the ones with the highest votes, then I think you pay attention to the numbers: you attach significance to the fact that 66% of Carrboro's entire turnout passed Ryan over.

If, on the other hand, you mean by democracy a system that represents distinctive and sizable viewpoints in the community (something, incidentally, that the federal Constitution requires governments to do when they're putting together pools of jurors in criminal cases), then I think you look at the makeup of the board as it now exists and try to see if there are noticeable viewpoint gaps on important issues.

Are there? I don't really know; here I defer to the Carrboro experts, of which I am not one. Everybody here, though, seems to be working from the premise that the Coles Store precinct does have some sort of perspective that is distinctive in Carrboro on important issues that will come before the Board. Doesn't that view animate much of the discussion in this thread (and others)? Isn't the results map itself suggestive of such a view?

This, incidentally, is not even really an argument for Ryan. The board might convene and decide that the viewpoints of the Coles Store precinct are adequately represented, but that the distinctive viewpoints of some other group or groups (racial, ethnic, etc.) are not. That would be an argument for making an appointment that brings that viewpoint onto the Board.

None of this debate, by the way, detracts from the other, more practical point that's been made here by others: it might well be more politically wise, down the road, to send a message to the Coles Store precinct that their views matter than that they don't.

Terri says, "There isn't a right answer here, but I hope those who will be making the decision will think forward and consider the impact over the next several years of NOT appointing Katrina."

Katrina failed to win a seat on the BOA by a fairly large margin in an election. She got herself into the BOA race by establishing a new residence for the race. This path was not available to many people because of the resources and attitude required. She ran a divisive campaign and got the largest number of votes in one district. The reason for the latter is not clear: some think she got those 101 votes because she ran a very strong campaign in Lake Hogan Farm; others believe the 101 votes indicate that there are a large number of disaffected voters in that neighborhood. If the latter is the case, then there are 101 voters in Lake Hogan Farm, some of whom are disaffected with Carrboro. Based on those 101 voters some say that Katrina should now be appointed to the BOA. I don't believe it is a strong case. Furthermore, this idea that we should extrapolate from 101 LHF voters that Katrina represents the NTA (which did not vote) offends my democratic sensibilities.

As a NTA resident who could not vote, I will be disappointed if the aldermen and mayor do not take advantage of the opportunity they now have to include new Carrboro residents from the NTA in the process of filling the fourth seat. The idea that we need to, “consider the impact over the next several years of NOT appointing Katrina." offends me. Katrina is noisy and she continues to try to attain the BOA seat through divisive means (see the go-go growth comment). It seems to me that what is now being accomplished by Katrina's current campaign is to divide Carrboro and make the annexation more difficult for those of us who would like to move on and find a solution for choosing the fourth member of the BOA that would include the annexation area and be part of a healing process.

This in from the News and Observer today:

“The town's mayor-elect and senior alderman said Monday they want to wait to fill the board's upcoming vacancy until after the town annexes northern neighborhoods.”


I am not "suggesting that we have reason to fear". I am suggesting that given the current hostile feelings by these new residents toward Carrboro town government that it is incumbent upon the BOA to change the tone of the interaction. This has always been a hospitable town, but we are not behaving hospitably toward new residents. We should be welcoming them; showing them the respect we show other residents of Carrboro; ensuring that this new group of individuals have the opportunity (voice) to assimilate into the community rather than providing them with more fuel for their discontent. We should be demonstrating our belief in inclusivity instead of sending the implied message that we want their taxes and nothing else. And if we chose to act exclusively rather than inclusively, then we all lose the same as we do when we exclude by race, class, sexual orientation, religion, or nation of birth.


The board has a strategic goal of doubling the density in the NTA. To many who moved to this area for it's quietness, lack of density, and family oriented lifestyle, that represents "go-go growth".

Mark ran with one of the key items on his platform being to introduce new developmnet without negatively impacting existing neighborhoods. Does that mean only neighborhoods south or Homestead Rd ? A large number of the developments on the Active Project list sit next to Lake Hogan Farms, the Highlands, and Tally Ho.

I'm sorry Terri offends you Mary, but please make it clear, neither you nor I speak for all of the annexed areas. However, the fact that the neighbors donated hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to my campaign is a pretty good indicator that I was trusted to be their voice on the BOA.

Mary didn't say I offend her Katrina. She's offended by the concept of opportunity cost (the cost of NOT doing something).

Basically, she and I are in agreement that the annexation areas should be represented. I am perfectly comfortable with the 'compromise' Mark Chilton presents in the N&O "If the board does not appoint Ryan, Chilton would like to open the process to residents of the six neighborhoods and outlying areas being annexed."

Can anyone tell me the EXACT date that the annexed area will be able to vote?

Annexation wil be effective Jan 31st.

The new board should wait until Jan 31st before taking applications.

I have been accurately quoted by the media as saying that the discretion given to boards to appoint members in certain circumstances reflects a balance past legislators have wanted to strike between democracy and efficiency. In the spirit of that balance I think it would be appropriate for the new board to take applications from anyone interested in serving on the board (including folks from the annexed area) and interview these candidates after Jan 31.) Ideally, IMHO, the board should pick a field of no less than three and no more than six, and then hold a special town-wide election, with voting done only at a central place, like Town Hall. I am open to input on this suggestion.

A word about election costs. Polls workers are volunteers. Printing of even as many as 5,000 ballots can't be that expensive. Can someone educate me as to the costs of running a special election?

BTW, a petition to the GA to hold a special election can't be that onerous. Or is it? Again, inviting input.

Here's Gerry from other thread:

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.

Comment at 7:20pm 11/10/2005 by Gerry

Katrina, does this correspond with what you've found out? I know you've been querying decision-makers about this question.

Mark C says: "Which result subverts democracy? Rejecting the person who came in fourth or appointing a person who was explicitly rejected by 2/3 of the voters?". Eric had a good response to this, but I'll put it even more succinctly: Mark is confusing democracy with majority rule. They are NOT the same thing.

As for representation, Mark and I share a distinct and unique common background, we were the two candidates elected to the Chapel Hill Town Council while Carolina students. I don't want to speak on behalf of Mark's 1991 campaign (I had left Chapel Hill in 1984 and by his 1991 campaign was working 60 hours a week in Raleigh and had two small children and wasn't following Chapel Hill politics again until I restarted grad school at Carolina part-time in 2002), but when I ran for Town Council I OVERTLY talked about representation. I advocated among groups of town voters who I might NOT have been among their first three choices (the town board had only six seats then) to vote for me on the basis of the need to have a student on the board (I see a number of student leaders this fall who actively ran away from that goal). I also lived in a predominantly black precinct and worked on alliances there. I see NOTHING wrong with advocating for representation of geographic, political, or other minorities.

Katrina says, "the fact that the neighbors donated hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to my campaign is a pretty good indicator that I was trusted to be their voice on the BOA."

Yes, Katrina, some neighbors supported you and trusted you, but you still lost the election by a fairly large margin. Others lost in this election too.

It is time to move on. We have the opportunity now to INCLUDE annexees in the applicant pool. Your neighbors in the NTA who supported your campaign are INCLUDED, and all of the rest of the people in the NTA who did not support your campaign are INCLUDED. I think this is a very welcoming approach.

The information I've received says that there would need to be some "enabling legislation" in order to hold a special election. It's not onerous, but would affect a lengthly delay, since the request wouldn't be eligible for consideration in the short session which convenes in January. It seems like a forward thinking body, wishing to be inclusive of its new residents might have thought of that, but I digress.

In the spirit of fiscal responsibility, I advocated for timing it in concert with another election. The big advantage to holding it at the same time as a general election is that you would get some serious turn out. The big disadvantage is the board then operates for a whole year with an unelected temporary member, which in principle, I don't like.

Secondly, campaigns are time consuming and expensive, and it seems like the pools of candidates who could justify a campaign for a one year term would be small.

Mark, I'm glad I'm not you in having to guide the board through this mess, since there is no good solution.

I still think the best solution is for a citizen's group to form (made up of community leaders from across the political spectrum) who would facilitate a community vote. Carrboro is small enough for this to work.

Then the Board has the best data of all to choose a replacement.

I did the same thing in 1991, Gerry. And because you and I did that in a way that was engaging to the voters of Chapel Hill we both won. Jason did a good job of that as well, but was running in a very competitive field this year. Mike McSwain ran in 2003 in direct opposition to the (apparent) majority view on the most salient issues of 2003 in Chapel Hill - and he was badly beaten. It doesn't make him a bad guy; but it didn't (and shouldn't) earn him a seat on the Town Council.

I have blogged on this point before: There are lots of kinds of democracy out there. True, majority rule is not the same as democracy, but democracy definitely involves majority rule - especially in the United States.

Having said all that, I am trying to deal with a system that was not created by me. Maybe the whole situation points to the virtues of Cumulative Voting. If we had CV in Carrboro, then the great diversity of view points in our town would probably be more fully represented on the BOA - and this would probably mean that there would end up being BOTH members from further to the right AND from further to the left (and more diversity in numerous other directions as well).

Every time someone mentions CV on this site, someone else points out that legislative authority would be needed to do it and claims that the General Assembly would probably not grant such authority. I don't think there is any reason to be so pessimistic about the chances of it. And I think it would have an especially good chance of being allowed if people from numerous different political backgrounds would get behind it. This could also be a good solution to the issue of rural representation on the County Commission as well.

"I see NOTHING wrong with advocating for representation of geographic, political, or other minorities."

Gerry, I respectfully disagree. If I followed your line of thinking, instead of promising to represent all the people of Carrboro and their diverse interests, and instead of pointing to the relationship between my educational and life experiences and the job of Alderman, I should have concentrated my efforts more on telling people that they should vote for me because I am a Hispanic, a former police officer, a member of the military, a student (geez, that's what alone? 20 percent of Carrboro? I wonder how that compares to certain geographical areas), a parent with a child in the Chapel Hill-Carrboro school system (how many present and near future board members can claim that?), a polyglot, a polyhistor, a poetry lover, and a hopeless romantic?

(Ok, forget the last four).

I guess representation is a puzzling notion to me. I simply cannot imagine that my demographics should be worth more than notional consideration.

What's the value of character? of integrity? of a robust and seasoned respect for justice and fairness. Why should where we live matter more than the passionate desire to serve the interests of ALL people, or the abilities necessary to do so? Where should we insinuate into the calculus of an ideal Alderman the ability to play well with others? to seek consensus and common ground?

I am increasingly frustrated with a discussion that speaks of minimums. Proportional representation should be realized only when considerations of competence, education, and character have been exhausted. As a candidate I wanted to be judged by my character and not by the color of my skin.

As a Rawlsian who advocates a self-imposed veil of ignorance in all matters political I find it self-serving and in poor taste for a candidate to enshroud himself with the banners of factionalism. As voters we should celebrate the diversity of our leaders, but as candidates we should present for inspection only those virtues we possess that would benefit everyone in society and that would address ALL inequities and concerns.

Mark Marcoplos, I like your idea of a citizen task force to facilitate a community vote. Very elegant idea.

David, Those are all nice sentiments in theory. But in reality I support (since I don't get to vote) local candidates who I believe understand the challenges of my life as a homeowner and citizen of Carrboro's extrajurisdictional territory in southern Orange County. Many, but not all, of my issues are very different from those of residents in the NTA. If I ever had a vote, it would go to the candidate I "trusted" to best represent me. If that candidate also demonstrated the ability to represent others, all the better. But my first and foremost decision is going to be based, quite selfishly, on my own best interests (in which I include principles).

We live in a geographically based world David. Towns, counties, and states are geographical units. Should we forego having NC reps for the House and Senate because there might be more qualified candidates in Virginia? Schools are geographical units. If you don't believe that stick around for redistricting debate that will erupt here in the next couple of years. Zoning is a geographical concept. Downtown, the most frequently discussed topic in this election, is a geographical concept. It's all around us David. How can we deny that representation is closely associated with geography?

Should it be the only criteria? No, but in this instance we have people in a geographical area who feel excluded. I haven't heard anyone say that there should be a dedicated seat forever and ever allocated to NTA. Just a half-term appointment until the individuals in that geographical area can vote and have their issues addressed by all candidates. I don't see this as an argument of minimums--to me its an argument of maximum. What's the BEST we can do to ensure the new northern residents are included in every aspect of Carrboro life?

Official results posted to the BOE site, but no update to the Carrboro votes in Coles Store.

Terri, what do you think of Mark M's suggestion if it is done after Jan 31 and includes the annexed area?

I prefer Chilton's suggestion “If the board does not appoint Ryan, Chilton would like to open the process to residents of the six neighborhoods and outlying areas being annexed.” Appointing a task force would just add more layers of politics that I think we can probably do without. I will trust the BOA to fairly and transparently review applications, interview candidates, and explain the criteria used to make a final selection.

You've won me over, Terri. I, too, will trust the BOA.

Just called the election folks-- they're checking those numbers now.

We have no choice, David, but to trust in the new board's collective wisdom. I also trust in our new citizens' collective willingness to accept the most peaceful solution at hand, which looks to me like Mark's proposed open application process. A community vote (moot point?) would culminate in ... an expensive appointment.

And STILL no one talks about the elephant in the room...

I would like the new board to draft some rules. or at least a resolution of some nature, so that this NEVER happens again. I know they claim they didn't have any choice, but it still strikes me as a tad disingenuous that these folks were annexed just OUTSIDE the time that would have allowed them to vote--but that allowed the town to gain the maximum number of "days taxed." Either it was timed--or the Aldermen weren't paying attention. Whichever way one looks at it, it's pretty damning.

If I lived in the area that will become Carrboro in January--I'd be righteously ticked. (And I mean righteous in the original sense of the word.) My guess is that had they been ALLOWED to vote you'd have seen Fayetteville all over again.


How many adults live in the NTA? (I guess I mean of voting age.)

I just answered my own question (which was really how many people are being annexed). According to the July 31, 2004 Carrboro Report on Annexation, 852 people live in Areas A and B.

I don't know how many of these folks are adults who are registered to vote, but certainly not 852.

Melanie, do you really think that, if these folks had been able to vote this time around, they would have voted in enough numbers to make a substantial difference? Do you think more folks would have run for office (which might have diluted their votes, actually)?

All hypothetical, of course.

Joan, My guess is those #'s are too low. The # of Coles Store precinct voters who do not vote in Carrboro, but do vote in the school sytem is over 1200.

When we parsed the information from the BOE and overlayed the GIS, we got just under 700 voters.



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.