In most of North Carolina, citizens would be concerned that a municipal attorney giving errant advice to a town governance board gets rewarded more than if good advice is given.

Orange County isn’t like the rest of the state. Here, paying a non-staff municipal attorney's expensive legal fees over and over again as a result of errant advice isn’t considered troublesome. In fact, in Carrboro, Mayor Mark Chilton actually praises Carrboro’s non-staff municipal attorney, Mr. Michael Brough, as being the best attorney the town of Carrboro could have for legal advice.

Translation – if the Boa wants legal advice supporting its actions, no matter how bizarre, then Mr. Brough stands ready to serve the Boa. Witness the enormous legal fees expended in the battle over a barn apartment by Mr. Brough's firm in 2008 and 2009.

Local municipal attorneys sit secure in the knowledge that local Orange County judges will uphold the actions of southern Orange municipal governance boards in their land use/zoning decisions. It doesn’t matter if the board followed North Carolina law and procedures or not. The judge is local. The judge is politically juiced and wired. The town attorney is local. The town attorney is politically juiced and wired. Way more often than not, the local judge approves of the actions of the local board.

The slippery slope is reached if the person(s) aggrieved by the actions of the local municipal board has at least $100,000 to litigate the town into the state appeals courts.

Turns out The Northwest Property Group (NPG) did.

The Boa denied NPG a permit to build a shopping center on Jones Ferry Road in 2007. The denial was in response to plans for a 77,000-square-foot shopping center on 7.7 acres. Parking was designed to be in the center between three buildings on the tract.

NPG told the Boa that its prime tenant, Harris Teeter, required two entrances/exits, one on Jones Ferry, another on Barnes Street.

The Boa told NPG it couldn’t have an entrance on Barnes Street, except for emergency use.

NPG sued.

The local Orange County judge, Allen Baddour, ruled for Carrboro.

Unfortunately for Carrboro, NPG had enough cash to go to the North Carolina Court of Appeals (COA). That higher court (not beholding to Orange County political development interests) saw the record without the rose-colored glasses of a politically-oriented judge ruling for politicians of the same political party. The COA chastised Judge Baddour for not seeing that the Boa failed to list facts supporting its decision to have only one entrance and exit for a substanital strip shopping center. In defense of Judge Baddour, neither Mr. Brough, nor the three lawyers on the Boa (Mr. Chilton, Ms. Broun Hall, or Ms. Lavelle) saw the need to explain themselves either.

In the words of the COA, the Boa was and is ”required by well-established principles of North Carolina law to make findings of fact justifying its decision to impose the challenged conditions. A careful examination of the board's decision disclosed that it completely failed to make any factual findings justifying its decision to adopt the challenged conditions over [NPG’s] objection.” (See Chapel Hill Herald Complete Boa Failure Story.) What's a Bro to do?

So the Boa must consider the NPG permit all over again. That means Mr. Brough (or his firm) will have gotten paid:
1) for attending Boa NPG permit meetings;
2) for not noticing that the Boa “completely failed to make any factual findings justifying its decision”;
3) for litigating for the Boa against NPG in his favored local court;
4) for reporting the results of the local litigation to the Boa;
5) for litigating the appeal for the Boa;
6) for reporting the results of the appeal litigation to the Boa;
7) for attending the second round of Boa NPG permit meetings;
8) …

Mr. Brough needn't fear any repercussions from the Boa on his performance in the NPG matter. Failure is an option in Carrboro. Just read Squeeze the Pulp!

No word on whether or not developer/attorney Mr. Chilton will pick himself up from the ground of municipal law jurisprudence, dust himself off, and praise what may be the most expensive municipal advice dispensing machine in North Carolina.

No word on when the town of Carrboro will account for town legal fees as a single line item in the annual budget.

In most of North Carolina, elected officials will avoid siting a homeless shelter next to their neighborhood. They will tend to put it as far away as possible.

Turns out, southern Orange is just like the rest of the North Carolina when it comes to homeless shelters. The veneer of Orange Progressivism is very fine indeed.

As the Chapel Hill Town Council tries to convince residents that the decision to place the new IFC homeless shelter at the corner of Homestead Road and MLK Boulevard isn’t a “done deal”, perhaps it’s time to step back and look at the authority the council seeks for homeless shelter siting.

Currently, town laws (the LUMO) restrict homeless shelters to less than 20,000 square feet and disturbing less than 40,000 square feet of land, with a capacity of up to 25 people. Moreover, only certain areas are considered suitable, i.e., the town center, neighborhood commercial zoned areas and office/institutional zoned areas.

Freshman Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt (elected by less than a majority of the votes cast in November 2009) isn’t happy with the law. He wants absolute authority to put as big a homeless shelter as he wants, wherever he wants in the town. Pulpsters should note that this craving for absolute power comes from a mayor who does NOT own his listed Chapel Hill residence.

Of course, the new IFC shelter will be approved at the pre-selected site given to the town by Duke Power. The issue in question is, can Mr. Kleinschmidt and his cronies give IFC permission to build as big as facility as IFC wants? Under current town law they can’t. Under the new town law Mr. Kleinschmidt craves, they can. You just have to trust the council to do what's best for you.

In the words of Ms. Nancy Oates, of Chapel Hill Watch, “Many members of this council seem bent on making Homestead Road Chapel Hill’s equivalent of New York’s Bowery. By grouping all social services together, we can keep all the undesirables in one small area, which coincidentally is away from where Town Council members live.

By segregating and ghettoizing some members of our community — and, like it or not, the homeless are part of our community — Kleinschmidt works against the climate of diversity he used as a defense when he voted against seating the fifth-place finisher for the vacant council seat. Kleinschmidt forgets that more people voted against him than for him. Ironic that to create his fantasy of Chapel Hill as a liberal, inclusive town, he adopts an I-know-best-for-the-people attitude, a style used by Iranian ayatollahs.” (SeeChapel Hill Watch Ayatollah Kleinschmidt Story.)

To show the penchant the town council has for sharing the love of the homeless shelter, here’s a table listing the residence address of each council member.

Please note that Mr. Kleinschmidt lists 208 Village Gate Drive as his legal residence. This townhome is owned by none other than convicted felon, convicted drug dealer, and preferred local developer, Mr. Scott Kovens. Pulpsters will remember that Mr. Kovens showed up to buy the Winmore development permit package after it was maneuvered through approval by town manager-for-Winmore-permit-only/non-staff town attorney Mr. Mike Brough.

Here’s a map showing those Council members homes with regards to the IFC site.

A picture truly is worth a thousand words.

One of the pride and joys of the local living economy movement is the Carrboro revolving loan fund (CRLF). Created by a grant of non-local state funds, the CRLF lends money at less than market interest rates to businesses that supposedly can’t get loans from private capital lenders.

Recently one CRLF recipient (Original Ornaments) went belly up in the hotly competitive Carrboro glass bead business. The town of Carrboro invested $70,000 in a small retail beading business in the midst of the worse financial downturn since the Great Depression.

Mr. James Harris, Carrboro’s ED director, foresaw no problem in issuing the owner, Ms. Schlatter, a loan of $70,000 from town coffers. He even foresaw no problem with Ms. Schlatter only putting up $25,000 in assets. (Try getting that debt-to-collateral ratio in the real business world.) The term was six years. The interest rate was 3%.

Turns out, that the Schlatter loan wasn’t the only undercollateralized loan approved by Mr. Harris in his rush to empty the CRLF coffers. Around the same time, Mr. Harris sent another CRLF loan to the Boa for approval. The business plan was to rent cubicle space in a common office in Carrboro. So many great businesses have been launched from coworking space. The loan was for $90,000 at 2% interest (a rate one–third better than even Ms. Schlatter got) over six years. The payment plan was interest only for the first six months, then interest and principal payments.

So what was the collateral for the $90,000 loan? It was $40,000 in home equity. The collateral was a second mortgage position on the business owners’ home.

Why would the town of Carrboro accept less than 50% collateral on a business that, unlike Original Ornaments, didn’t even have an inventory to help secure the loan?

The answer is simple if you recognize the time-honored tradition of Carrboro politics, reward your pals. Turns out that the requesting business, Yesh Thirty Seven LLC dba Carrboro Coworking, is owned by a married couple. Mr. Brian Russell is one partner. Ms. Ruby Sinreich is the other. Yes, it’s the same Ms. Sinreich who is a longtime friend of Mayor Mark Chilton.

Pulpsters will remember that as a college-educated, private secondary school educated, single female she received a low–interest loan from Empowerment, Inc. courtesy of Mr. Chilton. Ms. Sinreich denied that the loan was in return for her supporting Mr. Chilton in his run for Carrboro office. Ms. Sinreich also operates the local censored political blog known as Orange Politics. Despite, Ms. Sinreich never having lived in Carrboro, she's avidly supports Mr. Chilton in all of his developer/mayor schemes.

Pulpsters should note that as of June 2008, the town of Carrboro was sitting on over $400,000 in CRLF cash. Within the next year, the town had exhausted the fund. Here’s a table showing the wise dispersals creating dozens of well paying jobs and oodles of boodle in sales taxes, at least if you're Mr. Harris.

Note the Carrboro Raw “juice bar in a van” is so dedicated to repaying your loan money that it closed for business over the Christmas break.

No word on when the Boa will require Mr. Harris to produce an actual accounting that shows how much money has been given over the past decade to create exactly how much in additional tax revenue for the town.

When it comes to hypocrisy, no one has the art form honed finer than Carrboro Alderman Dan Coleman. He recently sent an email to his colleagues on the Boa questioning the “criminality” of national and regional sponsors of a local chamber of commerce event.

Mr. Coleman said he would like to attend with local business owners as opposed to having to sit with those nasty regional and national sponsors. In his words, ”I am very troubled by some of the sponsors of this event. To whit: SunTrust, Wachovia, BB&T: to varying degrees culpable in the financial crisis of 2008 and the executive pay scandal. Duke Energy: aggressively pursuing coal power despite global warming concerns; was complicit in the California energy crisis of the early part of the decade. AT&T: participated in illegal domestic surveillance scandal under the Bush Administration.”

Curious words indeed. Mr. Coleman committed a vehicular assault on a woman volunteer at a local school athletic event in Anderson Park in 2007. He followed that assault by lying to the Carrboro police, accusing his victim of having jumped on his car, as he innocently drove his son to Tee-ball practice. Of course, Orange Progressives elected him to office within a few months. The assault and the falsehoods were local events, as opposed to regional or national events, and thus, totally permissible for a local elected Orange Progressive.

Coming to Mr. Coleman's side is Alderman Jacquie Gist. With a breathtaking logic, Ms. Gist adds, “I second Dan's position on this. The Chamber does not seem to understand what local means.” (See N&O Nauseating Coleman Story.)

No word on when Ms. Gist will ask Mr. Coleman about why he lied to Carrboro police about his vehicular assault on a woman volunteer at a local school athletic event in Anderson Park in 2007.

No word on whether or not Mr. Coleman intends to introduce an ordinance in Carrboro to ban mirrors, thereby continuing to enable him from having to look scandal in the face since 2007.

In the Fall 2009 local elections, a handful of challenger candidates asked about the official growth forecasts for the conjoined towns of Chapelboro. No numbers were forthcoming. Incumbent Carrboro mayoral candidate Mark Chilton even pontificated as to the how could a candidate think to ask for such numbers, as there was no forecast number. Turns out Mr. Chilton was wrong, again. Turns out, there is an official forecast for Chapelboro growth from 2005 to 2035. Turns out that in order to stuff an überexpensive regional rail plan connecting Chapelboro, local smart growth social engineers have had to produce such a forecast.

And here is the third final round of detail from a 2007 regional transportation report. (The national housing bubble was just about bursting at this time.) These projections are for overall population growth. A first series has been presented on the overall population sector growth, with a second series on the employment sector growth. Please keep in mind that this report was made available to representatives from each local municipal government.

The projections are for an additional 2809 UNC student households and an additional 1893 Duke and/or Durham Tech student households over the next 30 years.

If ever one needed corroboration of the spiritual/religious aspects of climate change zealots, then the announcement of the Spring 2010 revival (aka “the Great Unleashing”) to be held in Carrboro is worth a look. Dr. Katherine Shea (a member of the UNC Institute for the Environment) recently distributed a notice to “People of Faith for the Environment”. (Pulpsters are forgiven in seeing the irony in having a great unleashing in conjoined towns that have recently implemented leash laws for animals.)

Dr. Shea is part of a new organization in Chapelboro dedicated to changing your lifestyle, for your good. It’s called “Transition Carrboro – Chapel Hill”. The mission statement for TCCH states, “Our purpose: Growing a pathway towards a positive local future that meets our needs in the context of the twin challenges of climate change and the end of cheap oil.”

TCCH will proselytize using a process developed by Mr. Rob Hopkins called ” Transition Town Initiatives” It’s set out in Mr. Hopkins book, “The Transition Handbook”. The cornerstone of the process is developing an “Energy Descent Action Plan” or EDAP. What's an EDAP. Look at the plan developed for a small Irish resort town. The Kinsale EDAP reveals a desire to return to the middle ages in terms of a local economy. The keyword is self-reliance.

Town residents should grow their own food locally (or at least 60% anyway), regardless of the local climate or soils. The town should appoint and pay a “Local Food Officer”. This food czar directs local food production. The town should become a “Slow Food” town. Fast food eating is banned. Food is made more expensive, putting a greater part on one’s daily budget.

Lawns are out. They’re bad (even though they can be used to sequester carbon through mulching). Town grounds should be covered in fruit trees. A municipal parking garage should be transformed into a subtropical arboretum for producing expensive bananas. Urban livestock raising should be the norm, with animal feces all over town. Livestock should be raised “free range”. Medicine can be made from locally grown mushrooms. Urban aquaculture should be used to raise fish in town.

Dr. Shea says the following about Chapelboro’s Great Unleashing. “Transition Carrboro-Chapel Hill…has been busy planning and has nailed down a date and location for our GREAT UNLEASHING. This is the capstone event of the Steering Committee's work which launches the concept of Transition in our towns. We hope to have many interested individuals and groups at this gala event which will include speakers, discussion, fun and food. An open spaces process will result in the formation of self-defined, sector based working groups which will take over the Transition work of growing a pathway to a positive, low carbon, locally resilient future in Carrboro and Chapel Hill. Climate Change and Peak Oil are upon us, but being proactive and creative will allow us to meet the future with enthusiasm and joy if we start now.

Please stay tuned for events leading up to the Great Unleashing, but mark your calendars now for May 15th. We need the minds, hearts and leadership of the faith community strongly represented in this critical work, so please plan to come and pass the word to others.”

Dr. Shea doesn’t tell you that this event comes designed straight from the Permaculture playbook,The Transistion Initiatives Primer. In following this playbook, expect government funds to be given to yet another, newly created local non-profit group.

Also expect to hear key parts of the Permaculture Creed chanted during the Great Unleashing. “Life with less energy is inevitable and it is better to plan for it than be taken by surprise. Industrial society has lost the resilience to be able to cope with energy shocks.” Anarchism and tribalism return under the guise of “respecting your elders”.

While creating its EDAP, will Chapelboro’s Transition Initiative advocates seek the end of the mining of hundreds of millions of dollars annually from the other 99 North Carolina counties which supports the local living economy UNC engine?

In the Fall 2009 local elections, a handful of challenger candidates asked about the official growth forecasts for the conjoined towns of Chapelboro. No numbers were forthcoming. Incumbent Carrboro mayoral candidate Mark Chilton even pontificated as to the how could a candidate think to ask for such numbers, as there was no forecast number.

Turns out Mr. Chilton was wrong, again. Turns out, there is an official forecast for Chapelboro growth from 2005 to 2035. Turns out that in order to stuff an überexpensive regional rail plan connecting Chapelboro, local smart growth social engineers have had to produce such a forecast.

And here is the second round of detail from a 2007 regional transportation report. (The national housing bubble was just about bursting at this time.) These projections are for employment population growth. A first series was presented on overall population growth, with a final third series to be presented on the student sector growth. Please keep in mind that this report was made available to representatives from each local municipal government.

The good news is that total employment for the combined Orange County - Durham County area is to grow 177,959 jobs by 2035. That's a 76% increase over 30 years. However, over 110,720 of that increase (62%) is in Durham.

The big employment winner in Orange County in terms of growth rate is Hillsborough. The employment total is from 5679 to 14,453, an increase of 8774, or a 154% increase. Of course, tens of millions your county tax dollars have provided the infrastructure for that growth.

The biggest employment winner in Orange County in terms of total numbers is Chapel Hill. The employment total is from 36,702 to 74,875, an increase of 38,173, or a 104% increase. Of course, the overwhelming bulk of this growth comes from UNC expansion, including Carolina North.

The “tail-end Charlie” in Orange County employment is Carrboro, again. The employment total is from 4390 to 6857, an increase of 2467, or a 56% increase. That's half the growth rate of Chapel Hill. So much for changing Carrboro from a bedroom community into a sustainable ”local living economy”. Good news for a developer/mayor interested in maintaining the transient, low income landlord fiefdom, otherwise known as Carrboro.

Here's the breakdown on the types of jobs that are estimated to be created. The dominant total job creation segments are Office (53,904) and Retail (49,804).

“Special generators” (i.e., large retail centers, airports, hospitals, and universities) is estimated to generate 27,828 jobs. That includes all Duke University, UNC-CH, and Carolina North UNC jobs.

^ ^ 2005 ^ Employment ^ ^

“ESC” stands for the North Carolina Employment Security Commission. The SE data value is said to always be lower than ESC estimates.

The Orange County difference is said to be caused by missing student employment in Chapel Hill (estimated to be about 6500 to 7500 employees).

In terms of absolute numbers, population growth will exceed employment growth in ALL jurisdictions except Chapel Hill. In terms of growth rate, the employment annual growth rate will exceed the population growth rate by 19%.

Sadly, even with the 2005-2035 Carrboro employment growth rate being higher than the population growth rate, the lack of local Carrboro employment is evident. The job-to-population ratio is one job created for every three new residents.

Even streetwalkers for Carrboro Mayor Mark Chilton better look twice when doublecrossing the path that runs up behind “Friends of My Backyard” backyards.

For years, Carrboro has lectured its citizens on the need to increase permeable surfaces within the town. Impervious surfaces increase stormwater runoff, and thus, are bad. The most environmentally sensitive areas, local streams and stream buffers supposedly need the greatest protection. (You can pick yourself up off the floor now. Yes, Carrboro has placed its densest recent residential development, Winmore, smack alongside Bolin Creek.)

The recent proposal by the town to build a concrete “transportation corridor” aka a “greenway” (large enough to take a police patrol car) alongside Bolin Creek on the OWASA easement between Estes Drive and Homestead Road might have seemed odd. Such a plan was recommended by Greenways, Inc., the consulting firm that planned this transportation corridor.

It didn’t seem odd to Mr. Dave Otto, co-chair of that FOMBY group, Friends of Bolin Creek (FOBC) and political streetwalker par excellence for Mr. Chilton. He wrote a guest editorial for the Chapel Hill News praising the concrete corridor.

According to Mr. Otto, “The primary objection to the GWI plan seems to be harm of pavement to the natural environment. However, the “natural environment” that the proposed greenway will replace is the existing OWASA maintenance road which is badly eroded, deeply rutted and a quagmire following heavy rain. A concrete surface would actually stabilize erosion of the roadway. To simply leave the existing “natural” surface is not an acceptable solution. No surface of soil, crushed stone or Chapel Hill gravel in the riparian corridor will withstand periodic flooding.

Another argument for pavement is handicapped accessibility. Wheelchairs, walkers, even crutches cannot be used on the existing muddy and rutted OWASA road. Should the elderly and handicapped be denied access to one of the most beautiful areas in Carrboro? Is it appropriate to reserve this place for those privileged to live in adjacent neighborhoods or physically able to negotiate the rugged terrain?” (See CHN Otto editorial.)

The editorial was printed and presented in the name of Mr. Otto, calling him the chair of FOBC. Unfortunately, Mr. Otto was only FOBC co-chair. Even more unfortunately, his co-chair, Ms. Julie McClintock, was dead set against a concrete transportation corridor.

Hell hath no fury like a co-chair scorned.

Mr. Otto sent a mea culpa to FOBC members. He acknowledged Ms. McClintock as co-chair. He acknowledged they disagreed on the proposed greenway. He said, “When I submitted the article to the CHNews, I clearly stated ‘this piece represents my personal opinion…FoBC is split on these issues…’.” He added that a correction would be printed in the newspaper.

He did not, however, attach a copy of the cover communication for his guest editorial, a communication that should have made these facts clear.

Curiously the CHN correction was neither as prominent as the guest editorial, nor forthcoming as to how such a mistake happened. In the words of CHN editor Mark Schultz, “A column by Dave Otto about the greenway path last weekend should have identified him as a ‘co-chairman’ of Friends of Bolin Creek and said the column represented his personal opinion, not that of the group. We have a correction running tomorrow, but it's out of date. The Friends named Julie McClintock chair after we went to press. Dave is now vice chairman. Julie or someone from the group will provide a dissenting view in an upcoming issue.” (See CHN Correction.)

More curiously, as of this writing, the online editorial still lists Mr. Otto as the sole chair of FOBC.

In response to the Otto editorial, one Carrboro resident wrote Mr. Chilton. “Could someone please explain to me why it is even a consideration to change these woods? I could understand making them a little more accessible to the community, but to pave any part of them?”

Mr. Chilton responded in his typically disingenuous fashion. ”At this point, all we have done is committed ourselves to the notion that we will create a paved greenway connecting Homestead Road with Estes Drive Extension. Two short sections were approved and are funded: 1) from Wilson Park to Estes Drive Extension and along Estes Drive Extension to the railroad tracks and 2) from Homestead Road to Chapel Hill High.

Whether the other parts of the greenway will be near the creek, near Seawell School Road or somewhere in between has not been decided and will probably not be decided until some funding for that part of the project is identified. At present there is no foreseeable source of funding available within the next five years at least. Consequently, I anticipate that the community will continue to have a lively debate about the merits of the various possibilities.” (See Whetten Chilton Letters.)

Mr. Chilton failed to tell the writer that the reason a paved concrete transportation corridor was being planned (plans paid for by the writer’s tax dollars) was to use non-town moneys to build the greenway. These funds are not only foreseeable, but also identified.

Mr. Chilton is just as forthcoming as his fellow bon vivant, Mr. Otto. Greenways, the company advocating the concrete corridor, also happened to have advised neighboring Wake County on its greenways. According to the Wake County Open Space plans (which include greenways), unpaved crushed gravel greenways can provide handicap access. “Type 3: Multi-Use Unpaved Trail Development This designation would apply to corridors that are capable of supporting a broader range of uses. Greenway trail development, if it occurs along a stream, would be located outside of the floodway. A variety of surface materials could be used, but crushed gravel is the most likely. These trails can be used by pedestrians, cyclists, equestrians and persons with disabilities (ADA).”

The leadership “Gunfight at the FOMBY Corral” was bound to happen. Spurs were strapped on. Someone was going down.

About one week after the Otto editorial was published, the following notice was sent to FOBC members. “Effective Monday, January 11, [Dave Otto has] stepped down from Co-chair to Vice-chair of the Friends of Bolin Creek.” Mr. Otto was too slow on the draw for Ms. McClintock, who is now the sole chair, and vehemently opposed to a concrete corridor.

Will Mr. Chilton’s mother, purported FOMBY friend, prevent a showdown between her son, the mayor, and the gravelly FOMBY shootists, set on protecting their backyards? Stay tuned.

In the Fall 2009 local elections, a handful of challenger candidates asked about the official growth forecasts for the conjoined towns of Chapelboro. No numbers were forthcoming. Incumbent Carrboro mayoral candidate Mark Chilton even pontificated as to the how could a candidate think to ask for such numbers, as there was no forecast number.

Turns out Mr. Chilton was wrong, again. Turns out, there is an official forecast for Chapelboro growth from 2005 to 2035. Turns out that in order to stuff an überexpensive regional rail plan connecting Chapelboro, local smart growth social engineers have had to produce such a forecast for the East 54 development corridor.

And here is the first round of detail from a 2007 regional transportation report. (The national housing bubble was just bursting at this time.) These projections are for overall population growth. A second series will be presented on the employment sector growth, with a final third series on the student sector growth. Please keep in mind that this report was made available to representatives from each local municipal government.

The following table gives the total overall population numbers projected to 2035 for each municipal jurisdiction. Chapelboro will grow to about 110,000 residents, Orange County to about 160,000.

The overall population growth projections in the table below are the NEW residents, i.e., are in addition to current residents. Orange County is estimated to increase by 50,000 residents by 2035, 30,000 of which will be in Chapelboro, 10,000 in Hillsborough, all facilitated by your tax dollars! Are you ready for 250,000 more people just in the Western Triangle?

As the following table shows, the overall population growth projections are based on fairly stable household sizes.

In most of southern Orange County “shovel ready” construction projects funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the Obama administration stimulus spending ) were approved and contractors started being solicited before the municipal election of 2009 in November. In fact, in NCDOT Division 7 (which includes Chapel Hill and Carrboro), most of the projects were being solicited for contractors by mid-October.

Curiously, there was one notable project which was not ready, namely TIP #U-3100B. The project was confirmed in April 2009, but no contractor had been solicited. What is U-3100B? It’s a project for providing bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit accommodations on Old Fayetteville Road in Carrboro (SR 1107) from NC 54 up to the McDougle two school campus at Strowd Lane (SR 1106). About $1,800,000 will be used to provide bike lanes and sidewalks along Old Fayetteville Road. Currently this less than half mile stretch of road has only about 50 residences, if you include the connecting block on Carol Street.

Why spend $1,800,000 on a half mile bike lane on a road with so few residences? As always, the answer in Carrboro can be found by looking at pals of the Boa. Turns out that favored Boa developers Mr. Trip Overholt and Mr. Giles Blunden are busy evicting affordable home households in a trailer park off Old Fayetteville Road and replacing them with expensive, dense “smart growth” communalists in a development called “Veridia”. Veridia is located between NC 54 and Strowd Lane.

Imagine that? Of all the half mile sections of road in Carrboro that don’t have bike lanes (the far more densely traveled and populated Estes Drive between Greensboro Street and Seawell School Road comes to mind), the Boa picks the stretch that helps their pals. Sort of reminds astute Pulpsters of the $50,000 gift turned $500,000 sidewalk/street widening charade the Boa gave Mr. Blunden for developing 46 truly odd units in the just about eight acre, Carrboro coal camp vernacular development, Pacifica.

Can you imagine why Boa incumbents running for office in 2009 wouldn’t have wanted this project breaking ground and in the news in time for voters to be told? Say, where was the local media? Anyone? Anyone?

The hallmark of 21st Century fiscal conservatism is the practice of government living within its citizens' means. Revenues are projected. Sustainable debt loads and taxation loads are calculated. The basic premise is that wealth generated predominately among the common folk can be tapped by taxation to support government programs. Overtapping that wealth disincentivizes the creation of future wealth.

The hallmark of 21st Century progressivism is the practice of fiscal profligateness, the opposite of fiscal conservatism. Expenditures are projected. Confiscatory debt loads and taxation loads are calculated. The basic premise is that the populous must hand over enough wealth to cover the costs of what government wants to do. If the government service or benefit is “progressive”, then it must be funded no matter what the fiscal consequences, no matter what the true benefit of a metricless “social good”. Human nature and motivations are dismissed as being of little importance, suitable only for government re-education efforts.

Progressives love to layer on to fiscal conservatism a smokescreen of social conservatism. For example, one could propose every local government program advocated by an Orange Progressive with one difference. Fiscal conservatist principles may make one delay or not fund some of the proposed programs because of a lack of financial resources. The failure to fund the desired programs produces a kneejerk labeling of that person as a “social conservative” despite the person being in favor of every program.

No more clear demonstration of such obfuscation can be seen than in the recent Chapel Hill mayoral election. The fiscal conservative mayoral candidate was Councilor Matt Czajkowski. The fiscal profligateness mayoral candidate was Councilor Mark Kleinschmidt.

Mr. Czajkowski would be viewed in most of North Carolina as a “liberal”. However, during the 2009 Chapel Hill mayoral election, he was branded a “conservative” by the pandering pundits, press, and radio. A local radio news director was stunned to consider the concept of a progressive government living within its means. Mr. Czajkowski’s political crime was to propose public policy based on reality. He recognized that the state, Orange County, and Chapelboro are dealing with enormous financial problems. Perhaps that’s because he has professionally handled money for for-profit businesses.

Mr. Kleinschmidt, on the other hand, never considered how much his proposed programs would cost. If the programs are socially worthy, then Chapel Hill citizens must pay the price and bear the burden.

Here’s the reality Mr. Kleinschmidt ignored.

According to the North Carolina State Fiscal Research Division (SFRD), “[e]ven with the economic recovery underway, economy-based taxes remain weak and general fund collections are below the forecast target. They remain at 1.5% below target through November.
• Sales Tax collections are by far the weakest component of the economy-based taxes.
• A national recession persisting for at least 20 months has significantly impacted the State’s employment conditions and we are not out of the woods yet.
• Budget pressures mount as the prolonged economic downturn increases demand for those government services related to an economic downturn.”

Mr. Kleinschmidt didn’t consider in his campaign that state income tax withholding on wages and salaries was down 3.8% through November 2009. Monthly and quarterly withholding payments were hit the hardest (Y/Y 12.4% decline). Sales tax collections reflect consumer financial problems. State baseline collections were down in November 2009 almost 12% from 2008.

The SFRD further warns as of November 2009 that: 1) It is clear from looking at economy-based taxes that the recession is still impacting consumers;
2) Housing market problems are still unwinding;
3) Employment woes will continue at least into the spring of 2010;
4) Consumers continue to cut back on most spending;
5) Credit market constraints could slowdown or derail the recovery;
6) The Feds most recent comments suggest a long slow recovery;
7) Weak employment outlook expected through all of 2009 and into first quarter of 2010;
8) Inflation-adjusted salary & wages are lower than before the start of the recession;
9) Household wealth suffered tremendous losses from housing recession and equity market losses;
10) Very tight credit conditions continue;
11) Highest household debt burden on record at the start of the Great Recession;
12) Positive employment growth is not expected until the second-half of 2010;
13) The State will have a long way to go to reach pre-recession levels given the 6% decline that occurred since the start of the recession; and
14) Moody’s economy.com forecasters envision only 3.1% growth in the State’s personal income for 2009 and 3.8% in 2010. This is far less than the 6.0% to 7.0% annual growth from 2004 to 2007.

The future? SFRD says there will be mounting pressures for remainder of FY 2009-10 and beyond:
1) The Unemployment Insurance Fund has borrowed $1.4 billion from the Feds (projected to reach $2 billion) by the end of calendar year 2010; and
2) A looming issue on the horizon will be the FY 2011-12 revenue picture. Temporary taxes are set to expire, fiscal stimulus money dries up, and early projections indicate revenue growth will not be sufficient to close the gap.

The North Carolina state budget has an FY 2009-2010 budget gap of $4,600,000,000. That’s about a 22% shortfall of the entire budget. The projected budget gap for FY 2010-2011 remains a problematic $4,400,000,000. (See Center For Budget And Public Policy.)

Mr. Kleinschmidt’s appreciation of these facts is best demonstrated by his stated campaign concern. He couldn’t add a cost of living increase this fiscal year for town employees who already have salaries AND retirement benefits far exceeding, on average, those offered in private employment.

In most of North Carolina (and the East Cost for that matter), people recognize that the natural ecological balance is way out of whack with regards to deer populations. The removal of predators has been met with increased suburban vegetation as a food source and decreased hunting pressures. Deer populations must be controlled to re-establish forest ecosystems. One method in the “eco-quiver” is controlled bow hunting in urban areas.

However, southern Orange County isn’t like the rest of North Carolina. Here it’s all about what makes you feel good. Killing Bambi's doe mother doesn’t feel good. Just because you’re a self-acclaimed “environmentalist” doesn’t mean you care about things like forest ecosystems more than saving Bambi's mother. In the world of Orange Progressive politics, science is the handmaiden of feel good environmental public policy, not the other way around.

Back in the real world, Dr. Emile DeVito, a conservation ecologist and Manager of Science and Stewardship for the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, states we are facing an ecological disaster from the deer overbrowsing. “Land managers are aware of the catastrophic impact of super-abundant deer on tree regeneration and the loss of biodiversity in the metropolitan New York region’s herbaceous forest wildflowers. Now another phenomenon, the loss of the woody shrub layer, has reached a critical stage across most of the region (outside the New Jersey Pine Barrens).”

The good news is that the damage is repairable. “In the Watchung Reservation, a parkland area in Union County, N.J., fencing that has kept deer out for 13 years has helped promote the regrowth of native woody trees and shrubs and perennial herbaceous plants in spots that had absolutely zero visible native plants in the understory when the fences — called exclosures — were erected in 1995.

These new areas of forest understory are dense and shade the ground, and they are suppressing invasive alien species that were abundant at the time of fencing. There is variation between plots; in some locations alien species are still common. But in every plot native species are now the dominant vegetation. In fact, in some locations — in the deep shade cast by native, regenerating trees — shrubs and wildflowers are outcompeting alien weeds!

It is clear that the only way to give our forests a chance to recover from both overbrowsing by deer and alien plant invasions is a two-step approach: 1. a drastic reduction in the deer herd, to a level so low as to achieve the functional equivalent of an exclosure (winter deer populations must be about 5 per square mile for a drastically damaged forest to begin to recover), and 2. the collection of local native seeds by local master gardeners or other volunteers, with associated gardening programs to re-introduce the native shrub layer where it cannot return on its own.”

How overcrowded are local woods with deer?

According to Duke University professor Norm Christensen, there wasn't a deer in sight 38 years ago when he began a long career studying the ecosystem of Duke Forest. Now, deer are so abundant they've inserted themselves into his research. (North Carolina's deer population has increased from about 670,000 in 1984 to more than 1.25 million in 2007, according to the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission.)

In the 7000 acre Duke Forest just north of Chapelboro, it was estimated in 2009 that about 900 “Deermowers” munch their way through the understory. Duke held a hunt to remove about 100 deer. However, even at 800 deer, that equates to about 70 deer per square mile, 14 times the optimal goal of 5 for restoring an ecosystem, as advocated by Dr. DeVito.

Local “Bambicologists” decry even these modest attempts. According to Ms. Jane Norton, a sustainability educator, who moved to be near Duke Forest 22 years ago, there aren’t too many deer. ”I care about all of nature and think it's imperative…to live in harmony with the natural world. I think our purpose on this earth is to learn from nature. I don't believe in playing God.”

Chapel Hill is overpopulated with Bambicologists eating the understory from your fiscal house as well. So it should come as no surprise to Pulpsters that the town council stands ready to shoot down a proposal for an urban deer hunt within city limits. Councilor Sally Greene said, “I cannot support an urban archery program, no way, no how.” Councilor Lauren Easthom said, ”I'm sensitive to this issue, but I can't support anything in town that involves archery and residents.” (See Chapel Hill Herald Bambicology Story.)

Of course, it's too much to expect Councilors Easthom and Greene to overcome their ignorance and biases against an urban archery hunt. Apparently, it never occurred to them that the hunt is conducted from an elevated tree stand, and that the arrow shot is made at usually about 20 yards, in a decidedly downward trajectory. It's not like archery practice at the local Girl Scout camp.

Back in the real world, Dr. DeVito suggest the following steps be taken when confronted with deer overpopulation. “Deer reduction can only occur with drastic changes to deer management, such as:
1. tax credits or other monetary incentives for every female deer (doe) harvested by an individual.
2. doe harvest requirements for landowners who receive a preferential, lowered property tax assessment for engaging in forestry programs that protect natural resources. Without aggressive management to reduce doe abundance, forestry programs have little chance of success in regenerating trees and other forest components. Deer fences may be substituted for hunting programs, where surrounding lands are not accessible to hunters.
3. economic incentives for municipalities and counties to initiate doe control programs.
4. legalizing the sale of local venison for food and hides for small manufacturing enterprises.
5. free butchering of deer for venison donations to homeless shelters.
6. other changes and innovations that represent thinking 'out of the box.' ”

As pointed out by Dr, DeVito, not only does restoring the deer population balance increase biodiversity, it also increases the absorption of storm runoff and decreases erosion and siltation of water courses.

Bambi and his kind needn’t worry about destroying Orange County ecosystems as long as they remain cute and don't bite. Public policy will be bent towards feelings over facts.

Oh, they should also keep a Democratic Party affiliation.