In most of North Carolina, if the county commissioners said they are not increasing the real property tax rate from the previous year, then that means that the assessed value ad valorem rate is not changing. But Orange County is not like most of North Carolina. In Orange County property tax rates can be set to rise by 12% and yet still be declared by the Commishes as “revenue neutral”.

How is that possible? Welcome to the world of linguistic nuance. As long as you are not bringing in more “Total Budgeted Revenues” in FY2009-2010 than you did in FY2008-2009, you are being “revenue neutral”. Adjusting the real property tax rate higher to be “revenue neutral” to the county, is not actually “increasing taxes”. Got it?

Let’s look at the sketchy facts that have been revealed to date. The Pulp will not try to confuse you by citing tax rates based on real property reevaluations. The “86 cent” rate being tossed around by the county manager is comparing apples (raised future real property evaluations rates) to oranges (current evaluation rates).

In FY 2008-2009, the OC Total Budgeted Revenues (TBR) amounted to $205,924,141. That amount includes the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Proprietary Funds, and Fiduciary Funds. Of the TBR, $128,359,609 came from real property taxes. That’s about 62% of the TBR.

In order to calculate the real property tax rate for FY2008-2009, the county Budget Office looked at the assessed value for real, personal, and corporate excess property in OC. That amount is $11,940,513,287. In order to yield $128,259,741 in a General Fund Levy (close to the budgeted amount above but not exact), the ad valorem tax rate per $100 of assessed valuation has to be set to 0.998. That’s the OC real property tax rate for FY 2008-2009.

However, the Commishes have reported two important shortfalls looming over the FY2009-2010 budget. First, there will be a shortfall of $6,300,000 in motor vehicle, public utilities and personal property taxes in the coming fiscal year. Second, there will be an additional $8,700,000 shortfall in other funding sources such as state grants and sales tax revenues. That’s a total estimated shortfall of $15,000,000, out of a “revenue neutral” TBR of $205,924,141. Commish Mike Nelson declined to comment on why the public is learning about a $15,000,000 shortfall barely three months before a budget has to be passed.

In order to raise that $15,000,000 shortfall, how much will the real property tax rate have to rise?

According to the commish approved county budget, for each one cent rise in the ad valorem tax rate, the county raises an additional $1,272,224. Thus, in order to raise $15,000,000, the number of cents that need to be raised equals $15,000,000 divided by $1,272,224 or 11.79 cents.

The FY2008-2009 ad valorem tax rate is 0.998, or otherwise referred to as 99.8 cents. If you add 11.79 cents to 99.8 cents, then the county must increase its ad valorem tax rate by 12%. That tax increase will the percentage of real property taxes up from 62% of TBR to over 70%.

For county budget numbers see FY2008-2009 Budget.

So a 12% ad valorem tax rate increase isn't really an increase, but just keeping revenues unchanged. In the words of Commish Barry Jacobs, ”It's revenue-neutral for the county, but it doesn't mean it's going to be revenue-neutral for the citizens, I actually thought I was accomplishing something for people. Even by being revenue-neutral, the majority of people are going to have a tax increase, even though we said we didn't want a tax increase. That doesn't really address their concern adequately.”

Taxpayers are admonished by Commish Jacobs to take solace in their aging, depreciating assets. He pointed out that taxpayers they will pay lesser taxes. So the personal economic development program advocated by Commish Jacobs is to own delapidated property! Either that or be the caretaker of the property and let someone else pay for the taxes.

Commish Bernadette Pelissier appears to be in disagreement with Commish Jacobs. She says, ”We are going to spend less, no matter what the tax rate is going to be.”

(See N&O Budget Story.)

The UNC publicity machine scored another triumph. At a media-only event University development officials rolled out plans for Carolina Commons. UNC talked of its concern for affordable housing for employees. The media lapped it up, rewriting the press releases. (See Chapel Hill Herald Story and Chapel Hill News Story.)

The real story was missed.

Never fear. The Pulp will deliver as much as it can of the full story of Carolina Commons over the next few months. It’s an uncommon story of private development interests tied quietly to public university interests. It’s a story of public deceptions. It’s a story of municipal taxes diverted for university benefit. It's a story of municipal taxes diverted for private development benefit. It’s not a story you’ll find in the local media.

Media Embrace
As reported by the local media, Carolina Commons is an affordable housing project north of Homestead Road that will provide affordable housing for junior faculty and staff who want to purchase their own home. All the magic ethereal buzzwords are used - sustainability, affordability, green.

According to Ms. Mary Jane Nirdlinger, purveyor of ever-changing Carolina Common promises for over a year and proud owner of the title “project manager in facilities planning”, UNC will sell the homes at 20% below the market value of similar units in the area. (The only such homes are in Winmore, directly to the south, where the public isn’t buying. The cheapest home in Winmore sells at about $305,000 for 1350 square feet, or about $225 per square foot.)

That’s it. As far as the media is concerned, that’s the whole story.

Follow The Money
No one in the local media asked the obvious question. What about the money?

Anyone with a modicum of private enterprise experience would want to know the financial details. How is UNC paying for this development? Who is providing UNC the development capital? At what cost? Has it been competitively bid? Who is making money off this development?

If you follow the money, then the real story emerges. But first, what is being built.

Physical Reality
So how green is Carolina Commons really?

UNC is building 58 single-family homes, 40 condominiums and 51 rowhouses (about 150 units) on about 15 acres. That’s a density of about 10 houses per acre. Their site for such density is not a flat field surrounded by flat buffer, but alongside Bolin Creek, an environmentally sensitive stream with steep slopes. Such a site reflects the best in UNC green planning. Such a site is the essence of sustainability, affordability, and green.

UNC hides its urban streamside density by referring in its calculations to the bulk acreage of the 63 acre parcel dominated by the Bolin Creek streambed and its slopes. While that acreage isn’t buildable, it’s not a problem. Carrboro rules allow such acreage to be counted as green space. As far as Carrboro and UNC are concerned, building the densest residential projects next to streams is to be encouraged, not deterred. Slap a few rooftop solar panels, add some extra insulation. Shazam, you have a green project.

Never mind that one won't walk from Carolina Commons to the UNC main campus. Never mind that one won't walk from Carolina Commons to the coming Carolina North campus. It sounds green. That's what's important.

Living Wages Versus Living Equity
Amidst the hoopla of affordable, green housing for UNC employees, lies the reality of the residential real estate fiefdom being created by UNC.

While UNC will sell the 150 or so southeastern Carolina Commons homes to its employees at below-market rates, UNC will not sell the land upon which those homes sit. UNC will retain ownership of those lands, forever. If the home is to remain as affordable housing for UNC employees, then UNC employees must enter into an agreement to sell to another UNC employee. Moreover, according to Ms. Nirdlinger, UNC employees must enter into an agreement to share the market appreciation of their home with UNC when they wish to sell. (Query, what will UNC do with that shared equity appreciation?)

Gone unspoken is another approach.

Why doesn’t UNC pay its employees a living wage that allows them to own a home in Chapelboro? If it’s important for UNC employees to live five miles away from campus, as opposed to fifteen, then why not pay a wage that allows them to enter the private home market? Why create a perpetual housing fiefdom? (Query, how much will the administration of this fiefdom cost?)

The Town/UNC Unspoken Deal
Lost by the local media is the handshake, behind-the-scenes deal between UNC and the town of Carrboro. In order to cut the county out of the Winmore development process in 2003, the Carrboro Boa had to get the Winmore land into town limits.

Mr. Michael Brough, then filling the unusual combination of being Carrboro’s outside attorney and Carrboro’s acting town manager, wanted to help Winmore developers stuff a mixed use village alongside Bolin Creek (which included his longtime friend and acquaintance, Mr. Phil Szostak.) He needed to get UNC to seek voluntary annexation of its Carolina North lands and the Carolina Commons land site in order to allow the Winmore land to be voluntarily annexed. Coincidentally, it allowed the town of Carrboro to involuntarily annex about 400 homes and bag over $500,000 annually in taxes without providing any more services to those involuntarily drug into the town.

UNC complied without offering a reason, even though it had no plans for developing these properties in the immediate future. Unasked by the media, (and unspoken by Mr. Brough, the Boa, or UNC) why would UNC seek such annexation years before building within the Carrboro planning jurisdiction?

The answer became obvious several years later. The town of Carrboro spent over $250,000 to extend a sewer line through the Carolina Commons property as a reward for the voluntary annexation move. That gift from the town to UNC reduced the development costs for UNC. A gift from town taxpayers to UNC.

Political Corner
The most interesting part of the Carolina Commons development from a news perspective is not the 150 or so homes in the southwest corner. Rather it’s the tale of the northeast corner.

Several years ago, Carrboro citizens living adjacent to the northeast corner approached UNC regarding the future of the northeast corner. No less that Mr. Roger Perry, UNC trustee in charge of UNC building plans, told these citizens that UNC intended to build about seven executive homes off a cul de sac at the stubout on Claymore Road. These homes would be high end, designed to attract key employees to UNC. It was a developer’s promise from a UNC trustee, worth the paper it wasn’t written on.

Then the town of Carrboro stepped into the fray. Seeking the highest return in tax dollars, the town $1,000,000 planning department decided to increase the number of homes from seven to seventeen.

Moreover, the town decided to force a road connection (32 foot wide with sidewalks and curb and gutter) between the Colleton Crossing development to the north of Carolina Commons and Claymore Road (20 foot wide, no sidewalks or curb and gutter). As can be seen below, such a connection would cost the town about $1,000,000 to improve that road up to the town’s legal requirements for a sub-collector road.

Curiously, the town planning staff ignored connecting Colleton Crossing to Homestead Road through Camden Lane (32 foot wide with sidewalks and curb and gutter, just like the proposed Colleton Crossing and Carolina Common roads). As can be seen below, such a connection would cost the town nothing and would provide a road connection that met the town’s legal requirements for a sub-collector road.

Why would the town of Carrboro seek to connect to a substandard road that would cost town taxpayers substantial moneys to improve when they could connect to an existing road that was up to standards?

The answer goes unreported by the media.

As described at a meeting between UNC officials, their private advisors, and neighbors surrounding Carolina Commons a few months ago, a political score must be settled at taxpayer expense by connecting to a substandard road. Taxpayer expense and public safety be damned. In the words of Alderman Dan Coleman, he wanted to get back at his political opponents in the Highlands who live off, you guessed it, Claymore Road. Challengers in the last municipal election, they publicly asked Mr. Coleman to resign after he lied to the public about attacking a woman on town property with his vehicle.

Enter The Handpicked Private Developer
Subsequent to the Perry meeting, and prior to the submission of the concept plan to the town of Carrboro, a new player came into the Carolina Commons deal. Enter the private for-profit residential development firm of D.R. Bryan. D.R. Bryan is a privately held for profit enterprise that builds major residential developments. It built Southern Village and Treyburn. It’s building an oversized hotel for Southern Village, as reported in the Pulp.

D. R. Bryan is “advising” UNC on the Carolina Commons development. What's the contractual relationship? No one will say. At the UNC Carolina Commons neighbors meeting the question was asked. However, Ms. Rosemary Waldorf, former Chapel Hill mayor and D.R. Bryan kingpin, declined to answer that question. Based upon their advice, the seventeen homes are no longer to be used to attract key UNC employees. Instead they are being sold on the open market. Mr. Perry's promise to Carolina Commons neighbors is a true developer’s promise.

The Unspoken Web
D.R. Bryan is also a partner in the mega Buckhorn Village development along with East-West Partners. Who heads East-West Partners? None other than… Mr. Perry, UNC trustee in charge of Carolina Commons.

How much is D.R. Bryan being paid by UNC?
Is it providing any capital?
Is it building the homes?
Why is it involved?
Was this “advisory” contract competitively bid?
Who at UNC approved the contract?
Is anyone other than the Pulp paying attention?

No word on why those in the media lamenting the death of printed newspapers can't see the reason why.

“Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive” - Sir Walter Scott

According to hundreds of local residents in southern Orange County, the Carrboro electronic library (“Cybrary”) and its attendant free internet service located in the Century Center in the historic business district is worth its weight in gold. It’s a service that mustn’t be cut by Orange County Commishes in tough budgetary times. However, apparently don’t ask these residents to put their money where there mouth is.

Not a single champion of the Cybrary has advocated user fees or contributions. If just 250 Cybraryborgs contribute $1.00 dollar per week to use the services, then the county cost of the Cybrary would be covered. (The Cybrary operational costs are $13,490.)

Commish Mike Nelson, former Carrboro mayor is leading a campaign to save the Cybrary. He’s the administrator of a Facebook page called, “Save the Carrboro Downtown Library.” He has collected hundreds of “friends” to give verbal, non-monetary support to the Cybrary. Other Cybrary supporters have collected signatures on petitions at the Carrboro Farmers Market.

Despite the demonstrative drumbeating, no Cybrary advocate has said they will open their wallet even for a $1.00 weekly user fee.

Take the reported case of Mr. Jakob Thornberry, 18, who lives a few blocks away on Greensboro Street. According to the Chapel Hill Herald, he “stops by nearly every day to check his e-mail, read news articles online and look at postings on Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia. He doesn't have a computer at home and would hate to see the Cybrary close.

‘That would be terrible,’ said Thornberry, who also said he's about ready to move out of state. ‘Theoretically, it would be terrible. Internet access is a very good thing.’”

Terrible, but not terrible enough to be worth $1.00 a week as a user fee.

People vote not only with a ballot, but also with their bucks. A Carrboro apartment owner (Tar Heel Companies of North Carolina or “THC”) has just voted to remove its capital from Carrboro's municipal jurisdiction after being villified by the town elected officials.

The “good news”? By selling out, about 255 affordable housing units are being created in Carrboro by the Boa's latest innovative affordable housing policy, unequal enforcement of property rights. Town government distaste for non-pal property owners can be combined with their taste for affordable housing for people of the right diversity.

Last July, the Pulp told the Abbey Court story, an apartment complex of about several hundred units located off NC 54 in Carrboro on Jones Ferry Road. Boa members very publicly intervened with the ability of THC to control who parks in their privately owned apartment complex.

Near to Abbey Court is a makeshift day worker pickup location. The complex is also near a bus stop and has been used as an unofficial park-and-ride lot. The Abbey Court manager has been facing problems with cars in the complex that don’t belong to renters. In response, the manager has made the mistake of enforcing parking rules that included requiring official parking stickers issued by the complex and enforcing the parking rules by towing away offending vehicles.

In most towns in North Carolina, such enforcement would be no cause for government intervention. But Carrboro isn’t like most towns. When a car owner facing his car being towed in Carrboro endangers a child by stuffing them into the hooked up car, neither Mayor Chilton (who was present) nor the police intervene for the safety of the child.

In response to this incident, the Boa met in a highly unusual summer recess meeting on 31 July 2008. After much breast beating over the apartment complex owner’s exercise of control over a situation ignored by town officials, the chaotic state of parking at Abbey Court, the Boa was constrained by home rule limitations on their authority to passing an ordinance limiting towing fees to $50 in Carrboro. The ordinance also limited retrieval fees to $100 and $20 a day for storage.

On 4 August 2008, the carnage at Abbey Court continued with renters continuing to endanger towing truck operators who are complying with the law. Mr. Jesus Sanchez Basurto, 25, claimed he didn’t realize that a tow truck driver had put a boot on his car. He got into his car and tried to drive it away from the tow truck before it could hook up his car. When the car wouldn't move, Mr. Basurto opened his car door to see why the vehicle wasn't moving. He left the car in reverse. It lurched backward and ran up on the curb. Somehow he was pulled under his own car, and the car ran over his foot. The towing truck operator did nothing beyond having already put on the boot.

THC got the message loud and clear. Don’t expect to have the right to maintain control over your apartment complex without the Boa strangling that right.

THC has responded by deciding to remove its investment from Carrboro. It's test marketing six Abbey Court two bedroom, one bath condominiums at prices ranging from $54,500 to $59,500 (“as is”) or remodeled units for $79,500. (See Chapel Hill Herald Abbey Court Sale Story.)

Showing Carrboro town government’s concern for THC, Mr. James Harris, Carrboro's ED guru, said ”I'm just hoping they will follow through”.

No word on the next apartment complex owner the Boa will chase out of town, creating more affordable housing.

No word on reaction from Mr. Robert Dowling on the creation of affordable housing units in southern Orange County that he doesn't control.

No word on whether or not Abbey Court will be renamed “Carrborini Green”.

No truer disciple of “feel-good” progressive political thought can be found than current Orange County State Senator Ellie Kinnaird. In a recent Carrboro Citizen editorial, she showered a veritable fountain of wisdom regarding the federal government controlling the nation’s borders. You see, if you advocate that part of the role of a national government is to control its border, well, then you are just practicing the hostility of an anti-semite. You lack a moral compass.

Yes, it's time for the Pulp to batten down the hatches again. The favorite canard of progressives is to affix a repugnant label on you if you disagree with them. (That's called “intelligent debate”.) Once the label is applied, the progressive need no longer address your arguments, no matter how cogent or powerful.

So Ms. Kinnaird gets right to work with the labelmaker. “It is time to speak out against the hostility and outrageous treatment of undocumented people in our state – such that has not been seen since the Jim Crow days. We strive to be a better people than this, but unfortunately repeat this disgraceful conduct every generation. How can we forget the history of discrimination in this country of the Irish, Germans, Italians, Poles, Czechs, Chinese, Japanese, Catholics and Jews? And now Hispanics are the target of intolerant speech and action.”

Ms. Kinnaird believes that the USA should open its borders to anyone from Canada or Mexico who wishes to come. At a time when the USA economy shed over 1,800,000 private jobs in the last three months, Senator Kinnaird wishes to open the borders to 140,000,000 people, of whom at least 30,000,000 are of an employable age. Moreover, while opening the borders to members of two countries, she doesn’t explain how she will keep the borders controlled with regards to the 400,000,000 that live in Mesoamerica and South America.

Moreover, she doesn’t explain, why a moral compass differentiates between those living in a country adjacent to the USA by land and those adjacent only by sea? Why is somebody living in Cambodia less worthy of open immigration than someone living in Mexico?

Perhaps the greatest wisdom from Senator Kinnaird can be found in her statement that “[a]nother advantage of open borders would be a reduction in drug trade.” Ms. Kinnaird seems to have missed the recent travel advisory issued by the US State Department, issued after the installation of the President Obama administration.

According to the State Department, USA citizens should avoid travel in Mexico if possible. “U.S. citizens should make every attempt to travel on main roads during daylight hours, particularly the toll (“cuota”) roads, which generally are more secure.”

Moreover, according to the State Department, drug cartels are waging a battle for control over the legitimate government authorities in Mexico.

“Mexican drug cartels are engaged in an increasingly violent conflict - both among themselves and with Mexican security services - for control of narcotics trafficking routes along the U.S.-Mexico border. In order to combat violence, the government of Mexico has deployed troops in various parts of the country. U.S. citizens should cooperate fully with official checkpoints when traveling on Mexican highways.“

“Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades. Large firefights have taken place in many towns and cities across Mexico but most recently in northern Mexico, including Tijuana, Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez. During some of these incidents, U.S. citizens have been trapped and temporarily prevented from leaving the area. The U.S. Mission in Mexico currently restricts non-essential travel to the state of Durango and all parts of the state of Coahuila south of Mexican Highways 25 and 22 and the Alamos River for U.S. government employees assigned to Mexico. This restriction was implemented in light of the recent increase in assaults, murders, and kidnappings in those two states. The situation in northern Mexico remains fluid; the location and timing of future armed engagements cannot be predicted.”

Somehow, open borders will curb the open, violent militarism of Mexican drug cartels. Why worry over the reality, if it feels good to say it.

No word on whether or not opening national borders will eliminate anti-Semitism as well.

At the risk of being branded a “right wing” ezine or blog, the Pulp is willing to report on a recently released regional study by the John Locke Foundation. In keeping with Pulp principles, the source of credible information is irrelevant to the meaning and context of that information. Accurate information regarding local government is hard enough to come by without imposing ideological sourcing tests, which, of course, puts the Pulp squarely at odds with local Orange Progressive principles.

The report entitled ”City and County Budget Crises: When in a hole, first stop digging” analyzed North Carolina state government published data and found that 96 out of 98 counties (two not reporting) and 24 of the 30 largest North Carolina towns or cities collected more revenue than needed to keep pace with increases in inflation and population.

The claims that population growth is the source of increased spending in Chapelboro and Orange Conuty is not supported by the facts, a charge the Pulp has made for years. For example, town of Chapel Hill government revenues (read mostly taxes) increased by 23% from FY2002-2003 to FY2007-2008. Per capita revenues increased by $158 in that five year period alone. Yet the population increased only 1.9%. Hiring a $60,000 plus per year public arts administrator for about 100 pieces of public art does cost in the end.

The Orange County Commishes are no slouches either. Not to be outdone by Chapel Hill Councilors, the Commishes increased spending by an additional 4% to reach a 27% per capita increase in county government revenues (read mostly taxes). That’s an additional $266 per person above the estimated $973 per capita that would have been needed to pay for pro rata population growth.

County population, on the other hand, increased only 4.6% in that same time frame.

The Commishes should be proud that Orange County grew its government revenues faster than any other county government in the Triangle. Moreover, that growth didn’t come from growing non-property tax revenues. It came from increasing proprety tax levies. While other governments improved their per capita sales tax revenues, Orange County languished in the doldrums of retail snobbery.

As reported in the Chapel Hill Herald, Chapel Hill Councilor Mark Kleinschmidt immediately went to work attacking the messenger and not the message. ”Is a few thousand dollars we provide to the Y for after-school programs low priority? Is the fact that the citizens of the community who voted for a new aquatic center – the will of the people – low priority?” Claiming that revealing the true pace of government spending is designed to pit citizens against their government, Mr. Kleinschmidt says that, ”The Town Council is a vehicle through which citizens voice their wants. The sole purpose is to manifest the interest of the citizens.”

No word from Mr. Kleinschmidt on the last time that the town of Chapel Hill informed its citizens as to the relative pace of per capita spending to population growth.

The trend has been clear for months. Over 1,800,000 private employment jobs have been lost from December 2008 to February 2009 in the USA. Yet the Orange County cruise ship of government continues to tour as if it’s 1999. County government is THE growth industry of Orange County.

The Orange County Commishes want no job cutbacks for the county workforce, a full time employee equivalents (FTE) workforce that has grown from 673.6 FTE in FY 2001-2002 to 900.45 FTE in FY 2008-2009. That employee growth is 226.85 FTE in 7 years, or about 34% in total, about 5% per year. In response, the county manager has resigned.

(Average county employee compensation in terms of salaries and benefits for FY 2007-2008 was $44,164 ($38,643,672 in salary and benefits for 875 FTEs).)

Unspoken in the directive to the resigning county manager is the fact that the Commishes will continue to enjoy their usual salary and their free medical benefits.

The Commishes cruise on despite clear evidence months ago that county revenues are falling rapidly. Year over year December taxable sales for Orange County fell from $63,296,902 to $52,413,079 from CY 2007 to CY 2008. That’s over a 17% decrease in the base from which sales taxes are redistributed to the county during the month typically having the greatest sales tax revenues. Yet almost three months later, no county employee pay cuts have been announced. No layoffs or furloughs have occurred.

Contrast the Commishes’ response to that of their loveable apologists, the staff of the News & Observer. McClatchey, the N&O’s parent company and the third largest newspaper company in the USA, announced on 9 March 2009 that it would slash 1,600 jobs and cut salaries across the corporate empire, about 15 percent of its work force.

Moreover, the McClatchey executives understand that leadership involves doing by example. In the words of Mr. Gary Pruitt, McClatchy's chairman and chief executive officer, “We previously discussed a plan to reach a targeted level of cost savings, but given the worsening economy, we must do more. I'm sorry we have to take these actions, but we believe they are necessary.” So he is taking a 15% pay cut and no bonuses. All other executives are taking a 10% reduction. (See WRAL N&O Story.)

No word on when, if ever, the Commishes will take a pay cut.

No word on how much such a pay cut would be.

No word on when, if ever, the Commishes will give up their free medical benefits for a part-time effort at “public service”.

In most urban cities with dense growth farm animals have been excluded. Public health officials understand the link between humans and domestic animal diseases. They understand that bringing animal feces and people together causes communicable disease risk. However, in southern Orange County public health and safety is low down the pecking order when it comes to locavore chic.

What can be more satisfying than the sight of chickens in your neighbor’s urban postage stamp yard. Apparently the Chapel Hill and Carrboro governance boards are scratching new ground in raising the risk factor to humans in urban environments. They want their towns to be urban, but still want farm animals. In the words of Carrboro Mayor Mark Chilton, ”I think the chickens around town help provide some food security to our community and are a good learning opportunity for children and adults.” (See Chapel Hill News Chicken Chic Story.)

The mayor is so right. Owning chickens affords Carrboro residents (even those not owning chickens) the “good learning opportunity” of being exposed to the following zoonoses, in this case, fowl diseases that are communicable to humans. The Carrboro BOA once again, as in the lonchera text amendment story, puts public health behind small town urban chic.

Here's a list excerpted from a University of Florida Pamphlet.

Avian Tuberculosis
Avian tuberculosis is caused by the bacteria Mycobacterium avium which is closely related to the human and bovine tuberculosis bacteria. In humans, M. avium infections can cause local wound infections with swelling of regional lymph nodes. The infection is most severe in immunocompromised individuals. M. avium is spread by ingestion of food or water contaminated by feces from shedder birds.

While most Mycobacterium infections are treatable with antibiotics, M. avium infection is the exception. It's highly resistant to antibiotics. Surgical excision and lymph node removal are often necessary to eliminate infection.

Chlamydiosis
Chlamydia psittaci is an unusual bacteria-like organism that affects more than 100 avian species. Chlamydiosis is primarily transmitted by inhalation of contaminated fecal dust and is spread by carrier birds, which act as the main reservoirs for the disease. The organism is excreted in both the feces and nasal secretions. Shedding is sporadic and is usually induced by stress. A carrier state can persist for years. The organism survives drying, which facilitates oral spread and allows transmission on contaminated clothing and equipment. Chlamydiosis can be transmitted bird to bird, feces to bird, and bird to human. Human to human transmission can occur, mainly by exposure to patient's saliva.

Colibacillosis
Colibacillosis is caused by Escherichia coli infection. E. coli is a bacteria which normally inhabits the intestinal tract of all animals. There are a number of different strains, many species-specific. Not all strains are pathogenic. Humans with colibacillosis usually manifest diarrhea which may be complicated by other syndromes depending on the E. coli serotype. These complications may include fever, dysentery, shock, and purpura (multiple small purplish hemorrhages in the skin and mucous membranes).

The incubation period is 12 hours to 5 days, although 12-72 hours is most common. Transmission is via the fecal-oral route. Colibacillosis is often food- or water-borne.

Cryptococcosis
Certain fungi prefer to grow in soils enriched with avian manures. Cryptococcus neoformans is one of these. The incubation period is probably weeks. Infections are seen in many mammals, but occur most frequently in humans, horses, dogs, and cats.

Transmission of cryptococcosis is usually by inhalation of this yeast-like fungus, although it can occasionally occur by ingestion. Humans can pick up cryptococcosis from exposure to old pigeon nests or droppings. In humans, cryptococcosis is manifested as meningitis or meningoencephalitis, and it is usually preceded by pulmonary infection with cough, blood-tinged sputum, fever, and malaise. The course of the disease is usually chronic. There is usually fever, cough, chest pain, and spitting of blood from the respiratory tract, followed by headache, stiff neck and visual disturbances.

(Technically, this disease is avian-associated, and not a zoonotic disease. The reservoir is soil and not the birds.)

Cryptosporidiosis
Cryptosporidiosis is caused by protozoa of the genus Cryptosporidium. Cryptosporidiosis normally causes respiratory problems in chickens and turkeys. It can also cause gastroenteritis and diarrhea. In humans, it causes abdominal pain, nausea, and watery diarrhea lasting 3-4 days. In immunocompromised people, it can cause severe, persistent diarrhea with associated malabsorption of nutrients and weight loss.

Eastern Equine Encephalitis
Eastern equine encephalitis (EEE) is caused by a RNA virus in the genus Alphavirus, family Togaviridae. Outbreaks can occur in chickens. Abdominal distress and dysentery are the most obvious signs of exposure.

EEE is mosquito-borne. The virus circulates in a mosquito-bird cycle in which passerine birds (i.e., song birds such as swallows, starlings, jays, and finches) are the most common reservoir. The mosquitoes become infected and feed on birds, horses, and humans, further spreading the infection. In pheasants, initial infection is mosquito-borne, but additional dissemination occurs by pecking and cannibalism.

EEE usually affects persons under 15 or over 50 years of age. In adults there is a sudden onset of high fever, headache, vomiting, and lethargy, progressing rapidly to neck stiffness, convulsions, spasticity, delirium, tremors, stupor and coma. In children, EEE is typically manifested by fever, headaches and vomiting for 1-2 days. After an apparent recovery, encephalitis (inflammation of the brain) is characterized by quick onset and great severity follows. Retardation or other permanent neurologic consequences are common in survivors.

Histoplasmosis
Histoplasma capsulatum is another soil reservoir issue. Histoplasmosis can affect humans, dogs and cats.

The incubation period is 7-14 days. Most cases in humans are asymptomatic. Disease may be manifested in three forms: acute pulmonary (most common), chronic cavitary pulmonary, and disseminated. The acute pulmonary form is influenza-like and lasts up to several weeks. It is characterized by chills, chest pain, nonproductive cough, fever, and malaise. The chronic form occurs in people over 40 and resembles tuberculosis. It is characterized by a productive cough, pus-like sputum (material expelled from the respiratory passages), weight loss, and shortness of breath. The disseminated form occurs in the very young or the elderly. Lesions include enlarged spleen and liver, and mucosal ulceration. The disseminated form of histoplasmosis can be fatal if not treated.

Transmission occurs by inhalation of spores produced by growth of the mold. Histoplasmosis is not a communicable disease. The reservoir is the soil, especially when enriched with droppings. Wet the area and wear a face mask or respirator when working in suspect surroundings. Spraying the soil with a formaldehyde solution has been used to kill the fungi. (Technically, this disease is avian-associated, and not a zoonotic disease. The reservoir is soil and not the birds.)

Salmonellosis
Salmonella bacterial infection is endemic to chickens in the USA. It’s why you take such care with raw egg preparations. Most animals are susceptible to salmonella infection. This bacterial disease has common clinical symptoms including diarrhea, vomiting, and a low-grade fever. Infections can progress to dehydration, weakness, and sometimes, especially in the very young or very old, death. In severe cases there can be a high fever, septicemia (blood poisoning), headaches, and an enlarged painful spleen. Focal infections may occur in any organ, including heart, kidney, joints, meninges (membranes which surround and protect the brain and spinal cord), and the periosteum (fibrous membrane of connective tissue which closely surrounds all bones except at the joints).

The incubation period is 6-72 hours, although 12-36 hours is most common. Salmonella are transmitted by ingestion of food contaminated by fecal matter (fecal-oral route). Excretion of the bacteria commonly varies from a few days to weeks. In some instances (e.g., S. typhi, typhoid fever) infected persons can shed bacteria for life. S. enteriditis in avian fecal material is able to penetrate eggshells, and may be present in uncooked eggs.

While down on the farm chicken flocks are regularly tested for disease and their environs sanitized against disease propagation, within the more urban environs of southern Orange they can roam free from knowledgeable safe handling.

No word on what, if any, testing will be required for chicken flocks residing within town limits.

To avoid overkill, the Pulp is not going to report on the avian flu threat presented by chickens in close associations with urban living quarters. You can read more about this public health issue at the following sites, CDC and FAO.

Orange County Manager Laura Blackmon submitted her resignation notice unexpectedly barely three months before a new fiscal year. It comes right in the middle of a budget cycle. She had taken over from Mr. Link after his retirement some almost three years ago. She had to report missing county moneys although she wasn’t in charge when the bungling occurred.

County commishes have handed Ms. Blackmon “Mission Impossible”. They don’t want to fire any county employee they irresponsibly hired as the good times rolled. (Pulpsters should remember that government has been the growth employer for the past decade in Orange County.) However, from Ms. Blackmon’s resignation statement it appears that this will require large cuts in services.

According to Ms. Blackmon, “Revaluation and neutral tax rate, however, are not the problem in and of themselves. The real problem for the coming year is most of our other revenue sources are declining, we have new facilities opening which means an increase in utilities and general operating costs, we have an increase in demands for services, especially in the human resources departments and the state is beginning to withhold revenue from us because of its budget shortfalls. Things are not looking good for the county or the two school systems, which have already been told they too will see a decrease in funds next year. The Budget Office has estimated the shortfall to be about $8 million, which will be difficult to absorb without cutting services or staff.”

More bad news comes out upon her notice of leaving. Ms. Blackmon reports that the county faces an 8% increase in medical benefits cost next calendar year. The Department of Public Works, the Information Technology Department, and the Parks and Recreation Departments all report increases in the cost of doing business. While the Health Department, the Department of Social Services, and the Emergency Services Department all report increased demand for services.

Meanwhile the Commishes who are responsible for overhiring in times of plenty, despite warnings from the Pulp for years, remain firmly ensconced, enjoying their medical benefits for a part-time job “well done”.

Ms Blackmon’s Resignation Statement
Dear Employees,

By now you have probably heard I gave notice to the BOCC on Friday that my husband and I have decided to leave the area and move to Tennessee. My last day on the job will be June 30, 2009. I know the timing of this announcement is not good, but my employment agreement with the county requires I give 90 day notice and I was running out of time. By the end of June I will have been here over 2 ½ years. This is not as long as I had originally thought I would stay, but life isn't always as we plan it.

I know you understand how difficult a year this will be for the budget. The BOCC has committed itself to a revenue neutral tax rate which means the tax rate will generate the same amount of revenue from property taxes as last year. A lot of residents are upset about the revaluation of their property, but the neutral tax rate should keep their taxes in check unless their property has increased in value above the average of all properties in the county.

Revaluation and neutral tax rate, however, are not the problem in and of themselves. The real problem for the coming year is most of our other revenue sources are declining, we have new facilities opening which means an increase in utilities and general operating costs, we have an increase in demands for services, especially in the human resources departments and the state is beginning to withhold revenue from us because of its budget shortfalls.

Things are not looking good for the county or the two school systems, which have already been told they too will see a decrease in funds next year. The Budget Office has estimated the shortfall to be about $8 million, which will be difficult to absorb without cutting services or staff. The BOCC has emphasized its desire NOT to reduce staff but to seek other ways of cutting expenditures. Those of you who are fully funded from outside sources such as grants, state and/or federal monies are more vulnerable than other employees because it will be hard to absorb the cost of your salary and benefits should those funding sources disappear. Nevertheless the Commissioners and Management are adamant about keeping everyone employed, so we will do our best to make sure no one loses their job.

Having said all that, it is crucial everyone understand and support the difficult decisions being made over the next few months. You have probably already heard there will be no cost of living or merit increases for employees next year. We are also expecting about an 8% increase in the cost of medical benefits next calendar year. These costs can be contained if we work hard to stay healthy and reduce our claims for insurance. Unfortunately that is easier said than done.

The department directors have submitted their budgets with a 10% reduction in operating line items, overtime and temporary employee expenditure requests. I am hoping this 10% cut will be enough given the shortfall we are expecting in revenues. However, some departments are actually seeing an increase in the cost of doing business (Public Works, IT, Parks and Recreation for example) or an increase in service demands (such as Health, DSS, and Emergency Services). In reality, once the final budget is approved some departments will see more cut from their budgets than other departments. I don't see how this can be avoided. Tough decisions will have to be made about whether or not we open new parks or county buildings that are now almost complete, whether we cut operating hours for libraries, the animal shelter, senior centers and other county facilities, or whether we limit the amount of services we provide for those residents in our community most in need of assistance.

I think the bottom line will be for us to reduce, eliminate, or delay those services that are important but not as critical as our core services, which are the services the county provides because it is legally required by statute or because government is the best agency to do so. Such decisions will not be easy and we must do all we can to suggest, inform, recommend and ultimately support the Board of Commissioners who will be tasked with that responsibility.

In closing let me just say thank you for all you do for the residents of Orange County. As public servants we have a unique responsibility to the community and I know you will continue to do the very best job you can despite the difficulties ahead.

(See notices in either the N&O or the Herald Sun.)