To those who don’t have intolerant ideology and blind partisanship coursing through their veins, the moral and ethical way to fill a panel elective seat that's vacated before the election, but vacated after the filing period for that election, is to have the highest vote getter not elected to the panel to receive the vacant seat.

However, Orange County is all about intolerant ideology and blind partisanship.

Back in 2005, Carrboro had an alderman seat vacated by the election of the new mayor. The fourth highest vote getter for the three open alderman seats was Ms. Katrina Ryan. She didn’t receive the open seat. Instead, Mr. Dan Coleman moved from Chapel Hill into Carrboro and didn’t bother to file to run for alderman office. Instead he just had to lobby a handful of elected officials to be awarded the seat. How progressive!

In 2009 history has repeated the Orange Progressive tradition. Mr. Bill Strom went RVing, leaving his Chapel Hill town council seat vacant after the move permanently out of state one month BEFORE the filing period for an election that could have filled his seat. Six votes decided who would get Mr. Strom’s seat. How progressive!

The Chapel Hill Town Council gave the seat to Ms. Donna Bell, the latest political anointee. Ms. Bell, like Mr. Coleman, didn’t bother to run for office in November. Like Mr. Coleman, she and her husband, euro-Causcasian Mr. Jason James, only had to lobby the council to win. She didn’t have to campaign for months. She didn’t have to participate in any political election forum. She didn’t have to raise money. She didn’t have to write up any position statements.

She did have to write her good buddy, new Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt a one page letter asking for the seat. Why was Ms. Bell so much better qualified than Mr. Matt Pohlman, the highest vote getter (about 3400) not winning a council seat?

Race, the answer boils down to race. Ms. Bell is African-American. Mr. Pohlman is not. With the council’s only African American member (Mr. Thorpe) retiring, and with no African-American candidates bothering to run for office, the answer is clear to progressives. Racism is best fought by being racist.

Councilor Laurin Easthom displayed her famous insightful powers. She said her vote as a council member was more important than the about 3400 Chapel Hill voters voting for Mr. Pohlman. It must be a diifficult burden to live with so much self-importance.

Ms. Bell’s support of Mr. Kleinschmidt’s mayoral run had nothing to do with her appointment. Her contributions of time and money to Mayor Kleinschmidt, her name endorsement in ads, her distribution of campaign literature had nothing to do with her appointment. It's about race. You either are of the right race for maintaining cosmetic diversity, or you aren't.

Showing great fairness, every town council member personally called and “interviewed” Ms. Bell, while only four contacted Mr. Pohlman, none in earnest.

Showing his great wisdom, Mr. Kleinschmidt said, ”This is not a decision that is going to make everyone happy in the moment we make it. We just have to hope that once we make a decision that the service the person provides will be able to dissipate that anger.” It's like executing the wrong person for the right reason.

In most of North Carolina, business owners look at Orange County and see a business community that feeds off the table scraps of UNC, the economic engine of Orange County. UNC extracts financial resources from the other 99 counties in North Carolina to the tune of over half a billion dollars annually. Much of that money is fed into the local Orange County economy, some directly, some indirectly through the salaries of thousands of UNC employees and contractors living in Orange County. Yes, in most of North Carolina, Orange County is the last place one would point to as an example of a “local living economy”

Orange County is so not like the rest of North Carolina. Here, overly narcissistic dilettantes dabbling as “business owners” can talk of the need to support a local living economy while ignoring the hypocrisy and sheer nonsense of their position. Yes, Orange Progressive values include simply ignoring inconvenient truths. Simply ignore the fact that the vast bulk of moneys flowing through the Orange County economy are NOT local in origin. They aren’t even voluntarily spent here. They come through that most socialistic mechanism of all, taxation.

Pulpsters can only laugh at the latest feel good pronouncement from the land of the loons. A merry band of local business owners, community leaders, and citizens are working together to build and sustain Carrboro’s local living economy. They call themselves “LocalMotive”. LocalMotive is becoming a network member of the neo-Luddite school of economic development called The Business Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE).

If you have a real business that can survive without government support or a voluntary form of local mercantilism/tariffs, then you needn’t apply. No, LocalMotive is for businesses that require customers who want to pay more for goods or services than they have to in a regional or national economy. According to LocalMotive, “the success of your [Carrboro] business is almost certainly tied to the community thriving. Up to now, you have had to operate independently when addressing all issues big and small, sometimes to the detriment of spending time building and maintaining your business.” Shudder the thought that Carrboro would want to attract a business that doesn’t depend on the immediate community surrounding its facility.

The LocalMotive roster of economic roundhouses already includes: Carrboro Creative Coworking, a professional shared workspace with a community atmosphere; Carrboro Raw, a smoothie juice bar; Happy Human, a spice rub purveyor; Protea Digital, a web based marketing company; the good old Weave, Weaver Street Market; and Wootini, an art gallery. All businesses, which for the most part, couldn’t survive in a town or city with a vibrant, successful regional economy.

LocalMotive is supported by the great green anarchist, Alderman Dan Coleman, another local Carrboro “businessman” with no known source of revenues, other than a non-locally working spouse. Mr. Coleman introduced a resolution to “BUY CARRBORO WEEK 2009” (December 5 to 12) during the latest BOA meeting. As usual, Mr. Coleman dispenses with the facts. According to AlderDan, Carrboro's locally-owned businesses create more high-paying jobs in our community. Yes, AlderDan wants you to give up shopping on the Internet, which may come as a surprise to LocalMotive member Protea Digital, a business which makes money from businesses that use web marketing. Gee, this planned economy thing is complicated.

One thing is for certain, no one will provide any metrics to measure the success of the campaign. Carrboro’s ED guru, Mr. James Harris, is just too busy doing whatever it is he does to occupy his time.

No word on whether or not Alderman Coleman will break into the line with LocalMotive, as he did for his son to ride on the Little Blue Choo.

In most of North Carolina, an organization trying to be more than a club party guide, one trying to report on political happenings, such a powerhouse would jump all over an incumbent who tried to run over a defenseless woman volunteer at a local public school athletic event. In most of North Carolina, late child support payments aren’t in the same league as misogynistic rage and assault.

As Pulpsters are too aware, Orange County and its boosters aren’t like most of North Carolina.

It must be local municipal campaign time, for the Indy, Triangle party guide par excellence is swinging its media machete and political hack hatchets in beat to the local funk.

Even before Labor Day, the Indy is busy publishing an expose’ about a Carrboro mayoral challenger candidate, Ms. Amanda Ashley. Allegedly, Ms. Ashley has had troubles keeping up with child support payments. These troubles aren’t recent. They stem from about three years ago, but that doesn’t deter the crackerjack machete maulers over at the Indy. They must let the voters know that there’s “dirt” on Ms. Ashley. After all, the Indy has blindly backed incumbent mayor, Mr. Mark Chilton, since he ran for a Carrboro office over six years ago.

Think that the Indy is “just doing its job”? Think that there’s no bias in selecting stories about Carrboro candidates?

Then let’s trip back to the last Carrboro municipal election in 2007.

Appointed Carrboro Alderman Dan Coleman committed vehicular assault against a woman volunteer at a local school athletic event in a public park. He told the Carrboro police falsehoods about the incident.

He got off with a half-hearted apology after a mediation session was rushed through the local Dispute Settlement Center by none other than Mayor Chilton. The poor victim was left having to consider future implications for her husband, who worked for the city school system.

Did the Indy report on the incident as it unfolded?

No. Instead the Indy reported on Dan Coleman’s epicurean delights while attending the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE) fest in Berkeley, California, home to the world’s greatest entrepreneurs. After all, it’s a party guide!

The Indy went even further.

Late in the campaign, the editors ”fully endorsed” Mr. Coleman as a candidate. Theymisled readers about the Anderson Park incident, saying ”Coleman's campaign was briefly tainted by an incident at Anderson Park in which he allegedly touched with his car a pedestrian who was holding up traffic. However, the he said-she said tempest shouldn't derail his re-election. (That said, we wish he would apologize.)”. Progressive morality in action. Can't even keep straight the fact that he was never elected at that point.


Late child payments…. Whack!

Misogynist vehicle assault…Police falsehoods…Have you tried the crustini with the masala chai latte?

In most of North Carolina, municipal governance boards are prone at least to schedule a public hearing on the substance of a formal written appeal to a North Carolina US Senator before sending a substantive letter. Even the fig leaf of a minimal public notice, followed by a pre-arranged parade of prepped and perky pals is seen to be “good form”.

Who cares if the majority of citizens in the municipality agree with a governance board letter? Let them run for office if they want to stop over-reaching and unsubstantiated letter writing.

However, Orange County isn’t like most places in North Carolina. Here, not even a fig leaf is needed. It’s not that modesty is in abstentia. It's just that rulers wear “emperor’s clothing”, i.e., they never know they’re naked.

A classic example of the governance syndrome of “caput inflatus” can be seen in the recent doings of Alderman Dan Coleman. He recently sent a letter to US Senator Kay Hagan (D–NC), not as a private citizen, but as a Carrboro alderman speaking for the entire governance board. It read as follows:

“I am writing on behalf of the Mayor and Alderman of the Town of Carrboro Board to urge you to give your full backing to the public option for health insurance sought by President Obama.

Municipal governments in North Carolina are struggling with double-digit annual increases in health insurance costs while county social services are hard-pressed to meet the needs of the uninsured and under-insured. We desperately need your help to achieve needed reform.

It is our belief that the health care crisis in the United States will ultimately only be solved by a single-payer national system. We encourage you, for the sake of the citizens of North Carolina and the nation, to do all you can to achieve such a system.”

(Mr. Coleman forgot to mention that for working less than 100 hours a year he gets free healthcare from the citizens of Carrboro.)

(See Carrboro Citizen Coleman Care Story.)

Unfortunately, the town records show that the BOA never bothered to tell town citizens of their decision. They didn’t even bother with a public notice of any meeting discussing and deciding upon a town “healthcare position”.

Exactly when was that public hearing? So much for replacing the burned out bulb in the Carrboro beacon of “open government”.

Luckily, Senator Hagan is prone to lucid moments of governance and not merely being a bobblehead to fellow party members. Apparently, she wants to read any healthcare reform proposal in its details before signing on. Just calling a proposal “a public option” doesn’t seem to be enough.

How un-Carrboro can she get?

In most towns in North Carolina, having the state department of transportation (NCDOT) pay to expand a heavily used road and add bike lanes and sidewalks to boot would be considered a great deal. In most towns, government exists to serve the people, not to have people serve the government.

However, Orange County is different. Creating traffic bottlenecks to get people out of their cars is considered “enlightened government”. Your pain is town gain.

For the past six months the Carrboro governance board (BOA) has been in a micturation contest with NCDOT. The BOA wants what it wants and doesn’t see why NCDOT doesn’t change its statewide programs to suit Carrboro.

What does the BOA want? They want a major road leading from the rapidly growing Chatham County (Smith Level Road) to remain choked at two lanes. Just add bike lanes and sidewalks so that pedestrians and cyclists can watch the traffic jams safely.

What does NCDOT want? It wants to widen the road in anticipation of the road traffic projected over the next 25 years. The road is already crowded and slated to become more so. As an incentive, NCDOT would throw in sidewalks and bike lanes at the same time.

NCDOT has a program that can provide just sidewalks and bike lanes. Unfortunately, that Bicycles and Pedestrian Division can’t fund anything in Carrboro before 2011, and Carrboro may have to wait until 2017.

Immediate funds to improve Smith Level Road are available through another program called the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The catch is that the remaining available TIP money from the last approved cycle is for enhancing roadways for the dreaded car, and not solely for installing sidewalks and bike lanes. Unfortunately, NCDOT doesn't appreciate that the BOA values respect for its opinions and wants, no matter how zany, above all else.

In the petulant words of Carrboro Mayor Mark Chilton, “[sidewalks and bike lanes] are not given the kind of weight or priority that roadway projects in other communities are given. I haven’t actually heard a reason why this can’t be part of the state TIP.” In other words, Mr. Chilton sees no reason why he shouldn't be accomodated, because, well, he's the mayor of Carrboro.

Unfortunately, Mr. Chilton knows that sidewalks and bike lanes can be funded by TIP. However it's up to the BOA to give NCDOT a priority listing for such a project. (Which begs the question, why didn't Mr. Chilton think enough of the sidewalks and bike lanes to include them in the currently funded TIP cycle?) Perhaps he has also forgotten that on 16 September 2008, he had the chance at a BOA meeting to add the Smith Level Road bike lanes and sidewalks to the town’s recommendations for the next funded TIP cycle (also 2011 to 2017). Too bad he didn't amend the list then to fund the sidewalk and bike lanes in the next TIP cycle, but then that would be showing subservience to routine, planning, and good governance.

As a public service, the Pulp offers to Mayor Chilton the following TIP link. Pulpsters can submit their own questions alongside those of the mayor.

Alderman Jackie Gist again most clearly reveals the creativity used by the BOA in addressing local transportation issues. If she can walk to her part-time job, why can’t you? “People will do what’s easiest for them to do. I would love to see it become a pain to drive a single occupancy vehicle because when it’s a pain in the neck people are going to change their behavior.” (See Chapel Hill News Road Story.)

Smugly pronouncing the BOA’s rejection of NCDOT aid, Alderman Dan Coleman states, “So the motion is, then, as “Mythbusters” put it, ‘We reject your reality and substitute our own'.” (Say, that doubles for a criminal defense too.)

That about sums up progressive governance in zany Orange County. Philosophy is based on an entertainment television show.

No word on when a resolution will be introduced to change the town name to “Cycleboro”.

Sometimes the velvet glove slips off the iron fist of local government. That happened at the Carrboro Planning Board on 4 June 2009.

The Carrboro Planning Board is a group of citizen volunteers that advises the Carrboro governance board (BOA) on town land development issues. Supposedly, the input from the planning board guides the BOA on how citizens feel about changes in the town’s land use.

As an example of “open and direct“ democracy, the planning board model is flawed. The weakness of the model is that it requires the BOA appoint a cross-section of views representing all diverse views held by residents in the town, and not just its pals. The planning board is loaded with citizens of a land use ideology that matches the BOA and not the citizenry of the town. In Carrboro the minority view is not legitimate, and thus, needn’t be considered, much less discussed.

However, even partisan planning board members were surprised by the fascismo move of the BOA. Over one week before the June 4th meeting, the agenda for the planning board meeting was circulated. A discussion of “farm issues” including a discussion of a text amendment proposal for accessory farm apartments was on the agenda.

At the opening of the June 4th meeting, a call was made as to any changes to the agenda. All were silent. Then much later, towards the end of the meeting, with citizens in attendance who came specifically to discuss the text amendment with the planning board, Ms. Patricia J. McGuire (town planner, member of the town's PZI “police squad”, and “open government expert”) announced that the planning board couldn’t talk about the text amendment.

Couldn’t talk about a scheduled agenda item? In an open government town? In a meeting of citizen volunteers? Yes, smiled Ms. McGuire. The BOA forbade it by legislative fiat.

How did a gag rule come into being with no one watching? Turns out, the deed was done at the very end of the 19 May 2009 meeting, After 10:30PM, in the last five minutes, after a long (over three hours) public hearing on Colleton Crossing, Alderman Dan Coleman brought up the text amendment issue, conveniently waiting for the audience to have cleared the room. Even the media had cleared the room to meet deadlines. Alderman Coleman didn't explain why he didn't raise the issue earlier in front of a town hall filled with citizens.

Mr. Coleman announced that he just happened to talk to the planning board head, Mr. Matthew Barton, prior to the May 19th BOA meeting. Peevishly, Mr. Coleman reported that Mr. Barton had the audacity to attend a meeting of farmers who had concerns of Carrboro town regulations without a BOA member in attendance.

To shut down further democracy in action, Mr. Coleman made a motion for the BOA to direct the planning board not to address farmer’s concerns until the BOA did. His reasons? First, BOA members should hear citizen comments and decide whether or not if the planning board should listen to citizens. The second reason is that Ms. Kille is “involved” with town planning board discussions. In other words, the planning board isn’t supposed to do any real work.

Alderman Joel Hall Broun was “uneasy” about Mr. Coleman's motion, but voted for it in her hurry to exit the meeting. Alderman Randee Haven O’Donnell thought that farmers going to the planning board before the BOA is “a circuitous route”. All normal land use matters go through the planning board before going to the BOA, so no explanation was given as to why this issue should not follow normal procedure. Alderman Lydia Lavelle displayed her trademark “level-headedness”, by ignoring the citizen volunteers.

In a cumbayah move, Alderman Coleman disparaged Ms. Kille as “an unreliable source”, despite the town having lost documents, conducted a kangaroo court trial at a BOA meeting, and generally revealing their penchant for iron-fisted control. Strange words coming from someone who wrote a book extolling the virtues of direct citizen democracy. But then the gag rule is more than just suppressing contrary views.

Politics is rearing its ugly head. With the Carrboro town election in November, it wouldn't do to have planning board members appear to be more responsive to town issues than incumbent aldermen. Questions would be raised. Why did the town spend so much money on attorneys? Why did Mayor Chilton kill even the consideration of a text amendment? Why did it take an “outsider” to propose a text amendment to the planning board?

Citizens are perplexed.

As quoted in the Chapel Hill Herald, Ms. Sharon Cook, planning board member and activist volunteer who introduced the text amendment that needed gagging, says, “It’s just very unusual in a government where we talk about openness and transparency to tell a board that you can’t talk about something.”

Those feelings are matched by town native Ms. Jennifer Ellis saying, “It sounds like they’re trying to hide something by not allowing the [planning] board to discuss something that’s one of the unique cultures of Carrboro.”

Town resident Ms. Meredith Carter adds, “It’s not even that uncomfortable of an issue. I can see it getting out of control easily by the aldermen becoming even more despotic in shutting down discussion on political issues with which they disagree.”

No word on when Alderman Coleman will introduce his latest book on direct democracy, ”GagPolitics”, as a companion to his bestseller, ”EcoPolitics”.

In most communities in North Carolina, elected officials stay on top of critical municipal needs, such as having enough space to dispose of solid waste. However, as Pulpsters know, Orange County isn’t like most of North Carolina.

At way past midnight on the trash transfer station timeline, Chapel Hill mayor Kevin Foy suddenly has a thought about a site for the trash transfer station. How about putting it next to the Chapel Town Operations Center?

The reaction of the local media and other local politicians is as informative as it is entertaining. (See Chapel Hill Herald Epiphany Site Story.)

Rip Van Winkle's Hollow

On Friday, 8 May 2009, Mayor Foy led a select entourage around the 32 acre site off Millhouse Road. In his decisive and immortal words, “The question isn't whether we should put a transfer station there. The question is, is this something worth talking about?” Talk, it's the fragrant and somnambulant lingua orange of Pulpville.

None other than Commish Mike Nelson opines that “It can't be a shock to anyone that a waste transfer station in that location would be very strongly opposed by residents of northern Chapel Hill. It will take an inordinate amount of political will — in a town election year no less — to site the waste transfer station there.”

Dr. Rick Kennedy, a Nelson supporter, a family practice physician, a rural buffer resident, and a critic of those criticizing local government finally found something that he didn’t like about local government. Seems the issue only has to be at his doorstep (he lives within less than ¼ mile from the site) in order for him to “see the light”. In his words, ““People ought to share the things in the community that nobody really wants. Why doesn't that resonate here like it does on Rogers Road?”

“Physician heal thyself” has taken on new meaning. Perhaps Dr. Kennedy hasn’t yet attained the enlightment that comes from a constant flow of smelly trash trucks, the piquant essence of rotten garbage, and the sights of soaring flocks of buzzards.

What’s missing from the local media story of Mayor Foy's epiphany about locating the trash transfer station?

Even Commish Valerie Foushee, the Sphinx of the Orange County board recognizes something is amiss. In her words, the county asked the towns “months ago… and probably more than once” about a transfer station site. “Nothing was forthcoming.”

So what happened? Never fear. The Pulp will reveal a most southern of pastimes is to blame for the sudden awakening of Mayor Foy. He read the local obituary section. Lo and behold, the answer was revealed to him from an end of April 2009 item.

“Mrs. Julia Blackwood, 88, died Easter weekend at her home in Chapel Hill. Julia was born in Clinton, NC to Herman Stewart and Jenny B. Merritt. She came to Chapel Hill as the young bride of Eugene M. Blackwood. Soon after, she went to work as a secretary at the American Tobacco Company in Durham. (See Carrboro Citizen Blackwood Obit.

What does Ms. Blackwood have to do with a trash transfer station? Well kick back and follow how “bidness get dun” in Orange County.

The Blackwood family has owned property around Millhouse Road since 1752, before Chapel Hill was founded. They came under assault from the town in 1996.

After the firestorm surrounding then Chapel Hill Mayor Howard Lee forcing a landfill on to the Rogers Road community in 1972, Chapel Hill went looking for an alternative site for solid waste. It, the county, and Carrboro all thought they had the new site, Ms. Blackwood’s property on Millhouse Road.

The past is prologue in Orange County. As in the present trash crisis, the answer is revealed not at the beginning of the process, but in a surprise move at the end. In 1996, the politicians had a citizen group working diligently on site selection for over a year. Sixteen sites were considered. Then, magically, at the end, a 17th site (OC-17) was added, the Blackwood – Duke Forest site.

None other than Mr. Gayle Wilson denied hanky-panky in the latecomer OC-17 becoming the odds-on favorite back in 1996. Yes, it's the same Gayle Wilson who is surprised in 2009 by Mayor Foy’s magical announcement about the town operations center space, which just happens to be next to – you guessed it – the property of the now deceased Ms. Blackwood. Back in 1996, Mr. Wilson was the town of Chapel Hill’s solid waste administrator. In 2009, he's Orange County's solid waste administrator. (Any wonder the new county solid waste facility has just been built on Eubanks Road?)

Recycling is not left simply to bureaucrats in Orange County. Politicians and pundits are recycled too.

Guess who voted for the OC-17 landfill site? None other than then Chapel Hill Councilman, now Carrboro mayor Mark Chilton. As reported in the N&O in 1996, although Mr. Chilton was a “favorite of the local Sierra Club”, he voted for the OC-17 without any debate by the local enviromentalists. So did Carrboro Alderman Jacquie Gist, So did then Carrboro mayor, now county commish Mike Nelson.

Guess who was in opposition to the county picking any landfill site? None other than then Green Party member, now Democratic Party member and Carrboro Alderman Dan Coleman. In his words, ”the people in the Blackwood Mountain area come across as NIMBYs. I’m particularly troubled by sone of their suggestions that we should ship our waste somewhere else. Why should we take advantage of another community’s poverty?” Strong words for someone with no visible means of occupation, then or now.

Then as now, technical arguments didn’t matter. Who cares if the site was too rocky and had a slave graveyard? What really mattered was raw political power. The county’s mistake was in going after some Duke Forest land. The Commishes can steamroll working African-Americans and land grant farmers. But, they are revealed as eunuchs where it comes to facing up to the Duke power block.

So let’s go back to the present.

Ms. Blackwood dies. Mr. Foy reads the obits. Shazam! We have a new spot for the trash transfer station.

The local media doesn’t ask the searchlight questions.

“So Mr. Foy, where have you been for the past three years in the trash transfer station debate?”

“When did you first think about the town operations spot next to Ms. Blackwood’s property?”

“Did you really wait until she died to screw up the courage to announce the site, while her grave is still fresh?”

Yes, local progressive profiles in courage abound.

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

The ostensible story in the local media is simple. As reported, “The town of Carrboro may soon join its neighbor to the east in keeping campaign contributors – and the candidates who accept their money – on a short leash.” (See Herald Sun Campaign Contribution Story.) The Boa can limit contributions in Carrboro elections to $250 per person per candidate, down from the state limit of $4000. Also, now contributors giving only $50 must be identified, as elsewhere in the state. (The Boa didn’t get the as low as $1 limit it originally wanted.)

A local Orange Progressive politician also tells a simple story. According to former Green Party member, little blue choo line cutter, vehicular weapons expert, tax-exempt business profiteer, and Carrboro anarchist alderman Dan Coleman, ”Carrboro elections have in the past been and are currently very affordable, This measure [allowed by recently passed S488], if we enact it, will allow us to keep them that way.”

Unfortunately, there is no sign of any problem with campaign contributions in Carrboro elections, except the use of outside district moneys. (See Lavelle Big Spender Outside Influence Pulp story.) The only person spending more than $3000 in an election in 2007 was Alderman Lydia Lavelle.

State Senator Ellie Kinnaird, who filed S488 in March 2007, is reported as saying “I think both Carrboro and Chapel Hill, and Orange County, want to be leaders and they believe strongly in campaign finance reform. They don't want money to influence elections.” Unfortunately, Senator Kinnaird is clueless in that she can’t give an example of where money has influenced an Orange election, choosing to ignore the use of outside district moneys by Commish Mike Nelson in his 2006 election campaign.

In order to take advantage of SB 488, the Boa must hold a public hearing and enact an ordinance. If adopted, the contribution limit ordinance sunsets 60 days before the next election. A new limiting ordinance can be adopted between 150 days and 60 days before filing for that next election.

Here’s the real story.

In order to maintain power in Carrboro elections, the Boa asked their favorite state senator to file an anarchist bill that would have allowed the Boa incumbents to maintain power by limiting campaign contributions to as little as $1 per person per candidate. The Boa would have been able to lower the contribution disclosure limit down to $1. The Boa could have done so at any time, even in the middle of an election, as many times as the Boa wanted. That’s what seemed fair and reasonable to Senator Kinnaird and to the Boa.

Unfortunately for Senator Kinnaird and the Boa, there is a state representative with Carrboro constitutents who doesn’t drink Orange Progressive Cool-Aid, Representative Bill Faison. Mr. Faison is responsible for changing S488 from a carte blanche maintaining power tool for the Boa into a law that supposedly is needed for a “problem” that Mayor Mark Chilton acknowledged to Representative Faison doesn’t exist. Mr. Faison required the contribution floor be no lower than $250, removed the $1 campaign contribution disclosure power, removed the ability of the BOA to change the limit during the election, removed the ability of the Boa to change the limit more than once in an election cycle, and imposed a sunset provision requiring reenactment before each election cycle.

So why isn’t the story of the reining in of an abusive anarchist Boa bill told in the local media? The answer is quite simple and in keeping with local politics. Mr. Faison is not in the favored political circle for southern Orange. So he shouldn’t get favorable media coverage. Moreover, his truly progressive actions highlight the abusive nature of the original overreaching bill wanted by the favored faux progressive anarchist Boa politicians.

The real lesson from this story is that the absence of “home rule” power for Carrboro forced an unreasonable, overreaching, anarchists bill to be recrafted into a tolerable, more reasonable bill. (“Home rule” refers to the ability of a local municipal jurisdiction to define its own powers. North Carolina doesn't allow “home rule”, and thus, the Boa had to go to the General Assembly to get the powers set forth in S488. But for a moderate legislator from Orange County (Mr. Faison), Senator Kinnaird and Representatives Insko and Hackney would have rammed through the original anarchist bill.)

Last year, the Boa asked Senator Ellie Kinnaird and Representative Verla Insko to introduce legislation in March 2007 that would enable the Boa to strangle the rights of Carrburbans to make campaign contributions and to do so anonymously.

Representative Insko’s bill (H.465) and Senator Kinnaird’s bill (S.488) would have enabled the Boa to require the disclosure of any campaign contribution, no matter how small the amount. Even a one dollar contribution could have been required to be disclosed. Moreover, H.465 and S.488 enabled the Boa to limit campaign contributions to as little as one dollar as well.

Only after Ms. Sharon Cook and Ms. Katrina Ryan, candidates in the Carrboro 2007 municipal campaign for aldermen, raised an objection to these bills, were changes made in the legislation. S.488 was amended to raise the disclosure threshold to $20 in May 2007. In July 2007, S.488 was further modified only to require disclosure of instate residents who contributed more than $20. Out of state residents were excluded.

About this time alderman candidate and self-described “level-headed” establishment annexee Ms. Lydia Lavelle started revealing her campaign contributions. While publicly for S.488, Ms. Lavelle didn’t release publicly the names of her individual contributors of at least $20. Instead she stuck to the statewide mandate of $100. While publicly wringing her hands on the influence of money in Carrboro elections, Ms. Lavelle turned out to be the largest receiver and spender of money in the Carrboro 2007 election. Showing her concern for keeping local elections local, well over half of Ms. Lavelle’s listed individual campaign contributions came from those living outside Carrboro. See Pulp Lavelle Big Spender Outside Influence Story.

Neither H.465 or S.488 passed in the 2007 legislature.

However, a bill did pass the legislature that limited the campaign disclosure limit to $50 statewide (H.1743, SL 2007-391).

Fast forward to the short legislative session in May 2008. The Boa is pushing for S.488 to become law, again seeking to reduce the rights of Carrboro citizens with regards to any other North Carolina citizen.

In an effort to tighten the Boa coils on diversity of thought, biggest four color glossy mass mailer and outside influence receptacle Aldermen Lavelle and choo-choo line cutter, vehicular weapons expert, political anarchist, apology challenged perp, and anger management specialist Alderman Dan Coleman met with Ms. Cook recently and told her the following:
1) the $20 disclosure limit by town ordinance (as opposed to the $50 statewide limit) is no longer part of S.488, the only active bill that can be amended and passed in this short legislative session;
2) the express exclusion of out of state residents from the disclosure limit by town ordinance is required by “federal law”; and
3) the Board can by ordinance cap campaign contributions to any amount less than the current $4000 state limit at any time.

Unfortunately, the Aldermen's statements aren't all accurate. No house or senate bill (including S.488) currently active in the legislature has removed the $20 disclosure limit. Moreover, SL 2007-391 (formerly H.1743) removed the distinction between out of state and in state residents for statewide campaign disclosures (excluding the language regarding Carrboro that was in that bill). According to the committee chairman, members objected to this artificial distinction that gave out of state residents more rights than in state residents. Yet, Aldermen Coleman and Lavelle remain adamant about being forced by “federal law” to have an artifical distinction.

Moreover, Aldermen Coleman and Lavelle couldn’t provide any examples of any excessive campaign influencing in Carrboro regarding campaign contributions except by those few candidates (such as Alderman Lavelle) who brought in most of their campaign monies from outside Carrboro (as revealed by disclosed individual campaign contributions). S.488 doesn’t address the problem of out of Carrboro monies influencing Carrboro elections. The Boa ignores a real issue to address a speculative issue.

Discerning herpteologists see further reasons to beware the Boa constrictor mentality. S.488 allows the Boa to change campaign contribution and disclosure limits at any time and as often as it desires. The Boa can wait until after candidates have filed to slither about with these limits.

In the Empire State, Governor Eliot Spitzer resigns amidst a cloud of charges revolving around his relations with a prostitute and a prostitution ring. The mere identification of involvement with potential criminal charges, brings about a political downfall. No criminal charges have been filed.

Astute observers contrast the ethics of the Big Apple world of New York with that of the Little Tart world of southern Orange. In 2007, choo-choo line cutter, vehicular weapons expert, political anarchist, apology challenged perp, and anger management specialist Carrboro Alderman Dan Coleman hit a Carrboro High track event volunteer with his car while she was directing traffic in Anderson Park last summer, and while he was dealing with the weighty public issue of getting his son to T-ball practice. (See Coleman's Crazy Call.)

Unlike Mr. Spitzer, Mr. Coleman was charged with a crime, assault with a deadly weapon. The one person who publicly called for his resignation was decried by local politicians and by political progressive leaders. The victim was placed under pressure to drop charges against Mr. Coleman, her domestic partner being employed by the Chapelboro school system (a fact unreported by the local media) and, therefore, touchable.

Every sitting politician currently in the Boa endorsed Mr. Coleman. Every progressive political organization in southern Orange endorsed Mr. Coleman, including big commish candidate Bernadette Pelissier.

No word on whether or not UNC doctors have discovered an underlying medical source for the absence of shame in southern Orange politicians and the local media.

Former Green Party member, little blue choo line cutter, vehicular weapons expert, tax-exempt business profiteer, and Carrboro alderman Dan Coleman makes a call in the local real estate advertiser for an Orange County future of “economic localization”. Mr. Coleman introduces a new code phrase (see Phictionary) into the Orange Progressive lexicon, one espousing the economic and social anarchism so near and dear to Mr. Coleman’s beliefs for decades. According to Mr. Coleman, “economic localization is an approach to economic development rooted in supporting local businesses, fostering local entrepreneurship and creating opportunities for the local work force.” Astute observers note that Mr. Coleman makes a call for rural villages surrouding Buckhorn Village for his rural village, local developer friends aka “locomotives” (see Phictionary) have been excluded from the latest cool junior high type “palopartnership” - the Buckhorn Village Developer Dream Team. (See Hot Orange Dream Team Story.)

Mr. Coleman cites a report put out by the Center for Sustainable Economy, yet another tax-exempt organization, this time from Santa Fe, New Mexico. (See Bay Local Report.) This group of university intellectuals “… works with non-profit, business, and government leaders to transform our economic system into one based on renewable energy supplies, protected natural capital, empowered communities, and growth in the quality of our lives rather than the quantity of goods we consume. We accomplish this by: 1.) Exposing the true costs and benefits of public and private sector decisions; 2) Developing plans and programs based on principles of economic, social, and environmental sustainability; 3) Providing expert support for public interest litigation; and. 4.) Educating decision makers, voters, and students about the real state of our economy and society.” In sum, it’s a group of people living in lovely New Mexico telling people living in the crowded San Francisco bay area how to live their lives, on a locally controlled basis. (See Center Leaders.)

According to Mr. Coleman, ”economic localization offers a tremendous opportunity to disengage from the zero-sum game of unbridled competition with other communities for the attention of global corporations.” For Mr. Coleman, Buckhorn Village is “a mammoth 20th-century style development, auto-dependent and anchored by big-box retail. Supporters of this project overlook the long track record of chain stores sucking money out of the local economy. Nor do they recognize the uncertain prospects for auto-centric development patterns as we move past the point of peak oil production in an increasingly oil-hungry global economy. ”

What’s to be put in the place of the Buckhorn Village dinosaur? What is “economic localization” really? What is Mr. Coleman embracing? Mr. Coleman believes in a report that lauds the following scenario.

Local municipal government ensures “food security” as a public good on par with education and health. Local government should establish a department of food access. That department should promote and fund local farm-to-institution marketing programs, establish a program for urban gardens, establish farmers' markets, fund and manage local low-cost food programs, build city-run cafeterias offering subsidized meals, and direct an urban orchard program that plants fruit trees in low-income neighborhoods for all to harvest.

Local municipal government embraces a web of tax-exempt local institutions, elected by no one and responsible only to their funders should be created. That web should include economic, food , energy, housing, and health care cooperatives, credit unions, independent business alliances, community development banks, community choice energy aggregation, community supported agriculture associations, farmers’ markets, and community supported manufacturing. That web of tax-exempts can be funded by local municipal revolving loan funds.

For Mr. Coleman, “economic localization” truly is a code phrase for economic and social anarchism that hits the Marx. You shouldn't be able to prosper without his benign, vastly important, paternalistic control (as an alderman) over your financial well-being.

No word on whether or not Mr. Coleman gets the ironic humor in his remarks. Southern Orange is a community absolutely dependent upon non-local income from people around the state funding the southern Orange economic engine (UNC). Non-local funding makes possible his source of income, a penumbra of university associated tax-exempt organizations.

No word on whether or not Mr. Coleman will go silent once his rural village people get a piece of the Buckhorn Village money pie. (See Hot Orange Carnahan Village Project Story.)

See Chapel Hill News Anarchism Soap Box.

With stunning duplicity, all of the winning candidates elected to the Boa last Fall discover a need for parking in the Carrboro historic business district. Only four months ago, Aldermen Joel Hall Broun, Dan Coleman, and Alderman (then candidate) Lydia Lavelle all said repeatedly in public forums that there was no problem with parking in the Carrboro historic business district. Bourgeoise mill house rentier, dense developer, and tax exempt expert Mayor Mark Chilton even ridiculed candidates in local political forums who begged to tell the reality.

Showing their respect for logical consistency, the Boa attended a retreat to ponder personal values, a Boa first, (see Poet Lariat - Boa Annual Tent Revival) and discovered that parking is a problem in the historic business district. (No word on whether or not “parking” is an emerging value in Carrboro.)

Now in a “dance with bricks” pirouette, the Boa wants a long term parking plan in place, most likely in place after they have approved the development plans of their political friends along Main Street, saving them the loss of profits from including adequate parking spaces.

Alderman Jacquie Gist leaped feet first into reality by saying that the new residential developments approved by the Boa in and near the district will force new residents to rely on parking on residential streets. (Translation, the Boa is approving residential development with insufficient parking allowances, a profit-enhancing move for its loyal local developer constituency.)

No word from Alderman Gist on how people visiting historic district businesses are supposed to park.

No word on apologies from Mayor Chilton now that he has reversed into the parking mess, perhaps awaiting the next election when all will be well again, at least until the vote is in.

See Carrboro Citizen Tent Revival Story.

For years members of the Carrboro governance board have made negative comments about town residents who choose to have grass on their property. Choo-choo line cutter, local pedestrian hazard, and Carrboro alderman Dan Coleman wrote a column in the Chapel Hill Herald displaying his impressive scientific foundation for being against grass growing. Self-described “widest margin” Carrboro alderman Jacquie Gist responded publicly by declaring that “grass makes you stupid”.

A new study from the prairie lands suggests that grass will have the last laugh on the aldermen, showing the price Carrboro residents pay for politicians determining and maintaining public policy based on a “facts optional” world view.

Perennial herbaceous plants such as switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) were evaluated by University of Nebraska researchers as a cellulosic bioenergy crop in multiple acre sized field trials. Switchgrass produced 540% more renewable energy than nonrenewable energy consumed. Switchgrass monocultures managed for high yield produced 93% more biomass yield and an equivalent estimated net energy yield than previous estimates from human-made prairies that received low agricultural inputs. Estimated average greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from cellulosic ethanol derived from switchgrass were 94% lower than estimated GHG from gasoline.

Switchgrass (adapted to the prairie climate and ecosystem) leaves corn (a non-prairie plant) stalking a distant second place.

No word from Aldermen Coleman or Gist as to when apologies will be issued to Carrboro grass owners.