Limit the ability of cities to annex: by Ed Williams

Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:37:56 -0400

The NC House Finance Committee approved a bill which would limit the presently unrestrained ability of cities and towns to annex adjoining or nearby lands without any input from the subjects (or victims) of the annexation. This is good news for residents of northeast Chatham.

We are in danger from two competing octopuses (octopi?) - Cary and, even worse, Chapel Hill
After the 2010 census, which is going to be rigged to favor - guess who? - including Chapel Hill, the population of Chapel Hill will be large enough so that the limits within which they can involuntarily annex land will be extended to cover much of NE Chatham, down as far as Fearrington Village. So if Chapel Hill were allowed to annex this area, much tax revenue would be diverted from Chatham to the Octopus of the North (which has 8 left arms).

We can be sure that Chapel Hill's close, intimate, bosom buddies in the legislature will try to get the limit-annexation provisions removed from the bill before it is voted on by the House. We must urge decent legislators to work and vote for restricted annexation. Letting people vote on their annexation is the only genuinely democratic way to go. The present way is dictatorial.

Creating Jobs in NC: By Brian Bock

Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:34:54 -0400

Republicans and fiscal conservatives are often accused of being one trick ponies when it comes to economic development, in effect; lower taxes and you will create jobs. Of course that is an oversimplification of our philosophy but for this article; let’s assume that it is essentially correct.

We see the eye rolling and tolerate the biased press reports anytime a Republican suggests that a tax system with a low rate and is broad based will stimulate job growth. We are told that it won’t work and we can’t afford it. Yet what do Democrats do when they need to attract a large business to the state? They lower taxes!

Two good examples of this include the data centers being built by Apple and Google in North Carolina.

Apple will build a $1 billion data center in Catawba County that will employ 50 people. Some estimate that several hundred more jobs will be created as a result of having the data center. In order to attract Apple, the state had to actually change the tax law just for them. They will be exempt from $46 million in state tax and have up to $21 million in local property tax forgiven over a ten-year period. Google is getting an even larger state and local tax break. All in, Google will get up to $250 million in tax breaks.

This is confirmation that lower state and local taxes create jobs. How many more jobs would be created if we had a sensible tax structure in place that wouldn’t require special rules in order to attract one or two businesses? By enacting a special law just for Apple,
the democrat-controlled legislature has admitted that the current tax rates aren’t conducive to job growth.

Why not lower the cost of doing business in NC for all companies? If the principle works for Apple and Google, it will work for dry cleaners, clothing stores, and countless other businesses. How would we pay for all of this “lost” revenue? The same way we intend to pay for it with Apple and Google. More people will be working and paying taxes, more companies will be opening their doors and paying property taxes and so on.

Since both parties seem to agree to the principle that lower tax rates create jobs, what is the hold up? Let’s get it done!

Spend smarter not more on education by Brian Bock

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 09:46:14 -0400

For as long as I can remember politicians have talked about and campaigned on improving education. More recently they've added "sustainable communities" as a high priority. They claim to have education and sustainability as their top priorities as if the two are not related. Yet after decades of increased spending there are few signs of improved student academic achievement in our public schools.

Too often we measure commitment to education by looking at the amount of money spent rather than actual achievement. Districts tout that they spend more than neighboring counties or states. If we truly want to build sustainable communities, we need to rethink our education priorities. The best way to sustain our way of life is to have a highly educated populace.

North Carolina school districts spent $2.9 billion in the last school year ($2,075 per student). This number has increased steadily over the years, so money is not our problem. Sixty-three percent of the amount spent is on salaries and benefits. Another $643 million is used to cover the debt service for school facilities to maintain construction programs. We should start in these areas if we hope to use our resources more wisely and improve academic achievement.

As legislators struggle to improve the system, three basic tenets should be incorporated; Choice, Accountability, and Freedom. Systems that incorporate all three are proven to succeed.

Let's start with salaries and benefits. There is a better way to allocate the money. Non-instructional staff has increased much faster than enrollment. Let's focus on increasing the teaching staff rather than bureaucracy. School districts need to have the freedom to devise innovative ways to allocate salaries. The state needs to develop performance measures and hold people at all levels accountable to achieve them. Pay should be tied to these specific performance measures rewarding successful teachers and administrators. Local administrations should be free to use funds to attract high-performing teachers in math and science, especially in schools that are underperforming.

Debt service is the other large expenditure to build and maintain facilities. Serious consideration needs to be given to adapting and reusing existing buildings at a much lower cost than building new ones. The economic downturn has left many chicken plants, big box stores, and strip malls empty throughout the state. Let's use them.

Charter schools are a success story. Waiting lists to get into these public schools are many years long in some cases. They are held to the same standards as other public schools and are accountable for results. Unlike a traditional school, they can be shut down if they don't meet the standards. That's accountability in action, yet we cap the number in the state at 100.

They give parents a choice to choose the school that best meets the needs of their children, and they don't cost a dime for the facilities. Much of the bureaucratic red tape has been removed allowing for local decisions. Why would there be such opposition to increasing charter schools and other ideas that provide districts and parents choice, flexibility, accountability and achieve high academic standards?

As long as the existing power structure continues to resist real change in the system, higher achievement will be nearly impossible regardless of the amount of money we spend.

Trickle Down Poverty won’t work by Brian Bock

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:44:15 -0400

There has been much debate about the effectiveness of trickle down economics and it’s role in one of the longest economic expansions in American history. The Obama administration comes down against the theory claiming that it just isn’t fair. He has replaced it with his own economic theory. “Trickle down poverty (TDP)”. Various forms of TDP have been tried throughout the ages and in every case it has failed.

Usually there would be checks and balances in place to stop this race to the bottom and to preserve the ideals that made the United States the largest force for good the world has ever known. There seems to be no opposition, none in the mainstream press, none in the entertainment world, and none in the education system. This is what has me worried.

Anytime a tax cut is proposed, we predictably hear “how will you pay for it” yet when congress passed a TRILLION dollar “stimulus” package, the silence was deafening. Unfortunately that package was just the start. It emboldened politicians at the State and local level to adopt the TDP theory.

In N.C. , the legislature is negotiating broad increases in income taxes to fill the budget gaps. They are planning on increasing rates and broadening it to apply to more types of purchases. In Chatham County, I’ve been told that a significant increase in property taxes will be necessary.

These increases are being proposed during a time when we all have to make tough spending decisions. Government needs to do the same. Entire programs need to be cut or postponed. We shouldn’t be expanding planning departments with new positions such as a new Sustainable Communities director or funding bus lines that nobody will use. We may want to set aside hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy land for future parks, or fully fund an arts incubator, or countless other programs, but we can’t afford it. Revenue in Chatham County is 19% higher than 2002 adjusted for inflation and population growth. I’m sure that holds for many other counties as well. Revenue isn’t our problem! We have to get spending under control.

The most maddening aspect of these tax hikes is that they are always presented to us as a way to fund education. The N.C. public school system has added administrative, non-instructional, and instructional support positions at rates much higher than enrollment. Nobody ever says we need to increase your taxes to fund more bureaucrats but that’s exactly what they are doing.

Enough is enough. Not one more nickel until spending is under control. The Trickle down poverty economic model will not build a sustainable community. It will, however, ensure we are equal.

Not the Same. by Larry Switzer of Chapel Hill

Wed, 29 Apr 2009 19:13:55 -0400

Gwynne Dyer's April 22 column on torture was extremely misleading in stating that the U.S. government declared the waterboard interrogation technique used by the CIA on terrorists as torture 60 years ago and equivalent to the Japanese "water cure" torture.

Water boarding was done under very strict guidelines as to give the terrorist the psychological feeling that he would drown without the physical result of water entering his airways or causing any physical harm. The water cure torture used a rag across an innocent victim's face that allowed profuse amounts of water to enter the mouth and nose and was intended to cause unconsciousness, great physical harm and, in some cases actual drowning. Hardly the same technique!

Comparing our brave citizens in the CIA who were trying to protect our citizens to clear war criminals who murdered literally thousands of our POWs is the only crime committed in this column. I also do not believe a Canadian journalist with a liberal ax to grind has a right to judge any official in the United States, let alone be given the privilege of a quarter-page [on the Other Opinion page] in one of our allegedly major objective newspapers.

Illegal Immigration is the real issue by Randy Dye of Pittsboro

Tue, 7 Apr 2009 08:02:22 -0400

Regarding the 23rd Annual Pilgrimage for Justice and Peace that will stop in Pittsboro on Wednesday, sometimes it’s better to allow things to happen. It wakes up the general public to what’s actually going on and reveals their agenda.

Legal immigrant workers already have legal rights, so the march is without merit. This is not just about illegal aliens coming into the U.S. illegally, it’s also about the “industries” that hire illegal immigrants to replace the American worker. The industries cut wages and benefits so no Americans can afford to make a living to support their families. It’s a vicious cycle where some American industries have turned their back on their fellow Americans out of pure greed.

We should all have to play by the same rules so no one is taken advantage of. It’s why I’m so passionate about legal immigration. These folks have every right to put a march or protest on, just as I have the same right. They are my opponents, but never my enemies.

Big industry, even here in Chatham County in the agriculture industry, has responsibility in this fiasco of illegal immigrants. It’s not about jobs that Americans don’t want to do, it’s about Americans wanting a fair wage for their labor. We must force all employers to play by the same rules. That’s why I still do not understand why the E-verify program was thrown out of the stimulus package; that was big business lobbyists and special interest groups that20got to our legislators.

Here’s something I don’t agree with at all — if U.S. citizens live in Alaska and want to come here to attend Chatham Community College, they are forced to pay out-of-state tuition, but an illegal alien would not. That’s just wrong. Plus, I still have a daughter to put through school, just as a lot of us do. In no way should an illegal immigrant get preference or tuition paid for over struggling families that are here legally in the U.S.

Who in the world are our elected officials representing? I would hope U.S. citizens and not special interest groups of illegal immigrants who should not be in the country in the first place.

Lucier’s shameful failure to keep his promise by Ed Williams

Wed, 4 Mar 2009 17:35:51 -0500

Commissioner Luciers's comrades are leaping to his defense (Chatlist 3354) for his last-minute ducking, weaseling, or chickening out of a forum organized to discuss actions taken by Lucier and other commissioners, plus other matters of interest to the county. Their "reasons" are even sillier than the cobbled-up excuses he gave for breaking his promise to talk to a group of the people that he works for.

Gary Phillips says Lucier didn't want to get "clobbered by an angry mob". He further spews about "lynching meetings manipulated by outside hate groups". (I suppose any group that disagrees with his far-left ideology is a "hate group".) He acccuses the Citizen Forum of "racism", presumably because most of us oppose illegal immigration.

Meg Miller says the Citizen Forum "sounds like a clan meeting to me", and has a "paranoid racist agenda". Who is paranoid here? She sounds not just paranoid but paranormal. (By the way, Ms. Miller, if you decide to leave the BB, and hopefully the Chatlist too, I would say "vaya con dios")

I attended the Forum, and - as we all expected - it was a very civil discussion of the Commissioners' ICE -287(g) resolution, illegal immigration, immigration in general and other matters. The language was moderate (nobody even called Lucier a weasel or chicken). I would estimate the attendance at about 80 - 100. The moderator asked all who lived in Chatham to raise their hands. Almost every hand in the room went up. It was clear to me from the discussion that most of us oppose illegal immigration but not legal immigration. Lucier has done his long-term reputation some serious damage by his failure to keep his commitment. What other commitments will he fail to keep for nonsensical reasons?

Commissioner Fails to Show at public Forum by Ed Williams

Wed, 4 Mar 2009 17:29:04 -0500

Shame on you, Commissioner Lucier, for weaseling out of your commitment to meet with a group of people who don't share your ideology. I won't mention that ideology, since it is obvious. The "reason" for your cowardly behavior is a silly, concocted one.

ONE group (NCFIRE), which you put forth as "an example", has sent flyers to several other groups promoting the Chatham Conservative Voice Forum. So you're afraid that people from the Asheville Action Club are going to be driving down here to be un-civil to you?!?! And you pretend that the circulation of these flyers by one group has "effectively undermined the efforts of CCV and local residents to have a civil discussion..." What utter nonsense! If you attended the forum and it turned out that a number of out-of-county activists were un-civil, then you would have a right to complain. But there is NO WAY you can honestly justify being a weasel and sneaking out before the meeting.

You do not genuinely represent the interests of the people of this county if you weasel out of meeting with a group simply because you are afraid that some people from out-of-county might attend the meeting. Weren't there some people from Chapel Hill and Carrboro at the Board of Commissioners meeting? Of course, that's OK since they share your ideology. Again, shame on you, Lucier.

Open Government by Brian Bock

Tue, 17 Feb 2009 20:25:21 -0500

In a time when it seems that politicians from different political parties can’t agree on anything, there is one topic that, in theory,enjoys universal acceptance. Open Government. From President Obama down to our local county commissioners, all have promised more openness in government.
Our county commissioners have made progress but at times openness gives way to expediency. Unfortunately, when it comes to the most controversial topics openness gets lost altogether. Two current issues come to mind. One I agree with and one I don’t.
The first is the ICE resolution passed in January. I feel strongly that the resolution sends a message that is counter to the goal of bringing the citizens together and ensuring all residents are treated fairly. I know I’m not alone in this sentiment but the BOC did not bother to involve the citizens prior to passing the resolution.
The second is the Liquor by the drink (LBTD) issue. I personally would like to see LBTD. However, I know that many citizens feel differently. A couple of weeks of discussion and quickly placing it on a “special election” ballot, does not pass the openness smell test.
Neither of these issues is new. LBTD has been tossed around for decades and the ICE resolution took 10 months to draft and “research”. Why not take a little extra time to get public input and tailor the decision to fit Chatham County? Why not announce now that they want to place LBTD on the next regular election ballot? Why not post a draft of the ICE resolution on the county website prior to voting and invite public input? I realize they are not required to do any of this, but if they are serious about a more open government it would be nice.
I would like to see Chatham lead the state in openness. A few ideas that could be implemented that would go along way in putting words into action include; 1) Commit to posting all resolutions on the website three months prior to voting. 2) Commit to placing all referendums on the ballot during a regular election. Besides getting more involvement from the public it could save money. 3) Commit to posting the entire line item budget in a searchable format online.

Civil discourse on 287(g)

Sat, 7 Feb 2009 17:28:42 -0500

This a note to all those who would like to see Chatham County use every tool at It’s disposal to ensure that our community is safe, stays safe and enforces the law. Recently I, and many others in the community expressed our displeasure with the recent ICE resolution passed by the BOC without any public input or discussion.
It didn’t take long before the press and our public officials mischaracterized our comments. They immediately began dismissing our legitimate concerns as coming from out of state anti immigrant activists. It’s true that Americans for Legal Immigration (ALIPAC) noticed what was going on here and was able to get national attention. That does not diminish the very real valid concerns that we have about the message that was sent by the resolution. It’s also being said that some of the calls to the commissioners are threatening. I would be surprised if those calls are coming from Chatham County. I also expect that those types of calls are the exception and not the rule. Make no mistake, EVEN ONE THREATENING CALL TO OUR OFFICIALS IS TOO MANY. An issue with this much emotion is bound to raise passion and tempers. from time to time but anyone making those types of calls should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
We don’t help our cause if we are anything other than professional, thoughtful, and civil. Everyone I’ve spoken to in Chatham County from has been extremely polite and has genuine concerns. None of them are racist and none are against immigration. They are against rolling out the welcome mat for illegal immigrants. Most simply want the BOC to hear them and reconsider their resolution after public input.
The facts are on our side. 287(g) DOES lower the crime rate, DOES discourage illegal immigration and it WILL make our county safer. If the BOC is secure in their position, why wouldn’t they welcome a public forum with some debate?
We have to keep fighting this fight. I encourage everyone to send a letter or email to the BOC requesting a public forum and real input from the citizens. This is too important to be intimidated by name calling and innuendoes.
We have posted an ICE resolution that encourages the rule of law and recognizes the importance of immigration on the website CCRP ICE Resolution.pdf It’s posted so the public can comment prior to it’s adoption. We have also posted a quick Quick reference guide.pdf to help with your discussions. Check them out.
Let’s keep speaking up until they hear us. You can’t be heard if you don’t speak.