Panhandling ban, corporate welfare, development, and light pollution

The County Commissioners made several far-reaching decisions Monday evening.  I missed the decision about the Durham Library meeting room fees. 

 

Panhandling:

 

A ban on panhandling on roads or to drivers was approved 4 to 1, with only Michael Page dissenting, saying that proponents need to educate themselves about panhandlers.  Commissioner Cheek, who is pushing for the ban, seemed irritated in his closing comments, which I heard on channel 8, and asked if opponents were willing to wait for more people to die panhandling before prohibiting it.  The rule has to be approved one more time, January 28th, to go into effect July 1st.  As expected. there are now rumblings that the City will make its current rule, requiring a $20 dollar permit for panhandling, more prohibitive.  This is being done in the name of safety, but it deprives homeless or supposedly homeless people (and newspaper vendors) of income (leading to crime?), and homeless panhandlers will only be referred to sources of help, or arrested after repeat offenses. 

 

Panhandling is mainly a City problem and from what I have seen it is very much more rare here than in 'downtown' Chapel Hill and at UNC.  I feel bad for people who have to panhandle, but it is an annoyance, and in Chapel Hill most people I have met use variants of the same story about needing money after getting stuck there, so I don't believe them.  I have often seen people on road medians (in the City, though usually in the outskirts) and I have heard that people will walk into the middle of highways.  I think it was Commissioner Reckhow who spoke at the meeting about a panhandler on 15-501 who walked between parked cars and then was standing in the road after the light was green, but when I see them they have always been on the median, and they can be ignored if one does not want to contribute.  The ban also would prohibit roadside newspaper sales and I assume lemonade stands and selling items at roadside vigils.    

 

I think the design of several roads in Durham is much more dangerous than panhandling.  It seems to me that if there are people standing in roads, that could be banned while allowing soliciting on the sidewalk.  At what distance from a road is panhandling legal?  If distracting drivers is a real issue, will they try to ban protests or holding a sign for a business or charity car wash?  I find that much more distracting than panhandling. 

 

Economic Incentives:

 

Businesses in the County are now eligible for incentives equal to 2.25% of their capital investment and $1000-2000 dollars per job created.  A company creating 200-500 jobs can receive $1000 per position, 501-1000 jobs bring in $1500 per position, and $2000 for more than 1000 jobs.  I can see the logic in doing this, but does it work?  There have been too many cases where a business gets incentives and soon after relocates or cuts jobs, and if a company is moving into Durham because of its positive characteristics, it does not need a bribe.  I wonder who will decide what companies get bribes and how much.  Unless this policy is very restricted, it looks to me like more transfer of tax money to the rich and corporate welfare.

 

Development:

 

A proposed residential development on Doc Nichols Rd., off of Leesville Rd, near Highway 98, was approved.  It will have 369 houses and 130 townhouses, and is the first phase of a planned 422-acre development with 1200 houses.

 

Street lights every 100 feet - is it beneficial or a nuisance?  

 

Permit me to rant on one very local Durham issue.  Again in the name of safety, unwanted, night-robbing street lights are being added in front of where I live, to bring the distance between lights from 200 feet to the current 100-foot interval code.  The new light is less than 100 feet from the closest old one.  This is happening because one person or a small group somewhere else in the community complained.  I only hope they use well-shielded lights.  I don't think they will upgrade the light fixtures on old poles simultaneously.  Meanwhile, one light nearby burned out and Duke Power fixed it after being informed, yet the next light down has been on 24 hours a day for months and I'm told they have been informed and they could have seen it while fixing the other light, yet it still it is still there wasting energy and therefore making a small contribution to climate change.  Well-lit roads can be safer, and encourage faster speeds, but there is a cost and lights can increase crime.  I care about light pollution that robs us of the stars and impacts wildlife (think of all those insects attracted to lights and eaten by bats).  A few years ago a light was put in at another spot, to deter crime, and destroyed a good meteor viewing spot, though technically it was closed at night.  I live on a side road, and speed bumps are a more necessary improvement. 

 

There is also talk of putting cameras at the entrances to the development to catch thieves.  Crime is not very common or serious where I live.           

 

 

BOCC 1/14: Library fees, panhandling, etc.

Tomorrow's BOCC meeting is relatively short and will cover two items I have posted on before, the library room fees and a County panhandling ban. 

 

 

THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA

 

Monday, January 14, 2008

 

County Commissioners' Chambers

200 East Main Street , Durham, North Carolina

 

AGENDA

 

"Public Charge"

 

The Board of Commissioners asks its members and citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and fellow citizens.   At any time, should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chairman will ask the offending person to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control.   Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chairman will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to the public charge is observed.

 

As a courtesy to others, please turn off cell phones during the meeting.

_________________________

 

7:00 P.M. Regular Session

 

1.     Opening of Regular Session—Pledge of Allegiance                                                                     5 min.

 

2.     Agenda Adjustments                                                                                                                     5 min.

 

3.     Announcements                                                                                                                            5 min.

 

·      Durham Neighborhood College is seeking applicants for the 2008 spring term.  Applications may be obtained from the Clerk to the Board's office or by visiting the Durham County website at www.durhamcountync.gov.  The deadline is January 18, 2008.

·      An informational workshop will be held for the proposed SR 1978 (Hopson Road) grade separation and the North Carolina Railroad/Norfolk Southern track realignment on Tuesday, January 29, 2008, between 4:30 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. at The Solution Center in the Asheville Room, 1101 Slater Road—Suite 200, Brighton Hall, Durham.

 

4.     Minutes

                                                                                                                                                               5 min.

        a.  December 3, 2007 Worksession

        b.  December 10, 2007 Regular Session

 

5.     Resolution Supporting 2008 Events Honoring Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

                                                                                                                                                               5 min.

The local Martin Luther King Jr. Steering Committee has requested that a resolution be prepared honoring Dr. Martin Luther King's life and legacy and that related activities in Durham County be acknowledged and supported by the entire community.   The resolution will be presented at the MLK Annual Religious Celebration on January 21 at Union Baptist Church at 6:00 p.m.

 

Resource Person(s): Michael D. Page, Vice Chairman

 

County Manager 's Recommendation: The Manager's recommendation is that the Board approve the resolution. 

 

6.     Consent Agenda                                                                                                                           20 min.

 

a.   Donation of Library Storage Shed by Friends of the Durham Library Inc. (accept the donation of a storage shed to be located at the Main Library);

b.   2008 Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Plan Employer List Bill (authorize the execution of the 2008 Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Plan Employer List Bill for the 12-month period beginning January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2009);

c.   Budget Ordinance Amendment No. 08BCC000049—Cooperative Extension—Juvenile Crime Prevention Council (authorize the appropriation of fund balance in the amount of $19,556 for reimbursement to the North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention);

d.   Budget Ordinance Amendment No. 08BCC000050—Recognize Library Gift Fund Revenue from the Durham County Library Foundation (recognize gift funds for a total amount of $23,016 and recognize the revenue in the library general fund budget by that amount; the Foundation pledges this money for the purpose of purchasing needed technology items throughout the entire system);

e.   Library Meeting Room Fee Revision (approve the recommendation of the Durham County Library Board of Trustees to eliminate meeting room fees for nonprofit organizations, while reinstituting a $25 fee for groups serving refreshments and $100 fee for commercial, for-profit groups);

f.    Social Services Shell Positions (approve the establishment of 10 provisional shell positions funded through lapsed salaries);

g.   Approve the County's new Minority and Women Business Enterprise (M/WBE) Ordinance which shall become effective January 14, 2008; and

h.   Durham Public Schools—Approval of Petition to Annex Property at New Elementary B (approve and submit the annexation petition).

 

7.     Resolution Adopting Economic Development Policy

                                                                                                                                                             30 min.

       Amendments to the "Resolution Adopting Economic Development Policy" were finalized by the Board of County Commissioners during its January 7, 2008 Worksession.   The Board directed that the proposed policy be placed on the January 14, 2008 agenda in order to receive public comment.

 

        Resource Person(s): Mike Ruffin, County Manager; Chuck Kitchen, County Attorney; and Carolyn Titus, Deputy County Manager

 

County Manager's Recommendation : The County Manager recommends that the Board receive public comment and approve the resolution, if appropriate.

 

8.     Regulation of Solicitation on the Streets and Highways of Durham County

                                                                                                                                                             20 min.

After receiving information regarding the possible adoption of an ordinance regulating solicitation in the rights-of-way outside the municipal limits of cities in Durham County, the Board passed (on April 9, 2007) an ordinance regulating solicitation on a 3-1 vote.   As the ordinance was not passed by a unanimous vote of the Board, it was required to be passed on a second vote.  However, due to the length of time since the first vote, the ordinance was considered again by the Board on July 23, 2007.   Following a discussion, the Board deferred the consideration of the Ordinance until the meeting on October 8, 2007.  At that meeting, the ordinance was referred to the City-County Committee.   The City-County Committee met on January 8, and the item is being referred to both the
City Council and the Board of Commissioners. 

 

        Resource Person(s): Chuck Kitchen, County Attorney

 

County Manager 's Recommendation: Adopt the Ordinance as presented.  

 

9.     Quasi-Judicial Hearing: Transportation Special Use Permit—Sierra (T07-02)

                                                                                                                                                             15 min.

To hold a quasi-judicial public hearing to consider a Transportation Special Use Permit for traffic impact in association with consideration of a major site plan for a residential development on parcels located on the east side of Doc Nichols Road, north of Leesville Road and southwest of Olive Branch Road, within the PDR 3.000 zoning district and F/J-B overlay.  PINs 0860-03-33-3314, 0860-01-20-8767, 0769-01-28-5772, -27-6679

 

To direct the Planning Director to prepare an order for adoption, for 1) approval, 2) approval with conditions, or 3) denial, or to continue the hearing to a specified later meeting.   (A draft order for approval with staff-recommended conditions will be available at the meeting.)

 

Request: Transportation Special Use Permit (TSUP)

 

Staff Recommendation: Approval, based on the technical conformance with Ordinance requirements.  Staff will make a final recommendation following the public hearing.

 

Resource Person(s): Steven L. Medlin, AICP, Interim City-County Planning Director, and William E. Judge, PE, City Transportation Division

 

County Manager's Recommendation: The Manager recommends that the Board conduct a quasi-judicial hearing on the proposed Transportation Special Use Permit and approve it, if appropriate, based on the testimony received.

 

10.   Major Site Plan and Preliminary Plat—Sierra (D06-283)

                                                                                                                                                             15 min.

If the Transportation Special Use Permit is approved, then approve a Major Site Plan and Preliminary Plat for "Sierra" submitted by Horvath Associates, PA, on behalf of MacGregor Development Company, to develop 369 single family and 130 town-home lots with a pool, clubhouse, and tennis courts, on 176.36 acres of a 422.60 acre site zoned Planned Development Residential 3.000 (PDR 3.000) and Falls/Jordan Protected Area (F/J-B).  The site is located east of Doc Nichols Road, north of Leesville Road, and southwest of Olive Branch Road.   PIN 0860-03-33-3314, 0860-01-20-8767, 0860-01-28-5772, 0860-01-27-6679

 

The Development Review Board recommended approval of the site plan on October 5, 2007 by a vote of 6-3.

 

Resource Person(s):  Steven L. Medlin, AICP, Interim City-County Planning Director

 

County Manager 's Recommendation: The Manager recommends approval of the site plan and preliminary plat.

 

11.   Durham Open Space and Trails (DOST) Commission Matching Grants Funding Recommendation

                                                                                                                                                             15 min.

The Durham Open Space and Trails Commission (DOST) received six applications for the Matching Grants Program to assist nonprofit community organizations with recreational and open space projects.  The Matching Grants Committee of the DOST and county staff examined the proposed projects to ensure compliance with the program's goals and guidelines.   DOST approved the project and funding recommendation below at its December 19, 2007 meeting:

 

The recommendation to allocate $66,946 of county funds represents a gain to the County of $66,946 in matching funds as half the projects' proposed value of $133,892.   The Matching Grants program budget was approved in the FY2007-2008 Budget.      

 

Resource Person(s): Annette Montgomery, Matching Grants Committee Chair, and Kevin Etheridge, Budget Analyst/Matching Grants Administrator

 

County Manager's Recommendation : The Manager recommends the BOCC approve the funding requests from Asbury Methodist Preschool, Central Park School, Durham-Orange Recreational Disc Golf Association, and Keep Durham Beautiful and the allocation of $66,946 of the budgeted Matching Grants funds to these projects.

                                                                                                                                                            _____

                                                                                                                                                    2 hrs.

RTI International's role in Iraq

The Herald-Sun ran two articles about work promoting "democratic" "self-governance" carried out by RTI International (www.rti.org) in Iraq (RTI says Iraq is making progress , on the front page, and Iraqi infrastructure presents challenge, on A5).  Supposedly Iraq did not have a constitution (this could be true, but I doubt it) or laws, other than those from the 50's, and the whole tone of the first article is that these 'savages' had little without us and cannot create democracy on their own.  For example, consider the phrase "the country's still awkward embrace of self-determination," which it of course had since freeing itself from the UK until it was occupied by the US and again by the UK in 2003).  An independent country is sovereign whether it is democratic or a dictatorship, and nations generally have the government they tolerate.  Also, there was an article several years ago, reprinted in the Triangle Free Press, that democratic local governments were formed early on by the Iraqis, but the US military disbanded them, and the US was forced to have elections ahead of schedule by pressure from the Shiite establishment.   

 

Deputy chief of party for the RTI project, Mark Grubb, is quoted as saying his team "believe[s] in a peaceful solution," and the reporter says "a local government program, as in Anbar province, was a key to seeing terrorists pushed out." Apparently using force is "peaceful," and RTI's program is admittedly supporting occupation.  This is how it usually is with the media, so use of force by Americans, Israelis, or other allies is for self-defense and peaceful, but the opposition is the only one that disturbs the peace and uses violence.  RTI could not do what it is doing without the US attacks on civilians and the resistance forces.  The "terrorists" in this case could be foreign al Qaida Islamists who are apparently disliked, with good reason, by the Iraqis, or are they patriotic Iraqis who want to free their country?  The Chief of party, Ross Wherry, is quoted later about the "normal leaders," such as local government, teachers, and professors being assassinated.  This could be more of al Qaida's terrorist campaign against secular institutions, but you could also assume from the article that these people are collaborating with the occupation.  In our society of course local government officials and educators exist to uphold the status quo, because the government is what pays their salaries, that's why we talk about ivory tower intellectuals. It could be unjust that civilian government employees are targeted, but that is often part of a war for independence, and not proof of any unique Muslim 'barbarism.'   

 

It is also 'funny' that Wherry says "Life is a little cheaper than in the United States" and that the Iraqis refuse to give up to people "who want to run the country with guns."  This is odd because the US military is cheap with Iraqi lives - for example in Falluja they bombed the hospitals and the US apparently does not track civilian casulaties, as are contractors like Blackwater, and the US wanted to 'run the country with guns' in 2003.  Of course al Qaida is careless with Iraqi lives, but so is the the US, which pulled al Qaida's strings in Afghanistan in the 70's, 80's and 90's, where Islamists also attacked teachers (look for that fact in Charlie Wilson's War).   

 

The second article starts by saying that efforts to win hearts and minds are hampered by "the deplorable state of infrastructure left behind by the regime of brutal dictator Saddam Hussein."  Wherry admits that Iraq was "a pretty nice place to live in 1975," under Hussein, but was destroyed by war "and a long set of sanctions because of the behavior of their government."  They correctly admit that Iraq was at the front of development in the Arab world, in addition to lacking today's sectarian violence, and that the sanctions were a disaster for Iraqi civilians.  Wherry's statements is more of the US, UK, and UN Security Council hypocrisy about Saddam making them kill Iraqis.  The US bombed civilian infrastructure such as water treatment plants in Yugoslavia, and presumably in Iraq too.  Wherry also makes it look like the Iraqi government did not try to help people survive the sanctions, when there was an effective food distribution system, dismantled by the occupiers.  I think Iraq could have done much better than President Saddam Hussein, but removing him was not up to us or necessary for our safety, and I am disgusted by the way most reporters and politicians lie about Iraq, to justify this neo-colonialism. We can do a lot better than George W Bush, or any of the frontrunners for 2008, but it would be a crime for another country to 'save us' from our government.       

 

In all of this, RTI is working with US AID, an agency the US uses to project insidious soft power, though I think I also read of its involvement in the attempted overthrow of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez in 2002.  Wherry and Grubb are former Marines.  Much of RTI's top management comes out of the big pharmaceutical companies, such as GlaxoSmithKline, the military industrial complex, and the US military.  The military industrial complex, US imperialism, and pharmaceuticals compose much of RTI's client list, posted online.  

 

I am sure RTI will come up at the March Triangle Socialist Forum, on who has benefited from the "War on Terror."           

Historic impeachment debate next Tuesday in Carrboro

For Immediate Release:

January 7, 2008 

Contact:

John Heuer, for general, sponsor and interview information

919-933-6589, 919-444-3823

jheuer at coalitionfortheconstitution dot com 
 
 

Hodding Carter III to moderate historic impeachment debate between Bruce Fein and Michael Tomasky 

Conservative Republican and Progressive Journalist will debate Impeachment at the Carrboro Century Center on January 15, 2008 at 7pm.  Guess who's arguing for Impeachment?  
 

CARRBORO, N.C.: In the tradition of the Lincoln/Douglas Debates, Coalition for the Constitution will host a Debate on Impeachment between Republican Bruce Fein (pro-impeachment) and Democrat Michael Tomasky (anti-impeachment). The Debate will be held on January 15, 2008 at 7pm, at the Carrboro Century Center and will be moderated by UNC Professor of Leadership and Public Policy, W. Hodding Carter III, and hosted by Orange County Commissioner Moses Carey. Seats are limited so preregistration is suggested at http://coalitionfortheconstitution.com/registration/. The debate will also be webcast on the Coalition for the Constitution web site at http://coalitionfortheconstitution.com. 

Impeachment is mentioned six times in the United States Constitution, including most clearly in Article II, section 3 which reads: 

"The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."  

Recently, privileged resolution HR 799 (HR 333 re-introduced), Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney, was introduced on the floor of the House. Former presidential candidate Joe Biden has also raised the impeachment issue on the campaign trail in connection with a possible war with Iran.  

To help the public better understand the pros and cons of impeachment, the organizers have lined up two well-known political pundits to debate and answer those questions. Admission is free and all citizens are encouraged to attend.  

Bruce Fein is a lawyer, specializing in constitutional and international law, who served as an associate deputy attorney general under Ronald Reagan. He has recently been a strong advocate for the impeachment of current U.S. vice-president Dick Cheney and President George W Bush. Fein graduated from Harvard Law School in 1972. In March 2007, he founded the American Freedom Agenda with Bob Barr, David Keene and Richard Viguerie. Fein is counsel to Ron Paul's campaign for the 2008 Presidential nomination. One of his most scathing indictments of Dick Cheney appeared in his article for Slate.com entitled, "Impeach Cheney, The Vice President has run utterly amok and must be stopped." http://www.slate.com/id/2169292/

Michael Tomasky, is a progressive journalist who has recently written an article about impeachment, entitled, "The Dumbest Move the Dems Could Make", which has been cited by the Democratic Leadership, and 4 ^th District North Carolina Congressman, David Price, as the reasoning behind their refusal to support impeachment. Tomasky has served as the executive editor of The American Prospect and is the author of Left for Dead: The Life, Death, and Possible Resurrection of Progressive Politics in America (1996), a study of the intellectual collapse of the American left. "Here is a link to his article "The Dumbest Move the Dems could Make ": http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/02/AR2007080201767.html

Hodding Carter III served as Assistant Secretary of State under President Jimmy Carter. For additional information, please visit: http://www.knightcommission.org/about/kciamember/hodding_carter_iii/ 

Bruce Fein and Michael Tomasky are available for press interviews, starting on January 12^th through the 15^th. Please contact John Heuer for scheduling arrangements. Telephone 919-933-6589 or 919-444-3823 email

jheuer at coalitionfortheconstitution dot com. 

Fein v. Tomasky Debate

7 pm, January 15, 2008

Carrboro Century Center

# # # 

End

Can we trust New Hampshire's voting machines?

After the stolen presidential election of 2000 (because the vote counting was stopped) and the probably stolen election of 2004 (in Ohio), I wonder when the media struggles to explain how polls get results wrong.  Below is something regarding New Hampshire's primary.  There are many problems built into our electoral system that discourage voting, but do we also have to worry that the election will be stolen again this year, or that there will be a shocking "October Surprise" engineered to benefit one side, or even provide a pretext to stop the election (which I hope is unlikely)?  If any of this happens, will the losing side and the American public allow it, or will we refuse to allow it, as people in other countries have risen up against their canceled or stolen elections in recent years? 

 

>Please distribute widely, Digg, Blog, reprints, get
this to the media, etc.
>
>A YouTube video from Black Box Voting that you won't
soon forget:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiiaBqwqkXs
>
>THE CAT THAT CONTROLS NEW HAMPSHIRE ELECTION
PROGRAMMING
>
>John Silvestro and his small private business, LHS
Associates, has exclusive programming contracts for
ALL New Hampshire voting machines, which combined will
count about 81 percent of the vote in the primary. And
as to Super Tuesday and beyond: Silvestro also has the
programming contracts for the states of Connecticut,
Massachusetts, and Vermont.
>
>Silvestro IS the New Hampshire chain of custody in
New England -- Or at least, a very large component in
it.
>
>Last fall, with the help of citizens like you, Black
Box Voting began working on "Chain of Custody"
projects, in which we identified some of the areas of
concern that might affect many jurisdictions at once.
First on the list for the Northeast U.S. is LHS
Associates, a vendor with inside access to every
memory card, as well as to the chips containing the
"brain" of the Diebold optical scan machines.
>
>RARE VIDEO FOOTAGE
>
>In an unusual confluence of available video, we
obtained footage of Silvestro grappling with Harri
Hursti, the master hacker who had his way with the
Diebold optical scans in Leon County, Florida in the
famous exploit that was showcased in the film Hacking
Democracy.
>
>The exact same make, model and version hacked in the
Black Box Voting project in Leon County is used
throughout New Hampshire, where about 45 percent of
elections administrators hand count paper ballots at
the polling place, with the remaining locations all
using the Diebold version 1.94w optical scan machine.
Because the voting machine locations tend to be urban,
this represents about 81 percent of the New Hampshire
voters.
>
>The video shows Harri Hursti testifying on Sept. 19
before the New Hampshire legislature, attempting to
explain significant vulnerabilities requiring urgent
mitigations; throughout his testimony, Silvestro
inserted his own comments, opinions, misstatements and
speculations.
>
>VOTING MACHINE CHECKUP
>
>One area of disagreement between Hursti and Silvestro
was the amount of expertise needed to exploit the
Diebold 1.94w optical scan system. Silvestro claimed
(in a strange contortion of reasoning) that he doesn't
hire very skilled programmers, implying that this
makes New Hampshire elections more secure.
>
>Hursti pointed out that hiring programmers with a
lack of knowledge is generally not considered a
security feature, and also that an average high
schooler can learn to exploit the system in two days
to two weeks.
>
>WE THINK IT DOESN'T TAKE THAT LONG
>
>Black Box Voting purchased a Diebold optical scan
with 1.94w firmware, and chose a computer repair shop
out of the phone book, took it in, grabbed the first
available technician. It took him less than 10 minutes
to zero in on the memory card as a point of critical
vulnerability -- and oh my, did he point out some
other intersting things!
>
>NEW HAMPSHIRE HASN'T UPGRADED SYSTEM SECURITY
>
>Silvestro tries to claim that the security problems
have been fixed in newer editions. Whether or not they
have been, it's a moot point in New Hampshire where
the upgrade is not made unless the Ballot Law
Commission meets, and they have not met for ages.
>
>Silvestro then points to extraordinary measures taken
by other states to enact special procedural
safeguards, but of course none of those were
implemented in New Hampshire either, because the
Ballot Law Commission has not bothered to meet since
March 2006.
>
>IN FACT, NEW HAMPSHIRE HAS NOT IMPLEMENTED
MITIGATIONS FOR KNOWN RISKS
>
>Not only that, they have turned all the programming
over to a sole source private company, taking vote
counting for 81 percent of New Hampshire citizens out
of the public domain.
>
>LHS is not subject to public records requirements, as
the government is, at least, not in New Hampshire. The
control over memory card contents is absolute; when
cards malfunction or get lost, LHS brings the
replacements.
>
>CONTROL OVER THE "BRAINS" OF THE MACHINE: ACCESS TO
THE CHIP
>
>Since LHS maintains the machines, repairs the
machines, and replaces the machines -- often on
Election Day -- when they malfunction, they have
intimate access to the chips, sockets, ports,
communications devices and other electronic
components.
>
>Silvestro stated that the chip has "read only memory"
and cannot be reprogrammed without frying it under
ultraviolet light overnight.
>
>Hursti never had a chance to examine the hardware,
nor have most of the recent university studies had
access. But our friendly neighborhood computer repair
guy differed with Silvestro on the point of plug &
play reprogramming of the guts of the machine.
>
>After I push the button to send this message out to
the media and the citizenry, I'll work on getting a
short YouTube video of the Accuvote checkup by our
local computer repairman. And before you say, "But
wait! He's not a world class expert!" -- That's just
the point.
>
>Our local computer repairman may hit or miss on some
of his analyses. You'll all be able to try your hand
at second guessing him as soon as the next video is
up. But if he hits even one of his ideas for how to
exploit the machine to steal votes, that's all it
takes. From someone who is not, certainly, a world
class hacker or even a hacker at all.
>
>I'll post the link to that in a follow up here:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/71200.html?1199744175
, and invite you techs to weigh in.
>
>Please feel free to distribute, reprint or excerpt,
with link to Black Box Voting and the video link
above.
>
>Bev Harris
>Black Box Voting
>bev at blackboxvoting dot org
 

Chickens in Durham and suburban sprawl

There is a petition online at: 

 

www.petitiononline.com/backyard/petition.html 

 

to allow chickens in the Durham city limits.  An email said they are currently only allowed in areas zoned residential suburban tier 20.  I think this is a good idea, as long as it is not too noisy, and I am for urban agriculture and gardening.  SEEDS NC might be behind the petition, and for information on chicken husbandry, contact SEEDS' Durham Inner City Gardeners program co-coordinator Kavanah Ramsier (kramsier at seedsnc dot org / (919) 683 1197 / SEEDS Community Garden on 706 Gilbert St.) 

 

Also, the developer of the proposed Boylan project, in the rural area on the west side of 751 at the intersection of 751 and Fayetteville Rd., across from the Jordan at Southpointe "conservation subdivision" site, will be meeting with the community tonight at 7 at the Chacellor's Ridge Clubhouse, 1511 Sophomore). 

Agenda from the last City Council meeting

I neglected to mention the City Council meeting on the 2nd, so here it is after the fact.  I think both the Council and the County Commissioners will be meeting in a week.

 

Present:

Mayor William V. Bell.
Mayor Pro Tempore Cora Cole-McFadden and Council Members
Eugene Brown
Diane Catotti
Howard Clement, III
Thomas A. Stith, III
Mike Woodard

Absent: None

Disclaimer: All information on the web site is subject to tampering and unauthorized changes without the knowledge of the City of Durham. Minutes are available after City Council approval. Contact the City Clerk's Office at 919-560-4166.

[Consent Agenda]

1. Approval of City Council Minutes

To approve City Council Minutes for the November 20, 2006 City Council Meeting;

To approve City Council Action taken at the November 9, 2006 City Council Work Session; and

To approve City Council Minutes for the following Closed Sessions: January 22, 2004, September 9, 2004, May 19, 2005, September 22, 2005, November 10, 2005, December 8, 2005 and March 23, 2006. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: D. Ann Gray – 4166) (PR# 3622)

2. Firemen's Relief Fund Board of Trustees - Appointment

To appoint Larry Crabtree to fill one (1) vacancy on the Firemen's Relief Fund Board of Trustees with the term to expire on January 1, 2009. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

Note: At the Work Session on December 20, 2006, Mr. Crabtree received seven (7) votes.

(Due to the term expiring of Larry Crabtree)

(Resource Person: LaVerne V. Brooks – 4166) (Attachment #2 - 3 pages) (PR# 3613)

3. Housing Appeals Board - Appointment

To appoint W. Russell Congleton to fill one (1) vacancy on the Housing Appeals Board for an Alternate Member to represent Residence Owner with the term to expire June 30, 2009. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

Note: At the Work Session on December 20, 2006, Mr. Congleton received seven (7) votes

(Due to a vacancy)

(Resource Person: LaVerne V. Brooks – 4166) (Attachment #3 - 3 pages) (PR# 3615)

4. Raleigh-Durham Airport Authority - Appointment

To appoint Tonita F. Lipscomb to fill one (1) vacancy on the Raleigh-Durham Airport Authority with the term to expire on January 1, 2009. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

Note: At the Work Session on December 20, 2006, Ms. Lipscomb received seven (7) votes

(Due to the term expiring of Tonita F. Lipscomb)

(Resource Person: LaVerne V. Brooks – 4166) (Attachment #4 - 6 pages) (PR# 3616)

5. Set Date for FY 2007-2008 Annual Action Plan "Needs" Public Hearing

To set a public hearing for the FY 2007-2008 Annual Action Plan "Needs" for January 16, 2007 and to receive public comments on the City's Housing and Community Development needs. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Karmisha R. Wallace – 4570 ext. 277) (Attachment #5 - 2 pages) (PR# 3630)

6. Bid Report - October 2006

To receive a report and to record into the minutes bids which were acted upon by the City Manager during the month of October 2006. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Persons: Joseph W. Clark and Lynette McRae – 4132) (Attachment #6 - 6 pages) (PR# 3624)

7. Resolution Authorizing An Auction

To adopt a resolution authorizing an auction to be held on January 27, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Joseph W. Clark – 4132) (Attachment #7 - 3 pages) (PR# 3627)

8. Setting Public Hearings for the Confirmation of Assessment Rolls

To adopt resolutions setting public hearings for January 16, 2007, for the following assessment rolls: [Approved – Vote 7/0]

Sewer Main on Marvin Drive from Farrington Road to the West Property Line of Tax Map 484-4-12;

Sewer Main on Pavillion Place from the North Property Line of PIN 0709-02-85-4702 to the South Property Line of PIN 0709-02-85-3564; and

Sewer Main on Mayo Street from Tax Map 603-2-1 to the South Property Line of Tax Map 603-2-2

(Resource Persons: R. Lee Murphy and Nathan L. McHenry – 4326) (Attachment #8 - 1 page) (PR# 3604)

9. Setting Public Hearings to Consider Ordering Petitioned Improvements

To accept a Certificate of Sufficiency from the Manager of Engineering and Stormwater for each of the following petitions, and

To adopt a resolution setting a public hearing for January 16, 2007, to consider ordering each of the following improvements: [Approved – Vote 7/0]

Water Main on Brightwood Lane from Fletchers Chapel Road West to the West Property Line of PIN 0852-04-52-1762;

Curb, Gutter and Paving, Water and Sewer Laterals on Red Oak Avenue from Hemlock Avenue to Gaston Avenue; and

Sidewalk on Infinity Road (South Side) from Shadebush Drive to Lazyriver Drive

(Resource Persons: R. Lee Murphy and Nathan L. McHenry – 4326) (Attachment #9 - 4 pages) (PR# 3612)

10. Street Acceptance

To accept the street on the attached list for maintenance by the City of Durham. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Persons: R. Lee Murphy and Nathan L. McHenry – 4326) (Attachment #10 - 2 pages) (PR# 3620)

11. Proposed Sale of Property at 519-B Eastway Avenue PIN #0831-10-45-4488 and 1405 Taylor Street PIN #0831-10-45-6096

To determine the properties at 519-B Eastway Avenue and 1405 Taylor Street as surplus;

To authorize the sale of the properties under the authority of Section 86 of the City Charter;

To accept the offers to purchase for the properties located at 519-B Eastway Avenue and 1405 Taylor Street; and

To authorize the City Manager to sell and the Mayor to convey the properties by a non-warranty deed.

Note: This item was approved at the December 20, 2006 City Council Work Session.

12. City Council Practices on Excused Absences

To discuss City Council practices regarding excused absences. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Thomas Stith – 4396)

13. Amendment to the Targeted Community Development Areas to Include a Portion of Holloway Street

To adopt a "Resolution Establishing a Job Creation and Retention and Investment Incentive Policy", and

To amend the "Targeted Community Development Areas" map to include those properties fronting Holloway Street between Alston Avenue and Miami Boulevard. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Chris Dickey – 4965 ext. 226) (Attachment #13 - 10 pages) (PR# 3599)

14. Lease Agreement between the City of Durham and the State of North Carolina for Exclusive Space on the Cole Mill Road Radio Tower to Operate a Viper System

To authorize the City Manager, under the authority of G.S. 160A-274 to execute the 20-year Lease Agreement with an automatic renewal of one 10-year term with the State of North Carolina to lease space on the radio tower at Parcel #174121 – 1701 Colewood Drive; and

To authorize the City Manager to make changes to the Lease, prior to execution, provided such changes do not materially affect the intent and purpose of the Lease and agenda memo. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: David Fleischer – 4197 ext. 288) (Attachment #14 - 15 pages) (PR# 3606)

15. Compensation and Classification Recommendations

To adopt as amended the Plan of Position Compensation and Classification for the City of Durham effective January 6, 2007. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Kevin Patton – 4214 ext. 273) (Attachment #15 – 7 pages) (PR# 3618)

16. Contract Amendment for Contract ST-224 Downtown Improvements Phases I & II

To authorize the City Manager to amend contract ST-224 Downtown Improvements Phases I & II with Triangle Grading & Paving, Incorporated by $1,766, 000.00. This represents a 15.5% increase over the $11,381,902.00 previously authorized expenditure to facilitate completion of the street improvements; and

To authorize the expenditure from the Water Extensions & Improvements and the Downtown Improvements Phases I & II accounts. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Edward R. Venable – 4326 ext. 233) (Attachment #16 - 3 pages) (PR# 3591)

17. Memorandum of Agreement for the US 15-501 Transit Corridor

To authorize the City Manager to execute the Memorandum of Agreement for the US 15-501 Transit Corridor; and

To authorize the City Manager to make minor non-substantive changes consistent with the general objectives of the agreement. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Andy Henry – 4366) (Attachment #17 - 23 pages) (PR# 3621)

18. Contract ST-227 Street Improvements

To authorize the City Manager to execute contract ST-227 for Street Improvements with Thalle Construction Company, Incorporated in the amount of $4,397,930.50;

To establish a contingency fund in the amount of $590, 442.80 (13.43%); and

To authorize the City Manager to negotiate change orders provided that the cost of all change orders does not exceed $590,442.80 and the total project cost does not exceed $4,988,373.30.

Note: At the request of the City Manager, this item was referred back to the administration – Public Works Department.

(Resource Person: Edward R. Venable – 4326 ext. 233) (Attachment #18 - 3 pages) (PR# 3625)

19. Professional Engineering Services for Pavement Condition Survey

To authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Incorporated in an amount not to exceed $49,952.00 for professional services to perform a Pavement Condition Survey for the City of Durham; and

To authorize the City Manager to modify the contract before execution provided the modifications do not increase the dollar amount of the contract and are consistent with the general intent of the version of the contract approved by the City Council. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Douglas D. Vaughn – 4326 ext. 287) (Attachment #19 - 2 pages) (PR# 3626)

20. Hock Plaza Public Storm Sewer System Contract

To adopt an ordinance amending the Stormwater Improvement Project Ordinance, Fiscal Year 2006-07, as amended, the same being Ordinance #13288; and

To authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Hock Plaza II, LLC in an amount up to $1,500, 000.00 for the storm sewer system improvements within Pratt Street and Douglas Street. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Paul J. Wiebke – 4326 ext. 239) (Attachment #20 - 6 pages) (PR# 3632)

21. Knuckle Boom Truck Replacement Plan

To authorize the City Manager to declare three (3) Chevrolet/Hol-Mac knuckle boom trucks with cabs (Fleet Numbers 34303, 34304, and 34305) as surplus and post the trucks in an electronic auction on Govdeals.com. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Donald Long – 4682) (Attachment #21 - 2 pages) (PR# 3486)

22. Engineering Services for Repairs to the Little River Dam

To adopt a resolution exempting engineering services for the Little River Dam Repair Project from G.S. 143-64.31;

To authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Hazen and Sawyer for engineering services in an amount not to exceed $197, 470.00 for the Little River Dam Repair Project; and

To authorize the City Manager to modify the contract before execution provided the modifications do not increase the dollar amount of the contract and are consistent with the general intent of the version of the contract approved by City Council. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Nancy Newell – 4381) (Attachment #22 - 47 pages) (PR# 3571)

23. Contract SR-45 – East Durham Outfalls, Phase II

To authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Reynolds In-liner, LLC for Contract SR-45 East Durham Outfalls Phase II in the amount of $548,892.00;

To establish a contingency fund for Contract SR-45 of $54,888.00; and

To authorize the City Manager to negotiate change orders for Contract SR-45 provided that the cost of all change orders does not exceed $54, 888.00 and the total project cost does not exceed $603,780.00. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Donald Greeley – 4381) (Attachment #23 - 3 pages) (PR# 3619)

24 – 28. These items can be found on the General Business Agenda – Public Hearings.

33. Hollow Rock Planning Committee – Appointment

To appoint Council Member Mike Woodard to the Hollow Rock Planning Committee. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: D. Ann Gray - 4166)

[General Business Agenda – Public Hearings]

24. Plan Amendment — Lowe's of South Durham (A06-03)

To receive public comments on the Lowe's of South Durham (A06-03) Plan Amendment; and

To adopt a resolution to change the Land Use designation on the Future Land Use Map of the Durham Comprehensive Plan from Medium Density Residential (6-12 DU/Ac.) to Commercial and Institutional.

Mayor Bell was excused from voting on this item by Council due to conflict of interest.

Approved [Vote 5/1/] Ayes: Mayor Pro Tempore Cole-McFadden and Council Members Brown, Clement, Stith and Woodard. Noes: Council Member Catotti.

Mayor Bell also abstained from voting on the item after being excused from voting by Council due to the financial interest announced earlier.

Staff Recommendation: Denial, based on lack of justification and not meeting one of the criteria for plan amendments.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, 8-3, based on the proposed designation being appropriate for this location.

(Resource Person: Frank M. Duke, AICP – 4137 ext. 213) (Attachment #24 - 12 pages) (PR# 3629)

25. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment - Chain-Link Fencing (TC06-19)

To receive public comments on the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Change - Chain-link Fencing (TC06-19); and

To adopt an Ordinance Amending the Unified Development Ordinance, the same being Chapter 24 of the Durham City Code, incorporating revisions to Article 9 to repeal the provisions restricting use of chain-link fences. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

(Resource Person: Frank M. Duke, AICP – 4137 ext. 213) (Attachment #25 - 4 pages) (PR# 3623)

26. Initial Zoning Map Change – Triangle Metro Center (Z06-61A)

To receive public comments on the initial zoning map change for Triangle Metro Center (Z06-61A);

To adopt an Ordinance Amending the Unified Development Ordinance, the same being Chapter 24 of the Durham City Code, to establish OI(D), CC(D), IL, RU-M(D) zoning for the property described in the attached staff report; and

To adopt as support for its action on the proposed zoning map change the determinations that the action is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is reasonable and in the public interest given that this reflects the zoning of the property in the County and in light of information presented in the public hearing and in the accompanying agenda materials. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

Staff Recommendation: Approval, based on annexation by the Council and the information contained in this report.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the resolution adopted by the Commission on December 13, 2005 and attached to the staff report. [The site is located north of Hopson Road, east and west of Davis Drive. PIN's 0737-02-96-7491, 0737-02-96-8491, 0737-02-96-7380, 0737-02-96-7188, 0737-02-96-8294, 0747-01-06-0400, 0747-01-06-1334, 0747-01-06-2382, 0747-01-06-3373, 0747-01-06-1137, 0747-01-06-2281, 0747-01-06-3281, 0747-03-14-2755]

(Resource Person: Frank M. Duke, AICP – 4137 ext. 213) (Attachment #26 - 8 pages) (PR# 3598)

27. Initial Zoning Map Change – Simko Property (Z06-21A)

To receive public comments on the initial zoning map change for Simko Property (Z06-21A);

To adopt an Ordinance Amending the Unified Development Ordinance, the same being Chapter 24 of the Durham City Code, to establish RR and IP zoning for the property described in the attached staff report; and

To adopt as support for its action on the proposed zoning map change the determinations that, while the action is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, it is reasonable and in the public interest given that this reflects the zoning of the property in the County and in light of information presented in the public hearing and in the accompanying agenda materials. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

Staff Recommendation: Approval, based on annexation by the Council and the information contained in this report.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, 14-0 on November 12, 2006. The Planning Commission finds that the ordinance request is not consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The Commission believes the request is reasonable and in the public interest and recommends approval based on the information in the staff report and comments received during the public hearing.

[The site is located on the east side of Page Road, south of Wind River Parkway and north of Smallwood Drive. PINs: 0758-02-58-6254 and 0758-67-3847 (City of Raleigh)]

(Resource Person: Frank M. Duke, AICP – 4137 ext. 213) (Attachment #27 - 8 pages) (PR# 3597)

28. Initial Zoning Map Change – Junction Road Property (Z06-65A)

To receive public comments on the initial zoning map change for Junction Road Property (Z06-65A);

To adopt an Ordinance Amending the Unified Development Ordinance, the same being Chapter 24 of the Durham City Code, to establish RS-M(D), RS-10(D), RS-8(D), IL, RS-20 and RS-8 zoning for the property described in the attached staff report; and

To adopt as support for its action on the proposed zoning map change the determinations that, while the action is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, it is reasonable and in the public interest given that this reflects the zoning of the property in the County and in light of information presented in the public hearing and in the accompanying agenda materials. [Approved – Vote 7/0]

Staff Recommendation: Approval, based on annexation by the Council and the information contained in this report.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the resolution adopted by the Commission on December 13, 2005 and attached to the staff report.

[The site is located on the east side of Junction road, north of Lakecrest Drive and Independence Avenue, south of Clayton Road, and west of Woodland Park Drive. PINs 0841-02-69-9405, -78-8940, 88-0643, -0563; 0841-07-59-7248, -58-7440 (partial)]

(Resource Person: Frank M. Duke, AICP – 4137 ext. 213) (Attachment #28 - 9 pages) (PR# 3596)

[Supplimental Agenda]

[Adjournment]

Ban panhandling in Durham?

According to the headline article today in the Metro section of the Herald-Sun, Commissioner Lewis Cheek, and possibly Durham Businesses Against Crime, want a ban on panhandling in road right-of-ways.   There might be safety issues, and I don't like being panhandled when I walk in urban areas (but that is much more of a problem on Chapel Hill's Franklin Street than in Durham, in my experience), but I can see some problems if panhandling is banned, especially in the City.   I think it is logical to sell newspapers on sidewalks in a city, and how would a ban affect the right to protest and do politics, such as the Saturday noon peace vigil at Brightleaf Square?   There could be some selling going on there, and a protest involves more people standing on the edge of the street than a newspaper vendor.  There are few outdoor public spaces for politics, since shopping centers try to ban people (though I think the Supreme Court just ruled that malls, such as Southpoint, cannot bar non-disruptive political speech) and town centers are not the heart of most communities now.   A ban would also seem to ban summer lemonade stands, even on roads with little traffic.  Seemingly homeless panhandlers might need that money, and Commissioner Cheek apparently recognize that poverty cannot be eliminated by making its manifestations illegal.  

 

Tomorrow at 8pm Cheek will address an open DBAC meeting on this issue, in Northgate Mall's Conference Room, on the lower level of the Mall, by Ruby Tuesday.   A ban will be discussed at the next City-County joint meeting January 8^th at 9pm in the County government building at 200 East Main St.     

Iowa's unrepresentative caucus

The Iowa caucus is this Thursday and is the first primary election of the 2008 presidential campaign.  It also demonstrates many of the flaws in our elections.  Articles in the Herald-Sun and the News & Observer Tuesday give different estimates of the number of people expected to caucus - 120,000 to 150,000 Democrats and 80,000 to 90,000 Republicans, or fewer than 125,000 Democrats and 87,000 Republicans, respectively.  Iowa has a population of 2,982,085, with 600,572 registered Democrats and 574,571 Republicans.  94.9% of Iowans are white, 7.3% are in poverty, and the median household income is $42,865 dollars. 

 

Part of the reason for the low turnout could be that one or both of the party caucuses will allow people inside only between 7:30 and 8 pm.  According to the N&O article, the Republican caucus will be like a straw poll, and will give numbers of actual votes.  The results of the Democratic caucus will be reported as percents, calculated based on the number of actual votes, and requiring a candidate to get the support of 15% or more of the voters to qualify.  Both parties' caucuses will discuss party business and debate the merits of people's choices.  This sounds very democratic, like a town hall meeting (or a popular council, which is called a soviet in Russian), but what about people who cannot get to the caucus at that time or stay for however long it takes, because of work, disability, severe weather, lack of transportation or childcare, or for some other reason) or want the privacy of a secret ballot?  

 

The caucuses take place on the precinct level and select delegates to county, district, and state conventions, and finally the national party conventions.  It sounds like this is very much controlled by party officials, who probably do not have to vote for the candidate they were selected to support.  The whole point of Iowa being first and using this method was to give the grassroots more influence.  It is up to a party to decide how it will select its candidates, but if registered voters, as opposed to only dues-paying party cadres, are going to be asked to vote, it seems like their supposedly final choice should be given precedence over the machinations of party officials.     

 

These are some of the reasons the caucus does not sound very democratic to a North Carolinian, though it might be fun to caucus.  On another level, the idea of Iowa being first and supposedly being so good at 'winnowing' the field and assessing "viability" irritates me a lot.  Less than 3% of the delegates a candidate needs to win the national election are provided by Iowa, yet it is first, along with New Hampshire.  Some candidates will likely drop out just based on the results in Iowa, and much of the media, which has already been calling candidates ahead or behind based only on polls for months, will further ignore most of the candidates.  This could be an example of a self-fulfilling prophecy, since candidates who are mostly ignored or condemned as "second" or "third-tier" by the media will probably receive less money and attention from voters, and then lose to the candidates the media considers 'viable.'  It is true that some candidates are more likely to win than others based on these advantages, but the media puts most of the attention in the "horse race" on those with money and name recognition, instead of substance, hurting other candidates' chances, before anyone has voted.  By the time the election come to North Carolina, our votes don't matter much in deciding who the candidate for each party will be.  If the candidates spent more effort on states like this one, I'm sure we (or at least the two parties) could do at least as well as Iowans in determining which candidates we want.  I think there is also too much emphasis on personal appearances, but then again, I don't understand why people have so much trouble deciding on candidates or why many think all of the candidates in their party are equally good for their interests.  I can vote in the Democratic primary, though I am like an outsider looking in, but I would say most of the Democrats (and Republicans) are more of the same and dangerous and some are very dangerous, and they are all for capitalism and the general hegemonic control of politics by the capitalist class, whether they realize the implications of what they do and say or not.