Showing posts with label General Assembly. Show all posts
Showing posts with label General Assembly. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 24, 2026

Revising Durham's UDO/LDC/LUP; Planning Commission hearing tonight cancelled



A Northern or yellow-shafted flicker (Colaptes auratus) in late afternoon on November 24, 2025; not a mature male. ©
A Northern or yellow-shafted flicker (Colaptes auratus)  in late afternoon on November 24, 2025; not a mature male. ©


[For more photos from late November 2025 see:  durhamspark.blogspot.com/2026/02/some-astronomical-events-fall-2025.html ]



I thought I heard upland chorus frogs or spring peepers very faintly calling in the distance southeast early on about February 18th and 20th (?), but it was hard to tell.  The weather was relatively mild but not very wet.  I heard angry-sounding raccoons or opossums (?) in a wooded area similarly early in the morning or in the evening two or three timerecently and one or two ducks were flying over in the dark one night in February.  I might have heard gunshots nearby at night few times recently (not first if so), but there have been few or none othe pandemic-era unsanctioned car meetups at night (I think a youth was shot by an officer at one at Woodcroft Shopping Center in 2025).  On sunny or warmer days woodpecker 'drumming' rattlefrom nearby wood(afar as I know, the drumming inot produced by flickers, which seem to be uncommon here) and I have probably been hearing smaller Picoides woodpeckers calling nearby.  Large pileated woodpeckers were here in summer 2025, which was unusual, but they live in larger bottomland forests nearby and might not be uncommon there.  Cardinals have been singing a lot (if I did hear frogrecently, they would have been drowned out by the singing cardinals and other birdand traffic noise around dawn), along with mourning doves, chickadees, towhees, etc.  Barred owls have been calling more often, day and night, but not very nearby.  I've heard red-shouldered hawks few times so far this spring.  Many of the migratory birds might have left.  Myrtle warblers are still here and I haven't seen many of the rarer migratory sparrows so far this season.  The small red maple was briefly bleeding sap, which often happens around now, maybe due to a yellow-bellied sapsucker migrating though.  Sapsuckers are here for months, but they often seem to leave the red maple alone until now, or maybe a lot of sarisenow.  The flowing sap attracted Baeolophus bicolor.  Earlier in the season sapsuckersometimes peck at fruit remaining on the persimmon below.  Despite the unusually cold weather in January daffodils sheltered by trees have been coming up fast and one already has a yellow flower bud this week.  Usually winged elms would probably be flowering by now or maybe even about done.  Other elm species might flower more in March.  Some Christmas lights are still on.  There can still be significant snow accumulation here even in March.     



Dry fruit remaining at the very top of the relatively large American persimmon (Diospyros virginiana; in the ebony family) nearby (surrounded by the hickory, left, and oaks) around mid-morning on November 22, 2025. ©
Dry fruit remaining at the very top of the relatively large American persimmon (Diospyros virginiana; in the ebony family) nearby (surrounded by the hickory, left, and oaks) around mid-morning on November 22, 2025. ©





From the New Hope Bird Alliance – petition near Sandy Creek Park in western Durham (Sandy Creek is a tributary of New Hope Creek/River):  www.change.org/p/petition-to-city-council-to-revoke-rezoning-adjacent-to-sandy-creek-park 


Durham Creek Week 2026 will be March 14th-March 22nd, and there will probably be creek weekaround then in Orange, Chatham, and Wake counties, etc.; others are usually held in the summer or fall.


[March 14th-21st:  www.chathamcountync.gov/government/departments-programs-i-z/watershed-protection/regional-creek-week ] [Theme:  “Water Connects Us”]


[ Orange County's 5th Annual Creek Week will be March 21st-29th:  www.orangecountync.gov/3491/Creek-Week ]


[2025 website?  raleighnc.gov/stormwater/services/stormwater-outreach-and-education/regional-creek-week ]


[2025 website, but covering much of the Triangle – nc-cleanwater.com/regional-creek-week-2/creekweek2025/ ]


[In the summer? – www.greensboro-nc.gov/departments/water-resources/get-involved/guilford-creek-week and www.guilfordcreekweek.org ; RowaCounty's Creek Week also?]



From American Rivers ? –  


Demand a smarter future for the Colorado River:  act.americanrivers.org/page/94467/action/1

Tell Congress to Support the Floodplain Enhancement and Recovery Act:  act.americanrivers.org/page/94332/action/1  






























There were a few articles on the 2025 (?) tropical storm flooding along Booker Creek by 15-501 and Village Plaza in eastern Chapel Hill. 


Along Bolin Creek in Carrboro (Booker Creek is a tributary; part of Little Creek in Durham): indyweek.com/news/carrboro-town-council-approves-creekside-greenway-alignment-for-bolin-forest/


On CHALT (not very recent):  indyweek.com/news/is-chalt-dead/



In Wake Countyindyweek.com/news/one-mans-trash-is-another-gulls-treasure/ 


[ soundrivers.org/momentum-growing-for-data-center-resistance/ ]


indyweek.com/news/apex-data-center-application-withdrawn-by-developer/ ]



indyweek.com/news/culture/art/dave-cook/


[The Eno River Association will hold a 60th Anniversary fall benefit concert and community celebration the evening of September 12th (Rosh Hashanah) in downtown Durham, instead of having its usual week of July 4th Festival for the Eno beside the River (north of downtown Durham) this year (people apparently say that early July is too hot, plus Tropical Storm Chantal almost hit the event in 2025); the Festival format should return in the spring of 2027?  www.enoriver.org/festival-for-the-eno/ ; from ERA Director Ryan J. Fehrman www.enoriver.org/a-new-chapter-for-the-festival-mar-dir-msg/ ; and www.enoriver.org/festival-for-the-eno/event-faqs/ ]





Both notices were sent out the afternoon oFebruary 20th:



PUBLIC NOTICE: CANCELLATION OF FEBRUARY 24 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING


The special meeting and public hearing of the Durham Planning Commission scheduled for Tuesday, February 24, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. to consider the rewrite of Durham’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), also called the Land Development Code (LDC), has been canceled by the Durham City Council and the Durham County Board of Commissioners.

Why is this happening? 

Durham has been working since late-2023 to rewrite its development rules so they align with the community’s vision in the Comprehensive Plan adopted in October 2023. State law actually requires local governments to have a comprehensive plan and to align zoning with that plan. That’s what Durham has been trying to do.

In December 2024, the General Assembly added a significant zoning provision to a 132-page disaster relief bill originally intended to assist communities impacted by Hurricane Helene. This provision prohibits local governments from making certain zoning changes—known as “down-zoning”—without obtaining written consent from every affected property owner. These restrictions make it extremely difficult for communities across North Carolina to update their development regulations. At the same time, other state laws require zoning regulations to be consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan. This creates a direct conflict in state policy: local governments are required to update zoning but are effectively prevented from doing so, resulting in uncertainty and challenges for sound governance statewide.

To avoid this conflict, the draft LDC included a carve-out: any property that would be “down-zoned” would be excluded and would continue to follow the existing UDO. Unfortunately, property owners have challenged this carve-out approach and threatened litigation within the past week. Given the legal challenges raised just days before the hearing, the adoption process for the LDC has been paused to allow time to evaluate these issues and determine the best path forward.

What’s next?

While the formal public hearing will not proceed, staff from the Durham Planning & Development Department will be present and available at the originally scheduled time—Tuesday, February 24, 2026, at 5:30 p.m.—to answer questions and provide information to any members of the public who choose to attend. This will be an informal opportunity for residents to learn more about the current draft of the LDC, to ask questions, and to share feedback about their specific properties.

Durham remains committed to transparency and to ensuring that the new LDC reflects the goals and values of our community. We will continue to keep the public informed as we navigate this challenge.






From the New Hope Bird Alliance 


[ACTION ALERT: Durham UDO Public Hearing Canceled


The public hearing previously scheduled for 2/24 to discuss the draft of the new Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)--now also known as Land Use Policy--has been canceled. Durham Planning Commission staff will still be available at the same time and location (5:30 PM at 101 City Hall Plaza) for an informal Q&A and to hear feedback about the draft code.

Please review the map and UDO and prepare to share your questions and thoughts with the Planning Commission. Almost every part of Durham will be affected, as this map shows. The full draft is here. The adoption process is described in more detail here

While the goals of increasing affordable housing, containing sprawl, and creating walkable neighborhoods are admirable, the UDO will result in more intense development within the Urban Growth Boundary. Long-term public and economic health and conservation of birds and other wildlife, require including preserving urban open space and wildlife corridors; retaining and using native plants; moderating lights; using bird-friendly design principles; increasing the urban tree canopy in heat islands; and widening riparian boundaries for flood control in the face of climate change. 

Stay tuned for more details on this ongoing issue! ]


ACTION ALERT: Durham UDO Public Hearing Canceled

The public hearing previously scheduled for 2/24 to discuss the draft of the new Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)--now also known as Land Use Policy--has been canceled. Durham Planning Commission staff will still be available at the same time and location (5:30 PM at 101 City Hall Plaza) for an informal Q&A and to hear feedback about the draft code.

Please review the map and UDO and prepare to share your questions and thoughts with the Planning Commission. Almost every part of Durham will be affected, as this map shows. The full draft is here. The adoption process is described in more detail here

While the goals of increasing affordable housing, containing sprawl, and creating walkable neighborhoods are admirable, the UDO will result in more intense development within the Urban Growth Boundary. Long-term public and economic health and conservation of birds and other wildlife, require including preserving urban open space and wildlife corridors; retaining and using native plants; moderating lights; using bird-friendly design principles; increasing the urban tree canopy in heat islands; and widening riparian boundaries for flood control in the face of climate change. 

Stay tuned for more details on this ongoing issue!


Tuesday, August 16, 2022

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of NCGP, rejects DSCC motion for stay to keep Greens off the ballot

A victory, but probably not the end of the NC Green Party's legal battles for ballot access this November.  There is a ballot access fund, linked below, as is the court's ruling.  The Green candidates for this fall are Matthew Hoh for US Senate, Michael Trudeau for NC Senate District 16 in Wake County, and Joshua Bradley for Raleigh City Council; the 2022 general election candidates are or will be listed at:  www.ncsbe.gov/results-data/candidate-lists#current

For Immediate Release: *BREAKING* 4th CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS DENIES DSCC STAY OF JUDGE DEVER ORDER
Contact: Tony Ndege & Michael Trudeau cochair [at ncgreenparty]; secretary [at ncgreenparty]
For Interviews: Call/Text [  ]


 
Quote: NC Green Party Cochair Tony Ndege says:


"NC Green Party applauds the just decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, securing NC Green Party's candidates their rightful space on the NC ballots this November.


This ruling serves as vindication for NCGP, for our dozens of grassroots supporters who spent thousands of hours petitioning, and for over 22,000 residents of North Carolina who supported democracy  by signing our petition. That The People of this state will be able to vote for candidates who stand for affordable Healthcare for All, for eviction foreclosure and debt relief and for a systemic solution to environmental destruction, (instead of trillions for war), is a victory for democracy and voter choice  beyond the limited spectrum of solutions that Wall Street wants us to hear and chose from."

 

"If elected, as State Senator I will fight for municipal democracy and to bring down the costs of housing and regressive taxation in our state. Make the rich pay, not working people. It's time to build a new party that fights for our interests," said Michael Trudeau, candidate for NC State Senate District 16. 

 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT RULING ATTACHED:


NORTH CAROLINA GREEN PARTY; TONY NDEGE; MATTHEW HOH; K. 
RYAN PARKER; SAMANTHA WORRELL; SAMANTHA SPENCE; AARON MOHAMMED; MICHAEL TRUDEAU

Plaintiffs - Appellees
v.
NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS; CHAIR DAMON
CIRCOSTA, in his official capacity as a member or employee of the North Carolina State Board of Elections; STELLA ANDERSON, in her official capacity as a member or employee of the North Carolina State Board of Elections; JEFF CARMON, in his official capacity as a member or employee of the North Carolina State Board of Elections; STACY EGGERS, IV, in his official capacity as a member or employee of the North Carolina State Board of Elections; TOMMY TUCKER, in his official capacity as a member or employee of the North Carolina State Board of Elections; KAREN BRINSON BELL, in her official capacity as a member or employee of the North Carolina State Board of Elections Defendants - Appellees and DSCC; NORTH CAROLINA DEMOCRATIC PARTY
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1830 Doc: 37 Filed: 08/11/2022 Pg: 1 of 2

Intervenors/Defendants - Appellants
------------------------------
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE
Amicus Supporting Appellees

___________________
O R D E R
___________________

Upon consideration of submissions relative to appellants’ emergency motion for stay pending appeal, the court denies the motion.
Upon consideration of the motion for leave to file brief of amicus curiae
National Republican Senatorial Committee, the court grants the motion and accepts the amicus brief as filed.

For the Court
/s/ Patricia S. Connor, Clerk

NC Green Party
http://www.ncgreenparty.org/


Tuesday, November 08, 2016

The election conundrum

I was planning to write something more substantial about the election, but I ran out of time, so this has to be just a note and I will write about lesser evilism in the future.  It is possible I'll change my mind before voting, but I will probably mostly follow endorsements by the Independent Weekly (www.indyweek.com), the Durham People's Alliance (www.durhampa.org), and SEANC, with some exceptions. 

I considered arguments for voting for Hillary Clinton, but she seems very dangerous, and people seem to be exaggerating the danger posed by Trump and his chances of winning in order to make voting for Clinton more palatable.  After the last debate the media spent a lot of time saying how shocking it was for Trump to say he might not accept the results of the election (something that Gore should have done in 2000 and that has happened in many countries, such as Mexico), but what I find shocking is how Clinton was allowed to dodge a question about Syria and what would happen if a Russian jet enters an illegal US-imposed no-fly zone.  A no-fly zone seems to mean directly attacking the government of Syria (to destroy its air defenses) and possibly Russia as well, so a vote for Clinton is a vote for war, maybe in just a few months.  In the last debate, Clinton had a chance to explain why a no-fly zone wouldn't lead to war, and she said something not believable about negotiating with the countries she has vilified for years.  Trump isn't anti-war, but he might not be as eager to go to war with Syria and he seems more likely to negotiate with Russia than a Democratic administration that blames its electoral and foreign policy problems on Russia.  Probably neither the US nor Russia wants a third world war, but a world war probably wasn't planned in 1914 either, and both sides spent decades trying to avoid a hot war between nuclear armed superpowers.  A NATO country has already shot down a Russian plane over Syria and the confrontation seems likely to escalate if the US starts dictating who can fly over a sovereign country without even the figleaf of a UN Security Council resolution, and European countries would probably only join a war against Syria if there is UN approval.  On NPR's The Diane Rehm Show recently a probably influential think tank official said Putin is willing to die over Syria, and we should be too, and there was no push back at that chilling and irrational statement.  I think it was a journalist talking with Charlie Rose on PBS who claimed it is too late to attack Syria and overthrow the government with US proxy forces, but even if Clinton can't attack Syria, she is "hawkish" (the media's term for a hardcore warmonger) and is likely to find other unnecessary wars to add to the ones the US is already engaged in.

Unless something big happens, I'm planning to vote for the Green Party's Jill Stein for President (www.jill2016.com/).  The media tries to ignore third parties and most voters go for the same old bipartisan system, so Stein is unlikely to win, but I'm not so afraid of Trump that I want to vote for Clinton, and it seems likely that Clinton will win anyway.  Write in "Jill Stein" on paper ballots in North Carolina, and the vote should count (see ncgreenparty.nationbuilder.com/how_to_write_in_jill_stein_for_president_in_north_carolina for instructions for electronic voting), and if she gets 2% of the vote, the NC Green Party will appear on ballots officially in the future, as the Libertarians do this year.  I think getting 5% of the vote nationally will also give the national Green Party access to public campaign funding.  According to Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016#Other_third_parties_and_independents) Jill Stein is the only left candidate whose votes will actually be counted in North Carolina.  Lamont Lilly of Durham is the Workers World Party's vice presidential candidate (vote4socialism.org), but a write-in vote for Monica Moorehead and Lamont Lilly won't be counted.  There is a long article on Lilly in the current issue of the Independent (I notice that they also have an article against the Libertarian candidate, but avoid mentioning the left alternative, Jill Stein, unless they profiled her in a previous issue).  The Party for Socialism and Liberation, Socialist Equality Party, Socialist Party USA, and the Socialist Workers Party are running presidential candidates, but according to Wikipedia any votes they receive in NC will not be counted, nor will write-in votes for Bernie Sanders, while a vote for Jill Stein would help build the Green Party as a left electoral alternative to the Democrats.  I have an open mind, but I find it surprising that some Marxist parties have actually endorsed Clinton.  The Progressive Labor Party advocates boycotting elections.        

Since we have been hearing about the presidential candidates for so long and they are familiar figures, it might be easy to decide who to vote for, but state and local candidates can be more slippery.  For example, State Senator Mike Woodard (in District 22) seems progressive and is endorsed by the People's Alliance (but not by the Independent this year), but voters might be surprised if they look into how their state legislators have voted (it is very easy at www.ncleg.net).  Woodard and other Democrats voted for the Iran Divestment Act (Senate Bill 455), while even the Obama administration is working to reduce tensions over a non-existent nuclear weapons program.  He voted for the Property Protection Act (House Bill 405), which seems like an ag-gag law that punishes whistleblowers, rather than those guilty of crimes such as animal abuse and violating environmental laws, though he claimed in The Durham News last month that it does not do this (the text is online and voters can judge for themselves).  Even rightist Governor McCrory was against the bill, but Democrats and Republicans voted to override his veto.  HB 553 prevents counties or cities from regulating the standards of care for farm animals, though possibly there are rigorous State laws already.  There is also the questionable HB 574, excluding opossums from the protection of State wildlife laws around New Year's Eve, for one town's annual possum drop (the wild possum isn't killed, but it may still be a bad practice).  This is just from a brief look through voting records, and I didn't follow the General Assembly closely this year, so there could be other questionable votes by Senator Woodard and other incumbent Democrats.  I would like to see the Democrats control the General Assembly, Council of State, and Executive branch again, but it would be better if there were more progressive alternatives, such as Green candidates.  I will have to think further about the District 22 election and other General Assembly elections.     

US Representative David Price is also up for election and probably won't try to stop Clinton from attacking Syria or other countries, given his record on Iraq and Palestine.  If Trump wins, it would be good to have Congress controlled by the Democrats, but if Clinton wins, maybe it would be better to have Republican control, though most Republicans would probably follow Clinton into a war and they wouldn't support the progressive domestic promises that Clinton actually tries to implement.  I'm against pro-war and pro-torture US Senator Burr, but Deborah Ross supports Clinton on Syria.     

The Durham Board of County Commissioners was basically selected in the primary election, but I am also conflicted about voting for incumbents who helped approve the rezoning for 751 South, a dense development planned for a rural area adjacent to parkland around New Hope Creek and Jordan Lake, though it does not seem to have been built yet.  As usual voters have to hunt for information about the Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor race, but there is a lot of information about the judicial candidates.        

Whatever happens, a person's vote belongs to them and in the solitude of the voting booth (if they can get one), they will have to decide who they want to support or can vote for in good conscience versus the odds of other candidates winning.  A large percentage of people who are eligible to vote won't, but if they did, maybe the election would turn out differently.  If Gore had energized more people, maybe there would never have been an opportunity for the Supreme Court to steal the election for Bush and the Democrats wouldn't have to scapegoat Nader for winning a few votes the Democrats think they own.              

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Two reactionary General Assembly bills

On the 11th two reactionary bills were filed in the NC Senate.

S138 (see www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2009&BillID=S138) would make Salvia divinorum a Schedule I controlled substance. S. divinorum is a hallucinogenic plant from tropical Central America (much more at www.erowid.net/plants/salvia/salvia.shtml). Instead of ending the failed Drug War, some politicians want to criminalize a rarely used, non-addictive plant, making a new set of people political criminals. I tried Salvia once and nothing happened. There are many hallucinogenic plants and fungi growing here wild, in gardens, or available legally here, and the government cannot stop people from using plants like this, as people have done for thousands of years.

On the 12th the bill was referred to the Judiciary Committee and it was highlighted in the News & Observer Tuesday. The bill is sponsored by William R Purcell and co-sponsored by four others.

S155 (see www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2009&BillID=S155) would create a basis in State law for barring undocumented immigrants from attending community colleges. Before they were forced out for political reasons, there were only about 112 such students in the system, according to the Independent Weekly, out of tens of thousands, and they were treated as out-of-state students and paid more tuition than most NC students. Barring them is another example of marginalizing people for political gain and to create an extra exploited labor force, which can then be used to undercut wages and benefits. Then people blame immigrants for economic problems and the ills of poverty.

Also on the 12th, the bill was referred to the Education Committee. It is sponsored by Philip E Berger, with four co-sponsors.

If these bills aren't buried in committee, I will at least let my representatives know where I stand, and I hope some readers care enough to oppose them as well. I already responded to the DBORDC's call for people to contact the president of the community college system.