PROGRESS?

How do we know when we as a nation or even as a smeall community have made progress, particularly on the social front? Some like to point to the election of Barack Obama as president as a sign that we are able to look at the "content of one's character" instead of the color of one's skin. But even though we know his election did not magically solve the issues of race in America, it did tell us what voters would elect an African American to our highest office - something that is surely character revealing.

Here in Chapel Hill we face a test of our character. Here's why: before the election a council member resigned, but after the date when his seat would have been on the November 3d ballot. Under our ordinance the Town Council gets to appoint the replacement who fill the remaining two years of the seat.

There was a great deal of community discussion on this, especially on the timing of the resignation's effective date, who knew what when, and whether or not the old council or new council should make the appointment. The Council has now decided that the new Council will make the appointment in December. There are 10 applicants, but none of the incumbents running for reelection applied.

OK, here is where it gets interesting. The member who is an African American who was appointed to fill the seat of an African American who died last year was not elected to a full term. Since he did not apply for the appointment, the only way to ensure that there is African American representation on the Council is to appoint one of the two African Americans who applied.

Another of the ten who applied for appointment finished fifth in the elect-four contest we just had, and was very close in total votes to the fourth place winner. This person is white. The local NAACP argues that for many historical reasons, the Council should appoint one of the two African Americans to the seat to ensure a voice from that community remains on the Council.
(see: http://www.orangepolitics.org/2009/11/future-of-the-town-council-without-broad-representation)

Simply put, I have a lot of problems with this approach. First, the author of the NAACP paper (the president of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro NAACP) is wrong in calling this a case of “taxation without representation.” It's interesting to note that the voters who did not elect an African American to the Council elected two African Americans to the School Board, and they will join another African American who is already on the seven member Board.

There are many African Americans I know in Town who are offended by this "you must appoint an African American" approach. If there is no African American on the Council, it is best explained by the campaign the candidate ran, the terrible overall turnout of 16%, and drastically less turnout by African Americans. Clearly, the outcome is not about the unwillingness of the voters to vote for an African American.

The fifth-place finisher ran a campaign that garnered him a lot of votes. Running a campaign is good prep for serving in office; you have heard directly from many citizens and interacted with them in forum after forum. Given the timing of the appointment on the heels of an election, why didn't those seeking the appointment run for office?

Well, the decision will clearly have tremendous impact on our community, no matter which way it goes. Those of us who are African American and don't support the NAACP position have and will continue to be labeled, negatively by some but not by others. Those who are not African American and don't support the NAACP position are also subject to similar actions because of their position. Those who remain silent for whatever reasons pose an entirely different question. Clearly, to put your convictions out there is character revealing.

Progress?

BACK TO THE "BIG APPLE"

While in New York City a couple of weeks ago, it was clear that in the year since our last visit, change had come. You are struck with it as you start down Broadway. They have closed it as the sign indicates, created ped and bike lanes, and put out the table and chairs. Wow! And no, we saw nothing strange when we walked by the Late Show - the announcement had not been made yet.



Anytime you go to NYC, you have to be prepared for seeing what you don't usually see anywhere else. Broadway is like a magnet, it draws the unique and those who come out and take their pictures. Yes, I'm guilty too.
We saw a group of delightful clowns taking a break and enjoying their coffee on a wonderful fall afternoon.


Then there is the now-famous "Naked Cowboy." I don't get it, but you should have seen all of the young ladies hanging on to him while friends took their pictures.


The "silver" man was also out, demonstrating the fundamentals of American capitalism - put some money in his bucket and he moved. I think I also heard him humming "God Bless America!"



Also working the tourist were "Dora the Explorer" and "Mickey Mouse." They both had "tip" bags and waved to you when you put something in their bags. If you just took their pictures and provided no tip, you earned their ire.






But there is no substitute for what happens when night falls on Broadway - you see THE GREAT WHITE WAY in all of its splendor. You can't help but love THE BIG APPLE!

WCHL (A WCHL Commentary)

WCHL is my hometown radio station and I’m a big fan. I got hooked when we moved here in ’94, so count me among those who were upset when WCHL was sold to Curtis Media in 1995 and moved to Durham. Jim Heavner repurchased the station in 2002 and returned it to Chapel Hill with a commitment that WCHL would remain a local service to the community and would provide a daily news and programming service that is heavily local in character.

WCHL is our community voice and has demonstrated time and again its commitment to community. Therefore it really doesn’t matter to me a whole lot who owns the station; what matters is how it remains committed to being the voice of our community. I wish Barry Leffler well as he takes the helm as CEO and Managing Partner.

So please use all of your experience in broadcasting and be a leader who will creatively efficiently to take WCHL to the place where it represents, informs and supports our community better than any other medium. You also need to prepare folks when you decide to make changes and maybe even do some listener testing before implementation.

Again, good luck to you and to WCHL as we embark on a new chapter, and oh, we won’t hold it against you because your degree is from Miami. GO HEELS AND GO WCHL!

LABELS (WCHL Commentary)

We are back in silly season, also known as campaign season. There is nothing wrong with you if you thought of this as a season without end, because it does seem that way. What you can depend on in silly season is the use of lots of labels to describe people or their positions. These descriptive terms or epithets are hurled for a purpose; as the hurler hopes that the label will resonate with those who read or hear it. They don’t have to be accurate or appropriate; the goal is to paint that picture with a short phrase or word that will stick.

But how are label hurlers sure that everyone will get the meanings that they intend? Just last week a local reporter labeled some candidates as “pro-business.” Wow! Is that a good thing or bad thing? Each of us decides, but do such labels really capture who candidates are? Do we call elected officials who disapprove a business project “anti-business?” Makes you wonder, doesn’t it.

Then we have an editor of a local paper who seems to love writing columns that seem designed to poke a finger in the eyes of many readers. He had another one of those interesting labels the other day: “Einsteins of liberal elitism.” Hey, it’s a free country so he’s as free to write as he wants, just as I am free to adopt a new label for myself: “former subscriber.”

And in case you might be so inclined, you can’t in this case come back with “YOU LIE!”

ARE YOU READY FOR SOME FOOTBALL? (WCHL Commentary)

Fall is in the air this week and on Saturday, Kenan Stadium and the campus will be alive with the sights and sounds of football. But it doesn’t stop at the edges of the campus – the entire community is enlivened by home football. Saturday is the first of seven home games, including a first time Thursday night game on October 22d.

Each game is an opportunity to welcome thousands of visitors to our community and show them some Tar Heel hospitality. Last year, eight Chapel Hill area organizations united to produce the “Touch Downtown Chapel Hill” campaign with the shared goal of bolstering the community, hometown spirit and economic activity during football weekends and that effort continues this year. The economic impact of one football weekend in Chapel Hill is $6.7 million, according to a recent study.

It’s good and smart that both UNC and our local businesses are working hard to get the message out that we value and appreciate the business that both new and seasoned fans will do in our community when they come to a game. The “Touch Downtown” will strive to encourage football fans, both residents and visitors, to start early and stay late in the Chapel Hill area after the game ends and enjoy nearly 100 restaurants, 50 specialty stores and a mile of family cultural attractions.

I think we all understand that a rising tide lifts all boats, so we will all benefit from being a warm and welcoming community. Sure, there are inconveniences but let’s focus on the benefits to UNC and our entire community. GO HEELS!

A TALE OF TWO CITIES

In late July, Town of Chapel Hill Councilman Bill Strom announced that he would not complete his third term and would resign effective August 1st. He resigned, he said, “to pursue other personal and professional opportunities outside the community.”

By resigning when he did, it was too late for his seat to be included in this year’s municipal races. The filing period for those races ended on July 17. According to Chapel Hill Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, had Strom stepped down within three days of the end of the filing period his seat would have been included on the ballot and the town council would have been charged with filling his seat until the election.

Now, when the council reconvenes on Sept. 14, Mayor Foy will officially announce the vacancy. The council will then set a time period of not less than seven and not more than 30 days for applications for the seat. Council members will then review the applications and officially place names in nomination. After the nominations, the council must wait at least one week before making its decision. The council will consider the opening at each meeting but is not required to make a decision by any set date. The new council member will serve out Strom’s term, which ends in December 2011.

This decision by Strom brought the blogs to life, in what had been a pretty slow summer. Some questioned Strom's timing, especially since there had been rumors of his departure for some time. Some, including this writer, wondered why he wouldn't trust the same voters who elected him three times to fill his seat. Some called on the four incumbents on the ballot to support the 5th place finisher for the appointment. Some candidates on the ballot, including incumbents, declared that they would not seek an appointment. Nothing is certain at this point except that this resignation and process to fill the seat will be an election issue.

Meanwhile, over in Carrboro, they also have a resignation. On August 20th, Carrboro Alderman John Herrera, who had already said he would not seek re-election this fall, has resigned effective immediately, five months before the end of his term and has moved out of Carrboro.

The Carrboro Board of Aldermen has not decided on a process yet, but many think that they will leave the seat empty since it will be filled by the election. The Strom seat has two years; should it be filled quickly, after the election so we know who came in fifth, or what?. The interesting thing to me is the Carrboro situation received no where near the reaction that the Chapel Hill situation did. What explains the "tales" in these two cities? Timing is everything!

CAMPAIGN 2009 (WCHL Commentary)

We know who will be on our ballots in November. Congratulations to all of our citizens who have decided to run for office and try to serve our community in this very special way. One difference in the Chapel Hill elections is that we are engaged in a state experiment with voter owned elections whereby candidates receive tax dollars to finance most of their campaign costs. One argument for this plan is that removing the barrier of money, candidates who might not run for office would now do so.

We have one mayoral candidate of the four participating and one of the eight Council candidates participating. The mayoral candidate participating was a vigorous supported of the plan. One not participating is a Council member who was a vigorous opponent. Nothing surprising there. But on the Town Council ballot the only participant is a second time challenger who finished 6th in 2007. What is puzzling to some is that the three incumbents on the ballot who voted for taxpayer funded elections (let’s call it what it is!) are not participating. Why is that?

I still think we are trying to fix a problem that doesn’t really exist. Money to win a seat is not the problem; time to serve is the challenge. There is no evidence that campaign spending is corrupting our elections. And I do favor publically funding those judicial elections; they give me a choice on giving my money or not. Choices matter and that’s what elections are and should beall about.