From Jack Evans concerning housing at Carolina North.
At the LAC meeting on October 19, we agreed that the University would draft some thoughts for the continuation of our discussion regarding housing at Carolina North. The attached file is our response to that request. As you will see, we found a number of issues and questions that we think are worthy of further discussion within the LAC. We don’t believe that our discussions to this point have reached a stage that
would permit the formulation of consensus principles, but we hope our discussion tomorrow afternoon will move us in the direction.
This follows on Mayor Mark Chilton’s (Carrboro) discussion of Oct. 19th (documented on OrangePolitics)
The Leadership Advisory Committee on Carolina North had an interesting discussion about housing as a part of Carolina North this afternoon.
Here are some prepared comments that I presented as a way of launching the discussion:
The housing problem at Carolina North is, in short, that the new workers at Carolina North will either live at Carolina North or they will live elsewhere and need to commute to the campus. There is not a great deal of vacant housing currently available within the Chapel Hill Transit service area (although there is some), so new employees will either have to occupy housing that is to be built in the Chapel Hill Transit service area, or they will have to live outside that service area and commute. Let’s take a look at the scale of the problem…
I suggest you read the extended discussion. UNC’s issues and discussion follow:
Discussion Issues and Questions Related to
Housing at Carolina North
Prepared for the LAC discussion on November 2, 2006
We believe that housing at Carolina North is a critical aspect of attracting employees, both faculty and staff, to the University, and helping existing employees find housing closer to campus. However, we believe that many issues will require further discussion within the LAC in the process of formulating specific planning principles that will be used to guide planning related to housing.
We envision the housing at Carolina North as a mixed-income community. That is, the housing will be a mixture of market, work force, and affordable housing. We need clear understandings regarding the definitions of these three categories. And we do not yet have enough information to set percentages for these three categories, but we will commit to study the issues.
The housing planned for Carolina North must be financially feasible, financially sustainable, and market driven. Although the University will likely retain ownership of the land, we anticipate that a large portion of the housing will be privately developed, thus adding values to local tax rolls. On that premise, the housing must provide opportunities for a reasonable return to prospective developers.
While housing at Carolina North will not solve all of the housing problems of the Chapel Hill/Carrboro community, UNC-Chapel Hill has a commitment to finding the right mix of market, work force, and affordable housing that will avoid making those problems worse. In this regard the University will maintain the goal that each stage of development at Carolina North will contain some level of each of the three types of housing. It may be appropriate to think of the first stage (approximately 10 years) as a test market that will provide valuable information about housing and will inform planning for subsequent stages.
As discussed in the LAC meeting on October19, we do not anticipate undergraduate instruction at Carolina North. Consequently, we do not foresee the need to build undergraduate housing at Carolina North. We do, however, anticipate some level of housing at Carolina North for graduate students and post-doctoral fellows. These groups of residents are likely to be married with children. Since housing at Carolina North is likely to be multi-family construction, this could also assist the University’s efforts to attract the best graduate students and post-doctoral fellows. For this type of housing it is possible, though not necessarily certain, that the University would be the developer and operator of the housing.
The discussion of housing during the LAC meeting of October 19 explored linking overall employment at Carolina North and the planned supply of housing. We consider it to be difficult to define and implement a linkage of this sort in advance. A number of questions deserve consideration. For example, what restrictions should apply to housing at Carolina North?. Should CN housing be primarily or exclusively for employees of the University or UNC Health Care System, or should it serve a broader population? What issues related to social and cultural diversity in CN housing should we consider? If work force and affordable housing involve some form of subsidy or constrained appreciation in the form of price caps or restrictions on sale, what issues are raised if some of this housing is occupied by non-University employees?
To the extent that University employees occupy housing at Carolina North, use of SOVs would be favorably affected. Similarly, to the extent that University employees living anywhere make use of transit (whether within the service area of the Chapel Hill transit system or not) use of SOVs would be favorably affected.
One of the inputs that we need for this and subsequent discussions is information that incorporates our best estimates, stage by stage, of the level of employment to be anticipated at Carolina North. Although we will not be able to formulate these estimates with great precision, it is important to get the order of magnitude approximately correct so that our discussions about housing, transportation, and fiscal impact will be as realistic as we can be at this stage or our work.
11/1/06
BTW, here’s Mr. Evan’s contact information:
John P. Evans
Executive Director, Carolina North
Hettleman Professor of Business
304 South Building, CB 4000
Chapel Hill, NC 27599
919-843-2025
Nice and quick response from Judge Calabria:
Mr. Raymond,
I will look into this as soon as I finish sending a letter to the State
Board of Elections about the violations that are occurring on TV. I have
already requested rescue funds. I will be happy to provide a copy of my
new letter to you after I send it to Mr. Leake. if you would like one.
Sincerely,
Ann Marie
Judge Ann Marie Calabria
Candidate for NC Supreme Court
Let’s see how quickly, if at all, the rest of the candidates respond.
[UPDATE:]
Dear Mr. Raymond,
Mr. Leake was gone for the day and we do not have his email address.
I will look into the Orange County Early Voting matter.
Thanks,
Ann Marie Calabria
According to WCHL1360 some kind of organized tomfoolery is going on at the Morehead Planetarium polling place
Some students from UNC Chapel Hill are working to get votes for Conservative judges, but are not always transparent in their efforts.
Chapel Hill attorney Bob Epting says a young woman approached him outside the polling place and asked if he was a Democrat. When he said yes, she gave him a list of candidates.
The implication was the list was of progressive judges (essentially Democrats) in this non-partisan race.
Fred Black relates the following over on OP:
Yesterday when I voted at Morehead (#996 since Oct. 23d), there was a young lady on the edge of the parking lot. She asked me if I was going to vote and I replied that I was. She handed me a small piece of paper that listed Duke, Martin, Levinson, Calabria, Bailey, and Stroud. With the DTH and the WCHL story as background, I asked if the named people were all Republicans. She said that she thought so but their’s are nonpartisan races. I asked her what organization she represented and she said she was just helping her friend who was in class.
More information on this BlueNC and OrangePolitics threads.
With the current vote flipping problems in Arkansas, Missouri, Texas and Florida – all biased towards Republican candidates – one has to wonder if the Morehead trickery is the least of election 2006 problems.
That said, I’ve gone ahead and contacted the campaigns of Duke, Martin, Levinson, Calabria, Bailey, and Stroud in case they weren’t aware of folks scamming the electorate in their name.
Their handling of this mess will be a great indicator of their willingness to cultivate public trust both in the election and judicial process.
Contact information:
- Judge Duke – www.rustyduke.com judgeduke@rustyduke.com
- Justice Martin – www.justicemarkmartin.org mmartin@justicemarkmartin.org
- Judge Levinson – www.justicelevinson.org campaign@justicelevinson.org
- Judge Calabria – www.calabria4judge.com amcalabria@nc.rr.com
- Judge Bailey – www.judgekrisbailey.com judgekdb2006@nc.rr.com
- Judge Stroud – www.judgestroud.com JudgeStroud@aol.com
Mailto link: MAIL the JUDGES.
My email:
RE: Apparent organized effort to deceive Orange County voters
TO: Judge Duke, Justice Martin, Judge Levinson, Judge Calabria, Judge Bailey, Judge Stroud
According to local media reports (WCHL1360 – http://www.wchl1360.com/details.html?id=2124 ) and several eyewitness reports ( http://orangepolitics.org/2006/11/republicans-attempt-to-deceive-orange-county-voters/#comment-65383 ) , an organized effort is being made in Orange County to deceive voters in your name. A list of your names is being presented to Democratic voters in a fashion meant to mislead uninformed voters into voting for you.
Given your current standings as judges, given the responsibility you’ve been entrusted with, given the tenor of all your campaigns, I imagine this tomfoolery comes both as a surprise and a disappointment.
Now that you are aware of the problem, would you please publicly ask the participants to desist? A quick resolution to this problem will serve the public well.
Thank you for your prompt attention,
Will Raymond
Independent, Orange County
I’ve been thinking quite a bit about citizen journalism of late.
Exemplary reports by BlueNC’s own SouthernDem, Greensboro’s release of the “secret” RMA report detailing the reasons for their police chief’s discharge, commentary from real journalists at the recent ConvergeSouth unconference, the Sunlight Foundation’s key assistance in outing congressional nepotism and revealing federal earmarks have me wondering about the future role CitizenWill.org might play in our local community.
Unfortunately, even as many online researchers/authors/activists are buoyed by rising fortunes, the United State’s professional journalism institutions are on the wane.
Reporters Without Borders Worldwide Press Freedom Index 2006 chronicles our medias plummet from 17th to 53rd place in a short 4 years.
The United States (53rd) has fallen nine places since last year, after being in 17th position in the first year of the Index, in 2002. Relations between the media and the Bush administration sharply deteriorated after the president used the pretext of “national security†to regard as suspicious any journalist who questioned his “war on terrorism.†The zeal of federal courts which, unlike those in 33 US states, refuse to recognise the media’s right not to reveal its sources, even threatens journalists whose investigations have no connection at all with terrorism.
It could be worse:
“Unfortunately nothing has changed in the countries that are the worst predators of press freedom,†the organisation said, “and journalists in North Korea, Eritrea, Turkmenistan, Cuba, Burma and China are still risking their life or imprisonment for trying to keep us informed. These situations are extremely serious and it is urgent that leaders of these countries accept criticism and stop routinely cracking down on the media so harshly.
The three worst violators of free expression – North Korea, bottom of the Index at 168th place, Turkmenistan (167th) and Eritrea (166th) – have clamped down further. The torture death of Turkmenistan journalist Ogulsapar Muradova shows that the country’s leader, “President-for-Life†Separmurad Nyazov, is willing to use extreme violence against those who dare to criticise him. Reporters Without Borders is also extremely concerned about a number of Eritrean journalists who have been imprisoned in secret for more than five years. The all-powerful North Korean leader, Kim Jong-il, also continues to totally control the media.
Strong journalism is a deterrent to tyranny both petty and powerful.
Maybe, in some small way, local folks like BrianR at Yesh, Mark Peters at SqueezeThePulp, Sally Greene at Greenespace, Ruby Sinreich at OrangePolitics, Robert P at CountryCrats, Bora Zivkovic at Blog Around the Clock, Eric Muller at isThatLegal.org, Laurin Easthom at The Easthom Page, Terri Buckner at LocalEcology, Paul Jones at the Real Paul Jones, Kirk Ross at Exile On Jones Street and many more, are filling the widening gap between what we have reported and what we need reported.
Maybe, even, they provide an encouraging example of what a local on-line community is capable of achieving.
