All posts by Administrator

Trash Talk: Mar. 13th’s Board of Commissioners Review

[UPDATE] I won’t be able to attend this evening. Good luck folks.

In case you missed it, there’s a meeting on siting the new trash transfer station on Eubanks Rd. this evening.

The discussion is item # 9b on the agenda.

The BOCC meeting starts at 7:30 pm in the Battle Courtroom 106 E. Margaret Lane, downtown Hillsborough [MAP].

If you get there early, are ‘net savvy and would like to see the video of BOCC meetings on-line, you might want to consider spending a few moments asking for online access when 5f. Authorization to Debut Live Casting of BOCC Meetings [PDF] comes up.

Commissioners, not everyone has cable.

I might not make it this evening but I bet there will be plenty of good folks speaking their minds. Good luck all.

Trash Talk: Media Steps Up to the Plate

Who, what, where, when and why might provide the context for local issues but without relevant analysis the local media falls down on their obligation to the inform, as fully as possible, the citizenry.

“Light and Liberty go together”, as Jefferson said. So does “light and good public policy”. The Chapel Hill News (of which I’m an occasional columnist) has been on top of the recent Rogers Road story – not only providing background, like Aarne Vesilind’s Bravery and broken promises mark landfill saga but also editorial leadership like Taking out the trash

There are some good reasons for locating Orange County’s planned solid waste transfer station at the site of the current landfill on Eubanks Road.

That site is closer to the population centers that produce most of the trash than the other possible locations that have been mentioned. The landfill site is already used to handle trash, of course, so you wouldn’t have to disturb any additional parcels of land. And, best of all, it’s the cheapest option on the table.

Reasonable considerations all.

But they’re outweighed by the arguments, moral and practical, against putting a waste transfer station on Eubanks Road. If a transfer station is necessary — and that’s a question that needs some better answers — put it somewhere else.

Back in the early 1970s, the landfill opened on Eubanks Road, where the people living next door were — here’s a shock — the predominantly low-income, black residents of the Rogers Road area.

Those residents were assured at the time by local leaders that they would have to live with the landfill only for a limited time, and then the county would move its solid waste facilities elsewhere.

That never happened. The landfill was expanded, not closed, and for more than 30 years the people who live along Rogers Road have lived with the noise, smell, traffic, trash, discolored groundwater and other noxious side effects of the landfill.

They’ve done their time.

….

Here’s some of their other recent coverage:

The Daily Tar Heel and WCHL 1360 have done their bit:

RAM’s VP Casey Cummings – The Sixth Beatle?

Is RAM Development’s Casey Cummings the sixth Beatle?

I’ll have to wait until tomorrow to get some video snippets (wish the Town was streaming video!) to get direct confirmation but it sure seemed like he was comfortable jumping up to the podium sans a request of Council.

I’m not quite sure the propriety of his hard charging rebuttals but I have seen the Mayor spank folks for making unbidden comments outside the normal time for testimony.

Heck, I wish I had had the opportunity to publicly cross-examine his assertions but I bit my tongue and chose to respond via the ‘blog.

Others commented on Cummings ease breaking convention in responding to Jim Ward – and seemed shocked that the Mayor didn’t rein him in.

I’m not surprised. With tonight’s vote, it’s clear that the Council has tilted away from the citizens and towards their partner – that in a sense they’ve been co-opted (though I still think it falls short of one person’s claim that they’ve succumbed to Stockholm Syndrome ) .

Given how difficult it was for me to see Foy’s, Kleinschmidt’s, Strom’s and Greene’s defense of RAM’s tipsy-turvy assertions, maybe, from Cumming’s side, their performance was emboldening.

The bar has been lowered. The door is opened. The precedent is set.

Downtown Development Intiative: Easthom, Ward on Hazardous Waste Liability

Live ‘blogged from hearing:

Laurin Easthom picked up on a point that I didn’t have time to speak to this round: hazardous material remediation.

It’s incredible that a hazardous waste assay hasn’t been done on a piece a property that is known to have had oil and gasoline exposures. Back in the ’80s I used to do environmental assays of just such properties. The cost was quite modest, moreso considering the heightened risk entailed by this site.

As Laurin pointed out, the taxpayers will eat the open-ended cost of remediation – now, as the project starts, instead of later. So, one hit on tainted soil in 2007 could cost the Town’s taxpayers $2-3 or more million.

Where’s the due diligence? This is symptomatic of the gaps opened up during the negotiation process.

Now Jim Ward has jumped in on the hazardous waste issue adding that remediation is more than soil removal. Volatilization of the chemicals could require long term pumping strategies. As Jim said “I’m not ready for an open ended commitment”.

Jim calls RAM’s Casey Cummings out on the energy commitment language in this agreement – “don’t we already know what your answer is?” Jim Ward wants the language struck as a farce – non-sensical given RAM’s VP Casey Cummings rather stern declaration that they won’t do more.

Mayor Foy tries to defend RAM Development’s language – saying, incredibly, “it’s not like they will just change the numbers”. This with a project that has lost half of its putative purpose while increasing required public expenditures 15-fold. Tomorrow’s video clips hopefully will capture Foy’s strange defense.

Jim Ward jumps in with a valiant defense – and makes the excellent point that they’re leaving a tremendous legacy – a poor legacy if they let the project go forward.

Later on:

Foy suggests there should be some give and take – more negotiating but RAM has already squeezed an incredible deal out of Council. Trading more elements away makes a tragic mess worse. My review of the negotiating process convinced me that our Council members compromised all the promise of this project away while RAM gets to pickup a bigger and bigger payday.

Sally Greene jumps in bolstering RAM’s VP Casey Cumming’s suggestion that they don’t spend $200K on a consultant to verify LEED compliance but on actual energy improvements. The problem? RAM’s credibility on delivering to target has been tarnished by their recent history. Reagan’s “trust, but verify” comes into play here. How, other than measuring the compliance, do we know we hit ASHRAE’s targets?

No reason to ask for compliance if it isn’t measured?

RAM’s VP Casey Cumming’s wants to move on to the SUP as the gatekeeper. Ralph Karpinos, the Town’s Attorney, points out that the SUP concerns itself only with LUMO (land use ordinance) variations and not energy/environmental concerns.

The Council, if the plan to “walk the talk” needs to stop the process tonight.

Dang! It’s tough watching Foy, Strom, Greene and Kleinschmidt work so hard on RAM’s behalf. Of course, Bill and Mark, using strategy to push through the proposal, were quick to move the resolution.

Hill and Thorpe are still out.

Right before the vote, Jim presses again on the hazardous waste liability. Karpinos says our only recourse is to default on the agreement and take our chances in court. In other words, the risk – which seems quite high given the prior use of this property – is passed on to the taxpayer.

Basically, RAM can sue the Town to move the project forward EVEN if the Town determines the cost of hazardous waste remediation isn’t tenable. The developer, RAM in this case, holds all the cards… The Town’s additional counsel says we have to go forward no matter what “damned if we do, dammed if we don’t”.

Would the “rah rah” folks pushing this broken deal be so jubilant if we don’t have the money to do social program improvements or couldn’t build the new pool complex, etc.

The counsel says the second environmental assay was unsanctioned and that there was a “smell of gas”.

CHFD: First Class Firefighters

From the Chapel Hill Fire Department website:

The primary mission of the Chapel Hill Fire Department is to protect life, property and the community environment from the destructive effects of fire, disasters or other life hazards by providing public education, incident prevention and emergency response services.

Thank you folks for all the long hours and hard work.

If for some reason you missed the official announcement , our Town graduated its first class of firefighters Aug.11th.

Lucky for us, youTube’s RyanJef recently posted this movie to celebrate



7/28/2006 – The Chapel Hill Fire Department will graduate its first Fire Academy in 13 years at 7 p.m. Friday, Aug. 11, in the Council Chambers at Town Hall, 405 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. The graduation will include a badge pinning ceremony and presentation of awards.

To attract more candidates and improve workforce diversity, the Fire Department has begun to provide training; previously, new hires were already-certified firefighters. Candidates are selected through a multi-step process of testing, including physical exams, agility tests, interviews, background checks, and application reviews. The academy, which began April 18, included 16 weeks of training in areas including basic firefighting, hazardous materials, emergency medical response, basic rescue, child safety seat installation and physical fitness. Graduates will be North Carolina-certified Level II Firefighters.

The graduating class includes 10 Chapel Hill firefighters, one Efland firefighter and one Parkwood firefighter. Four of the new firefighters will replace current vacancies, and six will fill new positions that were authorized by the Town Council in 2005. Three will be assigned to Fire Station 2, and three will be assigned to Station 3.

The Town Council has authorized an additional six new firefighters in the coming year, and the next academy will take place in April 2007. Applications will be accepted beginning in November 2006. To find out more, visit the Town website at www.townofchapelhill.org/fire,or contact the Chapel Hill Fire Department at (919) 968-2781 or fire@townofchapelhill.org.

Thanks RyanJef.

Ho, Ho, Ho, North Carolina’s Lottery Pimps Christmas

WRAL5 reports …state lottery officials are in the Christmas spirit.

Excuse me while I puke.

Merry Money, the first $10 instant-ticket game in North Carolina, began appearing in stores Tuesday. The new game is part of a trend in the lottery industry toward holiday-themed scratch-off games, which officials hope will boost sales.

The new game features a colorful Christmas tree with gift boxes below. Six tickets out of more than 2 million for sale will be worth the top prize of $200,000. Another new game in stores is called Carolina Greetings, which costs $2 to play.

Lottery director Tom Shaheen says more games at $10 or above are expected, including the possibility of a $20 instant ticket game, which Shaheen says may be attractive to people who don’t always play the lottery.

Is nothing sacred? The ever increasing number of shrill advertisements for the failing NC lottery is bad enough, but to encourage folks to play the lottery in the “spirit of Christmas” is just about as crass as you can get…

Tip to Chad Adams over at the Locker Room.

Soundbite: Carey, CitizenWill and the 2006 Redistricting Referendum

WCHL1360 caught a small taste [MP3] of Wednesday’s “debate”.

I’ve since heard the radio ad promoting,to some small extent (and, hopefully, unintentionally), the referendum. Besides surmounting all the advertising – radio, print – the layout of the ballot will probably prove to be the hardest obstacle to overcome. As someone (thanks) pointed out to me, most folks will read the first sentence describing the expansion of the board to seven members – something I agree with – and skip all the rest of the legalese. My concern? That on this strategic layout alone will the referendum be decided.

Hillsborough425: Yes, it is interactive!

One of my readers was slightly confused about whether the fly-by of Hillsborough425 documented in my post Hillsborough425: Google Earth Fly-By, Alpha Quality was live or not.

Yes it is!

If you have the proper version of GoogleEarth installed ( GoogleEarth v4.0291.beta ), then opening this link will crank up the application and display the maps.

Alternatively, you can download the KMZ file and open it in GoogleEarth.

In either case, once the fly-over/fly-by is open, you can play around with the map views by toggling Hillsborough425: Existing Town House, Hillsborough425ConceptPlanSept17th and Hillsborough425 GoogleEarth under GoogleEarth’s Hillsborough425 folder.

You can also start with a long view oriented from the North of the site by clicking on North Entrance Chapel Hill.

Any questions? Please post a comment, I’ll be happy to help.

Madison Smoozefest or Chapel Hill’s Sleazefest?

Smoozefest or snoozefest, either way this weekend’s (Sept. 24th-26th [correction]) trip to Madison by our local “usual suspects” appears to be more about building relationships at home than abroad.

Most of all, this trip is about building relationships. Not only will participants gain knowledge of what has worked and what has not worked in Madison, but a synergy will be created by our trip attendees working, traveling and discussing issues together.

This trip is not a place for any decisions to be made about our future, but rather a place to make connections and gather valuable information. Learning from the perspectives and ideas of other leaders in the community will help to ensure that our community grows and sustains itself.

LTE to CHN from Mariana Fiorentino,
Chair of the Trip Planning Committee and 2004’s Realtor of the Year

 

Maybe joyous, interesting and possibly rewarding (or not), I hope folks aren’t going expecting to later trade upon the stronger bonds Smoozefest is supposed to engender.

Even as national scenes of “Ney Money Go” spawned by Abramoff’s scandalous behavior continue, the lure of the private/public “business” junket cannot be diminished.

And “business”, local business, forms the continuous sub-text of this jaunt.

The purpose of the Intercity Visit and Leadership Conference is to convene leaders of the Chapel Hill and Carrboro community to learn from the experiences of another successful community and to build relationships among participants that will help us successfully address our community’s challenges and opportunities.

Continue reading Madison Smoozefest or Chapel Hill’s Sleazefest?

Crawford-Brown: “I’ll take the brickbats from both sides…”

Dr. Crawford-Brown claimed at today’s LAC meeting that he feels he does more work on behalf of Chapel Hill’s Town Council than for the University even though he’s a member of the University’s delegation – and the director of UNC’s Carolina Environmental Program.

Trying to clarify his role, Crawford-Brown said he’s here as a scientist, an expert and that, though he works for UNC, he’s giving his balanced opinion. Or, as he colorfully put it, “I’ll take brickbats from both sides…”.

Dan Coleman followed up Crawford-Brown’s statement by asking Dean Jack Evans what role, then, was Crawford-Brown playing vis-a-vis UNC’s delegation. Essentially, he was asking Evans if Crawford-Brown’s statements should be construed as representing the University’s position. Evans danced around, avoiding answering the question, because he feels the firm roles of the committee members shouldn’t be pinned down while the substantive content of the recommendations are being formalized.

Sure, Crawford-Brown has a tough balancing act trying to forge a coherent vision of environmental analysis at Carolina North both as a member of the UNC delegation and a concerned scientist.

He is in an unenviable position considering he’s been positioned by UNC’s Jack Evans as their environmental expert. No matter what, to preserve his value as “THE” expert, he must continue to maintain at least the appearance of making unbiased appraisals of the LAC’s environmental strategies wherever his loyalties lie.

Evans could’ve helped Crawford-Brown by clarifying his specific role as “the expert.”

More on Crawford-Brown’s personal environmental philosophy.

4:17pm UNC Leadership Advisory Committee meeting on Carolina North development.

Greenwashing?

One curious reader asks “What is greenwashing?”

From the Center for Media & Democracy’s Sourcewatch project, greenwashing is defined thusly:

“Greenwashing is what corporations do when they try to make themselves look more environmentally friendly than they really are.” [1] (here)

“Greenwash” is defined in the 10th edition of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary as the “disinformation disseminated by an organization so as to present an environmentally responsible public image.” Its inclusion in the dictionary indicates the significance and permanence of a growing trend among corporations to take advantage of the many consumers who look for products with negative environmental impact. [2] (here)

“Earthday Resources for Living Green has released this report annually for the last 11 years to call attention to the past year’s worst greenwashers, corporations that have made misleading or false claims abut the environmental benefits of their products and industries. “Don’t Be Fooled” describes companies’ greenwashing attempts as well as the truth behind their misleading claims.” Current and past reports are available [online (here)].

The Washington Post has produced a Special Report titled BIG GREEN (here) which as series of investigative articles exposes the corporate infestation of The Nature Conservancy and “documents on the organization’s transformation from a grassroots group to a corporate juggernaut.”

Frequent PR Watch contributor Bob Burton has prepared a 5 page paper titled “Corporations Will Save the World, won’t they?” which describes how corporations lure their environmentalist adversaries into the illusion of cooperative engagements such as Community Advisory Panels which result in a win-win result for the corporations by reducing the energy of their adversaries, and turning the media attention away from environmental advocacy against the evil corporation into an image of the corporation attempting to benefit the environment. [3] (here [PDF])

“Several recent incidents show that, when faced with environmental crises attributable to business interests cozy with the White House, the administration has developed an alternative response: Suppress, Ignore, Preempt.” [4] (here)

Greenwashing is a form of public relations propaganda which gives something the appearance of being environmentally friendly when it is, in fact, not.

An example of this would be an oil company being forced in a court of law to create a habitat for endangered species in its oil fields. Greenwashing would occur when the company creates a magazine ad campaign that is complete with paintings of a beautiful moonlit oil field and nature coexisting, with the image assisted by text explaining how much that company cares for Nature and endangered species, as well as how nature can beautifully coexist with oil wells, factories, or whatever.

Another example is naming a piece of legislation “Clear Skies” when the legislation will not result in sky clearing.

In December 2005 the New York Times noted that corporations including Ford, Exxon Mobil, BP, General Electric and Alcan “appear to be spending ever-bigger chunks of their advertising budgets to promote” what critics call greenwashing. New ad campaigns from WPP, Omnicom Group, and Interpublic Group tout corporate “environmental do-goodism.” [5] (here)

“Oil companies, under attack for reaping windfall profits from soaring fuel prices, are trying to position themselves as part of the solution to energy problems rather than the cause. Manufacturers of fuel-efficient automobiles, jet engines or other green products are recognizing that they can burnish their image even as they promote their products. And companies in all industries are trying to make socially conscious investors and customers comfortable about buying their products and shares.” [6] (here)

A more extensive overview is available here.

[UPDATE:] And why did they ask? Carolina North: Crawford-Brown’s Counter-principles

Price’s Bad Credit

Rep. David Price adds the local dimension to today’s Houston Chronicle review of the 2005 Bankruptcy Bill

I hope the credit card companies are happy.

After almost a year under the so-called bankruptcy reform that Congress enacted at their behest, the law has proved to be what it appeared: a love letter to lenders.Pitched as consumer protection, it was passed after eight years of political arm-twisting by credit card issuers who didn’t want to lose fees from indebted customers when they filed for bankruptcy. You may have noticed that their concern about lending to people who can’t pay hasn’t stopped them from stuffing your mailbox with 25 offers a week for easy credit.

“All it’s done is make it more time-consuming and more complicated and, for debtors, more expensive,” says Randy Williams, a bankruptcy lawyer with Thompson & Knight in Houston. “Most people don’t believe that this accomplished anything that it set out to do.”

It hasn’t lived up to the claims of Edward Yingling, president of the American Bankers Association, who said after it was enacted that it “strikes just the right balance” and would ensure the bankruptcy system remains “sympathetic and fair.”

Loren Steffy,Houston Chronicle

Other local activists have been able to excuse Price’s support for a bill that callously punishes folks whose only crime is falling prey to a asset-sapping serious illness.

Me? I’d like a representative that will consistently stand up for those in greatest need.

Tip via the excellent local academic ‘blog CreditSlips.

Liz and Laura’s Excellent Downtown Adventure

The other day I passed on a call from the Downtown Partnership for volunteers. Folks in “bright blue t-shirts” (as local crack WCHL reporter Dan Siler emphasized throughout the week) would hand out coupon and information packets to returning students. The hope? Spur more interest in our fine downtown.

I was signed up for the Sunday morning shift. Turns out I wasn’t needed.

Liz Parham, Director of the Downtown Partnership just called to let me off the hook (drat, I really wanted a 2XX bright blue t-shirt!). They and their Saturday volunteers handed out 3000 packets by 1pm.

Way to go Liz, Laura and the rest of the crew!

Liz said they might do student “grab bags” next year. I hope they’ll consider adding this little goodie from the Orange County Board of Elections.

encl: Voter Registration Form [PDF]

ZeFrank: The Scale was Imaginable

I posted this quick comment on BlueNC, a state-wide blog that appears to be hellbent on rehabilitating NC Democrats reputation.

I usually keep it local and try not to echo the meme of the moment but I thought Ze Frank was dead on with yesterday’s analysis:

The strategy of terrorism is to use isolated acts of violence to instill fear and confusion into the population at large. A small number of people can incapacitate a society by leveraging our inability to understand risk.

London’s police deputy commissioner Paul Stevenson said that the plot was “intended to be mass murder on an unimaginable scale.” No, it is imaginable: between three and ten flights out of thousands would have resulted in the terrible loss of human life.

Bush today said this country is safer today than it was prior to 9/11. Personally, I don’t think he knows. Whether we like it or not, terrorist attacks on Americans are now part of the global reality. They will continue to happen. Many places around the globe have had to deal with a similar reality for years. India, Ireland, England, Spain, Russia, to name a few. In many cases, these societies have pulled together and not allowed isolated acts of violence to tear at their fiber. Like disease and the forces of nature, it’s a risk that we have to rationally come to terms with. The government’s responsibility is to make sure that fear and terror are not disproportionate to the reality of the situation.

Today the President said, “This nation is at war with Islamic fascists who will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom to hurt our nation.” Generalized statements like this which instill nebulous fear without specific information are exactly in line with the goals of terrorism.

CitizenWill
there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because Conscience tells him it is right. MLK,Jr. to SCLC Leadership Class

Hot Spot U.S.A.

With tomorrow’s temperatures forecasted to be above 100 degrees, Chapel Hill is going to be one very hot spot.

As if centrally scripted, local news folks, punching up the drama of the weather story, have been issuing dire warnings not of the “real” heat but of the “felt” heat. “Think it’s going to be hot tomorrow? With the heat index, that 100 degrees will feel like a thousand!” Etc. Ad nauseum.

For the last 35 years, I’ve always assumed the “heat index” was a bit of a bugaboo – a pseudo-science calculation surfing the collective American conscience with little or no factual underpinnings.

Well, turns out there is a calculation:

HI = -42.379 + 2.04901523T + 10.1433127R – 0.22475541TR – 6.83783×10 -3 T 2 – 5.481717×10 -2 R 2 + 1.22874×10 -3 T 2R + 8.5282×10 -4 TR 2 – 1.99×10 -6 T 2 R 2

where

T = ambient dry bulb temperature degrees Fahrenheit
R = relative humidity
The equation is only useful for temperatures 80 degrees or higher, and relative humidities 40% or greater.
NOAA National Weather Service chart of Heat Index
That looks rather ad-hoc to this curious science guy, so I delved a bit deeper and found this commonly cited article [PDF] explaining the genesis of the equation.

Now that summer has spread its oppressive ridge over most of the Southern Region, NWS phones are ringing off their hooks with questions about the Heat Index. Many questions regard the actual equationused in calculating the Heat Index. Some callers are satisfied with the response that it is extremely complicated. Some are satisfied with the nomogram (see Attachment 1). But there are a few who will settle for nothing less than the equation itself. No true equation for the Heat Index exists. Heat Index values are derived from a collection of equations that comprise a model. This Technical Attachment presents an equation that approximates the Heat Index and, thus, should satisfy the latter group of callers.

The Heat Index (or apparent temperature) is the result of extensive biometeorological studies. The parameters involved in its calculation are shown below (from Steadman, 1979). Each of these parameters can be described by an equation but they are given assumed magnitudes (in parentheses) in order to simplify the model.

  • Vapor pressure. Ambient vapor pressure of the atmosphere. (1.6 kPa)
  • Dimensions of a human. Determines the skin’s surface area. (5′ 7″ tall, 147 pounds
  • Effective radiation area of skin. A ratio that depends upon skin surface area. (0.80)
  • Significant diameter of a human. Based on the body’s volume and density. (15.3 cm)
  • Clothing cover. Long trousers and short-sleeved shirt is assumed. (84% coverage)
  • Core temperature. Internal body temperature. (98.6°F)
  • Core vapor pressure. Depends upon body’s core temperature and salinity. (5.65 kPa)
  • Surface temperatures and vapor pressures of skin and clothing. Affects heat transfer from the skin’s surface either by radiation or convection. These values are determined by an iterative process.
  • Activity. Determines metabolic output. (180 W m-2 of skin area for the model person walking outdoors at a speed of 3.1 mph)
  • Effective wind speed. Vector sum of the body’s movement and an average wind speed. Angle between vectors influences convection from skin surface (below). (5 kts)
  • Clothing resistance to heat transfer. The magnitude of this value is based on the assumption that the clothing is 20% fiber and 80% air.
  • Clothing resistance to moisture transfer. Since clothing is mostly air, pure vapor diffusion is used here.
  • Radiation from the surface of the skin. Actually, a radiative heat-transfer coefficient determined from previous studies.
  • Convection from the surface of the skin. A convection coefficient also determined from previous studies. Influenced by kinematic viscosity of air and angle of wind.
  • Sweating rate. Assumes that sweat is uniform and not dripping from the body.

From Rothfusz, L. P., 1990:The heat index equation (or, more than you ever wanted to know about heat index). NWS Southern Region Technical Attachment, SR/SSD 90-23, Fort Worth, TX.

So, to be as accurate as possible, tomorrow, if you’re 5’7″ 147 pounds, wearing long trousers and a short-sleeved shirt made of %80 air, have an average human diameter (unlike my 46″ waist), plan only to walk 3.1 MPH and sweat uniformally, it’ll feel like a bazillion degrees.