I like to keep it local on Concerned Citizen, but this report does have a local angle.
Tag Archives: LocalPolitics
North Carolina Justice: Law & Order or CSI?
[ UPDATE: ] Via WRAL-TV, the NC Supreme Court has issued a stay pending DNA tests in the case.
May 12th, the State of North Carolina is poised to practice justice Law & Order style.
Law & Order, a popular television franchise using stories “ripped from today’s headlines”, combines 22 minutes of heavy-handed police work (suspects slammed against walls) with 22 minutes of legal maneuvering (often crossing Constitutional boundaries) to deliver, usually in some surprising twist, a satisfying dramatic conclusion.
As the screen fades to black, the audience is assured that justice, as practiced by the over zealous police and prosecution, has been fairly meted out.
Surpassing Law & Order in popularity, CSI, a franchise about criminal scene investigators, follows chief investigator Gil Grissom and his crack forensic team as they use real, but not readily available, technology and techniques to ferret out the truth behind a crime. Quite often, what seems to be the truth is revealed to be wrong. The show’s writers often proffer an initial red-herring suspect – vociferously declaring his or her innocence – whose claims are vindicated in an equally satisfying dramatic conclusion.
Justice, often meted out on the end of a DNA probe, is not perverted by zealous prosecutorial misconduct.
Jerry Conner, a death row inmate,is scheduled to die May 12th in spite of the real possibility of his innocence.
Exculpatory DNA evidence – evidence not conclusive using the original 1991 DNA technology – is available to be tested. It will definitively rule, one way or another, on Conner’s claims.
Our State Bureau of Investigation’s lab, like the lab in CSI, has the new DNA technology. Yet the State, on our behalf, refuses to test the evidence.
I don’t know if Conner is guilty or not.
- He originally confessed, but 1 out of 4 persons exonerated by DNA evidence have also confessed.
- He’s on death row, but in the last 23 years 25 states have released 123 death row inmates on grounds of innocence.
- He had a juror that lied about her knowledge of the case, but two of three U.S 4th Circuit Court of Appeals judges ruled against Conner, to the strong dissension of the third, Judge Michael Luttig, who wrote that the behavior of the juror clearly “constitute[d] a quintessential instance of actual juror bias.”
I know this.
- I know it took less than a week to test 46 Duke lacrosse players DNA in a recent Durham rape case.
- I know the Federal government has pledged $1 billion to assist DNA evaluations, leading to post-conviction exonerations like that of Kirk Bloodsworth.
- I know we only have to look slightly westward, to Winston-Salem’s Darryl Hunt case, to see how an individual, 18 years proclaiming his innocence, was wrongly convicted but eventually exonerated because of DNA evidence.
There’s a reason CSI is so popular. Folks, like the good citizens of North Carolina, want to bring every technique and technology to bear in order to prove innocence.
Let’s call on our State to stand firm for real justice and demand a DNA test before killing a potentially innocent man.
Contact Governor Easley
Contact Attorney General Roy Cooper
Contact Your North Carolina Legislators
More on what you can do to help at the Jerry Conner ‘blog.
Shell Game? Transfer Development Rights
[UPDATE:] Some good coverage of the initial steps towards TDRs in today’s soon-to-be-paywalled HeraldSun.
6:30pm Tuesday, May 9th, Battle Courtroom on Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC
The county is starting a dialogue on a transfer of development rights program (TDR) for Orange County.
Last year, the county recruited local citizens to the TDR taskforce. The membership is comprised of a who’s who of folk interested in local development.
Overly touted by some, the program essentially trades your right to develop one piece of property (say your farm) for the right to (over?) develop another.
The real estate industry has prepared a summary that covers TDRs fairly well from their perspective.
Locally, Nick Tennyson,executive vice president for the Home Builders Association of Durham, Orange and Chatham Counties weighed in observing “TDR is a concept that in the abstract people find interesting, but when you really start working on where it’s going to apply, it has fizzled many times in the past.” (via today’s HeraldSun).
Though troubled a bit by the eminent domain issues around TDRs, I’m interested in the concept as a potentially valuable planning and zoning tool.
Tonight Orange County will present their first pass analysis of using TDRs – I look forward to seeing the proposal.
NextBus – The Proposal
I’ve been reading through the town’s Request for Proposal (RFP) for our new Real-Time Passenger Information System and Automatic Vehicle Location system for Chapel Hill Transit.
There’s some interesting goofs (missing section 3.B.6) and specifications (Microsoft ODBC) in a document which appears to be a cut-n-paste of Triangle Transit, Federal and local requirements.
From the RFP we see
The System shall undergo functional testing onsite in a test environment for a minimum of 2 weeks prior to May 1, 2006. Confidence testing shall occur during production use of the System between May 1, 2006 and June 15, 2006. Every route must be assigned an equipped vehicle and data collected for comparison to the actual. CHT will issue written Acceptance of the System within 15 days of establishing that the System meets all contract requirements and upon completion of the Confidence testing period.
I’ve yet to see the actual results of the functional testing, the results of evaluating the RFP’s stated criteria (including the ADA requirements) and whether we solicited bids from vendors known to use WiFi/WiMAX technologies but probably not be aware of our town’s interest in their RTIS/AVL systems.
Ellen, over on OrangePolitics, wonders if NextBus will deliver digital signs with audio alerts for “a person who is blind gets there and tries to access then and cant read it or a person who cant read but can hear and understand verbal communication”.
While the RFP mentions ADA 49CFR Part 37.167 and 49CFR Part 38.5 , both which require some kind of audio notifications, we won’t know for sure if those requirements were adhered to as part of the evaluation process until we see the results of the functional testing.
It’ll be a shame if, on top of a wasted $950,000 opportunity, the town has to kick in extra funds to be ADA compliant.
Lucky #21?
As noted tonight by Council member Sally Greene, Chapel Hill Town Council
raised our collective fists in the air and said “We object.” We passed a resolution in support of impeaching the President
The impeachment resolution was proposed by Elders for Peace of Carol Woods.
I’m happy to note I was signature #21 on their petition.
Now, if we could only get this guy 
to sign on.
NextBus Recap – The story so far…
[UPDATE:] The proposal.
What would it take to build our own bus ETA notification and Internet hotspot system?
Twenty-four hours into blogging about the NextBus system, what have we learned? What’s the alternative? How large of an opportunity have we missed?
What have other folk said about NextBus?
Why is the town concerned about cellphone charges? What kind of deal did we make?
Alameda California’s ACTransit signed a deal with NextBus is January, 2006. Did we get as good a deal?
May 8th I had an opportunity to speak with one of the folk from ACTransit who negotiated their great deal.
ACTransit got for their $1M:
- NEW: 54 signs, 125 vehicles, 13 routes
- EXISTING: 46 signs, 74 vehicles, 12 routes
- 7 years of support for their existing and new infrastructure.
Chapel Hill?
- 14 signs, 83 vehicles, 26 routes, unknown warrantee.
What does the Daily Tar Heel have to say?
Why NextBus? What about the strange coincidence involving NextBus’ 2002 campaign contributions to Rep. Price?
[ UPDATE: ]
Bob Avery, the town’s IT director, came through this evening with additional documentation of the Real-Time Passenger Information System and Automatic Vehicle Location system for Chapel Hill Transit.
Affordable Downtown Housing? Pfah!
Just heard the local Chamber of Commerce’s executive director Aaron Nelson on WCHL 1360AM describe, in jubilant terms , how soon-to-open Rosemary Village is ” the impetus for a downtown renaissance”.
Aaron further proclaimed this development would give us “great downtown living we haven’t had in a long time.”
Really? I know folk living downtown that might disagree with that sentiment.
Further, while the Chamber’s Nelson has gone to bat on behalf of this project several times, this latest praise for:
Rosemary Village…38 luxury condominiums within a short walk of UNC’s campus…from $350s – $700,000
rings a bit discordant along-side Nelson’s recent observation on Habitat’s fight with local neighbors, Chandler Green:
“The character of our community is to build unaffordable homes,” said Nelson, who reported that the chamber board of directors unanimously endorsed the project. “[Habitat is] building affordable homes. That is out of character.”
Aaron’s right, our community tends towards expensive housing.
The lesson of Rosemary Village, I think, is that the planned downtown developments whether private or public, in spite of the best intentions, will follow that trend.
Unlucky %13
Early primary day I read online reports of low turnout in Hillsborough, Efland, Carrboro and Chapel Hill.
Having done a bit of research on local elections, I realized that my vote, 222, that late in the day, at the Chapel Hill Library, home of Estes Hills precinct, a precinct which traditionally turns out heavily, was a harbinger of worse to come.
I speculated we’d end up with turnout somewhere between %12-14.
Actual turnout? %13.2.
Only 11,738 of 88944 registered voters, 9,450 Democrats (%20 of D’s), 1202 Republicans (%6 of R’s) and 1234 Independents (%5.5 of I’s) showed up.
Carol Woods, once again, led the pack: %81 of Democrats (262/323), %48 of Independents (29/60) and %0 (!!!) of Republicans (0/67) or %65 of all registered voters. My neighborhood at least, based on my count, did well by their civic duty.
Even the most pessimistic estimates put the last Iraqii election turnout at over %55.
Maybe the tide will turn in November.
May 2nd: Chatham? Baddour, Lucier, Vanderbeck, Thompson!
[UPDATE:] Lucier, Vanderbeck and Thompson sweep the board! Baddour still in contention.
Chatham, the tidal wave of development is overwhelming county services, driving taxes sky high (and we haven’t seen the end yet) and leading to a brittle service economy built on shaky ground.
When you mark your ballot, take a moment to think about this ode to Briar Chapel’s sewage spray system. It’s a good metaphor of how Bunkey and company have treated the county, the environment and the community.
Want to restore sanity, honesty and integrity to the Board of Commissioners? Vote:
- George Lucier – Commissioner, District 3
- Tom Vanderbeck – Commissioner, District 4
- Carl E. Thompson – Commissioner, District 5
More information at The Chatham Coalition.
- Allen Baddour – Superior Court.
Allen, arguably, is even a better choice for Chatham than Orange county.
May 2nd: Don’t fear the reaper, get out and vote!
Several months ago I went to Hillsborough for a demonstration of the ESS voting equipment. I saw the tried and true, paper ballot optical scan code machine and the fancy, complex and, I think, easy-to-tamper-with, touch screen unit. Wisely, the Board of Elections recommended the optical scan over the touch screen.
Continue reading May 2nd: Don’t fear the reaper, get out and vote!
Tapping into our community’s aggregate wisdom
My April 26th Daily Tar Heel guest column:
During the November campaign, I spoke of tapping into Chapel Hill’s “talent, innovation and creativity,” a reflection of my belief that good governance flows from maximizing citizen involvement.
How best to tap Chapel Hill’s wisdom?
Continue reading Tapping into our community’s aggregate wisdom
Catch the NextBus II
From today’s DTH editorial board:
Coming this August, Chapel Hill, in cooperation with the federal government, will have found a new way to waste your money.
Catch the NextBus
I’m curious about both the process our town went through selecting NextBus, Inc. and the “real-world” results of other communities.
I’ll be documenting more of what I find over the next couple days, including why the town’s Technology advisory board, in spite of staff knowing of our particular interest in this technology, was shut out of the decision-making process.
To start with, here’s the manager’s recommendation to purchase NextBus’s system. I haven’t found any other online materials documenting the criteria, methodology and test results of the trial comparisons.
While “googling” NextBus, I accidentally ran into this bit of data:
MARESCA, JAMES F. – SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94118 – NEXTBUS/EXECUTIVE
| Date | Amount | Recipient |
| 3/22/2002 | $1,000 | Price, David |
| 6/5/2002 | $500 | Price, David |
| 6/24/2002 | $500 | Price, David |
| 6/24/2002 | ($500) | Price, David |
Documented here, here and here.
One of the lobbyist for NextBus at the time, Charles S. Walsh of FLEISCHMAN & WALSH , also made a 9/16/2002 donation of $1,000 to Price.
[ UPDATE: ] Turns out two lobbyists from Fleischman & Walsh gave $1,000. Aaron Fleischman gave $1,000 on 06/05/2002.
| Walsh, Charles S. | Fleischman & Walsh LLP/Attorney | 1,000 | G | 09/16/2002 | Annapolis | MD | 21401 |
| Fleischman, Aaron | Fleischman and Walsh LLP/Attorney | 1,000 | P | 06/05/2002 | Washington | DC | 20008 |
NextBus only retained FLEISCHMAN & WALSH 2001-2003 in which they paid $20K in 2001, $100K in 2002 and $80K in 2003.
The only other Congressman to receive NextBus executive’s direct largesse, Tom Davis, Republican representative for Virginia’s 11th district, got $1,000 in 2002.
This is only of interest in light of the recent HeraldSun article on the NextBus purchase:
Federal money helped fund the bulk of the $949,025 project, he said.
“This was something that Rep. David Price’s [D-4th district] office became involved in, that there were federal dollars available for transit enhancement,†Neufang said. “We’re very appreciative that Cong. Price has assisted us in this process.â€
and the comment in the manager’s recommendation:
In 2003, Congressman David Price obtained for the Town an earmark grant for an Intelligent Transportation System deployment program. The funds were to be used for obtaining a Real Time Passenger Information System for Chapel Hill Transit.
While 2002 was just a year before the initial run at doing this project, it has been quite awhile ago and both Maresca and FLEISCHMAN & WALSH have long moved on.
Mission Accomplished?
Having completed their missions, I petition the Council that we thank all existing and former committee members for their dedication and public service, and that we now conclude the service of the Technology and Horace Williams Citizens Committees, effective June 30, 2006.
Since yesterday’s 8 to 1 vote to dissolve the Horace-Williams Citizens’ Committee , I’ve heard from 7 HWCC members expressing from mild to strong dissent with the decision.
The common theme? More work to be done.
More on OrangePolitics.
Foy’s Two Thorns?
With one stroke, the Mayor proposes to eliminate two committees whose roles have been controversial at times. Both committees are far from done with their tasks, so it’s hard to understand why Foy wants to kill them off.
Is it because they’re both pushing the envelope?
I sit on both committees, so, from the inside, I find it quite a strange idea that they’re done with their tasks.
Maybe it’s a measure of the Mayor’s inattention to these committee’s work. Hard to say, though I do look forward to his explanation on April 10th.
What are these committees actively doing?
The HWCC has constituted several sub-committees to review equity, environmental and transportation issues.
For instance, the environmental committee is working on a proposal requesting that UNC do a complete, scientific environmental baseline for HWA and its surrounds. We also are researching environmental metrics to apply. Once the baselines and metrics are established, the environmental effects of Carolina North, positive and negative, can be measured over the next 100 years. UNC has an unique opportunity to study “green technologies and techniques” and using the Carolina North project as a driver for research and development.
Without the HWCC, who will advocate for that grand vision on behalf of the citizenry?
As for the Technology committee, yes, municipal networking is moving forward but that’s just a small part of the technology portfolio. Our town is way behind the technology curve and town management, to date, has shown no real interest in moving us forward.
For instance, it was the committee that identified technology-related cost efficiencies and savings in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Besides that, the committee has discussed and proposed a number of enhancements in: open document standards, open access to governmental data, open infrastructure, accessibility, bi-directional citizen communications, self-service operations, etc.
A number of these proposals have been approved by Council but their implementation lags.
And, to be fairly blunt, whether from disinterest in the subject, lack of time or inability, most of the Council has paid little attention to understanding and utilizing common-place technologies to drive costs out of service delivery, enhance citizen participation in governance, create transparency and generally improve the overall performance of government.
Without the Technology Committee, who will suggest and advocate for these technology-related improvements?
TO: Town Council
FROM: Kevin Foy, Mayor
SUBJECT: Conclusion of Service: Horace Williams Citizens Committee and Technology Committee
DATE: April 10, 2006
The Horace Williams Citizens Committee was established in October 2002 to assist the Council in preparing for deliberations with the University of North Carolina regarding the development of the Horace Williams property.â€
The Technology Committee was formed in 1998 and charged with advising the Council on the formation of a technology plan, including the formation of a town-wide network.
Both Committees have benefited from the work of dozens of citizens, council members, and town staff, and have put countless hours into their work. The Horace Williams Citizens Committee Report and the recent presentation on Wireless Internet from the Technology Committee are evidence of the time and effort involved.
Having completed their missions, I petition the Council that we thank all existing and former committee members for their dedication and public service, and that we now conclude the service of the Technology and Horace Williams Citizens Committees, effective June 30, 2006.
………
If you’re interested in the effective use of technology to enhance our local governance or in retaining a strong, local and non-political voice in the Carolina North mega-development, I suggest you contact the Mayor and Council by April 10th – ask them to keep these citizen voices active.