On this day in which a handful of willful extortionists intimidated fellow party members and acted to shut down the US Government, it is worth remembering: we live in a democracy.
The government is us. We are the sovereign. The Tea Party zealots driving this action are not patriots, they are terrorists. They hate the United States. They fear and hate fellow Americans.
They despise democracy. They are having a prolonged tantrum.
Time to give them a time out.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
Monday, September 30, 2013
United States Department Of Justice To Sue NC Over Voter Information Verification Act
We have known for a couple of days that the Department of Justice planned to sue North Carolina, as it has sued the state of Texas, over new voting laws. What we didn't have information on is the extent of the suit.
Here is the latest information:
"The suit, set to be filed in Greensboro, N.C., will ask that the state be barred from enforcing the new voter-ID law, the source said. However, the case will also go further, demanding that the entire state of North Carolina be placed under a requirement to have all changes to voting laws, procedures and polling places "precleared" by either the Justice Department or a federal court, the source added."
Good start. Now let's extend the voting rights preclearance requirement to all fifty states.
Here is the latest information:
"The suit, set to be filed in Greensboro, N.C., will ask that the state be barred from enforcing the new voter-ID law, the source said. However, the case will also go further, demanding that the entire state of North Carolina be placed under a requirement to have all changes to voting laws, procedures and polling places "precleared" by either the Justice Department or a federal court, the source added."
Good start. Now let's extend the voting rights preclearance requirement to all fifty states.
Topic Tags:
elections,
state government
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Economist Mark Thoma On Inequality And The Republican Shutdown Shakedown
In a column in the Fiscal Times, economist Mark Thoma explains the real reason for the current fight over the debt limit. He actually puts it more politely than I do, but the article explains pretty clearly what is at stake.
"We have lost something important as a society," Thoma explains, "as inequality has grown over the last several decades, our sense that we are all in this together. Social insurance is a way of sharing the risks that our economic system imposes upon us. As with other types of insurance, e.g. fire insurance, we all put our money into a common pool and the few of us unlucky enough to experience a “fire” – the loss of a job, health problems that wipe out retirement funds, disability, and so on – use the insurance to avoid financial disaster and rebuild as best we can."
One of the themes that jumps out at me from my reading of actions during World War II: American servicemen completely grasped that we were all in this together - they didn't abandon their fellow soldiers and sailors to the enemy. The order to "abandon ship" didn't mean "abandon your shipmates." It didn't mean "you're on your own." The French say "sauve qui peut," literally "save [oneself] who can" or "every man for himself." That wasn't the way of the American warrior. It is the way these days of wealthy Republicans.
"But growing inequality has allowed one strata of society to be largely free of these risks while the other is very much exposed to them." The two strata Thoma is referring to are the 1% at the top of the ladder and the other 99%. "As that has happened," Thoma goes on, "as one group in society has had fewer and fewer worries about paying for college education, has first-rate health insurance, ample funds for retirement, and little or no chance of losing a home and ending up on the street if a job suddenly disappears in a recession, support among the politically powerful elite for the risk sharing that makes social insurance work has declined."
During World War II, even the wealthy dared not violate rationing, even when they could easily afford black market prices. Nor did they dare evade the draft. It wasn't patriotic.
"Rising inequality and differential exposure to economic risk has caused one group to see themselves as the “makers” in society who provide for the rest and pay most of the bills, and the other group as “takers” who get all the benefits. The upper strata wonders, “Why should we pay for social insurance when we get little or none of the benefits?” and this leads to an attack on these programs."
I didn't miss the Republican message conveyed during last year's election. The theme was "you hard working white folks have to pay taxes to support those lazy, shiftless blacks and hispanics (all illegal immigrants)." Across the nation, African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans, Native Americans, Jewish Americans and recent immigrants of all varieties got the same message: The Republican Party has become the party of White Supremacists. Indeed, both supporters and opponents of the GOP understand that "politically conservative" is another way of saying "White Supremacist."
"Even worse, this social stratification leads those at the top to begin imposing a virtue and vice story to justify their desire to stop paying the taxes needed to support social insurance programs. Those at the top did it all by themselves." ( in their own imaginations) "They “built that” through their own effort and sacrifice with no help from anyone else." Balderdash!
The American industrial planner who most clearly articulated the antidote to this nonsense was the late W. Edwards Deming. He understood that success was a result of collective rather than individual effort and particularly opposed bonuses. He described giving a manager a bonus for his organization's quarterly success as akin to rewarding the weatherman for a pleasant sunshiny day.
"Those at the bottom, on the other hand," the comfortably wealthy assert, "are essentially burning down their own houses just to collect the fire insurance, i.e. making poor choices and sponging off of social insurance programs. It’s their behavior that’s the problem," according to the Koch Brothers and their ilk, "and taking away the incentive to live off of the rest of society by constraining their ability to collect social insurance is the only way to ensure they get jobs and provide for themselves." And how did the Koch brothers provide for themselves? The old fashioned way. By choosing wealthy parents.
The people who have made poor choices in recent decades are our political leaders who dismantled very effective protections put in place eighty years ago. We are all suffering as a result.
"Of course, this is a false view of how the system operates," Thoma explains. "The wealthy would not have the opportunity to make so much money if it society didn’t provide the infrastructure, educated workforce, legal protections, and other building blocks critical for their success. And we shouldn’t forget that many of the wealthy got where they are through the privilege and advantage that comes from familial wealth rather than their own merit."
I might add that another way the super wealthy got that way is by buying politicians to change the rules by which we all live. To their advantage, of course. They have rigged the system.
"We have lost something important as a society," Thoma explains, "as inequality has grown over the last several decades, our sense that we are all in this together. Social insurance is a way of sharing the risks that our economic system imposes upon us. As with other types of insurance, e.g. fire insurance, we all put our money into a common pool and the few of us unlucky enough to experience a “fire” – the loss of a job, health problems that wipe out retirement funds, disability, and so on – use the insurance to avoid financial disaster and rebuild as best we can."
One of the themes that jumps out at me from my reading of actions during World War II: American servicemen completely grasped that we were all in this together - they didn't abandon their fellow soldiers and sailors to the enemy. The order to "abandon ship" didn't mean "abandon your shipmates." It didn't mean "you're on your own." The French say "sauve qui peut," literally "save [oneself] who can" or "every man for himself." That wasn't the way of the American warrior. It is the way these days of wealthy Republicans.
"But growing inequality has allowed one strata of society to be largely free of these risks while the other is very much exposed to them." The two strata Thoma is referring to are the 1% at the top of the ladder and the other 99%. "As that has happened," Thoma goes on, "as one group in society has had fewer and fewer worries about paying for college education, has first-rate health insurance, ample funds for retirement, and little or no chance of losing a home and ending up on the street if a job suddenly disappears in a recession, support among the politically powerful elite for the risk sharing that makes social insurance work has declined."
During World War II, even the wealthy dared not violate rationing, even when they could easily afford black market prices. Nor did they dare evade the draft. It wasn't patriotic.
"Rising inequality and differential exposure to economic risk has caused one group to see themselves as the “makers” in society who provide for the rest and pay most of the bills, and the other group as “takers” who get all the benefits. The upper strata wonders, “Why should we pay for social insurance when we get little or none of the benefits?” and this leads to an attack on these programs."
I didn't miss the Republican message conveyed during last year's election. The theme was "you hard working white folks have to pay taxes to support those lazy, shiftless blacks and hispanics (all illegal immigrants)." Across the nation, African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans, Native Americans, Jewish Americans and recent immigrants of all varieties got the same message: The Republican Party has become the party of White Supremacists. Indeed, both supporters and opponents of the GOP understand that "politically conservative" is another way of saying "White Supremacist."
"Even worse, this social stratification leads those at the top to begin imposing a virtue and vice story to justify their desire to stop paying the taxes needed to support social insurance programs. Those at the top did it all by themselves." ( in their own imaginations) "They “built that” through their own effort and sacrifice with no help from anyone else." Balderdash!
The American industrial planner who most clearly articulated the antidote to this nonsense was the late W. Edwards Deming. He understood that success was a result of collective rather than individual effort and particularly opposed bonuses. He described giving a manager a bonus for his organization's quarterly success as akin to rewarding the weatherman for a pleasant sunshiny day.
"Those at the bottom, on the other hand," the comfortably wealthy assert, "are essentially burning down their own houses just to collect the fire insurance, i.e. making poor choices and sponging off of social insurance programs. It’s their behavior that’s the problem," according to the Koch Brothers and their ilk, "and taking away the incentive to live off of the rest of society by constraining their ability to collect social insurance is the only way to ensure they get jobs and provide for themselves." And how did the Koch brothers provide for themselves? The old fashioned way. By choosing wealthy parents.
The people who have made poor choices in recent decades are our political leaders who dismantled very effective protections put in place eighty years ago. We are all suffering as a result.
"Of course, this is a false view of how the system operates," Thoma explains. "The wealthy would not have the opportunity to make so much money if it society didn’t provide the infrastructure, educated workforce, legal protections, and other building blocks critical for their success. And we shouldn’t forget that many of the wealthy got where they are through the privilege and advantage that comes from familial wealth rather than their own merit."
I might add that another way the super wealthy got that way is by buying politicians to change the rules by which we all live. To their advantage, of course. They have rigged the system.
This
political dispute over the debt limit is, plainly and simply, about the
size and role of government. In particular, it’s an attempt by
Republicans to use undue fear about the debt to scale back or eliminate
spending on social insurance programs such as Medicare, Social Security,
Obamacare, food stamps, and unemployment compensation. And it’s no
accident that this attack on social insurance coincides with growing
income inequality. - See more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
This
political dispute over the debt limit is, plainly and simply, about the
size and role of government. In particular, it’s an attempt by
Republicans to use undue fear about the debt to scale back or eliminate
spending on social insurance programs such as Medicare, Social Security,
Obamacare, food stamps, and unemployment compensation. And it’s no
accident that this attack on social insurance coincides with growing
income inequality. - See more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
the debt is not even an immediate problem. As the latest estimates from
the Congressional Budget Office show, we don’t have a debt problem
until over a decade from now, and when the debt does finally begin
increasing the main cause will be rising costs for health care. So
finding a way to rein in health care costs, something that already seems
to be happening, is the key to solving our future debt problem. - See
more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
the debt is not even an immediate problem. As the latest estimates from
the Congressional Budget Office show, we don’t have a debt problem
until over a decade from now, and when the debt does finally begin
increasing the main cause will be rising costs for health care. So
finding a way to rein in health care costs, something that already seems
to be happening, is the key to solving our future debt problem. - See
more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
In
fact, the debt is not even an immediate problem. As the latest
estimates from the Congressional Budget Office show, we don’t have a
debt problem until over a decade from now, and when the debt does
finally begin increasing the main cause will be rising costs for health
care. So finding a way to rein in health care costs, something that
already seems to be happening, is the key to solving our future debt
problem. - See more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
In
fact, the debt is not even an immediate problem. As the latest
estimates from the Congressional Budget Office show, we don’t have a
debt problem until over a decade from now, and when the debt does
finally begin increasing the main cause will be rising costs for health
care. So finding a way to rein in health care costs, something that
already seems to be happening, is the key to solving our future debt
problem. - See more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
Topic Tags:
economics,
government,
politics
Which Wolf Do You Feed?
There is a story, thought to be of Cherokee origin, quoted in today's New York Times. It goes like this:
A girl is troubled by a recurring dream in which two wolves fight viciously. Seeking an explanation, she goes to her grandfather, highly regarded for his wisdom, who explains that there are two forces within each of us, struggling for supremacy, one embodying peace and the other, war. At this, the girl is even more distressed, and asks her grandfather who wins. His answer: “The one you feed.”
A girl is troubled by a recurring dream in which two wolves fight viciously. Seeking an explanation, she goes to her grandfather, highly regarded for his wisdom, who explains that there are two forces within each of us, struggling for supremacy, one embodying peace and the other, war. At this, the girl is even more distressed, and asks her grandfather who wins. His answer: “The one you feed.”
Topic Tags:
philosophy
Saturday, September 28, 2013
The Intentional Destruction Of Public Education
I recommend everyone concerned with public education to read Jonothan Kozol's review in the New York Times of Diane Ravitch's new book:
This Is Only a Test
‘Reign of Error,’ by Diane Ravitch
By JONATHAN KOZOL
Published: September 26, 2013
I also recommend following education issues Diane Ravitvh's blog: http://dianeravitch.net/
She also has a web site at http://dianeravitch.net/
I recently tried to recall when I first heard newspaper commentary about how our schools were failing. I can't pin it down exactly, but my best recollection is that the drumbeat of criticism began about 1970. That was when, across the South, public schools began to integrate as required by the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision of 1954. [Some may recall the Supreme Court's order that this be accomplished with "all deliberate speed."] I had a few words to say about this back in June.
Across the South, White parents began removing their children from public schools to "home school" them or to enroll them in "Christian" academies.
Now, across the land, wealthy Americans are engaged in a vast struggle to destroy public schools and replace them with corporate, for profit undertakings.
One element in the attack on public schools is "Teach For America." The premise of TFA is that bright, committed college graduates can do what trained, experienced teachers cannot. In short, it is an attack on American public education. This recent article in Atlantic calls that whole enterprise into question.
Topic Tags:
business,
education,
government
What's The Health Care Fight All About?
"The Republican Party is bending its entire will, staking its very
soul, fighting to its last breath, in service of a crusade to....
Make sure that the working poor don't have access to affordable health care."
Kevin Drum
Another way to put it:
When the exchange opens, 1,346,603 uninsured and eligible North Carolinians will have access to affordable care.
Up to 95,000 young adults in North Carolina can now stay on their parent's health insurance until they're 26 years old.
People from North Carolina with Medicare saved nearly $209 million on prescription drugs because of the Affordable Care Act.
Up to 4,099,922 non-elderly North Carolinians with pre-existing conditions, including 539,092 children, can no longer be denied coverage.
And this is what Republicans are trying to take away.
By the way, this is the party that claims to be "Christian" and to reflect "family values."
Someone has to explain that to me.
Make sure that the working poor don't have access to affordable health care."
Kevin Drum
Another way to put it:
When the exchange opens, 1,346,603 uninsured and eligible North Carolinians will have access to affordable care.
Up to 95,000 young adults in North Carolina can now stay on their parent's health insurance until they're 26 years old.
People from North Carolina with Medicare saved nearly $209 million on prescription drugs because of the Affordable Care Act.
Up to 4,099,922 non-elderly North Carolinians with pre-existing conditions, including 539,092 children, can no longer be denied coverage.
And this is what Republicans are trying to take away.
By the way, this is the party that claims to be "Christian" and to reflect "family values."
Someone has to explain that to me.
Topic Tags:
government,
health
Friday, September 27, 2013
Voter Suppression In New Bern
They are at it again! Today's Sun Journal highlights an e-mail campaign by the Craven County Republican Party to stir up concern over a supposed need to purge the county's voter registration rolls. The article, by reporter Sue Book, makes it clear that the e-mail is contrary to provisions of North Carolina general statutes governing elections. The restrictions of NC election law that the article describes concerning voters presumed to have moved are dictated by federal election law, namely the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. Craven County election officials got it right.
It seems worth mentioning that the State Board of Elections, now dominated by its republican members, also got the law right when they overturned county actions in the case of a student who filed to run in the Elizabethtown municipal elections. Neither that county board action or the one in Boone, NC closing a precinct at Appalachian State University, relied on recent changes to state election laws.
Stand by for more of the same.
It seems worth mentioning that the State Board of Elections, now dominated by its republican members, also got the law right when they overturned county actions in the case of a student who filed to run in the Elizabethtown municipal elections. Neither that county board action or the one in Boone, NC closing a precinct at Appalachian State University, relied on recent changes to state election laws.
Stand by for more of the same.
Topic Tags:
elections,
state government
Voter Suppression In NC: More Than Just Voter ID
Professor Dan Carter of the University of South Carolina has written a very illuminating article explaining what has happened in North Carolina in the past two legislative sessions. The article is here.
It is plain from this and other sources that the voter suppression
legislation in North Carolina is part of a national GOP scheme to
suppress voting by African Americans, college students, women, the poor,
and democratic voters in general. Carter explains clearly how this is
done.
Topic Tags:
elections,
state government
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Representative Speciale Doesn't Want Military Retirees To Vote
On Friday the 13th of this month, state representative Michael Speciale assured a public
gathering in Pamlico County that, unlike some of his colleagues, he
reads every bill. I take him at his word.
That's why I conclude he doesn't want military retirees to vote.
He
explained that voters shouldn't worry - there are seven different kinds
of photo ID's acceptable
to vote, in addition to a North Carolina driver's licence. One of them is a United States military identification card.
The problem is, what House Bill 589, the "Voter Information Verification
Act,"("VIVA") provides with one hand, it takes away with the other.
On
close reading, I believe representative Speciale's own retired military ID
does not qualify under VIVA as a valid photo ID for voting. Why not? His
ID has no expiration date. In the block for "expiration date" it says
"indefinite." No problem. Section 163-166.13 (e)(4) of VIVA says "there is no
requirement that it [a military ID] have a printed expiration or
issuance date." But above that, in section 163-166 (e), the bill says
"in the case of
identification under subdivisions (4) through (6) of this section, if
it does not contain a printed expiration date, it shall be acceptable if it has a printed issuance date that is not more than eight years before...voting."
I looked at my own retired military ID and discovered it does
not meet the new NC photo ID requirement. Had Mr. Speciale, who retired
in 1995, examined his own retired military ID, he would possibly have
discovered the problem. His military ID doesn't qualify, either.
1. Identification card for nonoperators issued by DMV. But that requires two forms of identification under DMV rules and the name on those ID's must be precisely the same. Some older women will have difficulty with this;
2. A United States passport. Outside of Oriental and Arapahoe, few residents of Pamlico County will have such a document. This is something middle and upper class people have, it is expensive to acquire, and not something the poor or working people are likely to have;
3. A United States military ID. There will be problems with retirees, as I have noted above;
4. Veterans ID issued by VA. I have examined a number of these and find they have neither date of issuance nor date of expiration. They don't meet the requirements of VIVA;
5. A tribal enrollment card issued by a federally recognized tribe. I checked with my grandsons, who are enrolled in a federally recognized tribe. Their enrollment cards issued when they were accepted into the tribe have neither a photo, a date of issuance nor a date of expiration. Why would they? Tribal membership doesn't expire until the member does. One of my grandsons has a photo identification issued by the tribe. It has a duration of ten years. Renewal requires a visit to the reservation. The eight-year limit does not match with tribal practice;
6. A tribal enrollment card issued by a tribe recognized by North Carolina, that has the same identity requirements as DMV;
7. Driver's license issued by another state, but only if the voter's voter registration was within 90 days of the election.
The bottom line is, the list of other accepted photo ID's is useless as a practical matter. The requirement is really for a NC driver's license or DMV-issued identification. More important are the omissions: the law rejects student IDs, public-employee IDs, or photo IDs issued by public assistance agencies.
but rejects student IDs, public-employee IDs, or photo IDs issued by
public assistance agencies. - See more at:
http://southernspaces.org/2013/north-carolina-state-shock?fb_action_ids=673615692650253&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%22673615692650253%22%3A577690535627400%7D&action_type_map=%7B%22673615692650253%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D#sthash.rGk7k2ir.dpuf
but rejects student IDs, public-employee IDs, or photo IDs issued by
public assistance agencies. - See more at:
http://southernspaces.org/2013/north-carolina-state-shock?fb_action_ids=673615692650253&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%22673615692650253%22%3A577690535627400%7D&action_type_map=%7B%22673615692650253%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D#sthash.rGk7k2ir.dpuf
but rejects student IDs, public-employee IDs, or photo IDs issued by
public assistance agencies. - See more at:
http://southernspaces.org/2013/north-carolina-state-shock?fb_action_ids=673615692650253&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%22673615692650253%22%3A577690535627400%7D&action_type_map=%7B%22673615692650253%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D#sthash.rGk7k2ir.dpuf
Then why the long list? To give the illusion of options.
By the way, Pamlico County has no DMV office. A mobile facility visits the county for one six-hour period each month. A preliminary estimate is that nearly 600 registered voters in Pamlico County have no Driver's license. How is the DMV van going to meet this need along with their regular business?
Topic Tags:
elections,
pamlico county,
state government
Friday, September 20, 2013
Oriental Town Board Whines About Wal-Mart
At a spirited special meeting last night of the Oriental Town Board, a standing-room only crowd voiced overwhelming opposition to the planned Wal-Mart Express to be built just outside Town.
After a dozen citizens spoke, all but one opposing Wal-Mart, the Town Board considered an eight-page resolution drafted over the previous 36 hours by Commissioner Venturi. Commissioner Summers, in the only sensible move of the evening, moved to "table" the resolution until the Board's next meeting. His resolution didn't pass. The Board then recessed for fifteen minutes to read the resolution they had just refused to table.
After the recess, Commissioner Bissette moved to amend the resolution by deleting approximately two pages of the resolution. The amended resolution, essentially a lengthy whine asking Wal-Mart to play nice, was adopted.
If you think my characterization a bit harsh, you can read the resolution here: http://www.townoforiental.com/vertical/sites/%7B8227B748-6F08-4124-B0ED-02789B9A2F82%7D/uploads/Too_-_Wal-Mart_Resolution.pdf
I agree with the commissioners who pointed out the Town has, at best, only limited powers in this case. Why is that? It is the result of decades of dithering and refusal to look aggressively to the future.
Examples:
Six years ago, the Long Range Planning Committee refused to even mention the possibility of expanding the Town by annexation. Such a move would be very much more difficult now;
In the 1990's, the Town sold its sewage treatment plant, rather than seeking state and federal funds to repair and modernize it. Result: the Town lost control over its future;
Six years ago, the Town made a poorly-conceived effort to remove a restriction on Extra Territorial Jurisdiction in Pamlico County. We wasted the support of our representatives in the state house and senate by a very clumsy approach;
And on and on.
We have an important municipal election coming up. Let's put some people in office who want to DO things.
After a dozen citizens spoke, all but one opposing Wal-Mart, the Town Board considered an eight-page resolution drafted over the previous 36 hours by Commissioner Venturi. Commissioner Summers, in the only sensible move of the evening, moved to "table" the resolution until the Board's next meeting. His resolution didn't pass. The Board then recessed for fifteen minutes to read the resolution they had just refused to table.
After the recess, Commissioner Bissette moved to amend the resolution by deleting approximately two pages of the resolution. The amended resolution, essentially a lengthy whine asking Wal-Mart to play nice, was adopted.
If you think my characterization a bit harsh, you can read the resolution here: http://www.townoforiental.com/vertical/sites/%7B8227B748-6F08-4124-B0ED-02789B9A2F82%7D/uploads/Too_-_Wal-Mart_Resolution.pdf
I agree with the commissioners who pointed out the Town has, at best, only limited powers in this case. Why is that? It is the result of decades of dithering and refusal to look aggressively to the future.
Examples:
Six years ago, the Long Range Planning Committee refused to even mention the possibility of expanding the Town by annexation. Such a move would be very much more difficult now;
In the 1990's, the Town sold its sewage treatment plant, rather than seeking state and federal funds to repair and modernize it. Result: the Town lost control over its future;
Six years ago, the Town made a poorly-conceived effort to remove a restriction on Extra Territorial Jurisdiction in Pamlico County. We wasted the support of our representatives in the state house and senate by a very clumsy approach;
And on and on.
We have an important municipal election coming up. Let's put some people in office who want to DO things.
Topic Tags:
town government
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Pamlico County State Legislators
Last Friday I attended the Town Meeting with Pamlico County's State Legislators at Pamlico Community College's Ned Delamar Center.
First the good news. Both State Senator Sanderson and Representative Speciale have become more polished in their presentations since being elected to the state legislature.
I'll get to the bad news in a minute.
I don't know Michel Speciale at all, but I do know Norm Sanderson. He has always been completely courteous in his dealings with me, despite disagreements on policy matters. Now that I have heard the two legislators explain what they view as the significant accomplishments of the General Assembly in the recent session, I have many more policy disagreements.
Most of all, I am disappointed that neither elected official seems to inquire very deeply into the truth of matters affecting their constituents. That is, the voters in their districts.
One example: Michel Speciale's explanation of one provision of the bill making vast changes to election law in North Carolina. The legislature did away with same day registration of voters during one-stop, Speciale explained, "because there was not enough time to review and certify the voter before the election." He did not cite a single case where this had been a problem.
His statement is false in several dimensions:
1. It may not look like it, but votes cast at one-stop sites are actually absentee ballots. They are processed exactly the same way. They are reviewed by the county board of elections weekly during one-stop and either verified, rejected or set aside for further examination. Like any other vote, they don't count officially until the tenth day after the general election in even-numbered years or the seventh day after the general election in odd-numbered years.
2. Every ballot cast at a one-stop site, every provisional ballot and every absentee ballot is retrievable. (That isn't true for ballots cast election day). I don't know of a single case where a county board of elections was unable to determine validity of any such ballot by the time they completed the canvass.
3. Because ballots are retrievable, votes cast at one-stop, including those cast by voters using same-day registration, could be challenged right up to the time the board of elections completes tha canvass of votes cast.
Why does this matter?
a. It makes it possible for voters to correct any errors in their voter registration information even after the registration deadline. Voters often don't review their information until voting begins at one-stop.
b. It provides a safety valve against voter registration scams. In 2012, both in North Carolina and Virginia, "helpful" persons conducted voter registration drives in African American, Hispanic and College neighborhoods. They then tossed all the registration forms for categories they didn't want to vote.
This scam worked in Virginia, where thousands of discarded registration forms were found in dumpsters after registration closed. It was too late for the scammed voters to correct the record and vote.
The scam didn't work as well in North Carolina, where more than half of the voters cast ballots at one-stop sites. Because of same day registration, North Carolina voters were better protected from an insidious form of GOP election fraud.
Our state legislature has now made North Carolina safe for a particular form of targeted election fraud designed to suppress the vote in certain neighborhoods.
I don't know whether the legislators who voted for this change are dishonest or just gullible. I prefer to think they are just gullible.
First the good news. Both State Senator Sanderson and Representative Speciale have become more polished in their presentations since being elected to the state legislature.
I'll get to the bad news in a minute.
I don't know Michel Speciale at all, but I do know Norm Sanderson. He has always been completely courteous in his dealings with me, despite disagreements on policy matters. Now that I have heard the two legislators explain what they view as the significant accomplishments of the General Assembly in the recent session, I have many more policy disagreements.
Most of all, I am disappointed that neither elected official seems to inquire very deeply into the truth of matters affecting their constituents. That is, the voters in their districts.
One example: Michel Speciale's explanation of one provision of the bill making vast changes to election law in North Carolina. The legislature did away with same day registration of voters during one-stop, Speciale explained, "because there was not enough time to review and certify the voter before the election." He did not cite a single case where this had been a problem.
His statement is false in several dimensions:
1. It may not look like it, but votes cast at one-stop sites are actually absentee ballots. They are processed exactly the same way. They are reviewed by the county board of elections weekly during one-stop and either verified, rejected or set aside for further examination. Like any other vote, they don't count officially until the tenth day after the general election in even-numbered years or the seventh day after the general election in odd-numbered years.
2. Every ballot cast at a one-stop site, every provisional ballot and every absentee ballot is retrievable. (That isn't true for ballots cast election day). I don't know of a single case where a county board of elections was unable to determine validity of any such ballot by the time they completed the canvass.
3. Because ballots are retrievable, votes cast at one-stop, including those cast by voters using same-day registration, could be challenged right up to the time the board of elections completes tha canvass of votes cast.
Why does this matter?
a. It makes it possible for voters to correct any errors in their voter registration information even after the registration deadline. Voters often don't review their information until voting begins at one-stop.
b. It provides a safety valve against voter registration scams. In 2012, both in North Carolina and Virginia, "helpful" persons conducted voter registration drives in African American, Hispanic and College neighborhoods. They then tossed all the registration forms for categories they didn't want to vote.
This scam worked in Virginia, where thousands of discarded registration forms were found in dumpsters after registration closed. It was too late for the scammed voters to correct the record and vote.
The scam didn't work as well in North Carolina, where more than half of the voters cast ballots at one-stop sites. Because of same day registration, North Carolina voters were better protected from an insidious form of GOP election fraud.
Our state legislature has now made North Carolina safe for a particular form of targeted election fraud designed to suppress the vote in certain neighborhoods.
I don't know whether the legislators who voted for this change are dishonest or just gullible. I prefer to think they are just gullible.
Topic Tags:
state government
Pamlico County - Two Wal Marts?
There may be news today on the Wal-Mart front.
Would you believe two Wal-Mart stores in Pamlico County?
I'm not sure even one makes sense in a county of 13,000, but two?
Would you believe two Wal-Mart stores in Pamlico County?
I'm not sure even one makes sense in a county of 13,000, but two?
Topic Tags:
business
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Doolittle Raiders Have Last Public Reunion
Every year since 1942, on April 18, the anniversary of the Doolittle raid on Japan by 16 B-25 bombers taking off from the pitching flight deck of USS Hornet, the survivors of the 80 aviators from the raid hold a reunion. They toast those who passed on during the previous year. Among the mementoes possessed by the surviving raiders is a bottle of fine cognac bottled in 1896, the year of General Doolittle's birth. The plan is for the last survivors to open the bottle and toast their departed comrades.
At their annual reunion this year, the four remaining survivors, all in their nineties, decided that this year's reunion was the last public reunion they will hold. Later this year, they will hold a private ceremony at which the 1896 bottle will be opened. Here is the story.
I have written about the Doolittle raid before: here and here and here and here and here. It was one of the most remarkable military operations in history and had an effect far beyond the slight damage it caused to Tokyo. It was, in fact, a game-changer for the entire Pacific war.
The eighty volunteers who pulled it off were no more remarkable than many others in our armed forces at the time of Pearl Harbor, but only trained B-25 crew members had the chance to volunteer.
They did a remarkable thing, but standing behind them were thousands of sailors, engineers, technicians and military planners who made the plan, modified the aircraft, trained the crews to take off from an aircraft carrier, land in China and get back to the US.
The aircrews got the glory, but all these men were in it together. Teamwork. And it was done with airplanes, ships, soldiers and sailors who were already in the service at the time of Pearl Harbor.
At their annual reunion this year, the four remaining survivors, all in their nineties, decided that this year's reunion was the last public reunion they will hold. Later this year, they will hold a private ceremony at which the 1896 bottle will be opened. Here is the story.
I have written about the Doolittle raid before: here and here and here and here and here. It was one of the most remarkable military operations in history and had an effect far beyond the slight damage it caused to Tokyo. It was, in fact, a game-changer for the entire Pacific war.
The eighty volunteers who pulled it off were no more remarkable than many others in our armed forces at the time of Pearl Harbor, but only trained B-25 crew members had the chance to volunteer.
They did a remarkable thing, but standing behind them were thousands of sailors, engineers, technicians and military planners who made the plan, modified the aircraft, trained the crews to take off from an aircraft carrier, land in China and get back to the US.
The aircrews got the glory, but all these men were in it together. Teamwork. And it was done with airplanes, ships, soldiers and sailors who were already in the service at the time of Pearl Harbor.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Seventy Years Ago: September 11, 1943: USS Savannah
September 11, 1943, USS Savannah (CL-42), a prewar Brooklyn class light cruiser, was hit by a German bomb while supporting our landing at Salerno. The bomb, which was dropped from high altitude, turned out to be a radio-controlled bomb, which hit the top of turret three and caused extensive damage, destroying part of the keel and killing most of the sailors in the forward part of the ship.
Here is a personal account of the event by one of the sailors aboard. Savannah's effective gunfire in support of US troops ashore figures in the movie, "Big Red One."
The photos below show the ship after the bomb hit.
The bomb killed 197 out of Savannah's 868-man crew.
Here is a personal account of the event by one of the sailors aboard. Savannah's effective gunfire in support of US troops ashore figures in the movie, "Big Red One."
The photos below show the ship after the bomb hit.
The bomb killed 197 out of Savannah's 868-man crew.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Syria And Chemical Weapons - Light At End Of Tunnel?
Today's news seems somewhat hopeful.
It isn't clear how it came about, but it sounds like Secretary of State Kerry may have proposed a settlement believing Syria would refuse - and now both Syria and Russia are jumping through hoops as fast as they can to accept it.
The proposal that Syria turn over its chemical weapons to international control is a good one. It was made even better when Russia suggested the weapons be destroyed under international supervision.
Doing this would resolve a potential dilemma: should there be a strike against Syria's chemical weapons depots? On the one hand, that would be the most justifiable target. On the other hand, attacking the chemical weapons would likely release some very nasty stuff into the Syrian countryside - possibly causing innocent deaths.
President Theodore Roosevelt is often quoted as advising that we "speak softly and carry a big stick."
George W. Bush's neocons seemed to think that meant "shout loudly and hit people over the head with the stick."
Sometimes diplomacy can accomplish wonders, but it is hard work best accomplished behind the scenes.
I hope that's what's going on here.
It isn't clear how it came about, but it sounds like Secretary of State Kerry may have proposed a settlement believing Syria would refuse - and now both Syria and Russia are jumping through hoops as fast as they can to accept it.
The proposal that Syria turn over its chemical weapons to international control is a good one. It was made even better when Russia suggested the weapons be destroyed under international supervision.
Doing this would resolve a potential dilemma: should there be a strike against Syria's chemical weapons depots? On the one hand, that would be the most justifiable target. On the other hand, attacking the chemical weapons would likely release some very nasty stuff into the Syrian countryside - possibly causing innocent deaths.
President Theodore Roosevelt is often quoted as advising that we "speak softly and carry a big stick."
George W. Bush's neocons seemed to think that meant "shout loudly and hit people over the head with the stick."
Sometimes diplomacy can accomplish wonders, but it is hard work best accomplished behind the scenes.
I hope that's what's going on here.
Topic Tags:
diplomatic,
government,
intelligence,
international,
military
Saturday, September 7, 2013
Unemployment Rate Down - Not Necessarily Good News
I have thought for many years that the "unemployment rate" was not a very useful statistic. It doesn't tell us much about the real world of jobs in this country, and when looked at alone, can convey the absolutely wrong impression.
Dylan Matthews of the Washington Post gives a good explanation why last Friday's employment report, showing reduced unemployment, is not good news. As usual, the devil is in the details.
In a nutshell, the unemployment rate is down because of the large number of jobless people who have given up looking.
Jared Bernstein reports that the reduced unemployment rate is "due to a decline in the share of the population in the labor force, which ticked down two-tenths of a percent, to 63.2%, its lowest level since the summer of 1978, according to MarketWatch.com."
Dylan Matthews' article includes a very illuminating graph:
As the graph shows, the only age group for which the labor participation rate is up is the age group that should already be retired. But many can't afford to retire, so hold on to their jobs as long as they can.
So much for the golden years.
Jared Bernstein has some more thoughts worth considering. He draws particular attention to the fact that since June of 2009, when the present "recovery" began, there has been a significant decline in public sector employment, unlike the recoveries beginning in 1991 and 2001. Without that loss of jobs in the public sector, our overall unemployment rate would be less than 7%. Still not great by historical standards, but better than now.
Dylan Matthews of the Washington Post gives a good explanation why last Friday's employment report, showing reduced unemployment, is not good news. As usual, the devil is in the details.
In a nutshell, the unemployment rate is down because of the large number of jobless people who have given up looking.
Jared Bernstein reports that the reduced unemployment rate is "due to a decline in the share of the population in the labor force, which ticked down two-tenths of a percent, to 63.2%, its lowest level since the summer of 1978, according to MarketWatch.com."
Dylan Matthews' article includes a very illuminating graph:
As the graph shows, the only age group for which the labor participation rate is up is the age group that should already be retired. But many can't afford to retire, so hold on to their jobs as long as they can.
So much for the golden years.
Jared Bernstein has some more thoughts worth considering. He draws particular attention to the fact that since June of 2009, when the present "recovery" began, there has been a significant decline in public sector employment, unlike the recoveries beginning in 1991 and 2001. Without that loss of jobs in the public sector, our overall unemployment rate would be less than 7%. Still not great by historical standards, but better than now.
Topic Tags:
economics
Friday, September 6, 2013
Town Of Oriental: Let's Have More Studies
Attending Town Board meetings in Oriental can be very frustrating. No one wants to actually take action.
Over the past several weeks, there has been an outcry against the plan announced by Walmart to put a Walmart express just outside the town limits.
The issue wasn't on the agenda for last Tuesday's Town Board meeting. That didn't keep a hall full of people from speaking out during public comment period, but the board maintained its customary silence toward the public.
Not entirely. One commissioner outlined a number of practical problems he saw as affecting the Town and explained what he is looking into - that was Larry Summers, whose points were met with studied indifference by the rest of the Board.
We have had months of agitation over the issue of controlling or regulating boats in the Anchorage. Quite apart from the issue of whether this is a real problem, the Board has seemed uninterested in taking action.
Except for Larry Summers. Larry talked to our state representative and was told he would be willing to sponsor a local bill modeled on one for Carolina Beach, that would grant the Town authority over adjacent waters out to 200 yards. Larry made a motion to go forward with that proposal. To actually act on the matter.
His motion did not receive a second.
Larry tried again to discuss the matter at yesterday afternoon's meeting of the Harbor Committee, explaining that the actual bill would be drafted by the legislative staff in Raleigh. Commissioner Venturi countered that we should refer it first to the Town Attorney (whose expertise in state legislative matters has been hitherto concealed) and who opined that we should first know what we want to DO with the authority before we ask for it. Presumably that would require some more surveys and a new ad-hoc committee.
Speaking of ad-hoc committees, the ad-hoc advisory committee on the water system has met and actually done something. Jim Barton, who has taken charge reported Tuesday night on the accomplishments to date, developing manuals and directives that the Town is required to have, but doesn't. He also pointed out that any ad hoc committee ceases to exist after the election.
The Town continues to speak of a "water board," which apparently never existed - at least there is no ordinance establishing one. On two recent occasions, Larry Summers attempted to introduce an ordinance and received no second.
Over the past several weeks, there has been an outcry against the plan announced by Walmart to put a Walmart express just outside the town limits.
The issue wasn't on the agenda for last Tuesday's Town Board meeting. That didn't keep a hall full of people from speaking out during public comment period, but the board maintained its customary silence toward the public.
Not entirely. One commissioner outlined a number of practical problems he saw as affecting the Town and explained what he is looking into - that was Larry Summers, whose points were met with studied indifference by the rest of the Board.
We have had months of agitation over the issue of controlling or regulating boats in the Anchorage. Quite apart from the issue of whether this is a real problem, the Board has seemed uninterested in taking action.
Except for Larry Summers. Larry talked to our state representative and was told he would be willing to sponsor a local bill modeled on one for Carolina Beach, that would grant the Town authority over adjacent waters out to 200 yards. Larry made a motion to go forward with that proposal. To actually act on the matter.
His motion did not receive a second.
Larry tried again to discuss the matter at yesterday afternoon's meeting of the Harbor Committee, explaining that the actual bill would be drafted by the legislative staff in Raleigh. Commissioner Venturi countered that we should refer it first to the Town Attorney (whose expertise in state legislative matters has been hitherto concealed) and who opined that we should first know what we want to DO with the authority before we ask for it. Presumably that would require some more surveys and a new ad-hoc committee.
Speaking of ad-hoc committees, the ad-hoc advisory committee on the water system has met and actually done something. Jim Barton, who has taken charge reported Tuesday night on the accomplishments to date, developing manuals and directives that the Town is required to have, but doesn't. He also pointed out that any ad hoc committee ceases to exist after the election.
The Town continues to speak of a "water board," which apparently never existed - at least there is no ordinance establishing one. On two recent occasions, Larry Summers attempted to introduce an ordinance and received no second.
Topic Tags:
town government
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
Names And Their Complications In Elections
My mother, born in Texas in 1916, never had a birth certificate. She had a driver's license, issued in Oklahoma in 1932, but didn't need a birth certificate to get it. Her name was misread by the typist who filled out my birth certificate. My parents were divorced and she remarried a young soldier in 1940. He recorded the marriage with the military but reversed the order of her first and middle names.
When I entered school in 1943, I used my stepfather's name, but I wasn't adopted until 1946. The school didn't care. Their job was education.
When I married, my wife took my adopted name but always went by her middle name rather than her first name. That was never a problem, through my thirty year naval career. She eventually started going by her middle name as her first name and her maiden name as her middle name. That worked just fine for a very long time. Then government bureaucrats started getting all hinckey about names and decided to start using driver's licenses as the equivalent of an internal passport ("carte d'identite) like other national governments issue.
My sister (first name Elizabeth) got caught up in the naming hysteria when the IRS complained that her pay checks, W-2's, etc. were made out to "Betty."
Every one of these perfectly innocent circumstances can lead to problems under the "real identity" laws.
Now Department of Motor Vehicles insist that every document give exactly the same version of the name. I might point out that this has absolutely no connection with whether the holder of a driver's license can safely operate a motor vehicle.
This is a frequent problem for women. Here is a recent article in the New York Times summarizing the problems for a woman who kept her unmarried name for professional purposes and uses her married name for private and family purposes.
This set of issues has now been brought into the artificial hysteria of voter ID. Republicans, who want to destroy the credibility of elections (when the "wrong" people win) levy charges of major discrepancies in voter registration - it must be fraud. These charges are usually based on computer matching programs, and on close (and expensive) investigation by boards of election, it turns out there is no fraud at all.
North Carolina Governor Pat McRory recently asserted that we need all these changes to voting procedures to "close loopholes that allow a voter to vote two or three times." There are no such loopholes.
In 2008 in North Carolina, more citizens cast votes than ever before - more than four million. North Carolina has an extensive set of safeguards and has its own computer matching system to uncover double voting. In 2008, the State Board of Elections uncovered 18 cases of double voting. On investigation, only one was found to be intentional and that case was prosecuted.
In a more recent case, a voter cast his ballot at one of his county's one-stop sites. Subsequently he realized he had not completed the reverse side of the ballot. So on election day, he went to his normal precinct and cast a ballot only on the reverse side. He was caught and prosecuted.
Since passage of the National Voter Registration Act in 1993, registration records in all states have vastly improved. North Carolina's records are among the nation's best.
Don't be hoodwinked. There is no election day voter fraud in North Carolina.
I'll have more to say later.
When I entered school in 1943, I used my stepfather's name, but I wasn't adopted until 1946. The school didn't care. Their job was education.
When I married, my wife took my adopted name but always went by her middle name rather than her first name. That was never a problem, through my thirty year naval career. She eventually started going by her middle name as her first name and her maiden name as her middle name. That worked just fine for a very long time. Then government bureaucrats started getting all hinckey about names and decided to start using driver's licenses as the equivalent of an internal passport ("carte d'identite) like other national governments issue.
My sister (first name Elizabeth) got caught up in the naming hysteria when the IRS complained that her pay checks, W-2's, etc. were made out to "Betty."
Every one of these perfectly innocent circumstances can lead to problems under the "real identity" laws.
Now Department of Motor Vehicles insist that every document give exactly the same version of the name. I might point out that this has absolutely no connection with whether the holder of a driver's license can safely operate a motor vehicle.
This is a frequent problem for women. Here is a recent article in the New York Times summarizing the problems for a woman who kept her unmarried name for professional purposes and uses her married name for private and family purposes.
This set of issues has now been brought into the artificial hysteria of voter ID. Republicans, who want to destroy the credibility of elections (when the "wrong" people win) levy charges of major discrepancies in voter registration - it must be fraud. These charges are usually based on computer matching programs, and on close (and expensive) investigation by boards of election, it turns out there is no fraud at all.
North Carolina Governor Pat McRory recently asserted that we need all these changes to voting procedures to "close loopholes that allow a voter to vote two or three times." There are no such loopholes.
In 2008 in North Carolina, more citizens cast votes than ever before - more than four million. North Carolina has an extensive set of safeguards and has its own computer matching system to uncover double voting. In 2008, the State Board of Elections uncovered 18 cases of double voting. On investigation, only one was found to be intentional and that case was prosecuted.
In a more recent case, a voter cast his ballot at one of his county's one-stop sites. Subsequently he realized he had not completed the reverse side of the ballot. So on election day, he went to his normal precinct and cast a ballot only on the reverse side. He was caught and prosecuted.
Since passage of the National Voter Registration Act in 1993, registration records in all states have vastly improved. North Carolina's records are among the nation's best.
Don't be hoodwinked. There is no election day voter fraud in North Carolina.
I'll have more to say later.
Topic Tags:
elections,
law,
public policy
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Syria, Ypres And Chemical Warfare
April 22, 1915, 5:00 pm northeast of Ypres in Belgium:
German troops had hauled nearly 6,000 cylinders of chlorine gas weighing 90 pounds each to the front lines and uncapped the cylinders by hand. Some German troops died from the gas, but some 6,000 French and colonial troops perished within ten minutes of the attack. The rest fled along a four mile front, leaving the way open for Germans to advance. They did so gingerly, because the Germans themselves lacked effective protection against the gas and German officers had not assigned enough reserves to the line to exploit a breakthrough.
Near midnight, Canadian troops formed up and attacked the Germans, driving them back and halting the German advance.
This was the first effective use of gas in warfare. Three months earlier on the Russian front, Germany had used gas-filled artillery shells, but it was so cold the poisonous gas froze and did not vaporize.
For the remainder of World War I, both sides continued to develop new and deadlier gases, new methods of delivery and better defense methods.
The US chemical warfare program began just prior to American entry into the war in 1917. The program was directed out of offices and laboratories at American University in Washington, DC. Just a few years ago, gas warfare shells were found buried in a residential neighborhood near American University.
In 1948, when my family lived in a rural area east of Oklahoma City, our next door neighbor was a man who had been gassed in Europe during World War I. Thirty years later, he was still suffering the effects of that attack.
Outside Ypres, large tracts of former agricultural land remain unusable because of the effects of persistent chemical warfare agents.
Since that time, on only a few occasions have nations used lethal chemical warfare agents: Italy in Ethiopia in 1935, Japan in China, Saddam Hussein against Kurds and against Iran. Most uses have been against insurgents or unprotected civilians (like the alleged Syrian attack), though even that is rare.
The non-use of chemical warfare in Europe during World War II is something of a puzzle. One possibility is that the agents are effective only under very specific weather conditions. It is difficult to find such conditions at the right time, especially with a dynamic battlefield. Then there is this:
Stanley P. Lovell, Deputy Director for Research and Development of the Office of Strategic Services, submitted the queston "Why was nerve gas not used in Normandy?" to be asked of Hermann Goering during his interrogation. Goering answered that the reason gas was not used had to do with horses. The Wehrmacht was dependent upon horse-drawn transport to move supplies to their combat units, and had never been able to devise a gas mask horses could tolerate; the versions they developed would not pass enough pure air to allow the horses to pull a cart. Thus, gas was of no use to the German Army under most conditions.
The green cloud that rolled down the shallow incline from the German lines was chlorine gas. Chlorine is heavier than air, and it pours like water, seeking lower ground - like protective trenches and fox holes.Dusk was falling when from the German trenches in front of the French line rose that strange green cloud of death. The light north-easterly breeze wafted it toward them, and in a moment death had them by the throat. One cannot blame them that they broke and fled. In the gathering dark of that awful night they fought with the terror, running blindly in the gas-cloud, and dropping with breasts heaving in agony and the slow poison of suffocation mantling their dark faces. Hundreds of them fell and died; others lay helpless, froth upon their agonized lips and their racked bodies powerfully sick, with tearing nausea at short intervals. They too would die later – a slow and lingering death of agony unspeakable. The whole air was tainted with the acrid smell of chlorine that caught at the back of men's throats and filled their mouths with its metallic taste.—Captain Hugh Pollard, The Memoirs of a VC (1932)
German troops had hauled nearly 6,000 cylinders of chlorine gas weighing 90 pounds each to the front lines and uncapped the cylinders by hand. Some German troops died from the gas, but some 6,000 French and colonial troops perished within ten minutes of the attack. The rest fled along a four mile front, leaving the way open for Germans to advance. They did so gingerly, because the Germans themselves lacked effective protection against the gas and German officers had not assigned enough reserves to the line to exploit a breakthrough.
Near midnight, Canadian troops formed up and attacked the Germans, driving them back and halting the German advance.
This was the first effective use of gas in warfare. Three months earlier on the Russian front, Germany had used gas-filled artillery shells, but it was so cold the poisonous gas froze and did not vaporize.
For the remainder of World War I, both sides continued to develop new and deadlier gases, new methods of delivery and better defense methods.
The US chemical warfare program began just prior to American entry into the war in 1917. The program was directed out of offices and laboratories at American University in Washington, DC. Just a few years ago, gas warfare shells were found buried in a residential neighborhood near American University.
In 1948, when my family lived in a rural area east of Oklahoma City, our next door neighbor was a man who had been gassed in Europe during World War I. Thirty years later, he was still suffering the effects of that attack.
Outside Ypres, large tracts of former agricultural land remain unusable because of the effects of persistent chemical warfare agents.
Since that time, on only a few occasions have nations used lethal chemical warfare agents: Italy in Ethiopia in 1935, Japan in China, Saddam Hussein against Kurds and against Iran. Most uses have been against insurgents or unprotected civilians (like the alleged Syrian attack), though even that is rare.
The non-use of chemical warfare in Europe during World War II is something of a puzzle. One possibility is that the agents are effective only under very specific weather conditions. It is difficult to find such conditions at the right time, especially with a dynamic battlefield. Then there is this:
Stanley P. Lovell, Deputy Director for Research and Development of the Office of Strategic Services, submitted the queston "Why was nerve gas not used in Normandy?" to be asked of Hermann Goering during his interrogation. Goering answered that the reason gas was not used had to do with horses. The Wehrmacht was dependent upon horse-drawn transport to move supplies to their combat units, and had never been able to devise a gas mask horses could tolerate; the versions they developed would not pass enough pure air to allow the horses to pull a cart. Thus, gas was of no use to the German Army under most conditions.
Sunday, September 1, 2013
What About Syria?
The subject of Syria keeps coming up at The Bean. "What do I think?"
I shy away from the subject. The truth is, I know a lot about warfare (it's my profession), but I don't know much about Syria.
I also know a lot about diplomacy, international law and strategic planning. But what I know of these subjects leads me to be cautious. Especially when the action under review is to become involved in someone else's civil war. Danger!
I also don't think much of the idea that we can just bomb a country into submission without some form of "boots on the ground." Or at least the threat of "boots on the ground." * And be sceptical of "regime change" as a goal. We're still suffering the aftereffects of our ill-considered "successful" operation of sixty years ago, where we caused the overthrow of Mohammad Mossadegh, the democratically elected, progressive prime minister of Iran.
We saved Iranian oil for British Petroleum, but at what cost?
Worth thinking about.
*The only case that comes to mind of a successful military campaign won almost entirely by bombing is that of Kosovo in 1999.
I shy away from the subject. The truth is, I know a lot about warfare (it's my profession), but I don't know much about Syria.
I also know a lot about diplomacy, international law and strategic planning. But what I know of these subjects leads me to be cautious. Especially when the action under review is to become involved in someone else's civil war. Danger!
I also don't think much of the idea that we can just bomb a country into submission without some form of "boots on the ground." Or at least the threat of "boots on the ground." * And be sceptical of "regime change" as a goal. We're still suffering the aftereffects of our ill-considered "successful" operation of sixty years ago, where we caused the overthrow of Mohammad Mossadegh, the democratically elected, progressive prime minister of Iran.
We saved Iranian oil for British Petroleum, but at what cost?
Worth thinking about.
*The only case that comes to mind of a successful military campaign won almost entirely by bombing is that of Kosovo in 1999.
Topic Tags:
diplomatic,
Europe,
international,
law,
war
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Medgar Evers, Non-Violence And The March On Washington
The March on Washington is one of those events that people use to mark time and transformation. "Did you go?," people ask. "Where were you on that day?"
I was serving my country, stationed on Adak in the Aleutian Islands. Defending democracy.
We had no newspaper and no live television, but still I followed events in Mississippi and in the nation's capitol.
I knew of the entry of James Meredith into my alma mater, the University of Mississippi. Many college administrators and professors I knew were involved in the court battles. The University was under attack by the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission and the White Citizens' Council.
I followed the violent assault on federal marshals when Meredith was enrolled. Some lost their lives at that time.
I knew of the assassination of Medgar Evers on June 12, a little more than two months before the March on Washington.
The hallmark of response to white violence in those formative years of the Civil Rights Movement, whether in Montgomery, Birmingham, Oxford, or during the voter registration drives, was non-violence.
For anyone familiar with the violence by white supremacists against blacks in the south, the non-violent response, even in the face of massive efforts to provoke violence, was impressive. The level of organization, the discipline and restraint during large demonstrations, were unprecedented. (Well, there was the precedent of the Women's Suffrage Movement).
The power of non-violence to transform the political situation was certainly Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s greatest insight. He had read the writings of Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhi, a small brown man wearing only a loincloth and carrying a walking stick, had ended the power of the world's greatest empire in India.
What power!
Martin Luther King, Jr. recognized that power and used it.
We are all the better for it.
I was serving my country, stationed on Adak in the Aleutian Islands. Defending democracy.
We had no newspaper and no live television, but still I followed events in Mississippi and in the nation's capitol.
I knew of the entry of James Meredith into my alma mater, the University of Mississippi. Many college administrators and professors I knew were involved in the court battles. The University was under attack by the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission and the White Citizens' Council.
I followed the violent assault on federal marshals when Meredith was enrolled. Some lost their lives at that time.
I knew of the assassination of Medgar Evers on June 12, a little more than two months before the March on Washington.
The hallmark of response to white violence in those formative years of the Civil Rights Movement, whether in Montgomery, Birmingham, Oxford, or during the voter registration drives, was non-violence.
For anyone familiar with the violence by white supremacists against blacks in the south, the non-violent response, even in the face of massive efforts to provoke violence, was impressive. The level of organization, the discipline and restraint during large demonstrations, were unprecedented. (Well, there was the precedent of the Women's Suffrage Movement).
The power of non-violence to transform the political situation was certainly Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s greatest insight. He had read the writings of Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhi, a small brown man wearing only a loincloth and carrying a walking stick, had ended the power of the world's greatest empire in India.
What power!
Martin Luther King, Jr. recognized that power and used it.
We are all the better for it.
Topic Tags:
politics,
public policy,
race
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Seventy Years Ago In The Pacific: August 27, 1943 At Nukufetau
Marines (2d Airdrome Battalion) and Seabees (16th Construction
Battalion) occupy the atoll at Nukufetau. The purpose is to set up an air base to support offensive operations later in the year against the Gilbert and Marshall Islands. Army troops
(RCT 172 of 43d Infantry Division) land on Arundel Island,
Solomons, for the same purpose.
Nukufetau (178.375E
8.064S) is an atoll in the Ellice
Islands group northwest of Funafuti.
It
is nine miles (14 km km) long
and five miles (8 km) wide. Its reef-enclosed
lagoon
has
just two passes on the northwest, of which the larger is Teafua
Pass. Deafatule Pass to its north is narrow and tortuous. The
lagoon is too shallow for large ships. Supplies, therefore, had to be brought in by landing craft from Funafuti.
The largest islet, Motolalo, was swampy
and heavily vegetated.
Within a month after marines and Seabees came ashore, they had built a 3500' fighter runway (ready 9
October), and later in the month completed a 6100' bomber
runway was completed later in the month.
Things Are Hopping In Oriental The Last Few Days - Walmart is coming! Or Maybe Not
A large and growing group has formed to oppose Walmart's plan to open a Walmart Express just outside Oriental's Town Limit.
Walmart Express is a new concept, apparently targeted at small town grocery stores, pharmacies, convenience stores and gas stations. It is being tried in two states (Arkansas and North Carolina) and one large city (Chicago).
Walmart Express won't bring any new economic activity to Pamlico County or to Oriental. It will, at best, replace existing businesses, putting locally-owned stores out of business and taking the profits off to Arkansas or wherever the Walton family vault resides.
There have been some good letters to the editor posted in Town Dock: http://towndock.net/letters/letters-walmart-in-oriental
It's very difficult, but not impossible, to stand in the way of what Walmart wants.
Stand by for further developments.
Walmart Express is a new concept, apparently targeted at small town grocery stores, pharmacies, convenience stores and gas stations. It is being tried in two states (Arkansas and North Carolina) and one large city (Chicago).
Walmart Express won't bring any new economic activity to Pamlico County or to Oriental. It will, at best, replace existing businesses, putting locally-owned stores out of business and taking the profits off to Arkansas or wherever the Walton family vault resides.
There have been some good letters to the editor posted in Town Dock: http://towndock.net/letters/letters-walmart-in-oriental
It's very difficult, but not impossible, to stand in the way of what Walmart wants.
Stand by for further developments.
Topic Tags:
economic development
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Pamlico County Commissioners Go For Wind Generators
After several months worth of effort, On Monday night, Pamlico County's Board of Commissioners voted five to two to adopt the Pamlico County Wind Energy Ordinance developed by the County Planning Board. Because the vote was not unanimous, there will be another vote taken at the Board's next regular meeting.
I spoke in favor of adopting the ordinance even though I agree with Neil Jones of Kimley-Horn and Associates that the ordinance is more restrictive than necessary. That can be fixed.
Well done to the Planning Board and the County Commissioners!
I spoke in favor of adopting the ordinance even though I agree with Neil Jones of Kimley-Horn and Associates that the ordinance is more restrictive than necessary. That can be fixed.
Well done to the Planning Board and the County Commissioners!
Topic Tags:
county government,
economic development
Oriental Planning Board: Back To The Future
Last night's meeting of the Town's Planning Board considered a number of issues that, to long-time residents, would have seemed "old hat."
One such issue was a request by Town Manager Wyatt Cutler for the Planning Board to revisit the issue of the Growth Management Ordinance limitation on overall building footprint. Section 77 of the GMO contains a number of limits on lot coverage. What got Mr. Cutler's interest is the provision limiting the maximum footprint for a building to 5,000 square feet in zone R-2, 6,000 square feet in R-3, 6,000 square feet for residential buildings and 8,000 square feet for non-residential or mixed use buildings in MU and MU-1. Wyatt pointed out that, curiously, there is no footprint limit in our most restrictive residential area, R-1.
These numbers were hammered out about six years ago with great acrimony in a series of meetings involving many members of the public. Like every such agreement, the GMO represents a carefully-balanced set of compromises among residents with differing views.
The present Planning Board showed no great enthusiasm to take on the issue of amending this part of the GMO. In fact, when Wyatt repeated his observation that there is no limit in R-1, Board member David White suggested that maybe there should be one.
Another old issue was raised during public comment period when local resident Pat Herlands asked the Board if they were considering reexamining the desirability of conditional zoning. All five members responded that they were not planning to reconsider that.
Here is an earlier post of mine from three years ago on the conditional zoning issue.
One such issue was a request by Town Manager Wyatt Cutler for the Planning Board to revisit the issue of the Growth Management Ordinance limitation on overall building footprint. Section 77 of the GMO contains a number of limits on lot coverage. What got Mr. Cutler's interest is the provision limiting the maximum footprint for a building to 5,000 square feet in zone R-2, 6,000 square feet in R-3, 6,000 square feet for residential buildings and 8,000 square feet for non-residential or mixed use buildings in MU and MU-1. Wyatt pointed out that, curiously, there is no footprint limit in our most restrictive residential area, R-1.
These numbers were hammered out about six years ago with great acrimony in a series of meetings involving many members of the public. Like every such agreement, the GMO represents a carefully-balanced set of compromises among residents with differing views.
The present Planning Board showed no great enthusiasm to take on the issue of amending this part of the GMO. In fact, when Wyatt repeated his observation that there is no limit in R-1, Board member David White suggested that maybe there should be one.
Another old issue was raised during public comment period when local resident Pat Herlands asked the Board if they were considering reexamining the desirability of conditional zoning. All five members responded that they were not planning to reconsider that.
Here is an earlier post of mine from three years ago on the conditional zoning issue.
Topic Tags:
town government
Saturday, August 17, 2013
Oriental, NC Water Board
Yesterday (Friday, August 16), the Oriental Town Board held a special meeting to discuss the state of the Town's water treatment plant and the related issue of whether to adopt an ordinance officially establishing a town water board.
One of the mysteries to me is why that should even be at issue. The state of the Town's water treatment plant is atrocious, as a number of us learned during an official tour of the plant last May 21st. There can be no doubt that the Town Board of Commissioners needs to receive independent advice on the needs of the plant. All other standing advisory boards are established by ordinance. We know how many members there are, what qualifications are sought, how long the terms of appointment, what are the functions and responsibilities of the board. Why not do the same with the Water Board?
When I sought that information five years ago, I found no ordinance at all. Only rumors that such a board once existed. That is not acceptable.
At Friday's meeting, Captain Jim Barton, United States Navy, (retired) and Oriental resident, provided a well-organized, lucid presentation on what our water plant requires and what it doesn't have. He made it abundantly clear that the plant is not operating the way it was designed, and that these deficiencies have existed for years.
Maintaining water chemistry requirements for the Town's system presented no mysteries to someone who has been responsible for boiler water chemistry of a 1200 psi steam plant. Deviations from those requirements can cause catastrophic boiler failures and loss of life. Compared to that, the challenges of operating the Town's water plant are comparatively small, but nevertheless important.
The Town Board has had in its hands for months an ordinance drafted by Commissioner Summers that would have formalized an advisory board. Some board members argued that the ordinance wasn't perfect, and board member Venturi insisted that the Town Board should meet with the apparently nonexistent water board to discuss the ordinance.
At this stage, it appears that Captain Barton will be an essential member of any Water Board that is established.
Barton explained that under present Town Manager Wyatt Cutler, improvements have already been made. Other planned near term improvements include replacing inoperative control panels with more modern and reliable equipment, as well as replacing and repairing failed control valves.
These failures would not, in my view, have happened with a proper valve maintenance program and an effective Operation and Maintenance manual.
At Friday's meeting, the Town Board appointed a drafting committee of perhaps a half dozen members.
Good way to get nothing done.
One of the mysteries to me is why that should even be at issue. The state of the Town's water treatment plant is atrocious, as a number of us learned during an official tour of the plant last May 21st. There can be no doubt that the Town Board of Commissioners needs to receive independent advice on the needs of the plant. All other standing advisory boards are established by ordinance. We know how many members there are, what qualifications are sought, how long the terms of appointment, what are the functions and responsibilities of the board. Why not do the same with the Water Board?
When I sought that information five years ago, I found no ordinance at all. Only rumors that such a board once existed. That is not acceptable.
At Friday's meeting, Captain Jim Barton, United States Navy, (retired) and Oriental resident, provided a well-organized, lucid presentation on what our water plant requires and what it doesn't have. He made it abundantly clear that the plant is not operating the way it was designed, and that these deficiencies have existed for years.
Maintaining water chemistry requirements for the Town's system presented no mysteries to someone who has been responsible for boiler water chemistry of a 1200 psi steam plant. Deviations from those requirements can cause catastrophic boiler failures and loss of life. Compared to that, the challenges of operating the Town's water plant are comparatively small, but nevertheless important.
The Town Board has had in its hands for months an ordinance drafted by Commissioner Summers that would have formalized an advisory board. Some board members argued that the ordinance wasn't perfect, and board member Venturi insisted that the Town Board should meet with the apparently nonexistent water board to discuss the ordinance.
At this stage, it appears that Captain Barton will be an essential member of any Water Board that is established.
Barton explained that under present Town Manager Wyatt Cutler, improvements have already been made. Other planned near term improvements include replacing inoperative control panels with more modern and reliable equipment, as well as replacing and repairing failed control valves.
These failures would not, in my view, have happened with a proper valve maintenance program and an effective Operation and Maintenance manual.
At Friday's meeting, the Town Board appointed a drafting committee of perhaps a half dozen members.
Good way to get nothing done.
Topic Tags:
town government,
water
Thursday, August 15, 2013
Seventy Years Ago: Invasion Of Vella Lavella
Third Amphibious Force (Rear Admiral Theodore S. Wilkinson) lands Navy,
Marine, and Army personnel at Vella Lavella, Solomons, thus by-passing
enemy positions on Kolombangara, Solomons.This advanced the Solomons campaign considerably, but many naval battles were to follow.
Meanwhile, to the north, Naval task force under Commander North Pacific Force (Vice Admiral Thomas C. Kinkaid) lands U.S. Army and Canadian troops at Kiska, Aleutians. They find Kiska had been evacuated by the Japanese on 28 July 1943. Only casualties in the operation occur because of accidents or friendly fire incidents.
Meanwhile, to the north, Naval task force under Commander North Pacific Force (Vice Admiral Thomas C. Kinkaid) lands U.S. Army and Canadian troops at Kiska, Aleutians. They find Kiska had been evacuated by the Japanese on 28 July 1943. Only casualties in the operation occur because of accidents or friendly fire incidents.
Vegetative Waste: A Case Study
Early last week, at Oriental's Town Board meeting, Commissioner Warren Johnson presented a "show and tell" demonstration of the vegetative waste bags the Town had procured, at a cost of about $4,000.
The "show part" was to demonstrate the enormous size of the reusable bags. Johnson called on the acting Town Manager, Wyatt Cutler, to assist him in spreading one of the bags out. The bag looked to have a capacity of about 100 cubic feet. It presented a rare dramatic photo opportunity, and newspaperman Jeff Aydelette of County Compass took full advantage. Jeff's photo graced one of County Compasses' inside pages. Pamlico News also reported the story.
The "tell" part was when Commissioner Johnson described the process and the cost to the Town. He related in amazement his discovery that Town Public Works employees were delivering bags to residents on request (tying up the employee for the time it takes for delivery) and then returning to pick up the bags full of waste, including branches as large as three inches in diameter.
Since a full bag could weigh hundreds of pounds, it might require a front loader to retrieve the bag. Once retrieved, the Town would have to pay for disposal of the waste.
Members of the public had a big laugh at the description, and the Board quickly voted to suspend the program while the Acting Town Manager examined options.
While both local newspapers reported what happened during the meeting, neither reported the rest of the story - or what might be called the "back story."
The idea of vegetative waste bags was first broached by Town Manager Bob Maxbauer at the Town Board's first retreat at River Dunes in January, 2012. Only three members of the public attended that session. As presented, the bags would be obtained at very little cost, and the vegetative debris would be deposited in a Town compost heap.
The "very little cost" turned out to be around $4,000 and the compost heap was never created.
Occasionally during meetings of the current Board, Town Manager Maxbauer made seemingly hostile remarks directed at Commissioner Johnson. Perhaps he apologized afterwards. I have no way of knowing.
I don't know if there is any connection between these events and Commissioner Johnson's pointed criticism of the vegetative waste project.
Investigative journalists might want to check it out.
The "show part" was to demonstrate the enormous size of the reusable bags. Johnson called on the acting Town Manager, Wyatt Cutler, to assist him in spreading one of the bags out. The bag looked to have a capacity of about 100 cubic feet. It presented a rare dramatic photo opportunity, and newspaperman Jeff Aydelette of County Compass took full advantage. Jeff's photo graced one of County Compasses' inside pages. Pamlico News also reported the story.
The "tell" part was when Commissioner Johnson described the process and the cost to the Town. He related in amazement his discovery that Town Public Works employees were delivering bags to residents on request (tying up the employee for the time it takes for delivery) and then returning to pick up the bags full of waste, including branches as large as three inches in diameter.
Since a full bag could weigh hundreds of pounds, it might require a front loader to retrieve the bag. Once retrieved, the Town would have to pay for disposal of the waste.
Members of the public had a big laugh at the description, and the Board quickly voted to suspend the program while the Acting Town Manager examined options.
While both local newspapers reported what happened during the meeting, neither reported the rest of the story - or what might be called the "back story."
The idea of vegetative waste bags was first broached by Town Manager Bob Maxbauer at the Town Board's first retreat at River Dunes in January, 2012. Only three members of the public attended that session. As presented, the bags would be obtained at very little cost, and the vegetative debris would be deposited in a Town compost heap.
The "very little cost" turned out to be around $4,000 and the compost heap was never created.
Occasionally during meetings of the current Board, Town Manager Maxbauer made seemingly hostile remarks directed at Commissioner Johnson. Perhaps he apologized afterwards. I have no way of knowing.
I don't know if there is any connection between these events and Commissioner Johnson's pointed criticism of the vegetative waste project.
Investigative journalists might want to check it out.
Topic Tags:
town government
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
Seventy Years Ago: WWII In The Pacific - Bombing Kiska August 12, 1943
ALASKA (Eleventh Air Force): From Adak B-24's and B-25's fly 26 bombing,
strafing, and radar and photo reconnaissance sorties over Kiska. From
Amchitka P-40's, P-38's, B-24's, B-25's, and A-24s fly 70 bombing
sorties over the island and are joined by B-24's, P-40's, and F-5A's
flying 6 reconnaissance and photo sorties. Targets included the runway,
harbor and shipping installations, army barracks, and the Rose Hill
area. Lost is B-24D 42-40309.
My friend Ray Rundle, a Navy Communications Technician expert in communications intelligence then stationed on Adak, told the Army there were no more Japanese troops on the island. The Army didn't believe him. Army pilots insisted that Japanese troops remained and had fired anti aircraft weapons against Army bombing missions.
In fact, the Japanese troops had evacuated the island under cover of fog on July 28, two weeks earlier.
When the US Army invasion force stormed ashore on August fifteenth, the invaders found three dogs. US Navy Chief of Naval Operations Earnest King reported to Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox that all they found were some dogs and freshly brewed coffee. When Knox questioned the report, King responded that Japanese dogs were very clever and knew how to make coffee.
Descendants of the Japanese dogs still lived on Adak when I was stationed there twenty years later. And Ray Rundle, who had been commissioned and promoted to the rank of Navy Lieutenant, had also returned to Adak.
My friend Ray Rundle, a Navy Communications Technician expert in communications intelligence then stationed on Adak, told the Army there were no more Japanese troops on the island. The Army didn't believe him. Army pilots insisted that Japanese troops remained and had fired anti aircraft weapons against Army bombing missions.
In fact, the Japanese troops had evacuated the island under cover of fog on July 28, two weeks earlier.
When the US Army invasion force stormed ashore on August fifteenth, the invaders found three dogs. US Navy Chief of Naval Operations Earnest King reported to Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox that all they found were some dogs and freshly brewed coffee. When Knox questioned the report, King responded that Japanese dogs were very clever and knew how to make coffee.
Descendants of the Japanese dogs still lived on Adak when I was stationed there twenty years later. And Ray Rundle, who had been commissioned and promoted to the rank of Navy Lieutenant, had also returned to Adak.
Topic Tags:
history,
intelligence,
military,
navy
Monday, August 12, 2013
Tony's Back
There is always a bit of an empty spot in public discourse when Tony Tharp's blog disappears, as it did a week or so ago.
I don't read him because I agree with him, though I often do. I read him because he makes me think.
That's a good thing.
Today he says he has made his last comment on Oriental politics for awhile.
I hope that isn't true.
Nevertheless, there are bigger and perhaps more interesting fish to fry in North Carolina politics.
What is happening in this state is worthy of Tony's analytic talents.
What do you suppose he means by "worth plowing through?"
I don't read him because I agree with him, though I often do. I read him because he makes me think.
That's a good thing.
Today he says he has made his last comment on Oriental politics for awhile.
I hope that isn't true.
Nevertheless, there are bigger and perhaps more interesting fish to fry in North Carolina politics.
What is happening in this state is worthy of Tony's analytic talents.
What do you suppose he means by "worth plowing through?"
Topic Tags:
county government,
journalism,
town government
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Town Of Oriental Board Meeting August 6, 2013
NCGS Section 160A-81.1:
"The council shall provide at least one period for public comment per month at a regular meeting of the council. The council may adopt reasonable rules governing the conduct of the public comment period, including, but not limited to, rules (i) fixing the maximum time allotted to each speaker, (ii) providing for the designation of spokesmen for groups of persons supporting or opposing the same positions, (iii) providing for the selection of delegates from groups of persons supporting or opposing the same positions when the number of persons wishing to attend the hearing exceeds the capacity of the hall, and (iv) providing for the maintenance of order and decorum in the conduct of the hearing. The council is not required to provide a public comment period under this section if no regular meeting is held during the month. (2005‑170, s. 3.)
Sections: Previous 160A-75 160A-76 160A-77 160A-78 160A-79 160A-80 160A-81 160A-81.1 160A-82 160A-86 160A-87 160A-101 160A-102 160A-103 160A-104"
At the beginning of last night's Town Board meeting, Mayor Bill Sage announced that he wants to try scheduling public comment at the monthly agenda meeting, held the Thursday prior to the regular (monthly) meeting. He explained this would afford more time for such comments.
A reading of NCGS 160A-81.1, which establishes the statutory requirement for public comments, reveals some interesting things:
1. The public comment period must be during a regular meeting of the council. It isn't clear that the agenda workshop, at which no business is conducted, meets the statutory requirement. Of course, nothing prevents the council from providing more than the minimum requirements for public comment;
2. It is the council, not the mayor, who may adopt "reasonable rules" for the conduct of the public comment period. I don't remember the council ever doing this.
Board members may assume that setting the rules is part of the mayor's duties as presiding officer, but that seems not to be the case. Another of those pesky technicalities.
Probably easily fixed.
"The council shall provide at least one period for public comment per month at a regular meeting of the council. The council may adopt reasonable rules governing the conduct of the public comment period, including, but not limited to, rules (i) fixing the maximum time allotted to each speaker, (ii) providing for the designation of spokesmen for groups of persons supporting or opposing the same positions, (iii) providing for the selection of delegates from groups of persons supporting or opposing the same positions when the number of persons wishing to attend the hearing exceeds the capacity of the hall, and (iv) providing for the maintenance of order and decorum in the conduct of the hearing. The council is not required to provide a public comment period under this section if no regular meeting is held during the month. (2005‑170, s. 3.)
Sections: Previous 160A-75 160A-76 160A-77 160A-78 160A-79 160A-80 160A-81 160A-81.1 160A-82 160A-86 160A-87 160A-101 160A-102 160A-103 160A-104"
At the beginning of last night's Town Board meeting, Mayor Bill Sage announced that he wants to try scheduling public comment at the monthly agenda meeting, held the Thursday prior to the regular (monthly) meeting. He explained this would afford more time for such comments.
A reading of NCGS 160A-81.1, which establishes the statutory requirement for public comments, reveals some interesting things:
1. The public comment period must be during a regular meeting of the council. It isn't clear that the agenda workshop, at which no business is conducted, meets the statutory requirement. Of course, nothing prevents the council from providing more than the minimum requirements for public comment;
2. It is the council, not the mayor, who may adopt "reasonable rules" for the conduct of the public comment period. I don't remember the council ever doing this.
Board members may assume that setting the rules is part of the mayor's duties as presiding officer, but that seems not to be the case. Another of those pesky technicalities.
Probably easily fixed.
Topic Tags:
town government
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
July 3 2012: Minutes And Transcript Compared
A week or so ago, I posted a transcript of the Town's audio recording of the Board's deliberation on July 3 of 2012 concerning street closings: here.
The accepted standard for complete minutes of public meetings is that the minutes should record what was DONE, (that is, motions and resolutions made, seconded, votes recorded, etc.) rather than what was SAID. By that standard, the Town's minutes for July 3 are not acceptable. Compare the audio recording above with the published minutes on the Town's web site here.
The minutes change the order of events and misrepresent the wording of the motions voted on and adopted.
I must say, the only commissioner in recent years who has compared the minutes with the audio and insisted on accuracy was Jennifer Roe. These particular minutes, on a matter of great importance and significance to the Town, are NOT accurate.
As we start thinking about forthcoming municipal elections, we should remember to keep the handling of public records in mind.
The accepted standard for complete minutes of public meetings is that the minutes should record what was DONE, (that is, motions and resolutions made, seconded, votes recorded, etc.) rather than what was SAID. By that standard, the Town's minutes for July 3 are not acceptable. Compare the audio recording above with the published minutes on the Town's web site here.
The minutes change the order of events and misrepresent the wording of the motions voted on and adopted.
I must say, the only commissioner in recent years who has compared the minutes with the audio and insisted on accuracy was Jennifer Roe. These particular minutes, on a matter of great importance and significance to the Town, are NOT accurate.
As we start thinking about forthcoming municipal elections, we should remember to keep the handling of public records in mind.
Topic Tags:
town government
Monday, August 5, 2013
What Experience Should A President Have?
Jonathan Bernstein posts an interesting entry on his "A Plain Blog On Politics" concerning the experience we should look for in a presidential candidate here.
The post was occasioned by a comment by economist Brad DeLong, who opined that we should elect former governors in preference to Senators and Congressmen.
I admit I have often had similar thoughts. And then I would think about our experience in the twentieth century with former governors in the presidency. By no means has our experience been uniformly good.
I thought the discussion following Bernstein's blog post was quite good. I particularly liked "Kylopod's" entry, summarizing the resumes of our early presidents. A mix of experience very rare today. Only recent exception might be George H. W. Bush.
Matt Jarvis calls attention to one 2008 contender for the Democratic Party nomination who had similar depth of experience as our early presidents and who did every job well: Bill Richardson. He would have made a superb president.
The post was occasioned by a comment by economist Brad DeLong, who opined that we should elect former governors in preference to Senators and Congressmen.
I admit I have often had similar thoughts. And then I would think about our experience in the twentieth century with former governors in the presidency. By no means has our experience been uniformly good.
I thought the discussion following Bernstein's blog post was quite good. I particularly liked "Kylopod's" entry, summarizing the resumes of our early presidents. A mix of experience very rare today. Only recent exception might be George H. W. Bush.
Matt Jarvis calls attention to one 2008 contender for the Democratic Party nomination who had similar depth of experience as our early presidents and who did every job well: Bill Richardson. He would have made a superb president.
Topic Tags:
elections,
government
Seventy Years Ago: John F. Kennedy And PT-109 In The Solomons
World War II PT-boats were fast, but little faster than Japanese Destroyers. Their armament was quite limited, and their torpedoes were no match for the Japanese Long Lance. But they were small, highly maneuverable and hard to shoot at.
It was the night of August 1, 1943 when PT-109 and Japanese destroyers were maneuvering at high speed at "darken ship" (no lights showing). By 0200 PT-109 had slowed to idling speed, using only its centerline engine in order to minimize its wake so as not to be spotted from the air.
Suddenly the crew became aware of Japanese destroyer Amagiri bearing down on them at high speed. They had only about ten seconds to light off the outboard engines (PT-109 was powered with three twelve-cylinder Packard gasoline engines). It wasn't enough.
Amagiri sliced PT-109 in two, causing it to burst into flames from its high octane AVGAS. The skipper, John Kennedy, managed to get the eleven surviving crew members to a small nearby island. Two crewmen perished in the collision.
Kennedy went for help. On August 5th, Kennedy found native Solomon Islanders, who were able to help. The full story is here.
It was the night of August 1, 1943 when PT-109 and Japanese destroyers were maneuvering at high speed at "darken ship" (no lights showing). By 0200 PT-109 had slowed to idling speed, using only its centerline engine in order to minimize its wake so as not to be spotted from the air.
Suddenly the crew became aware of Japanese destroyer Amagiri bearing down on them at high speed. They had only about ten seconds to light off the outboard engines (PT-109 was powered with three twelve-cylinder Packard gasoline engines). It wasn't enough.
Amagiri sliced PT-109 in two, causing it to burst into flames from its high octane AVGAS. The skipper, John Kennedy, managed to get the eleven surviving crew members to a small nearby island. Two crewmen perished in the collision.
Kennedy went for help. On August 5th, Kennedy found native Solomon Islanders, who were able to help. The full story is here.
Sunday, August 4, 2013
It's All About The Water - And Rights Of Way
Last year, when I was offering the Town's elected officials every suggestion I could muster on how to avoid legal missteps on South Avenue, I advised them to seek an opinion from the Attorney General.
I wasn't flying blind. I had a copy of an advisory opinion issued by the NC Justice Department in 1995 addressed to Oriental's Town Attorney. The opinion thoroughly explored right of way law across the nation as it concerned streets leading to navigable waters. I even called Town official's attention to the letter, which I knew was in Town files. That's where I got my copy.
When the mayor replied that the Town didn't want its hands tied, I wondered if they had actually consulted the document.
As it turns out, the Attorney General's advisory opinion is posted on the NC Department of Justice web site here. It totally refutes many of the claims made by the Town's attorneys at the court hearing of March 4, 2013.
Another opinion, that of the North Carolina Court of Appeals in the case of the Town of Oriental v. Henry, also in the Town's files, counters many points made on March 4 by Town's attorney. Here is that opinion, on the Court of Appeals web site.
A careful reading of these two opinions will reward anyone interested in legal issues associated with rights of way, especially those leading to navigable waters.
I wasn't flying blind. I had a copy of an advisory opinion issued by the NC Justice Department in 1995 addressed to Oriental's Town Attorney. The opinion thoroughly explored right of way law across the nation as it concerned streets leading to navigable waters. I even called Town official's attention to the letter, which I knew was in Town files. That's where I got my copy.
When the mayor replied that the Town didn't want its hands tied, I wondered if they had actually consulted the document.
As it turns out, the Attorney General's advisory opinion is posted on the NC Department of Justice web site here. It totally refutes many of the claims made by the Town's attorneys at the court hearing of March 4, 2013.
Another opinion, that of the North Carolina Court of Appeals in the case of the Town of Oriental v. Henry, also in the Town's files, counters many points made on March 4 by Town's attorney. Here is that opinion, on the Court of Appeals web site.
A careful reading of these two opinions will reward anyone interested in legal issues associated with rights of way, especially those leading to navigable waters.
Topic Tags:
law,
water access
Saturday, August 3, 2013
My Thoughts Of A Year Ago On South Avenue
In the interest of informing the public about the South Avenue case, I thought it would be useful to share a letter I sent to the mayor and Town Board last June 15, more than two seeks before the Board hearing on closing Avenue A and South Avenue. This was one of a series of similar communications to Town officials that I had sent starting January 28, 2012.
I had hoped by bringing legal precedents to the Board's attention that they would proceed with caution.
It didn't work. Here's the letter:
See also AT&T v. Village of Arlington Heights, 620 N.E.2d 1040, (“Municipalities do not possess proprietary powers over the public streets [which are] ... held in trust for the use of the public.”);
Eugene McQuillin, Law of Municipal Corporations, (3d rev. ed. 1990) at § 30.40 (“[T]he estate of the city in its streets … is essentially public and not private property, and the city in holding it is considered the agent and trustee of the public and not a private owner for profit or emolument.” The power to maintain and regulate the use of the streets is a trust for the benefit of the general public, of which the city cannot divest itself…”);
The contract which the town board approved on May 17 by a 4-1 vote sets forth a barter transaction, and transforms the town into a proprietor rather than a trustee of public streets.
This is not an obscure principle or an arcane technicality. It is fundamental. "...Whatever rights the city may have over its streets, its powers are those of a trustee for the benefit of the public, liberally construed for its benefit, strictly construed to its detriment." McQuillen at 569.
One of the most powerful protections of the public interest in rights of way is precisely the prohibition against selling or bartering them. That removes any temptation for the governing body to divest itself of rights of way held in the public trust for short term fiscal benefit.
To barter this town's most irreplaceable long-term asset - public access to the public trust waters of our harbor - for real estate held in fee simple, will inevitably tempt future town boards to sell the resulting waterfront property to meet short term fiscal needs. Once sold, the public will never get it back. Ever.
I had hoped by bringing legal precedents to the Board's attention that they would proceed with caution.
It didn't work. Here's the letter:
David R.
Cox
409
Academy Street
Oriental,
NC 28571
252-249-7219
June 15,
2012
The
Honorable William Sage
Mayor, Town
of Oriental
507 Church
Street
Oriental, NC
28571
Re: Proposal
to Vacate South Avenue and Avenue A and Agreement between the TOWN OF
ORIENTAL and G.CHRISTOPHER FULCHER et al
Dear Mr.
Mayor:
I oppose the
contract approved by the board of commissioners of the town of
Oriental on May 17 between the town and Mr. Chris Fulcher. I oppose
it not because of the resulting shape and size of the property
accruing to the town, though I think a better result could have been
negotiated.
I oppose it
because it violates a fundamental principle of right of way law: “the
governing body shall not sell or barter the streets and alleys which
it holds in trust for the benefit of the public.”
I have no specialized legal resources, but have easily located
authoritative legal references confirming that a town may not sell or
barter a public right of way:
"a City has no power to sell or barter the streets and alleys which it holds in trust for the benefit of the public and cannot vacate a street for the benefit of a purely private interest." - Roney Inv. Co. v. City of Miami Beach, 174 So. 2d 26, 29 (Fla. 1937),
"a City has no power to sell or barter the streets and alleys which it holds in trust for the benefit of the public and cannot vacate a street for the benefit of a purely private interest." - Roney Inv. Co. v. City of Miami Beach, 174 So. 2d 26, 29 (Fla. 1937),
See also AT&T v. Village of Arlington Heights, 620 N.E.2d 1040, (“Municipalities do not possess proprietary powers over the public streets [which are] ... held in trust for the use of the public.”);
Eugene McQuillin, Law of Municipal Corporations, (3d rev. ed. 1990) at § 30.40 (“[T]he estate of the city in its streets … is essentially public and not private property, and the city in holding it is considered the agent and trustee of the public and not a private owner for profit or emolument.” The power to maintain and regulate the use of the streets is a trust for the benefit of the general public, of which the city cannot divest itself…”);
The contract which the town board approved on May 17 by a 4-1 vote sets forth a barter transaction, and transforms the town into a proprietor rather than a trustee of public streets.
This is not an obscure principle or an arcane technicality. It is fundamental. "...Whatever rights the city may have over its streets, its powers are those of a trustee for the benefit of the public, liberally construed for its benefit, strictly construed to its detriment." McQuillen at 569.
One of the most powerful protections of the public interest in rights of way is precisely the prohibition against selling or bartering them. That removes any temptation for the governing body to divest itself of rights of way held in the public trust for short term fiscal benefit.
To barter this town's most irreplaceable long-term asset - public access to the public trust waters of our harbor - for real estate held in fee simple, will inevitably tempt future town boards to sell the resulting waterfront property to meet short term fiscal needs. Once sold, the public will never get it back. Ever.
To barter a
right of way, dedicated in perpetuity by Mr. R.P. Midyette for the
purpose of public access to the water, for a parcel of unrestricted
real estate which a future board of commissioners could sell without
even a public hearing does not protect the public interest.
Indeed, one of the present commissioners has expressed the view at a public meeting that the town SHOULD sell some of its rights of way. When someone suggested yesterday that there should be some restrictions on property acquired by the town in this proposed transaction, preferably a dedication to the public with restrictions that would preclude such a conversion to revenue by a future governing body, this same commissioner asked, "why would we want to tie our hands that way?"
Why? Because our rights of way are held in trust.
Town Boards may not always keep the town's future in mind. We need to help them do so.
There may have been a way to accept Mr. Fulcher's donation of property so that it was not a sale or barter and so the public's interests were protected by conditions of the gift. There may yet be a way.
The contract approved by the town board on May 17 isn't it.
Indeed, one of the present commissioners has expressed the view at a public meeting that the town SHOULD sell some of its rights of way. When someone suggested yesterday that there should be some restrictions on property acquired by the town in this proposed transaction, preferably a dedication to the public with restrictions that would preclude such a conversion to revenue by a future governing body, this same commissioner asked, "why would we want to tie our hands that way?"
Why? Because our rights of way are held in trust.
Town Boards may not always keep the town's future in mind. We need to help them do so.
There may have been a way to accept Mr. Fulcher's donation of property so that it was not a sale or barter and so the public's interests were protected by conditions of the gift. There may yet be a way.
The contract approved by the town board on May 17 isn't it.
Sincerely,
David R. Cox
CC: Mr.
Sherrill Styron, Commissioner
Mr. Warren
Johnson, Commissioner
Mr. Larry
Summers, Commissioner
Ms. Barbara
Venturi, Commissioner
Ms.
Michelle Bissette, Commissioner
Mr. Robert
J. Maxbauer, Town Manager
Topic Tags:
town government
Friday, August 2, 2013
Do You Know Who Your Commissioner Is?
Recent arrivals to the Town of Oriental sometimes ask: "who is my commissioner?"
Good question. The short answer is: "you don't have one."
One of the consequences of the fact that we elect all of our Town Commissioners at large is that no commissioner represents any particular part of Town. You can't, for example, call Commissioner Jones and say, "there is a pothole on my street that needs repair" and be confident that Commissioner Jones will look into it because he represents your district.
Our system of government, in other words, is not inherently responsive to citizen concerns.
This situation has been exacerbated in recent years by the Town Board's refusal to engage in exchanges of information with citizens at public meetings. Not only does this show a lack of respect for the public, it frequently deprives the Town Board of insights and information it needs in order to do its job.
There is a better way.
North Carolina General Statutes allow towns to modify their charters by ordinance. Such ordinances must pick from a menu of choices, and may allow a referendum on each change made.
One of the choices is to elect commissioners from districts, or a mix of commissioners from districts and at large.
I recommend a mix of three commissioners elected from districts representing equal numbers of residents plus two elected at large.
That way, we would each know who our commissioner is.
Good question. The short answer is: "you don't have one."
One of the consequences of the fact that we elect all of our Town Commissioners at large is that no commissioner represents any particular part of Town. You can't, for example, call Commissioner Jones and say, "there is a pothole on my street that needs repair" and be confident that Commissioner Jones will look into it because he represents your district.
Our system of government, in other words, is not inherently responsive to citizen concerns.
This situation has been exacerbated in recent years by the Town Board's refusal to engage in exchanges of information with citizens at public meetings. Not only does this show a lack of respect for the public, it frequently deprives the Town Board of insights and information it needs in order to do its job.
There is a better way.
North Carolina General Statutes allow towns to modify their charters by ordinance. Such ordinances must pick from a menu of choices, and may allow a referendum on each change made.
One of the choices is to elect commissioners from districts, or a mix of commissioners from districts and at large.
I recommend a mix of three commissioners elected from districts representing equal numbers of residents plus two elected at large.
That way, we would each know who our commissioner is.
Topic Tags:
town government
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
An Oklahoma City Surgical Hospital Leads In Cost Transparency: Who Knew?
Want to know how hospital costs compare for surgical procedures? You mostly can't find out.
Unless you have the surgery done in Oklahoma City.
Good for them!
Unless you have the surgery done in Oklahoma City.
Good for them!
Topic Tags:
health
Monday, July 29, 2013
Public Access To Water: Big Problem On Chesapeake
Chesapeake Bay: 11,684 miles of shoreline, equal to the distance of the entire West Coast, from Mexico
to Canada. But only 2% of it provides public access to the water.
Good article in yesterday's Washington Post about the problem and efforts to correct it. Some describe the Chesapeake as a large gated community.
It's hard to correct a problem this size. Once public access points are in private hands, the public never gets them back.
That's why Oriental's citizens have fought so hard to keep public access points like South Avenue in public hands.
It's all about the water.
Good article in yesterday's Washington Post about the problem and efforts to correct it. Some describe the Chesapeake as a large gated community.
It's hard to correct a problem this size. Once public access points are in private hands, the public never gets them back.
That's why Oriental's citizens have fought so hard to keep public access points like South Avenue in public hands.
It's all about the water.
Topic Tags:
town government,
water access
Sunday, July 28, 2013
Seventy Years Ago: Mussolini Falls
July 28, 1943: Franklin Delano Roosevelt delivers a fireside chat on the fall of Mussolini. And what a chat it was!
No American who heard FDR speak on that day could fail to note that we were all in this together, and we were winning!
Not many leaders have ever had the skill of FDR at putting events into perspective.
Read the whole, inspiring fireside chat here.
And celebrate with a cup of unrationed coffee.
No American who heard FDR speak on that day could fail to note that we were all in this together, and we were winning!
Not many leaders have ever had the skill of FDR at putting events into perspective.
Read the whole, inspiring fireside chat here.
And celebrate with a cup of unrationed coffee.
Topic Tags:
economics,
Europe,
government,
history,
international,
national security,
war
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Voter ID Is Just The Beginning
We've seen this movie before. A couple of years ago, I called attention to the voter suppression effort in Texas.
Now Texas has to take a back seat to North Carolina.
This is all so familiar. Until the US Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional in 1944, Texas, like other states of the former Confederacy, held whites-only primaries. In 1960, when I attempted to register in Mississippi while I was serving at sea in the Western Pacific, the Washington County registrar told me they had received my federal post card application form too late. I knew that was a lie. I was the ship's voting officer and I knew that voter registration in Mississippi was permanent. How could I be too late for permanent? I also knew what the real problem was. There was no block in the application to indicate race. What if the registrar had inadvertently registered a black man?
Return with us now to the thrilling days of yesteryear.
Now Texas has to take a back seat to North Carolina.
This is all so familiar. Until the US Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional in 1944, Texas, like other states of the former Confederacy, held whites-only primaries. In 1960, when I attempted to register in Mississippi while I was serving at sea in the Western Pacific, the Washington County registrar told me they had received my federal post card application form too late. I knew that was a lie. I was the ship's voting officer and I knew that voter registration in Mississippi was permanent. How could I be too late for permanent? I also knew what the real problem was. There was no block in the application to indicate race. What if the registrar had inadvertently registered a black man?
Return with us now to the thrilling days of yesteryear.
Topic Tags:
elections
Changes To NC Election Law: Down To Forty-Nine Pages
I just printed off a copy of HB 589, as passed by the General Assembly. Here is the text.
It should be titled the Voter Obstruction and Suppression Act of 2013. The voter photo ID provision has received the most attention, but there are a lot more provisions that need scrutiny.
Within Pamlico County, there was concern about a provision doing away with the direct record (touch screen) voting equipment that we use and are very satisfied with. The bill had called for eliminating them for all elections after January 1, 2014. We had done a quick estimate and concluded the change to scanned paper ballots would cost the County about a quarter of a million dollars. Implementation of that change has now been delayed until 2018.
That's about the only moderately good news. Details later.
It should be titled the Voter Obstruction and Suppression Act of 2013. The voter photo ID provision has received the most attention, but there are a lot more provisions that need scrutiny.
Within Pamlico County, there was concern about a provision doing away with the direct record (touch screen) voting equipment that we use and are very satisfied with. The bill had called for eliminating them for all elections after January 1, 2014. We had done a quick estimate and concluded the change to scanned paper ballots would cost the County about a quarter of a million dollars. Implementation of that change has now been delayed until 2018.
That's about the only moderately good news. Details later.
Topic Tags:
elections
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Fifty-Seven Pages Of Changes To NC Election Law
The Senate Rules Committee today engrossed the fifth edition of House Bill 589, known as "VIVA Election Reform." Initial reports are that the bill makes drastic changes to election procedures. The current version of what had been a fourteen page bill has expanded to fifty-seven pages and can be read here.
I am tempted to plunge right in with my first impressions of the bill, which are not favorable. I'll have more to say after I have studied the bill more carefully.
I am tempted to plunge right in with my first impressions of the bill, which are not favorable. I'll have more to say after I have studied the bill more carefully.
Topic Tags:
elections,
government
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Warren Johnson July 3, 2012: "What Have We Just Done?"
At the public hearing on closing Avenue A and South Avenue, held July 3, 2012, twenty local citizens spoke. Half were opposed to the land swap and half supported it. Among the speakers were three attorneys. All three opposed the swap for legal reasons.
When the public hearing was closed, the Town Board began discussing what action(s) to take. It was a confusing discussion. Afterwards, many attendees asked for clarification. It appeared that many of the commissioners were also confused.
A few days later, I obtained a copy of the Town's audio recording of the public hearing. It was not until I listened to the recording that I was able to follow what happened, even though I attended the hearing.
As a public service, I am providing a complete transcription of the discussion by the Town Board following the public hearing:
Transcription Board of Commissioners of Town of Oriental meeting
of July 3, 2012, deliberation by Board members after closing public
hearing: Source – Official digital audio recording made by Town of Oriental
[Time in Hours, Minutes and Seconds From Start of Audio Recording]
[...Public Hearing Closed] 1:11:21
Bill Sage (Sage): 1:11:40
There are basically two halves to get to what all the experts seem to agree is a
legal end. And that is closing these street rights of way and acquiring in fee
simple the yellow lot as you see it there.
One train of thought is that we proceed as we are proceeding tonight with closing
the street rights of way and then accepting the donation of the property shown
there in yellow.
The other train of thought is that we treat it as or we approach it as an exchange.
NC State law provides for and empowers a municipality to exchange a property
interest *or an interest in real estate, or personal property for that matter, for other
property. And there is a procedure set out basically in section 160A-271 for an
exchange of property interests.
[*Not exactly. Must be property belonging to the Town. Not “an interest.”]
And one of the options that the Board has is instead of choosing which of the two
paths to take to touch both bases and go through not only the street closing and
donation process which we we’ve taken another step towards tonight by having
this hearing, but also to go through the exchange process. And that of course
would entail a postponement of a decision on closing the streets for purposes of
gathering the necessary information and giving the necessary notices that the
statute requires under the exchange provisions. And so we can proceed with
consideration of closing the streets or we can defer a decision on closing the
streets so as to bring forward the necessary notices and information to comply
with section 160A-271.
Barbara Venturi (Venturi): Point of clarification; what additional information would we
be collecting and putting out?
Sage : 1:15:19
Under 160A-271, the town may by private negotiations enter into
an exchange of real or personal property *[Note: “belonging to the city”] if it is satisfied
that it receives full and fair consideration in exchange for its property. And it requires
that notice to be given by publication of the meeting at which the town board will
consider the exchange. And the notice must state the value of the properties.
[Note repeated misrepresentation of the statute.]
Larry Summers (Summers): [whispering to Venturi “I have a motion on this...”]
Summers: 1:15:36 I’d like to make a motion...
??:
“That’s enough to... receive it.”
[papers shuffling] [Summers submitted a written motion. No copy was
provided to the public in violation of NCGS 318.13(c).]
Sage: [Venturi recognized]
Venturi: 1:16:06
Indistinct... “model for openness”... indistinct...]
“If it is appropriate to follow two lines of action to ensure that all obstacle courses
have been dealt with, I move that we go forward on the full and fair consideration
including notice to the public, that would include appraisals as soon as appraisals
or evaluations of the properties and considerations...”
Sage: 1:16:53 “...Motion by Commissioner Venturi to pursue the exchange of property
provisions of section 160A-271 postponing a decision on the street closure until such
time as a public meeting is noticed to the public and published for consideration of the
exchange. Seconded by Commissioner Johnson, any discussion?”
[Note: portion in italics is the motion on the floor as stated by the mayor.]
Summers: “I’d like to make a point of order to the attorney: Is what we are doing an
exchange of property or a closure of a right of way?”
Scott Davis: “I think it can fairly be viewed as an exchange.”
Venturi: 1:18:20 [Indistinct... “appraisals, comparison full and fair”... indistinct.]
“if it is considered a swap, we should at least value these things and provide the
ability to prepare these properties for the public.”
Warren Johnson (Johnson): “By doing so, will we not be covering all our bases?”
Scott Davis: 1:19:00 “That’s the theory. As Mr. Cox and others have pointed out*,
there are a number of ways to structure this transaction - I have spoken to no-one that has
come to the conclusion that we cannot achieve this result.
“The theorical [sic] differences are in how we get there.
[*Cox had previously suggested Town lacked authority for exchange and
suggested stand alone transactions with dedication to public or deed
restriction. Town response: “Don't tie our hands.”]
“There’s camp that likes an exchange agreement, there’s a camp that likes a pure
exchange, there’s a camp that likes a street closing and a donation separated.
“And we don’t have any case-law that tells us what the magic recipe is. *
[*Translation: “We can't find a case that says we can do this.”]
“So here, since we have folks who have alternate points of view, and there’s
nothing that precludes us from trying to accommodate those different points of views,
meaning there is no down side to doing it both ways, and there is potential up-side if one
way is determined to be superior...
“...[1:19:41] so to me it’s a rather easy path to go down, to take the more prudent
course to do it both ways, and hopefully, one of those two ways takes.”
Venturi: [Indistinct about fact that holding a hearing doesn’t mean the Board must vote]
Scott Davis: [no, you would do that later, and you’d take evidence and vote]
Summers:
“I am opposed to this thing, and I’ll tell you what, we’ve been working on
this thing for seven months [subdued “oooh”s from the audience] [... indistinct...I hear a
lot of legal opinions anyone here a lawyer?” ...]
Jim Privette [from audience:] “yes”
Summers: “Experience in municipal law?”
Privette: “Yes. Municipal attorney in North Carolina.”
Summers: 1:21:34 “The other thing is: appraising the property. I look at this piece of
property, we don’t own the property, we own an easement, as Bill Marlow said,
and I look at that, what can you do with an easement?
“You can’t sell an easement, you can’t eat an easement, you can only close an
easement, that’s the only thing that you can do.
[Note: Summers got that right!]
“What we’re looking at doing is closing streets, and then being offered in
exchange, if we close the streets, you will receive X as a donation to the, for the
good of the Town.
“I think that’s a wonderful thing, and I think it’s a wonderful piece of property for
it.
“Grace Evans brought up something that I think is really important here. One of
the reasons we have a problem now, with our anchorage, is because of the five
acres that was sent out there with Oriental Harbor Marina... We have killed the
goose that laid the golden egg for Oriental... That’s what we did and I absolutely
believe that.
“I would like to be able to go over and put my chair on that property on Saturday
night and watch the fireworks, but I guess if we do this, we can’t. I am a believer
in doing it, and if this motion fails, I will offer a motion to close the streets.”
Sherril Styron (Styron): “If it’s gonna take one more month to do it right, I don’t have a
problem with that, but Avenue A: I can see no reason for that not to be closed, whether
we are doing exchanging or do nothing else, Chris Fulcher owns the property on every
side of it.
“It goes nowhere, except dead-ends in his property... [words to the effect that
opponents envy Chris Fulcher]... no matter what we do, I think Avenue A should
be closed, and I’m prepared to do it tonight, unless the attorney feels like we need
to wait until next week.
“I’ve not heard nothing tonight that changes my mind on what we need to do. I
would love to proceed as quick as we can and close this out.
“But if Scott feels like we need to wait one more month I’ll go along with it.”
Sage: “Any further comment or questions? OK, Motion is postponing a decision and
complying with...”
Venturi: “Can we get an idea from the attorney...”
Scott Davis: “...You can bifurcate the street closing, if the board wants to. By separate
motion - you can determine tonight to close any portion that has been noticed, leaving the
remaining portion to be dealt with at some later date.”
Venturi: “I do agree with Sherill, I think Avenue A is nothing but a liability written all
over it. But we had a motion to move forward...”
Scott Davis: “And recognizing, I just wanna say this out loud;
“That if you determine later not to close the terminus of South Avenue, and you
close Avenue A tonight, It’s done. “And there’ll be nothing in exchange for that,
just purely a closing of Avenue A.”
Sage: “All in favor of the motion, say Aye.”
Johnson: “Aye”
Venturi: “Aye”
Styron: “What?”
Sage: 1:25:28 “All in favor of the motion for the Town to take the steps to comply with
section 260A-271, developing information on full and fair consideration. Say aye.”
Venturi + Michelle Bissette (Bissette): “Aye”
Sage: “Raise your hands to say aye... Motion carries, we will take the steps to comply
with the provisions of 160A-271.
Sage: “Motion to close Avenue A would be in order...*”
Summers: “I move that the Town of Oriental close the streets as indicated on this with the exception of the South Avenue terminus, on that motion that I handed out earlier, to close Avenue A and the other possible rights of way in the back portion of that property.”
Scott Davis: “Let’s edit that motion in the continuation of the discussion regarding the South Avenue terminus - is that part of your motion?
“You move to close Avenue A, it’d be nice in that motion to also continue the
deliberation in consideration - ”
Summers: “Let me restate the motion, if I may, Mr. Mayor.
“I’d like to move that the Town of Oriental close the following town streets, along
with any rights of way formerly indicated as being located in the area bounded by
the Western margin of the right of way of Wall Street on the East, the Neuse
River on the South, Smith and Raccoon Creeks on the West, and the Southern
margin of the right of way of South Avenue on the North - said street portions
being lawfully described as follows: Avenue A, and its got the other writing on
there, other possible rights of way, but to defer the closing of the South Avenue
terminus, to a specific date... the next full regular town meeting. The August
meeting.”
Sage: “Motion by Mr. Summers for this Board to close Avenue A and other possible
rights of way as described in the notice of intention in the area bounded on the West by Raccoon and Smith Creek, on the North by the South margin of South Avenue, on the East by the Western margin of Wall Street, and on the South by the Neuse River.
“Seconded by Commissioner Styron.”
“... and to continue consideration of the closure of the South Avenue terminus for
the August 2012 regularly scheduled Town Board meeting.
Scott Davis: “Another recommendation might be to further amend that motion to provide that you have found that closing the street is not land-locking property owners, and is not contrary to the public interest.*”
[*Another intervention by Town Attorney to include conclusions on matters not
discussed or deliberated on by Town Board.]
Sage: “Will you make an amendment?”
Summers: 1:29:29 “Yes, I will amend that... it is to the satisfaction of the Board after the hearing that closing the above-referenced streets are not contrary to the public interests, and that no individual owning property in the vicinity of the street or alley, or in the subdivision in which it is located, would thereby be deprived of a reasonable means of ingress and egress to their property.”
Sage: 1:29:43 Repeats Motion, asks for discussion;
Johnson: 1:30:25
“I can't imagine this transaction not happening next month. But
let's say it dies or goes away. What have we just done?
Styron: All we've done is close a street [or words to that effect].
Johnson: 1:30:25 Yes, but it's part of the transaction. If for some reason.[indistinct]
Sage: 1:31:20 Calls for vote. Announces motion passes, 4-1 (Johnson voting “nay.”
Noise in room, Sage gavels meeting.
Sage: 1:31:30 “Motion carries. An order will be entered closing the streets as described.”
When the public hearing was closed, the Town Board began discussing what action(s) to take. It was a confusing discussion. Afterwards, many attendees asked for clarification. It appeared that many of the commissioners were also confused.
A few days later, I obtained a copy of the Town's audio recording of the public hearing. It was not until I listened to the recording that I was able to follow what happened, even though I attended the hearing.
As a public service, I am providing a complete transcription of the discussion by the Town Board following the public hearing:
Transcription Board of Commissioners of Town of Oriental meeting
of July 3, 2012, deliberation by Board members after closing public
hearing: Source – Official digital audio recording made by Town of Oriental
[Time in Hours, Minutes and Seconds From Start of Audio Recording]
[...Public Hearing Closed] 1:11:21
Bill Sage (Sage): 1:11:40
There are basically two halves to get to what all the experts seem to agree is a
legal end. And that is closing these street rights of way and acquiring in fee
simple the yellow lot as you see it there.
One train of thought is that we proceed as we are proceeding tonight with closing
the street rights of way and then accepting the donation of the property shown
there in yellow.
The other train of thought is that we treat it as or we approach it as an exchange.
NC State law provides for and empowers a municipality to exchange a property
interest *or an interest in real estate, or personal property for that matter, for other
property. And there is a procedure set out basically in section 160A-271 for an
exchange of property interests.
[*Not exactly. Must be property belonging to the Town. Not “an interest.”]
And one of the options that the Board has is instead of choosing which of the two
paths to take to touch both bases and go through not only the street closing and
donation process which we we’ve taken another step towards tonight by having
this hearing, but also to go through the exchange process. And that of course
would entail a postponement of a decision on closing the streets for purposes of
gathering the necessary information and giving the necessary notices that the
statute requires under the exchange provisions. And so we can proceed with
consideration of closing the streets or we can defer a decision on closing the
streets so as to bring forward the necessary notices and information to comply
with section 160A-271.
Barbara Venturi (Venturi): Point of clarification; what additional information would we
be collecting and putting out?
Sage : 1:15:19
Under 160A-271, the town may by private negotiations enter into
an exchange of real or personal property *[Note: “belonging to the city”] if it is satisfied
that it receives full and fair consideration in exchange for its property. And it requires
that notice to be given by publication of the meeting at which the town board will
consider the exchange. And the notice must state the value of the properties.
[Note repeated misrepresentation of the statute.]
Larry Summers (Summers): [whispering to Venturi “I have a motion on this...”]
Summers: 1:15:36 I’d like to make a motion...
??:
“That’s enough to... receive it.”
[papers shuffling] [Summers submitted a written motion. No copy was
provided to the public in violation of NCGS 318.13(c).]
Sage: [Venturi recognized]
Venturi: 1:16:06
Indistinct... “model for openness”... indistinct...]
“If it is appropriate to follow two lines of action to ensure that all obstacle courses
have been dealt with, I move that we go forward on the full and fair consideration
including notice to the public, that would include appraisals as soon as appraisals
or evaluations of the properties and considerations...”
Sage: 1:16:53 “...Motion by Commissioner Venturi to pursue the exchange of property
provisions of section 160A-271 postponing a decision on the street closure until such
time as a public meeting is noticed to the public and published for consideration of the
exchange. Seconded by Commissioner Johnson, any discussion?”
[Note: portion in italics is the motion on the floor as stated by the mayor.]
Summers: “I’d like to make a point of order to the attorney: Is what we are doing an
exchange of property or a closure of a right of way?”
Scott Davis: “I think it can fairly be viewed as an exchange.”
Venturi: 1:18:20 [Indistinct... “appraisals, comparison full and fair”... indistinct.]
“if it is considered a swap, we should at least value these things and provide the
ability to prepare these properties for the public.”
Warren Johnson (Johnson): “By doing so, will we not be covering all our bases?”
Scott Davis: 1:19:00 “That’s the theory. As Mr. Cox and others have pointed out*,
there are a number of ways to structure this transaction - I have spoken to no-one that has
come to the conclusion that we cannot achieve this result.
“The theorical [sic] differences are in how we get there.
[*Cox had previously suggested Town lacked authority for exchange and
suggested stand alone transactions with dedication to public or deed
restriction. Town response: “Don't tie our hands.”]
“There’s camp that likes an exchange agreement, there’s a camp that likes a pure
exchange, there’s a camp that likes a street closing and a donation separated.
“And we don’t have any case-law that tells us what the magic recipe is. *
[*Translation: “We can't find a case that says we can do this.”]
“So here, since we have folks who have alternate points of view, and there’s
nothing that precludes us from trying to accommodate those different points of views,
meaning there is no down side to doing it both ways, and there is potential up-side if one
way is determined to be superior...
“...[1:19:41] so to me it’s a rather easy path to go down, to take the more prudent
course to do it both ways, and hopefully, one of those two ways takes.”
Venturi: [Indistinct about fact that holding a hearing doesn’t mean the Board must vote]
Scott Davis: [no, you would do that later, and you’d take evidence and vote]
Summers:
“I am opposed to this thing, and I’ll tell you what, we’ve been working on
this thing for seven months [subdued “oooh”s from the audience] [... indistinct...I hear a
lot of legal opinions anyone here a lawyer?” ...]
Jim Privette [from audience:] “yes”
Summers: “Experience in municipal law?”
Privette: “Yes. Municipal attorney in North Carolina.”
Summers: 1:21:34 “The other thing is: appraising the property. I look at this piece of
property, we don’t own the property, we own an easement, as Bill Marlow said,
and I look at that, what can you do with an easement?
“You can’t sell an easement, you can’t eat an easement, you can only close an
easement, that’s the only thing that you can do.
[Note: Summers got that right!]
“What we’re looking at doing is closing streets, and then being offered in
exchange, if we close the streets, you will receive X as a donation to the, for the
good of the Town.
“I think that’s a wonderful thing, and I think it’s a wonderful piece of property for
it.
“Grace Evans brought up something that I think is really important here. One of
the reasons we have a problem now, with our anchorage, is because of the five
acres that was sent out there with Oriental Harbor Marina... We have killed the
goose that laid the golden egg for Oriental... That’s what we did and I absolutely
believe that.
“I would like to be able to go over and put my chair on that property on Saturday
night and watch the fireworks, but I guess if we do this, we can’t. I am a believer
in doing it, and if this motion fails, I will offer a motion to close the streets.”
Sherril Styron (Styron): “If it’s gonna take one more month to do it right, I don’t have a
problem with that, but Avenue A: I can see no reason for that not to be closed, whether
we are doing exchanging or do nothing else, Chris Fulcher owns the property on every
side of it.
“It goes nowhere, except dead-ends in his property... [words to the effect that
opponents envy Chris Fulcher]... no matter what we do, I think Avenue A should
be closed, and I’m prepared to do it tonight, unless the attorney feels like we need
to wait until next week.
“I’ve not heard nothing tonight that changes my mind on what we need to do. I
would love to proceed as quick as we can and close this out.
“But if Scott feels like we need to wait one more month I’ll go along with it.”
Sage: “Any further comment or questions? OK, Motion is postponing a decision and
complying with...”
Venturi: “Can we get an idea from the attorney...”
Scott Davis: “...You can bifurcate the street closing, if the board wants to. By separate
motion - you can determine tonight to close any portion that has been noticed, leaving the
remaining portion to be dealt with at some later date.”
Venturi: “I do agree with Sherill, I think Avenue A is nothing but a liability written all
over it. But we had a motion to move forward...”
Scott Davis: “And recognizing, I just wanna say this out loud;
“That if you determine later not to close the terminus of South Avenue, and you
close Avenue A tonight, It’s done. “And there’ll be nothing in exchange for that,
just purely a closing of Avenue A.”
Sage: “All in favor of the motion, say Aye.”
Johnson: “Aye”
Venturi: “Aye”
Styron: “What?”
Sage: 1:25:28 “All in favor of the motion for the Town to take the steps to comply with
section 260A-271, developing information on full and fair consideration. Say aye.”
Venturi + Michelle Bissette (Bissette): “Aye”
Sage: “Raise your hands to say aye... Motion carries, we will take the steps to comply
with the provisions of 160A-271.
Sage: “Motion to close Avenue A would be in order...*”
[*This move, following passage of motion to postpone confused both the audience and the Board.]Summers: “I’ll do that one.
Summers: “I move that the Town of Oriental close the streets as indicated on this with the exception of the South Avenue terminus, on that motion that I handed out earlier, to close Avenue A and the other possible rights of way in the back portion of that property.”
Scott Davis: “Let’s edit that motion in the continuation of the discussion regarding the South Avenue terminus - is that part of your motion?
“You move to close Avenue A, it’d be nice in that motion to also continue the
deliberation in consideration - ”
Summers: “Let me restate the motion, if I may, Mr. Mayor.
“I’d like to move that the Town of Oriental close the following town streets, along
with any rights of way formerly indicated as being located in the area bounded by
the Western margin of the right of way of Wall Street on the East, the Neuse
River on the South, Smith and Raccoon Creeks on the West, and the Southern
margin of the right of way of South Avenue on the North - said street portions
being lawfully described as follows: Avenue A, and its got the other writing on
there, other possible rights of way, but to defer the closing of the South Avenue
terminus, to a specific date... the next full regular town meeting. The August
meeting.”
Sage: “Motion by Mr. Summers for this Board to close Avenue A and other possible
rights of way as described in the notice of intention in the area bounded on the West by Raccoon and Smith Creek, on the North by the South margin of South Avenue, on the East by the Western margin of Wall Street, and on the South by the Neuse River.
“Seconded by Commissioner Styron.”
“... and to continue consideration of the closure of the South Avenue terminus for
the August 2012 regularly scheduled Town Board meeting.
Scott Davis: “Another recommendation might be to further amend that motion to provide that you have found that closing the street is not land-locking property owners, and is not contrary to the public interest.*”
[*Another intervention by Town Attorney to include conclusions on matters not
discussed or deliberated on by Town Board.]
Sage: “Will you make an amendment?”
Summers: 1:29:29 “Yes, I will amend that... it is to the satisfaction of the Board after the hearing that closing the above-referenced streets are not contrary to the public interests, and that no individual owning property in the vicinity of the street or alley, or in the subdivision in which it is located, would thereby be deprived of a reasonable means of ingress and egress to their property.”
Sage: 1:29:43 Repeats Motion, asks for discussion;
Johnson: 1:30:25
“I can't imagine this transaction not happening next month. But
let's say it dies or goes away. What have we just done?
Styron: All we've done is close a street [or words to that effect].
Johnson: 1:30:25 Yes, but it's part of the transaction. If for some reason.[indistinct]
Sage: 1:31:20 Calls for vote. Announces motion passes, 4-1 (Johnson voting “nay.”
Noise in room, Sage gavels meeting.
Sage: 1:31:30 “Motion carries. An order will be entered closing the streets as described.”
Topic Tags:
law,
town government
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)