In Memory Of John Knauth

Our friend John Knauth died last month. John was an important member of this community for many years and contributed much to our welfare. He was also a dedicated and visible member of the County Democratic Party. I am taking the liberty of quoting today's Town Dock's article:

"If you called 911 here in Oriental a few years back, chances are John Knauth would’ve come to your door, his EMT kit in hand. He was part of Oriental’s First Responders, which was a continuation of the volunteering he’d done in Connecticut. In retirement here, John also helped get the Pamlico Musical Society going. And was on the Pamlico Arts Council and active with the Pamlico Amateur Radio Society. As we write this, we’re certain we’re leaving something out.

"John and his wife Ilona Forgeng moved from Oriental to New Bern a few years ago. John died there last month and this Saturday their families and friends are gathering at the Unitarian Church in New Bern to remember him. That’s from 4-7p on April 5 at 308 Meadows Street."

We'll be there.

Tomorrow Is Election Day: Vote Wisely

I wish Oriental's voters could all have been at tonight's meeting of the Pamlico County Board of Commissioners. They would have seen the kind of board at work that the Town needs.

Those who have been following the issue know about Alan Propst's articles in Pamlico News and the Sun Journal exposing the effort of an out of state corporation to unlawfully convert a very large tract of land from wetlands to farmlands. If successful, this could result in vast profits for the firm and vast damage to the county.

The Pamlico County courtroom was filled with citizens concerned about the environmental damage this plan could cause.

As commissioner Chris Mele explained, the commissioners learned about the problem only two weeks ago. The last thing the county needed was the kind of dithering that has become routine in Oriental.

At tonight's meeting, the County Comissioners took three actions aimed at gaining control over the situation:
1. Approved a letter from the chair of the Board of Commissioners to the US Corps of Engineers detailing the reasons the Corps decision concerning the Trent Road parcel should be reexamined;
2. Referred a draft ordinance to the county planning board, which would require notification of such actions to the County Government as well as to state and federal officials;
3. Agreed to ask our legislators to seek a local bill clearly granting legal jurisdiction to the county over wetlands matters.

All three measures were unanimously approved. Clearly the commissioners had shared views with each other and with the county manager and had achieved a measure of agreement before the meeting. Only a few small details were discussed and quickly resolved.

Just as clearly, the County Commissioners were aware of public sentiment on the matter and arranged the agenda so that the problem could be presented to the board and the public.

It was a well-run meeting, addressing and engaging public concerns, and taking action.

Would that we had a mayor and Board of Commissioners in Oriental capable of such effective measures.

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.

Was Speciale intentionally misleading his audience or does he just not exercise care in his reading of draft legislation? In addition to a North Carolina driver's licence, VIVA authorizes the following forms of identification:

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?

Public Officials

In the summer of 2011 I posted a comment intending to put public service into context. In this case, I was writing mostly about municipal elected officials. But the same thoughts apply to County offices as well as state and higher offices. The pay may be somewhat greater than that for town officials, but the principal is the same and I thought it worth repeating:

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Let Us Now Praise Local Pols

I sometimes sit in the peanut gallery and aim (figurative) slings and arrows at local officials.

I have no personal interest in any controversies - I just want things done right. Yes, I have opinions about WHAT should be done to improve our town. My main focus, however, is HOW things are done. I try not to be influenced by personal feelings for or against individuals involved in the process.

This isn't personal - it's business. Public business.

There's another side to the story, though. We should admire all of our fellow citizens willing to step up to the plate and compete for approval of voters for the right to perform long hours of public service, steeped in controversy, often in the face of hostility, for no pay. Of all elected public officials in this land of ours, these are the ones we should most admire.

Let all incumbents know that we appreciate what they do.

For those who have already filed as candidates in November's election, I say thank you. For those still weighing whether to run for public office, I say "do it."

Oriental Croaker Fest 2012

A bit hot, but the opening of the Croaker Fest at 4:00 today went well and was enjoyed by all. Good music. Tasty food. And I loved the root beer floats (they benefit Hope Clinic, but they are not just morally good - they taste great!)

The Golden Rule

He who has the gold, rules.

That's certainly a commonplace, but it seems to be true of politics in River City. We'll see how well it plays out in the next few days.

2012 NC Elections: Second Primary

Based on the results of yesterday's primary election in North Carolina, it looks like there may be a second primary. Such primaries are often called "runoff" primaries. They are scheduled when no single candidate in a partisan election receives 40% or more of the vote.

The schedule depends on whether there is a federal office requiring a runoff or if there are only state offices. We will receive the official notification after next week's canvass of votes and learn whether any candidates have requested a second primary.

My guess is that there will be a second primary and that there will be one or more federal offices involved.

This year, unlike the runoff in 2010, it appears that both the Republican and Democratic parties will have a second primary, and that it will probably be scheduled for July 17, 2012. The county board of elections will notify the public as soon as we have the official word.

Two years ago, I tried the explain second primaries here. On that occasion, we also had an "instant runoff" for a judicial election. We have no advance information so far that there will be an instant runoff.

I also advocated that North Carolina dump the runoff. It is costly and pointless and few voters turn out.

Stay tuned.

Ladies And Gentlemen: Cast Your Ballots!

The 2012 election is underway in Pamlico County. Tuesday this week, the county board of elections held its first weekly absentee meeting of the primary and validated four absentee ballots cast by mail. These ballots are safeguarded and will not be counted until May 8.

In the meantime, "one-stop" voting started today at the board of elections office in Bayboro. These votes also will not be counted until May 8.

Many Pamlico County residents have found that one stop voting is more convenient than waiting until election day. In fact, at the 2008 general election, about two-thirds of the votes were cast at one-stop.

The election has begun.

Election Preparations

Voters don't need to know how much work goes into preparing for an election. They just need to show up and vote. It should be comforting, though, to know that great effort goes into insuring that their votes are accurately recorded and counted.

Today, and for several more days, the Pamlico County Board of Elections is conducting logic and accuracy testing of our voting machines. The state requires us to test 10% of our machines. In Pamlico County, we test every machine used in the election.

Testing pays off. We have never had a calibration problem with any of our voting machines on election day.

Get Out And Register - Then Get Out And Vote

Is voting a right or a privilege?

By law, it is a right. Every American citizen has the right to vote. One can also view it as a privilege, but it is a privilege that belongs to every citizen.

More importantly, it is a duty. In a democracy, if you don't take the trouble to vote, you are arguably a freeloader.

Don't be a freeloader. Do your duty and vote.

The first step in voting is to make sure you are registered and that the information is up to date.

How to register? You can do it when you get a driver's license or at any public service agency. But in Pamlico County, it is most convenient to drop by the Board of Elections office the next time you are in Bayboro.

The next election is the May 8 primary. Voter registration for that election closes at 5:00 PM April 13. If you miss that deadline, you can still vote using same-day registration during one-stop, but you can't change any previous party registration after April 13.

If you have questions, call the Board of Elections and ask our Elections Director, Ms. Lisa Bennett. She'll walk you through it.

DOT Ferry Hearing March 19, 2012

Do you know what a "Senior Public Involvement Officer" is? I tried to find out this evening on the NC DOT web site, to no avail.

Why do I want to know? Mr. Jamille A. Robbins, who chaired tonight's DOT public hearing on "NCDOT Proposed Temporary Rules Changes for Ferry Tolling" is one.

I was unsuccessful in finding a job description or explanation of Mr. Robbins' title.

But he must be powerfully influential. When the last questioner of the evening asked Mr. Robbins what DOT had done to carry out the governor's direction to seek economies within the DOT budget to equal the legislature's directed $5 million in revenue and then directed the question to the four DOT "suits" in the front row, Mr. Robbins explained they (the "suits") were present only as "observers" and couldn't speak. The four remained silent as Mr. Robbins attempted to explain the difficulties in figuring such things out while disgruntled attendees headed for the exits.

It reminded me of a mobile that a colonel of my acquaintance hung over his desk. The mobile consisted of a collection of fingers pointing in various directions, shifting with the wind. It looked something like this:

What was the hearing for? "To solicit comments regarding the request to amend, adopt or repeal portions of the NC Administrative Code per the temporary rules process."

What next? "Following the hearing and comment period, the NCDOT must adopt the proposed temporary rule change." In other words, nothing said tonight will have any effect whatsoever on the rule.

After the temporary rules are adopted, then the Rules Review Commission (RRC) will review the proposed changes. The RRC can either approve or object (not reject). If the RRC objects, NCDOT can either rewrite or not rewrite. If they do not rewrite and resubmit the rule, it will not become effective.

More importantly, if the RRC approves the rule, people opposing the rule may file an action for declaratory judgment in Wake County Superior Court.

I hope someone has started drafting such an action. Several of tonight's public comments included observations pertinent to a request for declaratory judgment, including an interesting account by Jim Barton of the legislative history of NC 306.

Representatives of other affected counties, including Beaufort, Craven and Hyde counties, provided very powerful inputs to the hearing.

A number of speakers pointed out that this ferry tax was enacted by Republican state legislators. The consensus seemed strong that Republican legislators had thrown Eastern North Carolina under the bus. The entire region east of I-95 knows what has happened and from what was said, they intend to remember that in November.

County Board Of Elections

Ms. Judy Smith, who has for the past two years served as the Republican member of the Pamlico County Board of Elections, submitted her resignation to the State Board of Elections, effective today.

I want to thank Judy for her contributions to our work over the past two years. We regret her departure.

Ms. Smith has been a particularly diligent and hard-working board member, who has made a strong contribution to the Board's work. Administration of elections is a complex and challenging part of doing the people's business - in fact, it is essential to a democracy.

I wish all the best to Judy and to her husband, George in the years ahead.

Thank you, Judy.

The Power Of Wind

Tonight's meeting of the Pamlico County Board of Commissioners received an information briefing from the Wind Capital Group concerning their planned wind farm in Pamlico County. The briefing also addressed issues concerning technical developments in wind generation of electrical power, power distribution, costs and environmental effects.

Wind Capital Group has built and operated wind farms elsewhere in the country, mostly in the mid west. The company's information addressed issues including the percentage of time the wind turbines will produce electricity (about a third of the time); cost per KW to generate electricity (less than nuclear, a bit more than coal, but in the general ballpark and costs keep coming down); noise (45-50 dBA - about the same as a conversation at home in a quiet suburb); adverse effect on the atmosphere (none to speak of - in same ballpark as hydroelectric power).

Tonight's briefing contrasted greatly with that of Dr. John Droz, who briefed the commissioners a month ago. Whereas tonight's briefing presented actual verifiable facts, complete with numbers, Mr. Droz provided a rant. There were no facts that could be verified - only strongly worded opinions. Don't take my word for it - read one version of the Droz briefing on his own site.

If you find any actual facts in the Droz briefing, please let me know.

As for me, I don't quite understand what the fuss is about. Anyone who believes or claims to believe that wind power can replace fossil fuels is either a fool or a liar. But no one promoting wind power or solar power or for that matter nuclear power, claims that it can solve our power generation problem.

A lot of foolish assertions are made.

Last week, for example, I came across an attack on electric automobiles. "What they really are," the author asserted, "is coal-powered automobiles." OK. Some might be. They also might be powered by natural gas. Or water turbines. Or by the tides. Or by the sun or the wind or nuclear power.

When you plug your car's charger into an outlet, you don't know how that particular power was generated. It doesn't matter. It's a game of percentages. Anything we can do to reduce the percentage of our transportation powered by high pollution sources is a plus. Even using better insulation.

Wind powered automobiles? Pretty neat idea.

YOYO's, WITTS, AND TROLLS

I've been thinking about the ongoing flap about ferry tolls.

So has Greg Piner, who has done an excellent job of clarifying the issue for Representative Frank Iler of Brunswick County.

Representative Iler, from his statements, seems to be an adherent of the YOYO philosophy: "You're On Your Own."

But the central idea of public assets is that we get together as a people, take up a collection, and commonly fund the infrastructure that holds us together as a state both socially and economically. After all, as Mr. Piner points out, "We're All In This Together." So Mr. Piner seems to be a WITT.

Count me as a WITT.

I've already explained about TROLLs.

Do not ask for whom the trolls toll - they toll for us.

The Billy Goats Gruff

Yesterday I asked in passing whether ferries have trolls. I now realize some readers may not recognize the reference.

It has been about seventy years since I first read the story about the Billy Goats Gruff. Since then, I have always associated trolls with bridges. So, since our ferries play the role of bridges, I naturally wondered if they could have trolls.

Since, in the story of the Billy Goats Gruff, the troll was attempting to exact a particularly high toll (the life of a goat), I thought there might be a connection.

The story ends with the troll's demise, done in by his excessive greed.

Governor Perdue Takes On The Toll Trolls

This just in:

Perdue orders 1-year moratorium on new ferry tolls

Read the entire article on News and Observer site here.

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/crosstown/perdue-orders-1-year-moratorium-on-new-ferry-tolls#storylink=cpy

Toll Tale Told

Some illustrations just can't be improved upon. Here is artist Laura Turgeon's take on the ferry toll issue. What more is there to say?

Do ferries have Trolls?

House Bill 200

Last week, the County Commissioners not only failed to adopt a measure to hire a lobbyist, they also failed to pass a measure authorizing the County Attorney to research issues surrounding a possible law suit by the county seeking injunctive or other relief from the tolls. The attorney explained that he would have to research a number of issues, including whether the county government has standing to bring a suit or whether only a citizen or taxpayer has standing. He would have to research court precedents for case law on point, including a review of North Carolina constitutional law.

This morning's session did not reexamine the issue of going to court.

Is a suit worth pursuing? Would there be a chance of success in a court, especially since a suit would have to be filed in Wake County Superior Court rather than in Pamlico County? I don't have a clue.  But in addition to the provision of North Carolina General Statutes that appear to prevent turning a previously toll-free highway into a toll road, there are some constitutional provisions that seem at odds with H200:

I won't post the entire bill of 343 pages. But it is interesting to look at the pertinent provisions. 


First, what was the bill about? Here is the stated purpose:

"GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA

SESSION 2011

SESSION LAW 2011-145

HOUSE BILL 200

AN ACT to Spur the creation of private sector jobs; reorganize and reform state government; make base budget appropriations for current operations of state departments and institutions; and to enact budget related amendments.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

PART I. Introduction and Title of Act

TITLE

SECTION 1.1.  This act shall be known as the "Current Operations and Capital Improvements Appropriations Act of 2011."

INTRODUCTION

SECTION 1.2.  The appropriations made in this act are for maximum amounts necessary to provide the services and accomplish the purposes described in the budget.  Savings shall be effected where the total amounts appropriated are not required to perform these services and accomplish these purposes and, except as allowed by the State Budget Act, or this act, the savings shall revert to the appropriate fund at the end of each fiscal year."

In other words, it was presented as an appropriations bill. But here are the ferry provisions:

"Transportation/Ferry Division Tolling

SECTION 31.30.(a)  Effective April 1, 2012, G.S. 136‑82 reads as rewritten:

"§ 136‑82.  Department of Transportation to establish and maintain ferries.

The Department of Transportation is vested with authority to provide for the establishment and maintenance of ferries connecting the parts of the State highway system, whenever in its discretion the public good may so require, and to prescribe and collect such tolls therefor as may, in the discretion of the Department of Transportation, be expedient. The Board of Transportation shall establish tolls for all ferry routes, except for the Ocracoke/Hatteras Ferry and the Knotts Island Ferry.

To accomplish the purpose of this section said Department of Transportation is authorized to acquire, own, lease, charter or otherwise control all necessary vessels, boats, terminals or other facilities required for the proper operation of such ferries or to enter into contracts with persons, firms or corporations for the operation thereof and to pay therefor such reasonable sums as may in the opinion of said Department of Transportation represent the fair value of the public service rendered.

The Department of Transportation, notwithstanding any other provision of law, may operate, or contract for the operation of, concessions on the ferries and at ferry facilities to provide to passengers on the ferries food, drink, and other refreshments, personal comfort items, and souvenirs publicizing the ferry system."

SECTION 31.30.(b)  The Board of Transportation shall toll all ferry routes no later than the effective date of subsection (a) of this section but is encouraged to begin tolling on all routes before that date. In establishing tolls for ferry routes under G.S. 136‑82, as amended by this section, the Board of Transportation shall consider the needs of commuters and other frequent passengers."

The establishment of tolls for previously toll-free segments of the state highway system  is arguably not an appropriations measure, but a revenue bill.

Because the effect of the measure on citizens affects Craven, Pamlico, and Beaufort Counties, it is also arguably a local bill.

Here is what the NC Constitution has to say about revenue bills and local bills:

"ARTICLE II

LEGISLATIVE

"Sec. 23.  Revenue bills.

No law shall be enacted to raise money on the credit of the State, or to pledge the faith of the State directly or indirectly for the payment of any debt, or to impose any tax upon the people of the State, or to allow the counties, cities, or towns to do so, unless the bill for the purpose shall have been read three several times in each house of the General Assembly and passed three several readings, which readings shall have been on three different days, and shall have been agreed to by each house respectively, and unless the yeas and nays on the second and third readings of the bill shall have been entered on the journal.

"Sec. 24.  Limitations on local, private, and special legislation.

(1)        Prohibited subjects.  The General Assembly shall not enact any local, private, or special act or resolution:

(a)        Relating to health, sanitation, and the abatement of nuisances;

(b)        Changing the names of cities, towns, and townships;

(c)        Authorizing the laying out, opening, altering, maintaining, or discontinuing of highways, streets, or alleys;

(d)       Relating to ferries or bridges;

(e)        Relating to non-navigable streams;

(f)        Relating to cemeteries;

(g)        Relating to the pay of jurors;

(h)        Erecting new townships, or changing township lines, or establishing or changing the lines of school districts;

(i)         Remitting fines, penalties, and forfeitures, or refunding moneys legally paid into the public treasury;

(j)         Regulating labor, trade, mining, or manufacturing;

(k)        Extending the time for the levy or collection of taxes or otherwise relieving any collector of taxes from the due performance of his official duties or his sureties from liability;

(l)         Giving effect to informal wills and deeds;

(m)       Granting a divorce or securing alimony in any individual case;

(n)        Altering the name of any person, or legitimating any person not born in lawful wedlock, or restoring to the rights of citizenship any person convicted of a felony.

(2)        Repeals.  Nor shall the General Assembly enact any such local, private, or special act by the partial repeal of a general law; but the General Assembly may at any time repeal local, private, or special laws enacted by it.

(3)        Prohibited acts void.  Any local, private, or special act or resolution enacted in violation of the provisions of this Section shall be void.

(4)        General laws.  The General Assembly may enact general laws regulating the matters set out in this Section."

 As to form, it may be argued that H200 is a general law. As to the substantive effect of the ferry provisions, though, it is arguably a local bill.

The provision requiring tolls for segments of the state highway is certainly a revenue provision, not an appropriation provision, and therefore improperly included in H200.

Fodder for attorneys?

Pamlico County Ferry Lobbyist

This morning at a brief 9 o'clock meeting, Pamlico County commissioners voted 4-3 to hire an experienced local lobbyist to undo the Republican legislature's measure establishing tolls on our two commuter ferries. Both ferries are shown in DOT transportation system maps as segments of state highway 306. The tolls, possibly as high as $7 per one-way trip across the Neuse, will be a heavy burden on workers who commute to and from Havelock.

The three commissioners who voted against hiring a lobbyist expressed doubt that the measure will succeed, and frustration that it wasn't attempted by our elected legislators. Commissioner Ollison expressed the view that the tolls are "a done deal."

My view: there is a risk of failure, but the consequences of the tolls on the county's economy are substantial.

In a democracy, there are no permanent "done deals."

Ferry Terminal

Here is a scan from this week's County Compass of the ferry terminal planned for Cherry Point. Cost: who knows? But it's pretty certain to exceed a million dollars. Let's say a million and a half.

Cost of collecting the tolls? About a million dollars.

Annual additional revenue ordered to be collected: three million.

Amount gained by ditching the tolls and leaving the terminal as it is? two and a half million.

Shortfall? Half a million, much of which will be recovered from reducing the ferry schedule.

Anyone still think the toll is about the budget?