The Town Council approves special use permits for local businesses, many of which belong to the 
Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce. The Town Council does not belong to the Chamber. Yet you’d never know that from the Chamber’s website. Scroll down through the C’s on the Chamber’s business directory, and there you’ll find a listing for Chapel Hill Town Council.
Town Council members would be within their rights to join the Chamber, which is a 501(c)(6), meaning it is a nonprofit allowed to lobby. The status is the same structure followed by Boards of Realtors, Home Builders Associations and the League of Municipalities. But Aaron Nelson, the Chamber’s president and CEO, said that though politicians are often invited to Chamber events, they don’t attend for free.
“If I were to comp Joe Hackney’s breakfast, he’d have to report it, and so would I,” Nelson said. “We skip that by charging him. Then you don’t have to worry about someone trying to influence you with some runny eggs.”
Coziness between council and commerce doesn’t bother Durham. In fact, Nelson said, the City of Durham gives the Durham Chamber of Commerce nearly $100,000 a year. And a while back, maybe 20 years ago, Nelson said, Chapel Hill’s Town Council did belong to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber. Nelson believes that may have ended to avoid conflicts over endorsing candidates.
Nelson said the Chamber spends less than one-half of 1 percent of its budget on lobbying. The Chamber supports microenterprise predominantly, with about 80 percent of its members being organizations with 20 or fewer employees.
And we would certainly expect that the Town of Chapel Hill and its council would support local businesses. But given that the council does have the power to approve or deny SUPs proposed by businesses, having the council appear to belong to the Chamber sends the wrong message. It might imply that any business that has business before the council should join the Chamber first.
We recommend taking the Town Council off the membership directory. And while the Chamber webmaster is fixing the membership directory, update the board of directors page, which still lists only the 2010 board.
“I have to fix that,” Nelson said. “2010 went by really fast.”
– Nancy Oates
Mark Marcoplos
/ March 25, 2011Heavy-hitter Chamber members Duke & Progress Energy don’t need no “runny eggs” to buy influence and pressure pols.
CitizenWill
/ March 26, 2011The Chamber is an interesting organization to watch. For one, I’m sure that not all its members support what Aaron says they collectively do. Some of the policies Aaron has advocated for are at odds with building a better business environment for ALL Chapel Hill’s commercial ventures. I know from speaking with entrepreneurs of all-stripes, especially some locally-owned smaller businesses the local Chamber likes to portray themselves as helping, that there’s a simmering conflict in agendas. So, when he gets up in front of Council and trots out the “X hundred of businesses and organizations” line, take what he says within that broader perspective.
As far as influence, here’s an interesting upcoming (April 1st – really!) seminar from the Chamber:
Breakfast Briefing: Effectively Influencing Government
Chapel Hill Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt, Orange County Commissioner Valerie Foushee, and NC Representative Bill Faison will discuss with attendees how they can successfully advocate for their businesses on state and local levels. Additionally, the Chamber will host a press conference to announce its Public Policy Agenda.
What do folks think about that?
Scott Maitland
/ March 27, 2011“For one, I’m sure that not all its members support what Aaron says they collectively do.”
Find me any 950+ organization that can reach complete consensus. I personally have not agreed with every Chamber decision but that doesn’t mean I don’t support the chamber’s collective efforts.
“Some of the policies Aaron has advocated for are at odds with building a better business environment for ALL Chapel Hill’s commercial ventures.”
I am interested in what specific policies you are referring to. Was it the support of the tax initiative last year? Was it the chamber’s work on LUMO? The chamber has a demonstrated track record of trying to advocate for good policy grounded in the triple bottom line. By definition, some policies will have directly opposite impacts on different actors. Our chamber’s effort to evaluate every policy through the lens of the triple bottom line is principled and enlightened. By the way, all chamber positions are reached by the Chamber’s Board which has an extraordinary mix of community leaders on it.
“especially some locally-owned smaller businesses the local Chamber likes to portray themselves as helping, that there’s a simmering conflict in agendas. So, when he gets up in front of Council and trots out the “X hundred of businesses and organizations” line, take what he says within that broader perspective.”
You are right, I will take it from the perspective that x hundreds of business find enough value to pay their membership dues especially in light of the economy.
As far as the Breakfast Briefing goes, I think it’s great that the organization sets up meaningful chances to learn from a variety of sources including elected officials.
By the way, I am sure that Mayor Kleinschmidt won’t miss the chance to emphasize “civility.” Based on the events of the last couple of weeks, apparently there are a lot of non-chamber members that need that reminder.
Scott Maitland – speaking as an individual
Local Business Owner
Current Chamber Board Member
CitizenWill
/ March 27, 2011Scott, I understand Aaron is a great booster of Chamber business but, for instance, some of the claims he’s made and inferences he’s drawn on the impact of Greenbridge and Lot #5 on Downtown’s business climate just don’t jibe with the facts. I applaud his exuberant style but sometimes his rhetoric looses touch with reality. As you’re well aware of, the direct negative fiscal impact of the Lot #5 project on local business and the high probability that TIFs will be used to finance its fiscal shortfalls (taking money out of the Downtown district which could be used more productively) surely is at odds with the claims made on behalf of the Chamber. I understand the Chamber Board has nothing to do with that specifically but it is a point of concern.
As Mark pointed out, Progress Energy’s agenda doesn’t align very well with small business interests and doesn’t align well with the local Chamber’s commitment to the “triple bottom line”.
Speaking of the “triple bottom line”, I have found that it is often a convenient talking point , especially in support of projects like East54, which has as little meaning as the measureless “sustainability” policies the Town has adopted.
Maybe this isn’t the case anymore, but my experience is that many businesses join the local Chamber as a matter of course and not necessarily because they endorse any or all of the policies it adopts. I know specific members who have been shocked by some of the rhetoric made on the Chamber’s behalf. Take the support for the shelter relocation as one example. Outside of your membership, there are businesses which don’t see the Chambers activities as complementary to their own agendas. What of the minority owned businesses which are being driven out of Downtown by the development policies the Chamber endorsed?
The Chamber already has a lot of influence with the Council, look how it has been able to postpone decisions, etc. You only have to look at how successful the Chamber was in the recent decision to push more Downtown development costs onto the shoulders of local taxpayers to understand that. Or even the breakfast meeting – I don’t recall a BOCC head, a Mayor and a local Rep getting together to coach local citizens on how they can have more influence in local government.
I think the Chamber has a responsibility commensurate with the power it wields. As part of that responsibility, it’s important that the rhetoric doesn’t outrun the reality.
CitizenWill
/ March 27, 2011Whoops! Meant former head of the BOCC.