You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “It’s only a slice”.
It’s only a slice
by Nancy Oates on April 22, 2013
• Permalink
Posted by Nancy Oates on April 22, 2013
http://chapelhillwatch.com/2013/04/22/its-only-a-slice/
Previous Post
Can we afford to be generous?
Can we afford to be generous?
Next Post
Invite them where?
Invite them where?
Recent Comments
- Nancy Oates on We’re still here
- Deborah Fulghieri on We’re still here
- Pluramus on Greene Tract series continues
- Nancy Oates on Greene Tract series continues
- Nancy Oates on Greene Tract series continues
- Plurimus on Greene Tract series continues
- Plurimus on Greene Tract series continues
- Nancy Oates on Greene Tract series continues
- plurimus on Greene Tract series continues
Blogroll
Categories
- 140 West
- Budget
- Business
- Carolina North
- CH2020
- Committees
- Community life
- Council Members
- County business
- Courts
- Courtyards of Homestead
- COVID-19
- Deer
- Downtown Chapel Hill
- Economic development
- Elections
- Environment
- Ethics
- Food Trucks
- Homeless Shelter
- Housing
- Land Use
- Library
- Lifestyle
- Media
- Museum
- Northside
- Occupy Protests
- Parking
- Police
- Politics
- Public Works
- Roads
- Sanitation workers
- Schools
- Social justice
- Spending
- Taxes
- Technology
- Town staff
- Transportation
- Trees
- UNC
- Uncategorized
- Work and Money
Tag Cloud
123 West Franklin advisory boards affordability American Legion annexation Bicycle Apartments bond referendum BRT Bus ads candidates Carolina Flats cell phones Central West CH2020 Charterwood Community Home Trust comprehensive plan county commissioners county government development Ephesus-Fordham fireworks form-based zoning Franklin Street Friends of Downtown Growth health care Historic District Commission historic districts Holidays Light Rail Obey Creek park-and-ride personalities real estate sales Rogers Road Shortbread Silent Sam students The Edge Timber Hollow towing traffic Trinitas VOEMeta
Mark Peters
/ April 22, 2013Tedesco’s was great and the family is very nice. Our kids were friends with their kids, in school together, played on the same soccer team, etc. We are sorry that they closed down shop and moved.
Linda Convissor
/ April 22, 2013Was Tedesco’s in the former Mexican restaurant space next to Caribou? I had no idea they served pizza, I (obviously wrongly) assumed that Tedesco was just a name change but the restaurant had stayed the same.
Terri Buckner
/ April 22, 2013Nope, Nancy, your taxes are not the highest in the state. Your municipal taxes are just slightly above the median for state. Your county taxes are about .20 cents higher than the state median. And then you have the special school tax. All together, Chapel Hill has among the highest total property tax in the state but Carrboro and Franklinton, Bunn, and a couple of others are higher.
Jon DeHart
/ April 22, 2013When the tax values and rates are combined , the residents of Chapel Hill and Carrboro pay higher taxes than anyone else in the state . Yesterday;s N&O had an article that summed it up pretty well .
http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/04/20/2836965/unfortunate-policies-lead-county.html
Terri Buckner
/ April 23, 2013Jon–I read that same article and have spoken with the author. Then I went out and did my own research which I reported above. Chapel Hill ranks around 6 or 7 when all 3 taxes are combined. I listed those that are higher above.
http://www.dor.state.nc.us/publications/propertyrates.html
anonymous
/ April 23, 2013Signage was not the problem. Tedesco’s was not aimed at college kids nor easily accesible to them.
Many
/ April 23, 2013Terri,
You need to step back and look at the big picture. It’s not just taxes, but also how the monies are spent. And don’t forget to include basic utilities such as water public transportation and solid waste.
What disturbs me the most is the fact that “Orange County has the second-highest per capita allocation to capital expenditures, near the top in all categories except public safety, where it is near the bottom.”
Terri Buckner
/ April 23, 2013Many,
You assume that I haven’t already taken that step back…. I’ve spent quite a bit of time reviewing the data Mr. Jacobs used to make his claims about water/sewer bills.
As with all data, you need to understand the way the data is reported/collected in order to analyze it. With respect to Chapel Hill’s public safety budget, I believe you would need to factor in UNC’s public safety budget/service to get a true understanding of the issue. Without that big picture view, it would be easy to believe that Chapel Hill residents and visitors aren’t safe. And that would be an incorrect assumption.
George C
/ April 23, 2013Terri,
In response to Many’s comments, what we have not done well lately is fund capital expenditures for our police & fire departments. The police station and several of the fire stations are in desperate need of repair/replacement. As is often the case, when a service is working well (and public safety is consistently rated the top public service in the citizen surveys) we tend to forget about it.
Many
/ April 23, 2013Terri,
When I talk Orange County you argue Chapel Hill. Not the same thing. We are talking *county* here.
Bottom line, the facts speak differently:
http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2012/12/county-to-speed-up-ems-response-time
Again, you are focused on the minutia of water bills and not looking at how the county taxes and spends. 1.4 Billion on LRT and 10+ (in some cases 20+) minute ambulance response times? Something is wrong with this picture.
Terri Buckner
/ April 23, 2013George,
Do you believe that buildings in need of repair make citizens less safe? That seemed to me to be the implication of the article and of Many’s repetition of the claim. But maybe I was reading too much into it…
Funding for building maintenance is a problem for everyone. I would be surprised to find any municipality (or university) that doesn’t have unfunded capital improvement needs. Of course, if those projects were all funded, our tax rates would be even higher. Take a look at the existing school buildings. It’s never a choice of whether to build a new school or repair the ones we have. The decision to build new is made for us through growth demands.
From an outsiders view, it seems like budget choices always seem to come down to maintaining what we have or building something new (the library comes to mind). I would definitely agree with anyone who says we need better balance in making those choices.
Many
/ April 23, 2013Oh BTW, we need a new jail too……..
http://www.chapelhillnews.com/2012/09/08/72848/new-jail-in-orange-countys-future.html
Many
/ April 23, 2013Terri.
Building maintenance? No…..it is response times and number of ambulances and the current wholy inadequate location of same.
It is also the poor and remote using the ER and 911 as primary care facilities.
It is the fact that the Orange County budget overspends on the latest “cause celebre” (e.g. being king of recycling) while ignoring the basic functions of government.
Jon DeHart
/ April 23, 2013terri,
I know the rates fairly well, as I calculate them in my job as part of people’s mortgage payments. When it comes to sheer dollars , Usually Chapel Hill dollars are higher becuase the house are more expensive.
You can argue the basis points on the rate but people pay actual dollars . The dollars are higher in Chapel Hill than anywhere else .
Owasa is more expensive for families of more than 4 people . We conserve as much as possible but when you have a six person household the water bill gets really high . There should be a reduction if you have a larger household .
Our policies make us more expensive . It is a great place to live , just very expensive compared to our neighbors .
Terri Buckner
/ April 23, 2013Many–Nancy’s comment that started this discussion was that her tax rate is the highest in the state. My response was to that claim. George’s comment was also about Chapel Hill, not Orange County.
I don’t know enough about Orange County’s budget to participate in the discussion you are trying to have. I do, however, know that we pay for things in many ways, not just direct budget items. There is a cost to not recycling–higher tipping fees now that we are going out of county. Higher workman’s compensations bills for using bins rather than rollout carts. Higher medical costs for environmentally-driven illnesses from pollution based on single-occupancy vehicles. These are all multi-dimensional discussions that do not lend themselves well, IMHO, to conversations on a blog. It’s too hard to separate what is true understanding of all the dimensions and what is more ideologically driven.
Many
/ April 23, 2013Terri,
Another excellent point; as far as I can tell no average citizen understands the Orange County budget.
Driving recycling through higher tipping fees. Workman’s compensations bills for using bins rather than rollout carts. Medical costs for environmentally-driven illnesses from pollution based on single-occupancy vehicles (really?) are not unique, so why is it Orange County spends so much more (in terms of percentage) on these things and so much less on public safety, which ?
the ideology should be simple enough. A budget that prioritizes the basic functions of government without over rotating on one sub-ideology.
Fred Black
/ April 23, 2013Nancy, what is your working definition of a “locally owned business?” There seem to be several of them out there?
Many
/ April 23, 2013Nancy; Here is another scary statistic for you while you eat your pizza:
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/business/change-in-worth-by-household-category/113/
Mark Marcoplos
/ April 23, 2013Fred – excellent referral to meaningful data.
Many
/ April 24, 2013OK. I’m confused. Several locally owned businesses or several definitions of locally owned business?
Is this data meaningful?
In the former case, yes there are, As hinted at in a previous topic, “Top of the Hill” is a locally owned business that successfully used a local (NIMBY) argument as part of the business plan to keep the national chain TGI Friday’s out:
“In 1994, when a Chapel Hill landlord announced plans to open a T.G.I. Friday’s along East Franklin Street, then-law student Scott Maitland was appalled. “I couldn’t stand the thought of a chain restaurant dominating our downtown,” he says.” http://www.fifteen501.com/Chapel_Hills_finest.aspx
In the latter, it depends on your definition of local and when it crosses the line into Xenophobia.
Fred Black
/ April 24, 2013I asked Nancy how SHE was defining a “locally owned business” because there are several definitions of “locally owned businesses” used in this community and therefore some disagreement on what a “locally owned business” is and what isn’t a “locally owned business.” Hope the question is clear now.
Many
/ April 24, 2013would you care to enumerate the several definitions of “locally owned businesses” for the larger audience?
I can only think of one that resonates with most people I talk to;…”a business majority owned by local residents (there is that definition of local again) who are free to make their own purchasing, advertising, operational, and legal decisions.”
Yes, the definition above excludes franchises which are minority locally owned and are bound by national advertising operational and legal considerations and are often bound to franchised approved purchasing.
Fred Black
/ April 24, 2013I asked Nancy how SHE was defining a “locally owned business.” Why is my definition a concern?
Many
/ April 24, 2013Just curious Fred. Nancy is not answering you is she? You are commenting on a public forum, remember?
Maybe you should take a another pill.
Nancy
/ April 24, 2013OK, sorry for the silence. I was away last week and have had my nose to the proverbial grindstone since I got back.
My definition of locally owned business is a business that is owned by someone who lives in the area and is not backed by the deep pockets of a corporation nor required to comply with rules and goals geared for a regional or national market, instead of what would work for the market specifically in our community. I know we have plenty of locally owned businesses — TOPO, Sugarland, Sutton’s being a few excellent examples. They have all invested significantly in the community, and I’m sure they all have stories of the lengths they’ve gone to to cope with Chapel Hill’s peculiarities.
Diogenes
/ April 24, 2013Let’s not overlook Phydeaux and Southern Season, two retailers which built their brands in Chapel Hill and now are expanding elsewhere. Or Chapel Hill Magazine and all it’s spin offs. Or Franklin Street Partners. It seems as though the discussion regarding “locally owned” tends to focus on restaurants. There are many locally owned businesses in Chapel Hill which are thriving but are not in the public eye because they are not restaurants or retailers. Is a public company which is headquartered here a “local business”. How do we define Investors Title with it’s headquarters on Franklin Street? How do we define Chapel Hill Dermatology which is owned by local physicians?
Chris Jones
/ April 24, 2013“They have all invested significantly in the community, and I’m sure they all have stories of the lengths they’ve gone to to cope with Chapel Hill’s peculiarities.”
I know that you know this, but it bears mentioning anyway . . . . our locally owned franchises have also made significant investments in the community, and have also gone to great lengths to cope with Chapel Hill’s peculiarities.
I don’t understand why some of you good folks get your panties in such a wad about those evil corporate citizens that may wish to besmirch our lovely village. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not interested in Franklin St. downtown turning into an outdoor Streets of Southpoint. I’ll never forget travelling to the DFW area for business, and the staff at my hotel telling me about the wonderful “restaurant row” in Addison. Well, let me assure you, 2 solid miles of Chili’s, Outback, Mac Grill, Magiannos, On the Border, Fridays, and every other similarity under the sun drove me batty for 2 weeks.
But, you know a “national chain” does do? It provides an anchor; it provides a destination; to provides a source to funnel consumers to other locally owned businesses. I’m eager to see if the re-development of 123 W Franklin (U Square) can include a major national retailer to “anchor” the spot — this is exactly what we need to drive more traffic to our fine downtown businesses.
Finally, one last thing that bears mentioning . . . It’s a crutch to blame too much competition on a business’s demise. I gotta be real honest . . . I don’t think oversupply relative to demand is what did in some of our most recently deceased. Bottom line, some of our most recent comers to, for instance, the “Pizza” segment (Artisan Pizza and Mellow Mushroom being the two that stand out to me) challenged the market with better product, better service, better branding, and a better overall value (value being a function of quality and price). Some of our recently closed in this segment downtown did not adequately respond to the challenge (the polite way of saying that all, or some combination, of the following was true: the product wasn’t any good, the place(s) were filthy, the company did not maintain sufficient controls, or the company invested more time and energy in complaining about all of the OUTSIDE factors influencing their business than investing any time or energy in fixing the INTERNAL issues that they could control).
Economic Darwinism will always exist — in the form of a corporate store, a locally owned franchise, or a local independent. If you refuse to adjust and adapt to the competitive environment, and maintain sufficient (or greater) value proposition, you will fail. That’s life.
Many
/ April 25, 2013Chris Jones: Well said.
I do think that it is often harder for a small business to get a toe hold here because they are often under capitalized.
Franchises although usually sufficiently capitalized sometimes have it worse once they are up and running because they contractually cannot make their own decisions about said peculiarities.
Fred Black
/ April 25, 2013I prefer to take a broader point of view, which was why I wanted to be clear on the language being used (still not really clear!). When Nancy writes, “The Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, the town manager and Town Council all should pay attention and find out why yet another locally owned business couldn’t make a go of it in Chapel Hill,” I think we should all be concerned whenever ANY business closes its doors. As Chris points out, there are market forces at work, as well as other factors. We should understand the forces at work and seek solutions. One of the things we have heard during every recent Inter-City Visit is that this is a problem all experience. We must plan economic development and not just wring our hands. Fortunately, our County and towns are moving in the right direction.
Nancy
/ April 25, 2013The locally owned businesses contribute to Chapel Hill feeling like a small town. Like Chris, I’ve been to towns whose business district is a two-mile strip of big chain stores. It’s convenient and serves the purpose, but it lacks charm. It’s also much easier for a big chain to pack up and leave during a downturn. My sense is that an independent business would take on extra risk to ride out the tight economy rather than leaving for greener pastures.
Terri Buckner
/ April 26, 2013There are lots of studies out there that show a clear multiplier benefit to locally owned businesses. I’ve seen some studies that report up to a 7x impact.
This doesn’t mean all businesses have to be locally owned, but after you’ve read a few of the studies (google: local business multiplier effect), it becomes clear that if the goal is to build a sound and resilient local economy, the bulk of the businesses should be locally owned. I don’t see why a locally owned business couldn’t also serve as an anchor institution (the way Weaver Street does in Southern Village).
Fred Black
/ April 26, 2013Agree with you Terri, the studies have demonstrated these benefits for many years. The problem remains as to what is and isn’t included in “locally owned.” If a business on Franklin Street is owned by someone who lives in Raleigh, some would say it is locally owned and others would disagree. I still want to be concerned about loosing any of our businesses, “locally controlled” or otherwise.
Terri Buckner
/ April 26, 2013I understand your point, Fred, and it’s a good one. Much of the discussion around waste management and transit has separated the community by urban and rural as well as Orange vs other counties. But everyone in Orange (urban and rural) has benefited from some (not all) regional economic efforts like RTP.
There are benefits to locally-tiered ownership (Chapel Hill vs Carrboro, Carrboro vs Orange, Orange vs Durham, etc.) but sometimes, those same distinctions seem more like barriers/divisive lines.
Scott Radway
/ April 26, 2013One of the competition issues that is critical to the smaller local business that have a “local” customer base is the wholesale cost of the goods and services they need to operate. T shirts to monopoly games. I’ve worked on town center redevelopment and sustainability as a consultant to towns for about 30 years. In most of them, including college towns, local retail businesses (small drug stores, audio-video stores, hardware stores, and yes smaller food markets) that eventually fold up know well that they can not purchase their supplies/goods/sales items at a price below the price that Wal-Mart, Lowes, Belks, name some more if you want, can sell the same product. I have a number of friends from high school and college that wanted to continue their family business but could not earn a stable or increasing return on their own time and $$ investments. I can tell you that I and many others I know have hardly ever bought clothing in Chapel Hill – or for that matter Durham or Raleigh. I buy clothes when I go to NY and Chicago and find the many choices not available here. So what is my point. Local businesses are to be valued and encouraged, but most of us aren’t going to pay $22 for a book at a local book store when we can get it for half price on-line. There are however other items I am perfectly happy to pay the extra cost to keep a local business in operation, but how many of us are willing to do the same? Overall I would suggest that our endless debate about what is “local” and what form of ownership is “local” obscures the thinking and decision making we should be engaged in and that should be focused upon – attracting retail businesses that provide products that serve the full range of ages (4-84) of people that will add to the more complete functional fabric of downtown. If not that, then lets get over the idea of local for local and do something that really does attract the spending of money in our town. Lets really become a destination – for in truth we are not the small village many idealize – and have not been for the 25 years I have lived in town. We are a commuter suburb, people live here and work in the Triangle and shop outside our town limits. Or they live outside and commute to UNC and the City School System and also buy outside of the town limits. The data and demographics are pretty clear we are not a sustainable community in any sense of that concept with respect to travel, purchase, recreation, or most other facets of “urban” communities. How about some serious talk and leadership about what we really are and not what we “really aren’t” but want people to believe we are?
Diogenes
/ April 26, 2013The insurmountable problem with your proposal Scott is that what we are is not how we want to see ourselves so we are passionately committed to our delusions. Otherwise we would have to reevaluate what we have become vs what we wanted to be.
Bonnie Hauser
/ April 26, 2013Diogenes – is the word you’re implying “elitist”
I guess we’re back to Michael Jacobs.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/04/20/2836965/unfortunate-policies-lead-county.html
People are voting with their feet- its more efficient than blogging.
Many
/ April 27, 2013Diogenes, I have a slightly different, more optimistic view.
I understand and agree with Scotts concern and criticism of Chapel Hill’s identity crisis, however I think some recent county level developments such as the partnership with Durham on the Eno and the (albeit glacial) movement on Buckhorn development areas are game changers. Its still to early to see how the Obey Creek vs. new Chatham Wal-Mart debate will go.
I understand that many in Chapel Hill do indeed want to be Greenwich, but that’s OK. Greenwich does not cater to choice either, but it has nearby areas that do offer choice both local and national. I don’t know what Carrboro wants to be, but they need to figure that out before things start happening to them rather than with them. Carrboro’s ability to influence has waned considerably in the last ten years and is getting noticeably weaker.
There will be development just outside of Chapel Hill that will address many of Scott’s concerns, although I don’t think it will ever be New York or Chicago (and thank goodness for that). Scott makes a well understood point about mobile ecommerce vs. brick & mortar. Retail business that thrive will either do both or partner across the divide. Choice and price always have trade-offs, but mass customization is making forays into more and more businesses and the cost is coming down rapidly.
I have been pleasantly surprised with Mark Dorosin’s reasoned responses on the OCBoCC. I think he is a good influence I know he was there too late to take any credit (or blame) for what is happening with Eno & Buckhorn, but I am cautiously optimistic about his influence on the future of those areas.
DOM
/ April 27, 2013The town’s long-standing habit of giving in to neighborhood “protection” has severely restricted any kind of meaningful growth in the community. As a result we’re stuck with pockets of wealthy residences and very little in between. Until the town’s leaders stop listening only to the few and think about sustainability for the whole, we’re doomed to live in one large make-believe gated community.
Mark Marcoplos
/ April 27, 2013Some have thought it would be valuable to know what onerous requirements and restrictions local businesses feel that they have sufered. It would be equally informative to know why they chose to locate in Chapel Hill.
Diogenes
/ April 27, 2013The rural buffer has restricted growth. We proudly declare we do not sprawl while affordable single family residences are built around our perimeter. The irony is that people commuting from the areas on our perimeter have a longer commute than if the rural buffer didn’t exist. As for growth inside Chapel Hill — the evidence is incontovertible. The condominiums built in the last several years are the most expensive residential space on a square foot basis in Chapel Hill. The cost of land in Chapel Hill is vastly higher than on the perimeter and nothing can change that now. Nothing.
Bonnie Hauser
/ April 27, 2013The rural buffer has protected a pretty special rural community – including farms that are over 200 years old. It served an important purpose. That said, its over 20 years old and preceded I-40 – which now cut through the center of the county. What does that mean for future land use and zoning?
Like Many, i’m pleased about the county’s plans for the EDDs, but I remain concerned that the high costs and complicated zoning will cause applicants to look elsewhere.
I also am becoming increasingly concerned that a vocal few are not speaking for the majority – and in fact most people are not paying attention. And rather than having a real discussion – with a goal of finding a win-win, we regularly speak past each other, and much of the rhetoric bears no resemblance to the facts on the ground.
To me, a good starting point would be joint planning between the towns and the county on land use and growth – because each jurisdiction has different assets and resouces to bring to the discussion. And the changing demographics – including our growing senior population – should align to our going foward service and economic models. As Many implied,its going to happen. The question is whether there will be any intention behind it.
Nancy
/ April 27, 2013Scott — Supply alone won’t push down rents and home prices. When developers set rents high, there will likely be someone to pay it; maybe not a single person, couple or family, but certainly several students crammed together to share the rent. If we had community-minded developers who paid attention to providing housing at all price points, those units would fill up, too, and we could preserve some of Chapel Hill’s diversity. But many of the developers who have come before council in recent years are interested only in profit.
I was pleased to see a plan among the Central West developers for an assisted living facility. That developer could make more profit by building a high-rise student ghetto but instead paid attention to what the community needs and what would fit in with the single-family neighborhood. Compare that to Ron Strom’s luxury renovation of the affordable Timber Hollow Apartments, jacking up the rents so that current tenants have to move out and join the commuters from Durham.
Many
/ April 28, 2013Nancy,
What is your definition of “community” in this context? Is it just Chapel Hill proper, or does it include Carrboro? Hillsborough? Durham? Mebane? Just towns or county too? Mine is the same as my definition of “locally owned” and consists of all of the above and likely Saxapahaw, Roxboro, Bynam and Pittsboro as well. The important feature of the definition is having a vested interest in the success of a particular locality more than simply exploiting the growth or success of the local demographic. I am still waiting (but not holding my breath) for Fred Black’s own definition of “locally owned” and how it differs from the one you and I put forth. I do not expect Fred can produce one with any coherent difference.
As I think I have pointed out already, just being community minded isn’t enough either, because history shows that when prices don’t keep up with costs, and owners/investors can’t make a suitable RoI, quality and maintenance suffer. In your example, would you expect the renters to be “community minded” and maintain/repair their own flats and grounds as well? I agree that the difference you point out is there, but I would not be too sure it is due only to Central West’s altruism, but more likely an astute market assessment of a need to be filled and a business model for greater profit over the long term.
I think Scott’s final point about stopping the collective navel gazing and really having a conversation about what businesses we want to attract is important. More to the point; how to make those businesses successful in the context of Chapel Hill and the community at large. How do we privatize services and keep them both responsible and affordable (The polar opposite of OWASA). Doing those things in a smart and organized fashion has the natural effect of enabling and attracting other supporting enterprises and ends up being win-win.
Fred Black
/ April 28, 2013Two points “Many,” one, my definition is not the issue as I didn’t write the pieces. I simply asked how Nancy was using it and she responded. Second, as I said before, I am not going to have conversations with those whose identities I don’t know. If you can’t for whatever reason(s) post under your own name, so be it.
Mark Marcoplos
/ April 28, 2013It’s very satisfying for many (or Many as the case may be) in our community to see their cranky perpspective on Orange County economics be presented with charts and graphs by a real professor, however shallow and inaccurate it is. Michael Jacobs was wrong on enough of his points, that the whole of his thinking is intellectually suspect. Start with the fact that Orange County is less white now than in 1990 and you can see that the professor either strangely just chose African-Americans as his minority bellwether or he can’t find simple facts. Barry Jacobs did a good job in his column today debunking some of the various canards that the professor tossed around in his column. And I’m still trying to figure out the purpose of using a nebulous pejorative like “bourgeois”.
http://www.chapelhillnews.com/2013/04/27/76055/professors-broad-brush-paints.html
Many
/ April 28, 2013Fred, Two points one, you typed “……..because there are several definitions of “locally owned businesses” used in this community and therefore some disagreement on what a “locally owned business” is and what isn’t a “locally owned business.” ” implying you had an opinion on the matter….but if you don’t then why do you care?
two; you ARE having a conversation with “those whose identities [you] don’t know. So be it 🙂
Many
/ April 28, 2013Mr. Marcoplos,
May I call you Mark?
I agree with Barry Jacobs on most of the points he makes, I did notice however, Barry Jacobs did not refute Professor Jacobs points on public safety, water costs, the over reliance on property taxes and the tax burden as it relates to other places in the sate.
I agree we often get the county and the towns muddled in the discussion and when it comes to using statistics to “……reinforce what I already think, or if it’s something unusual”. I am guilty as charged.
I think the most important thing Barry Jacobs points to is the need for “a healthy debate can be had regarding the limits and merits of public spending and government policy”, Two monologues don’t make a dialog however. I expect the onus is on the political leaders to enable and participate in that healthy public debate that they always say they want but never seems to happen.
Mark Marcoplos
/ April 28, 2013Mr. Many,
Sure, you can call me Mark. Or if it makes you more comfortable, you can make up an alias to use when addressing me.
May I call you ? ?
I totally agree on the need for continued discussion & debate of all these aspects of our local economy. This thread is a good example of that. The only improvement I would suggest is that participants not be allowed to hide behind aliases.
In regard to Barry not refuting all of the professor’s points, not only was word count an issue, but the professor sure threw a whole lot of mudballs up against the wall.
The charge that OWASA’s rates are “usurious” is fairly specious and will take an entire essay in itself to rebut. I will say that he’s wrong that a family of four can’t live just fine on 4000 gal./month. The 15,000 gal./month consumption rate that he seems to think should be discounted indicates a totally wasteful household. The elite water-guzzlers that think it’s their right to use four times the amount of water that normal families (maybe even African-American customers for whom this hired gun for the global, corporate banking sector apparently cares about deeply as individuals) use and that the rest of the community should pay for extra infrastructure to support that kind of profligacy cannot surely be surprised when not everyone considers them responsible, valued members of the community.
Bonnie Hauser
/ April 28, 2013Mark – if you heard the entirety of Michael’s presentation, you’d know that Orange County trails the rest of the state in growth in latinos and of course the African American population is shrinking. Not sure how Asians fit in or who Barry’s referring to. For Barry, a skilled writer and politician, to accuse Michael of misleading with statistics – is like the pot calling the kettle black.
Of course Chapel HIll and the County are not the same – and we are all guilty of blurring the two.
And despite lots of discussion about economic development districts (which I wholly support) and development in the towns, businesses aren’t coming here. (Quote Michael – 1 in 128 businesses located in Orange County).
I cringe every time I hear county leaders say they haven’t raised property taxes. Cause they raised sales taxes twice and added a host of new fees. They’ve tried to add two service district taxes which didn’t work – and they are trying again with the new recycling tax. Of course this is all applied to property tax values that are still higher than market values.
I am bullish on the economy in general and hopeful that the worst is behind us. But the evidence suggests that growth is happening around Orange County – and that high costs, taxes and cumbersome zoning will continue to impede local growth. We can help by clarifying who we are and what we want to look like.
Many
/ April 28, 2013Mark,
You may call me “Many”
Firstly:
I hope the good readers here are intelligent enough to evaluate the content of an anonymous writing. People use anonymity for a variety of purposes, admittedly only some of which may be consistent with the public good, At the same time, the audience chooses whether they accord anonymous speech as much value.
Readers may evaluate anonymity along with its message, as long as they are permitted to read that message in the first place. Then, once they have done so, it is for them to decide what is “responsible,” what is valuable, and what is truth.
The right to speak anonymously online is protected, in the United States, by the First Amendment. This law restrict the ability of the government and civil litigants to obtain the identity of anonymous speakers. The First Amendment says that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”. This protection has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court to protect the right to speak anonymously both on and offline. “Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority” without which public discourse would certainly suffer. See John Doe #1 vs. Cahill.
At the end of the day, the decision to remain anonymous is an editorial judgment, which makes choosing to omit one’s name the same as choosing to omit an opposing viewpoint or facts.
Besides all that, I like to irritate Fred 🙂
Secondly;
Barry Jacobs was just as selective with the facts as Professor Jacobs, Orange county is behind the rest of that state in ethnic diversity, more because of economics than anything else and that is a fact.
Orange county has not raised property taxes because of political reasons, not because of fiscal responsibility.
Pouring more money into schools has no correlation with test scores or quality education, unless of course the money reduces class size and we all know that we spend far too much on administration and facilities. http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/study-finds-no-relationship-between-ed-spending-and-results/
The fact about schools and test scores is that there is a direct correlation to household income. I don’t think the politicians can take credit for that, unless you count driving low income families out.
Despite not standing for public election, Owasa has chosen to restrict the water resources to Chapel Hill – Carrboro. They have taken by eminent domain and are a major factor in stunting development in Orange County. In my book they are the local equivalent of your frequent target; the corporate banking sector.
I wonder if you definition of “wasteful” and “normal” stand up to scrutiny? The EPA says “average” is 400 GPD for a family of four which is ~ 12000 GPM
http://www.epa.gov/region9/waterinfrastructure/residences.html
Agreed 15,000 GPM is more, but hardly _four_times_ the “average” eh?
I don’t disagree that we should all be less wasteful, but having that shoved down our collective throats by an unelected “mommy and daddy” water authority is not a good solution either.
Thirdly;
Branding someone a “hired gun for the global, corporate banking sector” is hardly the basis for discourse, or resulting solutions.