Wilmington Politics: 2008

Friday, November 7, 2008

The Election Results in New Hanover County

I'm specifying New Hanover here so we can see how we voted in the national and statewide elections. My information comes from the Star News . I have added comments as to the actual winners in parentheses and they are as follows:

New Hanover County Races

President

43 of 43 precincts reporting

McCain/Palin 50,004 50.2%

Obama/Biden (Winner-D)
48,588 48.8%

Barr/Root 558 0.6%

WRITE-IN 401 0.4%

U.S. Senate

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Kay Hagan (Winner-D)
52,403 53.5%

Elizabeth Dole 41,595 42.5%

Christopher Cole 3,856 3.9%

WRITE-IN 52 0.1%

U.S. House District 7

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Mike McIntyre (Winner-D)
63,780 66.0%

Will Breazeale 32,793 34.0%

Governor

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Bev Perdue (Winner-D)
48,250 49.5%

Pat McCrory 45,164 46.3%

Michael C. Munger 4,089 4.2%

Lieutenant Governor

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Robert Pittenger 45,661 48.1%

Walter H. Dalton (Winner-D)
44,792 47.2%

Phillip Rhodes 4,489 4.7%

Attorney General

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Roy Cooper (Winner-D)
55,221 58.8%

Bob Crumley 38,645 41.2%

Auditor

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Leslie Merritt 46,024 50.6%

Beth A. Wood (Winner-D)
45,011 49.4%

Commissioner of Agriculture

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Steve Troxler (Winner-R)
48,979 53.6%

Ronnie Ansley 42,353 46.4%

Commissioner of Insurance

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Wayne Goodwin (Winner-D)
43,837 47.8%

John Odom 42,519 46.4%

Mark McMains 5,281 5.8%

WRITE-IN 92 0.1%

Commissioner of Labor

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Cherie Berry (Winner-R)
48,748 53.3%

Mary Fant Donnan 42,648 46.7%

Secretary of State

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Elaine F. Marshall (Winner-D)
49,011 53.4%

Jack Sawyer 42,707 46.6%

Superintendent of Public Instruction

43 of 43 precincts reporting

June St. Clair Atkinson (Winner-D)
46,720 51.2%

Richard Morgan 44,548 48.8%

Treasurer

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Janet Cowell (Winner-D)
45,542 50.0%

Bill Daughtridge 45,540 50.0%

N.C. Senate District 9

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Julia Boseman (Winner-D)
49,980 51.6%

Michael Lee 46,789 48.4%

N.C. House District 16

17 of 17 precincts reporting

Carolyn Justice 22,756 100.0%

N.C. House District 18

13 of 13 precincts reporting

Sandra Spaulding Hughes (Winner-D)
14,641 72.6%

George J. Swart 5,523 27.4%

N.C. House District 19

19 of 19 precincts reporting

Danny McComas 31,110 100.0%

County Commissioner

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Jonathan Barfield, Jr. (Winner-D)
51,253 24.6%

Jason R. Thompson (Winner-R)
46,763 22.4%

Ted Davis, Jr. (Winner-R)
46,325 22.2%

Bill Kopp 45,044 21.6%

Brian Matthew Berger 19,329 9.3%

Register of Deeds

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Jennifer S. Hardison (Winner-D)
47,689 52.0%

Tammy T. Beasley 43,998 48.0%

Board of Education

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Dorothy S. DeShields (Winner-D)
44,903 17.6%

Elizabeth Redenbaugh (Winner-R)
43,987 17.2%

Jeannette S. Nichols (Winner-R)
43,672 17.1%

Jan Brewington 42,417 16.6%

Pat Chappell 41,731 16.3%

David G. Martin 38,623 15.1%

Supreme Court Associate Justice (Edmunds Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Robert H. (Bob) Edmunds, Jr. (Winner-R)
35,816 52.8%

Suzanne Reynolds 31,963 47.2%

Court of Appeals Judge (Martin Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

John C. Martin
53,987 100.0%

Court of Appeals Judge (Wynn Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

James A. (Jim) Wynn (Winner-D)
33,054 50.9%

Jewel Ann Farlow 31,897 49.1%

Court of Appeals Judge (Tyson Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Sam J. Ervin, IV (Winner-D)
36,254 56.1%

Kristin Ruth 28,380 43.9%

Court of Appeals Judge (McCullough Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Cheri Beasley (Winner-D)
36,539 55.9%

Doug McCullough 28,855 44.1%

Court of Appeals Judge (Stephens Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Linda Stephens (Winner-D)
36,348 56.5%

Dan Barrett 27,998 43.5%

Court of Appeals Judge (Arrowood Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Robert N. (Bob) Hunter, Jr. (Winner-R)
33,921 54.2%

John S. Arrowood 28,705 45.8%

Superior Court Judge District 5A

14 of 14 precincts reporting

Phyllis Gorham 16,541 100.0%

District Court Judge District 5 (Carroll Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

John J. Carroll, III 57,342 100.0%

District Court Judge District 5 (Corpening Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

J. H. Corpening, II 52,065 100.0%

District Court Judge District 5 (Criner Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Sandra Ray Criner (Winner-R)
45,475 65.3%

Joy K. Alford-Brand 24,177 34.7%

District Court Judge District 5 (Davis Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Richard Russell Davis 52,010 100.0%

District Court Judge District 5 (Noecker Seat)

43 of 43 precincts reporting

Jeffrey E. Noecker 47,440 100.0%

Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor

43 of 43 precincts reporting

David Thomas (Winner-Incumbent)
36,177 61.5%

David Dowdy 21,898 37.3%

WRITE-IN 705 1.2%

Cape Fear Community College Bond

43 of 43 precincts reporting

YES (Winner)
54,408 62.0%

NO 33,346 38.0%

What does this mean??? Well, we still kept one of the incumbents as County Commissioner, but the one that seemed to be dead set and unmovable from his previous votes that have caused outrage in our community lost, Bill Kopp. I think that this was probably an upset for him and rather unexpected. Barfield, Thompson and Davis (the other incumbent) are now moving on to the County Commissioner seats. Hopefully this will bring some more balance, and maybe next time the Demecrats could give us more options because it looks as though they could have blown out all the Republican contenders, especially with all the controversy.

The Democratic incumbent for Board of Education stayed as did the Republican incumbent, but the third seat was taken by a Republican newbie. Obviously, when looking through the results it becomes obvious that a large majority of New Hanover citizens voted on the issues rather than straight ticket. We have a huge mix of Democrats and Republicans winning and although some of the Republicans who won in New Hanover did not win state or nationwide you can certainly see the eclectic mix here. Overall Democrats had a good election nationally, statewide, and county wide.

I will remain active in our county's politics and hopefully have regular updates. It may be awhile since things will die down for a little while. I will also continue my updates on Titan and NCFOM's push to legalize CPMs.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

CONA Debate Forum: Part II

Well, it took me long enough. I will start this by saying that many of the questions in the debate have been asked of the candidates before and are answered below. So with this particular blog I'm going to go over my impression of the candidates and a few questions that may not have been covered before.

Board of Education

In the first debate were the candidates for the Board of Education, as a reminder the candidates are Brewington, Chappell, De Shields (Incumbent), Nichols (Incumbent) and Redenbaugh. It seems that the introduction of two new magnet schools is a source of some controversy. Redenbaugh and De Shields both talked about this topic and they both seemed to feel that this wasn't done properly, and that not enough research was done. De Shields added that when the parents and teachers don't buy in then magnet schools don't do well and the speed at which this decision was made did not allow time for this process. All of the candidates agree that Creationism is best left out of our Science programs. One surprise was when Nichols abstained from answering whether neighborhood schools lack racial diversity. Redenbaugh also abstained from answering whether she felt that vouchers would be a good option for our area.

Overall the candidates that I felt made the best impression were Brewington, De Shields, and Redenbaugh. Chappell was not asked many questions during the audience Q&A period, but some of her answers to the panel questions left me a little hesitant. Nichols seems to be of the "old guard" and her abstaining from answer the previously mentioned question left the audience and other candidates to believe that she felt that racial diversity in neighborhood schools is not much of an issue or that she believes that racial diversity is not important. Since we aren't in her mind we can't be sure but it certainly got a few groans all over the auditorium.

District 18 NC House of Representatives

The next debate was between Hughes (Incumbent) and Swart for the NC House of Representatives. Hughes came to the debate prepared to discuss her acomplishments in the short year that she has been a Representative, unfortunately she was not prepared for the attacks that Swart brought with him and this showed in some of her answers and responses to Swarts answers.

When asked about the Districting lines of Pender, Hughes stated that this was a matter for the US Supreme Court to hash out at this point and trusted a fair answer and Swart felt that the lines were unconstitutional and that Pender should be one district with NH being split into two districts.

On the subject of Forced Annexation Swart felt that annexation was being used to bring more tax dollars in rather than to provide services, he also stated rather than cutting programs we should look into getting rid of things like the controversial convention center. Hughes felt that without Annexation that city residents pay more for services that everyone uses and that this should be made more fair.

On the subject of Titan moving to our area, Hughes was against Titan all together and did not feel (after having spoke with the Corp of Engineers) that Titan would be able to obtain the necessary certifications. Swart felt that rather than giving tax incentives to one corporation to come into our area that the Corporate tax rate should be lowered altogether allowing any Corporation that wanted to move in to do so.

Hughes also answered that she felt that corruption of the General Assembly has been taken care of, citing that the House moved to thank the Speaker for his hard work in keeping things together so well, she also supports televising the General Assembly meetings.

Things got a little heated when Hughes asked Swart what kind of experience did he have and he said "Nearly as much as you". Hughes was on City Council before being put into her new position. I can't find where Swart has ever served a political office before.

I generally support Hughes and the vitriole with which Swart attacked and the fact that he has been on TV discussing how county Demecrats vote based on skin color I have to say that my impression of him at this point is quite low. Not to mention that my personal stances are very different than his.

New Hanover County Commissioners

This debate was between candidates Barfield, Berger, Davis (Incumbent), Kopp (Incumbent), and Thompson (City Council member). Obviously this debate centered a lot on Titan and the incentives that were promised by County Commissioner. Berger and Barfield came out as completely against Titan, with Berger even stating that a new Count Commissioner Board needed to pull out of this promise even if it would be problematic stating that it is a moral imperative. Kopp defended the incentive stating that we must offer incentives to get Corporations to move to the area with Davis saying that he would not take back his votefor the incentive if given another chance. Thompson is against incentives as a general rule and feels that this was a bad deal and that the public should have had a chance to give input before the decision was made.

Titan was not the only subject, though. When discussing the consolidation of services, Thompson stated that the concept was good but that it was being poorly managed giving a "C" grade to the process, he was the only candidate that did not feel that the consolidation was poorly planned. Berger was against consolidation of services.

On the subject of the privatization of Wave Transit, Davis was the only candidate that did not feel it was ill-conceived.

A county re-evaluation of Property taxes was also part of the lightening round with Davis and Kopp against the idea and Barfield, Berger, and Thompson for the re-evaluation.

The ABC Board Expansion also came up with Barfield, Berger, and Thompson against this, Davis for it and Kopp abstaining.

The CFCC Bond was generally supported by everyone except Berger.

Overall, I believe the three candidates that were not already on the board are the best candidates (Barfield, Berger, and Thompson). Davis and Kopp made this decision for me quite easy with many of their answers even before the debate, but even more obvious during this debate.

NC Senate

This debate was quite lively between Boseman and Lee. There were a lot of supporters from both sides and many questions from the audience were obviously skewed in favor of or opposition to one candidate or the other.

Titan came up with Boseman supporting incentives as a general rule, but opposed to Titan. She propsed that legislation should be put in to restrict polluting companies from moving into areas that would be that close to schools and wet lands. Lee sees that incentives are necessary but that there needs to be objective criteria used, he also favors lowering Corporate Taxes. Which leads to the subject of taxes, Boseman pointed out that she has already voted (and it was passed) to lower corporate taxes and that our base in NC has increased overall and that is how we get more tax dollars and keep a balanced budget.

When discussing how to keep spending down, Boseman says that a freeze on hiring, freeze on government travel, and eliminating jobs that have gone more than 6 months without being filled. Lee says that he will "stand up and say stop" when projects are being put in the budget that he doesn't support (this seems naive to me since politics is a system of give and take, and may lead to him being ineffective for our area).

When discussing UNCW and State Universities, Boseman states that our schools are a top value and has increased funding, including a new nursing school at UNCW. Lee says that Financial Aid will remain Federally backed and that college should be made more affordable for NC families. Boseman also answered that in our public education system that standardized testing is necessary but needs to shift and we need to be more creative in how this is done.

Boseman is generally regarded as an advocate in the Senate for Domestic Violence legislation. When Lee was questioned he stated that a better system of enforcement of restraining orders was needed statewide.

I hope that this information was helpful. I believe I've handled all of the elected positions in New Hanover county other than the Register of Deeds. Unfortunately, I'm having some problem determining much of a difference between the two candidates and will need to work a little harder. I may be left at just presenting their history and hope that is of some help.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Judicial Races

I received an email from an acquaintance explaining their inside view of the judicial races that will appear on our ballots. This will be an anonymous post, but I would like the readers here to know that this person has been a lawyer in our community for over 20 years in the state and federal trials & appellate courts, this includes work in the US Supreme Court.

The following is an excerpt from the email explaining some opinion on the races.

I'm going to comment only on those candidates that I know professionally and/or who I've appeared before. Party affiliation is irrelevant to me, as it is supposed to be for everyone; judges in NC run as non-partisan. Regretfully, each major party runs its own campaign to promote their candidates solely on party lines. That is too bad, because whether a person is a Republican or a Democrat does not ensure that person is qualified. Hopefully, the day will soon come when we use some other means of choosing our judges other than by election.

My recommendations:

Bob Edmunds, Candidate for re-election to the NC Supreme Court. I've known Bob for years and his credentials are stellar. I've lost count of the number of times I've appeared in front of Justice Edmunds (and the other justices) at the NC Supreme Court. He is professional and always courteous to the attorneys appearing before the Court. He is, by far, one of the most intelligent, knowledgeable, and fair justices I've encountered. I strongly endorse him for re-election to the NC Supreme Court.

James Wynn, Candidate for re-election to the NC Court of Appeals. In my opinion, but for his race, James Wynn would be sitting on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals or would have remained Chief Justice of the NC Supreme Court. Nonetheless, we are very fortunate to have him on our Court of Appeals. He is incredibly intelligent and knowledgeable, and one of the best jurists ever to sit on any of our courts. He has a brilliant analytical brain and even when he rules against someone, the logic is so clear, one almost agrees with him! I've appeared before him at both the NC Supreme Court, where he sat for a short time, and at the NC Court of Appeals. He is one of the best and I highly endorse him for the NC Court of Appeals.

Linda Stephens, candidate for re-election to the NC Court of Appeals. Judge Stephens served many years as a District Court Judge in Raleigh. Her performance on the Court of Appeals has been absolutely stellar. She is brilliant, hard-working, and treats all that come before her quite professionally. (I assure you this has not always been the case with all the judges, whether at the trial court level, the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court.) I highly endorse her for re-election to the Court of Appeals.

Sam Ervin, IV, candidate for the NC Court of Appeals. I've known 'Jimmy' for years and years when he used to do death penalty work. He is from Morganton, NC and has an impeccable reputation for working hard and for his brilliant mind. When he was still in private practice, Jimmy would always be willing to help analyze the law or the facts in any death penalty case that any attorney needed help with. He is very intelligent and I have no doubt will do an excellent job on the Court of Appeals. I highly recommend him.

District Court Judge, New Hanover County.

Sandra Ray Criner, candidate for re-election to District Court Judge. I've known Sandra Criner since she graduated law school and started working in the District Attorney's office here in Wilmington. We were on opposite sides in many cases and she was always prepared and always treated defense counsel with the utmost courtesy. She is one of the most hard working and one of the smartest judges we have. As she did when she was an assistant District Attorney, she continues to treat all who her enter her courtroom---attorneys, defendants, and witnesses--with courtesy and respect. Her rulings are grounded in law and she is a fair jurist. She is by far the most qualified candidate for this seat.

This is probably the best information that I have received on these particular races wince it is succinct and comes from a source that I trust.

I would however like to add some information that I have found on Sandra Criner's opponent at this time. He opponent is Joy Alford-Brand who is a Democrat and has been a practicing attorney for 9 years, 3 years as an ADA and currently the Felony Domestic Violence Prosecutor. According to her web-site:

I stand for:
· Safe families and neighborhoods
When the law is applied accurately and efficiently, criminals have fewer opportunities to commit more crimes. That means the streets we drive on are safer for our children, friends, families and loved ones. When we address crimes of domestic violence in our neighborhoods that means the cycle will be broken and our children will be protected. Safer families equal safer neighborhoods.

· Fair and prompt Justice for all
The role of a District Court Judge is to seek justice. They must hear each case that comes before them and decide whether or not the Defendant is guilty or innocent. They must be fair and just when deciding whether a Defendant is guilty or innocent. If the Defendant is found guilty or pleads guilty, the Judge must sentence that Defendant fairly and accurately. The sentence must match the crime and everyone must be treated equally.

· Better use of resources and tax dollars
Justice delayed is justice denied. We have a limited amount of resources in our court system to handle 70,000 cases that are charged each year. We need to make the best use of those resources which means hearing cases when they are scheduled to be heard. It also means making sure that Defendants are held accountable for not coming to court. Finally, it means working a full day for a full day’s pay. When the system is functioning correctly and efficiently, victims have a better chance to be heard and given justice.

· Respect.
Our District Courtrooms are courts of law that should be respected. Those of us who are elected should have respect for our legal system, the law, and all individuals who appear before us whether they be defendant, victim, defense attorney or prosecutor. I will treat everyone who appears before me with respect.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

CONA Debate Forum

I went to the 3 hour debate for our local candidates last night. I took lots of notes and will get back about those at a later time. I would like to, however, point out that this is the second debate that has taken place during a presidential debate. This seems odd at best, and could be difficult for people to motivate themselves to go. We have DVR and recorded the presidential debate (which we stayed up until midnight watching). Apparently the Young Republicans Club showed up for the debate to support Michael Lee for State Senate (wearing shirts and stickers), so visually it looked as though there were more Lee supporters than anything else, but the round of applause that Julia Boseman elicited showed that she had many supporters of her own in the room. This final of the four debates proved to be the most lively. Many of the questions covered last night have already been covered on my blog so I will post another entry later giving updates as well as my general feeling.

This is just an explanation and summary of the night's events. The debates were televised and will be rebroadcast repeatedly on our government channel. For the Board of Education and the County Commissioner debates a panel started by asking each candidate a question for two rounds, there were then questions from the floor, and then a lightening round in which the candidates were supposed to answer with one word (yes, no, undecided or abstain). This was actually adhered to fairly well. For the State Senate and State House candidates the first two rounds were the same with the third round being that the two candidates asked each other questions. The debate rules were adhered to very well and overall the tenor was very fair. I hope that everyone looks for the rebroadcast on television and watches, especially the State Senate and County Commissioner debates.

I will be back....

CONA Debate Forum

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Ballot

This year's ballot is going to be long and so here I am posting what our options are going to be to give a heads up. Since early voting starts this Friday I want to have this out there as soon as possible, since I won't be able to get a blog out on all the races by Friday. I am going to continue to blog on each race within the state until either the general elections occurs, or I somehow make it through them all. I'm starting with the lesser known local races for now and move out to the broader state elections. Here is what the actual ballot will look like.

2008 General Election Candidates

US PRESIDENT
Barack Obama DEM

John McCain REP

Bob Barr LIB

US SENATE
Kay Hagan DEM

Elizabeth Dole REP

Christopher Cole LIB

US CONGRESS DISTRICT 07
Mike McIntyre DEM

Will Breazeale REP

GOVERNOR
Bev Perdue DEM

Pat McCrory REP

Michael C. Munger LIB

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
Walter H. Dalton DEM

Robert Pittenger REP

Phillip Rhodes LIB

ATTORNEY GENERAL
Roy Cooper DEM

Bob Crumley REP

AUDITOR
Beth A. Wood DEM

Leslie Merritt REP

COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE
Ronnie Ansley DEM

Steve Troxler REP

COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE
Wayne Goodwin DEM

John Odom REP

Mark McMains LIB

COMMISSIONER OF LABOR
Cherie Berry REP

Mary Fant Donnan DEM

SECRETARY OF STATE
Elaine F. Marshall DEM

Jack Sawyer REP

SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
June St. Clair Atkinson DEM

Richard Morgan REP

TREASURER
Janet Cowell DEM

Bill Daughtridge REP

SUPREME COURT ASSOCIATE JUSTICE (EDMUNDS)
Robert H. (Bob) Edmunds, Jr. REP

Suzanne Reynolds DEM

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (ARROWOOD)
John S. Arrowood DEM

Robert N. (Bob) Hunter, Jr. REP

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (MARTIN)
John C. Martin DEM

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (MCCULLOUGH)
Cheri Beasley DEM

Doug McCullough REP

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (STEPHENS)
Dan Barrett REP

Linda Stephens DEM

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (TYSON)
Sam J. Ervin, IV DEM

Kristin Ruth DEM

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (WYNN)
Jewel Ann Farlow REP

James A. (Jim) Wynn DEM

SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05A
Phyllis Gorham DEM

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (CARROLL)
John J. Carroll, III REP

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (CORPENING)
J. H. Corpening, II DEM

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (CRINER)
Joy K. Alford-Brand DEM

Sandra Ray Criner REP

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (DAVIS)
Richard Russell Davis

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (NOECKER)
Jeffrey E. Noecker

NC Senate- District 9
Julia Boseman DEM - Incumbent

Micheal Lee REP

NC House - District 19
Danny McComas REP - Incumbent

NC House - District 18
Sandra Spaulding Hughes DEM - Incumbent (appointed)

George J. Swart REP

NC House -District 16
Carolyn Justice REP

Register Of Deeds
Jennifer S. Hardison DEM

Tammy T. Beasley REP

County Commissioner (Choose up to three)
Jonathan Barfield, Jr. DEM

Ted Davis, Jr. REP - Incumbent

Bill Kopp REP - Incumbent

Jason R. Thompson REP

Brian Matthew Berger LIB

Board of Education (Choose three)
Jan Brewington DEM

Pat Chappell DEM

Dorothy DeShields DEM - Incumbent

David G. Martin REP

Jeannette S. Nichols REP - Incumbent

Elizabeth Redenbaugh REP

Soil-Water Conservation District Supervisor; Non-Partisan
David Dowdy

David Thomas Incumbent

Friday, October 3, 2008

NC Senate Debate

Last night NC Senator Julia Boseman and challenger Michael Lee had a debate held at the WHQR office. Yes, I'm sure most of us were glued to the VP debate between Palin and Biden last night, as was I, but there were other political goings on last night as well. Most of the information is stuff we've gone over before. But I'll go over it quickly again.

Titan:

Boseman came out unequivocally against Titan saying, “I am absolutely opposed to the incentives to Titan. …I think Titan is wrong for New Hanover County, for Castle Hayne.”

Lee on the other hand "said he is generally against incentives but that the state has laws and regulations to protect the public from harmful environmental impacts. He didn’t say whether he supports the incentives."

The thing is that while our state and federal government have laws to protect it's citizens, these laws have been stripped down over the past 7 years and they aren't as strang as they were a decade ago. Also, how can we say "well, we still have a little pollution we're allowed to dump so let's go ahead and let another corporation do that to us"? We already have a fragile ecosystem in the Cape Fear region, and we aren't helping ourselves with all the sewer spills over the past couple of years. We do NOT need to add more pollution to the area and that's the bottom line. There is a school that is currently being built a couple of miles from the proposed site. Are we going to close the school down if parents refuse to send their kids there? How are we going to protect those kids with coal burning stacks just down the road from them, by disallowing recess and PE?

OK, onward to off-shore drilling:

Senator Boseman is completely against off shore drilling. The Star News reports:

Boseman said the nation should consider drilling where an abundance of oil exists, but not off the coast of North Carolina.
“All of the research I’ve seen is there is very little oil out there,” she said.

The fact is that she's right. This is a graph by the US Energy Information Administration.

This is a projection of where our oil supply will come from over the next 20 years if we drill off-shore. As you can see we will actually continue to INCREASE our foreign oil consumption. While we are adding 200,000 barrels of oil a day we USE over 15 MILLION barrels of oil a day.

Lee, however, fully supports off shore oil drilling.

While the technology is better than in previous years, oil spills DO continue to happen and in an hurricane plagued area like ares, the likelihood of a spill increases. We are a resort community and we just can't afford the cost of a potentially oil filled shore line for so little gain. Also, if an oil spill WERE to occur we couldn't even count on being able to sue the offender and getting them to clean up their own mess, as the recent Supreme Court case Exxon vs Baker shows.

How about other energy problems in the state:

Lee stated that the gas tax in NC needs to be lowered. While I tend to agree that we have a high gas tax, lowering it will only cut out a couple of pennies a gallon which would be unnoticeable. Senator Boseman replied "that if the state lowered the gas tax, it would have to look to local governments to pay for roads, and that could lead to property tax hikes." And let's face it, we would certainly notice a property tax hike. Anyways, Republican should like the gas tax, it keeps our property tax low and while only people who own their property pay the property tax, EVERYONE pays the gas tax.

On to taxes and spending:

Asked for three things they would do to lower taxes, Lee said he would look at lowering corporate and individual tax rates and examine state spending.
Boseman suggested a hiring freeze, except for essential positions, including teachers, and cutting out state travel.

25% of corporations in the US pay no taxes at all and Lee wants to add more to that category. Corporations could have a 10% tax increase and still pay less than they did under Reagan. In a time when state and federal incomes are low and expenditures are rising, we need to make sure that everyone pays their fair share, and that includes corporations.

Lee also attacked several expenditures of late. One thing he keeps picking on is money spent at the NC Zoo for a polar bear exhibition. As someone with a Zoology degree who at one time did behavioral research as well as worked with animal preservation organizations, I find it appalling that we would looking to cut funding for our local zoo. Zoos educate the public as well as provide much needed research on a variety of things such as ecology, animal husbandry, and global climate change. We need to keep our animals in humane conditions as well as highlight certain animals over time, therefore changing the focus and drawing in more public viewing and raising more money. Our zoo is a state owned zoo and to cut funding to it is a reprehensible view, in my opinion. He also brought up other museum expenditures, that in light of the total budget are just a tiny expenditure. Somehow, it looks as if Mr. Lee dislikes education outlets for the public.

Over the past few months Boseman has been attacked for many private problems. She smoked pot (so what), she had a foreclosure which many people are getting pinched with at this time, and she had an ugly seperation with her partner. However, she has been a great Senator, helping to protect our children and our families by introducing and passing bills that made it more difficult for predators to get back on the streets, she has helped women that are victims of domestic violence, she has increased our school funding, and she has helped to bring more HIGH-TECH jobs here to the Cape Fear area. She has been effective and fair and having tried to discuss a personal issue and bill that I want passed I can tell you that she listens without judgement and explores the issue to it's fullest.

Monday, September 29, 2008

NC Senate

The NC Senate seat is in a hotly contested battle between Democratic Incumbent Julia Boseman and Republican challenger Michael Lee. I have blogged about Senator Boseman, so my opinions on her senatorial record are easily viewed below. Again, I will use the League of Women Voters questionnaire answers form the bulk of this blog. I will organize by question and make my own comments below the two candidates statement on the issues.

Question #1: What is your position on drilling off the shore of NC for oil and why?

Boseman:

Overnight, offshore drilling has become a hotly contested issue. Congress appears to be willing to include some offshore drilling in a compromise national energy plan. As a Senator that represents over 330 square miles of the North Carolina Coastline, I am concerned that a shift in our national energy policy towards offshore drilling could place a great burden on our region's environmental and economic resources. However, I understand the need to find a way to lower gas prices for our families. As your Senator, I voted for legislation that capped the North Carolina gas tax, and legislation that provides energy assistance for low-income residents. I've also supported tax credits for alternative energies that will give North Carolinians more fuel choices in the future and recruit new industry to the state. I have made it a priority to focus on reducing our dependence on foreign oil by encouraging efficiency and alternative energies. We enacted landmark clean energy efficiency standards to reduce the burden on foreign oil, help cut pollution, and lower greenhouse gases. We created the bio-fuels Energy Independence Act that provides consumers who buy hybrid cars and energy-efficient home appliances tax credits for their purchases. This measure also gives consumers relief from rising gas prices by bringing alternative fuels to North Carolina through tax credits for manufacturers to produce biodiesel.

Lee:

In response to fast rising energy prices and an increasing dependence on foreign oil, North Carolina should strongly consider allowing offshore drilling for natural resources. However, we must regulate this industry so as to protect our coastal communities and beaches. The harvesting technology has developed in such a manner so as to assure protection of our vast and valuable environmental habitats and resources located here on the coast of North Carolina. In addition, if we choose to explore these resources, a portion of the royalty revenues (projected by some to be $23 billion over the next 40 years) from such offshore drilling must be set aside in a trust fund for perpetual beach re-nourishment, dredging and water quality monitoring by the UNCW Marine Sciences Department. State and Federal funds for beach re-nourishment and dredging are dwindling with each year that passes. Offshore drilling royalties may prove to be our best answer for preserving the valuable resources in our area, while contributing to a decline in oil prices and the United State dependence on foreign oil.

My opinion is that off-shore drilling is a very risky thing for our tourist dependent area with very little payoff. We will see NO return for a minimum of 10 years and there is no guarantee that oil companies will find anything that they want to tap anyways.

Question #2: While the State spends approximately 60% of its budget on education, the system is not meeting the expectations of state citizens. What do you think can be done to address this situation?

Boseman:

The problems that face our education system are comprehensive and require comprehensive solutions. This session, we raised teacher's salaries, lowered class sizes and funded drop-out prevention programs. I would like to see our recent efforts to put more emphasis on technology and vocational training programs to continue so our workforce can compete in a global world. Pre-kindergarten education has been identified as a crucial period for educational development and more should be done to support these programs. This year we expanded More at Four pre-kindergarten education by $170 million to serve 35,000 additional at risk children.

Lee:

First, let's look at just some of the ways our State is failing our children by reviewing certain key statistics: Approximately 1/3 of our public school students in North Carolina do not graduate from school on time (this statistic is even more dismal when looking at economically disadvantaged students); almost 1/3 of our elementary and middle school students are performing below grade level expectations in basic subjects such as math and reading; less than ½ of our schools in North Carolina are meeting Adequate Yearly Progress ("AYP") standards for No Child Left Behind (74% of schools nationally are meeting AYP); and the list of failures goes on from there. We need to completely reform our public education system in North Carolina. While there are many issues we must address, some immediate measures that we need to take are: (i) find ways to foster better communication between principals, teachers and parents, (ii) institute a new system for compensating our teachers so that good teachers are paid more, (iii) develop a system to utilize teachers with a wealth of experience but who need to move outside of the classroom for whatever reason, (iv) explore options to give parents more choice in the education of their children (whether through charter schools or other innovative programs), (v) make a commitment to the development of vocational and technical programs, (vi) work with the business community to develop true school to career pathways, (vii) raise expectations and direct resources to assist students, teachers and principals to excel, and (viii) make teachers, principals and schools accountable for the success of their students and not merely how well they test. We, as a State, need to give our children, teachers, and principals the tools to succeed in this ever changing education environment. In order to do this, we need to bring together educational professionals to create an educational system that will be able to prepare our children to meet 21st century challenges. The Governor and General Assembly must know that our children, our State, and generations to come depend on our success in this reform.

I think most agree on what the problems are in this area. My biggest problem has nothing to do with the state, but the Federally mandated No Child Left Behind (or as many of my friends and I call it, All Children Left Behind). However, when we add more tax cuts, more loopholes that allow corporations to wiggle out of paying their fair share, then our children are the first to feel the sting at school.

Question #3: What should be the role of the state in developing fast (clean and efficient) rail transportation to and from the Eastern part of the state and in the development of localized fast rail systems in the larger cities?

Boseman:

Public transportation and rail must factor into our nation's future energy plan and transportation infrastructure. The state should encourage the development of green industries while our nation moves away from foreign oil.

Lee:

Our cargo rail transportation has been utilized by industry for many, many years and other than regulatory oversight as is currently provided, the State should not be involved. However, passenger rail service will likely not be accomplished without significant involvement by the State since the current transportation habits of North Carolinians do not support it from a free market perspective. While light rail needs to be explored, my primary focus when elected to the North Carolina Senate will be rehabilitating our current transportation system and infrastructure.

I'm not really sure anyone truly understands this question, including me. I agree with both candidates, but I'm not sure they are answering the same question.

Question #4: What so you see as the major problem in the efficient working of the General Assembly?

Boseman:

Citizen involvement and the attention of the public is vital to making the General Assembly work efficiently towards the needs of its people. There have been great advances in transparency in making nearly all of the General Assembly's information available through the Internet. New methods of making the entire legislative process more transparent and available to everyday citizens should be pursued.

Lee:

Integrity and honesty have eroded over the years as to some of those who serve in our North Carolina Senate. Unfortunately, one party control of our North Carolina Senate for over 100 years has led to repeated violations of our public trust, a focus on re-election versus service to our community, and the complete breakdown of a fair democratic process. I think Senator Smith summed it up in his book, "A Little Extra Effort", in a concise way so I will quote the same:
"Many of my key bills + The Taxpayer Protection Act, Defense of Marriage Act and Protection of Private Property Act + were sent straight to the Ways and Means Committee, which never meets. My amendments were voted down in committee or on the floor. I had the power to speak during session, but the majority voted based on their floor leader's signals. My dream of contributing to the public space was unfulfilled. The Democrats totally dominated the Senate. Their rules allowed them to block any amendment or bill we wanted to bring up."
(Also Senator Smith:) "In 2005, my Republican colleague, Neal Hunt, introduced legislation to require the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in school classrooms. His bell was left on the cutting room floor. An almost identical bill was later introduced by a Democratic senator from a swing district in Wilmington. Neal's idea became her bill. Her bill became law, and the law became a campaign ad that helped ensure her reelection."
Since the publication of Senator Smith's book, matters have gotten worse in the North Carolina Senate. Senator Smith at least had the power to speak during the legislative session on bills up for a vote. In the last legislative session, the Democratic leadership did not allow any debate on the budget and drastically limited debate on other bills. This problem is not about Democrats or Republicans. It is about one party in control of our State Government and doing everything within its power to retain that control. This is the greatest challenge our State faces as we attempt to move forward with true reforms in education, transportation, the tax and spend policy of our government and many other very important initiatives.

I can understand Mr. Lee's point here, but more partisanship isn't going to help. There are definitely some members who have been in our state congress for far too long, but isn't that really up to their constituents to decide. I know that RC Soles has been in congress for 40 years, but his opponent is so wrong on the issues that Soles should be allowed to continue his reign. More transparency and more involvement would pressure those already in our legislature to do the right things.

Question #5: Please list your top three legislative priorities.

Boseman:

1. Continuing our efforts to improve our education system so that we can better compete in the world economy.
2. Focusing on the specific needs and opportunities of New Hanover County such as funding for the Oyster Hatchery at UNCW, the ports, and other local industries.
3. Protecting the middle and lower classes against rising health care costs, energy prices, and a stalled economy.

Lee:

Education reform to allow our children to thrive and compete in an ever changing economy.

Economic growth of our State (including (i) measures directed at retaining existing industry and attracting new ones, (ii) addressing the need for accessible and affordable health care, and (iii) reforming the tax and spend policy of our State Government).

Transportation reform so that our roads and bridges are safe for North

Well, that's not very helpful. Those are the same answers. Oh well, the info is here, make up your own mind.

NC House; District 18

This is my district, so I will pay special note to this one. The NC House seat was held by the controversial Representative Wright, when he had to resign over scandal, Sandra Spaulding Hughes was appointed to take over his post. She is being challenged by George R Swart. As before, I am taking from the League of Women Voters questionnaire and reorganizing by question as opposed to by person. This time I will comment after posting Hughes', and Swart's statement.

Question #1: What is your position on drilling off the shore of NC for oil and why?

Hughes:

I would not rule off shore drilling out as a means to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We must be particularly careful because historically the east coast of North Carolina has experienced numerous destructive hurricanes. The potential damage that a hurricane could cause to off shore drilling operations may negatively impact the environment and coastal economy. We must carefully evaluate the real economic benefits against possible environmental impact. Oil companies should be encouraged to fully utilize land already designated for drilling while seeking energy alternatives.
The reason I caution restraint in off shore drilling is that our coastal environment is "the golden egg" that fuels our economy. One major oil spill could ruin our coastal economy for years to come. We must not rush to judgment, but rather study and understand the pros and cons of off shore drilling. We could then make intelligent decisions on this issue.

Swart:

I favor the United States utilizing all of its domestic energy. This includes drilling off the coast of NC for oil and natural gas as long as there is reasonable oversight of the process and the rigs are at least fifty miles offshore. I also believe that the US should develop all other energy sources such as wind, solar, hydrogen cells, etc.
My reasons for this are twofold:

1. The US must provide immediate relief to the American people (who are suffering a serious financial strain in many aspects of their lives) from the VERY high price of crude oil. High gasoline prices affect all businesses, food price and other segments of the economy. It is also the largest transfer of wealth in history.

2. The high cost of energy also affects the ability of the US in the area of national defense. If there were any significant interruption in the flow of foreign oil, the US would not be able to provide domestic crude to fill the gap. Serious interruption has a high probability of occurring due to the instability in many countries from which the US imports crude oil; for example in the conflict between Georgia and Russia.

My Opinion is that off shore drilling would NOT provide immediate benefit to our country. It will take years to survey, explore, build and start pumping oil. Our time and money is better spent implementing new technologies that we already have as well as developing new technologies. The chance of a spill and the impending environmental and economic devastation it would cause to our local area is too scary to even consider for NC.

Question #2: While the State spends approximately 60% of its budget on education, the system is not meeting the expectations of state citizens. How would you address this situation?

Hughes:

I would put greater emphasis on early education and preventive programs such as Head Start, Smart Start, and More at Four. This will positively impact the drop-out and suspension rates. I would provide more support for teachers including mentoring, better training, and increased performance based salaries. More emphasis should be placed in teacher development and vocational training programs. A long-term comprehensive plan for improving our educational system should be developed through broad collaborative initiatives with all segments of the community.

Swart:

There are several areas where the State can provide for a better educational system that meets citizen expectation:
1. The cap should be lifted on charter schools,
2. The money provided by the federal, state and local governments for education of a child should follow that child the school where the parent or guardian decides to place their child,
3. Tenure should be eliminated so the system may terminate teachers that are not meeting established goals,
4. There should be merit pay for teachers and administrators that are meeting or exceeding expectations.

I really can't argue with Hughes statement I would like to state that performance/merit based pay for teachers is a great idea, but needs to take into account that some teachers take on the poorly performing students and shouldn't be penalized for doing so (in fact, they should be encouraged). I do not like vouchers, as it sounds like Swart is talking about in his second point. I do however agree, with the idea that parents should be able to move their children within the public school system if needed. I believe in tenure, but certainly understand the arguments against it, maybe it needs to be more difficult to attain.

Question #3: What should be the role of the state in developing fast (clean and efficient) rail transportation to and from the eastern part of the state and in development of localized fast rail system in the larger cities?

Hughes:

It is important to develop rail and other means of public transportation throughout the state as a means to reduce our dependence on oil and impact on the environment. A rail connection with the eastern part of the state should be a high priority in addressing future transportation needs. However, we must concurrently maintain our present highway system and continue appropriate improvements. Our larger cities should definitely consider developing rail and other public transportation initiatives as a means to address traffic, pollution, and infrastructure issues.

Swart:

1. First, this question begs the question: Will the citizens of the eastern part of NC utilize such a system? I think not, look at the current use of public transportation in this area. A better use of taxpayer dollars would be to provide alternative energy sources to NC citizens such as those I have spoken of above.
2. I do support the provision of subway systems in highly populated areas such as the triad area and Charlotte.

This is a really difficult subject. I believe that improving our infrastructure for alternative fuel usage is necessary as well as making current public transportation better. However, one of the biggest complaints most people have about public transportation is that it is not very cost-effective (meaning the cost is somewhat similar to what driving a vehicle is) and the amount of time it takes to navigate the system to get where you are needed takes a large chunk of time. If a high-speed rail system could address these problems then I would support such an idea.

Question #4: What do you see as the major problem(s) (my addition) in the efficient working of the General Assembly?

Hughes:

The General Assembly works efficiently. More time and staff could be allocated for research and study.

Swart:

There are so many problems in the General Assembly that I do not know where to begin. However, here are a few:
1. The current short session should be remembered for what they didn't do than what they did. For example: they did not address the mental health needs of people, they did not resolve the needs of state infrastructure in the area of highways and bridges, they did not address the overwhelming desire of the people for a change in "forced" annexation laws etc.;
2. The General Assembly has become an "oligarchy" with the leadership of the House and Senate completely dominating the rest of the representation. This is done by controlling bill introduction, floor debates, and amendments to bills on the floor;
3. The general Assembly is required to produce balances budgets. I do not consider a budget balanced when money is removed from the highway trust fund and placed in the general fund of when the legislature votes to issue nearly a billion in new debt;
4. And the list goes on.

As I've been learning quite a bit with NCFOM I'll try to see if I have this information right. It is not the short session's intent to get new bills passed through. While it is arguable that it means that things do not run efficiently, our state congress do have jobs that they have to keep up. Most "work" is done during the long session and most research is done before and after the short session with bills that have already made their way through being voted on during the short session. So it is disingenuous to look only at the short session and say that it is not effective.

Question #5: Please list your top three legislative priorities.

Hughes:

1. Economic development and creation of good-paying jobs. Our citizens are suffering and need immediate and long term relief from job lose compounded by higher food and gasoline costs.
2. Affordable health care and tax relief for senior citizens. Relief is needed for senior citizens and others on fixed incomes as property values continue to escalate.

3. Intelligent growth together with effective handling of water, sewer, drainage and environmental issues. . The natural beauty of our area will continue to attract development. We must be diligent in balancing growth with protecting the environment and impact on existing neighborhoods.

4. Quality education and safe neighborhoods.

Swart:

1. The state legislature MUST establish a permanent change in ethics for that body where there is an open, honest and ethical state government. This requires a serious culture change in the legislature.

2. Uncontrolled spending must be ended. There is not a revenue problem in NC; there is a spending problem. Budgets should be zero based and indexed to inflation and population growth.

3. High taxes, such as income, fees, corporate and gasoline, must be reduced. Appropriate reduction in the corporate tax rate would eliminate the need for incentives to corporations to locate in NC.

Frequently we hear about how government spends too much, however, when pressed most politicians can't find anywhere to cut, only new places that need funding. This makes me skeptical at best when it comes up repeatedly in political discourse. By reducing taxes on corporations we are allowing them to get away without paying their fair share. Since most corporations end up paying as little (percentage wise) as individuals after they take every deduction that loop holes allow them, I'm not too sure that reducing taxes on them does anything but hurt the services that government provides. Instead if the Federal government (as well as the state, but since deductions are mostly taken on your federal tax return it's more a federal problem) would close loop holes that allow corporations to effectively lower their own tax rate to, at times, lower than individual tax rates, this problem would correct itself.

County Commissioners

We currently have 5 candidates for CountyCommissioner; Brian Berger (L), Jason Thompson (R), Bill Kopp (R-Incumbent), Ted Davis, Jr. (R-Incumbent), and Jonathan Barfield (D). Again, I'm taking the answers from The League of Women Voters questionnare and I've reorganized to go to the question that most influences you and read all answers. I'll comment at the bottom, this one will probably be longer than previous.

Question #1: How do you think the public can be better involved in decisions such as Titan which have such potential effects on the environment?

Berger:

The decision to provide $4.2 million in incentives to Titan Americas LLC illustrates misplaced priorities and total disregard for the environment and citizen input in vital decisions affecting our community. The preponderance of evidence suggests that Titan's plans involve major implications for the region's environment, transportation and emergency services infrastructure, as well as risks for the area's most important economic drivers (tourism, retirement, real estate) exceeding the purported economic benefits. Studies show that operations like Titan has planned typically reduce economic growth in the long run.
All of these implications should have been carefully vetted during the past couple years, but never once did the incumbents ask these questions. Decision-making should engage the diverse range of experts we are fortunate to have in New Hanover County, and unfortunately these experts too often are turned down for appointments to "citizen advisory boards" in favor of Realtors and developers, exclusively.
While the misplaced priorities and short-sightedness of those we elect is partly to blame for lack of citizen input, the "economic development" process itself is flawed, outdated, and secretive and until it changes, there will continue to be similar environmentally hazardous projects proposed and the same reactionary responses required.
I'm the only candidate who would bring environmental and economic development processes, perpetually stuck in a 1959 mentality, into the 21st Century. My vision of "economic development" for the Cape Fear region is based on attracting businesses and individuals with an eye toward long-term, sustainable growth, and protecting the environment and quality of life for residents is an inherent part of this model.

Thampson:

The elected officials of NHC must do a better job of communicating their expectations from the various organizations they fund with public dollars. This is a prime example of a simple directive, "find companies to bring jobs to our community", but this directive should have been, "find companies to bring jobs to our community that will reflect our culture and preserve our unique living environment". I will strive to bring that type of leadership and clarity to the NHC Commissioners. While we must grow and diversify our tax base we cannot continue to do so at the expense of our environment. Quality beaches, coastal waters, and public open space will continue to be one of the strongest economic engines in our local economy.

Kopp:

When companies are deciding whether to locate in New Hanover County, they usually contact Wilmington Industrial Development (WID). WID is often told that the company wishes for its interest in New Hanover County to remain confidential. The company may be looking at other cities or states and it may not want its competitors or employees to know that it is expanding, relocating or closing a site. A company may want to review a potential site for suitability to its needs, such as training for employees, acreage, taxes. New Hanover County needs to be able to compete with other potential sites by offering incentives that are allowed by North Carolina law. The County does not want competitors to know what incentives are being offered until the deal is consummated. The public is allowed to comment before such action is taken. While the question posed asks about public involvement in companies such as Titan, New Hanover County has also competed for the film industry and companies such as Corning and G.E. When New Hanover County approves an incentive agreement, it is often only the first step in a company being able to locate in New Hanover County. For example, the G.E. expansion has to receive approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Titan must obtain all required environmental permits from the Federal and State government. The public can comment and participate in the permitting process. Finally, it should be pointed out that companies, like Titan and G.E., can as of right under the County zoning ordinance, locate in B-2 area. Thus, a company can, if it receives all the necessary permits, operate in a permitted zone without prior commissioner approval.

Davis -- Unanswered

Barfield:

By having forums such as the one last night sponsored by the LWV and CONA. The four panelist provided great insight into the Titan issue, but still left many questions unanswered. It would be great to have these forums with the Titan representatives, the current County Commissioners, as well as representatives from the area environmental agencies present to answer our questions and concerns. Issues such as this need public input at the beginning of the project, when it was known that Titan was considering this location.

Question #2: How do you propose to meet the growing demands on the county's infrastructure? (water, sewer, transportation)

Berger:

New Hanover County is not the first to experience rapid growth and the stresses brought on by population growth. In fact, other communities have faced these issues long before growth hit Southeastern N.C., and from those experiences a library of workable solutions, failed experiments and "best practices" has emerged. New Hanover County staff are well-versed in these "best practices" and they are retained for their expertise, we would be wise to engage County staff in formulating plans and policy.
Cumulative stress from haphazard property rezonings has taken a toll on infrastructure capacity, resulting in more congested roads, major sewer spills, polluted waterways, and other burdens on citizen's quality of life. The lack of common sense planning has also contributed to increased taxation without improvement in services in both the city and county. Let the planners plan!
The first step toward improvements is committing to infrastructure investments based on visionary, deliberate planning for growth.

Thompson:

Fully support the newly created Cape Fear Public Utility Authority while providing oversight, input, and accountability to their Board of Directors. I will continue to monitor and set in place guiding principles that will ensure quality service delivery while maintaining affordable rates. I will move the County to be proactive with their future land use plans and to act regionally through coordination with the City of Wilmington, and the three beach towns.

Kopp:

As a result of the Special Order of Consent (SOC) between the State of North Carolina and the City of Wilmington, long ignored maintenance of the sewer system has begun. Effective July 1, 2008 the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) has sole responsibility for operation of the New Hanover County (NHC) and City of Wilmington sewer systems which is to be managed and operated as a enterprise operation (users paying for service) with statutory authority to borrow funds for infrastructure improvements. Before the merger, the City of Wilmington had begun expansion of the Sweeney Water Treatment Plant surface water operation, and New Hanover County had under contract a new ground water treatment plant with fourteen (14) new wells in Castle Hayne and PeeDee aquifers. It is my opinion that with the merger of these two potable water sources, our county is positioned to take care of the needs of our citizens going forward. As President of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC), I am personally in a position to represent New Hanover County at the table when important decisions are going to be made regarding transportation issues in NC. The 21st Century Advisory Commission has been meeting for the past twelve months developing new strategies as it relates to the financial, as well as operational, functions of the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT). Significant changes are going to be made and counties are going to be required, in my opinion, to participate in the funding of the secondary roads within each county. Counties have not been required to fund roads in NC since the 1930's.

Davis -- Unanswered

Barfield:

We need to be more proactive towards growth, such as anticipating the need before it arises by utilizing the local real estate community to see where the next growth hot spots will likely be in the next 2-3 years and then start planning ahead of time to provide water,sewer and roads. We need to work closely with the State DOT to fast track the Hwy 17 connection to the I-140 into Brunswick County and also the Sky Bridge connecting Independence with Hwy 133. This would help alleviate some of the congestion coming into or out of New Hanover County at peak travel times.

Question #3: What would be your position on funding a Board of Elections endeavor to purchase more touch screen voting machines?

Berger:

With all the unresolved issues related to touch screen voting machines, such as tally result discrepancies, lack of a voter-verifiable audit trail, and other flaws, it would be irresponsible to support spending substantial funds on any system that fails to meet the highest standards for accuracy, dependability, and usability. Its irresponsible to endorse major expenditures on a system that might require replacement or expensive upgrading in the near future because of deficiencies that effectively disenfranchise some voters. I'm partial to the use of voter-marked paper ballots read by optical scanners as the primary voting mechanism, with touch screen systems available for ADA compliance as mandated by the law and demographic-induced demands. Until the issues can be resolved, mandating massive expenditures of taxpayer funds to acquire flawed machines would be difficult for me to support.

Thompson:

In favor because we must continue to update and add to our voting system. The easier and faster we make the voting process the greater the number of citizens that will participate.

Kopp:

Over the past two years, NHC has spent $763,000 on new voting machines. The type of machines put into service were recommended by the NHC Board of Elections. Should the BOE request monies to purchase additional machines during the next budget cycle, I will give it serious consideration based on demonstrated needs established by said department.

Davis -- Unanswered

Barfield:

For the techno savvy I think the touch screens would speed up the process and I would be in favor of purchasing more.

Question #4: Mandatory trash collection including recycling was rejected by the commissioners a few years ago. What do you thinkwe should do about the problem now?

Berger:

I applaud individuals who care enough to recycle, particularly those folks in the unincorporated areas who do so at some inconvenience. Yet, it's not entirely clear how much mandatory curbside pick-up would affect people's recycling habits, and adopting an involuntary fee assessed to property owners raises concerns. I support efforts to take a fresh look at the issues and costs now, since both the consumer attitudes and the economics of recycling have changed a good deal in just the past few years. In tasking a select group of citizens to lead this exploration into trash/recycling options and costs, appointments reflecting a diversity of viewpoints are vital. Typically in New Hanover County, only special interests with a pre-determined agenda are appointed to "citizen advisory" bodies. I would welcome the findings of an independent task group looking at both public and private options, creative approaches to enhancing recycling rates, taking advantage of competition and current market dynamics, but need convincing that taxpayers will not be forced to endure additional fees for a service that is not desired.

Thompson:

It was a mistake to reject this in the past and I would move the County to institute mandatory trash pickup and recycling. Recycling is one proven measure that the county can take to decrease the amount of waste that goes to our landfill. This will save airspace and extend the life of our landfill. Solid waste will be one of the biggest problems NHC faces over the next ten years as we reach an end to our landfills capacity and we must address the issue now because in 10 years it will be too late

Kopp:

I recently introduced a resolution before the Board of Commissioners which was unanimously approved to appoint a five member citizens Advisory Board to address the entire environmental management operation in NHC. This committee is to evaluate and make recommendations on improvements the County should make as it relates to recycling, WASTEC and the landfill. Everything should, and will be, on the table for discussion including curbside collection in the unincorporated area of the County.

Davis -- Unanswered

Barfield:

I believe in recycling, and while many county residents do not mind taking their recyclables to the stations set up throughout the county I feel that with mandatory recycling we would have a much greater response and alleviate the burden on our landfill and assist our residents in going green. We are stewards of this environment and we are entrusted to take care of it. I would be in favor of the County having mandatory recycling.

Question #5: Please list your top three priorities if you should be elected or reelected to this office.

Berger:

First, real job creation is a top priority, and a fundamental component of job creation is limiting taxation. New Hanover County was one of the few counties in the entire state of North Carolina to raise taxes this year. I will fight for lower taxes and oppose wasteful spending. Low taxation, protecting the environment, excellence in education and infrastructure planning are the keys to sustainable, long-term job creation. Let's reduce the taxes and fees government squeezes out of small businesses so they can hire new employees and increase pay for current employees. Keeping taxes down has other benefits as well, such as making housing and rents more affordable, especially for working class and fixed income citizens.
In order to keep taxes down, hard decisions have to be made about government spending. My priorities are infrastructure, fighting crime, and other basic services like education and emergency services. Therefore, my second priority would focus tax dollars and staff resources on these vital needs and cut down on the wasteful spending and misplaced priorities that have consumed our local government in recent years. If the same energy were put into fighting crime and reducing congestion that the other candidates have devoted to "developer services," we as a community would be better off.
My third priority is broader, but perhaps the most important role facing me as an elected official: promoting a long-term vision for the Cape Fear region based on priorities that are nearly non-existent in Wilmington and New Hanover County government at the moment. Embodied in these priorities is the integrity to stand up to special interests, to promote accountability in government, protect the environment, and fight for reform in areas like forced annexation, law enforcement and social services reform. It won't be easy, but working together, we can change New Hanover County and...influence change in Raleigh and Washington D.C.

Thompson:

Keep a low tax rate for property owners. Coordinated regional policy toward crime reduction and police services. Long range land use planning that encompasses more than just zoning classifications and includes the transportation grid in all growth patterns. Proactive leadership to move NHC toward a more sound and responsible environmental policy with regards to growth and development. I want to be a bridge between the county and the city in a way we have never experienced in this community, my unique city experience will allow me to mend fences and promote a regional approach to government that has been lacking here for decades.

Kopp:

Transportation (see answer to question #2). Water and sewer infrastructure for unincorporated areas of NHC. The three critical areas area Marquee Hills, Wrightsboro and Castle Hayne. Brown water reuse for irrigation purposes as well as a major emphasis on developing other green initiatives to save energy.

Davis -- Unanswered

Barfield:

My top three priorities would be 1) To work with the State legislature and local School board to find ways to increase our local teachers supplements so that we can attract and retain quality teachers here 2) Address the need for more Workforce\Affordable Housing. There are many County and City employees that work here in New Hanover County but live in Brunswick,Pender or Onslow county and commute here to work because they cannot find affordable housing. 3) Work closely with the State DOT to fast track the Hwy 17 connection to the I-140 into Brunswick County and also the Sky Bridge connecting Independence with Hwy 133. This would help alleviate some of the congestion coming into or out of New Hanover County at peak travel times.

Many of the things that have occurred over the past few years (Titan, repeated sewer spills, etc.) leads me to vote against the current incumbents that are running for office, in addition one of the incumbents Ted Davis, Jr., left the survey unanswered of which I find disrespectful of the LWV who is well known as a political debate mediator nationwide.

I found Berger's answered interesting, but I HIGHLY disagree with him on question 4 and am surprised that he talked about the environment as being a main concern, yet does not come out in support for mandatory recycling, other than these I align with his ideas.

With Thompson, I find I am surprised that align with most of his views as well. I have not looked at his record with the city, so I am enticed into looking further at him as a potential vote. I DO disagree with him over touch screen voting. With paper ballots you can get many people voting at once, as long as they have a pencil and a hard surface they can vote, and there is a paper trail to follow. Touch screens are too easily tampered with, and unless they give voters a paper trail then I see no reason to resort to this method. This is hugely controversial nationwide, and I've always been glad we hadn't gone to a computerized voting method.

My opinion on Kopp is pretty low at this point. He is an incumbent who voted for Titan to get economic benefits for moving to our area. His answer to question 1 was a cop out. While he is correct that any corporation can move into the area with appropriate zoning and do their business, he is neglecting to mention that these companies are HEAVILY catered to by MANY communities (obviously as our commissioners did with Titan) to offer them benefits for moving to their area. Without that economic package that we are handing over to Titan so that they can come to our community with LOW-tech jobs that will ruin our environment, they likely would have looked elsewhere. Comparing Titan to GE, who brings a host of high-tech jobs to the area as well as other benefits like partnering with CFCC to create a Nuclear Technician program as well as large swaths of green space on their campus, is insulting to all the GE emplyees and their families.

Barfield is a realtor and I believe that one of the biggest criticisms of County Commissioners is that most are in the pocket book of real estate developers; however, he does seem to align with me on many of the issues. Again, I disagree with using touch screen voting without a paper trail, I think that involving those in the community that have access to information about our growth is good, so long as they don't hold too much sway over the decision making process. The people should.

This race is interesting and there are no clear stand outs to me. I have a good idea, though, of who I will vote for. This is an important race since these people will have a direct impact into our lives.

Board of Education Candidates

Since the recent meeting for the proposed school redistricting maps has been in the news a lot lately, I'm going to start here in discussing our local political environment. The League of Women Voters of the Lower Cape Fear has sent out a questionnaire to local candidates and I'm going to use those answers here.

We currently have six people running for the Board of Education, Elizabeth Redenbaugh (R-Incumbent), Jeanette S. Nichols (R-Incumbent), David G. Martin (R), Dorothy De Sheilds (D-Incumbent), Pat Chappel (D), and Jan Brewington (D). I'm going to quote these six directly from the LWV website to allow you to make up your own mind. I will also give my two cents at the end. I am going to reorganize by question instead of by person to make it a little easier to find the question that most relates to you and see EXACTLY what ALL of the candidates stated.

Question #1: The school administration has already indicated that redistricting will have to take place during your term in office if elected. When it comes to redistricting what are your priorities and what input do you think the public should have?

Redenbaugh:

My top priority is to create and support environments which foster high academic achievement and prepare our children to be contributing members of a global society. In my opinion, the current elementary school attendance zones, as well as the proposed redistricting maps presented at the July 7, 2008 Board of Education meeting, do not support such environments and, sadly, the evidence buttresses this conclusion. This summer it was announced that 27 out of 38 New Hanover County Schools failed to meet federal testing expectations. Residential segregation and the neighborhood school criteria adopted by the current Board of Education for purposes of redistricting elementary school attendance zones have helped to create and maintain schools that are isolated not simply by race, but also by socioeconomic status. For example, in New Hanover County we have an elementary school where, of the student population, 80% are African American and 87% are eligible for free or reduced-priced lunches (a stand-in for poverty). On the other end of the spectrum is an elementary school where 0% of the students are African American and only 4% are eligible for free or reduced-priced lunches. The effects of such isolation cannot be adequately addressed by school finance reform, as students in schools with high concentrations of poverty need more than increased funding to improve achievement. Research supports the argument that significantly increasing expenditures will not necessarily increase the educational achievement of poor, minority students.
As a member of the Board of Education, I would move that the Board make economic integration a main element in the district's strategy. Since 2000, school officials in Wake County have used income as a key factor in assigning students to schools, with the goal of limiting the proportion of low-income students in any school to no more than 40%. The overwhelming majority of the 120,000 children in that district go either to a local school or a school of their choice. Slightly more than 85 percent of students attend a school within five miles of home and another 12 percent or so voluntarily attend magnet or year-round schools. The result of Wake County's seemingly innovative strategy: 91% of its students are performing at or above grade level. In addition to the Wake County example, numerous studies support economic integration. For example, one study revealed that low-income students who attended more-affluent schools scored 20 points higher than low-income students attending high-poverty schools, a difference equivalent to almost two years worth of education.
Opponents of my plan will argue that economic integration will lead to increased bussing. Admittedly, this is a legitimate concern given the soaring price of a gallon of gas. However, the economic impact of my plan on the overall school budget will be far less than the "hazard duty pay" our county will have to pay teachers who work in our high poverty schools. Moreover, if we fail the poor, minority members of our student population, we will all pay the price. Each class of high school dropouts costs the US economy more than $8 billion in incarceration expenses and lost wages per year. America loses more than $26 billion in federal and state income taxes each year due to high school dropouts.
The public should have a great deal of input into the direction our schools are heading. Throughout my volunteer and professional careers, I have learned that stakeholder input and buy-in is absolutely essential for organizational success. Unfortunately, the majority of the current Board does not agree with this viewpoint. At the September 11, 2007 meeting of the Board of Education, Board member Nick Rhodes made a motion that the Board have meetings with the community three times per year. This motion was seconded by my opponent Dorothy DeShields. Unfortunately, the remaining five members of the Board voted no and the motion failed. As a member of the Board, I would support and welcome public input in the redistricting process. Without an open and transparent process in which community input is valued, I do not believe New Hanover County Schools will achieve public support for whatever redistricting plan it adopts.

Nichols:

I believe that YOUNG children should be assigned to a school as close to their home as possible. During the years I have served on the Board of Education, I have listened to and read the many requests of parents from all neighborhoods who share the same priority. Many parents say it most difficult to become involved if they have no transportation or feel no connection to the distant school. Public forums, school board meetings - as well as direct contact with Board members + provide an opportunity for parental input. The escalating cost of transportation and congestion of traffic make it difficult for me to support assigning children to a school in order to achieve socio-economics diversity. The Redistricting Committee has adjusted the number of children who would be moved from the estimated 10,000 -- which included middle school students -- to only elementary children, which is now 3,892.
However, I support the School Assignment Plan that provides for parents to apply for another school if space is available.

Martin -- Unanswered

De Sheilds:

My priorities for redistricting are as follows: a. that we move as few students as possible; and b. that we allow for diverse student bodies without students having to travel extremely long distances.
I think the public should have a chance to voice their concerns about the plans and that the board should take those concerns into consideration when making final decisions.

Chappell:

Since re-districting is such a challenging and emotional issue for parents, students, community, and school personnel, it is imperative that the process take place in an open and fair manner. School officials must understand that people feel better about change when they have had the opportunity to share their thoughts and feelings. Priorities and perceptions can be extremely different from person to person or from group to group. No one plan will completely satisfy the needs of everyone. Factors that should be considered when developing a plan should include:
Least intrusive and most efficient scenario
Effective Programs that are currently being offered and planned (magnet schools, open choice, open enrollment, etc)
Efficient bussing
Budget impacts
Closeness to school
New housing developments being planned
Socio-economic factors No one of these factors should be considered in isolation of the others.

What input do you think the public should have in re-districting? Communication between school officials and parents is priceless during this process and should take place from the very beginning. The Re-districting Committee should be made up of parents, community leaders, county commissioners, teachers, and school officials. Currently, it is comprised only of Central Office Administrators. Input from parents, community members, and school personnel can be received via public hearings in alternating locations, making the process convenient to everyone. There should also be less formal conversations with school officials via "coffee hours", letters, emails, and public comments during Board Meetings. Individual and county-wide PTA/PTO groups, School Improvement Teams, and Advisory Councils should participate in the process.

Brewington:

My priorities for redistricting are the same priorities I have for the schools in general. Each classroom teacher should be equipped to bring each child from their own starting point up to the next level. In order for the teacher to accomplish this, no teacher or school should have a disproportionate number of at risk children. This is taxing on a classroom. Therefore, diversity in ability is important in the classroom. A mix of children who can learn from each other is ideal. I would rely on the administration staff to come up with a model of ideal educational mix for the schools, and then redistrict accordingly, keeping children as close to home as possible. Public input would be important because a certain understanding is often lost in numbers alone, but the school board needs to make decisions on what is best for educational purposes.

Question #2: Teachers in New Hanover County often remark that lack of discipline in the schools and non-attendance by students are their greatest problems. What policies could the School Board adopt that would help address this problem?

Redenbaugh:

I believe the Board of Education can begin to address these problems not by adopting additional policies, but by creating a system-wide (and community-wide) "culture of achievement." Such a culture would naturally lead to better behavior on the part of our students and would discourage non-attendance. How do we create such a culture in our community? I believe the answer lies in strategic planning, accountability, focus on our mission, communication of the system's strengths and weaknesses, stakeholder input (families, students, faculty, and community), full support for school administrators and teachers to enforce their school's code of conduct, proactive as opposed to reactive strategies, and an open dialogue. Although the foregoing may sound like the stuff of which dreams are made, it is actually supported by several studies, including one conducted by Harvard University.
As a Board member, I would also support the adoption of a school uniform policy to address the lack of discipline. Multiple credible studies credit school uniform policies with helping bring about a sharp drop in crime in schools, including reduced numbers of drug cases, sex offenses, violence and theft. A dress code would help prevent gang members from wearing gang colors and insignia at school and help school officials recognize intruders who come to the school.
In North Carolina, the legal dropout age is 16. I am in full support of raising the age to 18, which I feel would also help discourage non-attendance.

Nichols:

I don't think there is a need to adopt additional policies since there are 27 pages of policies and procedures relative to student discipline. What is needed is the enforcement of the policies and support for the teachers from the administration and parents. However, the new standards set forth in the Code of Ethics for Athletics and Student Representatives should dramatically improve discipline and attendance.
In accordance with state law, a policy is in place that outlines requirements for student attendance. Enforcing the policy is difficult when parents do not assume the responsibility of ensuring their child is in school and on time. If the state would resend it rule and allow students who have exceptional grades and attendance be exempt from end-of-course/grade tests, attendance would improve. Also, if participation/seat-time were factored into grades, attendance should improve. However, the most important approach is to help our students feel a part of the school and provide the necessary support for them and their family.

Martin -- Unanswered

De Sheilds:

It is my belief that State laws and County policies on discipline are adequate. However, individual schools can strengthen their rules and administration of those rules. Most importantly strengthening parental involvement in each school would help tremendously.
The School Board certainly needs to rethink the idea of developing an attendance policy. If the children are not in school the school cannot teach them!

Chappell:

Teachers are correct when they say that discipline and attendance are two of the biggest challenges that public schools have faced for many years. I hear this consistently from the teachers with whom I work. The more you research this issue, the more "programs" you will find claiming to improve student behavior. There are several common themes that I have observed in schools with little or no discipline issues. Those include:

Parental involvement is number one in achieving positive student behavior.
Make sure all new teachers are trained in appropriate Behavior Management techniques with support from mentors and administrators
Unified classroom rules and procedures followed by all teachers with consequences followed consistently
High expectations from the entire school staff for appropriate student behavior
Making the school inviting, safe, and supportive
Engaging classroom instruction that keeps students interested
Constant monitoring and support from the principal, Central Office Staff, and School Board

It will be my responsibility to make certain that the school system provides adequate training in classroom management for all new teachers, and that they follow through with appropriate support. As a School Board member, it will be my responsibility to maintain expectations that all teachers, staff, and administrators serve as role models for their students. This includes how they dress, how they present themselves to students, how they communicate with each other and the community, and the consistency to which they follow the rules that have been set forth for students. It should be the responsibility of the school board to set the minimum requirements for a district school dress code for students and staff.
Another responsibility I will take seriously as a school board member will be to continue to support the use of School Resource Officers, School Nurses, Guidance Counselors, and Social Workers. I will support individual schools who wish to institute the wearing of school uniforms. Attendance: Students who are unsuccessful are generally the ones who have poor attendance. I have read and researched district level and school level attendance policies that have been used across the state and nation. There is no magical policy for solving this problem. The number one impact on school attendance, outside of parental involvement, is the climate and culture of the school. Students often cite that their poor attendance is a result of not feeling safe at school. Individual School Improvement Teams need to address how their school should deal with the issue. Programs such as Early College, Dual Enrollment Programs, Career / Vocational training, and a wide-variety of extra-curricular activities provide students options and often help promote better attendance, thus higher achievement. Other programs that I would support as a School Board member include Extended Day (Night Programs) and increased use of technology such as Nova Net for students who miss excessive days due to illness and family issues. One of the primary duties of school Social Workers should be to monitor attendance patterns of students and work directly with the parents to address the issue. All school personnel should make good attendance a priority. Regular phone calls to parents do make a difference...................

Brewington:

Attendance policies in New Hanover County High Schools need to be uniformly enforced. They also need to be updated. Lack of discipline needs to start with an expectation in the early grades that all children will come to school prepared to learn. This is an attitude that must be pervasive in our community, not just in schools. I propose a task force of school officials, ministers, nonprofit leaders, law enforcement and parents who work together towards making goals for the children of our county and taking collective responsibility to realize these goals.

Question #3: Because of the lack of parental support in some of the county's schools those schools that do have the parental support are able to purchase more equipment, more supplies etc, for their students. What can the Board of Education do to correct the inequity?

Redenbaugh:

The answer lies in economic integration. Please see my response to question #1.

Nichols:

As a member of the Finance Committee for six years, I have worked to ensure the Board of Education provides additional funds for high-need schools. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been appropriated to those schools to improve technology, provide the necessary supplies/equipment, reduce class size, and provide additional staff and training. If re-elected, I will continue to work to support the underserved children.

Martin -- Unanswered

De Sheilds:

In many instances we provide the opportunity for low-wealth schools to get extra funds to purchase needed items. We should do more.

Chappell:

PTA's / PTO's often provide additional money to schools earned through fund-raising events such as Fall Festivals, etc. These funds can be used as determined by the School Improvement Team to provide equipment, supplies, etc. Unfortunately, parental involvement often is aligned with the socio-economic level of the school attendance area. Title I Federal Funding is provided to "low-wealth" schools (based on free and reduced lunches) to help "even the playing field." New Hanover County receives $5.2 million in Title I funding. This money is distributed to Title I Schools and should be used for purchasing materials, supplies, and equipment for use by the students and teachers. School Board members must closely monitor the distribution of these funds to ensure that it is allocated fairly and specifically used for student needs. There are numerous local, state, and federal grants available that provide financial assistance to low-wealth schools. As a School Board Member I will work diligently to assist our school system to finding these types of grants.

Brewington:

When parents decide to get together and provide extras for their schools, it is not the Board of Education's job to attempt to keep up. The Board's job is to make sure that necessities are taken care of and that each school has clean, safe facilities, up to date technology, nutritious food, and plentiful learning materials. In some cases, parent groups have been compelled to provide necessities, and this is wrong. When schools have a more socially diverse mix of families, one school won't have a disproportionate amount of "extras".

Question #4: What are your top three priorities for New Hanover County Board of Education if you are elected?

Redenbaugh:

1. Diversity among the student population.

2. Strategic Planning that values stakeholder input and includes accountability.

3. Meeting the educational needs of EVERY student, regardless of race, IQ, socioeconomic status, etc., and challenging them to do their very best.

Nichols:

1. High student expectation and achievement at all schools.
2. Effective and efficient use of public resources aligned to system priorities, i.e., closing the gap, dropout prevention, safe and orderly environment, highly qualified skilled workforce and school construction/maintenance.
3. Strong customer satisfaction through family, community and business support.

Martin -- Unanswered

De Sheilds:

My top three priorities for the New Hanover County Board of Education are to:

a. Increase Student Achievement

b. Increase Teacher Pay & Improve their Working Conditions

c. Encourage Strong Parental and Community Involvement

Chappell:

A SAFE learning environment equipped with UP-DATED TECHNOLOGY in ALL of our schools, so we can better educate our students to meet the challenges they will face in the 21st century work-force.
Provide clear CHOICE OPTIONS, including well-planned and funded Magnet Schools, Year-Round options, a Technical/Vocational School, more on-line options, and more programs for gifted students.
Provide OPEN, HONEST COMMUNICATION with parents and the community, encouraging dialogue and input on important issues such as re-districting, school choice, federal and state testing issues. One of the first things I plan to request will be that the school board add one additional board meeting per month (held at alternating attendance area schools) with the primary purpose of encouraging parental/community dialogue.

Brewington:

Providing middle and high schoolers with alternatives that will encourage them to pursue the path that will lead to their own best education: schools within- a school, vocational learning, and same gender education (for a middle school) are alternatives I would like to see.

Tracking children's progress individually, rather than as a school or classroom.
Children move, are redistricted, and fall between the cracks because they are not individually measured.

Those were the questions, and the answers do tend to sound similar. The biggest differences between the candidates have to do with whether they agree on busing children or neighborhood schools, although they all left room for compromise on this issue. I also must say that to not answer an LWV questionnaire, with their long held reputation as a mediator of MANY political debates, shows apathy at best. Ms. Redenbaugh mentioned that she motioned to have three meetings every year and the only other board member that voted with her was Ms. De Sheilds, which lends those two candidates a lot of my respect.

Wilmington Politics

Friday, November 7, 2008

The Election Results in New Hanover County

Thursday, October 30, 2008

CONA Debate Forum: Part II

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Judicial Races

Thursday, October 16, 2008

CONA Debate Forum

CONA Debate Forum

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Ballot

Friday, October 3, 2008

NC Senate Debate

Monday, September 29, 2008

NC Senate

NC House; District 18

County Commissioners

Board of Education Candidates

Subscribe via email

View my other blogs

Blog Archive

About Me

New Hanover County Races
President
43 of 43 precincts reporting
McCain/Palin	50,004	50.2%
Obama/Biden (Winner-D)	48,588	48.8%
Barr/Root	558	0.6%
WRITE-IN	401	0.4%
U.S. Senate
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Kay Hagan (Winner-D)	52,403	53.5%
Elizabeth Dole	41,595	42.5%
Christopher Cole	3,856	3.9%
WRITE-IN	52	0.1%
U.S. House District 7
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Mike McIntyre (Winner-D)	63,780	66.0%
Will Breazeale	32,793	34.0%
Governor
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Bev Perdue (Winner-D)	48,250	49.5%
Pat McCrory	45,164	46.3%
Michael C. Munger	4,089	4.2%
Lieutenant Governor
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Robert Pittenger	45,661	48.1%
Walter H. Dalton (Winner-D)	44,792	47.2%
Phillip Rhodes	4,489	4.7%
Attorney General
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Roy Cooper (Winner-D)	55,221	58.8%
Bob Crumley	38,645	41.2%
Auditor
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Leslie Merritt	46,024	50.6%
Beth A. Wood (Winner-D)	45,011	49.4%
Commissioner of Agriculture
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Steve Troxler (Winner-R)	48,979	53.6%
Ronnie Ansley	42,353	46.4%
Commissioner of Insurance
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Wayne Goodwin (Winner-D)	43,837	47.8%
John Odom	42,519	46.4%
Mark McMains	5,281	5.8%
WRITE-IN	92	0.1%
Commissioner of Labor
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Cherie Berry (Winner-R)	48,748	53.3%
Mary Fant Donnan	42,648	46.7%
Secretary of State
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Elaine F. Marshall (Winner-D)	49,011	53.4%
Jack Sawyer	42,707	46.6%
Superintendent of Public Instruction
43 of 43 precincts reporting
June St. Clair Atkinson (Winner-D)	46,720	51.2%
Richard Morgan	44,548	48.8%
Treasurer
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Janet Cowell (Winner-D)	45,542	50.0%
Bill Daughtridge	45,540	50.0%
N.C. Senate District 9
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Julia Boseman (Winner-D)	49,980	51.6%
Michael Lee	46,789	48.4%
N.C. House District 16
17 of 17 precincts reporting
Carolyn Justice	22,756	100.0%
N.C. House District 18
13 of 13 precincts reporting
Sandra Spaulding Hughes (Winner-D)	14,641	72.6%
George J. Swart	5,523	27.4%
N.C. House District 19
19 of 19 precincts reporting
Danny McComas	31,110	100.0%
County Commissioner
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Jonathan Barfield, Jr. (Winner-D)	51,253	24.6%
Jason R. Thompson (Winner-R)	46,763	22.4%
Ted Davis, Jr. (Winner-R)	46,325	22.2%
Bill Kopp	45,044	21.6%
Brian Matthew Berger	19,329	9.3%
Register of Deeds
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Jennifer S. Hardison (Winner-D)	47,689	52.0%
Tammy T. Beasley	43,998	48.0%
Board of Education
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Dorothy S. DeShields (Winner-D)	44,903	17.6%
Elizabeth Redenbaugh (Winner-R)	43,987	17.2%
Jeannette S. Nichols (Winner-R)	43,672	17.1%
Jan Brewington	42,417	16.6%
Pat Chappell	41,731	16.3%
David G. Martin	38,623	15.1%
Supreme Court Associate Justice (Edmunds Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Robert H. (Bob) Edmunds, Jr. (Winner-R)	35,816	52.8%
Suzanne Reynolds	31,963	47.2%
Court of Appeals Judge (Martin Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
John C. Martin	53,987	100.0%
Court of Appeals Judge (Wynn Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
James A. (Jim) Wynn (Winner-D)	33,054	50.9%
Jewel Ann Farlow	31,897	49.1%
Court of Appeals Judge (Tyson Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Sam J. Ervin, IV (Winner-D)	36,254	56.1%
Kristin Ruth	28,380	43.9%
Court of Appeals Judge (McCullough Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Cheri Beasley (Winner-D)	36,539	55.9%
Doug McCullough	28,855	44.1%
Court of Appeals Judge (Stephens Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Linda Stephens (Winner-D)	36,348	56.5%
Dan Barrett	27,998	43.5%
Court of Appeals Judge (Arrowood Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Robert N. (Bob) Hunter, Jr. (Winner-R)	33,921	54.2%
John S. Arrowood	28,705	45.8%
Superior Court Judge District 5A
14 of 14 precincts reporting
Phyllis Gorham	16,541	100.0%
District Court Judge District 5 (Carroll Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
John J. Carroll, III	57,342	100.0%
District Court Judge District 5 (Corpening Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
J. H. Corpening, II	52,065	100.0%
District Court Judge District 5 (Criner Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Sandra Ray Criner (Winner-R)	45,475	65.3%
Joy K. Alford-Brand	24,177	34.7%
District Court Judge District 5 (Davis Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Richard Russell Davis	52,010	100.0%
District Court Judge District 5 (Noecker Seat)
43 of 43 precincts reporting
Jeffrey E. Noecker	47,440	100.0%
Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor
43 of 43 precincts reporting
David Thomas (Winner-Incumbent)	36,177	61.5%
David Dowdy	21,898	37.3%
WRITE-IN	705	1.2%
Cape Fear Community College Bond
43 of 43 precincts reporting
YES (Winner)	54,408	62.0%
NO	33,346	38.0%