The members of Asheville Democracy for America have voted to endorse Holly Jones and Cecil Bothwell in the race for Buncombe County Commission.
In the end, the two candidates were endorsed in a near-unanimous vote by DFA-Asheville members, far surpassing the 60% threshold the group had set to ensure that they would focus their efforts only on the candidates who had the members' most enthusiastic support.
The vote came after an open process that began in December, when members were polled about how they wanted to go about endorsing candidates. In February, members were solicited for questions to ask candidates. Then in March the candidates' responses to the group's questionnaire were posted on the DFA-Asheville blog, and members got to talk directly to the candidates in a public meeting.
"We strive to be a member-driven organization," said Doug Gibson, one of DFA-Asheville's volunteer organizers. "And throughout this process we took pains to make sure our members had a say in how we did things as well as an opportunity to weigh in on the endorsements themselves."
The group plans to support Bothwell and Jones through independent advertising and grassroots efforts. They see their independent role as especially crucial this year, when many acknowledge that Buncombe County is at a crossroads with regards to development, and after recent controversies like the Progress Energy power plant have brought attention to open government and energy issues.
Says Gibson, "pro-development groups poured more than $40,000 into last year's Asheville elections, and more than half of it came from organizations based outside Buncombe County. The same forces will be in play in this year's county commission race, and we want to be a voice for people living here who are concerned about out future."
DFA Asheville is a local group associated with Democracy for America, a national organization dedicated to electing socially progressive, fiscally responsible candidates at all levels of government. To find out more about DFA Asheville, visit www.ashevilledemocracyforamerica.org
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Monday, March 24, 2008
Endorsement process for statewide and state legislative candidates
In January, our members voted to support candidates running for state offices outside of Buncombe who sought our help. So starting today, Asheville Democracy for America invites candidates running in Democratic primaries for statewide and state legislative offices to apply for our endorsement. The process will follow these steps:
1. DFA Asheville will not formally invite anyone to start the endorsement process. Instead, candidates must seek our endorsement, though individual members may encourage their preferred candidates to apply. Candidates seeking our endorsement should contact Doug Gibson as soon as possible.
2. All Democratic candidates for Buncombe county commission seeking our endorsement must a) contact Doug Gibson by midnight on April 2, b) complete and return a brief questionnaire by midnight on Sunday, April 6, and b) attend, or send a representative to, our April meeting - 7pm, April 9, at the North Asheville Public Library. (Due to the variety of offices under consideration, questionnaires will be tailored to each applicant, and will be sent via e-mail to candidates expressing interest.)
3. We also encourage candidates to prepare a brief (2-3 minute) video appeal for those members who can't make the April meeting and wish to participate online. We ask candidates to make them available as YouTube videos (and send us a link) several days before April 9 so we can post them on our group blog.
4. A separate vote will be taken for each candidate seeking our endorsement. Only DFA-Link members who joined before March 5, 2008 will be able to vote. Members will be able to vote at the April meeting and then via e-mail for a week afterward.
5. To receive our endorsement, a candidate must receive at least 3/5 of the total votes cast at the meeting and via e-mail.
Please note that until May 6, we will only endorse candidates running in contested primaries. At that point we will provide information on our process for endorsing candidates in the general election.
1. DFA Asheville will not formally invite anyone to start the endorsement process. Instead, candidates must seek our endorsement, though individual members may encourage their preferred candidates to apply. Candidates seeking our endorsement should contact Doug Gibson as soon as possible.
2. All Democratic candidates for Buncombe county commission seeking our endorsement must a) contact Doug Gibson by midnight on April 2, b) complete and return a brief questionnaire by midnight on Sunday, April 6, and b) attend, or send a representative to, our April meeting - 7pm, April 9, at the North Asheville Public Library. (Due to the variety of offices under consideration, questionnaires will be tailored to each applicant, and will be sent via e-mail to candidates expressing interest.)
3. We also encourage candidates to prepare a brief (2-3 minute) video appeal for those members who can't make the April meeting and wish to participate online. We ask candidates to make them available as YouTube videos (and send us a link) several days before April 9 so we can post them on our group blog.
4. A separate vote will be taken for each candidate seeking our endorsement. Only DFA-Link members who joined before March 5, 2008 will be able to vote. Members will be able to vote at the April meeting and then via e-mail for a week afterward.
5. To receive our endorsement, a candidate must receive at least 3/5 of the total votes cast at the meeting and via e-mail.
Please note that until May 6, we will only endorse candidates running in contested primaries. At that point we will provide information on our process for endorsing candidates in the general election.
Why state government matters. Part one . . .
. . . of what is likely to be an extremely long series.
After the disaster that was the 2000 election and its sequels in Florida and at the Supreme Court, some of us still held out hope that things were not going to be quite as bad as we feared. But one of the first signs that things were actually going to be worse came just after Congress convened.
One of the first acts of the all-new, all-Republican Congress (this was in the pre-Jim Jeffords days) was to repeal regulations put in place the previous year by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration that would have required employers to take account of ergonomics when setting up their workplaces. We're not talking about wrist pads and seat height here (though those sorts of items would have been covered): we're talking about, for example, not requiring poultry workers to repeatedly reach into awkward positions in near-freezing temperatures to clean up meat for packaging. In other words, the regulations sought to mitigate problems that can permanently disable people and set the stage for even more horrific accidents and injuries.
So the Republican Congress, as expected, took those new protections away from American workers before they even had a chance to enjoy them. Before there could be any accurate accounting of how much the new rules might cost employers, and before there could be any accurate accounting of how much the new rules might save the public - how many fewer lives might be ruined, how many more able-bodied people could stay in their jobs, how much less money communities paid in medical costs and disability programs.
Here in North Carolina, fortunately, we had our own ergonomics rules. But of course in the 2000 elections Democrats lost one seat on the council of state - Cherie Berry, a Republican, had eked out a victory over Democrat Doug Berger after taking 62% of her campaign donations from the very industries she would be regulating - including $10,000 from the House of Raeford, a poultry processor and one of the worst violators of workplace standards in the state. So it should also come as no surprise that within months of taking office, Berry threw out North Carolina's ergonomics standards. And so one election wiped out protections for millions of workers and gave special interests a victory at both the state and national level.
Absent some historic shift in voting patterns, Berry is likely to win reelection this year. But in 2012 reformers hope to include the Commissioner of Labor race in the state's public financing program, which might make Berry more vulnerable. Which is a good thing. Because whatever happens in DC, state labor departments are largely responsible for the enforcement of federal labor standards. And that means 2008 could be a banner year for Democrats nationally without improving the fortunes of North Carolina workers.
After the disaster that was the 2000 election and its sequels in Florida and at the Supreme Court, some of us still held out hope that things were not going to be quite as bad as we feared. But one of the first signs that things were actually going to be worse came just after Congress convened.
One of the first acts of the all-new, all-Republican Congress (this was in the pre-Jim Jeffords days) was to repeal regulations put in place the previous year by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration that would have required employers to take account of ergonomics when setting up their workplaces. We're not talking about wrist pads and seat height here (though those sorts of items would have been covered): we're talking about, for example, not requiring poultry workers to repeatedly reach into awkward positions in near-freezing temperatures to clean up meat for packaging. In other words, the regulations sought to mitigate problems that can permanently disable people and set the stage for even more horrific accidents and injuries.
So the Republican Congress, as expected, took those new protections away from American workers before they even had a chance to enjoy them. Before there could be any accurate accounting of how much the new rules might cost employers, and before there could be any accurate accounting of how much the new rules might save the public - how many fewer lives might be ruined, how many more able-bodied people could stay in their jobs, how much less money communities paid in medical costs and disability programs.
Here in North Carolina, fortunately, we had our own ergonomics rules. But of course in the 2000 elections Democrats lost one seat on the council of state - Cherie Berry, a Republican, had eked out a victory over Democrat Doug Berger after taking 62% of her campaign donations from the very industries she would be regulating - including $10,000 from the House of Raeford, a poultry processor and one of the worst violators of workplace standards in the state. So it should also come as no surprise that within months of taking office, Berry threw out North Carolina's ergonomics standards. And so one election wiped out protections for millions of workers and gave special interests a victory at both the state and national level.
Absent some historic shift in voting patterns, Berry is likely to win reelection this year. But in 2012 reformers hope to include the Commissioner of Labor race in the state's public financing program, which might make Berry more vulnerable. Which is a good thing. Because whatever happens in DC, state labor departments are largely responsible for the enforcement of federal labor standards. And that means 2008 could be a banner year for Democrats nationally without improving the fortunes of North Carolina workers.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
On the board at last.
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a post detailing the extreme difficulty I had had in finding grassroots Hillary supporters. Now it turns out that Clinton folks will have their first meetup in Buncombe County this coming Thursday at 7pm, at the Atlanta Bread Company on Merrimon Ave. Checking on the Hillary '08 site, I see that groups are up and - well - starting to run across the state. North Carolina's primary could get contentious, apparently.
Now, the fact that Obama folks have been meeting for months doesn't mean that they're better organized, or will be by the time the primary rolls around. And better organization doesn't always translate into victory, anyway. But Hillary supporters will have a lot of ground to make up, and a lot of hard work to pack into six weeks. Good luck, guys, and welcome to the grassroots!
Now, the fact that Obama folks have been meeting for months doesn't mean that they're better organized, or will be by the time the primary rolls around. And better organization doesn't always translate into victory, anyway. But Hillary supporters will have a lot of ground to make up, and a lot of hard work to pack into six weeks. Good luck, guys, and welcome to the grassroots!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
What the media can do to a candidate.
There's a great post right now on Daily Kos pointing out that, for whatever reason, the media has gone in search of a controversy to feed their audiences and found Reverend Wright.
The poster, TocqueDeville, illustrates what's happening now to Barack Obama with a compelling parallel: what happened to Howard Dean after Iowa. This is old history, of course, and I'm only posting because I hadn't seen this clip before. But if you'll listen carefully about 1:13 in, you'll hear what eyewitnesses would have told you they heard on the night of the infamous "Dean Scream." The difference between what you hear on this recording and what was played everywhere in the news - well, it's just symbolic of the difference between the substance of the Wright controversy and the way the media has played it up.
What's ironic to me is the way Democrats at the time mocked Dean and questioned his judgement, his media savvy. And the most common retort of those of us supporting the governor was, "just you wait. Whoever gets nominated - no matter how savvy they are - the media will do exactly the same to them." We were right. And it's happening again to the party's presumptive nominee. I don't know what to do about it. But there it is.
The poster, TocqueDeville, illustrates what's happening now to Barack Obama with a compelling parallel: what happened to Howard Dean after Iowa. This is old history, of course, and I'm only posting because I hadn't seen this clip before. But if you'll listen carefully about 1:13 in, you'll hear what eyewitnesses would have told you they heard on the night of the infamous "Dean Scream." The difference between what you hear on this recording and what was played everywhere in the news - well, it's just symbolic of the difference between the substance of the Wright controversy and the way the media has played it up.
What's ironic to me is the way Democrats at the time mocked Dean and questioned his judgement, his media savvy. And the most common retort of those of us supporting the governor was, "just you wait. Whoever gets nominated - no matter how savvy they are - the media will do exactly the same to them." We were right. And it's happening again to the party's presumptive nominee. I don't know what to do about it. But there it is.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
This way we could insure some parents, maybe.
Forgive the snark - after all, it's wonderful that we're doing so much to fund children's health care. But good as SCHIP is, there are plenty of adults who need health care, too. Over the past couple of years, North Carolina has taken some steps to provide more adults with health insurance: in 2006, the state passed a tax credit which allowed employers to take a deduction of $250 for every employee enrolled in a company health plan. Of course there were conditions - the employee couldn't make more than $40,000, the company had to be paying 50 percent of the employee's insurance costs, and the law only covered employers with 25 or fewer employees. But hey - a step forward is a step forward.
Then last year, North Carolina became the 35th (35th? Why does that sound familiar?) state to find the money to pay for a high risk insurance pool - subsidizing insurance premiums for North Carolinians whose medical conditions made it difficult to find affordable plans. There was a catch here, too: even with the subsidy, people who got this coverage were expected to pay 2/3 of a premium that could be 50% or 100% more than what a healthy person might pay. But it was another step forward.
So when I received my most recent Statside Dispatch from the folks at the Progressive States Network, I found what they had to say very interesting. Apparently some states are using Medicaid and SCHIP funds to pay some or all of the premiums of employed workers on Medicaid. In other words, some state governments are paying private premiums for the working poor.
This has a number of benefits: It provides the kind of positive employment incentive our welfare system has had less and less of since welfare "reform." It can increase the number of employees that a company insures, possibly allowing the employer to purchase insurance less expensively. It subsidizes private insurance, which can lower everyone's insurance costs. And it's another opportunity to work toward the main goal - insuring everyone, including adults - without a frontal assault on private insurors (though that's going to have to happen sometime).
It's not a foolproof system - there's always a chance that these kinds of policy initiatives will get twisted away from their original lofty goals, and some states are seeing low levels of participation. And of course it means that taxpayers are continuing to subsidize the inefficient private health insurance companies when they'd be better off just paying directly for medical care. But when you're in a state like North Carolina, where only incremental change seems possible, and social policies apparently have to allow the wealthy to feel good about themselves, it's good to have another piece of the puzzle handy in case there's an opportunity to put it in.
Then last year, North Carolina became the 35th (35th? Why does that sound familiar?) state to find the money to pay for a high risk insurance pool - subsidizing insurance premiums for North Carolinians whose medical conditions made it difficult to find affordable plans. There was a catch here, too: even with the subsidy, people who got this coverage were expected to pay 2/3 of a premium that could be 50% or 100% more than what a healthy person might pay. But it was another step forward.
So when I received my most recent Statside Dispatch from the folks at the Progressive States Network, I found what they had to say very interesting. Apparently some states are using Medicaid and SCHIP funds to pay some or all of the premiums of employed workers on Medicaid. In other words, some state governments are paying private premiums for the working poor.
This has a number of benefits: It provides the kind of positive employment incentive our welfare system has had less and less of since welfare "reform." It can increase the number of employees that a company insures, possibly allowing the employer to purchase insurance less expensively. It subsidizes private insurance, which can lower everyone's insurance costs. And it's another opportunity to work toward the main goal - insuring everyone, including adults - without a frontal assault on private insurors (though that's going to have to happen sometime).
It's not a foolproof system - there's always a chance that these kinds of policy initiatives will get twisted away from their original lofty goals, and some states are seeing low levels of participation. And of course it means that taxpayers are continuing to subsidize the inefficient private health insurance companies when they'd be better off just paying directly for medical care. But when you're in a state like North Carolina, where only incremental change seems possible, and social policies apparently have to allow the wealthy to feel good about themselves, it's good to have another piece of the puzzle handy in case there's an opportunity to put it in.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
The Flat Tax: An Idea Whose Time Has Come
No, really.
Rob Schofield at NC Policy Watch has a weekly briefing up on a new report from the NC Budget and Tax Center. In 2007, as it turns out, the lowest 20% of households in North Carolina - with an average income of $10,000 - paid about 11% of their income in state and local taxes. The top 1% of households - with an average income of $970,000 a year - paid about 7% of their income in state and local taxes.
That discrepancy says a lot about North Carolina tax policy. Schofield, for some reason, takes pains to point out taxes aren't as regressive here as they are in other states - which is true, especially when you consider states that don't have income taxes at all, but rather rely entirely on property and sales taxes to raise revenue.
But our state tax system is still regressive - it still relies too heavily on the sales tax, for example, and the sales tax is in turn made even more regressive by the fact that the state doesn't impose it on a number of personal services. And as we're beginning to see in Buncombe County, the property taxes that local governments rely on don't take account of the fact that many of us are "land poor," that is, in possession of land that's valued much more highly than it's worth to the owners - and that imposes a crushing tax burden on the elderly and others with fixed incomes.
The report suggests a number of remedies: making the income tax system more progressive, putting a sales tax on services, and providing tax credits for property taxes paid by those with low incomes. And if we took these steps, we could even up the score, creating a system whereby the poorest and the richest paid an equal portion of their income in taxes. The state would also begin collecting more revenue - enough to start making progress on other pockets of injustice, like our mental health system, or the shortfalls in the affordable housing fund, or the skyrocketing tuitions at our state universities - just to name a very few of the challenges we face.
That would be something, wouldn't it? So let's have that flat tax - as long as the goal is "justice," and not "helping the rich avoid paying their share by ignoring property and sales taxes," who could say no?
Rob Schofield at NC Policy Watch has a weekly briefing up on a new report from the NC Budget and Tax Center. In 2007, as it turns out, the lowest 20% of households in North Carolina - with an average income of $10,000 - paid about 11% of their income in state and local taxes. The top 1% of households - with an average income of $970,000 a year - paid about 7% of their income in state and local taxes.
That discrepancy says a lot about North Carolina tax policy. Schofield, for some reason, takes pains to point out taxes aren't as regressive here as they are in other states - which is true, especially when you consider states that don't have income taxes at all, but rather rely entirely on property and sales taxes to raise revenue.
But our state tax system is still regressive - it still relies too heavily on the sales tax, for example, and the sales tax is in turn made even more regressive by the fact that the state doesn't impose it on a number of personal services. And as we're beginning to see in Buncombe County, the property taxes that local governments rely on don't take account of the fact that many of us are "land poor," that is, in possession of land that's valued much more highly than it's worth to the owners - and that imposes a crushing tax burden on the elderly and others with fixed incomes.
The report suggests a number of remedies: making the income tax system more progressive, putting a sales tax on services, and providing tax credits for property taxes paid by those with low incomes. And if we took these steps, we could even up the score, creating a system whereby the poorest and the richest paid an equal portion of their income in taxes. The state would also begin collecting more revenue - enough to start making progress on other pockets of injustice, like our mental health system, or the shortfalls in the affordable housing fund, or the skyrocketing tuitions at our state universities - just to name a very few of the challenges we face.
That would be something, wouldn't it? So let's have that flat tax - as long as the goal is "justice," and not "helping the rich avoid paying their share by ignoring property and sales taxes," who could say no?
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Hillary supporters are hard to find.
As part of our "Souper Tuesday" food drive, I attended the Buncombe County Democratic Party's volunteer luncheon last Wednesday. (And collected heaps of food - thanks BCDP!)
Out of all the things that got discussed at the luncheon - including short stump speeches by four candidates for county commission, and an impromptu forum on the state's mental health crisis - one thing struck me in particular, because it jibes with my experience.
Kate Swafford of WNC for Change, the local Obama group, introduced herself at that meeting, and encouraged anyone there who supported Obama to come to their weekly meeting (Thursdays at 6:30 at Hill Street Baptist Church in Asheville). County chair Kathy Sinclair thanked Kate for coming, and mentioned that she didn't know if there was any similar group of Hillary supporters, but that she'd love to hear from them. A silence fell as a roomful of Buncombe County's most experienced and connected grassroots Democrats looked around at each other shrugging. Nobody else there knew of any local Hillary group. And as you might expect, nobody stood up to express support for Hillary and invite others there to form a local group.
That struck me because twice in the past year DFA-Asheville has organized forums for local supporters of Democratic presidential contenders. Last spring I found it very easy to get in touch with people backing Obama, Edwards, and Kucinich, and once the meeting was announced a Gore supporter contacted me on his own initiative. Obama and Edwards even had tools on their websites to facilitate exactly this kind of grassroots networking. At the time, however, Hillary did not, and appeals to our DFA list didn't bring anyone forward. I found a volunteer website dedicated to Hillary's campaign, and for a while the person running that site toyed with traveling to Asheville from Florida to represent his candidate. That didn't pan out, however, and by the time the meeting came around, he hadn't managed to recruit any local supporters to show up.
Fast forward to February '08, when we wanted to do another Presidential candidate forum. Again, Obama supporters were easy to find - after having signed up through the Obama grassroots tools in the spring, I had gotten onto a local Obama mailing list, and I just replied to one of those e-mails to recruit someone to appear for the senator from Illinois. I visited Hillary's site and was pleasantly surprised to see that she now had a place where volunteers could network; I signed onto the local list, sent several e-mails, and waited. No response. I tried the local contact the fellow from Florida had finally provided last spring. No response.
Not to labor the point any further, but I'm frankly shocked at Clinton's neglect of the grassroots - and equally shocked at her supporters' apparent antipathy to the sort of grassroots initiative that we've seen with Obama's campaign this year, and saw with Dean's campaign in 2004. I'm not saying that it should have been a top priority for anyone to send a rep to a small DFA meeting in western North Carolina, but the almost complete lack of response is jarring - especially compared with the enthusiastic response I met with from the Obama people.
I don't want to read too much into it, but I think this just highlights something a lot of other observers have noticed - the culture of the Clinton campaign seems unable to grasp the importance of grassroots organizing. But I suspect there's something deeper at play here as well - that Clinton's supporters just aren't themselves all that interested in grassroots politics. That's fine - I'd like to give it less time, too - but I'm not alone in thinking that for us on the left, our disengagement from electoral politics is part of what caused the disasters of 1994 and 2000. And to the extent that the Democratic Party has revived, it's been largely the result of people becoming engaged again - and especially people learning to use the new tools that the Internet offers anyone who wants to organize people locally or nationally. These tools are amazing, but you don't become proficient with them overnight.
More to the point, though, the tools have been used by people who were motivated to make a difference, and who felt the responsibility to act. I don't know for sure - after all, it's been hard to meet Clinton supporters face-to-face - but I suspect that even at the grassroots the people driving her campaign want to put the right set of professionals back in charge, and then go back to doing other things. Up until quite recently, that's all Democratic campaigns have ever been about. And given that mindset, why spend much time or energy on the grassroots - even if you're a grassroots supporter? On Obama's side, however, one gets the sense that his volunteers are aiming to put together a movement - and that after our experience with this Congress, a few even see as one of the aims of that movement holding Obama and his party accountable if he wins. At the very least, his campaign will have created a new group of experienced, motivated, and networked people capable of doing so.
Out of all the things that got discussed at the luncheon - including short stump speeches by four candidates for county commission, and an impromptu forum on the state's mental health crisis - one thing struck me in particular, because it jibes with my experience.
Kate Swafford of WNC for Change, the local Obama group, introduced herself at that meeting, and encouraged anyone there who supported Obama to come to their weekly meeting (Thursdays at 6:30 at Hill Street Baptist Church in Asheville). County chair Kathy Sinclair thanked Kate for coming, and mentioned that she didn't know if there was any similar group of Hillary supporters, but that she'd love to hear from them. A silence fell as a roomful of Buncombe County's most experienced and connected grassroots Democrats looked around at each other shrugging. Nobody else there knew of any local Hillary group. And as you might expect, nobody stood up to express support for Hillary and invite others there to form a local group.
That struck me because twice in the past year DFA-Asheville has organized forums for local supporters of Democratic presidential contenders. Last spring I found it very easy to get in touch with people backing Obama, Edwards, and Kucinich, and once the meeting was announced a Gore supporter contacted me on his own initiative. Obama and Edwards even had tools on their websites to facilitate exactly this kind of grassroots networking. At the time, however, Hillary did not, and appeals to our DFA list didn't bring anyone forward. I found a volunteer website dedicated to Hillary's campaign, and for a while the person running that site toyed with traveling to Asheville from Florida to represent his candidate. That didn't pan out, however, and by the time the meeting came around, he hadn't managed to recruit any local supporters to show up.
Fast forward to February '08, when we wanted to do another Presidential candidate forum. Again, Obama supporters were easy to find - after having signed up through the Obama grassroots tools in the spring, I had gotten onto a local Obama mailing list, and I just replied to one of those e-mails to recruit someone to appear for the senator from Illinois. I visited Hillary's site and was pleasantly surprised to see that she now had a place where volunteers could network; I signed onto the local list, sent several e-mails, and waited. No response. I tried the local contact the fellow from Florida had finally provided last spring. No response.
Not to labor the point any further, but I'm frankly shocked at Clinton's neglect of the grassroots - and equally shocked at her supporters' apparent antipathy to the sort of grassroots initiative that we've seen with Obama's campaign this year, and saw with Dean's campaign in 2004. I'm not saying that it should have been a top priority for anyone to send a rep to a small DFA meeting in western North Carolina, but the almost complete lack of response is jarring - especially compared with the enthusiastic response I met with from the Obama people.
I don't want to read too much into it, but I think this just highlights something a lot of other observers have noticed - the culture of the Clinton campaign seems unable to grasp the importance of grassroots organizing. But I suspect there's something deeper at play here as well - that Clinton's supporters just aren't themselves all that interested in grassroots politics. That's fine - I'd like to give it less time, too - but I'm not alone in thinking that for us on the left, our disengagement from electoral politics is part of what caused the disasters of 1994 and 2000. And to the extent that the Democratic Party has revived, it's been largely the result of people becoming engaged again - and especially people learning to use the new tools that the Internet offers anyone who wants to organize people locally or nationally. These tools are amazing, but you don't become proficient with them overnight.
More to the point, though, the tools have been used by people who were motivated to make a difference, and who felt the responsibility to act. I don't know for sure - after all, it's been hard to meet Clinton supporters face-to-face - but I suspect that even at the grassroots the people driving her campaign want to put the right set of professionals back in charge, and then go back to doing other things. Up until quite recently, that's all Democratic campaigns have ever been about. And given that mindset, why spend much time or energy on the grassroots - even if you're a grassroots supporter? On Obama's side, however, one gets the sense that his volunteers are aiming to put together a movement - and that after our experience with this Congress, a few even see as one of the aims of that movement holding Obama and his party accountable if he wins. At the very least, his campaign will have created a new group of experienced, motivated, and networked people capable of doing so.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Candidate Questionnaire: Cecil Bothwell
Cecil Bothwell is seeking our endorsement for the Buncombe county commission. His response to our questionnaire is below, with our questions in bold.
For more on Cecil's campaign, visit his website.
1. In what areas do you think Buncombe could be leading the rest of the country?
I believe that we should become leaders in planning and implementation of sustainable resource-use practices and a sustainable economy. I use “sustainable” in it's ecological sense, the no-net-growth model embodied in a forest. Kerala, India, for example, is on track to becoming a zero-waste state where everything is recycled. There's no reason we can't aim for that in Buncombe.
2. What is your number one priority with regard to development and land use?
We need to aim for hub-and-spoke development, in which homes and businesses are situated in walkable clusters along transit and utility corridors. I would advocate true-cost accounting for utilities and infrastructure and openly debate the question of whether new septic tanks should be prohibited, or at least prohibited in multi-family developments in order to cluster development along sewer lines.
3. Growth projections for Buncombe are continually revised upward. Have previous approaches to development become obsolete? Would you support a temporary moratorium on development while the county works with municipal governments to prepare for these new projections?
Yes. And yes.
4. How can the county practice environmental stewardship and promote broad-based economic growth at the same time?
This may seem contrarian, but I take exception to the economic theory implicit in this question. Economic growth as usually defined is a fraud because it requires externalization of environmental and resource costs. A more meaningful way to frame the question is, “Can we promote broad-based social benefits without practicing environmental stewardship?” The answer to that question is “no.” Viewed globally, water shortages are already constricting grain supplies and we are near if not past the peak on oil production. To ignore those twin crises and their near- and long-term implications in our community is to imperil our citizenry. Food security, for example, is a very real looming threat.
5. Many of our members want their local governments to lead the way in promoting energy independence and combating global warming. In what ways should the county work towards these goals?
We should build a peaking power plant in Woodfin. (joking folks)
I believe we should follow Asheville's lead in energy efficiency planning, and upgrade the building code to require lower-impact construction. One problem faced at the household level is that photovoltaic and active solar heating systems have relatively high upfront costs. Other municipalities have used their borrowing power to offer low-interest, long-term loans to homeowners and commercial property owners which are billed with property taxes. That way, the cost is apportioned to current and future owners, each of whom gain immediate reduction in energy costs and pollution. We should back up CEAC's recent suggestion to Progress Energy that it encourage people to switch to gas-fired hot water whenever a water heater needs to be replaced. Better still, switch to solar.
6. Do you see a role for the county in promoting energy efficiency in transportation and residential and business use?
Absolutely. I would support changes to the property tax code that gradually impose differential vehicle valuations based on efficiency. My answer to the previous question is just one way the county could promote energy efficiency, and I think my answers to most of the questions so far relate to this question as well.
7. The county government plays a central role in providing social services. Where has it been most successful? Where does it most need improvement?
The county has done a pretty good job overall in the areas of education and public health. However, the drop-out rate, particularly among black male students, remains far too high both here and across the country. There is some suggestion that there is even collusion involved, permitting drop-outs to stay out in order to raise the system's subsequent test score averages. I'd investigate that and I would seek improvements, but anyone who claims to have a sure cure is hallucinating.
I think the county dealt remarkably well with the mental health care crisis dumped on us by misguided legislators in Raleigh, but the crisis isn't over and the county has a major role in improving availability and continuity of mental health services. Treatment is cheaper than jail cells.
One hears many stories about problems in the Division of Social Services, some of which are undoubtedly true. As a commissioner I would do what I could to pierce the veil at DSS. The difficulty there is intrinsic to that department's function, dealing with highly personal and often highly charged interpersonal issues.
8. Do you think that the current commission has carried out its work in a manner that is sufficiently transparent? If not, how would you change things?
Based on my years covering the commission as a reporter, I believe that most decisions are made in secret, based on conversations and consultations that violate either the spirit or the letter of the state's open government laws. I would not be party to back-room discussions and I would publicly expose any such discussions of which I had knowledge. I would keep constituents informed of pending development matters and vote to televise the public comment section of commish meetings.
9. Has the current commission made decisions that you strongly disagree with? If so, what will you do to remedy those decisions if you are elected?
The incumbent commissioners are either incompetent or corrupt.
The Woodfin lease to Progress Energy is, perhaps, the most glaring example I can offer. All five voted to affirm a contract discussed in secret and written by Progress which granted an 80-year lease to a wide swath of pristine river frontage for one dollar per year, with no restrictions on use. They lied to us about it: said it was “former landfill” when, in fact, it was land approved for a landfill but never used (which the state government told me could easily be legally removed from the landfill designation for development purposes); and commissioners said the lease was only valid for construction of a power plant, when it explicitly permitted “any use.”
Selling of the downtown park property to developer Stewart Coleman is another example of either incompetence or corruption. On that latter case, I would vote to take back the land via declaration of eminent domain and buy him out. The deal is rife with insider dealing and idiocy. It's my impression that Coleman has no intention to build on that property but is using it as a pawn to force the city to trade more valuable property for that parcel. Coleman said as much at a Pack Square Conservancy meeting I attended, and that he'd cooked up the deal with former City Planning Director Scott Shuford in a private meeting in 2005. We shouldn't permit insider dealing to be rewarded, but the cost of condemnation and buy-back will be worth it to preserve the park.
10. Do you have a plan for how you will win this election? If so, could you briefly describe the elements of your plan?
Between now and May 6 I'll be putting in an appearance at every community group meeting or public event where talking to voters seems promising. Because I have a strong base in the progressive community in Asheville, much of that effort will involve reaching out to people beyond the city limits.
I intend to raise at least $20,000 for the primary race in order to do cable TV ads ($12,000), direct mail ($4,000) and 1,000 yard signs ($3,500). (These numbers are quick estimates based on previous experience.) Given the size of the county and the likely high turn-out due to interest in the presidential contest, I believe TV may be the only way to reach a wide swath of people.
My web site is already up and generating donations, though I know from past experience as a Web marketer that generating fresh hits is a tough sell. My e-list runs to about 5,000 people now, and if I could garner average donations of just $5 per person, I would exceed my immediate goal.
If I raise much money, I will divert a significant portion of it to a meaningful gesture such as Brownie Newman's distribution of compact fluorescent bulbs during the recent city council race—to campaign by making a difference instead of printing vast amounts of literature full of empty promises. One possibility for the general election is to run a series of free greening classes in conjunction with other environmentalists, to make a political pitch but also offer practical advice for individual action.
11. Would you call yourself a political progressive? Why or why not?
Utterly. One of my cats is named Chomsky, for Noam. Another is named Clare, for Hanrahan. Havoc is just Havoc.
For more on Cecil's campaign, visit his website.
1. In what areas do you think Buncombe could be leading the rest of the country?
I believe that we should become leaders in planning and implementation of sustainable resource-use practices and a sustainable economy. I use “sustainable” in it's ecological sense, the no-net-growth model embodied in a forest. Kerala, India, for example, is on track to becoming a zero-waste state where everything is recycled. There's no reason we can't aim for that in Buncombe.
2. What is your number one priority with regard to development and land use?
We need to aim for hub-and-spoke development, in which homes and businesses are situated in walkable clusters along transit and utility corridors. I would advocate true-cost accounting for utilities and infrastructure and openly debate the question of whether new septic tanks should be prohibited, or at least prohibited in multi-family developments in order to cluster development along sewer lines.
3. Growth projections for Buncombe are continually revised upward. Have previous approaches to development become obsolete? Would you support a temporary moratorium on development while the county works with municipal governments to prepare for these new projections?
Yes. And yes.
4. How can the county practice environmental stewardship and promote broad-based economic growth at the same time?
This may seem contrarian, but I take exception to the economic theory implicit in this question. Economic growth as usually defined is a fraud because it requires externalization of environmental and resource costs. A more meaningful way to frame the question is, “Can we promote broad-based social benefits without practicing environmental stewardship?” The answer to that question is “no.” Viewed globally, water shortages are already constricting grain supplies and we are near if not past the peak on oil production. To ignore those twin crises and their near- and long-term implications in our community is to imperil our citizenry. Food security, for example, is a very real looming threat.
5. Many of our members want their local governments to lead the way in promoting energy independence and combating global warming. In what ways should the county work towards these goals?
We should build a peaking power plant in Woodfin. (joking folks)
I believe we should follow Asheville's lead in energy efficiency planning, and upgrade the building code to require lower-impact construction. One problem faced at the household level is that photovoltaic and active solar heating systems have relatively high upfront costs. Other municipalities have used their borrowing power to offer low-interest, long-term loans to homeowners and commercial property owners which are billed with property taxes. That way, the cost is apportioned to current and future owners, each of whom gain immediate reduction in energy costs and pollution. We should back up CEAC's recent suggestion to Progress Energy that it encourage people to switch to gas-fired hot water whenever a water heater needs to be replaced. Better still, switch to solar.
6. Do you see a role for the county in promoting energy efficiency in transportation and residential and business use?
Absolutely. I would support changes to the property tax code that gradually impose differential vehicle valuations based on efficiency. My answer to the previous question is just one way the county could promote energy efficiency, and I think my answers to most of the questions so far relate to this question as well.
7. The county government plays a central role in providing social services. Where has it been most successful? Where does it most need improvement?
The county has done a pretty good job overall in the areas of education and public health. However, the drop-out rate, particularly among black male students, remains far too high both here and across the country. There is some suggestion that there is even collusion involved, permitting drop-outs to stay out in order to raise the system's subsequent test score averages. I'd investigate that and I would seek improvements, but anyone who claims to have a sure cure is hallucinating.
I think the county dealt remarkably well with the mental health care crisis dumped on us by misguided legislators in Raleigh, but the crisis isn't over and the county has a major role in improving availability and continuity of mental health services. Treatment is cheaper than jail cells.
One hears many stories about problems in the Division of Social Services, some of which are undoubtedly true. As a commissioner I would do what I could to pierce the veil at DSS. The difficulty there is intrinsic to that department's function, dealing with highly personal and often highly charged interpersonal issues.
8. Do you think that the current commission has carried out its work in a manner that is sufficiently transparent? If not, how would you change things?
Based on my years covering the commission as a reporter, I believe that most decisions are made in secret, based on conversations and consultations that violate either the spirit or the letter of the state's open government laws. I would not be party to back-room discussions and I would publicly expose any such discussions of which I had knowledge. I would keep constituents informed of pending development matters and vote to televise the public comment section of commish meetings.
9. Has the current commission made decisions that you strongly disagree with? If so, what will you do to remedy those decisions if you are elected?
The incumbent commissioners are either incompetent or corrupt.
The Woodfin lease to Progress Energy is, perhaps, the most glaring example I can offer. All five voted to affirm a contract discussed in secret and written by Progress which granted an 80-year lease to a wide swath of pristine river frontage for one dollar per year, with no restrictions on use. They lied to us about it: said it was “former landfill” when, in fact, it was land approved for a landfill but never used (which the state government told me could easily be legally removed from the landfill designation for development purposes); and commissioners said the lease was only valid for construction of a power plant, when it explicitly permitted “any use.”
Selling of the downtown park property to developer Stewart Coleman is another example of either incompetence or corruption. On that latter case, I would vote to take back the land via declaration of eminent domain and buy him out. The deal is rife with insider dealing and idiocy. It's my impression that Coleman has no intention to build on that property but is using it as a pawn to force the city to trade more valuable property for that parcel. Coleman said as much at a Pack Square Conservancy meeting I attended, and that he'd cooked up the deal with former City Planning Director Scott Shuford in a private meeting in 2005. We shouldn't permit insider dealing to be rewarded, but the cost of condemnation and buy-back will be worth it to preserve the park.
10. Do you have a plan for how you will win this election? If so, could you briefly describe the elements of your plan?
Between now and May 6 I'll be putting in an appearance at every community group meeting or public event where talking to voters seems promising. Because I have a strong base in the progressive community in Asheville, much of that effort will involve reaching out to people beyond the city limits.
I intend to raise at least $20,000 for the primary race in order to do cable TV ads ($12,000), direct mail ($4,000) and 1,000 yard signs ($3,500). (These numbers are quick estimates based on previous experience.) Given the size of the county and the likely high turn-out due to interest in the presidential contest, I believe TV may be the only way to reach a wide swath of people.
My web site is already up and generating donations, though I know from past experience as a Web marketer that generating fresh hits is a tough sell. My e-list runs to about 5,000 people now, and if I could garner average donations of just $5 per person, I would exceed my immediate goal.
If I raise much money, I will divert a significant portion of it to a meaningful gesture such as Brownie Newman's distribution of compact fluorescent bulbs during the recent city council race—to campaign by making a difference instead of printing vast amounts of literature full of empty promises. One possibility for the general election is to run a series of free greening classes in conjunction with other environmentalists, to make a political pitch but also offer practical advice for individual action.
11. Would you call yourself a political progressive? Why or why not?
Utterly. One of my cats is named Chomsky, for Noam. Another is named Clare, for Hanrahan. Havoc is just Havoc.
- I'm a member of the ACLU, the Unitarian Universalist Church, the American Humanist Society and DFA.
- I ran Cynthia Brown's pro-union/anti-war/environmentalist bid for the U.S. Senate in WNC in 2002.
- I co-founded Sparechange? a group which successfully challenged Asheville's unconstitutional panhandling law in 2002 and went on to organize Support Our Soldiers: Bring Them Home! and other peace demonstrations starting in 2003.
- I attended the School of the America's protest in 2003.
- I created and became chief organizer of the Asheville Rolling Thunder Down Home Democracy Tour event in 2003.
- I was co-coordinator of Dean For America in Asheville in 2004.
- I co-founded the Asheville Coalition in 2005 which evolved into the Robin Cape and Brian Freeborn campaigns.
- I attended the anti-war rally in DC in September 2006.
- I created a jail ministry at the Buncombe County Detention Center and have been an active participant since 2006.
- I attended Building Bridges in 2003 and 2006 and helped facilitate another session in 2007.
- I have been a volunteer client escort at Femcare, for three years in the 90s, and am currently, since 2006. (We help fend-off the shouting, aggressive protesters.)
- I created the Asheville-Buncombe Policy Institute in 2007, a progressive think-tank which began its work with a white paper on transparency in local government.
- I am on the Board of Directors of two nonprofits doing educational projects in Bolivia and Guatemala.
- I am a tutor at the Reid Center under the auspices of Partners Unlimited.
- I am chair of the Human Rights Team at the Unitarian Univeralist Church of Asheville, attend meetings of WNC Amnesty International and organized the annual UUCA Human Rights Fair in 2007 and 2008.
Candidate Questionnaire: Holly Jones
Holly Jones is seeking our endorsement for county commission. Below are her responses to our candidate questionnaire, with our questions in bold.
For more about Holly's campaign, visit her website.
1. In what areas do you think Buncombe could be leading the rest of the country?
I am proud of the work I have done as a member of the Asheville City Council to establish our community as a leader for clean, renewable energy. Asheville has committed to future city facilities to achieve the LEED Gold Standard, which only a handful of other cities in the country have committed to do. We also committed to reduce our cities global warming emissions by 80%, the level which the best science tells us is necessary to avoid the most harmful impacts of global warming on future generations. We have followed up on these good policies with strong actions, such as converting our city’s transit fleet to clean hybrid technologies and inventorying city facilities for energy efficiency opportunities. I want to see Buncombe County become a leader for clean, renewable energy as well.
2. What is your number one priority with regard to development and land use?
It’s clear the piecemeal approach that we have taken to land use and community planning is inadequate to address the challenges of growth. We need a shared vision for how our community and region will grow and develop. The County Commission is the logical body to lead a community-wide process for creating a shared vision and plan for our future. I will make creating a regional plan a top priority on the County Commission. While I believe the specifics of that plan must be based on input from the whole community, core concerns that are important to me include:
· Fostering walkable, bikeable and transit friendly neighborhoods throughout the county.
· Strong incentives for green building.
· Provisions to assure creation of affordable housing.
· Creation of a county-wide network of protected natural areas and greenways.
· Preservation of working family farms.
· Strengthening the economic vibrancy of the downtown areas of all our municipalities.
3. Growth projections for Buncombe are continually revised upward. Have previous approaches to development become obsolete? Would you support a temporary moratorium on development while the county works with municipal governments to prepare for these new projections?
I have seen examples of communities that have relatively low levels of growth that still have major problems with sprawl development, as well as examples of communities that have experienced major growth but who were effective in addressing these challenges. I am concerned that a blanket moratorium would amount to “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” I see many exciting positive community developments going forward in Asheville that I would not want to see blocked through a moratorium. One example would be projects like the Glenrock Hotel, which will be a major factor in revitalization of our riverfront and will create much needed affordable housing near our key employment centers. I don’t think it will be possible to resolve all the important planning challenges facing Buncombe County in a short period of time and I would have real concerns about the impacts of an open-ended moratorium on any new economic development and affordable housing in our community.
4. How can the county practice environmental stewardship and promote broad-based economic growth at the same time?
I do not support growth for the sake of growth, but I think it’s unrealistic to think that people are going to stop moving to Asheville in the near future. Our goal must be to assure that we shape a pattern of development that reflects our community goals and values. By insisting that new development be as green and energy efficient as possible, improving the energy efficiency of the existing built environment and creating new sources of clean energy, we can place our community on the path of sustainability. Similarly, we should focus new growth in areas within our existing developed landscape, rather than on our best remaining farmland and natural areas. Furthermore, the pursuit of such development is a great forward step in green job creation.
In terms of job creation, the Buncombe County Commission should take a leadership role in our community and I would pursue this avenue of green job creation aggressively. One final concrete example of the marriage of environmental stewardship and economic growth is the promotion of local farmers. Growth of this local food industry is a winner environmentally and economically (not to mention promoting healthier eating habits) and I would advocate Buncombe County pursuing policies that support it.
5. Many of our members want their local governments to lead the way in promoting energy independence and combating global warming. In what ways should the county work towards these goals?
First, we must lead by example. The County should make a commitment to reduce our global warming emissions by 80% by the year 2050. This can be achieved by making more energy efficient building and vehicle fleets and gradually switching out our energy and fuel use to clean, renewable sources. We should also provide strong incentives for all new development in Buncombe County to utilize the highest standards for green building. Furthermore, Buncombe County should lead by example. We should hold ourselves to high energy efficient standards as new county buildings are developed. Finally, the County should strongly work to bring new green collar jobs to Buncombe County so that our citizens can participate fully in the new emerging clean energy economy. To that end, I support the climate services initiative of the Asheville-Buncombe HUB project,, a collaborative regional economic development model. The HUB is a visionary, yet well-grounded, effort to bring green jobs to our community.
6. Do you see a role for the county in promoting energy efficiency in transportation and residential and business use?
Yes. I promoted a policy on City Council to provide a 100% fee permit rebate for new developments that achieve a high standard for green building. I will support this same policy at the County level. I am proud of the role the city has taken to create a more sustainable transportation network, including the implementation of a 90 day ride-for-free transit promotional campaign, new evening transit service, converting our transit fleet to low-emission hybrid vehicles, and supporting the Asheville Design Center’s plans for the I-26 Connector. I believe the County should take a stronger leadership role in transportation planning, including development of an effective park and ride network linked to high-quality transit services for commuters.
7. The county government plays a central role in providing social services. Where has it been most successful? Where does it most need improvement?
Health and human services make up the largest percentage of the Buncombe County budget and thus requires leadership in touch with the needs and priorities being addressed with these dollars. Furthermore, the services delivered in this arena have huge impacts on the daily lives of working families in Buncombe County. I am the candidate who is in touch daily with the real world issues being addressed by this sector. In terms of success, over the last decade, strong and visionary leadership at the Department of Social Services (DSS) resulted in effective partnerships to deliver much needed aid to our most vulnerable. The community partnerships established by DSS with entities such as AB Tech, Mission Hospital, ABCCM, demonstrate a deep commitment by the department to address the root causes of poverty and joblessness and not simply deliver federally mandated services.
The area for improvement I would highlight has to do with the issue of the consolidation of social services and health services. While a valid idea in theory, its ultimate effectiveness is dependent on broad community buy-in. I am concerned this has not happened sufficiently and the consolidation effort has been driven primarily by short-term cost savings. Given that the consolidation is a done deal, I would like to champion its true effectiveness with the community in terms of service delivery and cost efficiencies.
8. Do you think that the current commission has carried out its work in a manner that is sufficiently transparent? If not, how would you change things?
I do not agree with the manner in which the proposal for citing a new Progress Energy power plant on publicly owned land was withheld from public notice for a very long period of time. As a member of the Asheville City Council. I have been diligent in following the open meetings laws of North Carolina. I think such adherence is vital to achieving the public trust. The City Council has often been criticized for the length of our meetings, but I believe it is worth a more extended public meeting if that is what it takes to carry out the people’s business in a fully transparent manner.
9. Has the current commission made decisions that you strongly disagree with? If so, what will you do to remedy those decisions if you are elected?
I have great respect for the citizens who serve on the Buncombe County Commission. I do not agree with all the decisions they make, just as I am sure they do not agree with all the decisions I have made. One issue I particularly did not agree with was with the decision to sell public land in Pack Square Park to a developer.
10. Do you have a plan for how you will win this election? If so, could you briefly describe the elements of your plan?
Yes. I have worked with my team of supporters to create a plan for our campaign that I believe will carry us to victory in the Primary and General Election. I am fortunate to have a great group of dedicated volunteers and supporters. We plan to run a positive, issue oriented campaign. We have set ambitious goals for directly engaging the voters throughout the County through grassroots outreach as well as paid media. We have already achieved many of the key benchmarks we set for our campaign.
11. Would you call yourself a political progressive? Why or why not?
I am proud to count myself as a participant in our country’s long tradition of progressive change. I am proud to live in a community that elected the first female candidate, Lillian Exum Clement, to a state legislature in the Southeastern United States. For the past twelve years I have worked for the YWCA, whose mission is the empowerment of women and the elimination of racism. I bring those same core values to my work as a public official. I also identify with the mission and core values of DFA, which is to support fiscal accountability and socially progressive policies at all levels of government.
For more about Holly's campaign, visit her website.
1. In what areas do you think Buncombe could be leading the rest of the country?
I am proud of the work I have done as a member of the Asheville City Council to establish our community as a leader for clean, renewable energy. Asheville has committed to future city facilities to achieve the LEED Gold Standard, which only a handful of other cities in the country have committed to do. We also committed to reduce our cities global warming emissions by 80%, the level which the best science tells us is necessary to avoid the most harmful impacts of global warming on future generations. We have followed up on these good policies with strong actions, such as converting our city’s transit fleet to clean hybrid technologies and inventorying city facilities for energy efficiency opportunities. I want to see Buncombe County become a leader for clean, renewable energy as well.
2. What is your number one priority with regard to development and land use?
It’s clear the piecemeal approach that we have taken to land use and community planning is inadequate to address the challenges of growth. We need a shared vision for how our community and region will grow and develop. The County Commission is the logical body to lead a community-wide process for creating a shared vision and plan for our future. I will make creating a regional plan a top priority on the County Commission. While I believe the specifics of that plan must be based on input from the whole community, core concerns that are important to me include:
· Fostering walkable, bikeable and transit friendly neighborhoods throughout the county.
· Strong incentives for green building.
· Provisions to assure creation of affordable housing.
· Creation of a county-wide network of protected natural areas and greenways.
· Preservation of working family farms.
· Strengthening the economic vibrancy of the downtown areas of all our municipalities.
3. Growth projections for Buncombe are continually revised upward. Have previous approaches to development become obsolete? Would you support a temporary moratorium on development while the county works with municipal governments to prepare for these new projections?
I have seen examples of communities that have relatively low levels of growth that still have major problems with sprawl development, as well as examples of communities that have experienced major growth but who were effective in addressing these challenges. I am concerned that a blanket moratorium would amount to “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” I see many exciting positive community developments going forward in Asheville that I would not want to see blocked through a moratorium. One example would be projects like the Glenrock Hotel, which will be a major factor in revitalization of our riverfront and will create much needed affordable housing near our key employment centers. I don’t think it will be possible to resolve all the important planning challenges facing Buncombe County in a short period of time and I would have real concerns about the impacts of an open-ended moratorium on any new economic development and affordable housing in our community.
4. How can the county practice environmental stewardship and promote broad-based economic growth at the same time?
I do not support growth for the sake of growth, but I think it’s unrealistic to think that people are going to stop moving to Asheville in the near future. Our goal must be to assure that we shape a pattern of development that reflects our community goals and values. By insisting that new development be as green and energy efficient as possible, improving the energy efficiency of the existing built environment and creating new sources of clean energy, we can place our community on the path of sustainability. Similarly, we should focus new growth in areas within our existing developed landscape, rather than on our best remaining farmland and natural areas. Furthermore, the pursuit of such development is a great forward step in green job creation.
In terms of job creation, the Buncombe County Commission should take a leadership role in our community and I would pursue this avenue of green job creation aggressively. One final concrete example of the marriage of environmental stewardship and economic growth is the promotion of local farmers. Growth of this local food industry is a winner environmentally and economically (not to mention promoting healthier eating habits) and I would advocate Buncombe County pursuing policies that support it.
5. Many of our members want their local governments to lead the way in promoting energy independence and combating global warming. In what ways should the county work towards these goals?
First, we must lead by example. The County should make a commitment to reduce our global warming emissions by 80% by the year 2050. This can be achieved by making more energy efficient building and vehicle fleets and gradually switching out our energy and fuel use to clean, renewable sources. We should also provide strong incentives for all new development in Buncombe County to utilize the highest standards for green building. Furthermore, Buncombe County should lead by example. We should hold ourselves to high energy efficient standards as new county buildings are developed. Finally, the County should strongly work to bring new green collar jobs to Buncombe County so that our citizens can participate fully in the new emerging clean energy economy. To that end, I support the climate services initiative of the Asheville-Buncombe HUB project,, a collaborative regional economic development model. The HUB is a visionary, yet well-grounded, effort to bring green jobs to our community.
6. Do you see a role for the county in promoting energy efficiency in transportation and residential and business use?
Yes. I promoted a policy on City Council to provide a 100% fee permit rebate for new developments that achieve a high standard for green building. I will support this same policy at the County level. I am proud of the role the city has taken to create a more sustainable transportation network, including the implementation of a 90 day ride-for-free transit promotional campaign, new evening transit service, converting our transit fleet to low-emission hybrid vehicles, and supporting the Asheville Design Center’s plans for the I-26 Connector. I believe the County should take a stronger leadership role in transportation planning, including development of an effective park and ride network linked to high-quality transit services for commuters.
7. The county government plays a central role in providing social services. Where has it been most successful? Where does it most need improvement?
Health and human services make up the largest percentage of the Buncombe County budget and thus requires leadership in touch with the needs and priorities being addressed with these dollars. Furthermore, the services delivered in this arena have huge impacts on the daily lives of working families in Buncombe County. I am the candidate who is in touch daily with the real world issues being addressed by this sector. In terms of success, over the last decade, strong and visionary leadership at the Department of Social Services (DSS) resulted in effective partnerships to deliver much needed aid to our most vulnerable. The community partnerships established by DSS with entities such as AB Tech, Mission Hospital, ABCCM, demonstrate a deep commitment by the department to address the root causes of poverty and joblessness and not simply deliver federally mandated services.
The area for improvement I would highlight has to do with the issue of the consolidation of social services and health services. While a valid idea in theory, its ultimate effectiveness is dependent on broad community buy-in. I am concerned this has not happened sufficiently and the consolidation effort has been driven primarily by short-term cost savings. Given that the consolidation is a done deal, I would like to champion its true effectiveness with the community in terms of service delivery and cost efficiencies.
8. Do you think that the current commission has carried out its work in a manner that is sufficiently transparent? If not, how would you change things?
I do not agree with the manner in which the proposal for citing a new Progress Energy power plant on publicly owned land was withheld from public notice for a very long period of time. As a member of the Asheville City Council. I have been diligent in following the open meetings laws of North Carolina. I think such adherence is vital to achieving the public trust. The City Council has often been criticized for the length of our meetings, but I believe it is worth a more extended public meeting if that is what it takes to carry out the people’s business in a fully transparent manner.
9. Has the current commission made decisions that you strongly disagree with? If so, what will you do to remedy those decisions if you are elected?
I have great respect for the citizens who serve on the Buncombe County Commission. I do not agree with all the decisions they make, just as I am sure they do not agree with all the decisions I have made. One issue I particularly did not agree with was with the decision to sell public land in Pack Square Park to a developer.
10. Do you have a plan for how you will win this election? If so, could you briefly describe the elements of your plan?
Yes. I have worked with my team of supporters to create a plan for our campaign that I believe will carry us to victory in the Primary and General Election. I am fortunate to have a great group of dedicated volunteers and supporters. We plan to run a positive, issue oriented campaign. We have set ambitious goals for directly engaging the voters throughout the County through grassroots outreach as well as paid media. We have already achieved many of the key benchmarks we set for our campaign.
11. Would you call yourself a political progressive? Why or why not?
I am proud to count myself as a participant in our country’s long tradition of progressive change. I am proud to live in a community that elected the first female candidate, Lillian Exum Clement, to a state legislature in the Southeastern United States. For the past twelve years I have worked for the YWCA, whose mission is the empowerment of women and the elimination of racism. I bring those same core values to my work as a public official. I also identify with the mission and core values of DFA, which is to support fiscal accountability and socially progressive policies at all levels of government.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Taxes: 34th? We should aim for 50th!
This tidbit comes from Chris Fitzsimon at North Carolina Policy Watch. He's been warning us for months that Republicans will be trotting out any number of falsehoods about taxes this election - and he's been making it his job to combat them in advance.
So in his latest column he says that if you hear any Republican candidates for governor or the state legislature talk about taxes being too high, keep in mind that North Carolina ranks 34th in the nation in taxes collected per capita.
34th.
That means we're in the bottom third, almost in the bottom quarter. How much lower do Fred Smith and the usual suspects running for the state house in Buncombe want us to go?
So in his latest column he says that if you hear any Republican candidates for governor or the state legislature talk about taxes being too high, keep in mind that North Carolina ranks 34th in the nation in taxes collected per capita.
34th.
That means we're in the bottom third, almost in the bottom quarter. How much lower do Fred Smith and the usual suspects running for the state house in Buncombe want us to go?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)