Since 2015, the Chapel Hill Alliance for a Livable Town (CHALT) has endorsed candidates for Chapel Hill mayor and Town Council. Because of the major impact that Commissioner decisions have on the livability of Chapel Hill and the county, and the importance of having a good working relationship between them, for the second time we are recommending candidates running for the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
We take our responsibility as an endorsing organization very seriously. That procedure included listening to the PTSA/NAACP Forum, reviewing key issues and votes, and weighing candidates’ and incumbents’ responses to our questionnaire posted on line here. Our priority issues can be found here and a list of our criteria for effectiveness can be found here.
On February 8th, we held our formal endorsement meeting which was open to all CHALT supporters. At this meeting we considered the relative merits of each candidate and determined which of the candidates were most closely aligned with CHALT’s goals, and most likely to be effective at advancing those priorities. Finally we voted on which candidates to endorse.
We are endorsing Jean Hamilton for District One, Amy Fowler for the at large seat, and Renee Price for District Two.
Our detailed evaluations of each candidate follows.
Our Recommendation for the District One County Commission Seat:
We recommend unanimously that you cast a vote for Jean Hamilton because she will bring to the Board of Commissioners exactly the skills, temperament and data-driven decision-making history that our County Board needs.
With a PhD in Economics and a Masters In Social Work, Jean brings a unique blend of education, work, volunteer and elected experiences which will allow her to hit the ground running as a member of the County Commission. Her economics background gives her the tools to evaluate the cost and benefits of county programs and to ask the right questions of colleagues and staff.
Through Jean’s extensive involvement in the Orange County and Chapel Hill-Carrboro communities, she has developed a strong understanding of the issues that face our community. Also, during her service on various elected and volunteer boards (CHCCS School Board, Women’s AdvaNCe and the Art Center) she has developed a reputation for asking tough questions and advocating strongly for social justice and equity. Because we consider her the best option for the Board of Commissioners we are recommending Jean as your only vote for District 1.
Here are her impressive answers to the questionnaire. https://www.chalt.org/jean-hamilton
Our Recommendation for the At Large County Commission Seat:
We recommend unanimously that you cast a vote for Amy Fowler because she is committed to prioritizing funding for school programs and facilities. Amy will use tax dollars efficiently, and responsibly to pursue transit solutions that work for everyone, and she will enact data – driven climate change solutions to address the climate crisis in a systematic and collaborative way.
Through her work as a local healthcare provider, elected official (CHCCS School Board) and parent advocate, Amy works with people throughout our community on a daily basis. She knows the importance of working collaboratively and holistically on key issues of affordability, school funding and economic prosperity, is a strong listener and is committed to working on behalf of all Orange County residents.
Amy Fowler is currently Vice-chair of the School Board. Over the past several years, members of CHALT have had the opportunity to observe Amy’s phenomenal energy and to interact with and observe both Amy and her opponent on a number of issues.
Based on our experience, we believe that Amy’s presence on the Board of County Commissioners will foster a more welcoming and collaborative dynamic. Furthermore, we believe her systematic, data-driven approach will result in better overall decisions at a time when they are desperately needed.
Here are Amy’s answers to the CHALT questionnaire. https://www.chalt.org/amy-fowler/
Our recommendation for the District Two County Commission seat:
There is only one candidate for the District Two position, Renee Price, and we endorse her. Since her election to the Board, we have found Renee to be collaborative, open to new information, respectful to everyone she deals with, and strongly supportive of our values including: sustainability, economic equity, and racial equity.
Here are the Candidates That We Did Not Endorse and Why
Mark Dorosin
No question that Mark Dorosin has been a tireless advocate for social justice in his professional life, working now for the Julius L. Chambers Center for Civil Rights. While serving on the Orange County Board of Commissioners, although he occasionally acknowledges what did not bring the intended results — an attribute that is appreciated – yet Mark seldom follows up with the next steps for improvement after voicing a concern. Nor has he has voted in a manner that would garner our support on regional transit and support for schools, among other important issues. We will give examples here:
- Dorosin has made it clear that he wants to eliminate the Chapel Hill-Carrboro school district tax which funds a number of important programs. In June 2019, Mark made a motion to reduce the special district tax for CHCCS and increase the ad valorem tax.
- Until Jean Hamilton announced she was running, Dorosin had not supported studying [the feasibility of how to implement] Universal pre-K. While he reminds us that he ran on that platform in 2016, he has done nothing about it for four years. So far Dorosin and a commission majority have been unwilling to include actual pre-k class sizes in the formula used to predict when a new school or school expansion is needed. This will be the topic of a Board agenda this week.
- Commissioner Dorosin asked good questions all the way along during the light rail discussions, but in the end he did not vote to question the validity of GoTriangle’s rosy projections. He backed the project all the way to May 2019 at a considerable 20milliong dollar loss to Orange County.
________________________________________
Mark Marcoplos
Mark Marcoplos has passion and enthusiasm for tackling climate change, and was involved in the non-profit Orange County Living Wage. However, on key issues of county responsibility such as transit and the schools he has a disappointing track record.
A strong advocate for the ill-fated Durham-Orange Light Rail project, Mark served as Orange County’s representative on the GoTriangle Board of Trustees. In so doing, he failed to look critically at the project, often publicly challenging and dismissing questions and concerns raised by well-informed elected colleagues and members of the public.
Faced with a multi-year, county-wide tax increase that is projected to increase taxes by 5% over 4 years, we were particularly concerned by his last minute inclusion of a climate tax without a strategic plan for how the money would be spent.
Over several years of public engagement on that project and others, we have found that Mark does not make data-driven decisions. For instance, in 2017 citizens attended public meetings and succeeded in convincing the Commission to hire a financial analyst to examine the projections put forward by GoTriangle. When presented with the expert testimony that projects were not realistic or likely, Mark, along with some of his colleagues, simply discounted the data that was presented and adopted the position of continuing GoTriangle’s risky proposition. Furthermore, he withheld important risk assessment information from his colleagues, providing it only after a citizen-initiated public records request made it public.
Mark has been unwilling to acknowledge the flaws laid out in a GoTriangle project evaluation that pointed out that the oversight boards dropped the ball by ignoring clear warning signals. Thus, we were deeply concerned by Mark’s lack of critical thinking and transparency as the county’s representative on the GoTriangle Board of Trustees. Furthermore, we have found that Mark is quite inflexible in his views even when presented with new information.
Finally, we want to hold our elected officials to a high standard for public service. While Mark is willing to talk and argue with anyone, he is tenacious and quite inflexible in his views even when presented with new information. He never admits to being in error. In addition, there is little sense that as an elected official he offers respect and consideration to constituents. It is not uncommon for Mark to attack constituents and colleagues from other Boards on social media if he does not agree with them. We have found that, in times of disagreement, Mark does not afford the courtesy, or respect, to members of other boards or members of the public that is required of an elected official.
___________________________________
Penny Rich
Penny Rich is the current chair of the County Commission and is astute politically. We cannot support her for the next term because her priorities and views on education and transit do not align with ours. Furthermore, we have found her unwilling to consider new information and dismissive of citizen input and questions.
Penny was a strong supporter of the ill-fated Durham Orange Light Rail project which wasted over $150 million in taxpayer dollars ($30 million from Orange County). Over the course of several years, she ignored the early warning signals that the project was in trouble and routinely dismissed concerns raised by knowledgeable individuals. Also, she failed to provide important risk assessment information from her colleagues at a critical juncture in the process. At the recent PTSA forum said she would do it all again which runs contrary to the recent evaluation regarding GoTriangle staff’s capacity to run such a project and the board’s ability to oversee it.
In addition, Penny has not acknowledged the serious maintenance problems in our schools for which the Commission bears major responsibility. Most concerning is the disrespect and disdain with which Penny receives well-researched information from the public, if it does not agree with her views.
As the chair of the Board, Penny is in a position to promote good collegial relationships among her board colleagues and those in other cities and towns, but we are disappointed with her track record. Here are some examples where we would do better by electing mature and respectful elected officials.
During the last stages of the Light Rail cost over runs in 2019, Orange and Durham County elected officials planned to meet with staff to discuss the crisis and the meeting was placed on the County calendar. When increasingly concerned citizens asked Chair Rich to attend the briefing and discussion, Penny initially denied the meeting and then maintained the meeting was a closed session and barred citizens and the press from attending. After the meeting, Penny did not share the meeting materials with her colleagues that included critical risk assessment data. It was necessary for a citizen to make a public information request to supply her colleagues and the public that information!
Chair Rich sets the tone and the agenda for commissioner meetings. Instead of providing budget amendments days prior to the budget meeting as good protocol requires, the public and some commissioners were not given any information about budget amendments until the meeting itself. Chair Rich did not respond to a commissioner request to correct the practice of making amendments public available in advance until after the NAACP formally requested the change.
The Greene Tract provides a test of collaboration among local officials. The Greene tract is jointly owned (by Chapel Hill, Carrboro and County) and offers an opportunity for a school, affordable housing, and conservation of some important natural areas. The Chapel Hill Town Council, as the responsible party, listened to the neighbors and the CHCCS schools and insisted on environmental studies before land was earmarked for uses. Instead of providing collaborative leadership, Penny publicly attacked the Mayor and town council members who did not agree with her approach, then delayed bringing the needed joint action to the BOCC agenda that was required to move the project forward.
During a meeting at which Penny initiated a pay increase for county commissioners, the Board failed to meet the schools’ funding needs. As a result commissioners will be paid more than some county employees.
Finally there are two additional issues concerning Chair Rich and the entire Board. First is the millions of dollars that Orange County used to receive from the impact fee earmarked for schools. The Commissioners decided to triple the fee on muliti-family apartments again the advice of those who feared retribution from Raleigh. This move by a majority of County Commissioners, so angered the affected parties that State Representative Sarah Stevens convinced the NC legislature to repeal the legislation that enabled the county to levy the fee. Now the County receives no such revenue for the schools. (This happened during the tenure of current commissioners Penny Rich and Mark Dorosin with Commissioner Earl McKee arguing against taking this risky action. Note: correction made 2/14 bolded. Mark Marcoplos had been elected to the Board but did not participate in this decision. See https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article146511439.html.
Tax increases have serious impacts on our citizens and as such should receive careful consideration. Orange County is among the highest-taxed counties in North Carolina. Last minute budget amendments are a poor way to govern. The climate change tax proposed by Commissioner Marcoplos and Commissioner Dorosin’s proposal to eliminate the CHCCS special district tax were not presented to the public in advance of the meeting. Again a good public process would provide an opportunity for public comments, and ensure a well thought out, open, and transparent way of managing the county budget.
Why is the March 3rd Primary the Decisive Election?
The March 3rd primary will serve as the decisive election, making the November 3rd election only a formality for these four County Commission seats: At-Large (1 seat), District One (2 seats) and District Two (1 seat). Whomever wins the primary election, wins the fall election because of the large number of Democrats registered in Orange County.
In this year’s County Commissioner election, the At-Large and District One incumbent seats are contested by candidates with strong records of public and elected service. As you make these choices, there are overarching factors which we feel are important to highlight:
- It is critical for you the voter to be knowledgeable and cast ballots for local races during the March 3rd primary as it is the decisive race and will determine the make-up of the BOCC and local governance.
- Orange County faces big budget challenges yet major school needs have gone unaddressed. Read about them here. This County Board has spent a lot of money on discretionary spending, and wasting transit tax dollars on the DOLRT – the misguided 3.8 billion dollar project, yet has failed to address or make a plan for important transit and school needs.
- Taxes are projected to rise of 7 cents per $100 valuation or a 7% over a 4-year period (omitting any reset from upcoming reevaluation), making it harder for residents and businesses to live here. We want leaders who will apply good fiscal sense to every decision they make.
- In addition to assessing and comparing candidates on their individual characteristics and platforms, we feel it is important to assess their value to the overall make-up and culture of the Board of Commissioners. Specifically we are thinking about budget planning, finance and strategic planning skills as ones of particular value on this Board.