In our Chapel Hill-Carrboro community, there are 4 opinions for every 3 people. There is no shortage of strong opinions, and it's a tradition to let your opinions be heard, on WCHL's long-standing feature, "The Commentators." Now you can do a radio commentary, submit your script, and have it appear on chapelboro.com, as well. As long as you're talking about a local issue that affects local people, and as long as you're expressing an opinion for which someone out there might have an opposing view, we want to hear from you. If you can say it in 90 seconds or less, get in touch with Ron Stutts, and he'll make it happen. It's easier than you think!
Email Ron at RStutts@1360WCHL.com to record a Commentators (Listen to past Commentators audio here.)
Email info@chapelboro.com to submit just a written letter.
by Carroll Scott - The Commentators,posted May 17 2012 7:00AM
My name is Carroll Scott and I am the mom of a 2nd grader at Frank Porter Graham Elementary. My son started the year in 1st grade, but the outstanding teachers and staff at FPG recognized that he was not being challenged and needed more. They created a plan to slowly and comfortably transition him to the next grade and he's thriving.
That is just one example of the faculty recognizing a child's need and acting on it. That is just one example of great teaching and outstanding leadership at FPG that is making a significant impact on the achievement gap there. They have done an amazing job at creating one of the best educational environments with the most diverse populations in the district.
The school board should be applauding them. Instead, they are recommending dismantling all that great progress to create a Spanish dual language magnet school, a concept with very little buy in, that will benefit far fewer than it's disrupting, and that so far has a financial burden of at least $600k in the middle of a budget crisis.
I am not against the dual language program. I am against the recommendations to dismantle this great school which is making amazing strides with the whole diverse population to be replaced by a non-diverse magnet school with uncertain direction and a lack of evidence of plausible success. I applaud the school board for seeking out and collecting community feedback. What they found is overwhelmingly strong disapproval of the recommendations including from families in the program. We all need to come together and to work to find a better solution.
There are options, although the advisory committee and the school board continue to say there aren't. There is no logical reason to dismantle the great trajectory and community at FPG in order to force a dual language program riddled with holes and unanswered questions.
by Andrew Davidson - The Commentators,posted May 15 2012 4:57PM
This is Andrew Davidson and I'm a member of the School Improvement Team at Frank Porter Graham Elementary School, where I have a second grader and a rising kindergartener. The revised Dual-Language proposal put before our school board doesn't acknowledge the alternative proposals that have been presented by fellow parents like me who support dual language yet don't feel FPG should be dismantled.
The committee that put together the dual-language report identifies five goals of the new dual language plan; it should:
· "address the issues with our current model,
· increase access,
· provide equitable access,
· provide universal access,
· and enhance our program"
We have submitted to the administration and the board an alternate proposal that we call the "11-12" approach – use 2-3 tracks in elementary #11 as an incubator to pave the way for a full-fledged dual-language magnet school at elementary #12, scheduled to open in 2017.
We believe our plan address all of the committee's five criteria. And yet, the administration has HANDILY dismissed it, with a single sentence in a 230-page document. "Even a hybrid approach with a small expansion to Elementary #11 in advance of a planned magnet school at Elementary #12 is not recommended."
A lack of an alternative proposal stands in stark contrast to report's two choices for the Mandarin dual-language program at Glenwood – a program that, may I add, has only a single track.
My second issue with the proposal is the criteria that the administration fails to address. In the corporate world, if you presented a plan this ambitious and neglected to account for risk, you'd be laughed out of the board room.
There are two risks:
· What if enrollment doesn't meet expectations,
· And what if if there aren't enough qualified teachers?
The dual-language report offers an incomplete proposal with potentially disastrous and ill-considered risk. Help us tell the administration that they need to present the board with a choice for Spanish, just as they've done for Mandarin.
by Maria Palmer - The Commentators,posted May 10 2012 7:00AM
I am suspicious of towns that claim to be "truly democratic." In my experience that means that the influential people get to negotiate how they'll use everyone's resources. Sure, there is "input" from the public, but it seldom changes the discussion, much less the outcome.
Chapel Hill 2020 has helped me become a little less cynical and to recommit to the work of doing "democracy." I hope the spirit of community participation and transparent government grows and matures as we move into "phase 2."
CH2020, is the Town Council's initiative to involve the community in creating a new planning document that will guide Town Council in managing Chapel Hill over the next 10 years.
You may wonder who's been guiding this management so far. Our elected officials and our highly competent town employees have. And they do a good job, but there are problems when the public is not involved:
If we are not involved, we don't understand the trade-offs and real choices. It's more complicated than it looks. For example, not all the roads in Chapel Hill belong to the town; understanding building codes took me a week of workshops. All residents affected by the decisions HAVE to be in conversation or we are making decisions based on biased or incomplete information.
If we are not involved, a few people put their interests ahead of everyone else's. I know we are all busy, but I've come to realize that being politically responsible is like eating right: if you don't do it, you end up sick. If our town doesn't have the whole community involved, it will end up sick. Sick from lack of green spaces; from lack of affordable housing or adequate transit; sick from inequity and lack of access. Sick from lack of creativity.
Some years ago, we lost our two front-yard trees in an ice storm. I wasn't too sad. They looked beautiful in bloom, but they stank to high heaven, offered almost no shade, and were dangerously weak. I asked a landscaper why our developer might have planted Bradford Pears. "They're easy to put in the ground and grow quickly," he said. There's a lesson here for us: easy and quick won't meet your long-term needs. Easy and quick will cost you in the long run, when it breaks or starts stinking. We now have a young Maple and last week planted an apple tree. They are a lot more work, and we don't expect them to look majestic or start bearing fruit for some years, but come by in 2020 and check them out.
by Aaron Nelson - The Commentators,posted May 8 2012 12:19PM
Today, North Carolinians go to the polls to vote in a primary election. You may never have voted in a primary before, or maybe never voted in any election, or maybe you don't claim any political party. But today all North Carolinians need to go to the polls – Democrat, Republican, and unaffiliated – and come to the polls and vote against Amendment One.
North Carolina's proposed Amendment One is bad for business.
It will interfere with employers' ability to recruit talent and their right to provide competitive benefits to their employees.
It also signals to employers, employees, and entrepreneurs that North Carolina is not welcoming to the diverse, creative workforce that we need to compete in the global economy.
We should not do anything at this time that diminishes any individual or any corporation's interest in locating or remaining in North Carolina.
But don't take my word for it. Bank of America exec Cathy Bessant says "Amendment One has the potential to have a disastrous effect on our ability to attract talent and keep talent" in North Carolina.
Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers says twenty years from now we'll look back at this "amendment the same way we think about Jim Crow laws that were passed in this state" so many years ago.
Or executives at the AICPA who relocated five years ago, hired 500 employees, and now say they wouldn't have considered North Carolina had this had been the law.
This amendment will tarnish our state's reputation and affect everything from employee benefits to economic development.
So on behalf of myself and my family, and on behalf of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, I hope that you'll join me, today, in voting against Amendment One. Polls are open until 7:30.
by Jake Gellar-Goad - The Commentators,posted May 3 2012 7:00AM
I'm a Chapel Hill resident, and I've got something to say.
Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Durham, and a number of other towns around the state offer domestic partnerships. That ends next week.
Unmarried heterosexual couples, and their children, enjoy certain rights in North Carolina. That ends next week.
Unmarried victims of domestic violence have certain protections in North Carolina. That ends next week.
I am allowed to visit my husband in the hospital, share health insurance with him, and am his next of kin for any important medical decisions. That ends next week.
It all ends next week. Unless you do something about it.
The 2012 primary voting is already underway, and with broad, hateful, never-before-tested language on the ballot, we could potentially see many far reaching consequences unless you go vote against this amendment right now.
This isn't the first time North Carolina's constitution has tried to limit which loving couples count and which ones don't, but we can make sure it's the last.
Anyone, regardless of party or even if you're unaffiliated, can vote on this amendment. Please vote against the amendment on or before May 8th.
County government matters, and many of us pay close attention to the decisions that impact schools, economic development and critical county services for public health and safety.
In that context, we encourage District 1 voters (Chapel Hill and Carrboro) to please re-elect Pam Hemminger as County Commissioner District 1. Pam is a thoughtful and engaging leader who truly cares about the people of Orange County – all of us.
Pam is leading the way to improve transparency to county government. She introduced online video streaming of commissioner meetings –which has helped many of us follow what the commissioners are doing.
Pam's comfortable with the truth – and regularly chooses it over pandering to select groups. She has built open and candid relationships with community groups, and actively seeks citizen input on key issues such as transit, the landfill closing and Rogers Road, and economic development.
Pam knows money is tight – which is why she vocally opposed a $1 million conference room for the county commissioners and is moving cautiously to ensure that the county's funding for libraries is sustainable. Pam was the single voice that stopped the commissioners from putting a waste transfer station in Bingham township – which in hindsight saved taxpayers millions of dollars in capital and ongoing expenses.
A sustainable future for Orange County will not be found in the triumph of towns over county or vice versa. It takes open, transparent leadership to find the rich and creative solutions that serve our growing and diverse community. Pam Hemminger exemplifies that leadership and everyone wins if Pam continues to serve as Orange County Commissioner
You probably already know that it takes a village to raise a child. But did you know that the Chapel Hill Carrboro City School District is recommending turning one of its best known and best loved little villages, Frank Porter Graham Elementary, into a dual-language Spanish magnet school?
This would displace more than 400 students, including some of the most vulnerable in the district. We would lose so much more than classrooms and a gym; we would lose a vibrant, thriving, and exceptionally diverse community.
Did you know that there are over 40 nationalities represented at FPG? Managing the needs of them all is tough, but thanks to a great new principal, supportive staff and teachers, and involved parents, FPG saw the largest improvement in test scores in the ENTIRE district last year, all while supporting the district's most racially, ethnically, and economically varied collection of students. The entire community should celebrate this success and diversity, not dismantle it.
FPG provides unique services to the Karen and Burmese communities that no other school currently provides: These refugees who fled for their lives with little more than the clothes on their backs now walk to PTA meetings, visit the classrooms, and have playdates with our kids. FPG is their new village. Last week more than 50 Karen and Burmese parents attended the Chapel Hill Carrboro School Board meeting to oppose this new plan. The Karen have been forced out of one community. Let's not do that to them again.
We support dual language education; we propose that we work closely with school administration and the School Board to create an open and transparent discussion that meets the needs of all our students while protecting the most vulnerable. With two new elementary schools opening in the next few years, there are many options that would displace NO students while also advancing the goals of dual language. And that way, everybody wins.
If you are a parent of a rising kindergarten parent in the Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) district, please note that CHCCS is still accepting applications to the outstanding and innovative Chinese dual language program.
Recent press and misinformation from staff at Lincoln Center have led to uncertainty about the future of the program, effectively stalling new kindergarten registrations, but Superintendent Tom Forcella has reassured concerned parents that the program is continuing as usual.
Monday night, the Town Council will be reviewing a request to re-zone the corner of MLK/Historic Airport Road and Estes Drive. The project, named "Carolina Flats," proposes to develop this tract of land with a four story hotel placed right on the corner of this intersection with a minimal setback, plus seven apartment buildings, all designed for student housing. The traffic for this development would enter and exit onto MLK and also Estes Drive.
Carolina Flats, proposed for one of our town's busiest intersections, is a high density development. On Monday night, the out of state developer is hoping the Council will give a thumbs-up to rezoning this tract of land.
But should the Town Council be approving re-zoning requests during a time when our town and many of us are still working on the 2020 comprehensive plan, a plan to re-examine the future vision of Chapel Hill and our community? Why not have a moratorium on re-zoning requests until Chapel Hill 2020 is completed?
We all know the corner of MLK and Estes Drive is a critical and very busy intersection for our town. There are no future plans to expand or widen Estes Drive. Two to three times daily we already have traffic backed up at this intersection. With the YMCA in this location, a church, Carolina North and two large public schools, how can we burden this area with more traffic?
For our quality of life and our environment, for the public safety of all and for our town, for the children and all of us who bike, walk, and run in this area, for the buses and cars trying to get to the public schools and elsewhere in an efficient time, please urge the Mayor and Town Council to deny the re-zoning for Carolina Flats.
You know, it suddenly struck me recently that we don't need complicated definitions for competing political, economic and social philosophies to determine how we should interact when living and working together in a community, a society, a co-op, a family, a nation, a world.
We just need to remember the definition of words like 'decency,' 'honor,' 'loyalty,' 'respect,' and best of all – 'nice.'
We don't need a Supreme Court, a Judge, a President, a United Nations, a nag, a nanny or the Mayor of Chapel Hill to tell us when the manner of our political, economic or social interaction with others is wrong.
We just need to be conscious of whether or not something we are doing is likely to hurt someone else.
Take a moment to look around you. Think about your work-mates. Your family, your friends. The bar last evening. The Church on Sunday. The General Assembly the night before last. The local newspaper. WCHL this morning. The past week. The previous year. The social and political ups and downs since before you were born.
We are not in the mess we are in today, from the spat with our partner, through the CVS building at Greensboro and Weaver, to the coming fracas over fracking, because some grand human design failed.
We are where we are. Where you are. Because we forgot the most basic rule of living with 7 billion other human beings: You gotta own responsibility for the consequences of what you do and say. Or, to put it more simply, we stopped listening when our brain screamed at us: 'OMG, I can't do that, it's mean!!'
We don't need to crash this, burn that, or re-build the other to find a better way forward. We just need to start being honest with ourselves, and to start caring a bit more about how we behave with respect to others.
A recent story on WCHL informed us that Orange County rural residents were upset because, although they represent 40% of the county population, they would only receive 12% of services under a newly proposed Orange County Bus plan. One commissioner agreed, saying that it is crucial that county residents receive transit services in proportion to their investment in the overall plan.
I disagree. Receiving services in proportion to one's investment is not achievable, nor should it be, with regard to government services. For example, many persons do not have children but they still pay taxes for schools. I don't currently need the Department of Social Services, the Seymour Senior Center or our county jail - still, my taxes help finance these county budget items. In fact, with regard to transit itself, many residents of our towns get little or no bus service currently, yet our municipal taxes go toward our extensive and successful bus service.
One cannot view providing transit services only with regard to overall population. Transit services succeed if they are concentrated in areas that are dense -- like in Carrboro-Chapel Hill and Hillsborough where 60% of the county population lives. It is economically sound to have most transit routes, including light rail, where they can carry large numbers of people.
This benefits the county as a whole - by helping our county's workforce and other passengers move around efficiently, by informing our long-term land use planning, by helping us to avoid sprawl and create well-placed economic development opportunities, and by reducing our carbon emissions.
I ask everyone to consider that what might seem to be a benefit for one segment of our county can turn out to be a benefit for all of us.
Washington State, Maryland. New Jersey, New Hampshire. So far this year, the bumpy road to marriage equality has played out in four states, with wins in three, and an unsurprising veto in the Garden State by Republican Governor Chris Christie.
Next up, North Carolina's voters head to the polls on May 8 to vote on Amendment One, a constitutional instrument that would bring the Tar Heel State in line with all of its Southern neighbors in codifying discrimination against not only its LGBT citizens but all of its residents. As in other states where this battled has raged of late, the vitriol has been high, opinions are voiced as fact, and efforts to obfuscate the impact of the Amendment widespread. This perfect storm was in evidence recently when The News & Observer of Raleigh published an article titled "The Case for the Marriage Amendment" by John Long, a software engineer.
The public outcry to Long's op-ed was overwhelming, leading the paper to publish letters on its blog that same day. Repeatedly, the letters highlighted the "misinformation," "falsehoods," and "assortment of illogical and factually mistaken elements." This troubled us, too - the blurring of the line between fact and opinion, but also between fact and fiction -- which is why we think it's important to clarify what Amendment One is, and is not.
While we certainly hope that North Carolinians will reject Amendment One, we also hope, regardless of their position, that voters will make their decisions based on facts, with fiction kept in its proper place: novels.
Assertion Number 1: "For most of my lifetime, gay marriage was never a consideration. Neither was it a consideration for all but the last few decades of human history."
Fact: That may be Long's perspective as a presumably heterosexual male, but history tells us otherwise. For example, the late Yale historian John Boswell found examples of same-sex unions performed by Catholic Church prior to the 1400s, which is simply to say historical precedent exists, and that civilization did not end. In fact, it flourished.
Assertion Number 2: "The very definition of marriage has always been 'one man, one woman and their children,' with emphasis on the children."
Fact: Students and scholars of history, other cultures or other faith traditions conclude otherwise. Ancient Israelites supported a man's having several wives. The Oxford English Dictionary and Webster's all now include same-sex unions in their definitions of marriage. Our definitions of marriage have evolved over centuries and likely will continue to do so.
Assertion Number 3: "The reason for marriage has always been children."
Fact: Wasn't it Tina Turner who said, "What's love got to do with it?" Indeed, we marry for all kinds of reasons, from financial ones, to get away from our parents, for immigration purposes, because a woman is unexpectedly pregnant, and, of course, to purposefully start families. To this point, the nonpartisan Brookings Institute reported in 2010: "Married couples with children accounted for just over one in five U.S. households in 2008, about half their share in 1970." Perhaps the better question is: "What do kids have to do with it?"
Assertion Number 4: "[S]ame-sex couples simply do not provide the right foundation for raising children. Studies have shown that children do best when both a (female) mother and (male) father are present."
Fact: Every major professional medical association - from the American Psychological Association to the Child Welfare League of America -- supports the notion that children raised by lesbians and gay men differ in no significant way from those raised by heterosexuals. Stanford sociologist Michael Rosenfeld noted in 2010 that "in 45 empirical studies of outcomes of children of same-sex couples... none found statistically significant disadvantages for children raised by gay and lesbian parents compared with other children."
Assertion Number 5: "[S]ame-sex marriage would not strengthen marriage but weaken it. Increased rates of infidelity and divorce have weakened marriage in the last half of the 20th century, and the prospects aren't looking very rosy.... Extending marriage to same-sex couples would only increase and accelerate the weakening trend in marriage today."
Fact: Yes, it's true that the institution of marriage in is trouble. But Holning Lau, associate professor of law at UNC-Chapel Hill, found in his research that Massachusetts's data on annual divorce and marriage rates showed no difference in the four years before and four years after same-sex marriage became legal. He also presents data from Europe concluding that "there is no association between legal recognition of same-sex unions and fluctuations in rates of marriage, divorce, and non-marital births." The bottom line: You can't blame the gays - or same-sex unions -- for our collective marriage woes.
Assertion Number 6: "It is important to note that, should traditional marriage be upheld in North Carolina, no one's rights will be curtailed."
Fact: In a report titled "Potential Legal Impact of the Proposed Domestic Legal Union Amendment to the North Carolina Constitution," UNC law professor Maxine Eichner explained that the vagueness of the phrase that marriage would be the "only domestic legal union" allows for interpretations that would endanger numerous benefits that gay and straight couples receive from domestic partnerships. These include domestic violence protections or child custody and visitation rights. We'd hate to see anyone's rights curtailed, least of all those of families and kids.
The May 8 vote isn't a thumbs-up, thumbs-down determination on whether same-sex couples will have the right to marry. North Carolina already has a law that restricts marriage to one man and one woman. John Long and other proponents of the amendment's passage are entitled to their beliefs and opinions, but voters should reject spurious and baseless arguments. With the outcome of the May 8 vote potentially harming the civil rights of all North Carolinians, we trust informed voters will make decisions rooted in fact and, when in doubt, ask for sources and citations.
STEVEN PETROW [www.stevenpetrow.com], a former president of the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association, is the author of The New Gay Wedding and lives in Chapel Hill.
CHUCK SMALL, a former N&O editor, is now an editor and school counselor who lives in Raleigh.
I am a supporter of the Occupy Movement. Not least because I have spent much of my life fighting for social and economic justice, and against any form of arbitrary authority.
Recently, I have become unhappy with some of the actions of the group calling itself Carrboro Commune, because I have felt that, although they rail against the arbitrary authority of corporate America, they have employed a similar arbitrary authority to impose unwelcome behavior on a community from which they have received no permission.
I had prepared a rather pithy Commentary to that end, until I had coffee with one of the Commune's supporters.
We did not agree. But we did understand.
As with any small intense community, we believe strongly around here. But with all the differences we are so keen to underline, we forget to remember the one thing we all have in common. We all have addresses that end in either Chapel Hill or Carrboro.
The most disturbing argument I have heard in recent weeks was from a gentleman protesting the new CVS building in Carrboro. He told me that his protest was justified because the community processes had failed.
I wish I had had the wit and the compassion at the time to say, "my friend, the community processes only fail when we stop talking to each other as members of the same community."
Well, not our town, but Chatham County, just over the line. And to the victor go all the spoils. Walmart has announced it will build a huge 148,500 square foot store on the 15-501 commercial corridor near Smith Level Road and hire 300 employees.
Walmart cash registers will soon be ringing and Chatham County will rake in the sales tax dollars. Then the property tax will begin to roll in.
Meanwhile, traffic will beat a path across Chapel Hill roads to the Walmart store just a stone's throw away. More lost business for local merchants.
All this sound familiar? Déjà vu!
First, there was New Hope Commons along with several other commercial developments that went to Durham. The proposed Obey Creek mixed-use complex in Chapel Hill fell through because of town restrictions.
Long in the planning process, projects such as Aydan Court and Charterwood have met similar fates though Charterwood may be revived.
Chapel Hill is hemorrhaging tax dollars and there's no end in sight.
Let's hope Town Council gets its act together soon before Chapel Hill becomes the sole enclave of the rich and well-to-do.
Four years ago, in the Ides of March, those of us living in or around the Glen Lennox Apartments were shocked and awed as Grubb Properties presented plans to destroy most of the apartments and trees, build many big-story buildings, tunnel one of the streets and place a large grocery store across the street from the Church of the Holy Family. We got busy.
We talked, schemed, organized and hustled up "Save Glen Lennox" t-shirts. We met with town planning staff and found out that we could, with hard work, set up a Neighborhood Conservation District. About a year and a half ago, after over two years of street work, two signed petitions by the majority of area home owners, and with the planning board's approval presented to the Chapel Hill Town Council, the Glen Lennox NCD Committee was appointed.
I was hopeful.
The Committee first worked deliberately and established responsible regulations for those of us who own family homes in this NCD. On March 13, the planning staff, NCD Committee and Grubb Properties presented to the public what Grubb Properties expects to do, with Committee endorsement, replacing most of the 440 current units.
I am very disappointed and no longer hopeful.
What was presented with minimal modifications is this: Grubb Properties plans to build four, five, six and (gasp) even a mixed-use eight-story building along 15-501.
They have apparently dropped plans to set up a large grocery store across from the Church of the Holy Family.
My disappointment is over the apparent quasi love affair that has been established between the Chapel Hill planners, Grubb Properties and the NCD, as the Committee lauded Grubb Properties for all that they did.
I left the meeting with dashed hopes.
So while the answer remains blowing in the winds of what the Chapel Hill Town Council will do someday, my disappointment remains, along with the shock and awe of folks accepting corporate greed.
I am a supporter of Occupy. I am a supporter of civil disobedience. But I do not support assault, when it is physical or verbal. And I do not support trespass on private property, which I regard as violence against people and the community.
Specifically, I did not support the guerrilla gardening exercise by Carrboro Commune this past Saturday.
Carrboro Commune is the Donald Trump of Occupy. They take themselves really seriously. But no one else does.
They are all about stunts and showboat and sizzle – but no steak.
Occupy at its best is about building community. Not disruption and destruction.
There was nothing about last Saturday's protest that had to do with building community. It was about a few folks getting publicity for themselves. Not for a cause. Not for community. But for themselves.
Some may see this as harmless. But it's not harmless when it detracts attention from those of us who are doing the hard work of building genuine community.
And especially when it detracts attention from the legitimate protest being waged by those living around the proposed CVS building.
Frankly, I might have been more impressed if those protesting private property rights, did not themselves own private property. And I might be more convinced by the line that private property represents theft, if those same homeowners did not have insurance against theft.
Bottom line? There are some things you can do. Some things you can't. And then there's just plain cant.
I'm calling on my fellow Orange County residents to help defeat amendment one, also known as the marriage discrimination amendment, by voting against the amendment on May 8th.
You may be aware that all domestic partnerships, for both gay and straight couples alike, will be ended in places that offer them such as Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Durham, should this amendment pass. This could have devastating effects on hospital visitation rights, on the ability to share healthcare benefits, and on end-of-life-care decision-making rights for LGBT couples. So you should vote against the amendment, on May 8th.
But what you may not be aware of is that this amendment has special cause for alarm for all unmarried couples, because of its prohibition against the recognition of any union other than marriage.
UNC law professors have warned us against a repeat of what happened in Ohio, whose similarly-worded amendment called into question their domestic violence protection laws.
Even Tea Party Republican Congresswoman Renee Ellmers says this amendment goes much too far and should be voted against.
Please, vote against this amendment on May 8th. Or early vote against it during the early voting period starting on April 19th. Or, if you're especially motivated, look up Equality NC and ask them how you can volunteer.
Cries of protest of Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh's vicious attack on a Georgetown law student are echoing across the land -- even touching the hallowed halls of the University of North Carolina.
A petition circulating online is demanding that the University terminate broadcasting of UNC basketball and football games on a network that proudly proclaims itself "Rush Radio."
In an effort to distance itself, the UNC Athletic Department issued a statement noting that it has no control over, and does not endorse in any way, the normal programming of any stations that air the game broadcasts.
While Limbaugh has reluctantly apologized for his diatribe, nineteen of his sponsors, at last count, have pulled their ads off the air, and more will probably follow.
Limbaugh's venomous rhetoric aimed at anything liberal has finally caught up with him. And it's about time.
No doubt, the University is treading a fine line over this entire matter, but the solution is quite simple: Allow the advertisers to dump Limbaugh and keep those Tar Heels on the air!
This is a photo of what once was a majestic, stately magnolia on E Rosemary St.
It is now a one-sided sad specimen that lines the quiet street in one of Chapel Hill's historic districts!
I am appalled and saddened that Duke Power can be allowed to pay Asplundh to butcher historic --or any-- trees. And I am equally dismayed that IF our Town Council was...is...unaware of this tragedy, then shame on you! Are you (the Town Council) not the ones who so vocally prohibit development to save a tree? Where are you now when these trees are being butchered, destroying the stately charm in our existing neighborhoods?
I want to know how much is being spent on this destruction of trees. I understand that Duke Power will say the trees need to be "trimmed" because they are a threat to their power lines. This being the case, Duke Power should, at the very least, have the educated expertise of an arborist BEFORE butchering beautiful trees and creating eyesores in existing neighborhoods!
Sadly, this is just one photo. There are many other trees that have already been, and continue to be, destroyed.
Recruiting by Lew Margolis - The Commentators,posted Mar 1 2012 7:00AM
Can somebody explain to me "recruiting" in Division 1 intercollegiate sports? Recently, high school athletes announced the schools that they plan to attend and the teams they will join next year. Concerns have been raised about the quality of the football skills of the class of players who have declared their intention to enroll at UNC. After all, we had heard that the new head coach is a "great recruiter." While he himself was being "recruited," he was asked about his experience as a "recruiter." Some have suggested the cumbersome NCAA investigation and the possibility of sanctions against the UNC football program have created disincentives to attend UNC, in spite of active "recruitment."
UNC has become a great university because it attracts applicants to the quality of the "research, scholarship and creativity" at the heart of its mission, not because faculty and staff are wandering the country to meet with individual students. My colleagues in public health or computer science or philosophy don't spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours traveling around the country to meet with the best and the brightest applicants, to "recruit" them to come to UNC. Even prestigious programs like the Morehead-Cain and Robertson scholars programs, with their considerable resources, do not engage in this type of expensive and labor-intensive recruiting. Guidance counselors and teachers, parents and community leaders, know that UNC provides exceptional educational opportunities and they advise students accordingly.
Surely, 80 qualified football players or 20 qualified basketball players would enroll in our fine university each year without the expensive and harmful distortions in priorities that result from "recruiting" 18 year olds. After all, we manage to enroll outstanding linguists, mathematicians, chemistry students, and voice majors to name just a few, in each new cohort of Tar Heels.
My name is Carroll Scott and I am the mom of a 2nd grader at Frank Porter Graham Elementary. My son started the year in 1st grade, but the outstanding teachers and staff at FPG recognized that he was not being challenged and needed more. They...
This is Andrew Davidson and I'm a member of the School Improvement Team at Frank Porter Graham Elementary School, where I have a second grader and a rising kindergartener. The revised Dual-Language proposal put before our school board doesn't...
E-Mail
Print
The WCHL Morning News with Ron Stutts
