Several weeks ago, I penned a column on the full slate of financial issues facing the Town of Davidson, and for the first time since starting these columns for the Herald Weekly, the Town officially pushed back on how things were portrayed.
When it came to the town budget for FY2017, the Town objected to the use of the colloquialism “spending every dime” when referring to its spending plan. The town argued that it wasn’t “spending” every dime because they were “putting $200,000 into a capital projects fund to meet the town’s future capital needs”.
Needless to say, the town didn’t give taxpayers any of their money back in the new budget. Readers can decide for themselves if there’s a difference in “spending” taxpayer money now versus keeping taxpayer money for spending later.
The Town also didn’t like the point made in that previous column regarding use of fund balance (aka its savings account) to pay for the long awaited 2nd fire station. Even though documents passed out to the public showed fund balance as a source of funding for the fire station, the town wanted it clarified that it now planned to pay for the second fire station with installment financing but could use fund balance to pay the debt service.
How that’s materially different is a bit of a head scratcher, but it seems to be in the same vein as the first point. It’s easy to split hairs over wording. It’s harder to actually address the points made on spending and priorities.
As Davidson continues discussions on capital spending plans (Commissioners had a quickly scheduled, “special meeting” billed as a “mini-retreat” to discuss the topic on July 11th) here are a few ideas Commissioners could use to pay for some of their desired projects without reflexively raising property tax rates which are already the highest in North Mecklenburg.
Ask Davidson College to pay more of its fair share towards the services it receives.
A 2014 study of fiscal impact analysis commissioned by the town from consultancy TischlerBise showed that Davidson College receives almost $200,000 per year more in services from the town than it pays. Due to being a non-profit institution the college pays almost nothing, yet it receives a tremendous amount of service from the town – particularly from its fire department.
The Town wants a new downtown fire station. Davidson College could easily donate land for this project. The College should also be asked to make a payment in lieu of taxes to offset its outsized use of fire services or to finance some of the debt to build a new station.
Implement a special assessment district to help pay for parking.
When the Red Line was all the rage a few years ago, Davidson Town Hall was more than willing to seek approval from local commercial real estate owners in the town center to help finance it. The Town should be equally as willing go seek a Special Assessment District to help pay for a multi-million parking facility. Frankly, if downtown commercial property owners and businesses who will benefit the most from such a facility are not willing to help pay for it, then maybe it’s not all that needed.
Make the Affordable Housing program self-funding.
Davidson is in the process of its first ever RFP for an affordable housing project. This one is on Town owned land in the Bailey Springs neighborhood. Based on a conversation with the new town attorney, Cindy Reid, it seems likely the town may give the land away for the project. Regardless, the RFP did not require payment for the land. Rather than possibly taking on debt for the Affordable Housing program, the Town should commit to making the controversial program self funding through payments in lieu from developers and no free land from the town for its projects.
All of these options and many others are harder than simply taking on debt and raising taxes, but that’s what elected officials signed up for when they ran for office. It will be interesting to see which direction Davidson’s Board chooses.
This post first appeared in this week’s edition of the Herald Weekly at HuntersvilleHerald.com
Showing posts with label Town of Davidson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Town of Davidson. Show all posts
Thursday, July 21, 2016
Wednesday, June 29, 2016
Meet the "Washam Neighborhood"...ANOTHER development by ColeJenest&Stone in Davidson
Commissioner Brian Jenest's firm is on a roll in Davidson.
Yesterday, David Boraks broke the story on a new neighborhood of 99 units on South Street involving Jenest's firm. While this neighborhood is technically in Cornelius, it is on the Davidson side of the covered bridge connecting to Antiquity and feels like it's in Davidson proper.
Now comes notice via the Town of Davidson website that another ColeJenest&Stone designed neighborhood is in the works at the other end of town.
Meet the "Washam Neighborhood"...
From the town website...
"The Washam neighborhood is located on the south side of June Washam Road. The proposed development includes property located within the Neighborhood Edge and Rural planning areas. As proposed, the +/-52 acre Washam neighborhood would feature 80 housing units with +/- 20.6 acres of open space, yielding 1.6 units per acre with 40% open space."
"NVR-Ryan homes 'the Applicant' intends to develop the 52± acre site for a detached, single-family residential community. In conjunction with this development, the Applicant is coordinating with the North Carolina Department of Transportation and The Town of Davidson regarding the realignment of a portion of June Washam Road in order to provide additional traffic calming measures to support safer mobility in the area."
The highlighted comment about realignment is interesting.
During the June Davidson Board meeting the possibility of the Town taking over June Washam from the State was mentioned by one of the citizen speakers. It was given as an example of the town being willing to take over roads to support development.
There was pushback from the dais from Commissioners Graham and Anderson indicating Commissioners were unaware of that possibility.
A March 25th email available via public records between ColeJenest&Stone, the developer, NCDOT and Town Staff indicates taking over June Washam as a topic of conversation. What becomes of that and the "coordinating" efforts between the town, NCDOT and the developer remains to be seen.
However one thing would seem to be clear.
Town commissioners may want to take a more active role in keeping track of development conversations that could lead to requests to put the town on the hook.
Yesterday, David Boraks broke the story on a new neighborhood of 99 units on South Street involving Jenest's firm. While this neighborhood is technically in Cornelius, it is on the Davidson side of the covered bridge connecting to Antiquity and feels like it's in Davidson proper.
Now comes notice via the Town of Davidson website that another ColeJenest&Stone designed neighborhood is in the works at the other end of town.
Meet the "Washam Neighborhood"...
From the town website...
"The Washam neighborhood is located on the south side of June Washam Road. The proposed development includes property located within the Neighborhood Edge and Rural planning areas. As proposed, the +/-52 acre Washam neighborhood would feature 80 housing units with +/- 20.6 acres of open space, yielding 1.6 units per acre with 40% open space."
"NVR-Ryan homes 'the Applicant' intends to develop the 52± acre site for a detached, single-family residential community. In conjunction with this development, the Applicant is coordinating with the North Carolina Department of Transportation and The Town of Davidson regarding the realignment of a portion of June Washam Road in order to provide additional traffic calming measures to support safer mobility in the area."
The highlighted comment about realignment is interesting.
During the June Davidson Board meeting the possibility of the Town taking over June Washam from the State was mentioned by one of the citizen speakers. It was given as an example of the town being willing to take over roads to support development.
There was pushback from the dais from Commissioners Graham and Anderson indicating Commissioners were unaware of that possibility.
A March 25th email available via public records between ColeJenest&Stone, the developer, NCDOT and Town Staff indicates taking over June Washam as a topic of conversation. What becomes of that and the "coordinating" efforts between the town, NCDOT and the developer remains to be seen.
However one thing would seem to be clear.
Town commissioners may want to take a more active role in keeping track of development conversations that could lead to requests to put the town on the hook.
Friday, June 24, 2016
A prime example of citizen activism
There’s a reason for the saying “you can’t fight city hall”. It’s hard!
To get what they want citizens need perseverance, organization, and a willingness to push. The recent successful effort to lower speed limits on Davidson-Concord Road provides a prime example.
To be fair, local residents weren’t so much “fighting town hall” in this case as the Town of Davidson had previously asked to have the speed limit lowered. The problem was that when NCDOT said “no” on each occasion, the town did not force the issue.
The situation came to a head this Spring when multiple videos surface showing harrowing scenes near a school bus stop in the area and as the new West Branch neighborhood proposed over 300 new residences on the Westmoreland Farm adjacent to the already dangerous Robert-Walker Drive intersection.
So, what did residents do?
In the interest of transparency, I was involved in some of the activities that follow,, but all of the heavy lifting was done by many other citizens.
Residents organized multiple trips to town hall leading to two packed meetings in May and June. They worked with the media to bring the issue more attention. They showed tremendous courage in speaking truth to power. Most importantly, they did public records requests.
The public records request may be the sharpest arrow in the activist’s quiver. The results of these requests provide information. They shed light on who said what to who and when they said it
.
In this case it, these requests showed many interesting things. Here are just a couple.
The public record showed on multiple occasions in 2013 and 2014, citizens asked the town how they could get involved. Should they go to their legislative representatives? Could they help with gathering petitions?
In at least three different situations during this time period, Mayor John Woods told different residents that if NCDOT did not agree to lower the speeds, the town would engage the citizens for these activities. That never happened.
Why?
In another thread, the record shows NCDOT actually being open to the idea of lower speeds around Robert-Walker Drive contingent on the installation of a roundabout. However, the discussion was related to the proposed West Branch development and on street parking – not as a pedestrian safety initiative. This conversation involved NCDOT and the developers, including Commissioner Brian Jenest whose firm is doing the project’s design. Somehow, that information did not make it to the town board as a whole for nearly three months?
Again, why?
The answers as to “why” are not in the public record, but it does show the mounting pressure having an impact.
The first records request went in on May 3rd. On May 4th, State Rep John Bradford posted on Facebook that he had been contacted by Davidson Mayor Pro Tem Beth Cashion on the issue. He said “I’m ready to help. I don’t know what can be done, but I’m willing to learn.”
That contact to state electeds appears to have been the turning point.
After the May 10th town hall meeting, Bradford again posted to Facebook saying he was coordinating with the State Engineer at NCDOT to have a closer look at the issue. Shortly thereafter, State Engineer Kevin Lacy spent a Sunday and Monday in the area, and before the June 14th meeting the decision was made to lower the speeds along the entire length of the road including the area at Robert-Walker - without a roundabout.
Still though, the activists work wasn’t done. NCDOT had made the speed reduction to 35mph by Robert-Walker contingent on the West Branch development being 25% occupied – potentially delaying it many months, if not years.
It took another trip to town hall and another round of impassioned speeches to NCDOT Rep Scott Cole who was in attendance to get the speed limit lowered immediately.
As of last Thursday, the new speed limit signs are up.
Should it have been this hard? No, it shouldn’t have. In the end however, it yielded the results citizens were seeking - making it all worth it.
To get what they want citizens need perseverance, organization, and a willingness to push. The recent successful effort to lower speed limits on Davidson-Concord Road provides a prime example.
To be fair, local residents weren’t so much “fighting town hall” in this case as the Town of Davidson had previously asked to have the speed limit lowered. The problem was that when NCDOT said “no” on each occasion, the town did not force the issue.
The situation came to a head this Spring when multiple videos surface showing harrowing scenes near a school bus stop in the area and as the new West Branch neighborhood proposed over 300 new residences on the Westmoreland Farm adjacent to the already dangerous Robert-Walker Drive intersection.
So, what did residents do?
In the interest of transparency, I was involved in some of the activities that follow,, but all of the heavy lifting was done by many other citizens.
Residents organized multiple trips to town hall leading to two packed meetings in May and June. They worked with the media to bring the issue more attention. They showed tremendous courage in speaking truth to power. Most importantly, they did public records requests.
The public records request may be the sharpest arrow in the activist’s quiver. The results of these requests provide information. They shed light on who said what to who and when they said it
.
In this case it, these requests showed many interesting things. Here are just a couple.
The public record showed on multiple occasions in 2013 and 2014, citizens asked the town how they could get involved. Should they go to their legislative representatives? Could they help with gathering petitions?
In at least three different situations during this time period, Mayor John Woods told different residents that if NCDOT did not agree to lower the speeds, the town would engage the citizens for these activities. That never happened.
Why?
In another thread, the record shows NCDOT actually being open to the idea of lower speeds around Robert-Walker Drive contingent on the installation of a roundabout. However, the discussion was related to the proposed West Branch development and on street parking – not as a pedestrian safety initiative. This conversation involved NCDOT and the developers, including Commissioner Brian Jenest whose firm is doing the project’s design. Somehow, that information did not make it to the town board as a whole for nearly three months?
Again, why?
The answers as to “why” are not in the public record, but it does show the mounting pressure having an impact.
The first records request went in on May 3rd. On May 4th, State Rep John Bradford posted on Facebook that he had been contacted by Davidson Mayor Pro Tem Beth Cashion on the issue. He said “I’m ready to help. I don’t know what can be done, but I’m willing to learn.”
That contact to state electeds appears to have been the turning point.
After the May 10th town hall meeting, Bradford again posted to Facebook saying he was coordinating with the State Engineer at NCDOT to have a closer look at the issue. Shortly thereafter, State Engineer Kevin Lacy spent a Sunday and Monday in the area, and before the June 14th meeting the decision was made to lower the speeds along the entire length of the road including the area at Robert-Walker - without a roundabout.
Still though, the activists work wasn’t done. NCDOT had made the speed reduction to 35mph by Robert-Walker contingent on the West Branch development being 25% occupied – potentially delaying it many months, if not years.
It took another trip to town hall and another round of impassioned speeches to NCDOT Rep Scott Cole who was in attendance to get the speed limit lowered immediately.
As of last Thursday, the new speed limit signs are up.
Should it have been this hard? No, it shouldn’t have. In the end however, it yielded the results citizens were seeking - making it all worth it.
This post first appeared in this week's edition of the Herald Weekly at HuntersvilleHerald.com
Thursday, June 16, 2016
#DavidsonConcordSpeedway No More: Lower speed limits posted on Thursday
Moving at what can only be described as lightning fast speed for a large government agency, NCDOT workers posted lower speeds along the length of Davidson-Concord Road on Thursday.
This comes just two days after the Board meeting described in the previous post where residents implored the agency to not wait and tie the lower speed to the West Branch development.
At the Tuesday meeting after the public hearing there was a rapid fire discussion with multiple points discussed about enforcement, the technicalities of how speed limits are set, and even an arcane discussion of the "default" speed limits for municipalities involving exactly which parcels of land along the road are (and are not) within the town limits.
In the end though it boiled down to this. The town sent the below letter.
The letter asks for speed limits according to the below map.
And NCDOT made the changes.
When asked to explain the change in approving the 35mph starting at the Beaver Dam House heading into town, NCDOT Engineer Scott Cole had this to say.
"We approved the speed limit reduction to 45mph and to 35mph prior to the meeting, but we're really discussing the details of the timing of the reduction. We had proposed reducing the speed limits as the proposed development was to come on line. The Town Commissioners and therefore the Town proposed and expressed through their resolution, that they wanted the reduction to 35mph to occur immediately. We respected the Town's wishes on timing and moved to implement immediately. The signs should be in place at this time."
And that they are, for which many in town are very thankful.
Drivers should also know that at the meeting Chief Miller said "35 means 35!", so don't say you weren't warned!
This comes just two days after the Board meeting described in the previous post where residents implored the agency to not wait and tie the lower speed to the West Branch development.
At the Tuesday meeting after the public hearing there was a rapid fire discussion with multiple points discussed about enforcement, the technicalities of how speed limits are set, and even an arcane discussion of the "default" speed limits for municipalities involving exactly which parcels of land along the road are (and are not) within the town limits.
In the end though it boiled down to this. The town sent the below letter.
The letter asks for speed limits according to the below map.
And NCDOT made the changes.
When asked to explain the change in approving the 35mph starting at the Beaver Dam House heading into town, NCDOT Engineer Scott Cole had this to say.
"We approved the speed limit reduction to 45mph and to 35mph prior to the meeting, but we're really discussing the details of the timing of the reduction. We had proposed reducing the speed limits as the proposed development was to come on line. The Town Commissioners and therefore the Town proposed and expressed through their resolution, that they wanted the reduction to 35mph to occur immediately. We respected the Town's wishes on timing and moved to implement immediately. The signs should be in place at this time."
And that they are, for which many in town are very thankful.
Drivers should also know that at the meeting Chief Miller said "35 means 35!", so don't say you weren't warned!
Tuesday, June 14, 2016
Mayors Woods and Travis - Dead Men Walking
Today stands to be one of the most interesting days in the history of North Mecklenburg politics.
Last week, we reported on the ill thought out trip by local Mayors John Woods and Chuck Travis of Davidson and Cornelius to see Senate leader Phil Berger. The purpose of their trip was to advocate for the I77 HOT lanes in contradiction to the official position of their respective Boards. In both cases the men claimed to only be expressing their personal opinions and not those of their respective towns.
Nobody bought it.
The public response has been swift, vicious, and very likely fatal to both of their political legacies.
Almost immediately reports began swirling that Cornelius would seek to oust Mayor Travis. That Board had already censured his previouy for his off script actions on opposition to the town's official position. Then on Monday, CorneliusToday.com posted a detailed story about what's likely to happen to Travis.
He will very likely will receive a vote of no confidence and then be asked to resign at a special merting called for Tuesday.
Over in Davidson, the situation is more fluid.
Davidson Commissioners have been tight lipped about what may happen to Mayor Woods. Will he receive a censure? Will he receive the same treatment as Travis? Nobody is saying for sure.
However, one citizen posted responses from several Commissioners on Facebook to those questions. The response was that the Board had met with Woods regarding the Raleigh meeting and that they were "disappointed" in his response.
It would seem unlikely that the Davidson Board would do nothing. An agenda item for the I77 Managed Lanes project has been added for tonight. If no official action or very weak action is taken, the public would see that as the Board being complicit in what Woods did. They certainly do not want that as it would turn the public’s ire on them.
How all of this plays out is sure to be a spectacle, and it could have far ranging impacts.
Any political cover Senator Phil Berger was hoping to get from last week's meeting will have been stripped away. Berger was clearly hoping to hold up these two renegade mayors as the reason for his holding up the bill to cancel the toll project.
If both of those mayors receive serious punishment, that plan will have fully backfired.
Last week, we reported on the ill thought out trip by local Mayors John Woods and Chuck Travis of Davidson and Cornelius to see Senate leader Phil Berger. The purpose of their trip was to advocate for the I77 HOT lanes in contradiction to the official position of their respective Boards. In both cases the men claimed to only be expressing their personal opinions and not those of their respective towns.
Nobody bought it.
The public response has been swift, vicious, and very likely fatal to both of their political legacies.
Almost immediately reports began swirling that Cornelius would seek to oust Mayor Travis. That Board had already censured his previouy for his off script actions on opposition to the town's official position. Then on Monday, CorneliusToday.com posted a detailed story about what's likely to happen to Travis.
He will very likely will receive a vote of no confidence and then be asked to resign at a special merting called for Tuesday.
Over in Davidson, the situation is more fluid.
Davidson Commissioners have been tight lipped about what may happen to Mayor Woods. Will he receive a censure? Will he receive the same treatment as Travis? Nobody is saying for sure.
However, one citizen posted responses from several Commissioners on Facebook to those questions. The response was that the Board had met with Woods regarding the Raleigh meeting and that they were "disappointed" in his response.
It would seem unlikely that the Davidson Board would do nothing. An agenda item for the I77 Managed Lanes project has been added for tonight. If no official action or very weak action is taken, the public would see that as the Board being complicit in what Woods did. They certainly do not want that as it would turn the public’s ire on them.
How all of this plays out is sure to be a spectacle, and it could have far ranging impacts.
Any political cover Senator Phil Berger was hoping to get from last week's meeting will have been stripped away. Berger was clearly hoping to hold up these two renegade mayors as the reason for his holding up the bill to cancel the toll project.
If both of those mayors receive serious punishment, that plan will have fully backfired.
Friday, June 10, 2016
#Davidson Mayor John Woods responds regarding Raleigh meeting
Yesterday, we told you about the trip Davidson Mayor John Woods and Cornelius Mayor Chuck Travis made to Raleigh on Wednesday to speak with Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger on the I77 HOT lanes.
From reading reports on social media and speaking with those familiar with the meeting, it was a damaging trip directed at thwarting the efforts of citizens attempting to stop the toll project
Well, now Mayor Woods has finally responded.
Here's what he has to say in in an noontime email response to aShortChronicle.
"I went to Raleigh on June 8, 2016 and met with Senators Berger, Tarte, Curtis, and several others. At no time did I speak on behalf of the Davidson Board of Commissioners or the citizens of Davidson; I voiced my own opinions on the need to improve traffic congestion in our region."
Ok. So in other words, nothing to see here.
Mayor Woods was not speaking as "Mayor Woods" or for the Town Board when he went to see arguably the most powerful elected official in the Great State of North Carolina. No. He was just good ol' "John Woods" voicing his "own opinions".
How about you or I try to get a meeting with that group of officials? Do you think we'd even get the time of day if it was just to give our "opinions".
To say this is not a credible response from Mayor Woods is being generous. Davidson's Board should not, must not, accept it.
You can be sure citizens won't.
From reading reports on social media and speaking with those familiar with the meeting, it was a damaging trip directed at thwarting the efforts of citizens attempting to stop the toll project
Well, now Mayor Woods has finally responded.
Here's what he has to say in in an noontime email response to aShortChronicle.
Ok. So in other words, nothing to see here.
Mayor Woods was not speaking as "Mayor Woods" or for the Town Board when he went to see arguably the most powerful elected official in the Great State of North Carolina. No. He was just good ol' "John Woods" voicing his "own opinions".
How about you or I try to get a meeting with that group of officials? Do you think we'd even get the time of day if it was just to give our "opinions".
To say this is not a credible response from Mayor Woods is being generous. Davidson's Board should not, must not, accept it.
You can be sure citizens won't.
Thursday, June 9, 2016
Ambush of Anti-Toll efforts on #NCGA Town Day - AGAIN!
This is like a bad dream...
Over three years ago aShortChronicle posted an article about an ambush of anti-toll activists by then Speaker Thom Tillis during the annual NCGA Town Day in Raleigh
That post, titled "HOT Lanes: The Empire Strikes Back", was the first post on the site to get what could be called a significant number of page views in a single day. It hit a nerve. It exposed the kind of behaviour individuals within government were capable of stooping to in order to pursue their dream of HOT lanes. It was the first of many posts that would continually expose that fact.
Yesterday, that type of ambush happened again.
Late Wednesday/early Thursday word began leaking out of something hard to believe.
Mayor Woods and Mayor Travis traveled to Raleigh on Wednesday during this year's Town Day event and met with Senate President Phil Berger to strongly advocate for the HOT lanes project.
They did so behind the backs of their respective Boards. They did so against the will of their constituents. They did so when they knew it would hurt the most.
This level of betrayal of the public trust when clearly an overwhelming majority of the public opposes the HOT lanes project is shocking. It is hard to believe. Even after all the underhanded and dishonest actions by the pro-tollers over many years, this one earns these elected officials a special place in the hall of fame for bad faith actors.
Benedict Arnold has nothing on these two.
In a conversation with Davidson Mayor Pro Tem, Beth Cashion, it was confirmed that none of the Davidson Board was made aware of the meeting prior to its occurrence or that Mayor Woods would attend. In fact the plan was that Davidson was not sending anyone to Town Day this year.
Cashion went on to say that based on what is being communicated by those who were in the room, Mayor Woods was not accurately representing the position of the Board or the Town of Davidson.
In other words Mayor Woods was spreading "misinformation".
Woods loves to accuse people of spending so called misinformation. It's his polite way of calling people liars when he disagrees with them. See here for more on that.
Today, it looks like he was engaging in spreading misinformation himself at the expense of those he supposedly represents.
As the dust settles on this one, Davidson's Board will need to decide what to do with the Mayor. If he misrepresented their wishes to one of the highest officials in the state, there must be consequences.
Woods has not returned multiple requests for comment from aShortChronicle and as of earlier today he supposedly was not returning calls from Commissioners either. The town Public Information Officer also says he is unavailable.
The cone of silence has descended.
If mayor Woods or the town responds, there will be an update.
Over three years ago aShortChronicle posted an article about an ambush of anti-toll activists by then Speaker Thom Tillis during the annual NCGA Town Day in Raleigh
That post, titled "HOT Lanes: The Empire Strikes Back", was the first post on the site to get what could be called a significant number of page views in a single day. It hit a nerve. It exposed the kind of behaviour individuals within government were capable of stooping to in order to pursue their dream of HOT lanes. It was the first of many posts that would continually expose that fact.
Yesterday, that type of ambush happened again.
Late Wednesday/early Thursday word began leaking out of something hard to believe.
Mayor Woods and Mayor Travis traveled to Raleigh on Wednesday during this year's Town Day event and met with Senate President Phil Berger to strongly advocate for the HOT lanes project.
They did so behind the backs of their respective Boards. They did so against the will of their constituents. They did so when they knew it would hurt the most.
This level of betrayal of the public trust when clearly an overwhelming majority of the public opposes the HOT lanes project is shocking. It is hard to believe. Even after all the underhanded and dishonest actions by the pro-tollers over many years, this one earns these elected officials a special place in the hall of fame for bad faith actors.
Benedict Arnold has nothing on these two.
In a conversation with Davidson Mayor Pro Tem, Beth Cashion, it was confirmed that none of the Davidson Board was made aware of the meeting prior to its occurrence or that Mayor Woods would attend. In fact the plan was that Davidson was not sending anyone to Town Day this year.
Cashion went on to say that based on what is being communicated by those who were in the room, Mayor Woods was not accurately representing the position of the Board or the Town of Davidson.
In other words Mayor Woods was spreading "misinformation".
Woods loves to accuse people of spending so called misinformation. It's his polite way of calling people liars when he disagrees with them. See here for more on that.
Today, it looks like he was engaging in spreading misinformation himself at the expense of those he supposedly represents.
As the dust settles on this one, Davidson's Board will need to decide what to do with the Mayor. If he misrepresented their wishes to one of the highest officials in the state, there must be consequences.
Woods has not returned multiple requests for comment from aShortChronicle and as of earlier today he supposedly was not returning calls from Commissioners either. The town Public Information Officer also says he is unavailable.
The cone of silence has descended.
If mayor Woods or the town responds, there will be an update.
Bond, Davidson Bond
The Town of Davidson has a lot on its financial decision making plate these days.
There’s the ongoing saga around the controversial Catalyst Project to develop the town owned downtown property. The second batch of so called “roundtable” discussions are currently underway to gather input from the public and attempt to make the sale on what has become an increasingly publicly funded idea.
The town is set to pass its next budget which includes an over 6% spending increase in the town’s general fund. While the town is proposing to keep the tax rate steady, it is spending every dime of extra revenue that has started to come in as the local economy improves.
The town also plans to start the long overdue second fire station to serve Davidson’s east side. That project looks to take a big chunk out of the town fund balance (aka its savings account).
Then of course you have Mi-Connection – the town owned cable company. While that situation continues to improve, the town is still looking at a $1 million subsidy payment this year with subsidies likely to continue for at least a couple more budget cycles.
Finally, you have the issues currently swirling around private sector development projects such as the large West Branch neighborhood on Davidson-Concord Road and the possibility of a new hotel at Exit 30. These new projects bring with them new costs as well as new revenue streams with the realities of how much of either still quite murky.
On top of all these financial variables, the town has also been looking at the possibility of pursuing its first ever general obligation bond, or “GO” bond for short. Earlier this year the topic was the subject of multiple meetings surrounding the town’s long term capital projects list. Besides the fact that this debt requires voter approval, what makes GO bonds different from other forms of debt financing is that they are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the government entity issuing them. Meaning the government commits raising taxes as necessary to pay off the debt.
In that sense, much like the authority conferred on the famed 007 in the James Bond movies. GO bonds provide a “license to kill” when it comes to raising taxes. In fact it “obligates” the town to raise taxes as needed to pay off bond debt.
With Davidson already having the highest municipal tax rate in North Mecklenburg, already having a number of significant projects on its plate, and already spending every dime of increasing revenues in its next proposed budget, the town should postpone any decision on a bond referendum for later this year. Taking another year to see how the above issues shake out will likely provide a good deal more clarity to the town’s future financial situation and its true overall capital needs.
Besides, with many decisions yet to be made towards a well thought out bond proposal, it’s far from clear the town could pull together an appealing proposal in time for something this year. The town’s own bond counsel from the Parker Poe law firm informed the town in April that the process really needed to get formally underway in June to prepare for a November referendum.
Commissioners need to be very cautious in how they proceed if they want a bond proposal to be successful - whether it’s now or in the future. A bond proposal that does not serve the entire town may not pass. A bond proposal favoring pet projects of Town Hall may not end favorably either.
Proceeding deliberately with a significant amount of public input on any proposed project list will be the best way to ensure success. If the town wants that “license” from its citizens, it still has work to do on both counts.
This post originally appeared in the Herald Weekly at HuntersvilleHerald.com
There’s the ongoing saga around the controversial Catalyst Project to develop the town owned downtown property. The second batch of so called “roundtable” discussions are currently underway to gather input from the public and attempt to make the sale on what has become an increasingly publicly funded idea.
The town is set to pass its next budget which includes an over 6% spending increase in the town’s general fund. While the town is proposing to keep the tax rate steady, it is spending every dime of extra revenue that has started to come in as the local economy improves.
The town also plans to start the long overdue second fire station to serve Davidson’s east side. That project looks to take a big chunk out of the town fund balance (aka its savings account).
Then of course you have Mi-Connection – the town owned cable company. While that situation continues to improve, the town is still looking at a $1 million subsidy payment this year with subsidies likely to continue for at least a couple more budget cycles.
Finally, you have the issues currently swirling around private sector development projects such as the large West Branch neighborhood on Davidson-Concord Road and the possibility of a new hotel at Exit 30. These new projects bring with them new costs as well as new revenue streams with the realities of how much of either still quite murky.
On top of all these financial variables, the town has also been looking at the possibility of pursuing its first ever general obligation bond, or “GO” bond for short. Earlier this year the topic was the subject of multiple meetings surrounding the town’s long term capital projects list. Besides the fact that this debt requires voter approval, what makes GO bonds different from other forms of debt financing is that they are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the government entity issuing them. Meaning the government commits raising taxes as necessary to pay off the debt.
In that sense, much like the authority conferred on the famed 007 in the James Bond movies. GO bonds provide a “license to kill” when it comes to raising taxes. In fact it “obligates” the town to raise taxes as needed to pay off bond debt.
With Davidson already having the highest municipal tax rate in North Mecklenburg, already having a number of significant projects on its plate, and already spending every dime of increasing revenues in its next proposed budget, the town should postpone any decision on a bond referendum for later this year. Taking another year to see how the above issues shake out will likely provide a good deal more clarity to the town’s future financial situation and its true overall capital needs.
Besides, with many decisions yet to be made towards a well thought out bond proposal, it’s far from clear the town could pull together an appealing proposal in time for something this year. The town’s own bond counsel from the Parker Poe law firm informed the town in April that the process really needed to get formally underway in June to prepare for a November referendum.
Commissioners need to be very cautious in how they proceed if they want a bond proposal to be successful - whether it’s now or in the future. A bond proposal that does not serve the entire town may not pass. A bond proposal favoring pet projects of Town Hall may not end favorably either.
Proceeding deliberately with a significant amount of public input on any proposed project list will be the best way to ensure success. If the town wants that “license” from its citizens, it still has work to do on both counts.
This post originally appeared in the Herald Weekly at HuntersvilleHerald.com
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
Davidson's 1st Tuesday meetings...a black hole for transparency
We've tried here recently at aShortChronicle to give the Town of Davidson credit for improved transparency.
To those at Town Hall, really, we have. I promise.
But something happened at Monday's "special meeting" which really shows there is a looooong way to go.
The meeting was "special" because the date had to be changed from the typical "1st Tuesday" meeting which occurs every month. There was also a 2 hour presentation about the town's proposed new Rural Area Plan. At the end however, there was supposed to be a discussion on multiple other items - including the town possibly joining a new incarnation of the LNTC - the subject of the last post.
Inexplicably, the video of the meeting is summarily cut off just as that discussion was about to begin.
Watch the last 50 seconds below.
The video camera has been moved into place, clearly with the intent of filming the remainder of the meeting.
Mayor Woods asks if the video is still on. He shakes his head. Then, boom. The video goes off.
And this is not the first time these "1st Tuesday" meetings have been less than transparent. The Herald Weekly had a not so flattering story about them just a few weeks ago.
In that story Commissioner Brian Jenest called into one of the "1st Tuesday" meetings. He was going to relay information he had about a meeting with NCDOT, but upon hearing a Herald reporter was in the room he declined to discuss it.
In the past Davidson briefly held an informal monthly meeting inside Commissioners homes. While these too were technically open to the public, few if any people ever attended. Thankfully, the town got rid of those. Nobody believed they were just for "team building" anyway.
Those meetings were replaced by this "1st Tuesday" gathering. There was not supposed to be a formal agenda, and the idea was that they would be more transparent by being held in a more open forum.
As these two examples show, that idea of more transparency only goes so far.
Update: Commissioner Cashion just contacted me to clarify one point. The date of this particular meeting was moved at her request because of conflicting graduation events, not to obscure any of the items on the agenda.
While the date move is not the main point of this post, we're glad to clarify that in case readers got that impression.
To those at Town Hall, really, we have. I promise.
But something happened at Monday's "special meeting" which really shows there is a looooong way to go.
The meeting was "special" because the date had to be changed from the typical "1st Tuesday" meeting which occurs every month. There was also a 2 hour presentation about the town's proposed new Rural Area Plan. At the end however, there was supposed to be a discussion on multiple other items - including the town possibly joining a new incarnation of the LNTC - the subject of the last post.
Inexplicably, the video of the meeting is summarily cut off just as that discussion was about to begin.
Watch the last 50 seconds below.
The video camera has been moved into place, clearly with the intent of filming the remainder of the meeting.
 |
| Click HERE for video. |
And this is not the first time these "1st Tuesday" meetings have been less than transparent. The Herald Weekly had a not so flattering story about them just a few weeks ago.
In that story Commissioner Brian Jenest called into one of the "1st Tuesday" meetings. He was going to relay information he had about a meeting with NCDOT, but upon hearing a Herald reporter was in the room he declined to discuss it.
In the past Davidson briefly held an informal monthly meeting inside Commissioners homes. While these too were technically open to the public, few if any people ever attended. Thankfully, the town got rid of those. Nobody believed they were just for "team building" anyway.
Those meetings were replaced by this "1st Tuesday" gathering. There was not supposed to be a formal agenda, and the idea was that they would be more transparent by being held in a more open forum.
As these two examples show, that idea of more transparency only goes so far.
Update: Commissioner Cashion just contacted me to clarify one point. The date of this particular meeting was moved at her request because of conflicting graduation events, not to obscure any of the items on the agenda.
While the date move is not the main point of this post, we're glad to clarify that in case readers got that impression.
Friday, May 27, 2016
What's your agenda Mr Short?
First, say that headline to yourself but do it with your best villainous cartoon character accent.
Now, picture yourself as me sitting in Davidson Town Hall and being asked that question a few weeks ago by town staff – minus the Mr Short part, of course. We’re on a first name basis around here.
Once you’ve stopped laughing or shaking your head, here is the answer to that question.
Over the years, yours truly has been pretty rough on the Town of Davidson – both in my blog and in the columns the Herald Weekly so graciously lets me write. If you were to go back and read through it all, you would see the recurring themes of improving transparency, exposing conflicts of interest, opposing bad ideas before they become costly mistakes, and generally holding local government accountable.
If anyone wants to call those things an “agenda”, then I am more than happy to have them do so.
Here are a few examples of that “agenda” in action.
In recent years, Davidson tried twice to resurrect the bad idea of implementing 4 year staggered terms – a system that makes it nearly impossible to vote out a majority of elected officials in a single election. Both times, the idea never really got off the ground. That topic was a big one in the early days of my blog, and playing a part in stopping that is something I’ll always be proud of helping make happen.
Over the years, there have also been several storylines involving conflicts of interest – many more than I cared to write. It’s a topic I’d like to never cover again, but unfortunately that’s very likely not going to be the case.
Some of those columns were down in the weeds on the state law governing exactly what is a conflict. Others covered specific examples – more than one involving the long time Davidson town attorney, Rick Kline. Those columns in particular seemed to strike a nerve. Kline announced his retirement a few months ago, and his replacement was announced at the May 10th Board meeting. The town’s Affordable Housing Coordinator, Cindy Reid, will be stepping into the Town Attorney role. At the meeting, as Kline was complementing the town’s selection of Reid as his replacement, it was interesting to hear him add “unlike me, she doesn’t have any potential conflicts out there.”
Let’s certainly hope that turns out to be true.
Then you have the category of the “big idea”.
Big ideas are often accompanied by positive sounding adjectives such as “transformative”, or “progressive”, or even “necessary”. However, big ideas tend to also be costly, have long term impacts, and be rife with unintended consequences. Aggressively poking holes in those big ideas are the bread and butter of the “agenda”. When thinking of big ideas, think things like the Red Line, the I77 HOT Lanes, and the Catalyst Project.
Davidson more than most local towns has seen the negative impacts a big idea gone wrong through its adventures in the cable business with MI-Connection. It’s not being melodramatic to say avoiding the next debacle of that magnitude is akin to a life or death situation for Davidson’s small town character. Plus, quite frankly if a big idea can’t withstand a little criticism, then it is probably also not a good idea.
It has not all been criticism however. When they happen, it has been nice to call out positive things.
Implementing tools for greater transparency is one area where Davidson has done a good job. The recent widespread use of streaming technology to broadcast all types of town meetings is one example where the town has made real strides. The town has also regularly been responsive to my public information requests.
To be fair, when asked about my “agenda” for these columns it wasn’t taken as an ominous question, and it certainly wasn’t delivered with a cartoon villain accent. On the contrary, I took it as a compliment. It means these columns have the town’s attention, and that most definitely is a good thing.
Now, picture yourself as me sitting in Davidson Town Hall and being asked that question a few weeks ago by town staff – minus the Mr Short part, of course. We’re on a first name basis around here.
Once you’ve stopped laughing or shaking your head, here is the answer to that question.
Over the years, yours truly has been pretty rough on the Town of Davidson – both in my blog and in the columns the Herald Weekly so graciously lets me write. If you were to go back and read through it all, you would see the recurring themes of improving transparency, exposing conflicts of interest, opposing bad ideas before they become costly mistakes, and generally holding local government accountable.
If anyone wants to call those things an “agenda”, then I am more than happy to have them do so.
Here are a few examples of that “agenda” in action.
In recent years, Davidson tried twice to resurrect the bad idea of implementing 4 year staggered terms – a system that makes it nearly impossible to vote out a majority of elected officials in a single election. Both times, the idea never really got off the ground. That topic was a big one in the early days of my blog, and playing a part in stopping that is something I’ll always be proud of helping make happen.
Over the years, there have also been several storylines involving conflicts of interest – many more than I cared to write. It’s a topic I’d like to never cover again, but unfortunately that’s very likely not going to be the case.
Some of those columns were down in the weeds on the state law governing exactly what is a conflict. Others covered specific examples – more than one involving the long time Davidson town attorney, Rick Kline. Those columns in particular seemed to strike a nerve. Kline announced his retirement a few months ago, and his replacement was announced at the May 10th Board meeting. The town’s Affordable Housing Coordinator, Cindy Reid, will be stepping into the Town Attorney role. At the meeting, as Kline was complementing the town’s selection of Reid as his replacement, it was interesting to hear him add “unlike me, she doesn’t have any potential conflicts out there.”
Let’s certainly hope that turns out to be true.
Then you have the category of the “big idea”.
Big ideas are often accompanied by positive sounding adjectives such as “transformative”, or “progressive”, or even “necessary”. However, big ideas tend to also be costly, have long term impacts, and be rife with unintended consequences. Aggressively poking holes in those big ideas are the bread and butter of the “agenda”. When thinking of big ideas, think things like the Red Line, the I77 HOT Lanes, and the Catalyst Project.
Davidson more than most local towns has seen the negative impacts a big idea gone wrong through its adventures in the cable business with MI-Connection. It’s not being melodramatic to say avoiding the next debacle of that magnitude is akin to a life or death situation for Davidson’s small town character. Plus, quite frankly if a big idea can’t withstand a little criticism, then it is probably also not a good idea.
It has not all been criticism however. When they happen, it has been nice to call out positive things.
Implementing tools for greater transparency is one area where Davidson has done a good job. The recent widespread use of streaming technology to broadcast all types of town meetings is one example where the town has made real strides. The town has also regularly been responsive to my public information requests.
To be fair, when asked about my “agenda” for these columns it wasn’t taken as an ominous question, and it certainly wasn’t delivered with a cartoon villain accent. On the contrary, I took it as a compliment. It means these columns have the town’s attention, and that most definitely is a good thing.
This column first appeared in this week's Herald Weekly at HuntersvilleHerald.com.
Thursday, May 26, 2016
#Davidson to launch full court press pedestrian safety initiative
As aShortChronicle has reported on extensively, there is the ongoing effort to lower the speed limit on Davidson-Concord Road which was mentioned as Ingram began his remarks. This presentation was about other initiatives on top of that.
Lieutenant Ingram outlines multiple outreach efforts by the DPD.
They include handing out fliers at the Farmers Market and tracking numbers of police contacts where pedestrian safety is discussed. Lieutenant Ingram also extended the offer of inviting DPD to your neighborhood event to have the police speak directly with residents.
There will also be increased enforcement efforts.
The town will be getting 2 more of the portable automated speed limit signs allowing DPD to rotate them more often around town. A $340 fine for not yielding to pedestrian in crosswalk was also mentioned. Finally, while there wasn't immediate enforcement planned for jaywalking (a particularly bad problem on Main Street) that was not ruled out in the future if warranted.
The Town also plans to use its full arsenal of communication tools to spread the word including the town website, social media accounts, the eCrier email blast, the quarterly Town Message newsletter, and the regular meetings with neighborhood groups. It will also engage with other institutions such as Davidson College, local hotels and churches. They'll even have access to slides at Our Town Cinemas as well as access to Mi-Connection.
It sounds like you won't be able to go anywhere in town without hearing about pedestrian safety. That's definitely a good thing!!!
All of these actions should make a fair amount of improvement for residents. Now, if a way can be figured out for more non-residents who come through town to get the message, everything will be covered. That's one gap that's harder to fill.
Maybe investing in signage for roadways entering town would be a good idea as well.
How about this sign from Australia.
Or maybe get a bunch of signs like this one seen on Davidson's very own South St...
Or maybe make something up that's more unique...
Regardless something to bluntly inform non-residents that there are lots of non cars on the roads here would be helpful.
It was mentioned multiple times during the presentation that pedestrian safety is a pedestrian responsibility as well.
Commissioner Beth Cashion drove home that point saying...
"It is your responsibility to take care of yourself. You are responsible for crossing the street. You are responsible for driving a car, but more importantly as a pedestrian whether you are in the crosswalk, or not, or jaywalking, or on the sidewalk, you are responsible for your own well being. "
Cashion went on to say....
"We can put as many safety stops, and tickets, and cones out there as you all would like, but at the end of the day, you are responsible."
As a strong proponent of personal responsibility, there is a lot of truth in Cashion's statement - for adults. However, it's also true that "kids will be kids". If the town is to live up to its pedestrian friendly moniker, it needs to make it safe for people - particularly kids - sometimes in spite of themselves.
When the town bills itself as "pedestrian friendly", when there are crosswalks across a busy road like Davidson-Concord connecting to town greenways, and when the town approves development which makes all of that much more dangerous, the town does take on an element of responsibility for making it safer.
For those reasons this new program is welcome. That being said, there is a lot more to do, and some of those things will be a lot more expensive than sending out more information.
Watch the whole presentation here. It's about 25 minutes.
Sunday, May 22, 2016
More questions about the West Branch TIA
aShortChronicle has learned that the town has questions about the Transportation Impact Analysis completed back in March for the massive West Branch project designed by Commissioner Brian Jenest's firm.
Those questions go above and beyond what we raised in this piece, and the Town has questions out to Ramey Kemp, the firm that did the TIA, for more data before it can be accepted.
One of the main concerns we raised was that the baseline data for peak traffic did not completely cover the hours associated with pickup and dropoff times for local schools.
aShortChronicle has since learned that the hours used in the study do not appear to meet the town's clearly specified planning standard. The planning ordinance says...
"The trip generation counts shall be taken between 6 to to 9 AM and 4 to 7 PM to verify a local, more accurate trip rate."
The detailed trip counts in the submitted Ramey Kemp document only cover 7-9 AM and 400-630 PM.
The "staff" here at aShortChronicle pulled together the below analysis to show how this could miss a portion if the traffic related to the main CMS schools in the area.
This raises a couple of issues.
1. The town parameters in the afternoon miss a portion of traffic related to the bell schedules. Considering the number of trips generated as well as the potential for additional pedestrian activity, this is significant.
2. The Ramey Kemp time frame missed a significant portion of the AM traffic for Hough High than if it followed the town ordinance.
As examples of why this is important, two of the most significant accidents in recent years at the Robert Walker/Davidson Concord intersection occurred during these "missed" time frames. One was the Mason Stewart pedestrian accident which occurred at 630am. The other involved multiple Hough High School students in a rollover accident at this intersection which occurred just before 3pm.
Additional questions are out to the town on who chose Ramey Kemp to do this analysis. The town ordinance says...
"All required traffic studies shall be conducted at the expense of the developer by an engineer retained by the town."
One would think the parameters for such a study would be clear.
Add to that these facts...
- the TIA only shows data capture for one and a half days to get a baseline
- and those days started the day after a holiday (Presidents Day)
- and that day happened to be the day after one of only a couple winter weather events this past season (Feb 15th storm).
Pull all that together and one may get the idea the baseline data might not be all that representative of your typical day.
Stay tuned. More certain to come on this one.
Those questions go above and beyond what we raised in this piece, and the Town has questions out to Ramey Kemp, the firm that did the TIA, for more data before it can be accepted.
One of the main concerns we raised was that the baseline data for peak traffic did not completely cover the hours associated with pickup and dropoff times for local schools.
aShortChronicle has since learned that the hours used in the study do not appear to meet the town's clearly specified planning standard. The planning ordinance says...
"The trip generation counts shall be taken between 6 to to 9 AM and 4 to 7 PM to verify a local, more accurate trip rate."
The detailed trip counts in the submitted Ramey Kemp document only cover 7-9 AM and 400-630 PM.
The "staff" here at aShortChronicle pulled together the below analysis to show how this could miss a portion if the traffic related to the main CMS schools in the area.
This raises a couple of issues.
1. The town parameters in the afternoon miss a portion of traffic related to the bell schedules. Considering the number of trips generated as well as the potential for additional pedestrian activity, this is significant.
2. The Ramey Kemp time frame missed a significant portion of the AM traffic for Hough High than if it followed the town ordinance.
As examples of why this is important, two of the most significant accidents in recent years at the Robert Walker/Davidson Concord intersection occurred during these "missed" time frames. One was the Mason Stewart pedestrian accident which occurred at 630am. The other involved multiple Hough High School students in a rollover accident at this intersection which occurred just before 3pm.
Additional questions are out to the town on who chose Ramey Kemp to do this analysis. The town ordinance says...
"All required traffic studies shall be conducted at the expense of the developer by an engineer retained by the town."
One would think the parameters for such a study would be clear.
Add to that these facts...
- the TIA only shows data capture for one and a half days to get a baseline
- and those days started the day after a holiday (Presidents Day)
- and that day happened to be the day after one of only a couple winter weather events this past season (Feb 15th storm).
Pull all that together and one may get the idea the baseline data might not be all that representative of your typical day.
Stay tuned. More certain to come on this one.
Friday, May 20, 2016
Bait and Switch coming on town affordable housing project?
Tuesday's Davidson Town Board meeting has an agenda chock-full of potentially controversial topics. In addition to talking about the Catalyst Project, the Board will get an update on the use of the town Affordable Housing Payment in Lieu (PIL) fund.
After a study which will be completed this month, the number one priority for this fund appears to be rental housing.
From the PIL prioritization memo...
"Rental housing will be prioritized over homeownership projects, with the goal
toward a minimum of 50% of the annual appropriations (averaged over 2 years) to rental
projects through a grant or loan to a low income housing tax credit developer, or other
developer of low income multifamily rental properties, or town purchase of land to be
used for multifamily low income rental housing."
This is bound to cause problems down the road as most neighborhood HOAs don't typically like the idea of building rental apartments among single family homes.
It will be reeeeeeaaaalllly interesting to see how this plays out with the town's current Affordable Housing project in Bailey Springs.
Just last month Affordable Housing Director Cindy Reid said the Bailey Springs project was to be for sale units, but she did leave the door open for rental proposals.
Reid was recently promoted to town attorney by Davidson Commissioners. She replaces long time town attorney Rick Kline.
The RFP responses are due soon, so we won't have to wait long for that answer.
After a study which will be completed this month, the number one priority for this fund appears to be rental housing.
From the PIL prioritization memo...
"Rental housing will be prioritized over homeownership projects, with the goal
toward a minimum of 50% of the annual appropriations (averaged over 2 years) to rental
projects through a grant or loan to a low income housing tax credit developer, or other
developer of low income multifamily rental properties, or town purchase of land to be
used for multifamily low income rental housing."
This is bound to cause problems down the road as most neighborhood HOAs don't typically like the idea of building rental apartments among single family homes.
It will be reeeeeeaaaalllly interesting to see how this plays out with the town's current Affordable Housing project in Bailey Springs.
Just last month Affordable Housing Director Cindy Reid said the Bailey Springs project was to be for sale units, but she did leave the door open for rental proposals.
Reid was recently promoted to town attorney by Davidson Commissioners. She replaces long time town attorney Rick Kline.
The RFP responses are due soon, so we won't have to wait long for that answer.
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Davidson includes "transparency" in FY2017 budget.
In a recent meeting with Davidson town staff, we here at aShortChronicle were asked an interesting question.
"What is our agenda?"
Being asked that question makes us smile a little bit. It means we've got their attention.
What was the answer to that question?
In large part, it has around improving the overall sense of transparency in local government. Improving transparency should reduce the risk of repeating mistakes on the magnitude of MI-Connection.
So to that end, it's nice to see Davidson including a couple of transparency related items in the proposed FY2017 budget which will be approved in June.
Davidson plans to spend $8500 on new software to improve the Public Records request process. The software from a vendor named Barracuda will allow the town clerk to more quickly search for emails across the system relating to a particular request.
Over the years, Davidson has actually been very responsive to records requests from aShortChronicle. We've also instructed several other citizens on the how-tos if submitting requests as well. Seeing the town take this step to make this process go even better is a positive thing.
We did recommend that the town implement a policy requiring elected officials always copy the town "Public Records" email box in the event they receive an email that should be public information to a private account such as their work account.
Next year's proposed budget also includes a request for $21,800 towards improved technology for live streaming Davidson public meetings.
This will be another step towards greater transparency by providing residents a more realistic option for watching meetings. Currently, meetings are recorded using an iPad and while greatly appreciated, the sound quality in particular leaves something to be desired. Since Davidson implemented streaming of meetings last fall it has grown from just the regular monthly meetings to include Civics 101 classes as well as off site events such as Commissioner Chats at the Egg and other public information sessions like the one at the Beaver Dam House for the east side parks.
To date, 1900 user views have occurred which is likely several times the number of people who have actually attended these events. It's particularly useful for events that occur during the work day.
Yes, $8,500 for an email archive and $21,800 for video is a lot of money. However, the more people who are involved and watching what Town Hall does, the better. If this money helps prevent anything even a fraction the size of the MI-Connection debacle, then it is money well spent.
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
Q&A with #Davidson PD Chief Jeanne Miller on possible new camera system
The Davidson Police Department does a great job serving our small town. In 2014, the department received renewal of its CALEA accreditation. In 2015, the town was ranked the 2nd safest small municipality in North Carolina - just behind fellow college town, Elon. The town was 3rd safest overall. That's a quantitative testament to the job the department is doing.
However, the town does not have all the crime fighting tools it needs, tools that have become standard practise in most urban areas. That would be the use of fixed surveillance cameras that can help solve crimes more quickly when they do occur.
To remedy that, the DPD has requested funding in the upcoming budget to install a system of cameras for the town.
Below is a brief Q&A with Police Chief Miller on the system and the funding request.
However, the town does not have all the crime fighting tools it needs, tools that have become standard practise in most urban areas. That would be the use of fixed surveillance cameras that can help solve crimes more quickly when they do occur.
To remedy that, the DPD has requested funding in the upcoming budget to install a system of cameras for the town.
Below is a brief Q&A with Police Chief Miller on the system and the funding request.
Q: How many cameras should we expect? A: There will probably be 8 – 10 cameras, plus four (4) license plate readers.
Q: Are these Davidson’s first cameras? A: These are Davidson’s first static, cameras to be installed in public space. We have cameras in all the police cruisers; body worn cameras; and one deer camera that we’ve used for problem locations/criminal hot spots.
Q: Will they only be at entrances to town such as at Potts/Main, I77 exits and North Main, or will they be all around town? A: We will be positioning them at the major thoroughfares entering town. However, we would like to have at least one portable camera that can be moved to an area where we are experiencing an active crime problem.
Q: What kinds of crimes will these help solve? Has this technology been used to help solve crimes in Town before? A: The city of Charlotte has an extensive camera system and they have partnered with private businesses and the NC DOT to increase their camera views. They have had great success using their camera system to close all types of criminal cases. The city of Cornelius also has a wireless camera system and some of their video assisted us in our investigation into the fatal shooting of Jerry Kerns on June 23, 2015. Their system also helped us in an animal abuse investigation.
Q: How long will the video captured by these cameras be kept and who monitors it? Is that possibly outsourced, or will the town do that itself? A: The capacity for storage is estimated to be 30-60 days. There will not be a person monitoring the video 24x7. However, if a hot spot is identified, we will have the ability to observe the camera view remotely.
Q Has a vendor been selected? The budget request of $44,442 seems rather specific A: We were working with a vendor who gave us that estimate. Due to an additional desire for flexibility, we decided to explore other options that are the most cost-effective and flexible. Nucentric Solutions (our IT provider) is assisting us in research and developing this system. We used the estimate as a placeholder, and believe we will be able to implement a system for the same cost or less.
Some additional research shows that these types of systems can get pretty high tech. The video is stored digitally. Then using what is called "smart search" technology the data is parsed into time segments and analyzed to identify human activity (i.e. people walking) as well as vehicles by size, color and direction. That data can be searched based on specific criteria. If tag readers are used, then the system can be searched for a specific licence plate.
For example, let's say police search for a suspect vehicle that's a "red car at Exit 30 between 2am and 3am." If the car is spotted and the tag is captured, the user can then search all camera data for that tag in the time frame before and after that time to see where that vehicle travelled.
One can clearly see how this system could be useful in solving crimes, but as importantly in discouraging them from happening if criminals think they will get caught on tape. It should also be noted that these are not the same thing red light cameras which capture data and automatically send tickets.
Saturday, May 7, 2016
Davidson Agenda includes new "Davidson-Concord Speedway" Resolution
On Friday, Davison published the agenda for its upcoming Town Board meeting on Tuesday. Citizens should take heart that it includes a resolution asking NCDOT to lower the speed on portions of the "Davidson-Concord Speedway" between 73 and the Rocky River roundabout.
Here it is.
This resolution is similar to the one passed back in August of 2014 with one critical difference. It asks to lower the speed limit to 45 from 73 to Beaver Dam and then drop to 35 the rest of the way into town. The 2014 resolution asked for 35 the entire length of the road.
This is a more reasonable resolution, one that NCDOT should consider.
The state agency recently proved it could move fast on safety issues, jumping to attention to fix the timing on the crosswalk lights in town. Tragically, this only occurred after the recent fatality at a crosswalk on Main Street.
Here is hoping they listen to the town and help avoid more in the future.
Please plan on attending Tuesday's meeting to get your comments on record. Davidson's meetings are video recorded. Having these comments to go along with the resolution will be a powerful combination.
Here it is.
This resolution is similar to the one passed back in August of 2014 with one critical difference. It asks to lower the speed limit to 45 from 73 to Beaver Dam and then drop to 35 the rest of the way into town. The 2014 resolution asked for 35 the entire length of the road.
This is a more reasonable resolution, one that NCDOT should consider.
The state agency recently proved it could move fast on safety issues, jumping to attention to fix the timing on the crosswalk lights in town. Tragically, this only occurred after the recent fatality at a crosswalk on Main Street.
Here is hoping they listen to the town and help avoid more in the future.
Please plan on attending Tuesday's meeting to get your comments on record. Davidson's meetings are video recorded. Having these comments to go along with the resolution will be a powerful combination.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
#Davidson seeking #NCDOT rep for feedback on "Davidson-Concord Speedway" at May 10th meeting
Late last Thursday we posted this piece with three disturbing videos showing incidents on Davidson-Concord Rd involving bad behaviour by inconsiderate drivers around school buses.
On Friday, after one reader saw the post, this event encouraging residents to attend the regular Davidson Board meeting on May 10th began circulating around cyberspace. The invite encourages people to speak out before tragedy ensues (again) in this area. Readers will remember the skateboarder who was involved in a serious accident at the intersection with Robert-Walker Drive a few years ago.
After several hundred page views and watching that invite circulate, aShortChronicle has learned that by Monday an official request was made to get this subject on the agenda for May 10th and a representative from NCDOT may be present.
Here's hoping that's true. Otherwise it will likely be an extra long "public comment" period which traditionally occurs at the beginning of regular Board meeting.
At the April Board meeting when the town was discussing pedestrian safety in the wake of the tragedy on Main St a few weeks ago, Mayor John Woods indicated he had a good working relationship with the "Chair of the whole department" (referring to NCDOT) and could use that influence to get them involved on the Downtown crosswalk issue they were discussing at the time.
Assuming the Mayor meant NCDOT Secretary Tennyson, here's also hoping the Mayor can use that influence to ensure someone from NCDOT shows at the May meeting to hear citizen concerns.
#Davidson Bonds: June deadline to decide - many questions outstanding
Remember that feeling you had the first time you jumped off the high dive into the deep end of the pool? The thought "maybe I didn't think this all the way through!?!?" probably flashed through your mind.
There was a moment during the discussion Tuesday night on Davidson possibly conducting its first ever "general obligation" bond referendum when you could sense that same feeling in the room.
Davidson's Board was in the middle of a tutorial on the GO bond process when Commissioner Rodney Graham asked the town's bond counsel from high-powered law firm Parker Poe for advise on how Davidson should structure the bonds to help ensure passage. The response was that town officials typically have their finger on the pulse of public opinion and know when things will pass or when they are in trouble.
One got the distinct feeling in the room that may not be the case in Davidson.
Maybe it's the lingering bad feelings over the Mi-Connection decision which has put the town in the position of needing to look at bonds in the first place. Or maybe, it is the more recent swirl around the Catalyst Project and the surprising amount of pushback from residents. That seemed to catch Town Hall off guard and could certainly feed into uncertainty on the idea of bonds.
What was clear is this...
The Town has a lot of decisions to make in a big hurry if they want to put a good proposal before voters this November. The man from Parker Poe outlined a series of steps that need to occur and those need to start in June.
To do that, the Town needs to...
- understand how exactly it wants to divide up the bond questions;
- get a better idea of exactly what projects would be in each proposal;
- identify the real dollar amount needed for the projects;
- identify what the tax rate impacts are for each proposal;
The bond counsel mentioned in other towns he'd seen efforts to have public input on forming the list of projects. It doesn't seem like there is time to complete something like that now. So, Davidson will likely depend on previous documents such as the "Walks and Rolls" plan or the ever present Comprehensive Plan.
However, when you get down to talking about spending real money on real projects - not just hypothetical plans - and you want to raise taxes to do it, that certainly may not be enough.
Bonus Observation: According to NCTreasurer.com, municipal bond referendums have a solid record of passing in November elections across the state in recent years. One example where one failed recently was in Bald Head Island where a bond for a "broadband system" failed. One has to wonder what would have happened if Davidson had put Mi-Connection to a vote back in 2007. If they had, we might not be talking about bonds and higher taxes now.
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Davidson sends RFP for newest Affordable Housing project
On March 31st, Davidson sent out an RFP for the latest effort out of the Town Affordable Housing department - selling off 2.3 acres of prime real estate in the Bailey Springs neighborhood.
aShortChronicle has obtained a copy of the RFP and the list of RFP recipients. It's an eye opening read.
From the RFP (emphasis added)...
"The Bailey Springs affordable housing project is the first of its kind undertaken by the Town. The project area, as shown on Exhibit A, encompasses approximately 2.3 acres and is located in the middle of the Bailey Springs neighborhood facing Bradford Park Drive. It is less than a mile from Hough High School and within two miles of Bailey Middle School.
The foremost objective of this project is to provide high quality and attractive homes targeting households with incomes that range from 50% to 120% of the area median income.
...
The original vision for this property was eight bungalows, with three apartments each, for a total of 24 units. ... The project was not eligible for low income tax credits due to its contiguity to overhead power lines, lack of public transportation, and limited access to service centers. Although the property has infrastructure to support eight bungalows, or 24 apartments, this RFP is not limited to a particular number of homes."
In this piece from the Lake Norman Citizen it said Johnstone's firm would “challenge the legality of the Town of Davidson’s Affordable Housing Ordinance” unless the town waives affordable housing requirements. Other documentation related to that lawsuit would also appear to indicate the belief the ordinance lacked "enabling legislation to support it."
Ultimately, the lawsuit was settled before trial so there was no legal judgment one way or the other.
When asked about the somewhat ironic situation of being on the short list for this RFP after the lawsuit Johnstone replied with the following.
Johnson went on to say that his firm is still assessing the Bailey Springs situation, and if the numbers work they may submit a proposal.
When asked how he would handle the obvious conflict of interest questions that would come up in such a situation, Graham responded with...
"I don't plan to submit a proposal, so that's an easy one. There were a number of builders who received the RFP who I think would be much more competitive than us for this type of housing.
I'm anxious to review the proposals based on my expertise in this area, but that is the extent of our involvement."
Responses to the RFP are due back by the end of May. They will head to the town's Affordable Housing Committee and then to the Town Board.
Affordable Housing is always a hot topic when it comes down to the brass tacks of putting it in an existing neighborhood, and this instance likely won't be any different.
Stay tuned.
aShortChronicle has obtained a copy of the RFP and the list of RFP recipients. It's an eye opening read.
From the RFP (emphasis added)...
"The Bailey Springs affordable housing project is the first of its kind undertaken by the Town. The project area, as shown on Exhibit A, encompasses approximately 2.3 acres and is located in the middle of the Bailey Springs neighborhood facing Bradford Park Drive. It is less than a mile from Hough High School and within two miles of Bailey Middle School.
The foremost objective of this project is to provide high quality and attractive homes targeting households with incomes that range from 50% to 120% of the area median income.
...
The original vision for this property was eight bungalows, with three apartments each, for a total of 24 units. ... The project was not eligible for low income tax credits due to its contiguity to overhead power lines, lack of public transportation, and limited access to service centers. Although the property has infrastructure to support eight bungalows, or 24 apartments, this RFP is not limited to a particular number of homes."
Two things stand out in this description. First is the size. The project could be rather large with the area having been previously approved for up to 24 units. This will be additional volume to the 306 home West Branch neighborhood in the same area. Second, the conditions which killed the previous projects still exist - particularly the lack of mass transit or service centers in the area.
The project is apparently intended to be for sale units rather than rental. In response to a question about that point Affordable Housing Director Cindy Reid said "the Town prefers an ownership model because it will be more suitable to the neighborhood." What's interesting about this response is that the town was just recently pushing for rental affordable housing in the Bradford neighborhood just across Davidson-Concord Road. The plan moved to for purchase units only after strong pushback from the neighborhood.
While the town is saying it prefers owner occupied units, at the same time it has told developers who received the RFP that proposals containing rentals would not be considered a "non response".
That point is definitely something to keep an eye on going forward.
While the town is saying it prefers owner occupied units, at the same time it has told developers who received the RFP that proposals containing rentals would not be considered a "non response".
That point is definitely something to keep an eye on going forward.
But maybe the most interesting thing about this project was the list of recipients.
This wasn't broadcast far and wide which might ensure the town gets the best offer. Instead the list of RFP recipients includes several local names. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but interesting nonetheless.
Two names stood out.
Jay Johnstone with Artisan Homes was on the list. That’s interesting considering Johnstone was involved in the 2014 lawsuit challenging the town's affordable housing ordinance.
In this piece from the Lake Norman Citizen it said Johnstone's firm would “challenge the legality of the Town of Davidson’s Affordable Housing Ordinance” unless the town waives affordable housing requirements. Other documentation related to that lawsuit would also appear to indicate the belief the ordinance lacked "enabling legislation to support it."
Ultimately, the lawsuit was settled before trial so there was no legal judgment one way or the other.
When asked about the somewhat ironic situation of being on the short list for this RFP after the lawsuit Johnstone replied with the following.
"The lawsuit with the town was never about legalities of affordable housing. It had more to do with expediting a fair agreement for both parties involved. Ultimately the Town of Davidson and Artisan/Knox LLC agreed amicably and have discussed future projects.
We have a good relationship with the town and actually gave suggestions during negotiations as to how the affordable housing component could be implemented better."
Johnson went on to say that his firm is still assessing the Bailey Springs situation, and if the numbers work they may submit a proposal.
The other interesting name was that of Davidson Commissioner Rodney Graham. Yes, a sitting Commissioner received a request to seek possible business developing town owned property.
When asked how he would handle the obvious conflict of interest questions that would come up in such a situation, Graham responded with...
"I don't plan to submit a proposal, so that's an easy one. There were a number of builders who received the RFP who I think would be much more competitive than us for this type of housing.
I'm anxious to review the proposals based on my expertise in this area, but that is the extent of our involvement."
Responses to the RFP are due back by the end of May. They will head to the town's Affordable Housing Committee and then to the Town Board.
Affordable Housing is always a hot topic when it comes down to the brass tacks of putting it in an existing neighborhood, and this instance likely won't be any different.
Stay tuned.
Monday, April 25, 2016
CORRECTION - MI-Connection Subsidy to be $3.0 million in FY2017
We originally incorrectly reported a deficit of $3.5 million. Accordingto new information provided by the town the correct number is $3.0 million. The below has been updated.
Based on numbers just confirmed from Town of Davidson Finance Director Pieter Swart, Davidson's total obligation to MI-Connection in the upcoming fiscal year starting July 1st will be $914, 902.
Under the current inter-local agreement with Mooresville, Davidson is responsible for 30% of the deficit. That brings the total amount of subsidy required to $3.05 million.
Davidson's annual cash payment is capped at $1 million with Mooresville covering the rest. Any amount not covered by Davidson accrues and the current amount owed Mooresville is $1.77 million. Davidson currently has $1 million set asside towards this debt.
Improvement is always good, but there is still a long way to go. At this rate of improvement, Davidson will owe the $1m per year for at least the next couple years (including FY2017) to cover current year debt each cycle and cover the unfunded $700k owed to Mooresville. After that, the annual amount could drop significantly below $1m per year.
As reported earlier, Davidson will be discussing its upcoming budget on Tuesday. Will be interesting to see how this plays into the discussion.
Based on numbers just confirmed from Town of Davidson Finance Director Pieter Swart, Davidson's total obligation to MI-Connection in the upcoming fiscal year starting July 1st will be $914, 902.
Under the current inter-local agreement with Mooresville, Davidson is responsible for 30% of the deficit. That brings the total amount of subsidy required to $3.05 million.
Davidson's annual cash payment is capped at $1 million with Mooresville covering the rest. Any amount not covered by Davidson accrues and the current amount owed Mooresville is $1.77 million. Davidson currently has $1 million set asside towards this debt.
Improvement is always good, but there is still a long way to go. At this rate of improvement, Davidson will owe the $1m per year for at least the next couple years (including FY2017) to cover current year debt each cycle and cover the unfunded $700k owed to Mooresville. After that, the annual amount could drop significantly below $1m per year.
As reported earlier, Davidson will be discussing its upcoming budget on Tuesday. Will be interesting to see how this plays into the discussion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)