Bull City Rising

Young Dems'/NCCU SGA City Council candidates debate wrap-up

A moderate but engaged crowd of Durhamites turned out for last night's City Council candidates' debate at the Hayti Heritage Center -- a crowd that State Sen. Floyd McKissick, Jr. wished in his opening remarks had been larger, alluding to the challenges in ever getting citizens engaged and interested in civic life.

(One of McKissick's other introductory comments, intriguingly, admonished attendees to focus on candidates' skill set at the technocratic and deliberative that makes up City government, from understanding planning and zoning rules to a careful understanding of finances and budgets. My read on it was, vote for the people who can do the job and have the experience, not the people who're saying just what appeals to you.)

Ray Gronberg has a solid wrap-up of the forum in today's Herald-Sun that provides a very good overview of the event. This morning at BCR, we'll look at how the candidates did overall, along with the themes each introduced in their opening statements. Later this week, we'll have summaries of the candidates' positions, along with some highs and low points for each candidate during the discussion.

Next Wednesday through Friday, we'll go through all the questions raised during the debate, and provide a summary of each candidate's responses. N.B., my notes are a typed summary, not (in most cases) word-for-word verbatim, so any candidates with clarifications or corrections should feel free to email me. Also, if any of the candidates who could not attend wish to add responses to these questions, those are welcome as well. (Catotti had a health emergency in her family, Funderburk and Monks a prior engagement according to Parrish. David Thompson was also absent.)

Overall: How did the candidates do, regardless of philosophy or political view? Farad Ali and Eugene Brown consistently had the most nuanced, thoughtful, and on-point answers to questions, and both proved capable of answering a wide range of questions on different topics. Ali, a newcomer to the races for elected office around these parts, was to my mind the genuine surprise of the night in terms of the depth and eloquence with which he answered questions. Brown demonstrated the mastery of issues you'd expect from the incumbent and former Alliance leader, plus the wry humor and capability of re-deflecting complaints about the current Council with the deftness of someone who actually has to sit through four Council sessions a month.

Melodie Parrish, Victoria Peterson, and David Harris all provided complete answers to most questions, though each seemed to stumble on their understanding of at least one question. All three of them did tend to focus more on points of generality and themes -- good government and fiscal accountability for Parrish, redirecting city dollars from downtown projects to vo-tech and to work for African-American males for Peterson, improving communication for Harris. I was actually a bit surprised by Harris' answers in particular, as he occasionally seemed further out of his depth in answering questions than his experience and background would have suggested.

Joe Williams, to be blunt, did nothing to demonstrate competence for any elected office. If video of some of his answers were ever posted to YouTube, the Jon Stewarts/Stephen Colberts would have a field day, not to mention the Bill O'Reillys of the world who remain forever convinced that Durham is a political backwater.

Now, on to the opening statements.

Stith and immigration: The candidate responds, and how did we get here, exactly?

City Councilman and mayoral candidate Thomas Stith released a statement on Tuesday, sent by at least one campaign supporter to at least one Partners Against Crime listserv, clarifying the purpose of his proposed revision of the City's resolution concerning interactions with those termed illegal immigrants. Stith's response appears below the jumpcut here.

Barry has an analysis of Stith's statement at his blog that is worth reading. I don't agree with every point of the analysis (since my read of G.O. 4073 suggests it and the DPD practice are aligned, though whether the Order and the Council resolution are aligned is open to some interpretation), but I won't repeat that debate here.

That said, there are two points I think are worth noting, given the following text in Stith's statement:

"I feel it is important to correct the misconceptions about my effort to correct our current city policy that states our police in particular should not determine legal status of individuals who they are investigating for specific crimes.... [S]ome people have characterized this issue in a negative manner and that is unfortunate. I would hope that we would not let the real issue of providing our department with the proper guidance become lost in the current misinformation that is curculating."

Point #1: There was, to my knowledge of the local blogosphere and listservs, any significant online discussion, criticism or coverage of the immigration policy change before or immediately after Stith brought up the subject of re-aligning the City's resolution with current policy at the September 6 Council work session, save for that at the John Locke Foundation's blog. (The family that financially backs the JLF also backs the Civitas Institute, of which Stith was a VP until this spring.)

Point #2: Coverage of the topic on Durham blogs only began when the robo-calls began late last week from the Stith campaign. The average recipient of a robo-call likely walked away with the impression that Stith was taking a far more strident stand on illegal immigration broadly, implying that Durham was "a safe haven for illegal immigrants."

Put directly: the robo-calls created an outroar precisely because they left a far different impression on callers than reconciling City policy with on-the-beat practice. They were best interpreted as, and -- I can only conclude -- intended to be, red-meat fodder to shock and awe the voting public.

Can you directly reconcile Stith's more nuanced statement yesterday about aligning policy with practice with a close textual read of the robo-call? Yes. Can you make a case that a variance of policy and practice sets up Durham for still more litigation, as Stith asserted on Monday night at Council? Yes.

But is it reasonable to believe that the robo-call was meant to inform citizens about this procedural question -- instead of using the specter of "illegal immigration" to score points among Stith's political base and moderate voters? That the typical recipient would perform a close analysis of the message text and cross-reference it back to the interaction of two policies and one in-the-field practice?

I doubt it. There's no logical reason for Stith's campaign to have chosen the robo-call tactic, in terms of the precise word choice and the (alleged) targeting of recipients, except to appeal to the basest, darkest, most emotional instincts in us. Not to say you can't and shouldn't have a rational debate over immigration policy (a subject on which I'm fairly middle-of-the-road, personally.) But rationality seemed far removed from this discussion.

I opined here last week, tongue in cheek, that both mayoral candidates live closer to Morrisville than to the heart of Durham. I didn't expect that either of the candidates would actually borrow from the negative campaigning playbook so common in traditional Sunbelt cities. But I'm disinclined to believe this tactic is the right one for Durham.

(And all of which is to set aside Stith's past on-the-record support for the existing City policy, something I doubt he would have ever mentioned in the robo-call message.)

My analysis: The best way out of this for Stith would be to propose a change to the 2003 resolution that notes that City staff should not inquire about the immigration status of individuals, unless same are under arrest on bona fide suspicion of having committed a crime. This seems to be the only way to reconcile his vote on principle in 2003 with the concerns he's raised about the variance in today's policy and practice, and to move his campaign past this as quickly as possible. Which by now probably seems like a pretty darn good idea.

Stith's statement appears below the jump.

City Council candidates' forum tonight at Hayti Heritage Center

Durham's Young Democrats and NCCU's student government are holding a forum for City Council candidates tonight from 7-9pm at the Hayti Heritage Center, 804 Old Fayetteville St. in Durham. Most of the candidates are expected to be there. An informal meet-and-greet with candidates precedes the forum, starting at 6:30.

Look for a wrap-up of the forum and the candidates' positions here on Thursday.

Downtown Durham, from the top of the Hill

Last week, Greenfire Development hosted a fundraiser for Durham Central Park at the top of the Hill Building (nowadays carrying the flag for SunTrust at its peak). The fundraiser, part of the Meals from the Market series benefiting the Park and its supporting non-profit, gave patrons a chance to try some of Chef Jim Anile's cooking in advance of his opening his new downtown restaurant, Revolution -- and also provided one final chance to get a birds-eye view of downtown Durham before Greenfire begins renovation of the structure, which is set to become a boutique hotel and spa by 2009.

BCR reader Joshua Allen attended the dinner and brought along his digital camera for good measure. He's been kind enough to share his photos from the top with the blog and with everyone on the web in this online photo gallery. Here's a few of my favorites--

The top-down view of the CCB Plaza below shows how the concrete-and-brick pattern continues on both sides of Corcoran St, and how the grassy areas interact with the plaza. Obvious to others, perhaps, but folks like me need to be hit over the head with things like this.

Signs of change downtown

To me, few things really capture the change that's underway downtown as well as this picture:

Just visible at the top: the shadow left behind by the old lettering for Peoples' Clothiers, a downtown retailer that had a rather eclectic mix of clothing, and which was one of a number of very small and local businesses along the Five Points strip, which has had some of the more active downtown retail in the district. I don't know why Peoples' Clothiers closed -- if it was a non-renewed lease, or the business not doing well, or a relocation.

Nonetheless, the site now is being renovated to make way for a new business -- Toast Paninoteca, described on its web site as an "authentic Italian sandwich shop" serving breakfast, lunch, and "late afternoon snacks." Toast will also feature North Carolina beers and wine by the glass and bottle. The web site anticipates being open 7am-7pm Mondays through Fridays, 11am until 7pm om Saturdays. (See their new web site for more details.)

It's great to see more dining options downtown, as well as new opportunities for small businesses to open up in downtown retail spaces. (Toast is actually funded by a business start-up loan from Self-Help, with City participation in same under the city's small business support programs voted on at last night's Council meeting.) At the same time, one of the challenges in downtown's redevelopment lies in ensuring that the change doesn't manage to crowd out entirely the Peoples' Clothiers of the world.

One of the positive trends in downtown redevelopment has been the availability of smaller-sized retail and storefront spaces (the renovation of 1000 W. Main comes to mind) and the opening of small businesses in non-traditional properties (305 South is a good example.) And for all that I have cast aspersions on Northgate's business model, they deserve credit for being open to leasing space to businesses that, like them, are locally owned examples of entrepreneurship.

Maintaining diversity in downtown's storefronts is going to be a more and more critical item as time goes on. If we can manage this, it will speak to the energy and spirit of a Durham that remembers that creating more opportunities for enterprise throughout the socioeconomic strata is a valuable thing in a world of strip-malls and REIT-owned shopping centers.

Stith and immigration redux -- and the Committee endorses who?

Monday proved an interesting day in Durham's "silly season," as one neighbor calls our bi-annual political merry-go-round.

The City Council meeting brought a tremendous turnout -- over eighty, by the news media's count -- of individuals who appeared to be present just for the promised discussion of Durham's "illegal immigrant" policy, as broadcast in automated robo-calls from mayoral candidate and Councilman Thomas Stith.

Just hours before, the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People made an expected Council primary endorsement (Farad Ali) -- and an (almost-)completely baffling one (Victoria Peterson).

Let's take a look at each in turn.

University Marketplace: Reading tea leaves into a survey...

Last week came the news that, in light of the City Council's approval of the re-zoning request for the old Kroger shopping center across the street from the one-time South Square Mall, the mixed-use development plans for the project are now moving along at a brisk clip.

Besides Charlotte-based Hawthorne, who's been a part of this from day one, it's been revealed that financial backing comes from a joint venture of Morgan Stanley's Real Estate Fund (which has been a major player in property investing since the S&L crisis of the late 1980s) and Duke Energy. The latter, of course, doubtlessly seeing a good opportunity to leverage mixed-use investment a stone's through from their founding family's namesake university. (Who ever said you couldn't do well by doing good?)

According to the Herald-Sun, the project is now slated to encompass 115,000 sq. ft. of retail and 300 luxury apartments. Mid-2009 is the estimated completion date.

Now, we've known for some time that Sitar India Palace would be the only remaining business after the redevelopment's completion. But the H-S and N&O articles note, oh-so-casually, the development team's interest in bringing a 'specialty grocery store' to the area.

Stith and immigration: Game-changer or gaffe?

This week has seen the mayoral campaign -- or at least Thomas Stith's half of it -- take a decidedly negative turn. First came what Barry pointed out, some questionable mailers mocking Bill Bell as being soft on crime.

Then, we have yesterday's report of robo-calling for the Stith campaign, with in the words of blog-pal Joe, the campaign saying "something like he thought others were making Durham a safe haven for illegal immigrants."

Barry Saunders has already run a great column today about why Stith's negative campaigning is a bad idea. But there's more to this particular story that's worth exploring along two different grounds. First, is Durham actually a sanctuary city for immigration? The evidence is murky, but there are plenty of grounds on which to say, no, it isn't.

And second: to the extent this is a tet-a-tet, it may most clearly be between Stith and his own political past, since he voted for the policy he's now calling to change.

Confirmed: Greenfire purchases SouthBank building

Well, it's official: Greenfire Development has confirmed that it is purchasing the SouthBank building in downtown's Five Points area, at the northwestern edge of the Downtown Loop. The Herald-Sun reported Greenfire's official announcement of the buy in this morning's edition, confirming the reports that initially appeared at BCR on September 7.

According to the H-S article the plan for the time being is to continue to operate the building as a commercial property, with about 75% of its space leased by SouthBank and other tenants. I suspect that eventually we'll see a higher use for the site than the current office building, especially given the Loop and West Village connection.

In fact, the bigger question with yet another purchase lies in this being the next step in what Ross Perot might have called a "giant sucking sound" hovering over Bull City's downtown. Gary has some thoughtful opinions over at Endangered Durham, including asking the question that has bedeviled so many of us who watch Durham: exactly what is Greenfire's end-game with all this?

Greenfire's done a quality job with properties like the Baldwin and Kress buildings, but have been notoriously less-than-transparent about their long-term goals. Over time, the financial sources of Greenfire's funding have become clearer, representing a mix of out-of-region and increasingly within-region investor dollars supplemented by bank financing post-site control. (The "green" in the word Greenfire may not be merely a reference to conservationism -- it can also be read as an allusion to Ireland, reportedly the ancestral home of one of Lemanski's early investor partners.)

Financing aside, what does Greenfire stand to gain by owning so much property? We tread into the murkier ground of speculation at this point, but bear with me for a moment as we look at four reasons this mass investment seems to make some sense.

Royal Ice Cream sit-in leader speaks Sat. at 4pm at Durham County Library downtown

We've talked recently here at BCR about the Royal Ice Cream sit-in that took place fifty years ago, an early occurrence of an event that became more common and better-known in cities like Greensboro a few years later.

On Saturday, Sept. 15 at 4 p.m., Reverend Douglas Moore, who led the Royal sit-in effort here in Durham fifty years ago, will speak in a presentation honoring the history of this event. The discussion will take place in the main auditorium of the Durham County Library in downtown.

After the speech, Eddie Davis -- who (as Jim Wise noted in his mention of this event at the N&O blog) is a former Hillside High teacher and chair of the North Carolina Association of Educators --
will lead the crowd in a singalong featuring updated lyrics to the civil rights anthem, "We Shall Overcome."

I've included the lyrics along with the whole press release from Mr. Davis in the jumpcut below in this post. It's an important message, and one that needs to be heard loud and clear in a city that still faces fractures not just from the lacrosse-case fracas, but from a history of injustices, slights, misunderstandings, and ignorance on so many sides.

Red, Black, White, Brown, Yellow
We all stand tall for Durham
...
Unity for Durham

Words we can all take to heart.

I'm planning to stop by for tomorrow's discussion and recollection of the events of a half-century past, and I know fellow blogger Barry is too -- joined, hopefully, a packed crowd of residents from throughout the Bull City. The Royal Ice Cream sit-in is part of a painful period in Durham's history, but one that we can't forget. Take advantage of a special opportunity to hear the story from the man of the cloth who led it.