[Durham INC] How many ways has K&L Gates touched you today? (IndyWeekly)

[Darius Mercedes Little]

Ha!

- Darius



--------------------------------------------
Darius M. Little
Business Consultant & Analyst
Cell: (919) 641-4124
Web: www.linkedin.com/in/dariuslittle

-----Original Message-----
From: TheOcean1 at aol.com
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:25:37 
To: <Darius.M.Little at alumni.unc.edu>; <bwatu at yahoo.com>; <inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org>; <inc-list at DurhamINC.org>
Subject: Re: [Durham INC] How many ways has K&L Gates touched you today? (IndyWeekly)

And all I did was speak the truth  ;-}
 
Bill  Anderson
REALTOR

919 282-8209 Cell
_www.SeagrovesRealty.com_ (http://www.SeagrovesRealty.com) 



In a message dated 1/20/2011 6:14:26 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
Darius.M.Little at alumni.unc.edu writes:

Let's  keep this clean!  (Smiley Face)

All I did was accept an invite to  a meeting.

-  Darius






--------------------------------------------
Darius  M. Little
Business Consultant & Analyst
Cell: (919) 641-4124
Web:  www.linkedin.com/in/dariuslittle

-----Original Message-----
From:  John Schelp <bwatu at yahoo.com>
Sender:  inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:30:12 
To:  <inc-list at DurhamINC.org>
Subject: [Durham INC] How many ways has  K&L Gates touched you today? (Indy
Weekly)

How  many ways has K&L Gates touched you today? 
by Samiha Khanna,  Independent Weekly, 19 Jan 2011

Durham City Hall was nearly empty when  Patrick Byker and Craigie Sanders 
arrived in dark overcoats and suits. They  strode into Council Chambers with 
a sense of purpose. They were followed by  their go-betweens: Ed Pope, a 
behind-the-scenes political supporter and  businessman, and paid public 
relations pundit Steve Toler. And behind them,  attorney and former Democratic U.S. 
Senate candidate Cal Cunningham, who was  flanked by Alex Mitchell and 
Tyler Morris, the two entrepreneurs with Southern  Durham Development. Their 
controversial 751 South project was on the council  agenda.

It was the first Monday of the new year. Some of the men  gathered in a 
circle and exchanged handshakes. Toler and Sanders chatted about  their winter 
holidays and the virtues of Maker's Mark bourbon. The room began  to fill, 
citizens queued to speak and soon the divisions became clear:  Opponents 
clustered at the back of the line, and supporters, a larger group of  
consultants and businessmen gathered up front. Kicking off the presentation  were 
Byker, Sanders and Lewis Cheek—three high-octane attorneys from one of  the 
nation's largest law firms, K&L Gates.

The lawyers may be the  most influential people the Triangle has never 
heard of; doubtless, they are  one of the region's most formidable and pervasive 
forces in development and  politics. The firm, with offices as far-flung as 
Beijing and Dubai, has 13  land-use experts planted in Raleigh and Research 
Triangle Park. The attorneys  are known for their relationships with top 
decision makers as much as for  their legal aptitude. They infuse political 
campaigns with cash and embed  themselves on prominent local boards. They 
wield influence behind closed doors  to advance the interests of their clients—
developers who are shaping the  quality of life in the Triangle.

Crescent Resources is counting on  K&L Gates to help it build 318 
apartments on Main Street in Durham.  K&L Gates is helping a Baton Rouge company 
build shopping centers and  homes on 400 acres near I-540 in Raleigh. And in a 
notorious case, K&L  Gates has battled Durham officials and activists so 
Southern Durham  Development may erect a village near environmentally sensitive 
Jordan  Lake.

The attorneys and their public relations team declined several  requests 
for interviews with the Indy. But the firm's high-stakes cases are  well 
documented, and so is its slick, and often aggressive, brand of  lawyering. To 
win, the attorneys have used clever legal tactics to steamroll  opponents, 
impugned the ethics of some government officials and singed  relationships with 
allies.

"Even if the techniques are legal, they're  not the best way to endear 
yourself to a community," says Durham resident Bill  Anderson. He opposed the 
attorneys' campaign for Fairway Outdoor Advertising,  which wanted to add 
digital displays to its many billboards in Durham. "I'd  like to think we could 
wipe the slate clean and start all over again. But it  is hard to ignore 
when we keep seeing the same techniques. Even if they're  legal, they're not 
palatable."

As a global company, K&L Gates' vast  scope of specialties includes 
corporate mergers and environmental law. The  firm has earned renown for 
representing financial giants such as Goldman Sachs  and Bank of America, and for its 
lobbying and policy work in Washington. It is  the nation's ninth-largest 
firm, with more than 1,700 attorneys, according to  2010 rankings from the 
National Law Journal. K&L Gates arrived in North  Carolina in 2008, acquiring 
Kennedy Covington Lobdell & Hickman and its  200 lawyers, one of several 
consolidations in K&L Gates' worldwide  expansion.

Many U.S.-based firms were forced to downsize offices during  the 
recession. But K&L Gates has grown, gobbling smaller practices in  Dallas, Boston and 
Chicago and world capitals Warsaw and Taipei. The firm has  expanded 
without taking on any debt, according to interviews given by its  chairman, Peter 
Kalis, to national news outlets.

"We would rather jump  out of a 20-story building than incur a dollar of 
debt," Kalis said in a 2009  article with Of Counsel, a national newsletter. 
This fall, the company even  won a No. 1 ranking by The American Lawyer for 
its performance during the  Great Recession. According to the company's 
website, the firm's 2009 revenues  topped $1 billion.

Locally, the firm's stronghold is in real estate,  land use and zoning. Of 
the firm's more than 80 attorneys across the globe  with this focus, nearly 
a fifth are in North Carolina, according to the  company's website. The 
state is a rich market for the land-use team. North  Carolina continues to grow, 
and many towns and counties, to keep up with that  growth, must change 
their ordinances. As a result, the approval process has  become more complicated 
and uncertain, creating demand for the lawyers, says  Rich Ducker, 
associate professor of public law and government at UNC-Chapel  Hill.

It can require hurdling planning boards, appearance commissions  and other 
bureaucracy. Protected areas such as the Jordan Lake watershed  impose 
restrictions that require entirely separate  negotiations.

"Property owners and developers have to go through more  hoops than ever 
before," Ducker says. "It takes a whole lot longer, and  there's no guarantee 
that the answer's going to be yes at the end of the  process."

In Durham, local government has rarely said no. With the  exception of 
individual commissioners and council members who have voted  against K&L Gates' 
interests, the majority of elected officials have  required only minor 
concessions to accommodate the firm's projects.

The  negotiations are delicate for the firm, but also for elected leaders. 
Defying  the attorneys may cost hundreds of dollars in campaign 
contributions, or  crucial election endorsements from the Friends of Durham, a 
conservative  political group that K&L Gates partners Byker and Bill Brian have 
chaired.  The few leaders who clash with the firm's clients also risk being cut 
out of  the process altogether.

Becky Heron, a county commissioner since 1982,  is a steadfast 
environmentalist. It's for that reason that she opposes 751  South, a community that 
includes 1,300 residences, a shopping center and even  a school. Heron's 
concerns are apparently why, over three years of tense  negotiations, K&L Gates 
attorneys never asked her to meet about the  project. Heron says she has also 
been dropped from Byker's social register. "I  used to be invited to all the 
Christmas parties at Patrick's house," she said.  "But I don't get invited 
anymore."

Members of the Durham Planning  Commission, a city-county advisory board, 
also said they have been excluded  from the process. When the commission 
voted on 751 South last April, some  members were armed with privileged 
information—packets with vibrant  illustrations and in-depth economic analysis. But 
only select board members  received meeting invites and glossy reports.

"It was the only time I  can remember that K&L Gates didn't reach out to 
me," says Don Moffitt, who  was on the board at the time. "I don't know whose 
strategy it was, or why, but  it was clearly strategic."

Even Darius Little had a packet, Moffitt  says, and Little hadn't even 
started his term. The county commissioners later  rescinded Little's spot 
because he had legal troubles. He never served, but  did appear in the developer's 
corner during subsequent public  hearings.

On a matter as heated as 751 South, freezing out some members  of a voting 
board divides its members. It elevates public suspicion. The  strategy is 
shortsighted, says County Commissioner Ellen Reckhow, adding that  developers 
and K&L Gates might win allies if they shared more information.  Reckhow 
says she, too, was excluded from meetings with K&L Gates for more  than two 
years after raising initial concerns about the project's proximity to  the 
watershed.

"It creates a real awkwardness," Reckhow says. "All  board members should 
be informed."

Former Raleigh planning commissioner  Betsy Kane agrees. A crusader for 
public participation, Kane had a policy  during her tenure not to meet with 
anyone privately prior to a public hearing.  Kane said she reiterated that in 
2005, when prominent Raleigh attorney Mack  Paul—who now works for K&L Gates 
and is also chairman of the Wake County  Democratic Party—asked to meet with 
her about the now-defunct plans for the  Soleil Center, a proposed 
four-star hotel. At 480 feet, it would have been  Raleigh's second-tallest building.

"I don't think it's really fair or  open to receive information about this 
in private," says Kane, who also is a  land planner and attorney. "It's not 
an ethical violation, but I feel like  it's bad practice. It's public 
business and it should be conducted in  public."

As Kane later learned, her colleagues had met with Paul and  his clients 
beforehand to ask questions and discuss the project's merits. What  would have 
been a long and thoughtful debate over several public meetings  resulted in 
significantly less public discussion.

"Most planning  projects take six months and five meetings to go through 
the planning  process," Kane says. "That thing shot through. [The lawyers] had 
so greased  the skids."

If this sounds like stereotypical big-city politics, that's  because it is. 
New York University sociologist Harvey Molotch has spent years  documenting 
how developers, attorneys and other pro-growth allies shape urban  land 
policy. They are the true activists, he says, using their social,  political 
and cultural connections to local government "to intensify land use  and make 
money."

Through routine interactions—even passing the creamer  or an envelope full 
of checks at a business breakfast—lawyers and lobbyists  build credibility 
with elected officials.

City Councilman Mike Woodard  says Ed Pope, a well known retired 
businessman, approached him at an event for  Downtown Durham Inc. It was a week before 
the 2009 municipal election. Pope  handed him an envelope containing 
campaign contributions—five checks totaling  $350 made out to Woodard's campaign 
committee from K&L Gates attorneys and  Fairway. Pope didn't return phone 
calls from the Indy.

"That's the only  time I recall receiving a group of checks in one 
envelope," says Woodard, who  later voted against billboards and a preliminary 
approval for 751  South.

Elected officials deny that special interests have more  influence than 
citizens. "I treat [K&L Gates] like I treat any other  lobbyist or neighborhood 
group that comes before me," Durham City Councilman  Eugene Brown says.

But citizens and political observers are suspicious  of K&L Gates' motives. 
In recent cases, the firm's attorneys have used  legal—but, many argue, 
backhanded—means to remove obstacles to their  projects.

Only the most aggressive law firms try to defeat opponents by  discrediting 
or disqualifying them, a strategy K&L Gates used in 2009. The  firm was 
mired in a dispute with Durham County over restrictions on the land  slated for 
751 South. While some Durham officials argued that 100 acres was  inside 
Jordan Lake's protective watershed, the lawyers worked to prove it was  not. 
First, K&L Gates demanded that Planning Commissioner George Brine  abstain 
from voting on matters related to the project. The attorneys argued he  had an 
unethical bias against it by forming an opinion before the vote. Even  
though it's Brine's privilege to form an opinion, he recused  himself.

Next, the lawyers tried to topple then-county attorney Chuck  Kitchen, 
commissioner Reckhow and even the planning department. In its June  2009 lawsuit 
against the county, K&L Gates alleged that the county was  improperly 
limiting its client's property rights and that Reckhow and Kitchen  used their 
influence to block the project.

The suit accused Kitchen of  lying to county officials, intentionally 
misquoting ordinances and even  threatening to get the county manager fired if he 
didn't back Kitchen's legal  opinion. Had the accusations been proven in 
court, state authorities could  have disbarred Kitchen. But six months later, 
a judge agreed that the land was  not in the protected watershed and ruled 
without investigating the other  ethics issues. Now in private practice, 
Kitchen declined to comment on the  case. Reckhow denied the lawyers' 
allegations against her.

The  attorneys have also outmaneuvered citizens who have used petitions to 
protest  developments. The petitions are a legal method for landowners to 
challenge a  change to the use of the land around their properties. For 
example, a petition  would allow a landowner to challenge a builder's plans to 
erect a gas station  next door when the land was originally intended for a 
house. If enough  adjacent property owners sign, the zoning can't be changed 
unless  three-fourths of the city council or board of county commissioners 
approve it.  Without a petition, only a simple majority—a lower threshold of 
approval—is  required.

In some cases, it would be tough to win a 75 percent  majority. So K&L 
Gates attorneys have focused instead on invalidating the  petitions. Legal? Yes. 
Manipulative? Absolutely.

In a 2008 land-use  case, property owners near Guess Road and Interstate 85 
signed a petition  opposing new apartments in their neighborhood. A few 
days later, resident  Laura Suski reported, she saw Sanders knocking on 
neighbors' doors. "I thought  it was very suspicious, that I saw Mr. Craigie 
walking around," said Suski,  who lives on Omah Street. "And then our petition was 
nullified, and all of  sudden no one will talk to us." Suski learned 
several property owners removed  their names from the petition they had signed 
just days before. The city  approved the project.

In a Raleigh case last summer, Paul, the attorney  who steered the Soleil 
project, pitched plans for apartments near Hillsborough  and Morgan streets, 
a gateway to downtown Raleigh and N.C. State University.  Landowners near 
the valuable seven acres petitioned the plans, concerned the  apartments 
wouldn't honor the area's historic aesthetic and would close a  street. So the 
attorneys excised a three-quarter-acre corner from the rezoning  request, 
which put just enough distance between the land in question and the  property 
owners to void their petition.

Last summer, outrage over the  firm's tactics boiled over when K&L Gates 
secretly worked to nullify a  protest petition in Durham. Their strategy was 
unveiled in e-mails between  N.C. DOT staffers and Durham officials, and 
finally, during a tense and packed  county commissioners meeting.

On July 12, just a day before  commissioners opened a public hearing on the 
751 project, Byker headed to an  N.C. Department of Transportation office. 
There, he persuaded staffers to  accept rights to a strip of land along N.C. 
751. The department would need the  right of way for long-term plans to 
widen the meandering two-lane highway. But  Byker withheld key information: By 
accepting the easement, the N.C. DOT would  foil the petition filed by 
property owners across the street on a  technicality.

Byker was in a hurry. When staff asked him why the land  deal needed to be 
fast-tracked, he told them his client wanted to demonstrate  good faith 
before the commissioners voted on the project. He didn't mention  the petition, 
the e-mails said. The N.C. DOT accepted the land and unwittingly  undercut 
the citizens' right to protest.

When Byker met with county  commissioners the next day, he again failed to 
mention the transaction with  N.C. DOT. In fact, he stayed mum until two 
weeks later—just one business day  before commissioners were scheduled to vote 
on the rezoning.

Perhaps  the most disingenuous part of the maneuver was that even after 
Byker's client  acknowledged the tactic was designed to stop the petition, 
Byker still refused  to admit it.

"I knew the dedication had to take place," Alex Mitchell,  president of 
Southern Durham Development, told the Indy in early August. "I  chose to do it 
when I thought it was most advantageous to me."

In a  brief phone conversation with the Indy a few days later, Byker 
repeated his  original statement that dedicating the land to the N.C. DOT was, in 
fact, to  show the developer's "good faith." Challenged with Mitchell's 
statements,  Byker said, "I can't speak to my client's motivations."

This was the  job the attorneys were paid to do—to clear the path for the 
development. "If  they are less aggressive, then they wouldn't be the company 
that they are,"  says David Harris of the Durham People's Alliance, which 
actively opposed 751  South. "If they can't do the job, [developers] are 
going to find someone else  to do it."

The tactic alienated citizens and even public officials who  have known 
Byker for years, since he began a career in Durham as a government  liaison for 
the local chamber of commerce. Some Durham leaders have said  privately 
that Byker's actions have eroded their trust. Several elected and  appointed 
officials said they'll treat future dealings with Byker and the firm  more 
cautiously, or even avoid meeting privately with the attorneys in case  
questions arise about what transpired. Only a few leaders have commented  publicly.

"We don't like what he did. But he was doing his job," said  Wally Bowman, 
an N.C. DOT supervising engineer whose staffers accepted the  right of way 
on behalf of the department. "That doesn't mean I'm going to  treat him any 
different."

Critics of the project are less diplomatic.  "It has the appearance that 
they didn't care about the residents of Durham,"  says Planning Commission 
Chairwoman Jackie Brown, who voted against the  project. "It's like, 'We just 
stomped on ya, and now we're going to spit on  ya, 'cause we're going to get 
what we want, come hell or high  water.'"

To be the object of such distrust—or even contempt—is  incongruous with 
the image the attorneys have worked for years to polish. Many  business 
leaders have described Byker and Sanders as friendly and well  regarded in 
political circles. Associates say Byker is often first to ask  about their children 
or a recent family vacation. "He's just a nice, friendly,  intelligent 
person," said Bob Booth, a retired president and CEO of the  Greater Durham 
Chamber of Commerce. "I certainly would not ever accuse Patrick  of doing 
something sneaky. I'm sure he wants to do what's good for his law  firm. Law firms 
don't always take up cases that are in the best interest of  the community. 
They take the cases that are in the best interest of the law  firm."

"These are people who are part of our community. These are not  people from 
out of town," said Wendy Jacobs, the planning commissioner. "These  are 
people we go to church with, that our kids play soccer with—people that we  
would like to respect and trust."

The firm involves itself in the  community, contributing to charities, 
spending thousands of dollars to sponsor  annual socials for organizations 
including the chamber of commerce, the NAACP  and the Durham Committee on the 
Affairs of Black People. This month, Byker and  Cheek agreed to represent for 
free the Durham Rescue Mission for its expansion  at Main Street and Alston 
Avenue. But critics see some of the firm's  contributions as opportunistic.

Published on the society page of the  current Durham Magazine are photos of 
the black-tie fundraiser Byker helped  organize in honor of Howard Clement, 
a city councilman for the last 27 years.  About 300 people toasted Clement 
at the September gala, which raised nearly  $30,000 for a scholarship at 
N.C. Central University in his name.  Representatives from the area's most 
prominent corporations and nonprofit  groups attended, including local TV 
stations, banks, the Greater Durham  Chamber of Commerce and K&L Gates.

Yet several months earlier,  while Byker was helping to plan the party, he 
and fellow K&L Gates  attorneys were lobbying Clement and council on behalf 
of Fairway Outdoor  Advertising to allow digital billboards within the city 
limits. Clement  quashed the notion that scholarship contributions would 
earn his  loyalty.

"I am not for sale," says Clement, who later voted against the  billboard 
proposal.

K&L Gates attorneys also work their connections  in official government 
settings, securing appointments to municipal boards and  commissions that 
regulate mundane yet important functions such as building  heights and bus 
routes. Although they are legally prohibited from voting on  matters directly 
related to their business interests, the attorneys build  social and political 
capital with public servants whom they later lobby. The  firm even recruited 
one of those former public servants, Lewis Cheek, who  spent eight years on 
Durham City Council and county commissioners. While  studying to become a 
lawyer, Sanders served on Durham's planning commission  and is on the RDU 
Airport Authority. In 1997, Byker co-founded the Durham  Crime Cabinet, and in 
2009, long after he'd left the board, he tried to parlay  relationships with 
its members into a win for digital billboards.

"I  think they make an effort to be very informed and establish 
relationships with  elected officials in social and other events," says Durham City 
Councilwoman  Diane Catotti. "And they pursue those angles to enhance the 
chances of  approval for their projects."

Some elected officials say they wouldn't  discourage the lawyers from 
serving on government boards, where they bring  valuable expertise. But others 
are trying to rein in the firm's emerging  influence. In late 2009, the City 
Council voted 4 to 3 to oust Byker from the  city's Capital Program Advisory 
Committee, of which he had been chairman for  two years. In an interview 
with the Herald-Sun, City Councilman Eugene Brown  was quoted as saying Byker 
had done a fine job, but "perhaps it's time for a  little distance" between 
the committee and the attorney. At the time, Byker  and K&L Gates were 
involved in a lawsuit against Durham County and its  commissioners. "It's just a 
little too close," Brown told the  newspaper.

Last summer, City Council passed over another K&L Gates  attorney, Keith P. 
Anthony, for a position on the Board of  Adjustment.

County commissioners, however, did reappoint Sanders to  represent Durham 
on the RDU Airport Authority, a board on which he has served  since 2003.

The Herald-Sun quoted Brian in 2009 denying that he and his  colleagues 
were using these strategic appointments to build a political  empire. "We are 
engaged in local affairs not because it's the professionally  smart thing to 
do, but because we live here," said Brian, who served 14 years  on Durham's 
Board of Adjustment, which rules on development matters. "I  honestly cannot 
think of a time I took a position on a matter I didn't think  was in the 
best interest of the community."

County Commissioner Becky  Heron says her colleagues should consider the 
stronghold K&L Gates  attorneys are building. "We would hope they have the 
county's or city's best  interest at heart," says Heron, who voted for Sanders' 
reappointment. "But  they also have to make a living."

The firm's posts with civic  organizations have also allowed them to forge 
productive alliances. Brian was  a member of the Greater Durham Chamber of 
Commerce board, an outspoken  advocate for 751 South and digital billboards. 
Brian and Byker are both  leaders in Friends of Durham, which has campaigned 
for 751 South and the  rezoning of the Jordan Lake watershed that preceded 
it. Current Friends of  Durham Chairman David Smith said that no one 
involved in the project voted on  it.

Occasionally, K&L Gates attorneys have failed to woo  neighborhood groups, 
despite connections to those organizations. For instance,  Sanders was 
president of the InterNeighborhood Council, a coalition of  neighborhood groups, 
while his firm was lobbying for digital billboards and  751 South. Still the 
INC opposed both.

For some lawyers, securing  positions on these boards and with these 
organizations is "part of their job  description," says Bob Hall, executive 
director of Democracy North Carolina, a  government watchdog group. "I've seen 
that to be the case with similar outfits  that specialize in getting the 
permits approved, or getting regulations that  are favorable to their business 
clients," Hall adds. "They will cozy up to the  regulators, get themselves 
appointed to the committees—it's all part of the  business strategy."

As the Jan. 3 Durham City Council meeting chugged  along, the dwindling 
line of speakers signaled the council would vote soon on  751 South—but not 
before someone commented on the attorneys' deft legal  maneuvers.

"I've been in the land-use business teaching and doing  research for 
exactly 40 years," said Bob Healy, an environmental scientist at  Duke University 
and member of the People's Alliance, a progressive political  group. "And I 
have got to say, I have never seen a legal team that has been as  clever as 
this one." The audience—and council—snickered.

While K&L  Gates lawyers have demonstrated impressive legal skills, those 
very assets may  have hurt their reputation. Just before the winter holidays, 
Byker and Cheek  appeared at a City Council work session to implore city 
officials to hasten a  decision to extend city services to the 751 South site. 
The developers were  racking up $2,000 a day in carrying costs, Byker 
appealed.

City Council  member Clement echoed their concerns. "To me, the developers 
are being harmed  substantially because of the delay," Clement said to his  
colleagues.

But City Council member Catotti was unsympathetic. "I  appreciate the cost 
effects, but frankly, the reason this is in court is  because of the 
right-of-way dedication that nullified a valid protest  petition," Catotti said.

As she spoke, Byker fidgeted nervously,  clasping his hands and rocking in 
his loafers.

"[The process] has been  legally manipulative all the way through," she 
continued. "It's left a very  bad taste in everyone's mouth. And I'm not happy 
with some of the actions that  have been taken up to this point."

For all of its power, K&L Gates  isn't invincible. In its long campaign for 
Fairway Outdoor Advertising, the  firm worked for more than a year to 
generate support from corporations and  nonprofits, many of which received free 
billboard advertising.

But the  company damned its own campaign just weeks before the crucial 
vote. It placed  a billboard for a gun and knife show next to a new pedestrian 
bridge named for  Durham civil rights activist R. Kelly Bryant. At a public 
hearing last summer,  several city council members said they were offended 
and asked Cheek how to  remove the billboard. Cheek told the council that the 
billboard couldn't be  removed unless the city's ordinance was amended in 
favor of Fairway. But  Catotti, who was well versed in the ordinance, 
challenged him, and Cheek  acknowledged his statements were not entirely true.

"When they go up  there and tell a half-truth to an elected official, you 
know we're listening,"  said John Schelp, a neighborhood activist who helped 
hand Fairway and K&L  Gates a unanimous defeat. "This is Durham. We're not 
fooled by these  tactics."

K&L Gates has proven it can court public officials. But  the firm knows it 
can't so easily court the public.

"Durham already is  the most challenging jurisdiction in the Triangle for 
developers, and it is  about to get more challenging," Brian wrote in a 2009 
K&L Gates newsletter  about pending changes to the development process. Some 
of those changes, he  said, "clearly have been inspired by Durham's own 
special political problems  emanating from neighborhoods like Trinity Park and 
Watts  Hillandale."

Translation: An active, engaged community is making  development in Durham 
more difficult.

"That kind of engagement doesn't  happen in Raleigh or Chapel Hill, or 
Charlotte or Greensboro," Schelp says.  "We do celebrate citizen engagement. 
Some people on the outside look at the  Bull City and see sausage-making. Others
—those of us in the community—see  democracy."

In his closing statements to council Jan. 3, Sanders  celebrated Durham's 
quality of life: "This is a great area of the country. We  have moderate 
weather, world-class health care, Duke University, my alma mater  N.C. Central 
University, an excellent airport ... All of this and more is  available right 
here in my hometown of Durham."

But Durham is also  where Sanders, Byker and others with K&L Gates have 
exposed their own  tactics. Their recent cases have thrust their political and 
legal strategies  into public view, and residents and elected officials are  
watching.


-> Flowchart: Who's who in the K&L Gates World  
http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/interactive-whos-who-in-the-kandl-gates-wor
ld/Content?oid=1966418

->  See this week's Independent for chart showing local political  
contributions.

_______________________________________________
Durham  INC Mailing  List
list at durham-inc.org
http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
_______________________________________________
Durham  INC Mailing  List
list at durham-inc.org
http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20110120/0240e648/attachment.html>