[Durham INC] last thoughts on the Meals Tax
Reyn Bowman
Reyn at Durham-cvb.com
Fri Jan 9 15:05:57 EST 2009
Flaw in your point is in the example you're using. It assumes public or neighborhood opinions were constant...and that they had the same amount of information upon which to form opinions.
The public opinion shifted based on extrinsic factors.
Maybe there is a better example you can us but from what I've read people share the same sensitivities.
-----Original Message-----
From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org] On Behalf Of RW Pickle
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 3:00 PM
To: Mike - Hotmail
Cc: inc-list at durhaminc.org
Subject: Re: [Durham INC] last thoughts on the Meals Tax
There is no blame on this end directed toward INC (the entity) or even the
premise. My point is that there is a big disconnect somewhere that needs
to be addressed. If neighborhood voting reflects something entirely
opposite of what comes out of any INC vote, then you have to wonder where
the disconnect is. Or at least one should for INC to continue to be the
credible source of "the pulse" as it was in the past. Maybe I'm the only
one scratching my head...
Length... Some appreciate it and others won't. It's what I had to say that
was important. Sometimes a simple yes or no works... Don't want to read
lengthy stuff? The devil is in the details...
RWP
27 Beverly
> Randy,
>
> Your posting is way, way too long.
>
> The point I was trying to make is simple.
>
> If a neighborhood is sending a representative to INC that isn't
> representing
> their views, interests or opinions it is up to that neighborhood to
> correct
> it.
>
> Trying to blame INC for that failure is a flawed premise.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "RW Pickle" <randy at 27beverly.com>
> To: <inc-list at durhaminc.org>
> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 12:45 AM
> Subject: [Durham INC] last thoughts on the Meals Tax
>
>
> If you go and look at the votes that were cast (you can do it online via
> the Board of Elections website), and you match up the precincts with the
> neighborhoods of INC (for some, not all), you'll see that very few members
> of INC represented their neighborhoods. Their neighborhoods (as voters)
> didn't support it. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, it may be that
> the Associations of INC really do not represent the majority of any
> particular neighborhood. In some cases, they represent 10% or less of the
> neighborhood. So how is it fair to say they represent any neighborhood,
> when in fact they do not? They can't. Their association represents only a
> small minority of their respective neighborhood and can't possibly
> represent all of it as HOA's do. I believe this is why there was such a
> difference. It may even be that the Boards of these Associations are out
> of touch with their neighborhood...
>
> It's easy to see why most of those (see Bill's list) who supported the tax
> did so; they would have directly benefited from the passing of the tax.
> Even the print media who supported it would have generated more revenue
> from the spending of those listed. But INC, we didn't have a dog in that
> race. They wanted INC behind it because of what INC has come to stand for
> over time; a unified voice of the citizenry. The citizenry wasn't behind
> it, but somewhere in the process, that never made it to those who are
> charged to represent them, and never made it to INC (or vice versa).
> That's the point here. You can rationalize it any way you want, but it is
> what it is and ended up the way it did because those citizens voted the
> way they did. INC on the other hand went the other way...
>
> I didn't ask many folks how they voted, but those that I did opposed the
> tax. I voted against it and I sit on the committee (CCIP; representing
> INC) that would have seen the biggest benefit from it. Every year we go
> through the budget process with the departments of the City, Budget and
> Finance, and the 26 other Durham citizens representing a slew of other
> organizations (CAN, the PAC's, Duke, NCCU, DDI, etc.). And if you think
> INC stuff moves slow... But I hope to get 10 minutes sometime in the
> future at a monthly meeting so I can tell you what we have done in the
> last 3.5 years that I've been involved (maybe I can stretch it for 10
> minutes with Q&A...). Like I said, when you're working with government,
> there is no reason to get in a hurry because they are not. Long range
> planning is just that. Twenty years really isn't considered long range
> just to give you some idea. What we worked on for this budget cycle we
> hope will bear fruit in 10-15 years. So as you begin to see, this is a
> slow process.
>
> Progress is slow, but we've made some substantial strides in the process.
> And the funds raised by the tax would have gone toward the capital
> improvement projects we look at every year (or at least some of the
> money). Last year we had about $30M and that would have only gotten us
> through 19 of our top rated projects (17 of our projects were in the
> City's top 20 just so you can see that we're all on the same page; CCIP
> and City staff). But that left us short by about the same amount it does
> every year; $90-110M. So the tax would have helped close that gap. Most of
> those organizations that supported the tax were somewhere past the 19th
> project (on a two page list of them) and would have been funded out of
> that tax pool (over time I guess).
>
> It's easy to see why they would be for it, but my reasons for not voting
> for it were simple. I don't mind a new tax if it is directed toward a
> specific use; this wasn't. It had a broad paint brush with no specific
> use. It had no sunset clause; it could have gone on forever and even
> increased in percentage of collection over time. And lastly, the folks who
> would have to bear the burden of collecting it didn't want it; they saw it
> as a fly in their soup. It's easy to see why voters thought it was a food
> tax because it was; prepared food. Meals... food; that's a duck that looks
> like the same duck. I don't think the opposition ever said ALL food would
> see the tax. But you'd have us believe that that the voters couldn't see
> what they were talking about. That rotisserie chicken from Harris Teeter I
> get on Sunday, that slice of pizza at Costco when I go there to shop, that
> Loco Pop on a hot sunny stroll through downtown, my favorite bread at the
> church bake sale; those as well as your meals at any bar/restaurant in
> town. It was a food tax... It walked like a duck, quacked like a duck, so
> everyone saw it as the duck it was. To say anyone muddled the waters by
> calling it what it wasn't is just an excuse (and a poor one at that). And
> to think that voters were confused and those who come to INC meeting are
> more "knowledgeable" is giving very little credit to the citizenry for
> being able to think for themselves. Or you could blame it on the
> "knowledgeable" folks of INC for keeping it to themselves about what a
> good thing it was (since it was overwhelmingly supported) and not being
> the messengers they should be to their hoods. But the fact that >73% voted
> against it is still there. Maybe the <27% who voted for it are just those
> folks "in the know" who supported it or those folks on the list (Bill's
> listed supporters) who might get some of the cash from it. The only time
> before the vote I listened to anything about it, it was an "in the know"
> messenger who just didn't know what he was talking about. His was a poor
> message...
>
> Perhaps with the new leadership, looking back at the history and charting
> a path to our future, INC will once again begin to focus on it's core
> values. INC once was the group that directed the leadership of this City
> in decision making that made it a better place for all citizens; for some
> items and against others. Maybe it can get back to it's roots... Hardly an
> Executive Board meeting went by (when I was involved) that I didn't stress
> the need for some sort of resolution that the delegates could engage their
> own neighborhoods in. At least that way, it looked like INC was doing
> something positive to make our City a better place to live. City Council
> and County Commission vote on issues every month they meet. There's no
> reason (except we've slipped away from what INC once was) why INC couldn't
> do the same thing.
>
> RWP
> 27 Beverly
>
>
>>
>> Randy is right that most government stuff is so slow, there is certainly
>> no
>> need to slow it down.
>>
>> Everyone at that meeting will attest to a better explanation of the vote
>> at
>> hand than I provided below.
>> There was no change of process, just the utilization of a rarely used
> tool
>> that INC has always had in the box.
>> It allowed the proponents of the Meal Tax to add INC's name to a long
> list
>> of 31 organizations, so the vote didn't carry earth shaking
> consequences.
>>
>> Regardless of how big an issue is, our process is extremely important,
> as
>> Randy points out, and is (as stated) one of the reasons I accepted a
> seat
>> on
>> the board again.
>>
>> There was no deviation from process of the Meals Tax vote, but Randy is
>> not
>> wrong to scratch his head at the disparity of the INC unanimous vote,
> and
>> the
>> results of the general election.
>>
>> Wonder what these other organizations thought of the outcome.
>>
>>
>> Organizations Endorsing the Prepared Meals Tax
>> African American Dance Ensemble
>> American Tobacco Trail Group - Triangle Rails To Trails
>> Board of Trustees of the Carolina Theatre of Durham Incorporated
> Cultural Master Plan Advisory Board
>> Downtown Durham, Inc.
>> Duke Chronicle
>> Durham Appearance Advocacy Group
>> Durham Arts Council
>> Durham Art Guild
>> Durham Central Park, Inc.
>> Durham Civic Center Authority
>> Durham County Stadium Authority
>> Durham Open Space and Trails Commission
>> Durham Savoyards
>> Durham Tourism Development Authority
>> (DCVB Governing Board)
>> Durham Workforce Development Board
>> Eno River Association Board of Directors
>> Friends of Durham
>> Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce
>> Herald-Sun
>> Independent Weekly
>> InterNeighborhood Council
>> Keep Durham Beautiful
>> Museum of Durham History Steering Committee
>> Museum of Life and Science
>> New Hope Creek Advisory Board
>> Parrish Street Advocacy Group
>> Peopleââ,¬â"¢s Alliance
>> Preservation Durham
>> Spectacular Magazine
>> St. Joseph's Historic Foundation/Hayti Heritage Center
>>
>> Bill Anderson
>>
>> In a message dated 1/6/2009 6:28:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>> randy at 27beverly.com writes:
>>
>> Bill Anderson said:
>>
>> "The type of people who attend INC meetings are on the most part,
> better
>> informed than the general populous, and in my opinion, that's why those
> present voted for this progressive effort."
>>
>> My point exactly. If the INC reps were in touch with their communities,
> then INC should have never overwhelmingly supported the Tax. The
> community
>> voted >73% against it. As it appears, the reps that come to INC can
> just
>> vote the way they want and to heck with the folks they represent.
> Otherwise, INC would have voted it down as well. That's where the
> disconnect is here. Either word isn't getting out or ear wax and
> bedfellows are in the way...
>>
>> I still maintain our old way (as long as it takes sometimes) is the
> tried
>> and true way the system works. If something is so critical, that INC
> voting one way or another interupts that process, then perhaps it was
> because of poor planning. There never should be a sense of urgency that
> is
>> so great that it changes the process. Most of the dealings of INC is
> with
>> government. And slowing it down is hardly necessary. It moves at a very
> slow pace. So what if INC doesn't have time to digest the particular
> issue, it's INC's fault that it has a process in place for dealing with
> issues in a timely fashion. Having a process and sticking to it is not
> a
>> bad thing. I can't think of an iron hot enough to make it any
> different.
>> To put INC into a position where the process necessitates a change
>> because
>> of some sense of urgency is a disservice to INC. INC meets every month.
> You can't get much more regular than that... And it's been this way
> (except maybe for a year or two of a summer break) since I've been
> involved.
>>
>> RWP
>> 27 Beverly
>>
>>
>>> As Nancy points out, organizations change over time, often effected by
>
>>> how
>>> our method of communication changes.
>>> 20 years ago, the primary means of neighborhood communications were
> newsletters. Today, much more is done over the neighborhood listservs,
> and
>>> eventually
>>> that may become our primary means of communication.
>>> As a returning board member of INC, I've witnessed the changes INC has
> experienced over the past years.
>>> Our new President seems dedicated to a better understanding of the
>>> past,
>>> and
>>> a more thought out plan for the future. I'm greatly encouraged by his
> more
>>> holistic approach.
>>> My personal goals include making sure the INC process is better
>>> explained
>>> and adhered to. The downside of that process is it is frustratingly
>>> slow.
>>> Generally, that would be; an issue is brought up in say May, and a
>>> program
>>> around
>>> it is planned for (at the earliest) the June meeting. The information
> would
>>> be gathered there by the reps, who would take it to their individual
> neighborhood's next meeting and return in July with that
> neighborhood's
>>> collective
>>> opinion.
>>> Some issues don't allow for that three month minimum process, and such
> was
>>> the case on the Meals Tax.
>>> In cases like that, the board can provide a provisional vote that can
>>> be
>>> ratified at the following meeting, which is what was done for the
> Meals
>>> Tax.
>>> Durham was provided almost no leeway except that it could put the
> issue
>>> on
>>> the ballot. That provided far too little time to inform the general
> public, and
>>> partly thanks to opponents who muddied the waters calling it a food
>>> tax,
>>> the
>>> general population cast too many votes under a cloud of
>>> misinformation....
>>> and that's why it failed.
>>> The type of people who attend INC meetings are on the most part,
> better
>>> informed than the general populous, and in my opinion, that's why
>>> those
>>> present
>>> voted for this progressive effort.
>>> The short window (six week?) might have been enough to inform the
>>> voters,
>>> had it not been for all the misinformation that opponents were
> spewing.
>>> If
>>> you
>>> doubt this, take your own private poll.
>>> Ask folks how they voted and why. You'll hear a lot of them who
> thought
>>> the
>>> tax was on all food, not just prepared food.
>>> We can only learn from the past, and prepare for the future. Our
>>> current
>>> President is doing just that, first by calling a meeting of all the
>>> past
>>> Presidents last month. INC's first President was in attendance and
> provided history
>>> back to the '80s. I've seen incoming Presidents plan for their year in
> office, Craigie Sanders is the first President I've seen working on a
> five
>>> year
>>> plan.
>>> If you consider the listservs are a better means of communication, and
> feel
>>> that careful planning produces better outcomes, then I think great
>>> things
>>> should be expected.
>>> Bill Anderson
>>> In a message dated 1/6/2009 11:25:14 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>>> scrapping.nancy at verizon.net writes:
>>> Randy brings up a thread that I too have pulled at as a new rep for
>>> Hope
>>> Valley Farms. I am not allowed to vote because my neighborhood does
>>> not
>>> currently have a way to effectively convey information and receive
> adequate
>>> input in order for me to vote in a representative way.
>>> I would really like us to look at this issue -it is not unique to
> INC,
>>> I'll
>>> give a PTA example. A controversy occurred at a school - PTA
>>> leadership
>>> purported to speak for all PTA members but they had not taken a vote
>>> and
>>> if
>>> they had, they would have needed to share four bits of info - total
> school
>>> population, how many members they have - how many voted for and how
>>> many
>>> voted against the proposal.
>>> As a newbie - I have been very surprised that INC has taken votes
>>> before
>>> they have taken the information back to their membership.
>>> Finally, I can imagine there are issues that not all INC members
>>> should
>>> vote
>>> on -things particular to a region - my beef - no secret here -is the
>>> effects
>>> of development on SW Durham and other regions of Durham with rural
> areas.
>>> This issue's impact just isn't felt to the same degree by someone who
> lives
>>> outside of SW Durham although I am sure they can and do empathize and
>>> of
>>> course want what is best for all of Durham. Nevertheless...
>>> The start of a new year is a good time to revisit mission, goals
> etc.
>>> Nancy Cox
>>> writing just as me not as rep of HVF
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: <inc-list-request at rtpnet.org>
>>> To: <inc-list at rtpnet.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 7:43 AM
>>> Subject: INC-list Digest, Vol 49, Issue 7
>>>> Send INC-list mailing list submissions to
>>>> inc-list at rtpnet.org
>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>> inc-list-request at rtpnet.org
>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>> inc-list-owner at rtpnet.org
>>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of INC-list digest..."
>>>> Today's Topics:
>>>> 1. what happened... (RW Pickle)
>>>> 2. Re: what happened... (Reyn Bowman)
>>>> 3. 50% CUTS IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH BUDGETS
>>>> (pinnaclecdc at aol.com)
>>>> 4. Re: County Manager's Proposed Budget Actions (Reyn Bowman)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Message: 1
>>>> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 03:06:04 -0500 (EST)
>>>> From: "RW Pickle" <randy at 27beverly.com>
>>>> Subject: [Durham INC] what happened...
>>>> To: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>>>> Message-ID:
> <1162.71.111.250.165.1231229164.squirrel at www.patriot.net>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>>>> Melissa brings up another point:
>>>>>> But I do not think this museum needs any additional improvements
>>>>>> at
>>>>>> this time, particularly a new and larger gift shop...and many
>>>>>> Durham
>>>>>> citizens did not vote for the prepared food tax because they
> didn't
>>>>>> want the money used toward this end.
>>>> This brings up something that has been a topic of conversation for a
> number of people; both associated with INC and outside of it. But I
>>>> have
>>>> yet to hear it discussed in an open forum.
>>>> How could INC reps be bringing information back to the meetings, and
> vote
>>>> overwhelmingly for the Meals Tax, only to have it defeated by >73%?
>>>> It
>>>> just doesn't seem like the neighborhoods and their reps are even
>>>> talking
>>>> about the issues. Otherwise the INC vote wouldn't have been so
>>>> positive
>>>> in
>>>> favor of the tax. (I don't believe anyone voted against it when the
> vote
>>>> was taken). Obviously there is a problem here somewhere in the
>>>> communication paths. Otherwise you'd expect the vote to be reflected
> similarly by INC as it was by the voters. Yet it was so far off, you
> have
>>>> to wonder why.
>>>> Or is it that only the HOA's that are members of INC truly have a
> membership of ALL of their neighbors while some Associations that
>>>> make
>>>> up
>>>> INC have as little as 10% (or less in some cases)
>>>> membership/participation
>>>> in them? For example, INC currently has Board member that has
> claimed
>>>> to
>>>> represent a neighborhood for years. Yet, last year when I mentioned
>>>> them
>>>> to the long-term President of that Association, she didn't even know
> them.
>>>> Maybe it's that type of lack of neighborhood
>>>> conversations/involvement
>>>> that led INC to support something that clearly had little support by
>>>> the
>>>> people it claims to represent. It's hard to believe that INC is that
> out
>>>> of touch, but the Meals Tax vote is a clear sign that something is
> wrong.
>>>> The last couple of years INC has moved further away from the core
> values
>>>> that made it work so well for so long. It has taken on some
>>>> bedfellows
>>>> that perhaps it's time to kick out of bed. These are hard things to
>>>> think/talk about, but it's necessary if votes are to be taken on
>>>> issues
>>>> that clearly the community INC purports to represent believes the
>>>> exact
>>>> opposite.
>>>> RWP
>>>> 27 Beverly
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> Message: 2
>>>> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 06:45:35 -0500
>>>> From: Reyn Bowman <Reyn at Durham-cvb.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] what happened...
>>>> To: RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com>, "inc-list at durhaminc.org"
>>>> <inc-list at durhaminc.org>
>>>> Message-ID:
>>>> <1CCD4AA8608B1148A080E953C1A2EEA60F00D820CC at EXCHANGE-2008.durham.cvb>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>> Here is another viewpoint.
>>>> Polls indicate the meals tax failure had everything to do with the
> economy, not popularity of the measure. Prior to the economic
> turndown
>>>> the measure was more than 2 to 1 in favor.
>>>> I wouldn't read too much into it or judge those who had much more
>>>> time
>>>> to
>>>> study the pros and cons...voters were given an artificially short
>>>> window
>>>> for voter education by virtue of the state legislation.
>>>> It was also clear in analysis that had the measure been on a local
> election ballot as is more typical vs. forced into a presidential,
> the
>>>> more than 35,000 votes it received would have given it more than any
>>>> other
>>>> measure or candidate for that matter on the previous local election.
> One thing is clear. If it had passed, we'd see 2/3rds of the costs
> of
>>>> many things transferred to non-residents, opening up millions in the
>>>> general fund to soften the impact of these cuts on core services.
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org
>>>> [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org]
>>>> On
>>>> Behalf Of RW Pickle
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:06 AM
>>>> To: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>>>> Subject: [Durham INC] what happened...
>>>> Melissa brings up another point:
>>>>>> But I do not think this museum needs any additional improvements
> at
>>>>>> this time, particularly a new and larger gift shop...and many
>>>>>> Durham
>>>>>> citizens did not vote for the prepared food tax because they
> didn't
>>>>>> want the money used toward this end.
>>>> This brings up something that has been a topic of conversation for a
> number of people; both associated with INC and outside of it. But I
>>>> have
>>>> yet to hear it discussed in an open forum.
>>>> How could INC reps be bringing information back to the meetings, and
> vote
>>>> overwhelmingly for the Meals Tax, only to have it defeated by >73%?
>>>> It
>>>> just doesn't seem like the neighborhoods and their reps are even
>>>> talking
>>>> about the issues. Otherwise the INC vote wouldn't have been so
>>>> positive
>>>> in
>>>> favor of the tax. (I don't believe anyone voted against it when the
> vote
>>>> was taken). Obviously there is a problem here somewhere in the
>>>> communication paths. Otherwise you'd expect the vote to be reflected
> similarly by INC as it was by the voters. Yet it was so far off, you
> have
>>>> to wonder why.
>>>> Or is it that only the HOA's that are members of INC truly have a
> membership of ALL of their neighbors while some Associations that
>>>> make
>>>> up
>>>> INC have as little as 10% (or less in some cases)
>>>> membership/participation
>>>> in them? For example, INC currently has Board member that has
> claimed
>>>> to
>>>> represent a neighborhood for years. Yet, last year when I mentioned
>>>> them
>>>> to the long-term President of that Association, she didn't even know
> them.
>>>> Maybe it's that type of lack of neighborhood
>>>> conversations/involvement
>>>> that led INC to support something that clearly had little support by
>>>> the
>>>> people it claims to represent. It's hard to believe that INC is that
> out
>>>> of touch, but the Meals Tax vote is a clear sign that something is
> wrong.
>>>> The last couple of years INC has moved further away from the core
> values
>>>> that made it work so well for so long. It has taken on some
>>>> bedfellows
>>>> that perhaps it's time to kick out of bed. These are hard things to
>>>> think/talk about, but it's necessary if votes are to be taken on
>>>> issues
>>>> that clearly the community INC purports to represent believes the
>>>> exact
>>>> opposite.
>>>> RWP
>>>> 27 Beverly
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> INC-list mailing list
>>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> Message: 3
>>>> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 06:50:02 EST
>>>> From: pinnaclecdc at aol.com
>>>> Subject: [Durham INC] 50% CUTS IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH
>>>> BUDGETS
>>>> To: inc-list at rtpnet.org
>>>> Message-ID: <d43.30f1e350.36949f6a at aol.com>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>>> Hello,
>>>> Many providers of substance abuse and mental health services funds
>>>> received
>>>> cuts of up to 50% before January 2009. This was not about poor
>>>> performers,
>>>> etc. It was an across the board decrease. I am sure that it was not
>>>> an
>>>> easy
>>>> decision for the Durham Center, but, my first concern was for
> those
>>>> needing
>>>> treatment. Our funding was cut also, (pending availability and
> State
>>>> budget
>>>> issues) and we had to become creative quickly. There are still
>>>> people
>>>> who
>>>> need
>>>> services.
>>>> NOT ASKING FOR MONEY!!! - MEETING ANNOUNCEMENT - NOT ABOUT MONEY!!
> To that end, I am writing to you on behalf of Durham Together for
>>>> Resilient
>>>> Youth, Drug Free Community Coalition. We are a hard-working
>>>> coalition
>>>> that
>>>> decided to take action a few years ago after researching the
>>>> relationship
>>>> between substance use and incarceration, illness and even death. It
> shows
>>>> that
>>>> substance abuse exacerbates problems such as domestic violence,
>>>> child
>>>> maltreatment, and homelessness.
>>>> We highly respect and actively support the great work currently
>>>> being
>>>> done
>>>> by local government agencies, and treatment providers
>>>> Our membership includes parents and youth as well as valued
>>>> community
>>>> partners. We believe that if we collaborate, we will have a greater
> impact on
>>>> strengthening our families here in Durham and on building
> resiliency
>>>> in
>>>> our youth.
>>>> To that end, we would like to invite you to our monthly Community
> Coalition
>>>> meeting on January 9, 2009 at the Durham Public School Staff
> Development
>>>> Center, located at 2107 Hillandale Rd Durham, NC 27705 from 6:00 PM
>
>>>> ?
>>>> 8:00 PM.
>>>> You will hear reports from business, youth, parents, faith, local
>>>> university
>>>> representatives and from North Carolina Prevent Underage Drinking.
>>>> We
>>>> will
>>>> discuss the Strategic Prevention Framework that guides our work and
>>>> how
>>>> these
>>>> important steps can lead to substance abuse prevention.
>>>> Please RSVP at _www.DurhamTRY.org_ (http://www.durhamtry.org/) ?
> click
>>>> calendar. Attendees who join the coalition will receive a binder
>>>> full
>>>> of
>>>> great
>>>> information. This meeting is free and open to the public.
>>>> Thank you for all you do to support children and families in our
> community.
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>> Wanda Boone
>>>> Wanda Boone, Chief Executive Director
>>>> Durham Together for Resilient Youth
>>>> Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America MemberNorth Carolina
> Prevent
>>>> Underage Drinking Grant Award Recipient
>>>> **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is
>>>> making
>>>> headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)
>>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>> URL:
>> <http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/private/inc-list/attachments/20090106/ad1d9d71/attachment-0001.htm>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> Message: 4
>>>> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 07:41:17 -0500
>>>> From: Reyn Bowman <Reyn at Durham-cvb.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] County Manager's Proposed Budget Actions
> To: "mmr121570 at yahoo.com" <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>,
>>>> "inc-list at DurhamINC.org" <inc-list at DurhamINC.org>
>>>> Message-ID:
>>>> <1CCD4AA8608B1148A080E953C1A2EEA60F00D820CE at EXCHANGE-2008.durham.cvb>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7"
>>>> I'm not certain but I believe the Museum does all it can to offset
>>>> expenses with earned income like it generates from the gift shop.
>>>> So
>>>> those who have all the facts are probably making cuts in expenses
>>>> where
>>>> they know it won't also result in cuts in revenue...
>>>> Last information I had the Museum has a very high degree of
>>>> popularity
>>>> and
>>>> support from residents and especially important, more than 60% of
>>>> the
>>>> visitors to the Museum are visitors who are bringing tax dollars
> into
>>>> the
>>>> community that help fund other services.
>>>> The meals tax certainly wasn't a referendum on the Museum... From:
> inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org
>>>> [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org]
>>>> On
>>>> Behalf Of Melissa Rooney
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:14 PM
>>>> To: inc-list at DurhamINC.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] County Manager's Proposed Budget Actions
> Our schools cannot afford any more cuts. In fact, they need
>>>> significantly
>>>> more money to accommodate the supposed increase in people moving
> here
>>>> (one
>>>> of the arguments for all the new development we're seeing in the
>>>> suburban
>>>> and rural areas). Many of our schools are still overcrowded,
>>>> particularly
>>>> those in the rural and suburban areas, and their trailers are now
> considered permanent fixtures.
>>>> Don't mean to be barking up the same tree, but our local gov't needs
>>>> to
>>>> kick and scream and demand the ability to vote on NEW DEVELOPMENT
> impact
>>>> fees specifically for public school funding. We citizens have been
>>>> begging
>>>> our state reps and senators for this ability for years, to no avail.
> Meanwhile Orange County is still benefiting from these fees which
>>>> Durham
>>>> County is prohibited from imposing. In the meantime a referendum to
>>>> impose
>>>> land transfer impact fees toward this end should be included on any
> ballot
>>>> from here on out... even if it is unfair to our long-term and senior
>>>> residents, it's the only thing we've got...there must be some way
> we
>>>> can
>>>> offset this unfair effect somehow. Colin, didn't you have some ideas
>>>> in
>>>> this regard?
>>>> I love the Museum of Life and Science, and all the improvements
>>>> they've
>>>> made. I am in full support of the new outdoor section and the
>>>> Dinosaur
>>>> trail, which are supposedly already funded via bonds. But I do not
> think
>>>> this museum needs any additional improvements at this time,
>>>> particularly a
>>>> new and larger gift shop...and many Durham citizens did not vote for
>>>> the
>>>> prepared food tax because they didn't want the money used toward
> this
>>>> end.
>>>> Just my ten cents...
>>>> Melissa
>>>> --- On Mon, 1/5/09, RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com> wrote:
>>>> From: RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com>
>>>> Subject: [Durham INC] County Manager's Proposed Budget Actions To:
> fhna-list at fhnanews.com
>>>> Cc: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>>>> Date: Monday, January 5, 2009, 6:27 PM
>>>> Press release from Durham County.
>>>> Today, the Durham County Board of Commissioners met for their first
> Worksession meeting of the New Year. County Manager Mike Ruffin
> presented
>>>> a plan of recommended actions to accommodate the declines in the
> economy
>>>> and its impact on County operations. The report used a decline in
>>>> key
>>>> revenues as the basis for an overall FY 2009-09 Revenue Shortfall
> of
>>>> $14.25 million dollars. To make up that difference, the County
>>>> Manager
>>>> recommends substantive cuts to county departments? budgets to
> capture
>>>> $8,951,100 and proposes 3% cuts to other county funded agencies
>>>> including
>>>> Durham Public Schools, Durham Technical Community College, Museum of
>>>> Life
>>>> and Science, various non profits and more to
>>>> make up the remaining
>>>> $5,291.587.
>>>> Dawn D. Dudley
>>>> Public Information Specialist
>>>> Durham County Manager's Office
>>>> 919-560-0008 desk
>>>> 919-475-4411 cell
>>>> ddudley at co.durham.nc.us
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> INC-list mailing list
>>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>> URL:
>> <http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/private/inc-list/attachments/20090106/710a9c48/attachment.htm>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> INC-list mailing list
>>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>>> End of INC-list Digest, Vol 49, Issue 7
>>>> ***************************************
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> INC-list mailing list
>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>> **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is
>>> making
>>> headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> INC-list mailing list
>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>
>>
>> ====================================================================
> This e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
> CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s)
> or
>> entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of
> this
>> e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
>> dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly
> prohibited.
>> If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please
>> notify
>> me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic mail
>> (pickle at patriot.net)
>> immediately.
>> =====================================================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making
> headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)
>>
>
>
> ==================================================================== This
> e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
> CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) or
> entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this
> e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
> dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly prohibited.
> If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify
> me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic mail (pickle at patriot.net)
> immediately.
> =====================================================================
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> INC-list mailing list
> INC-list at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
====================================================================
This e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) or
entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify
me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic mail (pickle at patriot.net)
immediately.
=====================================================================
_______________________________________________
Durham INC Mailing List
list at durham-inc.org
http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
More information about the INC-list
mailing list