[Durham INC] County's motion to dismiss Superior Court Case (751 South)

[Melissa Rooney]

In case others missed it, as I did. See the Jan 11th article below detailing the 
county's motion to have the 751 South appeal to Superior Court (lawsuit) 
dismissed--
Melissa


http://www.indyweek.com/triangulator/archives/2011/01/11/durham-county-attorney-asks-for-dismissal-of-751-south-lawsuit-saying-plaintiffs-didnt-serve-defendants-in-time


____________________

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 5:30 PM, John Schelp <bwatu at yahoo.com> wrote:

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-world/Content?oid=1966418
>
>
>-> See this week's Independent for chart showing local political contributions.
>



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20110121/b3eb12fb/attachment.html>