[Durham INC] Fw: Interesting article on the power of developers in local politics.

[Melissa Rooney]

I hope that some of you will write letters to the editor regarding the incredible financial backing Bowser is receiving from Hunter and the potential conflict of interest as a result. This was just for the Mayoral race. I imagine that another big donation (or series of donations ) will be made by 751 South development backers in the upcoming county commission race.

See the HS article below.

Melissa


http://heraldsun.com/view/full_story/16249156/article-751-South-backer-led-Bowser-donors?instance=homethirdleft

 
751 South backer led Bowser donors
16 hrs ago | 815 views | 0  | 8  |  | 
By Ray Gronberg

gronberg at heraldsun.com; 419-6648

DURHAM – County Commissioner Joe Bowser’s abortive campaign for mayor received most of its funding from one of the key backers of the controversial 751 South project, Cree Inc. co-founder Neal Hunter.

Campaign finance reports show that Hunter and his wife, Janet,
          gave Bowser $8,000 out of the $8,300 the commissioner raised
          for his run against incumbent Mayor Bill Bell.

But Bowser’s bid came up short in the field-winnowing Oct. 11
      primary, when he finished third behind fellow challenger Sylvester
      Williams.

He reported spending $4,195 on the race.

Bell told the county Board of Elections he’s taken in $5,275 and
      spent $1,850 in this election cycle. The only money he’s received
      this year from anyone on the 751 South team is a $50 donation from
      K&L Gates lawyer Craigie Sanders.

Williams – who will face off with Bell in next Tuesday’s general
      election – told the Board of Elections he’s raised $5,533 and
      spent $5,137. 

The minister and financial adviser is mostly self-financing his
      campaign, loaning it $5,458 of his own money.

Neal Hunter assembled the 167-acre tract that Southern Durham
      Development Inc., a company run by a cousin and another business
      associate, now proposes to turn into 751 South. 

He retains an interest in the project by virtue of holding,
      through a shell corporation, a promissory note from Southern
      Durham Development for $9.8 million.

The project has won zoning approvals and a promise of sewer
      service from the County Commissioners, with Bowser in each case
      joining the three-person majority favoring the development.

Bell, meanwhile, agreed with other City Council members to delay
      annexing the project site and offering city services to it pending
      the outcome of a lawsuit neighbors of the site filed to overturn
      the county’s zoning vote.

The incumbent led the Oct. 11 primary with 80.8 percent of the
      vote.

Williams received 7.7 percent of the vote in the primary and
      Bowser 7.5 percent.

In the City Council race, challenger and former school board
      member Steve Schewel continues to hold a massive fundraising lead
      over the other five candidates.

He’s raised $23,979 and spent $5,251.

Incumbents Diane Catotti and Eugene Brown trail Schewel in the
      money race, having raised $14,334 and $13,734, respectively.
      Catotti has spent $8,728 and Brown $7,683.

They and Schewel have each given money to the People’s Alliance
      for that group to use in promoting them as the group’s endorsed
      slate of candidates.

The best financed of the remaining challengers is Donald Hughes,
      who’s banked $2,211 and spent $1,950.

Victoria Peterson follows closely behind, having banked $2,101 and
      spent $2,025.

Like Williams, both Hughes and Peterson are self-financing their
      campaigns. Hughes has channeled $1,942 of his own money into the
      race, while Peterson has chipped in $1,696 of hers. 

The Board of Election hasn’t posted to its web site a new report
      for remaining challenger, Solomon Burnette, since September. The
      most recent available data said he’d raised $679 and spent $372.

Catotti led the primary field with 26.5 percent of the voted,
      outpacing Brown with 23.2 percent and Schewel with 21.7 percent.
      Peterson finished fourth with 11.5 percent. Hughes followed with
      7.4 percent and Burnette trailed with 5.4 percent.

Committees campaigning for the county’s transit and education
      sales-tax surcharges also have filed reports.

The transit-tax committee as of Tuesday had taken in $19,200 and
      spent $6,502.

The group is relying heavily on corporate money, drummed up mostly
      by the Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce.

It’s gotten $10,000 from the Research Triangle Foundation, $2,500
      from Cree Inc., $2,500 from Duke Energy, $1,000 from First
      Citizens Bank, $1,000 from Teer Associates, $750 from BB&T,
      $500 from PSNC, $500 from Kimley-Horn and Associates, and $250
      from Northgate Mall manager Ginny Bowman.

The education-tax committee, meanwhile, reported raising $4,000
      and spending $1,809.

It received $1,500 from Southern Durham Development and $2,500
      from Capitol Broadcasting Co.

Read more: The Herald-Sun - 751 South backer led Bowser donors
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111102/691f1617/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 63 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111102/691f1617/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 343 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111102/691f1617/attachment-0001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 58 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111102/691f1617/attachment-0002.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 854 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111102/691f1617/attachment-0003.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 63 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111102/691f1617/attachment-0004.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 343 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111102/691f1617/attachment-0005.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 58 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111102/691f1617/attachment-0006.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 854 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111102/691f1617/attachment-0007.gif>