http://trtpdev.info/index.php en Cyndy_Yu_Robinson@URSCorp.com Copyright 2012 2012-02-09T14:00:17+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/rail-route-on-nc54-gains-renewed-support/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/rail-route-on-nc54-gains-renewed-support/#When:14:00:17Z DURHAM – Plans for a rail link that uses the N.C. 54 corridor between Durham and Orange counties cleared a key hurdle on Wednesday, picking up a formal endorsement from the elected officials who serve on a cross-county planning group. The action by the Durham-Orange Transportation Advisory committee gave Triangle Transit a green light to expand work on the project, among other things by launching a full-blown environmental impact study. Committee members made only one significant change to the proposal, saying they would prefer not to use a reserved-since-1995 routing for the line that goes through Chapel Hill’s Meadowmont neighborhood. They stopped short of ruling out the Meadowmont option entirely, saying it deserves continued study alongside an alternative that would pass by on the south side of N.C. 54. That squared with the desires of Chapel Hill’s Town Council, but not necessarily those of the Orange County Commissioners. Orange’s representative, Commissioner Alice Gordon, told fellow committee members her board preferred to dump the Meadowmont option entirely. But Gordon’s request on that point drew no support from other committee members. Among Chapel Hill officials, there’s a “general belief [that the south-of-54 option is] going to be the one that meets the town’s best interests,” Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt said. But on the Town Council there “wasn’t support for completely eliminating” the Meadowmont option at this point, he said. Wednesday’s cross-county committee decision came just hours after a divided Orange County Commissioners had given Gordon permission to vote for the N.C. 54 routing. The commissioners’ debate focused mostly on another issue, County Manager Frank Clifton’s suggestion that they ask Triangle Transit’s planners to consider as an alternative to N.C. 54 a routing that would hew to U.S. 15-501. The 54-focused routing endorsed Wednesday would follow U.S. 15-501 through southwest Durham until it hits Interstate 40, there turning south to follow the interstate to N.C. 54 before heading west again toward Chapel Hill and UNC. Clifton and Orange County Planning Director Craig Benedict argued last month that a routing that skips the jog south along I-40 would open up redevelopment opportunities in Chapel Hill along U.S. 15-501. But Triangle Transit officials noted that all the region’s land-use and transportation planning since the mid-to-late 1990s has assumed an N.C. 54 routing. Reconsidering the matter now would cause a 12- to 18-month delay, and in focusing on U.S. 15-501 would be eying a corridor that’s only the fourth-most-popular choice of those who commute to UNC, Orange’s largest employer, said Patrick McDonough, a Triangle Transit senior planner. Orange Commissioners Chairwoman Bernadette Pelissier made it clear at the outset that she thought county officials should defer to Chapel Hill’s preferences in the matter. “This whole issue of 15-501 and 54 is related to their land-use plan,” she said. “We have heard from Chapel Hill that they have built in 54 based on transit. The land-use plan is within the jurisdiction of the towns, not the county.” Commissioner Barry Jacobs was also unwilling to brook delay. “We’re essentially the caboose on this train,” he said, noting that Chapel Hill’s and other local governments had already weighed in. But Commissioner Steve Yuhasz said the development that could be sparked in Orange’s jurisdiction along U.S. 15-501 could go a ways toward overcoming doubts he and others have about the extra expense involved in based transit on rails instead of buses. For Orange County, “there are very few economic development opportunities” in an N.C. 54 routing, he said. Yuhasz and Commissioner Earl McKee dissented from a 5-2 vote by the Orange board that gave Gordon the instructions she followed Wednesday morning. McKee attributed his opposition to a broader preference for using buses only, for the flexibility they offer in choosing and changing routes. McDonough noted that nothing in Tuesday or Wednesday’s decisions rules out a separate study of transit in the U.S. 15-501 corridor. He also pointed out that local transportation planning has endorsed an expansion of bus service there. originally published in the Herald Sun by Ray Gronberg, gronberg@heraldsun.com; 419-6648   2012-02-09T14:00:17+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/fed-its-time-for-transit-in-the-triangle/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/fed-its-time-for-transit-in-the-triangle/#When:14:04:30Z DURHAM – Count the head of the Federal Transit Administration among those who’ve noticed that it’s taken a while for the Triangle’s government and business leaders to settle on plans for a regional rail network. Visiting Durham and Raleigh on Tuesday for a combined tour and meeting with local officials, FTA Administrator Peter Rogoff said he’s been hearing about the project for a couple decades now, going back to when he was a U.S. Senate committee staffer. “When I was working in the Senate, I think I talked to Sen. [Terry] Sanford about it,” Rogoff said, name-checking the former governor and Duke University president who represented North Carolina in the nation’s capital from 1986 to 1993. Now, “it’s time,” he added. “There is no question, this area is going to see a lot of growth. It already has. The question, really, that the community has to face is whether the community is going to plan for that growth or be overwhelmed by it.” Rogoff, whose agency will someday decide whether the project should receive federal construction subsidies, added that he’d heard “a lot of smart thinking” from local leaders about how they should provide the necessary infrastructure. But “we are not going to dictate from Washington, D.C., what the transit solution here is going to be,” said Rogoff, who’s headed the FTA since being appointed to the post by President Barack Obama in the spring of 2009. “The people in this room are going to tell us what they want it to be, and we’re going to tell them what we can partner in.” Rogoff’s trip gave him a chance to confer with Triangle Transit’s general manager, David King, the mayors of Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill, and the Research Triangle Foundation’s chief land-use planner. The group traveled by bus from Durham’s downtown Amtrak station to the campus of N.C. State University, along the way passing several places local transit planners think would make for good station sites. King was quick to highlight the success of last fall’s Durham transit referendum, which saw voters by a significant margin approve the creation of a sales-tax surcharge to help pay for expanded transit offerings. He also noted that Triangle’s major cities and town have built their land-use plans around the proposed Raleigh-to-Durham-to-Chapel Hill rail links that would become the backbone of the system. That local-level land-use planning is “very robust and very integral” to the likely success of the system, King told Rogoff. “We’re shooting at a target 15 years from now: During that time, a lot of development will happen, and a lot will be focused around the stations. We believe we’ve got that piece right.” His comments, however, glossed over a dispute that’s arisen recently in Orange County as officials there mull whether to endorse the transit plan and even more critically whether to call a sales-tax referendum like Durham’s for their voters this fall. Orange County Manager Frank Clifton last week said he’d like to see Triangle Transit revamp its planning study for the Durham-to-Chapel Hill portion of the network, this time looking at a route that would hew to the U.S. 15-501 corridor. Clifton told the Orange County Commissioners he thinks they need to see how the 15-501 corridor would stack up against the agency’s preferred routing, which would follow 15-501 for a while but turn south at Interstate 40 and then west toward Chapel Hill at N.C. 54. Triangle Transit, Durham and Chapel Hill officials have favored the N.C. 54 routing because they think it would better serve commuters to UNC. But Clifton said a 15-501 routing would open up more development opportunities in Orange County. He later warned Durham County Manager Mike Ruffin that a referendum in Orange “may not happen” this year, although officials are trying to make it happen, because his board isn’t convinced “the current plan works best for Orange County.” King – whose subordinates believe reopening the larger routing question could delay the key decisions by another two years – made it a point Tuesday to prod Orange County Commissioners Chairwoman Bernadette Pelissier on the referendum question. “Bernadette is going to deliver us to the promised land on November 6th of this year, or we’re all going to turn into turnips or something,” he said, citing the date of this fall’s general election. “No pressure, Bernadette, none whatsoever.” Durham officials are interested observers because, as Mayor Bill Bell twice pointed out to Rogoff, they agreed to delay implementation of the transit tax in their community until they see what officials in neighboring Orange and Wake counties decide. Originally published in the Herald Sun by Ray Gronberg, gronberg@heraldsun.com; 419-6648. 2012-02-01T14:04:30+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/orange-officials-question-transit-plan/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/orange-officials-question-transit-plan/#When:15:59:38Z DURHAM – Key Orange County officials are signaling doubt about one of the fundamental premises of a regional transit plan, questioning whether it should serve the N.C. 54 corridor. The problem with that, in the eyes of Orange County Manager Frank Clifton, is that routing a new rail line along N.C. 54 would open up development opportunities in the western reaches of Durham County, at the expense of competing possibilities in Orange. On Tuesday, Clifton told the Orange County Commissioners that he wants Triangle Transit to look at using the U.S. 15-501 corridor exclusively, a routing that could feed into potential redevelopment of sites like Ram’s Plaza and University Mall. “The greater potential benefit to Orange County from an economic development standpoint is along 15-501,” he said, echoing comments from his government’s planning director, Craig Benedict. “It is not along a short stretch of 54 that is in Orange County.” Clifton also dropped a bombshell during Tuesday’s meeting by telling commissioners that Chapel Hill Town Manager Roger Stancil agrees with him. “Roger Stancil and myself have talked about this at great length,” Clifton said. “We’ve talked to our economic people. We just think [15-501 is] something that should not be written off, off the top.” The Orange manager’s comment were surprising for many reasons, starting with the fact that city and county elected officials from Durham and Orange are supposed to vote in less than two weeks on a rough outline of the routing. Since the 1990s, most of the transit-related planning work on both sides of the county line has assumed a rail connection would run towards Chapel Hill from Durham along U.S. 15-501 to about the Patterson Place area, then head south along Interstate 40 and turn back toward Chapel Hill at N.C. 54. Moreover, all of Chapel Hill’s land-use planning since the mid-1990s debate over the Meadowmont development has been built around that assumption. Clifton brushed off those factors. “The times have changed,” he said. But his comments came about 24 hours after Chapel Hill’s Town Council reviewed the transit plan and confirmed its support for using the N.C. 54 corridor. Clifton’s claim to be speaking also for Stancil drew skepticism from Orange Commissioners Chairwoman Bernadette Pelissier. “Did the Chapel Hill Town Council discuss at all the 15-501 corridor last night?” she asked Clifton. “I don’t believe so,” he answered. Chapel Hill elected officials on Wednesday quickly made it clear they hadn’t abandoned their historical unwillingness to tolerate any freelancing on land-use matters by staff. “I don’t know why Mr. Clifton decided to proclaim Roger’s position on this, but it’s just not the case,” Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt said. “We’ve all had conversations about [15-501], and that was resolved some time ago.” Town Council Ed Harrison added via email that Clifton “has [no business] representing any of Stancil’s opinions.” Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Durham and Triangle Transit officials have preferred the N.C. 54 route because it would in their view better serve commuter traffic to UNC. Already, bus ridership along N.C. 54 is about 30 times greater than it is along Fordham Boulevard, Triangle Transit Senior Transportation Planner Patrick McDonough told commissioners. “The transit demand of the future is very well indicated by the transit demand of today,” he added. “That’s where the heart of the matter is.” Clifton’s comments provoked obvious consternation from Triangle Transit General Counsel Wib Gulley, who said an assessment of U.S. 15-501 would cause at least a two-year setback for local transit planning and cost millions of extra dollars. But three of the commissioners – Pam Hemminger, Earl McKee and Steve Yuhasz – made it clear they shared Clifton’s reservations. McKee also said he had no problem waiting. “If it takes an extra year, if it takes an extra 10 years, it will be worth it to get it right and get it right the first time,” McKee said. Tuesday’s discussion also raised questions about whether Orange commissioners will schedule a referendum this year about a half-percent sales-tax levy to support the transit plan. Durham voters approved such a measure last fall, but elected officials here are holding off on implementing it until they see whether Orange or Wake counties put the levy to a vote. Yuhasz signaled that he’d be more inclined to support the N.C. 54 routing if Durham officials share with Orange County the extra tax revenue they’d realize if the area around a potential Durham station location near Creekside Elementary School develops as planners expect. “All the costs we are being asked to recommend to our citizens, we need to recapture that within Orange County,” he said. “I’m not convinced this plan does that. Whereas if in fact all the revenue that was generated at [the station site], if some portion of that was shared back with Orange County, then maybe it would be more of a regional plan and it would make more sense for Orange County to look at it in a regional way.” But one Durham official monitoring the situation, City Councilman Mike Woodard, said he’s set on the U.S. 15-501/I-40/N.C. 54 concept and added that Clifton’s objections are “11th hour.” “Any plan that would just move along 15-501 and not help us on 54 is a plan I wouldn’t be interested in,” Woodard said. Originally published in the Herald Sun, on January 27, 2012, by Ray Gronberg, gronberg@heraldsun.com, 419-6648. 2012-01-27T15:59:38+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/transit-tax-passes-great-day-for-durham-bell-says/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/transit-tax-passes-great-day-for-durham-bell-says/#When:13:43:47Z Originally published in the Herald Sun by Ray Gronberg DURHAM — Voters in Tuesday’s general election made Durham County the second community in the state with the authority to levy a half-percent, local-option sales tax to pay for an expansion of public transit. The transit levy — one of two local-option taxes on the ballot — received 60.1 percent of the vote countywide. City and county officials, along with local business leaders, were pleased at a result that essentially mirrored the results of an early March poll. Tuesday was “a great day for Durham,” Mayor Bill Bell said. “I’m really serious about it. I couldn’t be happier.” County Commissioners Chairman Michael Page echoed the mayor’s reaction. “I’m glad, delighted that citizens realized the long-term needs we have in preparing for the next few decades in establishing transit, getting our transportation system a lot more up to speed with the growth we anticipate,” Page said. The complete but unofficial results show that 16,517 people voted for the transit levy, while 11,864 voted against. The March poll, conducted by Regional Transportation Alliance pollster Paul Fallon, found that 59.7 percent of those surveyed at the time were supporting the idea of a transit tax. Officials asked the Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce and an ad-hoc campaign committee to turn that sentiment into an election result. Bell last month flatly predicted victory. Campaign co-chairwoman Susan Ross more cautiously last week said things were looking good. Chamber President Casey Steinbacher conceded, though, that a Fallon “flash poll” conducted Tuesday and Wednesday of last week last week had pegged the levy as having only a 3 percent lead, with 17 percent of those surveyed undecided. One support group, the Durham-Orange Friends of Transit, on Monday said on its Facebook page that “exit polling results for early voting [were] discouraging” and called on volunteers to work Tuesday to get out the vote. “We think we converted a lot of people by really getting grassroots in the community,” Steinbacher said. “I can’t stress enough how important it was to get out and talk to people and explain what it meant. A lot of people had a lot of questions.” Officials expect the levy to generate about $18 million to $19 million in new revenue. Money from it would pay first for added bus service in Durham, and later would finance work on two rail systems. Commuter rail lines would use existing railroad lines to connect Durham with Raleigh and eastern Wake County. The second, more expensive, plan of the two would add a new light rail corridor. Officials have said they’ll wait until either Wake or Orange counties passes a similar tax before they ask Page and his colleagues on the commissioners to implement Durham’s half-cent sales tax. Fallon’s March survey found the idea of the tax had similar levels of support in Durham and Orange. In Wake, though, only 51 percent of those surveyed backed a transit tax. Both Orange and Wake leaders opted to hold off on calling referendums until 2012 at least. Now that the tax has passed here, the next steps for Durham officials include “encouraging our neighboring counties … to join us in a truly regional [transit] plan,” City Councilman Mike Woodard said. The tax had received near-unanimous support from Durham’s major political groups, the main exception being the Durham County Republican Party. Its chairman, Ted Hicks, said Tuesday he thought the results of Tuesday’s referendum would have been different had voter turnout been higher. Countywide, turnout was 17.4 percent of those registered to vote, Board of Elections officials said. “The message is about 40 percent, plus or minus, voted no on these things,” Hicks said, alluding also to a local-option tax to pay for education programs that also passed on Tuesday. “That is a very significant shift, and that really needs to be highlighted. The fiscal irresponsibility of local government is starting to get people’s attention.” Hicks added that the challenge opponents had is that “the Republican party and the Republican voter in Durham is just so demoralized because the deck is stacked against them.” Steinbacher, who represents the business community, said few people told pro-transit campaigners they were against it because of an outright aversion to transit or to taxes. Many, though, weren’t sure how they personally or the community in general would benefit, she said. Tuesday’s 60.1 percent showing for the transit tax bettered the result of the last transportation-related referendum, a city street-paving bond that appeared on the 2010 general election ballot. The 2010 street bond passed with 57 percent of the vote. Charlotte, which, before Tuesday, was the only community in the state with voter-approved transit-tax authority, used the money to build a rail line from its downtown to the southern reaches of the city. 2011-11-09T13:43:47+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/durham-okays-new-sales-taxes/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/durham-okays-new-sales-taxes/#When:13:39:07Z Originally published in the News & Observer by Jim Wise. DURHAM -- Voters approved two new taxes in Tuesday's election. With 61 of 62 precincts reporting, 60 percent favored a half-cent transit sales tax, and 57 percent said yes to a quarter-cent education tax. Transit proponents hope approval of the tax in Durham will motivate Orange and Wake counties to follow next year. "Hopefully we will set the pace for other counties to follow," Durham Mayor Bill Bell said Monday. Transit tax revenue is expected to generate $17.3 million per year, to be used for immediate bus-service expansion and for Durham County sections of a light-rail line between downtown Durham and UNC Hospitals and a commuter-rail line from downtown to eastern Wake County by way of the Research Triangle Park. The education sales tax is expected to produce $9 million a year. County commissioners have said revenue would replace federal stimulus money used to pay school salaries, pay down debt on school-construction projects, and fund pre-kindergarten programs and scholarships county graduates to attend Durham Tech. The schools tax will take effect in 2012, but the commissioners have said they will not levy the transit tax unless Orange and Wake counties adopt similar measures for their parts of a planned regional bus and rail transit system. Bo Glenn, executive coordinator of the advocacy group Durham-Orange Friends of Transit, said voters in Orange County are "very transit-oriented" and will likely follow suit. Ballots in those counties did not include transit referendums Tuesday. Orange County commissioners were concerned it might hurt the chances of approval for its quarter-cent sales tax for schools and economic development. Wake County put off a referendum until May 2012 at the earliest. "It's just going to be motivational for Wake citizens to know that Durham has taken the first step," said Karen Rindge, director of WakeUp Wake County, an advocacy group that supports the regional plan. All three of the county's major political-action groups endorsed the transit tax, and contributions to the Durham Transit Tax Referendum Committee totaled $25,291. The Durham Education Tax Referendum Committee reported only $4,000 in donations. Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/09/1629786/early-results-favor-sales-taxes.html#ixzz1dJFOp8gN 2011-11-09T13:39:07+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/wunc-radio-story-on-busrail-improvements-in-durham/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/wunc-radio-story-on-busrail-improvements-in-durham/#When:17:45:11Z Jessica Jones interviews four people with different views on the half cent tax referendum before the voters on November 8: Bo Glenn (Durham-Orange Friends of Transit), Ellen Reckridge (County Commissioner), Ted Hicks (Chair of Durham's Republican Party), and Jackie Cole (student).  To listen to or download the audio file, click on http://wunc.org/programs/news/archive/njj110211.mp3/view Eric Hodge: On Tuesday, Durham County voters will decide whether to approve a sales tax increase that would help fund big improvements to public transit. Public transportation advocates across the Triangle have been working for years to plan a comprehensive network of buses and trains to make the area more commuter-friendly. Jessica Jones reports the Durham referendum is the first test the regional plan faces before voters. Jessica Jones: Bo Glenn is a retired attorney who heads Durham-Orange Friends of Transit, the main advocacy group for the measure. On this fall afternoon, Glenn and I are walking through a hardwood forest that borders a few houses and a shopping center. If the referendum were to pass, a commuter light-rail stop would eventually be built right here. Jones and Bo Glenn: This is actually a beautiful area. You probably have got to stop here, I'm not sure you want to go into the poison ivy. There's poison ivy everywhere- just another sign this forested area doesn't get visitors very often. But Glenn says if Durham voters decide to approve the referendum, this place will eventually look very different. Glenn: You would see a station stop, you would see vertical construction for apartments, for offices, for retail, you would lose this forest, but by building density in the central core, we're going to be preserving a lot more forest in the outer parts of the county. Glenn and other transit advocates hope Durham County voters share his opinion. The half-cent sales tax would generate more than 18 million dollars a year. The money would go for greatly expanded bus services, a commuter rail and eventually a light-rail line that would pass through here. Glenn says if Triangle residents don't get behind improving public transit, the area is going to become a very difficult place to live. Glenn: Right now we're the third most sprawled region in the country and if you let that continue unabated, we'll be the number one most sprawled region in the country. Up to one and a half million newcomers are expected to arrive in the Triangle over the next twenty years. Wake and Orange counties are part of the area's big master plan for transit too, but unlike Durham, they haven't put referendums before voters yet. And the money is essential to getting the project off the ground. Ellen Reckhow is a Durham County Commissioner. Ellen Reckhow: It is daunting, we decided to move ahead because we felt the timing was right for Durham to do it this year. Reckhow believes if Durham can get the measure passed, that will help Wake and Orange counties win voters' approval in the fall of 2012. She says Durham's part of the plan focuses on getting residents to and from Research Triangle Park, Duke, and UNC in Orange County. Reckhow: Those are huge nodes. And these transit plans that we have connect to our major employment centers, and will help tremendously to move people to the jobs. Reckhow says if the referendum passes, the tax increase won't begin automatically. Commissioners have decided to wait until Wake and Orange Counties pass their own revenue-raising measures. It would only apply to luxury items including clothing and consumer goods. But not everyone favors raising taxes for transit improvements. Ted Hicks is the chair of Durham's Republican Party. Ted Hicks: It would be more expensive to shop in Durham than in surrounding counties. People who are spending money on luxury goods- they're going to do it regardless. We're driving those shoppers away, go shop somewhere else and spend less of your money. Hicks says he's not against public transportation, but he's not sure this transit plan is the right one for the area. Hicks: When the ballot is drawn up, it's not a yes or no question, it's not a multiple choice. And to begin with we don't believe the Raleigh-Durham area is a viable place for light rail. At this point the plan is set, but the bigger question is whether Durham voters know much about it. Jackie Cole is a student who's catching a bus home from Durham's main bus depot. Jones and Jackie Cole: So do you know about the referendum? Not much about it but I've heard about it actually. Are you planning to vote? Um, well I have a lot of stuff on my slate right now, you know life as it is, but I've been thinking about it. Cole says he hasn't decided yet whether he'll actually show up at the polls. Jessica Jones, North Carolina Public Radio, WUNC. 2011-11-02T17:45:11+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/transit-pace-setting/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/transit-pace-setting/#When:17:40:59Z Durham voters can assume a prominent role in an area of crucial importance to the Triangle when they hit the voting booth come Tuesday. They'll approve or reject a half-cent sales tax increase for improvements in public transit, from bus service to light rail connecting areas from east Durham to Chapel Hill, along with rush-hour commuter rail service toward Raleigh. The tax would bring in more than $18 million a year for these projects, with bus improvements beginning almost immediately and rail projects targeted for completion in stages over the next 6-14 years. This vote represents the first big step in funding a regional rail system. Orange County and Wake County will have to step up and approve their own sales tax increases to finish the funding for a system that could bring more efficient and convenient transit options to the Triangle, which is expected to grow by more than 1 million people over the next 20 years. State and federal funding will be sought, if the counties approve the tax. The positives are many. Rail transit can be the thread that more tightly knits the areas together while helping address the expense and environmental problems that come with dependency on gasoline. Instead of development constantly moving out, out, out, there could be more concentrated areas of housing and commerce, including high-tech corridors, near rail stations. Entertainment venues in all areas, and there are many good ones, would have more customers from more places. The quest begins Tuesday in Durham. If voters there approve of a tax (which is exempted on food, medicine and other necessities, by the way) then the push will have momentum for votes in Orange and Wake. Originally printed in the News & Observer , Opinion/Editorial pages on Nov. 2, 2011.  Read more at http://www.newsobserver.com 2011-11-02T17:40:59+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/half-a-penny-tax-hike-fine-with-friends-of-durham/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/half-a-penny-tax-hike-fine-with-friends-of-durham/#When:17:36:39Z by Bruce Siceloff - News & Observer Staff Writer When the transit skeptics at a conservative, anti-tax business group speak up in favor of increasing the sales tax to expand transit service, I feel the earth move under my feet. Durham County voters will decide Nov. 8 whether to increase the local sales tax by a half penny to pay for beefed-up bus service and to start work on rail transit connections into neighboring Orange and Wake counties. The transit tax proposal was blessed by two influential groups that tend toward the left end of the political spectrum, and whose votes were pretty much expected: the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People and the People's Alliance.  But some folks were surprised to see the Bull City's third big political organization add its cautious voice to the yes-chorus for a transit tax: the Friends of Durham. This bodes well for a solid approval vote when Durham ballots are counted next Tuesday night. It may offer encouragement for transit boosters looking ahead to a similar sales tax referendum expected to show up on the Orange and Wake county ballots in November 2012. There are naysayers out there, and we'll hear from the Durham Republicans in a minute. But let's listen first to a convert from the swing-vote camp. The Friends of Durham, mostly business people, generally backs conservative candidates and policies in the name of economic improvement. "Our primary reason for supporting it was for economic development," said David A. Smith, a commercial real estate appraiser who is chairman of Friends of Durham. "We were a little skeptical about how much transit would reduce traffic and those sorts of things." Impressed by the booming construction that has grown along Charlotte's first light-rail line, Smith said a commitment to rail transit in Durham would draw new employers and spur development around transit stations. He cited projections for continued growth and said dense residential neighborhoods near transit hubs would appeal to newcomers, students and elderly people. Like the Durham Bulls and the Durham Performing Arts Center, Smith said, a transit upgrade would help make the city appealing to more investors. On their website, these folks do not pretend to be a bunch of, you know, people who ride the bus: "While transit may not be used by you and me, it will be used by people we need like nurses, educators and office workers," the Friends of Durham "issues" page says. "We felt the economic development aspect of mass transit was enough to earn our support." The transit tax argument falls flat with the Durham County Republican Party. "It's not a job creator," said Theodore Hicks, a certified financial planner who is the local party chair. "It's a job killer." Hicks warns that a half-cent sales tax, adding 50 cents to the price of a $100 retail purchase, would hurt Durham merchants and give a competitive advantage to Wake County shopping malls. In its argument against the transit tax, the Durham GOP also contends that the county's bus services are under-used and do not need expansion, and that there is little demand for the dense development proposed near transit stations. "We have urban sprawl because that's what people want," Hicks said. "They want a little piece of land. They don't want to live in a tower." Both Orange and Wake have transit skeptics among their county commissioners. The two boards are moving on similar paths toward decisions on whether to hold transit tax votes a year from now. Karen Rindge of Raleigh, who heads the advocacy group Capital Area Friends of Transit, said the expected "yes" vote in Durham would provide momentum for the effort in Wake. Rush-hour commuter trains are part of a shared proposal for Durham and Wake. "It's just going to be motivational for Wake citizens to know that Durham has taken the first step," Rindge said. "So we'll want to step up so we can literally connect with commuter rail." Friends of Durham declined to endorse another referendum item on next week's Durham ballot: a quarter-cent sales tax for schools. One of the group's primary concerns is the need to reduce taxes. "We want to have lower taxes," Smith said. "And to do that you need to have a wider tax base and more economic development." And if it takes higher sales taxes to get there, he said, that's OK with Friends of Durham. Originally published in the News & Observer on November 1, 2011.    Read more at http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/01/1610597/half-a-penny-tax-hike-fine-with.html#ixzz1cT0W10xD 2011-11-01T17:36:39+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/friends-back-incumbents-schewel-transit/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/friends-back-incumbents-schewel-transit/#When:14:54:25Z by Ray Gronberg DURHAM – The Friends of Durham on Thursday announced that it’s endorsing the re-election bids of Mayor Bill Bell and City Council members Diane Catotti and Eugene Brown. For the third council seat up for grab on Nov. 8, the group is backing challenger Steve Schewel, Friends leader David Smith said. The group is also endorsing one of the two sales-tax referenda County Commissioners have placed on the ballot, which would allow officials to levy a half-percent surcharge to support public transit. Smith said the Friends’ internal debate yielded “a close vote” against the second levy, a quarter percent for public education. The group settled on its support for Bell and Brown without serious dispute. Speaking of Bell, Smith said Friends leaders “thought his experience and knowledge was better suited for the job than his opponent,” minister and financial adviser Sylvester Williams. As for Brown, “we’ve been real pleased with him,” Smith said. But the decision on Catotti and Schewel produced another close vote, as Friends leaders also considered giving a nod to challenger Donald Hughes. In the end, the group opted to go with Catotti and Schewel because they’re “very knowledgeable and committed,” whereas Hughes is “more of an unknown,” Smith said. “We hope that he will continue to stay active,” Smith said. “But we went with the experience.” The group’s support for the transit tax came because it believes the rail system officials are planning will open future economic development opportunities, similar to those seen around Charlotte’s rail corridor, Smith said. Members also regarded transit as a matter critical to Durham’s ability to entice more businesses to locate here. “Companies coming to the area, one of the things they look for is, do you support mass transit,” Smith said. The education levy lost out because members were concerned its state-dictated ballot language doesn’t oblige County Commissioners to spend the revenue on schools. Commissioners have said “that’s what it’s going to be used for, but they can change their minds, or we can get different commissioners on there” who would be free to use the money elsewhere, Smith said. Moreover, Friends leaders believe the Durham Public Schools are too costly. “Our schools, per student, are very expensive,” more so than in most places in North Carolina, Smith said. “And our local charter schools are running [with] a lot less per student than the [DPS] schools.” The Friends of Durham is generally regarded as the most conservative of Durham’s big-three political groups. Its leadership includes both Republicans and Democrats. The other groups, the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People and the People’s Alliance, are more tightly aligned with the Democratic Party. The Friends mayoral and council slate nonetheless was identical to that of the People’s Alliance. The Durham Committee, meanwhile, supported Bell, Hughes and City Council challengers Solomon Burnette and Victoria Peterson. Thursday’s Friends announcement gave the transit tax a clean sweep of the big-three referenda endorsements. The Durham Committee and the People’s Alliance were united in also supporting the levy for schools. Originally published in the Herald Sun newspaper on 10/21/2011 2011-10-21T14:54:25+00:00 http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/two-tax-measures-set-for-nov-8-durham-county-election/ http://www.ourtransitfuture.com/index.php/newsroom/two-tax-measures-set-for-nov-8-durham-county-election/#When:18:22:16Z October 18, 2011 | Geoffrey Mock – Duke Today Durham, NC - Off-year local elections are the poor stepchild of American political activity, but the upcoming Durham County elections on Nov. 8 have two tax measures that might attract wider than normal voter interest. Two separate resolutions would levy a local sales tax of 1/2 cent for transit improvements, including additional bus hours and construction of commuter rail service, and a tax of 1/4 cent for Durham Public Schools (DPS), Durham Technical Community College, county pre-K programs and debt service on DPS buildings. The ballot also includes the race for city mayor and for three at-large seats on the Durham City Council. The mayor's race features incumbent William Bell versus challenger Sylvester Williams. The transit tax is expected to raise $17.2 million in the first year, with collection beginning in April 2012. According to supporters, the funds collected add an extra 25,000 bus hours in the first full year of implementation. Down the road, the tax revenues will construct commuter rail service from Durham through Research Triangle Park to eastern Wake County by 2018. Finally, light rail will be constructed to run from just east of downtown Durham to UNC Hospitals by 2024. The school tax will raise approximately $9.2 million in the first year with more than $6 million of the funds going to DPS. Supporters say both measures are important to the future of the county. Bill Kalkhof, president of Downtown Durham, said in a letter to the Durham Herald-Sun that the transit tax will enable Durham to "think big" at a critical time in the economy. "For Durham to reach its potential, actions need to be taken today to solve our looming transportation problems -- even if our action means taking the lead before our neighbors. If we do not act, Durham and the Triangle may face the prospect of becoming another Los Angeles, where the car is king and congestion abounds. Our regional transportation status quo will simply not serve us for the long term," Kalkhof said. But opposition has come from several sources, including the Durham County Republican Party, which is urging voters to vote no on both measures. In a statement released over the weekend, the party challenged the value of additional bus lines and light rail commuter service and called the ¼ cent tax "a general revenue tax hike masquerading as education funding." Early voting begins Oct. 20. Duke officials encourage all employees to vote but note the university has a policy defining acceptable political behavior on the job and on campus. "We encourage faculty, staff and students to actively participate in the civic life of the community," said Michael Schoenfeld, vice president for public affairs and government relations.   "Voting is the most direct way in which every citizen can make a difference." Schoenfeld noted that as a non-profit, tax-exempt entity, Duke must abide by federal and state laws prohibiting the use of its facilities, services or personnel to promote or support individuals or organizations campaigning for public office.  These laws prohibit Duke University, and any of its related entities, from contributing to or supporting political candidates or parties.  The restrictions on political activity do not apply to any employee acting as an individual, on their own time and using personal resources.  "Understanding the basic rules helps promote vibrant discussions on campus about candidates and political issues without violating the law," he added. For more information about the tax measures, see the Durham County Government website. Originally published in the Duke Today paper and online newspaper, at  http://today,duke.edu/2011/10/elections2011 2011-10-19T18:22:16+00:00