Another Wake County Task Force on Growth will convene on Thursday.
This the 2008 Task Force.
We had one in 2005-2006, the "Blue Ribbon" task force on growth.
There was also a Wake Growth Management Strategies task force in 2000-2003.
It's a good thing we keep talking about doing something!
City Council candidate Jessie Taliaferro received the overwhelming majority – 77 percent – of her campaign funds from developers and their allies in the real estate and building community, campaign filings with the Wake County Board of Elections reveal.
Moreover, in the most recent month of September, Taliaferro received 93.8% of her campaign funds from developers and the real estate industry.
Taliaferro’s filings with the Wake Board of Elections reveal that the vast majority of her contributions in the 2006-2007 campaign cycle came from developers, developers’ lawyers, spouses of developers, and others in the real estate and development industry.
Developer John Kane and his wife, Willa, contributed a total of $2000 to Taliaferro’s campaign. Taliaferro has been criticized for supporting Kane’s proposal to build a private parking deck for luxury condos using $75 million in taxpayer funds (Independent Weekly, August 15, 2007).
Developers’ attorneys Clyde Holt, Elizabeth Trahos, Mack Paul, and Isabel Mattox were among those who contributed at least $250 each to Taliaferro's campaign. They have appeared regularly before the Raleigh Planning Commission to advocate for rezonings and other development approvals on behalf of real estate interests.
The analysis, performed by the Rodger Koopman campaign, was based on public record filings for the current election cycle.
The campaign contributions that Taliaferro received from developers help to explain the incumbent’s position in favor of development interests, such as the Kane parking deck subsidy.
Taliaferro also opposed the mayor’s proposal to increase impact fees so that development would pay more of its own way, leaving Raleigh taxpayers paying 75% of the costs of growth according to an independent study performed for the City of Raleigh by Duncan Associates (News & Observer, April 19, 2006).
The election is on October 9.
We have just received word -- and it appears to be from a reliable source -- that Mary-Ann Baldwin, or her campaign, has retained an attorney to ferret out the authors of the blog Below the Beltline and take legal action against them.
What basis there may be for a legal claim, we are at a loss to say. Speaking their minds? Exposing the facts? Publicizing her developer-funded campaign?
These actions may be annoying as hell when you're Big Real Estate's hand-picked candidate, but the last time we checked, they were not illegal or tortious. (The Bill of Rights is still in effect in this state; matter of fact, you can go take a look at it through Sunday at the History Museum.)
But lack of a valid claim doesn't prevent a determined plaintiff from filing a lawsuit. Anyone with deep pockets can sue anybody, of course, and make the defendant's life pretty darn difficult, even if the suit is eventually thrown out of court.
If that's what she has in mind, we are about to see a SLAPP -- a "strategic lawsuit against public participation." The point of a SLAPP is to harass and discourage the airing of opposing viewpoints and political opinions.
Good heavens, the woman isn't even on City Council yet, and already, she has heard quite enough from the citizens.
This just in, via email:
If you haven't heard, Mary Ann Baldwin recently had a fundraiser hosted by Elizabeth Dole's Treasurer (Brent Barringer). Folks, he raises money to defeat Democrats. He's supporting Mary Ann Baldwin because she is bought and paid for by the real estate and development industries. Unfortunately, the other main Dem candidate, Paul Anderson, was also listed on the invitation. The stakes are high.
We have not had an opportunity to verify this intelligence. Perhaps one of our Gentle Readers would care to comment on its accuracy?
Update: Gentle Reader "J" confirms the story. See comment below.
This new blog is in shockingly poor taste.
It's a crowded field out there for just two at-large seats on the Raleigh City Council. How to know where your vote should go on October 9, Election Day?
A busy person hardly has time to keep track of the issues. (And the candidate's own "brand identity" may be somewhat misleading. An oak leaf on a candidate's sign doesn't mean she's green.)
But there's one simple question that stands in for a host of complex issues.
Where do you stand on a $75 million subsidy for John Kane's parking garage at North Hills?
The answer to this question can only go one of three ways: yes, no, or I won't say.
And that answer tells you, the voter, quite a bit.
It tells you where the candidate's loyalties are -- to developers, or taxpayers.
It tells you how the candidate feels about massive public subsidies to private development.
It tells you a lot about the candidate's ideas of fiscal responsibility.
It tells you whether an influential bigwig has that candidate in hand, or whether Raleigh citizens are in charge.
It tells you about the candidate's spending priorities: parks? streets? sidewalks? the arts? drinking water? public safety? recreation? ... or private shopping-center parking decks?
And if the candidate won't commit to an answer, that, too, should tell you all you need to know.
