Thorpe's Dean Dome vote

Here's a statement from Bill Thorpe clarifying his leadership in protecting neighborhoods on Town Council during the 1980's:

I am writing to clarify my role in Council votes over the Smith Center Special Use Permit. I believe that by providing voters with this background, they will understand that I have long been a strong advocate for the people and neighborhoods of Chapel Hill.

Here are the facts: In July 1980, I voted to approve the university's application for a special permit to construct the Dean Dome, having cast two prior opposing votes because of my concerns about the impact the development would have on the surrounding neighborhoods. These two 'no' votes were based on the legitimate objections raised by nearby residents about noise and traffic problems. I voted 'no' until the council secured noise buffers and more traffic controls. After securing those concessions, I voted yes - the vote alluded to by Mr. Davis.

As a Council member I do not hope to be an obstructionist to UNC's development goals. But I do intend not to vote for any UNC project or any development at all for that matter unless it is environmentally and socially responsible. That means adequate measures need to be taken to protect neighborhoods and ensure affordable housing.

Every candidate in this race will talk about how they will stand up to UNC on Carolina North, but I actually have the record to prove it. I was not afraid to stand up to UNC during my previous time on Council, and I will not be afraid to stand up to it now. If you want experienced, progressive leadership for Chapel Hill vote Bill Thorpe on November 8th.




That also fits in with my recollection of the meeting — that there were several votes on the issue. One of the important things to remember in looking at votes is not to take them in isolation. I recall there were times when I wanted to get concessions on issues and the quid pro quo was to be a team player — my changes might be accepted but then I might be expected to go along with the amended package. I had been off the council for a few months when the Smith Center issue was voted on, but I was at all the public hearings and the meeting the final vote was taken. I remember annoying some University folks at the public hearing by referring several times to the then named “Student Activities Center” as the “Alumni Activities Center”, mainly because so few seats were allocated to students. I recall shortly after that the student seating area was increased. Not that my complaints had anything to do about that change.

(above reposted from a less relevant thread)

Unless there's another shoe to drop, it looks like this one is backfiring on the folks who set out to smear Thorpe. Not only do the minutes vindicate his claim but they show him speaking out in defense of neighborhoods as reported by Jake Potter . It's what every candidate would hope for: that the more you look into his record, the better he looks.

Thanks to the DTH for their research on this.

Yes Dan, and while I may have some problems with the DTH Editorial Board I must say that the City Desk's coverage of the election has been awesome. Far better than in 2003, and far, far better than either of the other two Chapel Hill papers are doing. Thank you to Ted Strong, Jake Potter, Meghan Davis, and Brianna Bishop for the awesome job they are doing!

Well said, Bill.

(Still stuck at work,)

Thanks for the pot-shot, Tom. ;-) But yeah, those fresh-faced folks over on the city desk -- none of the editors are older than 20! -- are doing a good job.

chris, it's not a pot shot if it's backed up;

if you've passed the spelling and grammar exam, you know that none of those editors IS older than 20.

Oh, jeez. I was talking about Tom's comment about the editorial board, and I was kidding.

At any rate, I guess I'm moving up in the world -- I never in a million years thought I'd be the target of ad hominem attacks on OP!

Haha, well I will be more than happy to target you for ad hominem attacks on my blog if you like... it's a step down from OP though :)

Ginny, what is your blog?


Community Guidelines

By using this site, you agree to our community guidelines. Inappropriate or disruptive behavior will result in moderation or eviction.


Content license

By contributing to OrangePolitics, you agree to license your contributions under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License.

Creative Commons License

Zircon - This is a contributing Drupal Theme
Design by WeebPal.