Archive for the Uncategorized Category

A reminder of how District Two serves District One

Posted in Uncategorized on November 4, 2012 by seaweavermarine

Here is the  County link to the expansion of the County Commission Referendum of 2006.

The Question and Answer component NEVER addresses the fact that the most populace District will always control the Board due to their population advantage and thus ALL Board members pander to D1.  (perhaps to attain the HC benefits provided to County Reps… that district one rebelled against… when their Town Counsel tried to snare the same Health Care benefits for life…)
Actually this is not the part that is UN-constitutional to the NC Constitution…it is the disparity of representatives in a electi0n cycle. This year D1 has 3 choices, D2 has 2.
Standing and speaking to people waiting in line at Carrboro Early Voting,  no one thought this consolidation of power in one district was fair or equitable…and everyone was holding a blue democrat sample ballot. Many said they would vote for me. I asked them to do so, or abstain.
I ask ALL district One voters to do the same.

This is a sham of an election structure.
Here, Democrat Citizen Will agrees (from 2006)


Daily Tar Heel Questionnaire

Posted in Uncategorized on October 24, 2012 by seaweavermarine


Name: Chris Weaver

Age: ?

Town/City: Caldwell

Career/Occupation: Self employed Marine Contractor

Political Affiliation: Republican

Political Career: I have Zero Years of Bureaucratic training.


If elected, what are your top three goals you want to accomplish during your term?
1. End the gerrymandered structure that allows for district interference in the Commissioner Election process. The result of which is the entire Board catering to the larger voter base of one district.

2. Expand Economic development

3. Reduce Taxes and Regulation

What makes you a better candidate than your opponent?

There never has been a Republican elected to the commission in this county’s history. A famous leader once said, “If everyone is thinking the same thing, no one is thinking”. This applies to governing bodies as well. If everyone on the Board thinks the same way, there will be no change in Orange. The political make up of the board is going to shift hard to the ideological left when the unchallenged commissioners arrive from Chapel Hill. As a token Republican for diversity’s sake I would not be alter the balance of principles, but I can provide a voice for a large population that has been marginalized in the county and provide an ideological check.

What is your opinion on the proposed transit plan?
The Light rail portion is an albatross. It will confiscate resources from an otherwise good Bus plan. The Light Rail is track is minimal in Orange County but will absorb the bulk of Local, State and National taxpayer monies. It is funded by a Legacy Tax that will never end and property owners of this county will pay for it in their sleep. The Proponents of the Rail have been selling the plan to Students who will not pay the tag fees as they own no vehicles or are not required to register them in Orange. The supposed economic development along the scant 4 miles in Orange will face the First District’s historical hostility towards growth, and will never offset the costs of the portion in Orange AND the portion in Durham that Orange citizens will be responsible for.

How would you increase economic development and the local economy?
Less taxes + less regulation = more economic freedom. It’s pretty simple but it works every time it is tried. We have dedicated economic development zones, but prospective industry still must contend with our 700 pages of regulatory restrictions and our soon to be 4th highest property taxes in the state. This makes it near impossible to compete with neighboring counties who have only 70 pages of regulations and greatly reduced property taxes. Water and sewer alone are not strong enough magic to overcome a mountain of red tape. Taxes and regulation that drive industry to sit outside of our borders must be addressed and fast as we are rapidly loosing share. The Walmarts, Cabelas, Tanger Outlets, and Malls strategically avoid Orange for the sole reason that it makes good business sense to avoid Orange. If it practical for retail, it is practical for other industry except Non Profits which can avoid the Taxation. If I am hired to serve the Citizens to the Board of Commissioners, it would send a signal of change in Orange to the business world. I will not be able to push the door open with out help, but business leaders would know there is someone trying to open the door.

How would you diversify Orange County’s tax base, which is predominantly generated by property taxes?

As I noted, less taxes and less regulation will accomplish this. If for nowhere else, the economic development districts must have greatly reduced burdens of both to attract industry. The key is not allowing Government to spend the tax revenues generated by increased development, but make sure the monies are returned to the citizen in greatly reduced taxes.

What is your plan for remediation in the Rogers-Eubanks community?  Do you have any plans beyond the water and sewage hookups that have already been promised?

Fix it.  The government that created and poisoned the land, and then made 40 years of promises should not wait another day. As local governments quibble about who owes what, time is wasted. Orange County should do exactly as the regular citizen does when short on money, sell something.

Orange County has been in the land buying business and owns prime real estate that can be sold to offset the costs of such an egregious mistake. The land must be made safe if possible in addition to the water and sewer improvements. If the costs and the risk of opening up a superfund site in trying to re-mediate the soil then selling prime real estate should perhaps become trading prime real estate. The Blackwell property is large enough and not to far removed.

Pro Train Tax Forum at UNC

Posted in Taxes and Managment, Transit, Uncategorized on October 9, 2012 by seaweavermarine

It snowed last Monday night in Howell Hall on the UNC Campus. Light Rail Proponents ( former students), sought to bond with the meager crowed assembled for an “overview” of the proposed light rail tax noted it was wonderful the school finally installed AC in the hall. It was not required last night. It was below 50 degrees outside and the snow job broadcast to the audience to sell the Light Rail Tax to students was enough to put a chill into any real taxpayer of Orange County.
Only the happy aspects were presented. The Triangle Transit Treasurer doubling as the Orange County Commission Chairwoman, the Leader of the Sierra Club, Chapel Hill’s Chamber of Commerce Director, and an Author of a book on the Triangle were present.

Each had about a fifteen to twenty minute power point presentation touting all the wonderful things the Tax could do. Only the rosiest projections were cast except for when fear was required to make a pitch.

That fear came in the form of a projected 1.7 million new people moving to the “Triangle” and how best to cope with their transportation needs. The problem for me, was the Triangle Transit wiz and author of the “everything you want to know about the Triangle” book, could not tell the crowd what was going to draw this mass of humanity to Orange County.
What rate of growth in Orange is projected to accommodate this mass? He could not answer. Orange County has been run by one party for 122 years. It is historically hostile to any private development or industry. What sea change in philosophy could possibly occur to allow for industry and housing to build on a scale to accept or even attract this projected influx of people? Again, the guy who wrote the book had no answer. I can only suppose he had not taken into account the political history of the county or the election structure that allows a “Progressive” district to dictate the course of the entire county. Perhaps he had not considered a 700 page Unified Development Ordinance(regulations) that is 100 times larger than our neighboring county.The Chairwoman for Orange County said nothing about this massive regulatory hurdle being amended for the Economic development districts…what’s the point short of location?

My question as to the 200% increase in Tag Tax in relation to a populace that votes for the Transit Tax (and thus the Tag Tax) and their ability to avoid not paying the Tag tax as the bulk of students have cars registered out of state… was met with no satisfactory answer, but I did note the Triangle Director giving instructions to the “moderator” to shut down the meeting after the weak attempt.

I’m still not certain who proposed this meeting this meeting; it was published electronically 23 hours before it occurred. Beside the cast I mentioned, the Director and Planners of Triangle Transit were also present as well as at least two reporters and one  Pro Rail campus organizer. As far as I could tell I was the only opposition to the Rail Plan in attendance. Other County Commissioners I spoke to were not aware that it was taking place neither was a great portion of the public.

This was a targeted sales pitch to one select group of voters and in the interest of “transparency” it was released to one electronic media outlet at 8pm on a Sunday. Triangle Transit had enough notice to have 3 of their top brass in attendance. The Treasurer of Triangle Transit and Orange County Board Chair Bernadette Pelissier had notice to pull together a power point presentation as did Aaron Nelson, President of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce.

This is how Government works in Orange County. When a tax is needed, it knows where to curry votes. Drop some snow on the steep slopes of any lecture hall on UNC Campus… blow it around to hide the pitfalls and only invite your “friends”.
I am not anti-public transit. I am anti Light Rail. The Federal Transit Administration Data shows it is a failure and a burden to every local economy that implements it and to our In Debt Nation as a whole that foots the greater portion of the bill.

Government “transparency” makes the snow job hard to see in this picture

Orange County Residents pulling the Light Rail Load for the greater “Triangle”

New Tax Would Do Next to Nothing to Relieve Congestion

Posted in Uncategorized on October 5, 2012 by seaweavermarine


Oct. 4th, 2012

RALEIGH — Orange County voters will decide in November whether to raise taxes on themselves to help “invest” $1.4 billion toward construction of 17 miles of transit line that would have a miniscule impact on traffic congestion and air pollution.

Transit supporters don’t highlight this fact. A draft plan written by the area’s transit and regional planning agencies provides glowing verbiage about rail transit’s benefits. “These investments would positively impact traffic congestion,” it proclaims.

But promises of a “positive impact” on congestion have not panned out in other cities that have wasted billions of taxpayer dollars on rail transit. Of the 33 U.S. cities with some form of rail transit, only six account for more than 1 percent of the passenger miles traveled in the region, and 22 carry less than one-half of 1 percent. Does Orange County want to be like San Jose, where rail makes up 0.42 percent of passenger miles traveled? How about Denver (0.44 percent) or Dallas (0.26 percent)?

Perhaps North Carolina is better-suited to rail transit. Some cite Charlotte as a great rail success story that Orange County should follow. But Charlotte’s light rail cost about $561 million — more than double the initial estimates — and accounts for a whopping 0.07 percent of all passenger miles traveled in the region. Has that “investment” significantly reduced traffic congestion and air quality? Hardly.

In addition, ridership on Charlotte’s light rail peaked in July 2008 and has declined almost 15 percent since. It costs taxpayers more than $40 for the average commuter to go to and from work each day. The light rail uses more than twice the energy per passenger mile as a Toyota Prius. Do Orange County residents really want to pay higher sales taxes and vehicle registration fees for abysmal results like this?

Orange County rail transit supporters argue that state and federal taxpayers will pick up 75 percent of the construction costs. In today’s political climate, that is a very risky bet. The U.S. House opposes funding additional rail projects; a recent compromise transportation bill included funding — with tighter eligibility standards — only because of the Senate’s demands.

Given the new standards, Orange County’s size and population density, and the project’s cost, it is unlikely federal funds would be forthcoming. State funds are also questionable. The General Assembly is looking long and hard at funding rail projects, especially as unemployment remains high and state budget dollars scarce.

Wake County commissioners recently cited economic factors, and concerns about high costs and small benefits, in rejecting a plan to place a transit tax on Wake’s ballot. In late July, Atlanta-area voters rejected a proposed 1-cent sales tax to fund transportation projects that many thought were top-heavy on costly transit extensions.

Even Charlotte’s light-rail expansion plans are in trouble. The planned Red Line running north from the Queen City to Iredell County ran into a brick wall when Iredell commissioners voted unanimously to reject a creative financing plan based on tax increment financing. Commissioners also heeded warnings from national experts who questioned the proposal. Meanwhile, the Blue Line running to the University of North Carolina at Charlotte campus is likely to run over budget, if it is funded at all. The city also recently dropped a capital plan that included a proposed $119 million streetcar.

If Orange County voters want a transportation plan that provides relief from traffic congestion, they will vote against new taxes and fee increases. They will send county government planners back to the drawing board. Rail transit will do nothing to address the area’s real transportation needs.

Sanera recently retired as director of research and local government studies at the John Locke Foundation

Meet the Conservative Candidates Sept 20th

Posted in Uncategorized on September 18, 2012 by seaweavermarine

Meet the Conservative candidates at the Cedar Grove Ruritan Club Sept 20 6-7 pm
6116 Efland-Cedar Grove Rd
Cedar Grove, NC 27231

Mountain to Sea Trail and the Rights of Citizens

Posted in Uncategorized on August 15, 2012 by seaweavermarine

I have no issue with trails especially when they already exist. But these additional trails force many questions that need to answered definitively rather than be allowed to proceed by   the “appearance” of cohesion on the party of the community.

That said, I thought this “Open House” was a horrible format to answer questions to the community. It is nice to mill around and gather insight but a formal Q&A is needed. This “Open House” follows the Rand Corporation’s prescription for “Guiding community Consensus”. There was no unified Q&A session were all citizens could ask questions and collectively hear the answers. Spread around the room voicing questions and concerns limits the ability for all to participate in unified dissemination of answers. By receipt of questions on paper, those in charge answer those questions they choose. When I asked Rick Shaw if there was to be a Collective Q&A where we might all hear… he said no.

One of my greatest concerns in the advancement of this Trail Plan is the issue of Riparian Rights.

When looking back at the Final SOCF Guide from 2000 and the precursor 1999 Measuring Sustainability index, control of all surface water is readily apparent goal. This trail, complicit or not, provides a mechanism to further that goal set out 14 years ago. These are New Alternate trails (not mentioned in the article), and all follow watersheds. Add to this the Best Management Practices of fencing off streams by farmers via State programs further ads a layer of separation between the landowner and a critical resource that is vital to agriculture.

The map provided has future “alternate trails” all over the county….all follow every watershed.

As farmers and landowners allow degrees of separation between themselves and resources on their land, they should be acutely aware of what they a ceding and to whom …and the difficulty of remediation in the future. These same controlling entities are the very same ones that had the idea to place meters on your wells not too long ago.

Also not mentioned in the article and what was poorly and confusingly addressed at the meeting, was the issue of Liability. In today’s culture this is huge. How are land owners to be protected? Is the State (our tax dollars flow from the state to MTST), The County going to provide an Indemnity Contract to the landowners? This is critical component I would demand.

What of property devaluation due to easements? On a Real Market level people moving to the rural areas are not doing so to be next to a public 24/7 access trail. This will affect market value. Will this be reflected in the Taxes? Given the Counties choice to continue taxing Orange at an inflated market value by not proceeding with a revaluation, I would guess every “Opt in” land owner would have to demand a revaluation individually.

What happens during Hunting Seasons? MTS folks already have stumbled into coyote hunters while flagging private property with out permission. During Hunting season will Hikers be required to wear 500 square inches of Safety Orange?

The citizens of this county need a General Hearing so that Questions may be asked and answered to a sufficient standard rather than have cheery picked questions and answers meted out. It also be nice to know that Sovereign Rights of our Citizens do not take a back seat to the goals established by non Sovereign entities through Active Membership by our local Governments.

1999 Measuring Sustainability index….

SOCF Master Guide

The United Nations Planning Branch ICLEI (Orange is a dues paying Member) Planning guide with similar water control goals.(this is but one guide)

The Prepared report for OC from ICLEI  with general goals of  water control.

As a side note:
There may yet be another angle for The MTST push for alternate routes.
Orange county has is near maxing out it’s limitations on the 2009 Nutrient loading regulations and thus imposing limits on Development. As Developers (…the right Developers) and League of Municipalities have been able to forestall reaching the cut off limits for their activities by manipulating the state legislature into NOT protecting farms (along the water sheds) and thus allowing the farm land to become a Nutrient “sink” (via restrictions on fertilizer and animal count ), acquisition of easements along the streams under the pretenses of Nature Trails, further ads a margin of Buffering  to stave off  reaching this critical Nutrient Loading threshold on our water sheds….and putting the breaks on all development.

Geology has not worked in the favor of salesmen. Orange County and the Triangle have been marketed around the nation for decades. Nitrogen and P04 run off is near Federal max due to soil composition. To continue what is in development, or future development, biological sinks are needed to retain nutrient. Who is between(down hill) of the sources and the streams were data is collected? Individuals and their private property
The interests that have sold this area require more time to complete their objectives by any means. The MTST alternate routes especially those east of Chapel Hill can be seen as a time extending device (nutrient absorbing device…). Kinda like leaving the lights on a bit longer on the sales lot.

The proposed trail and future alternates Link below. (note: in my hypothesis above, the biological sinks west of Carrboro are immediately addressed for developers/nutrient loading limits by laws and regulations to drive those farmers out. As it appears they fail by design,  automatic ETJ annexation continues west towards the primary proposed MTST.


OC Employee Benefits and Commissioners Free HC for Life?

Posted in Taxes and Managment, Uncategorized on June 19, 2012 by seaweavermarine

Note: A funny thing happened on the way to the Forum and I was not able to attend and read this letter to the BoCC.

Tonight the BoCC will address the looming costs of it’s benefits and compensation packages that in comparison to private industry, as well as the current healthcare bill is extremely generous. The current benefit packages offered by Orange County are not self sustainable for future growth and vitality.  Fortunately everyone understands the tenuous position this places us in and tonight the County Manager and the BoCC are attempting to address these increasing liabilities.  There is a change being proposed to mitigate some of the costs by changing the employment criteria from 10 years to 20 years to be eligible for retirement benefits.  I’m pleased the Manger and the Board have sought to curtail costs and ensure responsible spending of our tax dollars, however, please consider there are some interesting highlights of this proposed action and of the existing plan itself.

First, in the new plan the dramatic increase of doubling employment requirement from 10 years to 20 may be conceived by employees as unfair and excessive. This is not a moral booster to new hires. The County is currently benefiting from a down economy when there are fewer options for employment opportunities. Realistically however, many could look for new opportunities as the economy recovers leaving gaps in our county roster that will be costly to fill. In speaking to a board member of the North Carolina Business Group on Health, there are a number of structural changes that could be made to save the county and the tax payers money and at the same time reduce present and future liabilities that will be better received by current and future employees and not partition them as drastically in terms of their benefit package

Another interesting feature of the old and new plan is the provision for health benefits to part time employees who are receiving the same benefits as full time employees. This doubles the cost to the county and exceeds the requirements set forth in Obamacare. (if deemed constitutional at the time of this reading( it was as a Tax)). This is very generous feature that must be paid for by the county and thus the taxpayer.

The last and personally most interesting feature of both the new and old plan is the exclusion of County Commissioners from the same requirements. Currently the Commissioners may work one day to receive benefits for life much like the US Congress and this is not slated to change. This is a rich feature for any company much less a government in any economy.

The Commissioners should really address this issue tonight. The BoCC should at minimum consider adopting the new employment eligibility standard offered to the county employees for themselves and grandfather in only those members no longer on the board.

Serving the citizens in the capacity of a representative should not come with a parachute. To be able to vote on major changes to any county employee’s benefit package and not address the comfortable security in which the voting members of the Board are wrapped in is a considerable conflict of interest as well as unconscionable to both the employees of the County and the taxpayers harnessed to bear this cost.


The new rule passed with out a mention of the Commissioners Parachute. There was however great emphasis placed on the Generous Plan and how new hires who serve 20 years will enjoy this “significant benefit”, this  “generous benefit”, this …“(one of) the best benefits packages out there…”

But no one touched the benefits package of the Commissioners themselves.

Commissioners Pkg Link (pg11-12)