Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 23:23:35 -0400
From: Jan Nichols <>
Subject: Five questions voters need to answer to make their choice between opposing County Commissioner slates
Before reporting further on the extreme policy positions of the Tea Party inspired challengers to the incumbent commissioners, The Chatham Coalition poses five questions that each voter should seek answers to before casting their vote for County Commissioner candidates. These questions are a tool for choosing between continuing on the progressive path of our current commissioners or making a 180-degree reversal with the libertarian, tea party influenced direction their opponents would take.
1. Do you believe that the county board’s policies are moving the county in the right direction or the wrong direction? This is critical in any voter’s choice this fall since a majority of the current board is seeking re-election.
Coalition answer: Yes
2. The three incumbents seeking re-election, George Lucier, Carl Thompson, and Tom Vanderbeck, ran on a specific policy platform: sustainable economic development, improved educational funding and quality, open government, environmental protection, and smart and balanced growth. (In addition to their individual platform statements, See the 2006 Coalition platform which they endorsed and upon which we supported their candidacies ) Did they keep their promises to the voters, and work to implement that platform?
Coalition answer: Yes.
3. A self-described conservative slate of candidates is challenging the three incumbents. The conservative slate says Chatham needs to change direction 180 degrees. They want to make massive spending cuts that will overturn the current board’s investment strategy for bringing jobs to the county. They oppose the Siler City/Pittsboro to Chapel Hill bus. They want to eliminate the affordable housing, green building and sustainable energy, sustainable communities, transportation, obesity prevention and human relations staff positions. They feel private property owners deciding how they will use their land is the best way to manage growth and protect the environment. Do you support this type of dramatic change in the county government policies?
Coalition answer: No.
4. This conservative slate has taken a number of their specific policy positions from the radically libertarian John Locke Foundation (JLF). For example, at a recent conservative candidates forum sponsored by a group entitled “Western Chatham Citizens for Change,” the featured speaker was from JLF. In the property section of Pamela Stewarts’ website, she provides links to three John Locke articles or policy briefs to support her opposition to smart growth and the proposed effort to protect the rural character of our highway corridors. She indicates she agrees with fellow slate member Brian Bock concerning his “flex growth” alternative, which is copied word for word from a John Locke policy document. JLF spokesmen have argued on their behalf in the county on public policy questions. Thus, the question is, do you want to put in office candidates who will be utilizing the libertarian JLF as their policy advisors? (NOTE: More details on this in subsequent newsletter. But feel free to check on policies section of the JLF website to see if you agree with their public policy ideas?
Coalition Answer: No.
5. The conservative slate makes numerous vague and expansive campaign promises. Bock has said he wants to reduce the county budget by 15-21% over three years. The slate has said it will eliminate wasteful spending. They have not defined the spending they will cut to equal 21% of the budget. This slate has said they want to eliminate overly burdensome regulations on small business though they’ve not cited a single county regulation they will eliminate or modify. They said they would manage growth responsibly by allowing private landowners to make all decisions about how they will use their land. They have not spelled out how this will work or any example of another community that successfully carried out turning over all land use regulations to private property owners. In contrast, Lucier, Thompson and Vanderbeck provided a fairly detailed set of policy proposals they planned to put into place if they were elected. Now you can judge whether they implemented those policies based on their record in office. Do you believe that the conservative Bock led slate should have to spell out the details of their policies before voters should even consider taking a risk of voting for them?
Coalition Answer: Yes.
If you answered these questions the same way we did, then we need your help…
Jan Nichols
Chair