News-Record.com

Ready for your close-up?

If you’re a letter to the editor writer who’d prefer to be seen as well as heard, your time (almost) has come.

Early in 2009, the News & Record will begin to “publish” video letters.

What’s a video letter?

It’s a letter you read before a camera for posting on our Web site.

If, for instance, you’ve got a complaint about a noisy intersection, you may choose to shoot your commentary on the scene to make your point more dramatically. The same goes for an eyersore or a cherished landmark that faces possible destruction.

You may record video commentaries on your own and e-mail them to us. Also, we’ll also make occasional days and times available during which you can record your letter in the News & Record’s studio.

As long as your video meets our taste and length guidelines, almost anything goes.
Watch the newspaper for more details in the coming weeks.

But we encourage you to think visually. You don't just have to sit there. Show us and tell us wherever possible.

This is a new concept for us and most newspapers, but hardly an original one.

Here is a look at what they do with video letters at the Orlando Sentinel.

P.S: Don't use the guy who does the nearly 18-minute video letter as a role model. One minute or so is the optimal length.

The long-running controversy surrounding the Greensboro Police Department just got a fresh gust of momentum: Former Police Chief David Wray is suing the city and the city manager.

Wray's lawsuit alleges that the city stripped him of his authority and forced him to resign in 2006 because he is white.

This issue just won't die, even though Wray has moved on to a new job in Tennessee.

The tangle of EEOC complaints and other lawsuits has been hard to unravel and continues to affect some citizens' views of both the police department and city government.

Then again, the Wray lawsuit and other possible legal action related to the case could help bring some degree of closure, by moving the debate from the court of public opinion into a court of law.

Update: Here is a link to Wray's complaint.

Despite his dubious track record at Black Entertainment Television, the National Association of Black Journalists has endorsed Bob Johnson's bid for a new black-oriented cable network.

Richard Prince provides the details here.

Johnson, who owns the Charlotte Bobcats and whose mangling and elimination of BET's news and public affairs offerings are well-known, says this new venture is a different propostiion -- that his next network will, in fact, concentrate on news and public affairs.

I don't believe him.

How many of you read the book Old Yeller when you were kids? smart-alecky slacker Bill Murray asked fellow boot campers in the Army comedy "Stripes."

And how many of you cried when Old Yeller died?

Sheepishly, most of the soldiers in traiing raise their hands.

I could have been one of them.

I'm still struggling to convince my significant other to see the new movie "Marley and Me."

Ever since I was a kid I was a sucker for dog books and dog movies and, of course, real dogs.

Even some of the ones that chase me on my morning jogs.

By my count, one neighborhood dog has chased me more than a hundred times over the past three years.

I have threatened both owners with contacting Animal Control, but they obviously don't believe me. And so far they've been right.

The irony is, they have a fenced-in back yard, but still see a reason to let the dog (a very big one) roam the streets in the mornings.

Then there is this teeny-weeny, white-furred pug that chases me with a squeaky bark that sounds more comical than hostile.

I laughed out loud when the pup came scampering after me the other day, growling with great ferocity ... and wearing a striped sweater.

In neither case have I been bitten.

But there are leash laws in Greensboro and people routinely ignore them. The problem isn't bad dogs ... it's bad dog owners.

The issue surfaced recently in Wake County, where a 40-pound boxer may be put to death for repeated instances of biting people.

The dog's name is Honey but its disposition isn't always so sweet.

The News & Observer of Raleigh reports that Honey may be put down for biting two people and knocking another down, causing him to break his wrist.

The first victim hurt himself in August when the dog lurched at him and he tried to get away.

The second was bitten, also, in August, and successfully sued the owners.

The third was a jogger who was knocked over in December and bitten on the arms and legs.

The family that owns Honey cites not knowing about one of the incidents and not being notified by the county that Honey had been officially classified by the county as dangerous.

That's a lame excuse.

Frankly, it's not Honey's fault that these incidents occurred. The family that owns the dog has been careless and irresponsible.

One incident ought to be enough to convince a dog owner of a dog's potential to do harm, much less three.

Does Honey deserve to die? That's a toughie.

Does she deserve better owners? Absolutely.

We're moving forward on the video letters initiative.

If you already have an idea and want to shoot it yourself, go for it. Remember to keep the length to about a minute.

If you'd like for us to shoot it in the studio, e-mail us at edpage@news-record.com to make an appointment. We'll be shooting letters from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Wednesday, Jan. 14.

There may not be enough slots for everyone, so please make your reservation early.

Call me at 373-7010 or e-mail me at ajohnson@news-record.com if you have questions.

If you're just getting wind of this idea and need more detail, here is an earlier post about it.

This week's column.

The Greensboro City Council will hear the case for and against protest petitions in less than two weeks.

Then it will say no.

I could be wrong. But if I were you, I wouldn’t bet against me.

Greensboro is the only major city in the state that does not allow citizens to use protest petitions to oppose new development in their neighborhoods. The provision allows citizens who live near a proposed development to request a special City Council vote. Simply put, it would raise the bar for approving a disputed rezoning.

If opponents of the zoning manage to produce signatures from owners of at least 5 percent of the adjoining land they would force a super majority (at least a 7-2 vote in favor) of the City Council to approve the rezoning.

The council will decide on Jan. 21 whether to ask Guilford County lawmakers to seek legislation that would revive protest petitions in Greensboro.

Mayor Yvonne Johnson said late last week that she has not made up her mind on the issue. So did council members Trudy Wade and Mary Rakestraw. “I want to hear what everybody has to say,” Johnson said.

Yet she added: “I don’t want to be detrimental as far bringing in businesses.”

Wade said she’ll approach the discussion with an open mind but questioned why one of the biggest advocates for protest petitions in Greensboro is a High Pointer, Keith Brown. “I want to know why it originated in High Point,” she said. Noting High Point’s luring away of the La-Z-Boy headquarters from Greensboro in 2006, Wade said she wanted to make sure Greensboro doesn’t lose a competitive edge.

Update: This e-mail came from Donna Newton of the Neighborhood Congress Saturday night:

"Allen, we had a great turnout for the Congress meeting this morning and attendees were more incensed than ever that Greensboro would have had this state right of redress taken from its residents with no record in Council minutes of a rationale for it. We can only conclude that since it was simply lumped with a group of items on the legislative agenda, it was not clear to those voting as to what they were doing."

... and a middle index finger from the salty lead character, played by Clint Eastwood.

The new film, which finally opened over the weekend, essentially poses the question: What would happen if Dirty Harry retired to a crumbling old Detroit neighborhood, where Asian immigrants now comprise the majority, and gangs threaten the peace?

This is not a great movie, but it is a very good one. And it offers some lessons for Greensboro, which has similar issues in suddenly diverse neighborhoods where some of us fear what we don't understand.

Without spoiling much, I will tell you Eastwood could have opted for a Hollywood ending. To his credit, he does not.

Some of you have asked me about a Jan. 9 letter from Susie Barnes, who rebutted Charles Davenport's Jan. 2 column on his experience in a local hospital.

Some specifically wondered if Barnes is a nurse and if she was threatening Davenport with reprisals, should she end up again in a hospital.

She has e-mailed a follow-up letter and I have since spoken to her on the phone.

We can't publish her letter in the paper, because it violates our 30-day rule (each writer gets a limit of one letter published per month). But I'll post it here, and she has added it as a comment on the letters blog. Here her followup letter is, in its entirety:

"I am Susie Barnes and I am not a nurse. I am in a totally unrelated profession. However, I respect and admire anyone who has chosen nursing as a profession to let Davenport's column go without comment. I have seen how hard nurses work believe they should be treated with more respect than that.

"I also believe that if you have a problem, take it up with the appropriate people. The real point is that it was totally inappropriate for the N&R to publish his column.

"I have since heard from friends who are nurses that there are reasons for some of the things he didn't like. They call out numbers of treatment rooms because using the patient's name is a violation of HPPA. I've also had nurses tell me how much they appreciated my letter. Davenport's columns always tear someone or something down without ever offering a suggestion of how the situation can be changed for the better. His column is a waste of space. The News and Record can do much better than him.

"Susie Barnes

"Note to the editor: I realize that this is in violation of your 30 day policy, but I think it's important that folks know that I am not a nurse. Otherwise, my opinion comes off as sour grapes, which is not true."

Barnes also told she wasn't serious about words she used that may have come across as a threat. They were meant "tongue-in-cheek," she said.

Proponents of protest petitions in Greensboro may have made such a compelling case that Guilford lawamakers may push legislation restoring them here even if the City Council says no.

That's certainly the impression I got Tuesday from state Rep. Maggie Jeffus of Greensboro.
Jeffus, who isn't known for her bluntness, was uncharacteristically direct in a brief interview.

When asked if the county legislative delegation would move forward with a bill to re-establish the right to use protest petitions to Greensboro -- even if the council opposed it -- Jeffus said: "I think probably we will. I'm almost certain a bill will be filed."

Jeffus added: "You pick your battles and I think this is something people want."

Jeffus made her remarks after a presentation by UNC-Chapel Hill School of Government professor David Owens.

Owens, an expert on zoning laws, said lawmakers usually defer to the wishes of a local city council in such cases. But they don't have to.

Owens explained the history and impact of protest petitions in a speech to the League of Women Voters.

Attending the speech in addition to Jeffus was newly elected state Sen. Don Vaughan and City Councii member Goldie Wells.

The Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition adamantly opposes protest petitions, saying they will stall growth and hurt the economy.

But what makes Greensboro so special? The rest of the cities and towns in the state have had protest petitions since 1923 and their economies have survived.

As for whether lawmakers should buck the wishes of the council, if it comes to that, why not?

Ultimately, they represent all of the people in Greensboro and Guilford County, not just the City Council.

On the cusp of a big sports weekend, one fan's 2 cents:

1. Wake Forest is really, really good, maybe better than Carolina. Even as a Tar Heel diehard, the Deacons have made me a believer.

2. Jeff Teague is better than Ty Lawson. And getting better.

3. If I were Jerry Jones of the Cowboys, I'd dump Terrell Owens in a New York minute. He's divisive, he's a distraction and his skills are declining. Right now his overactive lips work better than his hands.

As an avid moviegoer, I've got my share of pet peeves about some of my fellow theater patrons.

Some of them refuse to turn off their cell phones.

Others blithely bump chair backs of the rows in front of them with their feet and legs.

Still others rudely shoot off their mouths while you're trying to hear the movie.

Now some people are shooting guns.

The shooting occurred Friday in the lobby of the Grand 18 at Four Seasons Station. A 32-year-old man was shot twice in the abdomen.

The film "Notorious," about slain rapper Notorious B.I.G., was about to play at the time and its star was present for the showing, but it is not yet clear whether the shooting, which reportedly followed an argument, was connected to the movie.

At the time of this posting, no suspects had been arrested.

Any shooting is unfortunate and unsettling.But you don't expect gunplay near the popcorn counter at your hometown Bijou.

The Grand is a nice theater with a huge, majestic lobby and jumbo auditoriums.

It's a shame its image sullied by somebody's dangerous foolishness.

High Point Road has struggled with crime, some of it real, some of it perceived. This hardly helps.

The shooting also raises the question of gang violence: Did this incident involve gangs?

Also, the new theater was supposed to anchor a new Shops at Friendly Center-style shopping center, but the center's owner, the Koury Corp., has had problems attracting tenants to join the theater.

A major part of the problem: High Point Road's image as unsavory and unsafe.

Meanwhile, the Carmike 8 in High Point now prohibits the admission of 18-year-olds to weekend movies unless accompanied by an adult. This follows an incident in which younger moviegoers threw food and rocks.

More fuel for the home theater movement.

There are other implications, none of them good.

This week's column.

The county commissioners’ annual retreat is set for Jan. 26.

But who needs a retreat?

Steve Arnold and Skip Alston are doing just fine on their own.

Let’s see ... thus far Alston, chairman of the Guilford County commissioners, and Arnold, the vice chairman, have gotten rid of the county manager, eliminated the deputy manager’s position (while he was in it) and forced out the county attorney.

They’ve vowed to reshape county government in their image. And they’ve managed to do most of this without talking to at least some of their fellow commissioners or the media.

“It’s frustrating to have to wonder what they’re slipping and doing next,” said Commissioner Billy Yow, a Republican who is one of the loudest critics of Alston’s and Arnold’s tactics.
Why are they conducting the county’s business this way? Because they can.

They’ve built a bloc of six votes on the 11-member board. As they see it, they don’t need no stinkin’ news media ... or those other five votes, either.

I agree with Ed Cone:

If City Council members Trudy Wade and Mike Barber are serious about the idea they floated Friday about establishing a police review board in Greensboro — with subpoena power — it could make for some downright bizarre bedfellows.

During a news conference, Wade and Barber rattled off a long list of proposals.

But their review board idea stood out. It is an idea that has been pushed and pushed against for years now, primarily in the African American community.

The death of an emotionally disturbed African American man, Daryl Howerton, sparked a review board campaign several years ago.

Two officers fatally shot Howerton, 20, as he was waving a knife, in a tense standoff on Phillips Avenue in 1994.

Howerton had refused repeated police requests to put down the knife.

The case became a rallying cry from the Rev. Nelson Johnson and others. They said it provided positive proof that the city needed a review board because of deep-seeded distrust of police in the black community.

Now the idea is sparked by the ouster of former Police Chief David Wray, who has filed a lawsuit alleging that he was forced to resign because he is white.

The city’s Human Relations Commission already operates a Citizen Complaint Review Board, but critics say it is neither independent nor tough enough.

The Pulpit Forum and Wray supporters may find themselves on the same team -- not to mention the Truth and Reconciliation folks as well..

If these groups agree that a common goal outweighs their obvious differences, the review board idea could gain more traction than ever before.

And David Wray and Nelson Johnson could become ... hermanos?

The new president gave a rousing and skillful inaugural address Tuesday.

It was tough and diplomatic.Hard-edged and warm-hearted.

He clearly recognizes the enormity of the task ahead, and he wants us to know that it will take time and sacrifice to fix all that’s broken.

I especially give Obama points for his direct appeal to Muslims and his warning to America’s enemies about our resolve.

And for his warning that government doesn't have all the answers. Nor should it.

Good start. Now comes the hard part.

The City Council will weigh in on the question of protest petitions in Greensboro tonight.

A word to the wise: Just say yes.

Anyone (including Robbie Perkins) who can sit there in good conscience and tell people here they don't deserve a right granted in every other city in the state since 1923 will have a whole lot of splainin' to do if and when he runs for mayor.

I promised this earlier this morning. Here is a link to the News & Record's coverage of the Chief Wray issue.

Following a hot debate on an icy cold night, the City Council voted unanimously Wednesday to support returning the right of protest petitions to Greensboro residents. Sort of.

In a fuzzy motion following a lively debate, the council endorsed restoring the tool -- provided representatives of the real estate and building industry and the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress can come to terms on the particulars.

Greensboro is the only city in the state that doesn't allow protest petitions. The City Council quietly asked and received an exemption from state lawmakers in 1971. No one seems to know why or how this occurred, or why it was done with zero public discussion.

There was plenty of public discussion Wednesday night.

Some City Council members expressed concern with the current state law, which allows the owners of 5 percent of adjoining land to a proposed rezoning to request a super-majority vote of the council (7-2 in Greensboro) to approve that rezoning.

Marlene Sanford, president of the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition, called the law "the tyranny of the minority" while other opponents, all of whom represented the building and real estate industry, called it "un-American" and a threat to the economy.

Proponents argued that they deserved what residents of all other cities in the state enjoy: a fighting chance to have their voices heard and respected in disputes against real estate interests.

In a clever PowerPoint presentation, blogger David Wharton cited the influence industry interests wield on city boards and its power to hire attorneys and lobbyists.

The main recourse of average residents? asked Wharton. Then a pair of praying hands flashed on the screen.

The bad news is that Wednesday's vote lacked clarity and is missing the most critical aspects of the law: exactly what it will say.

What if the parties (primarily Sanford and Donna Newton, adviser to the Neighborhood Congress) can't agree on the specifics?

The good news is that both women flatly predicted success.

"We'll work it out," Newton said.

The City Council will hold a special meeting Tuesday to revisit the question of a proposed new five-story mixed-use building on South Elm Street.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I think it’ll work just fine in that spot.

The council should say yes to incentives for the project and resolve a dispute with neighbors over parking spaces.

And it should to stop trying to conduct such sensitive business after midnight, when most normal human beings are punchy, weary and anything but clear-headed.

Kay Yow has lost her long battle with cancer at age 66.

She battled the disease with the same drive and focus she expected from her N.C. State women's basketball team I'm glad I got to see her in person at the ACC women's tournament.

What courage and grace.

Here's one Carolina alum who admits his admiration.

This week's column.

I attended the rap biopic “Notorious” last week and I am pleased to report that no one was shot.
In fact, the most discomfort I felt in the theater was clearly being the oldest person there. By light years.

“Notorious” chronicles the short, tragic life of the supersized rap impresario known on the stage and in record stores as Biggie Smalls — or the Notorious B.I.G.

Named Christopher Wallace in real life, Smalls displayed a rare talent for fresh, edgy rhymes and rose quickly in the fickle world of rap music under the guidance of rapper/producer Sean “Puffy” Combs.

Before being fatally wounded in a drive-by shooting. He was only 24.

Raised by a single mother (Angela Bassett), Smalls, played by a remarkable newcomer, 33-year-old Jamal Woolard, found his inspiration on the hard streets of Brooklyn.

Nerdy and overweight as a boy — and an “A” student — he found solace and acceptance as a rapper. Then, when he grew older, as a drug dealer.

Following a prison sentence, he steadily built a reputation as a performer and scored a contract with Combs.

Rightly or wrongly, Smalls saw his fame and sales soar. He also achieved a reputation (real or imagined) for feuding with West Coast rappers.

It ultimately cost him his young life.

Now his movie has gotten its own bad rap in Greensboro.

A 32-year-old man was shot twice in the abdomen Jan. 24 in the lobby of Grand Theatre Four Seasons Station 18. At press time, no arrest had been made but someone had to have seen something.

How utterly confusing was the City Council's vote on protest petitions last week?

Even city PR staffers were perplexed.

Here's the first account, in the city's e-mail newsletter, City Connections:

Greensboro residents' exemption from the right to file protest petitions over rezoning issues has caused much debate in our community. At its meeting on Wednesday, January 21, City Council discussed the issue in depth and agreed to consider adding that issue to the legislative agenda.

The protest petition, which is granted under state law, says if five percent of property owners in an area sign a rezoning petition, a supermajority of Council must say yes to approve it. Greensboro was exempted from the law in 1971.

To get the ball rolling on restoring the petition, Council requested that the Greensboro Neighborhood Congress and real estate industry representatives develop a compromise version of the petition for consideration in February. If Council approves that version, it will be sent to the state legislature as part of the City's legislative agenda.

Here's a clarification, sent hours later:

At Wednesday night's City Council meeting, the Council voted to ask the State Legislature to reinstate the protest petition for residents of Greensboro. Separately, Council asked the Neighborhood Congress, the League of Women Voters, and TREBIC to try to reach an agreement on changes that could make both sides comfortable with the legislation, specifically in the percentage of nearby property owners required to trigger the supermajority vote. If that agreement is reached by February 3, it will be submitted as a local bill along with the request to reinstate the protest petition in Greensboro.

Even council members say they didn't fully understand what happened last week.

A simple yes or no vote was all that was needed, without asterisks. There is little evidence to support that the law needs to be changed.

Yeah, I know, Greg LeMond and Lance Armstrong once raced here in the Tour DuPont.

But I am having trouble envisioning the Cycling Hall of Fame in Greensboro.

Until this week, I didn't even know there was a Cycling Hall of Fame.

Forgive me if I sound flip or cynical. I don't mean to.

While I respect and appreciate the efforts Neil Belenky and others who are heading an initiative to bring the hall here from Somerville, N.J.,I have been trying to picture the concept. I'm still trying.

I am trying to picture exactly what such a hall would look like and what it would contain.

I am trying to understand why it would be worth as much as a $200,000 investment a year for four years to get up and running.

And I am trying to imagine the target audience for such an endeavor.

Oddly, the organizers of the effort have no projected figures on economic impact or the number of visitors.

Meanwhile, I did take time to check out a Cycling Hall of Fame Web site, which describes itself as "dedicated to preserving the history of cycling's greatest races and the riders who rode them." I can't tell if it is affiliated with the brick-and-mortar hall.

But I did discover there that "Henri Van Leberghe was born on this date in 1891. He died on April 10, 1966.

"The Belgian rider won one of the five monuments in cycling."

Um, OK.

That said, more downtown attractions are always a good thing.

I'm keeping an open mind but I need to know a lot more.

Here's an ethical dilemma: That unidentified California mother who gave birth this week to eight babies already has six children at home.

She chose to take fertility treatments to help prompt her latest pregnancy.

She lives with her parents and her family previously filed for bankruptcy and abandoned a home, CBS News reports.

Should she have been allowed to take fertility treatments under those circumstances?

My initial reaction is no.

Should she have been prescreened psychologically before the treatments. Absolutely.

Then again, it is her family and her choice.

Is it anyone else's business?