News-Record.com

To respond to this week's question, please click the "Opinion" tab on the home page of the News & Record. You will then find a Question of the Week entry.

Thank you.

What should be done to stop convenience store crime?

The shooting death of Mohammed "Mike" Ali, the co-owner of the Red Mike Grocery in Fisher Park, is just the latest in a long string of tragedies connected with convenience stores in our area. Surely, some of you must have ideas for how the people who run these stores could better protect themselves from being robbed. Won't you share them? Maybe your ideas could help the owners of other stores. Or maybe you have ideas on steps the community or the police could take to make convenience-store crime less likely. We'd like to hear from you.

Why didn't the War Memorial Auditorium bond pass?

The auditorium's situation is dire: Its deteriorating condition could cause it to be shut down in five years.

So why didn't Greensboro voters support it?

Tuesday's editorial:

During October, we offered endorsements in most national, state and local races on Guilford County ballots, as well as tax and bond questions. These aren’t directives. We just ask readers to consider them informed opinions. We only insist that everyone vote.

Here’s a recap. Candidates are designated D for Democrat or R for Republican, except where elections are nonpartisan. We didn’t comment on uncontested races.

U.S. Senate
Kay Hagan, D

U.S. House of Representatives
6th District: Howard Coble, R
12th District: Mel Watt, D
13th District: Brad Miller, D

Governor
Pat McCrory, R

Lieutenant governor
Walter Dalton, D

Attorney generalRoy Cooper, D

Auditor
Leslie Merritt, R

Agriculture commissioner
Steve Troxler, R

Insurance commissioner
Wayne Goodwin, D

Labor commissioner
Mary Fant Donnan, D

Secretary of state
Elaine Marshall, D

State superintendent
June Atkinson, D

State treasurer
Bill Daughtridge, R

State Senate
District 27: Don Vaughan, D
State House
District 58: Alma Adams, D
State House
District 59: No endorsement

Guilford County commissioner
At-large: Paul Gibson, D, and Larry Proctor, R
District 4: Kirk Perkins, D

N.C. Supreme Court justice
Robert H. (Bob) Edmunds Jr.

N.C. Court of Appeals judges
James A. (Jim) Wynn
Sam J. Ervin IV
Doug McCullough
Linda Stephens
John S. Arrowood

Guilford District Court judges
Susan Burch
Robert Enochs
A. Robinson Hassell
Betty J. Brown
Polly D. Sizemore

Guilford County school board
At-large: Michael McKinney
District 3: Darlene Garrett

Guilford County sales tax
For

Greensboro bonds

Street improvements: Yes

War Memorial Auditorium: Yes

Parks and Recreation: No

Housing: Yes

High Point City Council
At-large: Latimer B. Alexander IV and Mary Lou Andrews Blakeney
Ward 2: Julius Clark
Ward 6:John Faircloth

An unintended target
The now-infamous “Godless” TV ad, meant to cast doubts about Kay Hagan’s beliefs, seems to have winged a bystander with Greensboro connections.

Charles Frederick “Rick” Stone III moved to Boston last year to study theology at Harvard Divinity School and attended the fundraiser for Senate candidate Hagan at the home of an atheist activist.

Stone, a Christian, previously taught biblical studies at Greensboro College. Viewers who recognized him in the ad might have been shocked, but Stone told The Independent Weekly of Durham the political event was not a gathering of atheists.

The ad, run by Sen. Elizabeth Dole’s campaign, hit like a shotgun blast, perhaps inflicting more collateral damage than its creators intended.

A fair and equal chance to vote
State and local elections boards made the right decision last week to keep polling places open longer on Saturday, the final early voting opportunity.

Giving everyone a greater chance to vote always should be the goal.

But it’s also important to be fair about it. State board member Chuck Winfree of Greensboro, a Republican, appropriately made that point in discussions last week. If the board was going to allow some counties to extend voting Saturday, he said, it should ask all counties to do so. The board agreed.

What’s the issue? Democrats control the voting mechanism in every county. It wouldn’t be proper if partisan motivations kept polls open longer in counties where Democrats prevail but not in counties where they don’t. Not that such a thing actually would happen, but it was wise to banish the idea.

To the greatest extent possible, all voters deserve a fair and equal chance to get to the polls.

Dog reunited with trooper
Remember the video of the State Highway Patrol officer kicking a work dog and saying that it was part of training?

You’d think that Ricoh would have been separated from the trooper. And for about a year, he was. But the dog is back in Charles Jones’ care. Apparently, Robert Reaves, the trooper who had been taking care of the dog, which is retired, had to go on vacation. So he took Ricoh to Jones a month ago and never retrieved him.

Jones had been fired from the patrol, but a state judge and personnel commission recently ruled he should be reinstated with back pay. Jones argued in court that violent training procedures were common in the canine unit, and troopers testified on his behalf.

This latest twist to the tale should open Jones up to further disciplinary action if he returns to work. The patrol also might want to take a look at Reaves, who signed a contract saying he would provide lifetime care for Ricoh.
At least Ricoh appears healthy.

Payback’s a gas
There was more than bureaucratic bluster to the state Attorney General’s Office’s investigation of North Carolina gas stations for price gouging during Hurricane Ike in September. All told, 36 stations have been subpoenaed. Eight thus far have agreed to pay refunds to customers.
The two latest stations to ante up are located in Ashe and McDowell counties. One of them, the Corner Market on U.S. 221 in Jefferson, raised prices to $5.29 per gallon on Sept. 12. The overcharges to customers there totaled more than $1,600.

A Citgo in Old Fort overcharged customers by more than $1,897, after raising prices to $4.99 a gallon on Sept. 12 and 13.

Customers who paid by credit card would have their accounts credited. It will be harder for those who paid with cash; they’ll have to present receipts or other proof of purchase.

But station owners should think twice the next time they’re tempted to prey on consumers’ anxieties.

In addition to the restitution, each station has been ordered to pay $5,000 in civil penalties.

How would you improve the voting process?

Do you have suggestions for state and local officials on how to ease the voting process? We liked the Guilford Board of Elections' link to early voting poll wait times. It certainly helped voters know which sites had short lines and which had long ones. We also liked that the State Board of Elections decided to allow polling places to extend hours yesterday. What are other steps that could be taken to make it easier to vote? Or do you think the voting system needs to be more restrictive?

Sunday's editorial.

Bad news travels fast. And far.

Even in North Carolina, which has been spared some of the worst ravages of the mortgage crisis, we are not untouched.

Thus far in 2008, Guilford County has seen 3,061 foreclosure starts, a 23 percent increase over last year.

But the credit crunch spawned by the subprime mortgage implosion may be only the beginning.
Another road to easy money, the one paved with plastic, is beginning to close as well.
American Express announced last week that it would cut 7,000 jobs and freeze management salaries. That amounts worldwide to 10 percent of its work force. The cuts will affect the company’s sizable call center in Greensboro, although it was not immediately clear how much.
Amex saw a 24 percent drop in third-quarter profits.

It is not alone.

The New York Times reported last week that the credit card industry wrote off $21 billion in bad debt during the first half of this year. Those losses could mount to $55 billion over the next year. Or worse.

All told, total credit card debt in the United States approaches $950 billion.
And the industry’s problem is our problem.

Tightening the screws
As lenders’ cash flow ebbs, they’ve begun to change the terms and limits of credit cards.
Fewer credit cards are being issued.

Fewer zero-interest offers are available as lures to new customers.
Fewer opportunities to transfer existing balances to lower-interest cards exist as relatively easy outs for overextended borrowers.

This means you’re unlikely to see as many offers for new cards in your mailbox, as many as 13 fewer per household, one direct mail company told the Times.

Maybe that’s not such a bad thing.

But this also means that if you’re deemed a bad enough credit risk, you could lose your existing card, even if your account is current.

Finally, this means as well that it will be harder to qualify for cards in the first place. You’ll need more than an address and a pulse.

A new reality
Credit card issuers should have been using such policies from the start. Instead, they’ve seduced consumers with sexy promotional interest rates that balloon over time and can saddle consumers with hidden fees.

The problem is, times are tough all over, for lenders and borrowers.
As job losses mount, more people have been forced to use credit cards as less of a choice and more of a necessity.

A card that yesterday might have bought a new stereo or a flat screen TV might pay today for groceries or utilities.

The tougher terms couldn’t come at a worse time.

Even consumers with solid credit are being squeezed. Those whose accounts aren’t active enough are finding them closed. Some even are charged higher interest rates or assigned lower borrowing limits, which could lower their credit ratings.

Whose fault is all this? Everyone’s.

The credit card companies are culpable for flooding consumers with offers and keeping them hooked with minimum payments and fees in fine print that keep balances high and maximize interest revenue. The consumers are culpable for spending too much and saving too little.

As one credit card commercial says, using the lyrics of an old Queen song: “I want it all ... and I want it now.”

Credit cards can be useful tools to stretch budgets and ease cash flow. But they also feed our desire to buy now and pay later, often recklessly and impulsively.

Kicking the habit
Those of us who needed to impose more discipline on our buying habits now have an additional incentive: We have to.

At least the crisis has forced healthy change, as painful as it might be.

North Carolina rightly has placed laws on the books to protect consumers from predatory lending practices, including a ban on payday loans and unsavory mortgage lending practices.
It is, in fact, one of the most progressive states in such regulation.

That does not excuse consumers from acting more responsibly.

This includes paying more than the minimum, paying off total balances as soon as possible, curbing reckless spending habits and saving more.

According to the U.S. Commerce Department, the personal savings rate hovers below 3 percent of disposable income. That’s a recipe for trouble.

As a common rule of thumb, we should aim to put away 10 percent of each paycheck for a rainy day.

It’s beginning to pour right now.

Saturday's lead editorial.

Convenience stores aren’t just convenient for customers. Criminals also find them handy. The stores have long hours and most of their transactions are for little items, which translates into lots of cash on hand. Also, their security often isn’t good. No wonder some call them “stop and robs.”

But it doesn’t have to be that way. A concerted effort by convenience store owners and the larger community could reduce these crimes. The recent robberies of C&C Market on Lawndale Drive — two in five days and a third foiled just five days later — underscore the need for Greensboro to consider such an effort.

Dallas did so not long ago, creating a task force made up of mom-and-pop stores, national chains, law enforcement and the larger community. Its recommendations, in August, became the basis for a city ordinance.

It requires convenience stores to be equipped with security cameras, silent alarms, height markers, safes and notices about them. They also must train workers in safety procedures. In addition, owners also must sign statements that give the police more power in dealing with loiterers.

Dallas isn’t the only city with such an ordinance. Houston and Hartford, Conn., have passed similar laws.

Greensboro doesn’t have such a law — and it might not want one exactly like Dallas’. Would small stores here be able to afford expensive security equipment? Then again, C&C already is incurring an expense in hiring private security — a move that on Tuesday thwarted the third robbery attempt.

Still, convening a task force to examine convenience-store crime could prove fruitful. It would enable affected parties to share valuable information, such as that studies show that a convenience store that has been robbed is likely to soon face another attempt. Or that research has found that limiting the money kept in the register will deter 80 percent of robbers. Or that robberies of 7-Elevens dropped 71 percent after that chain began a safety program.

The Greensboro Police Department is giving its all to the C&C robberies. It has suggested ways for the store to improve safety. Extra patrols in the area caught a crime in progress at a nearby coin-operated laundry. The police also are investigating a suspect in Lawndale/Battleground crimes and following other leads.

The department also seems more than willing to help individual stores combat crime. It encourages their managers or owners to call 373-CITY (2489) to speak to a community resource officer about crime prevention.

Still, it’s time to go to the next level on this issue. The city needs to consider more-encompassing approaches to reducing convenience-store crime.

Friday's lead editorial.

On a raw, blustery morning this week, a well-wrapped volunteer in front of the old courthouse in Greensboro was handing cards to early voters. One side named judicial candidates recommended by the Guilford County Democratic Party.

A disclaimer noted: “Not authorized by candidate or candidate committee.”

The candidates named who are running for the N.C. Supreme Court and Court of Appeals are participating in the state’s public campaign financing system and are bound by spending limits. Money spent on their behalf by an independent organization may trigger an awarding of matching funds to their opponents.

That’s one reason why the political parties should stay out of judicial races, which are nonpartisan. When their expenditures are matched from the public fund, it costs taxpayers money.

Spending by the N.C. Democratic Party so far has led the State Board of Elections to grant more than $16,000 in matching funds to each of four statewide judicial candidates who happen to be registered Republicans.

Public funding was intended to put all participating candidates on equal footing financially and to spare them from the sometimes tawdry process of raising money privately. Otherwise, judges could be elected feeling a sense of obligation to those who funded their campaigns.
When independent organizations use their own money to influence voters, they upset the balance and threaten the integrity of the process. Although the candidates themselves don’t direct these expenditures, they can benefit and could be expected to return favors from the bench.

An overworked State Board of Elections staff tries to monitor spending, but the job isn’t easy. When an independent organization like the N.C. Democratic Party exceeds $5,000 in spending, it’s required to report all its outlays within 24 hours, allowing a quick release of matching funds. Spending by smaller groups like a county party unit, however, is harder to keep up with, which means matching funds might not be issued in time.

The amount of public funds allotted for statewide judicial campaigns is modest — $233,000 for Supreme Court candidates and $160,000 for Court of Appeals candidates. It wouldn’t pay for a single postcard mailed to every voter. But the system does guarantee financial independence from special interests and a level playing field. It is meant to make sure that no one can buy a seat on the state’s high courts.

Political parties and other organizations are wrong to throw their money into the mix, and to insert partisanship while they’re at it. North Carolina should preserve integrity in its top judicial races even if nowhere else.

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

It’s official: Mary Easley’s European trips charged taxpayers for “unallowable” and “unreasonable” expenses.

The public knew that from media reports months ago, but an investigation by the state auditor confirms it.

First-class travels by North Carolina’s first lady and state employees to France in 2007 and Russia and Estonia this year yielded bills for luxury hotels, fancy dinners, alcoholic drinks, a linen jacket charged as a meal and a costly chauffeured SUV. The most notable item was a caviar cocktail for $332.

The junkets were arranged by the N.C. Department of Cultural Resources. Easley supports state arts programs, but her official duties overseas were minimal. Her presence, however, seemed to have extended the itinerary and upgraded the travel arrangements to top-of-the-line.
The trouble, as the auditor pointed out, is state policy. Government employees aren’t permitted to charge the state for luxury meals and accommodations. That applies to the first lady, too. It’s strictly prohibited to put alcoholic beverages on the expense account and, of course, to misrepresent a personal clothing purchase as a meal. That was done by the first lady’s former executive assistant, the auditor said.

A spokesman for Gov. Mike Easley said the first lady was asked to go on the trip by Department of Cultural Resources leaders and simply did what they asked — as if she were force-fed caviar on a silver spoon.

Staci Meyer, the department’s chief deputy secretary, said the “unallowed” expenses have been repaid and, after “thoughtful consideration,” the expenditures deemed unreasonable will be, too. Thoughtful consideration for taxpayers would have avoided these expenditures in the first place.

What Mrs. Easley says isn’t known. She didn’t make herself available for an interview by the state auditor.

If she was out of the country, let’s hope the taxpayers don’t get the bill.