News-Record.com

The governor's office isn't going to get public records laws right unless it first gets serious about honesty and openness.

Gov. Mike Easley last month asked senior assistant Franklin Freeman, a former N.C. Supreme Court justice, to lead a review of policies regarding the handling of e-mails by state agencies.
Freeman's committee, which includes retired News & Record managing editor Ned Cline, has its work cut out for it unless the governor shows he's willing to respect the public's right of access to public documents.

The e-mail issue was raised by Debbie Crane, a former public information officer with the state's Department of Health and Human Services who alleged the governor's office sent instructions to routinely delete electronic messages among state agencies.

A spokesman for the governor called Crane a liar.

It owes her an apology. Notes from other public information officers turned over to The News & Observer of Raleigh record similar instructions.

"Public records request -- increasing -- careful of email -- delete emails to/from gov. office everyday," one reads.

A lawyer for the governor, Andrew Vanore, downplayed the significance of the notes, telling The News & Observer their meaning "could be interpreted a number of different ways. ..." He also said he directed the officers who took the notes not to speak to reporters about their interpretations.

The meaning seems clear enough. The governor's office wants to keep its communications with state agencies away from the eyes of the media and the public. It can't produce public records upon request if they no longer exist. That's not just evasive; it's deceitful. It allows officials to tell the public there are no records when in fact there should be records. Worse, it makes it easier for them to issue false information that otherwise might be contradicted by official records. At the very least, deleting records fosters suspicion of state officials -- who, after all, are demonstrating their distrust of the public by denying access to inside information.

It's true that electronic communications complicate public records issues. State government can generate millions of e-mails each year, putting the pencil-pushing bureaucrats of the past to shame. A review of policies is overdue and ought to produce recommendations for better ways to allow full interaction among agencies while protecting public access. Freeman is well qualified to head this effort.

But the best ideas will be wasted unless the governor pledges that government officials will tell the truth and make openness a fundamental principle ... starting in his office.

Amanda reports today about a little movement in Greensboro to initiate public financing for city council elections.

We'd need a whole lot of convincing to go along with that.

We'd have to be convinced that ...

Private campaign money is a corrupting influence on a significant scale ...

The candidate with the most money almost always wins regardless of other circumstances or abilities ...

Taxpayers -- only 20 percent of whom even vote in a good year -- want to pay for city council campaigns.

We're working on an editorial. What's your opinion?

Thursday's lead editorial

Fifty years ago, on April 3, 1958, the North Carolina Board of Education approved establishing an industrial education center in Guilford County.

Classes training sock and upholstery workers in High Point had caught the attention of Guilford leaders, and they wanted a place that could train more people to work in local businesses. The Guilford County commissioners provided a vacant tuberculosis sanatorium in Jamestown.

Industry donations and $50,000 in state money turned it into a training institute.

A half-century and many expansions and bond referenda later, Guilford Technical Community College is arguably one of the county's strongest assets. It both shapes and serves the community and acts as an industry drawing card.

The college is spending much of the week celebrating its golden anniversary. Tonight's gala at the Koury Convention Center will highlight the college's accomplishments and plans — everything from its aviation-related training to its Larry Gatlin School of Entertainment Technology. Gatlin even will honor GTCC by performing at the coliseum Saturday night.

The entire county, not just GTCC, has much to celebrate. Perhaps more than any other local institution of higher education, GTCC has defined its mission by focusing on the community's needs. Over the years, it has prepared thousands to work in local industry or to go on to four-year schools. It also has acted as an economic development engine, as its ability to work with industry to develop appropriate courses of study has attracted the attention of businesses outside the area.

GTCC's establishment of its College Tech Prep program in connection with the Guilford schools has helped to focus and motivate many younger students. And older, displaced workers have benefited from retraining they have received at GTCC. The college's ESL programs have served many new arrivals to the county.

One reason for GTCC's success is that it has had strong leadership. In the late 1960s and early ‘70s, President Luther Medlin was instrumental in the institute's expansion and accreditation while President Raymond Needham enabled it to make the transition to community college status in the 1980s, ending a decades-long struggle.

More recently, GTCC has benefitted from the 17-year leadership of Don Cameron, whose dedication to and belief in GTCC have made many others in Guilford — and beyond — also believers in the school.

Cameron has helped the school to be nimble — and visionary — enough to adjust to varying economic conditions, from the loss of traditional manufacturing jobs to the current emphasis on transportation and logistics.

The next 50 years will see big changes and challenges, as the state's population increases and resources become more strained. If the past is any indication, GTCC will remain an essential player in helping Guilford County meet such challenges a half-century from now.

Thursday's No. 2 editorial

For 50 years, the Pentagon has resisted efforts to rename Pope Air Force Base for Greensboro's World War II flying ace George E. Preddy and his brother, William.

However, the transfer of the base by 2011 from the Air Force to the Army is an ideal time to do what should have been done years ago.

Arguments against at least a hyphenated compromise -- Pope-Preddy -- are mostly based on money, tradition and public perception.

Opponents cite costs of changing signage, stationery and other comparatively minor expenses. But more to the point, the military thrives on tradition, justified or not. It's been Pope AFB for years, so leave well enough alone.

U.S. Rep. Bob Ethridge, in whose district Fort Bragg and Pope AFB are located, has no problem adding the Preddys' name -- if his Fayetteville-area constituents support the idea.

That's an understandable concern, yet the impact of the Army's largest stateside military installation extends well beyond Cumberland County. Other state residents also deserve a say.

A name change in no way reflects negatively on World War I pilot 1st Lt. Harley H. Pope, who was killed in 1917 when his plane crashed into the Cape Fear River on a training flight.

Yet he pales in comparison with Maj. George Preddy, who downed more than two dozen enemy planes before losing his life to friendly fire over Germany on Christmas Day 1944.

William Preddy, who wasn't in combat long enough to amass such a distinguished record, died in a strafing mission over Czechoslovakia only days before the war in Europe ended.

Several books have been written about their exploits. A Web site maintained by the Preddy Memorial Foundation, which has worked diligently to raise the brothers' profile, also relates their accomplishments.

There's been some recognition locally -- a VFW post, a historic marker and a stretch of highway. But a well-deserved higher profile should come with a name when the Army takes over Pope AFB.

Friday's lead editorial.

North Carolina scores only a hair's breadth above a C in the latest national report card on government management.

At least it isn't New Hampshire, which rated a D-plus. But it isn't Virginia, Utah or Washington, either, which scored the only A's (A-minuses) in the nation.

The less-than-stellar B-minus comes in a Pew Center evaluation of state governments. Based on interviews with North Carolina officials and "opinion leaders," the report cites a number of hopeful developments: an upgrade in computer technology that replaces a quilt-work of incompatible systems; the state's first comprehensive capital plan for infrastructure (despite an alarming inventory of subpar bridges and stalled highway construction); and a new "Program Evaluation Division" that will assess the effectiveness of various state agencies and programs.
The report card also gives the state strong marks for tying the budgeting process to results and performance. Then the gold stars come to a screeching halt.

"As things stand," the report says, "the governor's budget document is the place where the transparency ends." "Some budget information published by the legislature can be difficult even for experts to follow," the report adds, "and public input in legislative hearings is in most cases severely limited."

The study does not even mention perhaps the most irksome feature of the state budgeting process, where lawmakers slip additions into the final budget bill at the 11th hour, devoid of any meaningful debate or discussion.

In fact, when it comes to transparency, the Pew people don't know the half of it.
This week, Gov. Mike Easley still was lamely fending off criticism that his administration systematically has kept information from the press and the public. Recently revealed notes have made evident an edict to state agencies to promptly delete e-mails to and from the governor's office, lest the press and the (gasp) public get access to them. The governor insisted on Tuesday, April Fools' Day, that the notes don't prove an attempt to purge information.

To be fair, this grade isn't based entirely on a curve. The report does reflect tangible improvement.

In 2005 North Carolina received only a C-plus, based largely on the state's technology woes, described in the Pew report as "a passel of IT problems." Those issues can be fixed with the state's new computer system. But how to fix a culture of secrecy and vagueness among some of the human beings who operate those computers?

The last thing the state needs to be, or to seem to be, is reluctant to share the people's business with the people.

2 p.m. Friday update: People have been having trouble with the toll-free number, so we called the N.C. Bar Association to find out what's going on. Apparently, many people have been calling, and the demand was more than expected. There are now three toll-free numbers people can use to get through. If you call and it says the number is no longer in service, try calling it again. Apparently, the numbers don't work consistently.

The numbers are:

1-800-289-0013

1-888-722-0407

1-877-404-4149

The call-in period ends at 7 p.m. Friday, April 4.

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

Free advice often seems worth what it costs. But not today.
Hundreds of lawyers across the state are manning a toll-free hot line and providing free legal advice from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. They are participating in the N.C. Bar Association's first statewide public service day.

Have general questions about child support, your legal recourse following a questionable medical procedure or how to draw up a will? The attorneys probably can't solve your problems in one phone call, but they should be able to provide pertinent information.
The event is due in large part to the efforts of Greensboro attorney Janet Ward Black, head of the state bar association. She has made such pro bono work a focus of her presidency.

Indeed, this public service day is just one part of the association's multipronged "Justice 4All"campaign to ensure that all North Carolinians, especially the impoverished, have access to legal services.

Such a campaign is needed: The number of North Carolinians who qualify for legal aid far outstrips the number of attorneys providing it. About 2.9 million people fall within Legal Aid of North Carolina's service guidelines, yet there are only about 150 legal aid lawyers to help them.
That leads to about 80 percent of those seeking help being denied assistance. The bar association hopes the public service day will lead more attorneys to commit in more substantial ways to pro bono work.

If you take advantage of the hot line today -- and anyone can, no matter their income -- here are some tips: Have pertinent legal documents and questions you want answered in front of you. Be able to summarize your concern. And have a way to write down information.

Want to know more?
Ask an attorney number: 1-877-404-4149.
N.C. Bar Association’s 4all Web site:
http://4allnc.ncbar.org/

Saturday's lead editorial.

Smothered into submission by high fuel prices, a teetering economy and steep losses, Skybus announced Friday night that its hopeful experiment in discount travel had ended —less than a year after its takeoff in the Triad.

The Columbus, Ohio-based airline's demise was hardly a surprise. That it happened so quickly was.

The recent news had been ominous. The company's affable CEO and founder, Bill Diffenderffer, stepped down only last week to resume a career writing books. When the resignation of the airline's vice president of operations, Bud Sittig, followed on Thursday, the end seemed nearer.
But not that near.

Then the air carrier suddenly ceased operations Friday. Company officials said it would file for bankruptcy protection Monday.

The latest, best hope for competitive air fares at PTI Airport went with it. The only other discount carrier at PTI, Allegiant Air, will close its operations at the airport May 31.

This is very bad news for PTI. The airport needs discount carriers to remain competitive with the airports in Raleigh and Charlotte. Low-price airlines not only offer affordable alternatives but tend to drive down fares among the larger, more traditional "legacy airlines."

Skybus was making a promising impact on passenger traffic at PTI, with its limited offers of 10 seats for $10 on every flight. Now it is gone.

Skybus debuted in Greensboro, selected as its second "focus city," last May 22. Company executives back then confidently trumpeted the airline's simple but clever formula for success: If you needed to get from here to there on time, cheaply, with no frills, they were your airline. Any extra service -- checked baggage, refreshments, etc. -- would cost you more, a la carte.
Skybus sought to entice employees with company stock and commissions for whatever products they sold in-flight.

Now all 450 workers, approximately 100 in Greensboro, are out of work.

When asked in a News & Record interview last year about the threat of high jet fuel prices, Diffenderffer predicted the company's fleet of 11 new, bright-orange Airbus A319s would offer an edge over other airlines whose fleets were older and less fuel-efficient. He was mistaken.

Meanwhile, the airport will have to renew the weary search for a discount carrier who will succeed here and stay here.

Still, PTI was right to seek a partnership with Skybus, and Triad leaders were right to unite in luring the air carrier. The Skybus experiment was a worthy pursuit that could have worked in a different climate, at a different time.

Saturday's No. 2 editorial.

People who urge swifter justice on death row should think about Glen Edward Chapman.

He could have been executed long before spending 14 years on death row, but that wouldn't have been justice. Just the opposite.

Chapman, 41, was released this week when all charges against him were dropped. Last year, a judge ruled he deserved new trials for the two 1992 murders in Hickory police and prosecutors said he committed; Wednesday, the Catawba County district attorney said there wasn't enough evidence to try Chapman again.

The case against Chapman was badly flawed. Evidence that would have cast doubt on his guilt was withheld, and a lead investigator might have lied in court. Prosecution witnesses later recanted their testimony: "If anyone asked me at trial, I would have testified that police pressured me into testifying and that I did not believe Edward killed anyone," one said in an affidavit.

These aren't technicalities but significant issues that were recognized in Superior Court Judge Robert Ervin's 182-page order for new trials. It was the state that employed "technicalities," arguing against Chapman's motion on the questionable grounds that his contentions should have been raised in earlier appeals.

When a man's life is at stake, justice demands fairness. A conviction and death sentence can't be allowed to stand when evidence was denied or even fabricated. In Chapman's case, it took many years and the help of new attorneys who began work on his behalf in 2002 to set things right. "Swift justice" would have meant injustice.

Chapman hasn't been given a proclamation of innocence. It can't be said with certainty that he didn't commit the murders of Betty Jean Ramseur and Tenene Yvette Conley. But prosecutors didn't have sufficient evidence to prove that he did; they didn't in 1994, and they don't now. Chapman was wrongly convicted and sentenced to death. He can thank the slow pace of justice for keeping him alive long enough to go free.

Today's editorial, written by Doug Clark in the wake of our latest One Guilford leadership conference, March 12, at UNCG. We particularly welcome your comments on this very important issue.

Students should not advance through the grades without reading well. More early intervention and better assessments will help children keep up.

A simple, powerful question was asked of panelists during last month's One Guilford program at UNCG:

Why are children promoted if they can't read at grade level?

The audience heard Kathy Baker Smith, vice president for educational support services at GTCC, report that nearly 40 percent of the students enrolling directly from Guilford County Schools don't read above the eighth-grade level.

Smith High School Principal Noah Rogers noted that two-thirds of new students arrive there with less than sixth-grade reading skills.

How does that happen? No satisfactory answer was offered, and maybe there isn't one.

It's not a simple question, school board member Nancy Routh said last week. What's considered "grade level" is determined according to arbitrary standards that vary from test to test. Results often aren't reliable.

"If I wanted to know if a child could read, I'd sit down and listen to him read," said Routh, a retired principal.

"The majority of our kids do read, and they are good readers," she added.

Those who aren't good readers should get remedial instruction outside normal classroom time in early grades, Routh said. But holding students back a year is the wrong solution.

"There's no evidence that retaining kids improves their achievement," she said. "Sometimes they actually regress."

Another school board member, however, said too many children are promoted without reading well.

"How do they get into middle school?" Garth Hebert asked. "How do they pass the third grade?"

Hebert recalled attending a disciplinary hearing for a 13-year-old sixth-grader who had passed only one subject in his entire school career -- a D in a third-grade course.

Students like that often are advanced to avoid bottling them up in already crowded elementary school classrooms, Hebert believes.

That's possible when students "pass" state reading tests that may be too easy. Guilford County's 2007 passing rates range from 79 percent for third-graders to 88 percent for eighth-graders. Numbers that high invite skepticism.

Like Routh, Lewis Ferebee believes standardized tests do a poor job of measuring students' abilities.

An instructional improvement officer for Guilford County Schools, he's a former principal at Fairview Elementary in High Point.

Assuming that a label of "proficient" on a standardized state test means a child is reading at grade level is "one of the things that has gotten us in trouble," Ferebee said. "I think that's an illusion. It's one way children fall through the gap."

Ferebee won notice for raising achievement at Fairview by initiating a schoolwide emphasis on reading, including a home reading component.

"The thing about reading is, the more you do it the better you get," he said. But many children read too little at school and at home, for studies or for pleasure.

Ferebee said schools are putting more emphasis on early intervention with small-group reading instruction and, "if possible, one-on-one support." He'd also like to see reading "imbedded in all our content areas."

The system is developing new assessment models to determine "who's actually reading on grade level and who's not," Ferebee said.

Hebert said he'd support an independent reading evaluation of every first-grader, with appropriate responses to correct deficiencies.

Maybe the Routh method would help: Spend enough time with each child to find out how well he or she reads and comprehends, then devise a strategy to meet individual needs.

Solutions like that are expensive, but the cost of failure is higher. At best, it's paid in providing remedial instruction at GTCC and other colleges and universities. More expensively, it requires trying to teach ninth-graders who can't read at a sixth-grade level, which invites frustration, discipline problems, drop-outs and too many young people leaving school without the skills they need to gain meaningful employment.

Hebert, an accountant, knows the cost of failure and says too little is being done to prevent it. "We do not invest in remedial reading, we just pretend we do," he said, adding that more teaching assistants and volunteer tutors are needed.

"We have to do everything we can to teach them," he said. "If we can't teach reading, what the flip can we teach?"

More to the point: If students don't learn to read in elementary school, when will they learn? How will they ever learn anything?

Not reading is not acceptable.

Should Greensboro City Council candidates receive public financing?

Tuesday's lead editorial.

Living in Alamance County could be hazardous to your health. At least if you're anywhere near Burlington Chemical Co. on Willow Springs Lane.

A routine inspection on Feb. 14 by the Burlington Fire Department and the Alamance County Fire Marshal's office discovered that 856,000 pounds of the highly combustible powder, sodium hydrosulfite, was being stored there.

Although efforts are progressing to whittle down that amount, state and local authorities may have a tough job convincing nearby residents that all is well, considering the frightening worst-case scenario.

The Burlington Times-News reported that the inspection revealed the chemical was being kept in 670 drums, 18 bins, 14 trailers and two trucks.

Had the volatile material ignited under the right conditions, fire officials project that people within 1.5 miles conceivably could suffer permanent injuries or die. The so-called "dead zone"includes Alamance Regional Medical Center and E.M. Holt Elementary School, not to mention hundreds of residents living in parts of Burlington, Elon and Graham.

Despite assurances from the county that "there's no possibility of any imminent danger," folks downwind are bound to remain skeptical. First of all, few apparently had any inkling they were living in the path of a potential ticking time bomb.

For reasons unclear, Burlington Chemical Co., which is owned by the conglomerate Gulf States Inc., got away with amassing significantly more than what is considered to be a safe amount of the chemical used in industrial processes.

The company now has until April 30 to reduce the on-site total to 100,000 pounds -- the maximum listed on its permit dating back to the 1980s.

Compare that with the 1,500-pound limit for storing sodium hydrosulfite in newly granted state permits. That drastic reduction can only raise questions about the potential for harm in spite of the drawdown.

Also worth noting is County Manager David Smith's comment to The News & Observer of Raleigh that "so long as the temperature remains around 60 degrees, it's safe."That's unnerving in light of the Piedmont's wide seasonal temperature swings and the fact that some drums are stored in enclosed tractor-trailers.

For starters, the company's removal program must continue on schedule. Additionally, there's a need for more timely state and local inspections and tighter facility security as well as heightened public accountability.

Given new storage guidelines, the only conclusion can be that Burlington Chemical's enormous sodium hydrosulfite stockpile was risky and improper.

Friday's lead editorial.

The Triad has moved closer to becoming a nanotechnology hub with the proposal to create a nanomedicine facility in Winston-Salem.

The N.C. Translational NanoMedicine Institute, or N.C. NanoMed, would focus on helping startup companies pass the many hurdles found when moving from research to final product. Focusing on areas such as pharmacology and therapeutics, it would work with federal agencies, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, to speed up product testing and other regulatory review. That would be a drawing card to companies nationwide, as there is a great demand for such services, but few that provide them.

David Carroll, head of Wake Forest University's Center for Nanotechnology and Molecular Materials, is the leading force behind the idea, but Winston-Salem State University and Forsyth Technical Community College also are involved in the plan.

Supporters want to locate the facility in Piedmont Triad Research Park in Winston-Salem. They plan to hold meetings across the state during the year to promote the institute.

Greensboro residents can't help but wonder whether such a facility would be a competitive or a complementary venture to the Nanotechnology School being built jointly by N.C. A&T and UNCG on East Lee Street. UNCG's Rosemary Wander, associate provost for research and public/private sector partnerships, assures us that "these efforts are complementary."

While both are connected with universities, they have different emphases. Greensboro will focus on research and education. The Winston-Salem institute would focus on clinical research and business support.

Actually, there's likely to be lots of synergy between the two. Graduates of the school in Greensboro could end up working for the Winston-Salem institute or needing its services. Or research generated in Greensboro could spawn a start-up venture that the institute would serve.
Both centers would be powerful attractions for people nationwide in, or wanting in, the field.
"We are trying to increase the visibility/presence of nanotechnology/nanobiosciences in the Triad. In effect, we are trying to 'brand' the Triad as the home for this type of work for the state," says Wander, about the two ventures.

That's a smart thing to do. Research shows the benefits of "clustering" industries, not just for the particular industry itself but for the economic health of the larger community.

A Triad nanotechnology cluster not only could lead to the development of more molecular-level products and applications but to the development of a more robust North Carolina Piedmont.

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

The arrest of Alexander Kohanowich allegedly for assaulting a police officer is an embarrassment to the city of Greensboro. The shame will deepen if the city continues the case, as its statement Thursday indicates it will.

Kohanowich was standing in the median of Coliseum Drive during presidential candidate Barack Obama's March 26 visit holding a sign that read, "We Support Our Troops" and "God Bless America." According to his account, a police officer directed him to move, and when Kohanowich put his hand on the officer's shoulder to ask where, he was taken down to the ground and handcuffed.

The story, originally reported by News & Record columnist Jeri Rowe, made national news and generated torrents of criticism. A key fact is that Kohanowich is 78 years old.

The Police Department Thursday issued its most detailed statement to date. It said Officer L.D. Prescod told Kohanowich several times to move from the median. Kohanowich didn't. Instead, he "raised his voice" and created a "disturbance." Then he "held his sign in his right hand and reached forward with his left hand, shoving Officer Prescod's shoulder."

That action prompted the arrest on the charge of "assault on a government official and that is now a court issue," the police statement said.

If it's a court issue, prosecutors will have to demonstrate that the police account of a "shove" -- not Kohanowich's version of a "touch" -- amounted to an assault. It will have to prove that the elderly man meant to do harm and gave the officer reason to fear for his safety. If the city wants national media attention on that courtroom scene, it will deserve the scorn that it brings.

With so many real crimes to prosecute, the District Attorney's Office should advise the city to drop this embarrassing case.

Sunday's editorial.

A teenager charged with serious crimes didn't belong at High Point Central High School, but he was sent there about two weeks ago before complaints led to his abrupt removal.

The troubling case of Varren Daveldre Anderson, 16, of Buckleigh Lane in High Point appears to be unusual -- but it's hard to know for sure because of privacy laws that restrict what schools can say about students.

Court documents state that Anderson was arrested Nov. 1 and charged with robbery with a dangerous weapon, second-degree kidnapping and first-degree burglary in connection with two crimes committed in October. In each instance, two teenagers abducted a victim at gunpoint and made him drive to an ATM and withdraw money. In one incident, the assailants entered an apartment occupied by a married couple and forced the husband to go with them. In both cases, the victims were released unharmed.

Bank photographs helped police identify Anderson, who was arrested, confessed and named his partner, a 15-year-old High Point boy, according to court papers. Police discovered the weapon was a BB gun -- less lethal but perhaps no less terrifying.

The legal status of the second suspect, who turned 16 on Dec. 1 but was a juvenile when the crimes were committed, is not a public record.

District Court Judge Pete Hunter set Anderson's bond at $10,000 on Dec. 13 and put him under the supervision of the Pre-Trial Services office in High Point until his trial, which has not been scheduled yet. The judge ordered Anderson to report in person to that office once a week, observe a 7 p.m. curfew and attend school every day unless he had a medical excuse. Anderson's family posted bond.

Hunter did not say which school Anderson should attend, and the school system was not obligated to accept him.

Should President Bush boycott the Olympics' opening ceremony?

The British prime minister is staying away. Should Bush?

Saturday's lead editorial.

Skybus failed to survive turbulent times in the airline industry. But its short presence here proved PTI can successfully compete in the passenger business.

Skybus Airlines' sudden tailspin into bankruptcy may seem to validate some skeptics who'd questioned from day one its folksy, thrift-store approach to the friendly skies.

Gaudy orange planes and 10 seats for 10 bucks on every trip and flight attendants hawking everything from sodas to T-shirts? Were these guys serious?

Yes, and so were Triad leaders, who were right to bet on Skybus' success and to hope they'd hitch a ride on the upstart discount carrier from the ground floor up.

Skybus had a solid, if nontraditional, business model, and it filled a critical need at PTI for a discount airline that could help drive down Triad fares. Ironically, it was working. Passenger traffic at PTI in February was 41 percent higher than it was last year.

Skybus also proved the ability of PTI to hold its own in the passenger business, even with bigger airports in Charlotte and Raleigh nibbling at its heels.

That's one of the factors that likely helped PTI Airport Authority Chairman Henry Isaacson not only to persuade the only other discount carrier at PTI, Allegiant Air, to remain, but to add service in the Triad, after originally announcing its intentions to leave. "Even before Skybus (folded) I talked to Allegiant about staying," Isaacson said Friday. "In a quiet way, they're a very successful airline."

That still leaves a void for the airport to fill, but it's a hopeful step forward. Isaacson says he will continue to shop for a new discount carrier until he finds one. It won't be easy. By the end of last week alone, Skybus, ATA Airlines and Aloha Airlines announced shutdowns and bankruptcy filings. This week, another carrier, Frontier Airlines, announced it was filing for bankruptcy but will continue to operate. The entire industry is in turmoil, primarily because of the rising cost of jet fuel.

"All the airlines, including Southwest, are feeling the pinch," Isaacson said. "But we're gonna keep trying."

Meanwhile, taking into account a local incentives package that could have totaled $57 million (had Skybus met all the benchmarks), the Triad may have lost between $40,000 and $130,000 in the deal.

In the volatile, high-stakes game of the passenger airline business, it was a gamble well worth taking.

Where Skybus did not distinguish itself was in how it treated some customers, some of whom were suddenly stranded and who in some cases received little or no assistance from rattled Skybus employees. "In retrospect, it would have been a lot easier for everyone involved if we'd had enough notice," Isaacson said.

That was no way to run an airline, even one whose brief lifetime was coming to an end.
.

Monday's Short Stack.

City Manager Mitchell Johnson held his long-anticipated Q&A session with the public Thursday night but the public didn't show up.

Given that some people blame Johnson for everything from the resignation of Police Chief David Wray to the weather, this was expected to be a tense and heated affair.

Instead, Johnson faced a sea of mostly empty seats at the Greensboro Historical Museum.
By our count, 26 people came out for the session, including media, city staff, members of the sponsoring Greensboro Neighborhood Congress and a few police officers.

Which leads us to wonder if all of the alleged angst over Johnson's job performance could be at least a little bit overblown.

Appalled but not shocked

The Raleigh morning radio shock jock who thought it was funny to disparage Lumbee Indians as "lazy" was suspended for three days without pay after Lumbee groups and others complained about the broadcast.

He and his crew were scheduled to return to the air this morning.

But you have to wonder whether the station's tepid statements of apology were sincere, or merely considered another cost of doing business.

The 15-minute bit involved the host, Bob Dumas "joking" with an intern, whose fiance is a Lumbee.

Dick Harlow, general manager of the station, WDCG (105.1 FM), later apologized on air, as did Dumas.

But in light of the controversy last year over Don Imus' foul remarks over the air about the Rutgers women's basketball team, these people had to know better.

Then again, controversy is morning talk radio's stock in trade. They probably expect it and even plan for it, the same as the National Enquirer budgets for celebrity lawsuits.

After all, the station is No. 1 in its market. And Dumas has been in trouble before.

In 2003 he was suspended for encouraging drivers to harass bicyclists (boy, that was a hoot).

In 2004 he described High Point native and "American Idol" winner Fantasia Barrino as "low-class" and "ghetto."

Does anyone seriously believe he won't pass this way again?

Universities can name finalists
UNCG and N.C. A&T leaders deserve commendation for naming three finalists, all with sterling credentials, for the position of dean of their Joint School of Nanoscience and Nanoengineering.
Yes, naming three finalists ... which is what the universities say they can't do when they're hiring a chancellor. They think publicly identifying candidates frightens off top prospects.
If the universities are sure they've got well-qualified finalists for their important new position, they should be just as confident of openness in the chancellor search process. When the UNCG search committee narrows its choices to three, it should let the community know who they are.

Votes for sale
Saying she'd become disenchante
d by the Democratic presidential primary campaign, which she likened to car commercials, an N.C. State senior decided to put her vote on the market.

Literally.

The News & Observer of Raleigh reports that Sara Yasin auctioned her vote on eBay, with the bidding starting at 15 cents.

Of course, the state Board of Elections does not take very kindly to literalism. So the ad was yanked last week, after the bidding had climbed to $11.50.

Buying and selling votes -- at least overtly -- is against the law.

Sunday's editorial.

A teenager charged with serious crimes didn't belong at High Point Central High School, but he was sent there about two weeks ago before complaints led to his abrupt removal.

The troubling case of Varren Daveldre Anderson, 16, of Buckleigh Lane in High Point appears to be unusual -- but it's hard to know for sure because of privacy laws that restrict what schools can say about students.

Court documents state that Anderson was arrested Nov. 1 and charged with robbery with a dangerous weapon, second-degree kidnapping and first-degree burglary in connection with two crimes committed in October. In each instance, two teenagers abducted a victim at gunpoint and made him drive to an ATM and withdraw money. In one incident, the assailants entered an apartment occupied by a married couple and forced the husband to go with them. In both cases, the victims were released unharmed.

Bank photographs helped police identify Anderson, who was arrested, confessed and named his partner, a 15-year-old High Point boy, according to court papers. Police discovered the weapon was a BB gun -- less lethal but perhaps no less terrifying.

The legal status of the second suspect, who turned 16 on Dec. 1 but was a juvenile when the crimes were committed, is not a public record.

District Court Judge Pete Hunter set Anderson's bond at $10,000 on Dec. 13 and put him under the supervision of the Pre-Trial Services office in High Point until his trial, which has not been scheduled yet. The judge ordered Anderson to report in person to that office once a week, observe a 7 p.m. curfew and attend school every day unless he had a medical excuse. Anderson's family posted bond.

Hunter did not say which school Anderson should attend, and the school system was not obligated to accept him.

John Morris, chief student services officer for Guilford County Schools, declined to speak specifically about Anderson. In cases like this generally, he said, "school" can be interpreted to include GED studies at GTCC, online courses, an alternative program provided by a faith-based organization, or private school. The decision could depend on whether the student's alleged crimes "fit the profile of someone who might be dangerous at school."

Administrators assigned Anderson to Guilford County Schools' SCALE program in Greensboro, which serves students who need an alternative setting for disciplinary reasons, usually for a maximum of 45 days.

After about 10 weeks at SCALE, Anderson was reassigned to High Point Central, where he previously had attended. His presence immediately created concerns that reached top school administrators, District Attorney Doug Henderson and Board of Education member Garth Hebert, who represents High Point. Anderson was removed within a few days.

The school system declined to disclose why Anderson was sent to Central, why he was removed or where he is now. Again not speaking about Anderson, Morris explained: "If a student's presence at a school is extremely disruptive for whatever reason ... you cannot have him in the school."

That's a sensible standard. Given the charges pending against Anderson, school leaders should have anticipated an angry, fearful reaction at Central. School safety concerns must be taken seriously, and staff, students and parents shouldn't have to worry about dangerous individuals on campus.

But Morris said school officials themselves sometimes aren't informed about criminal charges pending against students, and they can be prevented from knowing when the alleged offenders are younger than 16.

Anderson's defense lawyer, John Bryson, said his client hasn't been convicted of crimes and should be allowed to attend school. "Would you rather have him out on the street?"

Henderson, the district attorney, looked into Anderson's file in response to public inquiries. He declined to comment about the case but agreed that students in those circumstances need to be in school.

"The place to get that structure is SCALE, not with the general student population," he said, adding, "there's a need for something probably a step up from SCALE," where closer supervision can be provided.

The schools currently don't have that option, Morris said, but Marianne Woody, an officer with Pre-Trial Services, said a new program offered through the Greensboro nonprofit agency One Step Further offers GED classes and other education for individuals waiting for trial.

In Anderson's case, Judge Hunter should not simply have ordered Anderson to attend school and then left it to the school system to deal with him. Instead, the judge should have committed Anderson to an appropriate alternative program. Hunter did not return a call for comment.

Once Anderson was in their care, however, school administrators never should have sent him to a regular school. Any of the available alternatives would have been better.

Young criminal suspects have a right to their day in court but not to attend a regular high school.

Today's lead editorial.

The leadership style in Greensboro is less authoritarian than it used to be. If we value inclusion, the community should try to involve even more people.

Goodbye, paternalism.

Hello, collaboration.

That, in a nutshell, is how leadership style in Greensboro has changed in the last several years.

Gone (for the most part) are the CEO power meetings, the behind-the-scenes decision-making by a few.

They've been replaced with Action Greensboro and synerG, young professionals with ideas and foundations with legacy industry money.

Want to help shape Greensboro's future? If you have the will, there are plenty of ways to become involved.

As Dick Barron reported in his stories on Sunday, leadership in the Gate City in the 21st century is about inclusion, not exclusion.

It's about encouraging people of all walks of life -- from students to seniors, from the poor to the wealthy -- to have a say ... and an opportunity.

This is all good. For places with such an ethos are the healthy ones.

Just read Richard Florida's new book, "Who's Your City?" In it, he talks of the importance of networking, of the "strength of weak ties" in creating communities with resilience. He points to research showing that areas such as California's Silicon Valley and Boston's high-tech Route 128 owe their vitality to "decentralized but cooperative networks" that connect universities to businesses, venture capital to talent.

The hemorrhaging of the textile industry might have forced Greensboro to change its leadership style, but more recent revisions have come voluntarily. Nowhere is this better seen than with our institutions of higher education, which have put community service on steroids in the last few years. They provide Greensboro with formidable talent and resources and, perhaps most important, vision. From GTCC's "Quick Jobs with a Future" effort, which retrains people in little time and for little money, to UNCG's and N.C. A&T's Gateway Research Park, these institutions are helping us all.

But more can be done. Those in leadership positions need to examine how to increase community connections. What people still feel left out of the loop in Greensboro? How can we get them involved? How can we help the next generation -- our children -- get on board?

Are we doing all we can for small business owners? What about the persistent concern that developers are calling the shots and trampling neighborhoods? And does anyone even hear those with a more grim view of the future and the problems it holds? (Such people aren't just naysayers; they may be able to help the city prepare for harsh times.)

Greensboro has seen the value of setting more places at the leadership table. Will it see the value of setting some more?

Tuesday's No. 2 editorial.

A visit to the county jail might be just what it takes for parents to convince misbehaving kids that's where they're headed if they don't shape up.

However, a well-intended tour sometimes can take an unexpected and unacceptable turn. That reportedly happened recently during a teenager's visit to the Alamance County Jail.

As a result, Sheriff Terry Johnson fired three detention officers and accepted the resignation of a fourth. The SBI is investigating, and criminal charges haven't been ruled out.

According to a sheriff's department spokesman, a family member asked at 7 p.m. on April 5 if a teenaged boy could tour the facility, and the request was granted. While inside the jail, the youth reportedly was forcibly restrained and possibly assaulted.

So-called "scared straight" visits are supposed to get across the message that real jail time is far different than TV's Otis ambling into the friendly confines of the Mayberry lockup. For some kids, the real thing can be an eye-opener; others aren't even fazed.

Strict guidelines, however, are needed for tours of any secured facility housing potentially dangerous inmates. And it goes without saying that deputies manhandling a guest -- particularly one underage -- is verboten.

To prevent future embarrassing incidents, Sheriff Johnson has tightened the rules. Henceforth, he will clear all tours in advance.

While "tough love" scare tactics may have their place and even work, law enforcement or the public schools can't be expected to do a parenting job that should be happening at home. And showing up on short notice on a busy Saturday night makes even less sense.

To its credit, the sheriff's department is cooperating with the SBI and district attorney's office to see if charges should be brought. Unfortunately, careers already have been ruined.

Wednesday's lead editorial.

Bev Perdue is a nice person, but voters might have gotten a different idea from some of the political ads shown on television this spring.

Her opponent's and her own.

Perdue, North Carolina's lieutenant governor, announced last week she won't run any more negative ads in her campaign to win the Democratic gubernatorial primary.

"It's been hard for me to look people in the face," she told reporters. She added that even friends and relatives were critical of the nasty tone the race had taken.

As if to prove the point, her rival's campaign manager answered: "This is the clearest evidence to date that she's losing the campaign."

State Treasurer Richard Moore first launched attack ads last month and immediately began to climb in the polls. Perdue responded in kind, with the result that two candidates who once looked like worthy contenders suddenly seemed sleazy.

Perdue's pledge to stop throwing mud could be calculated to clean her image. She gained some positive news coverage and opened a 10-point lead over Moore in a Public Policy Polling survey released Monday. That result "provides evidence that voters support Bev's decision to run a positive campaign focused on the issues that matter most," the Perdue campaign said.
Whether that holds true through May 6 remains to be seen.

Candidates, including Moore, ought to keep it positive. If they have the right qualifications, they can promote themselves without attacking their opponents.

It's fair to talk about relative qualifications and to express disagreement. If a candidate believes she has a better record and smarter solutions to problems, she's entitled to say so. Unless she's running against someone like Jim Black or Thomas Wright, however, she ought to stay away from suggesting her opponent is some sort of crook.

Perdue has a particular reason to keep it clean because she's a proponent of publicly funded campaigns. If she thinks taxpayers should fork out money for candidates, she should set a positive example of how campaigns ought to be conducted. The public probably doesn't want to pay for slanderous TV ads.

Politicians don't have to go negative -- at least not in their advertising. The presidential campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton might snipe at each other, but their TV ads are positive. U.S. Senate candidate Kay Hagan's initial ad touted her credentials and didn't go after anyone. It made a good impression. In the Republican gubernatorial race, Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory's TV spots have pointed out what he thinks needs fixing in Raleigh, but he hasn't engaged in personal attacks.

Voters decide what kind of campaigning works and what doesn't. If they respond to the politics of personal destruction, then that's what candidates will give them. The nicest candidate shouldn't necessarily win, but neither should the meanest.

Wednesday's "First Person" editorial essay.

Fire. Aim. Ready.

A 16-member Wake County high school marksmanship team recently was prevented from competing in a state-sanctioned competition. School officials said no to the East Wake High School students because the gun-shooting competition involved (gasp) guns.

Talk about a misfire. The competition in question was a 30-year-old state Wildlife Resources Commission-sponsored and -supervised activity held off-campus. And, for the record, students here have participated in similar activities. I know that because I did (a long, long time ago).
I was a member of the Dudley High School Air Force Junior ROTC rifle team and took park in shooting practice on the indoor ROTC range at N.C. A&T. We fired at targets while lying on our stomachs. (I didn’t know until then the definition of “recoil.”)

I wasn’t that much a fan of guns then and I'm not now. To paraphrase the late Charlton Heston, take this gun from my warm, live hands. Please.

I also was a lousy shot.

But the Wake County ban is heavy-handed and just plain wrong. While guns don't belong on campus, none, in this case, would have been brought to campus. The statewide tournament involves nearly 2,000 middle and high school students competing in skeet shooting, archery, rifle marksmanship and orienteering. It's a safe way to introduce young people to hunting and other outdoor activities.

Although I don't like guns -- especially using them to hunt for sport -- I won't stand in the way of others who do.

As for the competition banned at East Wake High, the same thinking holds: I wouldn't prevent someone else from enjoying a legal activity safely and responsibly. And neither should school officials.

-- Allen Johnson, from his blog “Thinking Out Loud” at news-record.com

With Gov. Mike Easley having written a letter to Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama encouraging him to debate Hillary Clinton in North Carolina, we decided that we should write a letter to him too.

We'd like to include your reasons why the two candidates should debate here. Let us know by 3 p.m. and they may be a part of tomorrow's editorial.

We hope to hear from you!

Friday's lead editorial.

Greensboro City Manager Mitchell Johnson revealed his list of 49 job cuts Tuesday, but at least two council members wanted one more: his.

Observers might have thought they were watching the Guilford County commissioners of days gone by. But then, a couple of former commissioners were driving the action.

Some council members aren't happy with the manager, as separate motions by Mary Rakestraw and Trudy Wade demonstrated. One would have dismissed Johnson, the other demoted him. Neither led to a public discussion, although the manager bravely passed a note to Mayor Yvonne Johnson waiving his right to privacy and granting permission for the council to talk about him in open session.

It would have been useful for critics to lay their case on the table. If the manager isn't performing his duties properly, citizens ought to know where he comes up short. Earlier this year, the council gave him some directives and ought to tell the public how it thinks he's doing. If Mitchell Johnson was OK with that, the council should have gone ahead. Instead, it retreated behind closed doors to continue its discussion but didn't reach a conclusion.

The manager has carried out one directive, probably his toughest: identifying 49 city staff positions for elimination when the next budget takes effect July 1. Thanks to an ongoing hiring freeze, only 15 of those jobs were filled as of Tuesday, and more might be vacated through transfers or attrition over the next couple of months.

The 49 positions represent less than 2 percent of the city work force, hardly a draconian reduction when many businesses are cutting back much more severely. Still, eight were designated to come from the Police Department, including an arson investigator and two parking enforcement specialists who write tickets worth a combined $113,000 a year, according to the chief. Maybe jobs that pay for themselves should be retained. Three positions would be axed from the Fire Department, including a training officer, and eight from Water Resources.

The council needs to make sure essential services are maintained or even increased in high-priority areas like police protection, despite these reductions. Getting more done with less requires excellent management, which begins in the city manager's office.

That means now is the time to address concerns about the manager's abilities. If the city's elected leaders lack confidence in Mitchell Johnson, they're foolish to leave him in charge at a critical time. But they have to be fair. Has he met their objectives so far or hasn't he?

Commissioners used to get rid of managers without much public explanation. The Greensboro City Council should do better.

What do you think of Republican presidential candidate John McCain's call for a holiday from the federal gas tax?

One of Sunday's six bond endorsement editorials.

EASTERN GUILFORD -- $45 MILLION

What it is: The cost of completing the rebuilding of Eastern Guilford High School.

Your cost: T he owner of a $200,000 home would pay an average of $16.01 more in property taxes each year over the next five years, ranging from $7.94 more in FY 2008-09 to $19.24 more in 2009-10, then decreasing in subsequent years.

Pros: This will fulfill the county's promise to replace the school that was destroyed by fire in November 2006.

Cons: Insurance fell millions short of covering the replacement cost.

Our take: Some bond proposals address projects that are needed, some projects that are wanted. This one is an obligation.

After the catastrophic fire, there was never a question that a new school would rise from the ashes. Eastern students, faculty and staff have survived trauma, hardship and inconvenience, completing the 2006-07 school year in two separate locations and using a temporary pod village on their own campus now while a new school is being built. Although the 2007, 2008 and 2009 classes will have graduated before the new school opens, the entire Eastern community should trust that the promise will be kept.

Commissioners tried to assure success on May 6 by splitting the Eastern Guilford request from the other school projects on the referendum. Even voters who might balk at $412 million for schools should be willing to support Eastern.

It was disappointing that insurance on Eastern paid only $17 million, leaving a gap of $45 million. The Board of Education should make sure it isn't caught short like that again. But "next time" doesn't build a school this time. Voters should be willing to pay this bill after all their Eastern neighbors have endured. Rejection on the ballot would be another heartbreaking setback.

We say: YES

One of Sunday's six editorials on bond endorsements.

PARKS & RECREATION -- $20.2 MILLION

What it is: Expansion of various parks, greenways and the first phase of Bryan Park Guilford County, 535 undeveloped acres in Browns Summit.

Your cost: The owner of a $200,000 home would pay an average of $6.60 in extra property taxes over the next five years, ranging from a low of $2.16 in the fiscal year 2008-09 to a high of $9.40 in 2011-12, then decreasing in later years.

Pros: This area prides itself on its parks and recreational facilities, and voters consistently have supported parks bonds.

Cons: In light of a struggling economy, are these projects more wants than needs? Can they wait?

Our take: What's not to like about a sweeping plan to create more places to walk, bike, hike, fish and jog? Among the proposed county parks and recreation bond projects are:

* Phase 1 of Bryan Park Guilford County, which would transform some of its 535 undeveloped acres into shelters, playgrounds, playing fields and fishing areas.

* Upgrades to Hagan-Stone Park in southeast Guilford County.

* An assortment of greenways throughout the county, including downtown Greensboro.

* Shelters, a mini-golf complex and grading for a planned amphitheater at Triad Park.

* Skate parks in Greensboro and High Point and a "Miracle Field" for physically impaired children in High Point.

There's no doubting the appeal or the lasting effects of such projects, which make the area more livable and attractive to new residents and new industry. What's more, the park bonds are easily the least expensive on the ballot.

But they are also easily the least urgent as well. None of these projects has to be completed now. All can and should wait until cash-strapped taxpayers are better able to afford them.

We say: NO

GUILFORD COUNTY JAIL -- $114.6 MILLION

What it is: The expansion and renovation of the jail facility in downtown Greensboro.

Your cost: The owner of a $200,000 home would pay an average of $41.84 in extra property taxes over the next five years, ranging from a low of $19.12 in extra taxes in FY 2008-09 to a high of $50.82 in 2009-10.

Pros: The jail is chronically -- and dangerously -- overcrowded.

Cons: This project is expensive and politically very difficult to sell to taxpayers.

Our take: Understandably, few voters are thrilled at the prospect of a new county jail in Greensboro.

Times are tough. Taxes are high enough. Jails are for bad people anyway. Let 'em sleep on the floor and maybe they'll think twice next time about breaking the law.

But if the county doesn't fix the jail, the federal government almost certainly would step in -- and this would become an even more expensive proposition.

The bonds would pay for an addition to the jail as well as a renovation of the current facility.

A recent tour underscored the critical need. Narrow corridors with blind spots and cramped cells breed danger for inmates and officers.

Some argue that a smaller-scale renovation of the existing jail, paired with alternative-sentencing programs, would remedy the situation. But that would make only a small dent in the crowding. Meanwhile, some local judges have conceded that an overfilled jail affects their decisions. "I find myself often making a choice," District Court Judge Susan Bray said last year. "I may believe that someone at sentencing deserves active time. I do more of weighing, 'Well, how crowded is the jail?' "

The county needs alternative programs and a new jail.

We say: YES

One of Sunday's six endorsement editorials.

GTCC -- $79.5 MILLION

What it is: A new northwest campus near the airport, an aviation classroom building, land acquisition, and classroom renovations and upgrades.

Your cost: The owner of a $200,000 home would pay an average of $24.83 more in property taxes over the next five years, ranging from a low of $9.26 in extra taxes in FY 2008-09 to a high of $33.94 in 2011-12, less in later years.

Pros: GTCC needs to keep pace with growing demands for job training and retraining, especially during a soft economy.

Cons: At $12 million, the proposed new Jamestown parking deck seems especially expensive.

Our take: Over its 50-year existence, GTCC has trained displaced workers to find new careers and armed students with the skills to plug into up-and-coming industries that pay well. A good example is GTCC's aviation program, which prepares students for marketable jobs with airport-area companies such as FedEx, TIMCO and HondaJet.

If voters approve the bonds, the school would build a new northwest campus ($50.5 million) near PTI Airport that would specialize in aviation, transportation and logistics.

In addition, GTCC would buy land to expand existing campuses ($2 million), a prudent investment that would allow purchases as land became available.

A more difficult sell (at least at first glance) is the Jamestown parking deck, which would cost a pricey $12 million. But the only option for the landlocked campus to grow parking spaces is to build "up" and not "out."

Traditionally, GTCC has been viewed as the least glamorous member of the county's formidable higher education community. Today voters seem to recognize the school's vital contributions to the Triad economy.

They can prove it by saying "yes" to the GTCC bonds.

We say: YES

One of Sunday's six endorsement editorials.

GUILFORD SCHOOLS -- $412.3 MILLION

What it is: For new school construction, renovation and expansion of existing schools and other improvements.

Your cost: The owner of a $200,000 home would pay an average of $102.52 more per year in property taxes over the next five years, ranging from $37.44 more in FY 2008-09 to $145.88 more in FY 2011-12, then less in later years.

Pros: The projects covered would provide classroom space for 7,000 students and substantially make up for years of neglect.

Cons: The expense, both in terms of total cost and for individual projects, including more than $80 million for one new high school.

Our take: A larger school population is squeezed into older school buildings every year. More students are educated in mobile classrooms. Many lack adequate space for lunch or other activities. Outdated facilities don't provide the best learning environment. The need to build, expand and renovate is obvious. Even $412 million won't make up sufficiently for lost time.

Voters approved $200 million in school bonds in 2000 and $300 million in 2003. The effort was long overdue and just a start.

"We are at a point because of the age of our schools and the influx of students that we have got to do this. I don't think it's even a close call," said Paul Daniels, an unopposed school board candidate in District 5.

Much of the new funding will address needs in southeast Guilford County and Jamestown, areas that "have been pretty much ignored ... well, for a long time," Daniels said.

But, if the bonds pass, the school board needs to re-examine projects with an eye on paring costs. "We don't need Taj Mahal schools," Daniels said.

The proposed bonds represent an important investment in the county's future, but with so much catching up to do, every dollar must stretch as far as possible.

We say: YES

One of Sunday's six endorsement editorials.

SALES TAX INCREASE OF ONE-FOURTH CENT

What it is: An option for Guilford County commissioners to raise the local sales tax by one-fourth cent.

Your cost: You would pay an additional penny for every $4 you spend, or $1 more on $400 in purchases.

Pros: This offers county government a means of increasing revenue other than raising the property tax.

Cons: Sales taxes are regressive, meaning poor people are taxed on a greater share of their incomes.

Our take: This is a small tax that can raise a large amount of money -- an estimated $16 million in Fiscal Year 2009-10. That's nearly equal to the revenue raised by 4 cents on the property tax. Sales-tax income "is one way to offset the property tax," said Kirk Perkins, chairman of the Guilford County Board of Commissioners. Would it really be used to offset some of the property tax? "That is an absolute certainty," Perkins said.

A tax is a tax, but raising property taxes year after year hurts property owners whose incomes are stagnant or even declining. Yet the property tax is the principal means counties have to pay for school construction, law enforcement and other needs. Shifting a little more of that burden to the property tax provides a better revenue balance and pulls in a new segment of taxpayers -- people who make purchases in Guilford County but live and own property outside Guilford County. Officials estimate that at least one-third of revenue will come from those people.

The extra tax will add just a penny for every $4 spent. Food and medicine are exempt.

Although commissioners aren't bound to spend the sales-tax revenue in specific ways, they can use it to help pay off bond debt. That whole load can't be carried by the property tax.

We say: YES

Tuesday's lead editorial.

Critics say the U.S. Supreme Court spread more confusion about the death penalty in a ruling issued last week.

It's true the 97-page decision upholding Kentucky's lethal-injection protocol offered six separate opinions, leading readers along tangled lines of logic. But inconsistent thinking about capital punishment didn't originate with nine justices. They're just like the rest of us, only more educated in the law.

The clearest conclusion drawn by the majority was that the three-drug combination used to sedate and kill condemned criminals in Kentucky and other states, including North Carolina, doesn't amount to cruel and unusual punishment if properly administered. Beyond that, old uncertainties remain.

They were addressed by two of the court's liberal members, both of whom joined in upholding the constitutionality of the death penalty. But that leaves the serious risk of executing the wrong person, Stephen Breyer said. He could have noted the case of Glen Chapman in North Carolina, who recently was released from death row because his original conviction was badly tainted. John Paul Stevens asserted that capital punishment amounts to "the pointless and needless extinction of life with only negligible social or public returns"

Proponents contend it's not pointless in response to horrendous crimes. In North Carolina, they might cite the murder of UNC-Chapel Hill student Eve Carson, which has elicited intense sadness and anger across the state.

Will it result in a death penalty? Not likely, if the case is tried in Orange County. None of the 166 offenders on North Carolina's death row was put there by an Orange County court. In fact, no one convicted in Orange County has been executed since 1948.

Guilford County, for all the murders committed here, hasn't sent anyone to death row since 2002. Randolph County has sent four since then. Guilford County District Attorney Doug Henderson said juries here tend to be better educated and less likely to vote for the death penalty.

In North Carolina, application of capital punishment can be as arbitrary as a county line. The conflicting reasoning of nine Supreme Court justices is nothing compared to the various attitudes of North Carolina juries, or prosecutors, from one county to another. When it comes to the death penalty, fair and consistent application of the law simply doesn't exist.

Last week's ruling didn't eliminate problems with North Carolina's death penalty. The N.C. Medical Board, for valid ethical reasons, still challenges the law that requires physicians to attend executions. An unofficial moratorium will continue.

Legislators can sweep away all the inconsistencies and potential for deadly mistakes by replacing the death penalty in all instances with life in prison without parole. Someone who commits a terrible crime in one county shouldn't be punished more or less severely than someone else who commits a similar crime in another county. Even Supreme Court justices might agree on that.

Tuesday's No. 2 editorial.

Go ahead. Do the right thing ... we dare ya.

That seems to be the message to any state worker with enough gumption to raise questions about waste and cronyism on the taxpayer's dime.

Consider the case of Ken Cassidy, a 17-year employee in the state Division of Motor Vehicles, who received "good" to "outstanding" performance evaluations -- and got a pink slip anyway.
Cassidy just happened to be let go after making public the DMV's practice of employing emissions specialists who simply didn't have enough to do. Specialists at the DMV's Avent Ferry Road office in Raleigh were making their appointed rounds to check service stations' inspections records -- and frequently finishing each day by lunchtime, reported The News & Observer of Raleigh, based on Cassidy's tip.

In fact, that office was so well-staffed that it took only from 45 minutes to two hours to complete what was supposed to be a full day's work.

Cassidy also fingered the Highway Patrol for passing over a highly qualified mechanic in favor of a much less-experienced applicant as an emissions specialist. The mechanic knew the job well enough to train others to do it.

Once word of the snub was reported, the SBI investigated. And the questionable applicant resigned the job.

These incidents continue a recent pattern of bad practices in the DMV, from the top down. Last year an employee was suspended after notifying superiors that then-DMV Commissioner George Tatum was trying to help a friend obtain a vintage title for a truck that would have saved him more than $1,000 in taxes. Ultimately, the employee in that case, Joey Gardner, was reinstated with a raise. And Tatum resigned under fire.

If state officials cared anything about fairness and credibility, they'd think twice about blaming the messenger, and about their indefensible treatment of Ken Cassidy. Better to set things right rather than cover them up, and to show conscientious employees some appreciation, rather than the door.

Wednesday's main editorial:

Too bad the N.C. Democratic Party gave up on its presidential debate plans. But that doesn't mean North Carolina voters should give up on getting the candidates to address issues of importance.

The debate debacle on April 16 in Philadelphia underscored the need for a serious conversation between Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. It also showed there is a national audience for a debate, as 10.7 million viewers tuned in to the one in Philly.

The chorus of criticism after the debate -- that the moderators pursued the trivial and ignored the substantive -- showed that many were interested in issues more significant than whether Obama wears an American flag pin.

One reason given for the cancellation of the Raleigh debate -- beyond the huge one of Obama's refusal to commit to the April 27 date -- was that the party said its members feared it also would focus on the insignificant. Is the party so powerless that it couldn't have set debate parameters? Anyway, it's likely that Katie Couric and the CBS crew would have realized that a serious debate would have been an easy way to one-up ABC, whose newscasters moderated the last one.

North Carolina's chance to host a debate is gone. Still, it's showtime here.

The next 13 days will give North Carolina voters more exposure to presidential candidates than we have had in decades. Just as important, the time will give the candidates exposure to us and to our issues.

Now is the chance for you to be heard. Are there issues you want the candidates to elaborate on? Are there North Carolina concerns that the candidates have ignored? Have they made remarks that you want them to clarify? Do you want their opinions on rising food and energy costs, Jimmy Carter's visit with Hamas, drilling off the Carolina coast? What's important to you?

Send your questions for the presidential candidates -- including Republican Sen. John McCain -- to us. We'll publicize them and try to get answers from the candidates' campaigns.

Let's get the debate rolling in North Carolina. It's time the people had a say on what the presidential candidates discuss.

Wednesday's No. 2 editorial.

The General Assembly ought to stay on the sidelines in the battle between the cable guys and the National Football League over subscribers' access to pigskin programming.
Before getting needlessly mixed up in the revenue scrap between billionaire bruisers, lawmakers are advised to take a TV timeout.

Last week, officials of Time Warner Cable, which serves thousands of customers in the Triad, and the NFL made their respective cases in Raleigh before the legislature's Joint Legislative Review Committee.

At issue is whether cable providers should make space in their lineup for the NFL Network and at what cost to their customers. So far, the acrimonious negotiations remain at a standstill with no game breaker in sight.

The NFL wants to restart the clock by pressuring states to legislate binding arbitration. Cable companies counter that an existing federal review process will work if only the league will give it a try.

Safe odds, however, are that unless both sides back down, pro football fans hooked into the nation's cable systems will be the losers. If they don't switch to satellite dish signals, they could miss several key games next season scheduled to be shown only on the NFL Network.
Time Warner has balked at including 24-hour football programming on its basic tier. Instead, it proposes offering space on an extra-cost sports tier.

But the NFL takes umbrage at being relegated to niche programming status. It says cable providers openly favor little-watched stations in which they have a financial interest.

Congress has piled on by threatening to reconsider the NFL's antitrust exemption if it ever withholds games from established networks. Some legislators want the Federal Communications Commission to join the huddle.

In the end, the outcome is best left to the marketplace. Diehard fans may be willing to pay an extra five bucks a month to watch football anytime, all the time. Then again, they may find better things to do.

Thursday's lead editorial.

You’re in an accident and lose a lot of blood. Your life will ebb away unless you receive a transfusion immediately.

The emergency room doctor says no: “Your records say you’ve never donated. Sorry. Under our rules, only people who give blood can get blood.”

Thanks goodness there really is no such rule. People are given blood on the basis of medical need. People give blood to help others without considering whether the recipients might be blood donors or not.

Some people hold a different attitude toward organ donations. A nonprofit organization called LifeSharers claims more than 11,000 members who agree to donate their organs first to fellow members and only if there are no takers to people on general waiting lists.

“About half of the organs transplanted in the United States go to people who have not agreed to donate their own organs when they die,” the LifeSharers Web site states. “That’s not fair, and it’s one of the reasons there is such a large organ shortage.”

The LifeSharers approach is legal, and ought to be. People aren’t required to designate their organs for transplant, but if they do they should be allowed some discretion in how they’re used.
LifeSharers also potentially encourages more people to become organ donors, although with the promise that they’re more likely to receive a life-saving transplant if they’re part of the network.

But LifeSharers’ legality, or its appeal to self-interest, isn’t all there is to consider. More important is whether it represents “the camel’s nose under the tent,” as Nancy M.P. King, director of the program in bioethics, health and society at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, told the News & Record’s Lex Alexander.

Once, organ recipients were selected for reasons that included a recipient’s worthiness or standing in society, King said. While LifeSharers doesn’t discriminate on that basis, it does absolutely distinguish by membership. One person is regarded as more deserving of a heart, lungs, liver or some other organ -- and therefore more deserving of a chance to live -- solely because he or she promised to return the favor if the circumstances were different. How much further under that tent could the camel crawl?

Fair? The irony is that LifeSharers members don’t have to remove themselves from other waiting lists if they need an organ. They can receive from outside their network; they just don’t want to give outside their circle unless everyone on the inside passes first.

Blood services can’t work that way. The system for moving organs from donors to recipients is more complicated and far from perfect, but it might collapse if too many people put limits on the lives they’re willing to save.

Thursday's No. 2 editorial.

The statistics are grim: About one in 100 American adults is in prison. Almost two-thirds of released inmates will be back in jail within three years.

But, thanks to an act just signed into law by President George W. Bush and backed from the beginning by U.S. Rep. Howard Coble, R-N.C., those stats may soon improve.

The Second Chance Act allots $165 million annually for programs to help nonviolent released prisoners as they re-enter society.

It provides grants for nonprofits to set up mentoring programs. Those going through such programs are much less likely to return to crime.

It also focuses on another big trigger for jail: substance abuse. Providing funds for addiction treatment and mental health services should help some inmates kick harmful habits that lead them to commit crimes.

It will provide money for other programs to help the incarcerated make a successful transition back into the community, such as those focusing on employment and housing.
Finally, it will collect information on “best practices” to use to help released prisoners and will train people to apply them.

Local people, such as the youth crime task force established by Greensboro City Council member Goldie Wells, should keep an eye on this new source of funding. It could provide money for groups that the task force might establish to provide mentoring for released juvenile offenders.

The reality, though, is that the new funding that the Second Chance Act will provide is little compared to the $60 billion the country now spends annually keeping people behind bars.

Still, the legislation was four years in the making, and it’s an achievement that it was passed.

A step in the right direction is better than no step at all.

Friday's lead editorial.

Last Friday night, a man forced his way into Leslie’s House, a shelter for women in High Point, and viciously attacked Holi Olga Grant, kicking and punching her, a witness told police.
“Grant has lost consciousness and had severe swelling and bleeding from her head and face. She was transported to High Point Regional Hospital,” the police report said.

This was the second assault on Grant, 30, in three weeks. Phillip Jeremy Holland, 36, was charged both times: assault by strangulation on March 30 and assault inflicting serious injury on April 18.

Holland was arrested April 15 in connection with the first assault and released the same day by magistrate Neill Jennings on nothing more than a written promise to appear — despite the serious charge and his criminal history: Holland has served time in state prison for assault with a deadly weapon, communicating threats and assault on a female.

Holland is in jail now with bond set at $500,000 — too late to protect Grant. A substantial bond should have been set the first time. Why wasn’t it?

In an interview Thursday, Chief District Court Judge Joseph E. Turner defended Jennings’ decision: “Based on the information he had at the time, he did the right thing.”

That included a belief that the March 30 assault wasn’t as serious as it might have appeared at first and that Grant wanted the charge dropped. Whether that belief was correct isn’t clear.
The case technically was not classified as domestic violence because Holland and Grant weren’t living together and had a casual relationship. In domestic violence cases, the suspect is locked up for 48 hours before seeing a judge and prosecution proceeds even without the victim’s cooperation.

But High Point police Capt. Larry Casterline said Thursday he’s not aware Grant tried to withdraw charges. Furthermore, he noted that the responding officer, C.B. O’Toole, immediately acted to pursue the March 30 case.

“If we’re sure an assault has taken place — clear evidence — we’re going to make an arrest,” Casterline said.

A magistrate issued a warrant for Holland’s arrest, indicating probable cause was found, Casterline said.

When Holland was arrested April 15 and brought before Jennings, the magistrate didn’t have information about Holland’s criminal history. He checked for an arrest record in Guilford County but found none, Turner said.

“I think it would have been better if he’d checked the statewide record,” Turner said.
Doing so would have turned up Holland’s prison history and should have led to a better decision.
Grant was still hospitalized but doing better, the Rev. Jim Summey, pastor of English Road Baptist Church in High Point, said Wednesday. His church is part of West End Ministries, which operates Leslie’s House as a shelter for single women who are homeless or, in some cases, trying to separate from a husband or boyfriend. Friday’s attack was “very disturbing for us,” Summey said. “We were all just so upset.”

Grant isn’t the first victim of multiple assaults, Chris Preston, a victim witness coordinator for the District Attorney’s Office in High Point, said Wednesday.

“Unfortunately, this happens very often,” she sighed. “Time and again, we see the same victims, the same defendants. ... There’s a horrible, horrendous cycle of domestic violence.”
High Point police try to break that cycle with a “very pro-arrest policy. In all domestic violence situations, if there’s any sign at all that there’s an assault, we’re going to pursue it,” Casterline said.

The March 30 incident was “not a clear-cut domestic violence situation,” he added, but there was evidence of an assault. “Clearly something happened.” The officer’s original report indicated “minor” injuries to the victim.

She wasn’t as lucky the second time.

“Quite frankly, the reason we go to the lengths we go to is because of this exact situation,” Casterline said.

Judge Turner called it “terrible and regrettable ... the worst nightmare” of a magistrate or judge: “You release somebody and they go out and do more harm.”

That’s always a risk, especially in Guilford County, where overcrowded jails lack room for all the offenders who probably ought to be locked up.

There’s no simple answer to that problem, but when someone who’s obviously dangerous can be locked up, he should be locked up — or else someone else may get hurt.

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

It’s a given that kids born into poverty start life at a severe disadvantage that limits their full potential. A report released this week by the nonprofit Action for Children North Carolina goes a step further by saying it also can impair brain development.

What impact the revelation about poverty’s effect on the brain will have is unclear. But at least it underscores the seriousness of a pervasive problem that puts poor children at a disadvantage when competing with their more affluent peers.

In North Carolina, grappling with inter-generational poverty costs the state millions of dollars, not to mention the human toll. The social and economic costs are staggering considering that an estimated 25 percent of the state’s children under 5 live in homes below the federal poverty level.

No matter what caused the poverty to take hold, early intervention is critical in fighting it and giving poor kids a better chance at success. According to the report, remedies include revamping the state’s economy to attract more jobs that provide a living wage. Parents earning the minimum wage probably don’t have time to nurture and develop young minds.

Poor families trapped in crime-ridden neighborhoods have only scant hope of moving out. Seldom do they have access to decent child health care that could identify potentially harmful physical and mental health issues.

There’s been progress, but not enough. The governor’s More at Four initiative targets at-risk children by getting them into the classroom early. Free school breakfast and lunch programs help meet nutritional needs.

But the poverty cycle will never be broken unless parents themselves achieve educational and economic levels compatible with engaging and stimulating their children. While early child development sets the pattern for life, family stability increases the odds for success.

Too many kids start at a disadvantage and never catch up. Leveling that playing field takes time, money and a unified response.

“This has shocked everybody,” Dan Lynch said, speaking for, well, just about everybody.

The president of the Greensboro Economic Development Partnership was referring to angry complaints voiced this week by TIMCO Aviation Services chief executive John R. Cawthron about HondaJet.

The Japanese company is a “subsidized foreign entity” cutting its costs by “stealing from TIMCO,” Cawthron wrote in a letter published as an op-ed column Friday. By “stealing,” he meant hiring highly skilled engineers.

The alarming outburst upsets what had been a hopeful view of an emerging Triad aviation industry centered at PTI Airport and featuring companies like TIMCO and HondaJet. As they grow and contribute to a synergistic business environment that draws other firms in related fields, they are expected to create thousands of highly skilled design, engineering, manufacturing and maintenance jobs. GTCC is already stepping up to the challenge of training workers to fill some of those jobs.

Suddenly Cawthron reveals the other side of the equation: competition for top employees.

HondaJet says it’s advertising for employees, not stealing anyone. The answer to this problem is to train or attract enough workers for everyone.

More troublesome is Cawthron’s resentment of the tax breaks and benefits used to land HondaJet. This shouldn’t have shocked anyone. State and local governments play a risky game of favoritism when they offer incentives to lure new companies and inadvertently give them competitive advantages over companies they already have.

“I will now be forced to consider TIMCO’s expansion away from the Triad where I must compete for labor with a North Carolina state and locally subsidized, foreign giant who will probably never reach employee levels that TIMCO now provides to the Triad area,” Cawthron wrote.

Diplomacy has begun between the two companies. Long term: Inequitable and possibly counterproductive incentives policies must be fixed.

Spring is an especially vulnerable time for young people, when proms, peer pressure, fast cars — and alcohol — can mix to create a potent blend of temptation and poor judgment.

As recently as Friday, the Alamance County Sheriff’s Office announced that nine high school students who had attended prom at the Burlington Ramada Inn were issued citations for underage alcohol possession.

Nationally, approximately 5,000 people under the age of 21 die each year as a result of alcohol use. Among those deaths, 1,900 come in car crashes, 1,600 from homicides, 300 from suicides and hundreds more from falls, drownings, burns and other injuries.

Many don’t wait until spring to make deadly choices. In January 2007, an 18-year-old senior at Wakefield High School in Raleigh died when a car in which he was riding slid down an embankment. He had been to a party for underage drinkers.

That March, five Wakefield students were charged with taking part in the same party. A week later, six more Wakefield students were cited for attending yet another underage drinking party. In less than a year, five Wakefield students died in alcohol-related crashes. The appeal of alcohol to young people can be that magnetic.

In response, the Guilford County Substance Abuse Coalition, Alcohol and Drug Services and the News & Record have joined forces to sponsor a town hall meeting on underage drinking Monday night at Grimsley High School.

In Guilford County, 41 percent of all students reported using alcohol in the last 30 days in 2003. Twenty-four percent admitted to binge drinking in the last 30 days. Binge drinking, as defined by the experts, entails having five or more drinks within two hours.

Monday’s 6:30 p.m. town hall meeting is aimed particularly at parents and teens but is open to everyone. It will feature a variety of panelists who will address the teen drinking problem from a variety of perspectives, including those of young people. Police Chief Tim Bellamy will participate, as will District Court Judge Susan Burch and a number of health professionals.

The message will be simple but powerful: Talk openly and honestly with your children about the issue. Don’t underestimate the role parents and the broader community can play in stemming the tide of teen alcohol abuse. Acknowledge the role some adults obviously play as enabling teens to drink, from supplying the alcohol to sanctioning parties where it is served.

And be aware that other adults can tacitly enable underage drinking by not knowing their children’s activities and whereabouts. Ignorance may be bliss, but it’s a sorry excuse when young lives are at stake.

Have you registered for the first time to vote or have you recently changed party affiliation? Why?

Six years ago, Elizabeth Dole dazzled North Carolina voters and won election to the U.S. Senate from the state where she was born and raised.

The Salisbury native, Duke graduate and Harvard-trained lawyer already had built an impressive career in Washington, including Cabinet posts under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Married to Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas, she delivered perhaps the best speech at the Republican National Convention in 1996 when he was the party’s presidential nominee.

In 1999, she resigned her job as president of the American Red Cross to launch a presidential bid of her own. Although it sputtered before the primaries, the effort further raised her national profile. These accomplishments place her among the most notable North Carolinians.

Beyond any question, Dole deserves the Republican Party’s nomination to run for re-election to the Senate. She is its leading lady in North Carolina. The second candidate in the GOP primary, Pete Di Lauro of Weldon, a former New York City police officer, recommends on his Web site voting everyone out of office and giving someone else a chance. That’s not a convincing pitch.

Dole supports President Bush’s Iraq policies and Republican positions on most other issues, including tax relief, gun rights and “sanctity of life.” Lately she’s focused on immigration and services for veterans. Poised and gracious, she remains popular, commands formidable campaign resources and, despite her party’s troubles, could repeat her success of six years ago.

North Carolina Democrats need a U.S. Senate candidate who can do two things:

l convince voters she has the desire and ability to represent the state effectively in Washington;
l and give Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole a credible challenge.

Kay Hagan is the only Democrat who meets both requirements.

Dole has her own primary, but opponent Pete Di Lauro from Weldon doesn’t pose any competition. In his last political outing, he lost a race for a town council seat.

Hagan’s never lost an election for public office. The long-time Greensboro resident is completing her fifth term in the state Senate, where she quickly rose to leadership positions and ranks seventh in the latest effectiveness survey by the North Carolina Center for Public Policy Research.

Her rivals for the nomination, particularly Jim Neal, closest to her in the polls, may criticize her views on some issues or claim they have better ideas, but no one knows what they’d do once in office. Hagan has a track record: She’s worked hard, kept promises and been accessible to constituents. Few, if any, elected officials in the Triad are more highly regarded than Hagan.

North Carolina has elected senators before — John East, Lauch Faircloth, John Edwards, some would say Dole — who’ve been seen too little here once they’ve seen Washington.

There’s less risk Hagan would be like that because she’s gone to Raleigh to serve Greensboro, not personal or political agendas.

As a moderate Democrat who supports business and economic development, she can contest Dole for independent voters. But she also holds mainstream Democratic views on education, health care and other social issues. A lawyer and former banker, she’s smart and experienced in finance. As a wife and mother who raised three children while working, she understands family concerns.

Neal, a Greensboro native who lived out of state for nearly three decades while pursuing a career in business and finance, began running almost immediately after returning to North Carolina two years ago. He’s personally appealing and well-spoken, winning a following among very liberal Democrats. But his self-proclaimed “outsider” status and lack of a public record would make him an unlikely winner against Dole.

Lumberton attorney Marcus Williams has a long record of engagement in community service and presents himself as offering middle ground between Hagan and Neal. She, he says, is “only three or four issues from Dole,” and he is “so left he can’t be elected.” But Williams hasn’t assembled a viable campaign organization.

Duskin Lassiter of Lexington, who owns a trucking business, and Dr. Howard Staley, a podiatrist who lives in Moncure, round out the field but also lack political experience.

Democrats originally hoped to attract either outgoing Gov. Mike Easley or N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper to this race. Both passed. It may prove to be Kay Hagan, however, who’s best able to take on Elizabeth Dole.

The $114 million bond proposal for a new 1,000-bed Guilford County Detention Center, though needed, is mind-boggling.

Unless you live in Mecklenburg County, where consultants advised commissioners they need to build prison space for an additional 4,500 inmates by 2030. The cost could exceed $500 million.

At some point, it’s got to be a lot cheaper to pay for effective crime prevention.

Most of us are familiar with the Greensboro Urban Ministry, one of the two nonprofits Bruce Springsteen and fans will help support through The Boss’ Greensboro concert tonight. Less is known of the other nonprofit: Project Green Leaf.

Directed by UNCG’s Susan And­reatta, it supports the development of local agriculture. It does that by helping make connections — among farmers; business owners, such as restaurateurs; and consumers.

At greenleaf.uncg.edu you’ll find information on local farms and farmers’ markets, restaurants that purchase food grown locally, even recipes. Thinking about starting a small farm? The Web site provides resources. Project Green Leaf also is helping fishermen make a living through its Wild Caught Fishing Project, which assists Carteret County fishermen in finding and developing markets for their catch.

With news of some food staples depleting globally (as well as escalating in price), the work of Project Green Leaf becomes essential. Local food producers are vital for an area’s food security.

... and battered ram.

And father and son to boot.

UNC-Chapel Hill’s mascot, Rameses XVII, lost his job earlier this month after son Pablo butted him with enough strength to knock off one of his horns.

Reporters had a field day with the Oedipal references, all of which were lost on the two major players in the drama. But now, the drama has taken an even more tragic turn. The elder ram died Thursday morning because of an infection resulting from the head-butting.

Rameses XVII was buried that night on James Hogan’s Magnolia View Farm outside Carrboro. The Hogan family has supplied UNC-Chapel Hill with its ram mascots since 1924.

It was apparent even before the polls closed in Pennsylvania.

North Carolina was going to play second fiddle to Indiana in the Democratic presidential campaign and the media coverage of it during the next two weeks.

With the pundits viewing a North Carolina win as certain for Barack Obama, and an Obama-Hillary Clinton debate in the state shelved, the Tar Heel State and its May 6 primary suddenly became less interesting. Indiana was the next battleground, the North Carolina primary something to mention in parentheses.

The John Locke Foundation’s John Hood, though, sees our state’s primary as pivotal. He writes at www.carolinajournal.com: “If Obama maintains his substantial lead here and blows her out, that could make it mathematically impossible for her to catch up in the popular vote in subsequent, smaller states. And if, somehow, Clinton were to come from behind and eke out a victory here, it would knock the Obama campaign for a loop and cause a major crisis of confidence.”

So maybe we do matter. At least to our state’s pundits.

Still, better to be ignored than to get the national spotlight for ill-thought-out activity, as the state Republican Party has done with its TV ad linking Democratic gubernatorial candidates Beverly Perdue and Richard Moore with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s controversial former pastor.

Both the Republican National Committee and Republican presidential candidate John McCain have asked the state party not to run it.

Amazingly, the state party, as of this writing, hasn’t listened, so, unless TV stations refuse to run it, you can catch the ad’s debut tonight.

Longtime incumbent Guilford County Commissioner Melvin “Skip” Alston is a savvy and talented politician. Unfortunately, those attributes too often are overshadowed by belligerence, intimidation and a propensity to see nearly every issue from a racial perspective.

Next Tuesday, District 8 voters will decide whether Alston or opponent Greg Woodard will get the job. In this contest, the Democratic Party primary determines a winner.

Woodard, who has been active in several community and veterans-based organizations, last fall made an unsuccessful bid for an at-large seat on the Greensboro City Council. This time around, an ill-timed bout with pneumonia is preventing him from actively campaigning.

But despite his skimpy resume, he’s a better choice than Alston, who consistently squanders political capital by practicing his unique version of divide-and-conquer political hardball.

That said, Alston does deserve credit for pressuring the county into seeing that African Americans get a fair chance at county jobs and business contracts. His constituency and mission, as he sees it, stretch well beyond his own district.

But his tiresome, in-your-face tactics only serve to further hamper a board already prone to divisiveness — much to the county’s detriment. Not all issues can or should be viewed through a prism of black and white.

Woodard is an unknown quantity. Yet, if he were given the opportunity to serve, there’s every reason to believe he would respond well.

Woodard, who is white, faces an uphill fight in the overwhelmingly minority district. Not being able to campaign further reduces his already slim chances of winning.

Should Alston prevail as expected, he must take time to reassess his priorities and tone down the rhetoric.

So, which Billy Yow are we discussing today: the Good Billy Yow or the Bad Billy Yow?

The Good Billy Yow is a lot smarter than he lets on and capable of prudent votes on key issues such as the downtown property swap that paved the way for a new downtown ballpark in Greensboro. The Bad Billy Yow can be caustic and divisive, even when you’re convinced he knows better.

Yow’s a Hatfield to fellow County Commissioner Skip Alston’s McCoy when it comes to racial politics, and both have played starring roles in “The County Commissioners’ Most Forgettable Moments.”

Good Billy seems sincere when he says he regrets past transgressions. Then, oops, Bad Billy goes and does it again.

Yow and Alston often lock horns in name-calling and petty childishness that embarrass the whole county and tarnish its image statewide and arguably beyond.

And unfortunately, you can’t have Good Billy without the bad one. That’s why it’s worth taking a chance on a newcomer rather than returning Yow, 45, to a third term in the District 5 Republican primary, which essentially decides the outcome. No Democrat filed to run.

Yow’s prime challenger, Rick Wallace, 45, is a Town Council member and a former mayor of Pleasant Garden. A third candidate, Lisa Andrews, has not responded to interview requests and seems not to be mounting a serious campaign.

Wallace is a chemical plant supervisor who is running on a platform of “sensible planning,” “quality education” and “professional behavior.” Yow stresses his opposition to property tax increases, incentives and county funding of community-based organizations.

Yow and Wallace clearly differ on $671.6 million in county bonds, which also will appear on the May 6 ballot. Yow supports only the jail bonds and bonds to help rebuild Eastern Guilford High School, which was destroyed by fire in 2006. Wallace supports bonds for GTCC, the schools and Eastern Guilford. He argues, correctly, that the county finds itself where it is with school spending because it neglected school needs for so long.

Yow says he opposes tax increases while Wallace pledges to hold them “to a minimum.” Both, however, support the proposed quarter-cent sales tax increase as a means to ease the burden on property-tax payers.

The main difference between the two men is, in fact, more style than substance. Yow is unpredictable. Wallace at least offers a hope for more consistent and professional behavior.

Yow contended in an interview that Wallace has been “rude” as a Pleasant Garden leader. But Yow himself has been involved in so much infamous behavior that the uncertainty of a less-familiar face is preferable to the one we know.

That’s why Wallace is the better choice in District 5.