News-Record.com

Friday's lead editorial.

What happens if Hillary Clinton hitches a ride on John McCain’s campaign bus?
You can’t call it “Straight Talk Express” anymore.

Clinton and McCain are barreling down a dead-end road together with their proposal to get rid of the federal gas tax for the summer. Sure, it’s full speed ahead for a while. But they can’t get anywhere in the long run.

McCain came up with the idea first, calling on Congress “to suspend the 18.4-cent federal gas tax and 24.4-cent diesel tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day.”

He didn’t propose any way to make up the lost revenue, which supports transportation programs like highway construction and, incidentally, keeps a lot of people working. But at least he acknowledged a role for Congress.

Clinton didn’t when she mimicked McCain’s proposal and added a dubious funding mechanism.
“Hillary will impose a windfall profits tax on oil companies and use the money to temporarily suspend the 18.4-cent per gallon federal gas tax and the 24.4-cent per gallon diesel tax during the upcoming peak summer driving months,” her campaign proclaimed.

Hillary will impose? She’s not president yet. And this “windfall profits tax on oil companies” raises such a complex issue it would take Congress months to enact the necessary legislation — if it ever could agree on what amount of profit is considered a “windfall” and how much money oil companies, or any companies, ought to be allowed to make. What she proposes, then, is an immediate tax break paid for by a very speculative revenue source sometime later.

But this is about political mileage, not policy sustainability. Maybe it’s a smart bid for votes. Motorists would welcome any break at the pumps and might resent Barack Obama’s dismissal that they’d only save an average of $30 over the entire summer.

In the long haul, however, the country needs to develop more energy resources and break its addiction to foreign oil. Obama has put forward some suggestions, and Clinton and McCain have as well. They all know that encouraging Americans to drive more — many of them in gas-guzzlers, still — isn’t going to pay off down the road. And depleting revenues for transportation projects isn’t going to keep the country moving.

Americans don’t need to pay higher gas taxes. North Carolina legislators wisely capped the state’s gas tax last year, or else motorists here would be paying even more at the pump now.
Yet, it simply isn’t responsible to pretend that a gas tax summer holiday is going to pay any real dividends. McCain and Clinton ought to get off that bus. It’s running on empty.

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

The three Democrats vying for a chance in the May 6 primary to unseat veteran 6th District Rep. Howard Coble all say it’s time for a change.

In addition to sharing a view that Coble’s voting record makes him vulnerable, they have something else in common. All are making a first try at elective office.

Johnny Carter, 59, lives with his family in Summerfield and is general manager for a local plumbing and heating company.

Jay Ovittore, 34 and single, operates a painting business. He’s been active in the local Democratic Party and serves on the Greensboro Human Relations Commission.

Teresa Sue Bratton, 59, is a physician specializing in pediatric allergies. She’s married, has three children and resides in Greensboro.

While they agree on a number of issues including an end to congressional funding for the Iraq war, each has a much different take on health care.

And on that key issue, Bratton offers a more workable approach than her opponents. She favors compatible government and private coverage for people not in employer-paid plans.

Carter calls for quickly expanding coverage now available to members of Congress to everyone. Ovittore prefers transitioning to a government-run single-payer system.

Bratton comes across as thoughtful and knowledgeable. If elected, time spent living in Great Britain and Canada could prove an asset in the national health care debate.

Ovittore’s sometimes intense demeanor can be a turnoff. As for Carter, he’s pleasant enough but doesn’t offer voters much to distinguish himself from the crowd.

Any of the three would face a formidable task in taking on the popular Coble, who has no primary opposition in the heavily Republican 6th District.

However, Bratton emerges as the candidate who best articulates an opposing viewpoint worth hearing.

Saturday's lead editorial

Not one North Carolina state legislator voted against a tough, new sex-offender monitoring law last year. But some judges have.

The latest was Ripley Rand, who ruled in Wake County Superior Court last week that four registered sex offenders should be released from satellite tracking systems.

Twenty-one others have been granted similar breaks in other courts.

Activist judges rewriting laws at the expense of public safety? That might be a common reaction. After all, sexual predators often repeat their offenses. The best way to prevent that, if they’re not incarcerated, is to strictly limit where they can go and whom they can see. That requires close monitoring.

But it must be done without violating constitutional safeguards that apply even to convicted sex offenders. Judge Rand spotted one problem with the law’s application, and he didn’t address another one.

The law went into effect Dec. 1 but applied to everyone who was at that time a registered sex offender and met other criteria. It’s questionable, at best, whether a new law can go back and place additional conditions on a defendant that weren’t part of his original judgment. Rand dismissed the monitoring requirement on that basis. He didn’t consider a further objection that the new law effectively increases penalties long after conviction and sentencing.

On the other hand, judges can use the law to order lifetime monitoring for offenders whose crimes were committed on or after Dec. 1 — unless the courts find other objections.
Satellite tracking has become a popular means of watching offenders who are never trusted, even after they complete their sentences. But it strains the agencies assigned the job of operating, maintaining and paying for the systems. While the offenders themselves often are required to pay the cost — several thousand dollars a year — many simply don’t have the money. Potential employers, always aware of the criminal history, aren’t keen to hire sex offenders who carry obtrusive tracking devices wherever they go.

Laws like this should give judges some discretion to limit monitoring when appropriate. For some offenders, lifetime tracking might seem excessive. In cases of extremely dangerous predators, however, judges should use every legal means they can to lengthen prison terms.

There’s no need for satellite tracking when criminals are confined to 8x10-foot cells. And, if a person poses such a severe threat to the community that he has to be tracked everywhere he goes, maybe he can’t be trusted in society in the first place. After all, the best tracking system in the world can’t stop a crime. And, isn’t that the objective?
.

Saturday's No. 2 editorial.

Not yet having served three full terms in Congress, U.S. Rep. Brad Miller already has become a respected national figure. But he also has his pulse on the pocketbook issues affecting North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District. Democrats in that district should again make him their nominee.

The 13th District stretches along the Virginia border and into parts of Raleigh, Burlington and Greensboro. Miller, 54, lives in Raleigh.

Miller’s concern for the common man has led him to take a leadership role in unraveling and finding remedies for the subprime mortgage crisis. He lists as a key accomplishment House passage of an anti-predatory lending bill modeled after a much-praised North Carolina law. He also is working to provide help to homeowners facing foreclosure.

It’s appealing that Miller has held hearings on topics where the government has performed poorly, such as the NASA survey of airline pilots that the agency itself suppressed because of its worrisome findings. It’s also refreshing to see Miller confident enough to buck Democratic leaders, as he did in his vote on the Armenian genocide issue last year.

Miller’s opponent, Derald Hafner, 63, also professes to be a candidate for the people. A former Republican, the Granville County small businessman, organic farmer and first-time candidate wants to take action against America’s mounting debt by greatly limiting federal government and by largely ending federal borrowing. Among other things, he would work to end U.S. military actions in other countries, cut back on social programs and abolish the Federal Reserve. To help U.S. workers, he would repeal the income tax, support tariffs on goods coming into the country and secure borders to keep illegal immigrants out.

Hafner’s ideas may appeal to some voters, but the platform he has chosen is wrong. They are more in keeping with the Constitution Party.

The winner faces Republican Hugh Webster, a former state senator, in the fall.

Have high gas prices affected your lifestyle? If so, how?

Sunday's editorial.

Of all the words you could use to describe Mike Easley, outgoing isn’t one of them.
The popular two-term Democratic governor chooses to be seen very little and to be heard from even less.

Aside from his commendable prodding of local governments to react more urgently to a severe drought, Easley typically prefers closed doors to open ones, and tight lips to transparency.
Up close and personal, Easley is a likable enough guy. And there is something refreshing about a politician who actually shuns bright lights and cameras. But he is notoriously reclusive and rarely has seized the initiative to lead instead of merely govern.

What the state needs desperately right now is a governor who can bring people and ideas together — who is willing to set the tone, the pace and the priorities in Raleigh.

Each member of a generally strong field of Republican and Democratic candidates contends he or she can provide the sense of focus and direction state government needs right now in the wake of a mental health reform disaster and a string of ethics embarrassments.

But two clearly stand above the others.

The case for McCrory

Among five candidates in the Republican primary, Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory offers the most impressive record and the most creative ideas.

McCrory, 51, grew up in Jamestown, where he graduated from Ragsdale High School. He is the longest-serving mayor in Charlotte history, having won seven terms. In a setting where city elections are partisan, McCrory also has worked effectively over those years with a majority-Democratic council. He pushed a sales tax for mass transit that voters overwhelmingly approved and championed the city’s fledgling light-rail line.

Beyond Charlotte’s city limits, McCrory was the founding member and is a driving force behind the N.C. Metropolitan Coalition, which brings mayors together to discuss common issues, including the growing threat of youth gangs.

McCrory calls for a 50-year state transportation plan and rightly contends that state transportation projects should be based on need, not politics. He favors lower corporate and income taxes over incentives as better ways to recruit industry.

One reservation: His strategy on immigration is much more reasoned in person than on his TV ads, which appeal to voters’ baser instincts and emotions.

Among the other Republican hopefuls, Bob Orr is a thoughtful and principled former state Supreme Court justice.

Fred Smith is an affable state senator who has run a spirited and competitive campaign.
Salisbury lawyer Bill Graham waged an effective grass-roots protest against rising state gasoline taxes.

And Sampson County farmer Elbie Powers mounted an unsuccessful bid for agriculture commissioner in 2000.

But McCrory stands alone as the best choice in the Republican primary.

Moore over Perdue

Were it not for the ruthless tenor of his negative campaign ads, State Treasurer Richard Moore would receive an unqualified nod over Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue in the Democratic primary.
Moore oversees $90 billion in state investments and has been an excellent steward of the state pension fund.

He has maintained the state’s stellar triple-A credit rating. He also has won national acclaim for his crusade against Wall Street investment firm abuses. Moore, 47, also lobbied forcefully and successfully for an increase in the state’s minimum wage.

He supports a further increase to the minimum wage, pre-paid college tuition plans that would lock in tuition rates, and tax cuts for small businesses.

Perdue, 61, is a former state representative and senator who became North Carolina’s first female lieutenant governor. She would be its first female governor as well.
She played a lead role in keeping the state’s military bases open and she headed the state’s Health and Wellness Trust Fund.

Despite their ferocious campaigns against one another, Moore and Perdue agree on most issues, but his blend of moxie and inventiveness make Moore the better leader.

What would not serve him or the state well is the caustic tone of his campaign ads. While Perdue has pledged to suspend negative ads for the rest of the primary, Moore keeps slinging away.

He should base his campaign on the strength of his own record, not his brazen attacks on hers.

Tuesday's editorial.

For weeks, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have treated North Carolina to the greatest political show on earth: an American presidential campaign. Even John McCain has gotten in on the act with an appearance in Charlotte Monday and a planned speech today at Wake Forest University.

For those of us not used to this much attention from presidential candidates, the experience has been exciting and entertaining. Despite record early voting, Primary Day turnout is expected to be enormous. The atmosphere at polling places will be electric.

The one problem is that so much energy drawn to the top of today’s ballot has cast state and local candidates and issues into the shadows of uncertainty. They deserve consideration, too — and they won’t run off to other states after today’s voting is done.

We’ve made recommendations regarding some of the important decisions voters face today. We’ll cover more in the general election, but today’s outcomes constitute the voters’ final answer in some. Here’s a recap:

U.S. Senate
Elizabeth Dole won this seat in 2002 and remains the leading lady of North Carolina Republicans. She’s a clear choice in her party’s primary.

Among five Democrats, state Sen. Kay Hagan from Greensboro is the only candidate who’s demonstrated two qualities: the ability to serve effectively in office, and the political experience to make a credible run against Dole.

Congress, 6th District
First elected in 1984, Greensboro Republican Howard Coble has no primary opposition, but three Democrats are competing for the right to challenge him in November. Best qualified is Greensboro physician Teresa Sue Bratton, whose top issue is creating a better health care system.

Congress, 13th District
For Democrats, Brad Miller of Raleigh is an easy choice over Derald Hafner. In three terms, Miller has become one of the most effective members of the state’s congressional delegation. Hugh Webster of Yanceyville is the lone Republican candidate.

Governor
The overriding issue is leadership. Voters should choose the candidates who promise smart, creative and effective management of state government. The next governor must put an end to closed-door, special-interest politics and work with members of both parties to get things done.
Among Republicans, that’s the successful seven-term mayor of Charlotte, Pat McCrory. He’s proved that partisanship yields when leaders put forward a unifying vision.

State Treasurer Richard Moore fits the bill for Democrats, although his overly aggressive campaign against Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue warns of too much ambition and a streak of ruthlessness. Nevertheless, Moore has a record of impressive accomplishments.

State Senate, District 28
This Democrats-only contest matches Guilford County Commissioner Bruce Davis of High Point against incumbent Katie Dorsett of Greensboro. Experienced and respected, she gracefully and conscientiously represents a diverse district. Davis’ bid for her seat is premature.

State House District 61
Republicans own this district, where Laura Wiley of High Point has served with energy and intelligence for two terms. Jamestown resident George Ragsdale is promising but hasn’t made a convincing case for replacing Wiley.

County Commissioner, District 5
Republican voters can replace sometimes-wise, sometimes-wicked Billy Yow with steadier Rick Wallace, a former mayor of Pleasant Garden.

County Commissioner, District 8
Skip Alston too often wastes his considerable political talents pursuing racial conflicts. Veterans advocate Greg Woodard is untested but worth a try in this Democratic contest.

Bonds and sales-tax proposal
Guilford County voters decide costly but important proposals. Our view:
Parks and recreation bonds, $20.2 million, No. The projects are fine, but they aren’t necessities.
Jail bonds, $114.6 million, Yes. A new facility housing 1,000 prisoners is needed to supplement the outdated, overcrowded and unsafe jail in Greensboro.

School bonds, $412.3 million, Yes. The plan contains some nonessential items that the school board should revisit, but the reality is that more and better classroom space is required for a growing population of students.

GTCC bonds, $79.5 million, Yes. The community college is a key driver of economic development and the place where thousands go to learn new job skills. It must be equipped for a challenging future.

Eastern Guilford bonds, $45 million, Yes. This fulfills an obligation to rebuild the high school that was destroyed by fire in 2006.

Sales-tax increase, one-fourth cent, Yes. This funding option relieves pressure on the property tax.

Wednesday's lead editorial.

Weeks of anticipation ended abruptly Tuesday evening when television news networks declared North Carolina early for Barack Obama.

So early, in fact, that many voters were still waiting in lines at polling places well after the official closing time of 7:30. CNN, for one, didn’t wait.

An early call for the Illinois senator was appropriate. Obama’s campaign urged supporters to vote early, and many thousands did over the past two weeks. By the time polls showed Hillary Clinton catching up, it probably was too late. Obama’s win was practically in the books.

Until Tuesday, Clinton based her claim to the Democratic nomination on the strength of her success in large states. But she couldn’t hold form in the last Top Ten state on the primary schedule. Despite trailing in Indiana, Obama took a possibly decisive step ahead with his convincing win here.

The team of Hillary, Bill and Chelsea Clinton worked hard, making appearances almost everywhere in North Carolina, but Obama drew larger and more enthusiastic crowds and, more importantly, got out the vote.

The question now is whether he could wrest this reliably red state from the Republicans in November. It’s far too early to make that call, but he won so many more votes than did John McCain (in a noncompetitive GOP primary) that anything seems possible.

Schools rate a high priority
Anita Bachmann and other leaders of the school bonds campaign cheered as positive numbers continued to roll in at the Old Guilford County Courthouse Tuesday night.

Several commissioners fretted about the taxes needed to pay for them.

“This is an automatic property tax increase,” Chairman Kirk Perkins said. “But the people have spoken.”

Bachmann led a force of more than 200 volunteers who drummed up support throughout the county for a record $457 million for schools. Their efforts were driven by passion for their cause, said Bachmann, a regional vice president for UnitedHealthcare.

Despite hard economic times, voters answered responsibly, owning up to obvious needs for new and better school facilities. The result wasn’t a landslide, but it sends a clear message that schools remain a high priority — even at the price of higher taxes.

GTCC again prevails
Guilford County voters have never turned down a GTCC bond request. They kept the streak alive Tuesday by overwhelmingly approving a $79.5 million referendum that will fund projects vital to the school’s growth and the Triad’s economic future.

It means school officials can move ahead with their plans to build a $50.5 million campus near PTI Airport specializing in aviation and logistics, and to improve existing campuses.

A rapidly changing Triad economy underscores the urgency to retrain laid-off workers and provide classes for those entering the work force. GTCC excels on both counts.

The school, which is celebrating its 50th anniversary, now can forge ahead with its continuing commitment to have trained workers ready when potential employers call.

Voters were less charitable when it came to the $20.2 million county parks bond. Although it was the least costly item in the bond referendum, most apparently had qualms about such spending in a faltering economy.

Hagan gets back to work
Kay Hagan celebrated her victory in a familiar setting Tuesday night, but planned to get back to work today. “I’ll be on the phone raising money,” she said at the Old Guilford County Courthouse, a place where she’s watched election returns from several successful campaigns in the past.

This time the numbers gave her the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate and a race against Republican Elizabeth Dole. The Greensboro resident and state senator has an uphill fight, but an impressive win against four other candidates increases her credibility and might convince national Democrats that an upset is possible. Still, it will take millions to match Dole’s likely campaign fund and overcome her other advantages.

Hagan’s primary didn’t attract much attention with so much interest in the presidential battle, but she should continue to do well as voters get to know her better. “They’re eager for a change in Washington,” she said.

And then there were twoState Treasurer Richard Moore had lots going for him in his bid for governor: a national profile as a crusader against Wall Street abuse, a sterling record as keeper of the state employee pension fund, and a head of hair that could give John Edwards a run for his money. But in the end, Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue got the most votes and moves on as the Democratic nominee against the Republican nominee, Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory, in November.

Moore had erased much of an early Perdue lead in the pre-election polls, with a series of full-throated (some would say cutthroat) attack ads. Perdue responded by pledging to withdraw her own attack ads and to go positive until the primary.

McCrory now faces two challenges: He is a Republican in a state that tends to elect Democratic governors and he is a big-city mayor who will have to make inroads among small-town voters.

But he also has worked well across party lines as a mayor, and could attract crossover votes from Democrats.

This should be a good race between two good choices for North Carolina voters.

The house BJ builtAs Guilford County Sheriff BJ Barnes sees it, it was the truth that set him free.
In a result that surprised even Barnes, county voters approved the $114.6 million jail bond Tuesday that will renovate and build an addition to the overcrowded Greensboro facility.
Given the soft economy, voters’ aversion to tax increases and the traditional tendency of electorates to not like paying for jails, this was a major upset.

But Barnes had mounted a full-court press. “It’s Your Decision: Our House or Yours” billboards suggested, rightly if not subtly, that crowded jails force early release of some offenders who might not otherwise be released. “The deal-closer was that some people are not feeling safe in their homes,” Barnes said.

Barnes had noted earlier on Election Night that jail bonds rarely pass, and he seemed resigned to a similar result here. “Ninety-eight percent of jail bonds across the country fail,” he said. “I was bucking the odds to expect to be in the 2 percent (that pass).”

Lo and behold, we were.

The jail victory is good news for all of the county. But those who push alternative programs to help reduce crime, drug addiction and jail crowding still need to be heard. A new jail without those kinds of programs to help address root causes of crime inevitably would become a house of cards.

Thursday's No. 2 editorial.

Barack Obama had good reason Tuesday to say, “Thank you, North Carolina.”

Voters in the state’s Democratic primary gave him a strong and possibly decisive victory over Hillary Clinton.

Will he repeat the line on Nov. 4?

If he does, other Democrats on the ballot might say, “Thank you, Barack Obama.”
The idea that Obama, if he secures his party’s nomination, could carry North Carolina isn’t as far-fetched as it seems considering Republican presidential candidates’ long winning streak here. John McCain, with his military record and appeal to moderates and independents, can do very well in North Carolina, but he’s got a math problem. More than three times as many people voted in the Democratic presidential primary Tuesday as in the Republican contest. How will McCain make up that difference? Even winning half of Hillary Clinton’s supporters won’t do it. He’ll also need to add an overwhelming majority of the likely general election voters who skipped the primaries.

Kay Hagan, the Democrats’ U.S. Senate candidate against Elizabeth Dole, expressed confidence in her party’s standard-bearer. “I’ll be running with the Democratic nominee,” she said Tuesday night.

North Carolina Democrats ran away from some past presidential candidates, including Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, John Kerry. If Obama heads the ticket, they’ll stick as close as they can to him because, unlike those others, he’s already shown he can draw North Carolina voters to the polls.

Tuesday’s primary mattered in the Democratic presidential nomination process. It also should be important enough to both parties in November for the candidates to put it on their campaign schedules.

Who ends up thanking whom will depend on whose voters turn out.

Thursday's lead editorial.

No one saw this one coming.

Even the most passionate supporters of the $412.3 million Guilford County school construction bond package that miraculously passed Tuesday seemed tempted to pinch themselves when it was over. We won?

Voters have blessed other school bonds in recent years, but this one had so much going against it:

• teetering local and national economies;

• a fistful of other bond projects that tugged on voters’ purse strings to the potential tune of more than $671 million — and that guaranteed sizable property tax increases;

• lack of faith among some in the school system’s ability to successfully manage construction projects.

• opposition from three black school board members who say the district has not met the needs of minority contractors and black students.

• opposition as well from the George Simkins Memorial PAC, which typically wields considerable influence in black voting precincts.

• the county commissioners’ decision to split the larger package of school bonds from a $45 million bond to help rebuild Eastern Guilford High School, which was destroyed by fire in November 2006. The premise was to remove any likelihood that “sympathy votes” for the Eastern bonds would boost the other school bonds, had they been combined on the ballot.
In the end, ironically, the general school bond package performed slightly better than the Eastern bonds, garnering 54.79 percent in “yes” votes versus 53.94 percent for Eastern.

Among likely reasons for this resounding — and utterly surprising — good news is the effective sales job school bond boosters did of communicating the various projects’ wide-ranging impact throughout the county. The bonds also enjoyed solid support from the business community, which has stepped up in recent years to invest in public education as an economic engine.
A local political consultant, Bill Burckley, also cites the high female turnout, arguing that female voters are more apt to favor bonds. Heavy doses of Democratic voters and new voters energized by the Obama-Clinton race probably helped as well.

As for the impact of opposition from the Simkins PAC and the black school board members, it appears negligible at best. The school bonds passed in most predominantly black precincts, nearly 58 percent in the district of one African American school board member, Deena Hayes.
So the bonds ultimately may have benefited from a confluence of good will and good fortune.
Now district leaders can breathe a sigh of relief and get on with making the overdue construction and renovation projects as efficient and cost-effective as possible.

This is an opportunity not only to build buildings, but to build trust as well.

Friday's lead editorial.

Even a high-tech powerhouse like Greensboro-based RF Micro isn’t immune from the mood swings of the global economy.

But whenever a high-profile corporate citizen lays off workers it’s noted with some trepidation. Memories of once rock-solid local textile giants disappearing at the cost of thousands of jobs still are fresh. Could history repeat itself?

On Tuesday, the microchip manufacturer announced significant layoffs for the second time in a month. Corporate restructuring eliminated 200 jobs in Greensboro for a total of 350 worldwide. That comes on the heels of 80 local jobs lost as part of a move to consolidate the company’s microchip testing in China.

Earlier this year, plans to expand a local plant and add jobs were put on hold after both the state and city had provided a tax-break package to seal the deal. Instead, a British subsidiary now will do the work.
.
Strategic corporate refocusing can be painful, particularly for the loyal workers who get pink slips. Thousands of downsized Piedmont workers already have taken that uncertain path. But corporate managers have an obligation to concerned stockholders to sense market trends and respond proactively.

RF Micro, begun here in 1991, has grown from a handful of employees to nearly 5,000 people around the world. It is one of Greensboro’s largest with about 2,000 workers. The company makes a specialized type of microchip for cellular phones and high-performance radio systems.
However, a constantly changing world marketplace dictates frequent fine-tuning. Staying one step ahead of the competition is the best way to stave off more draconian measures in the future.

The good news is the latest cuts don’t portend the outsourcing of jobs to China, where many cellular manufacturers have plants. In the long run, hundreds of RF Micro jobs in Greensboro could be saved.

For certain, the global economy is a two-way street. While some jobs head overseas, foreign companies set up shop here. Unfortunately, it isn’t always a fair trade-off. Laid-off RF Micro workers, for example, may not be candidates for aviation-related jobs at HondaJet.

Yet, no matter where jobs originate, it’s important to convey the message to high-tech businesses that the Triad is a good place to locate.

Setbacks such as the RF Micro layoffs will happen from time to time, but there’s no turning back the clock. Companies geared to succeeding in the ever-expanding global economy will fare far better than the traditional manufacturing sector.

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

For Greensboro City Council members, listening to what people say is part of the job.
No matter what they say.

So a proposal to put a content restriction on public comments is not permissible, Jamiah K. Waterman, an attorney for the city, says in a memo to the council.

Councilman Zach Matheny wasn’t trying to muzzle anyone. He just suggested reserving the 30-minute comment period before each council meeting for people raising issues related to city business. People who wanted to talk about other things would have to wait until the end of the meetings.

The idea wasn’t without appeal. Some speakers try everyone’s patience by gabbing for their allotted three minutes about matters that interest no one or lie beyond the ability of the council to address.

Nevertheless, the council can’t restrict speech by its content, Waterman advised. Council meetings traditionally are considered public forums where citizens gather to address their elected representatives. In such settings, government is restricted in its ability to regulate speech.

Waterman pointed to another problem. The distinction between what is or isn’t city business “is an ambiguous and vague standard. Such a standard will give too much discretion to the council to determine who speaks and when.”

Exactly. The council itself, in the many resolutions it considers, probably stretches the definition of “city business” in some people’s judgment. It shouldn’t deny its constituents the same latitude.

The council can impose rules for its public comment periods, but restrictions applied with a time clock are fair and easy to enforce. The content of speech has to be left alone. The council should listen to its attorney.

What surprised you the most about Tuesday's primary?

Tuesday's lead editorial.

Picture an elementary school where enrollment is 1,000 but classrooms hold only 750. In Guilford County, that doesn’t require much imagination.

In most circumstances, this overstuffed school scenario would put the extra 250 children in trailers. Eventually the school might be expanded or even replaced with a larger facility, but either option would cost millions of dollars.

There’s another way. The school could convert to a multi-track year-round schedule. This plan would divide the student body into four groups of 250 each and put them on a rotation of nine weeks in school and three weeks off, but staggered so that three groups are in and one is out at any given time.

There it is! Because a group of 250 students is always out for its three-week break, the school has room for the other 750. No more need for trailers, or an expensive expansion. Furthermore, the common areas — cafeteria, media center, bathrooms, gym, auditorium, playgrounds — are always one-fourth less crowded than they were before.

North Carolina’s fastest-growing school system, Wake County, adopted this multi-track year-round schedule for some of its schools several years ago to maximize classroom space, but not enough parents volunteered to send their children. So the school board assigned students, by the thousands. Several parents and an advocacy organization sued and won. A year ago, Superior Court Judge Howard Manning ruled the board is authorized by law to operate year-round schools only “on a voluntary consensual basis.”

Wrong, a panel of the N.C. Court of Appeals said unanimously last week. The General Assembly has given local school boards a “broad grant of authority,” the opinion written by Judge Martha Geer said. One relevant statute provides, about as clearly as it’s possible to express, that “the authority of each board of education in the matter of assignment of children to the public schools shall be full and complete, and its decision as to assignment of any child to any school shall be final.”

That’s coupled with the board’s further power to operate schools on a year-round schedule, the court said.

The only restraint on an elected board in setting policies like this, Geer wrote, citing an earlier Supreme Court ruling, “is at the ballot box.”

Year-round schools aren’t popular with everyone, and school board members who force them on families might be voted out of office. But, despite last week’s 55 percent support for $457 million in Guilford County school bonds, there are limits to the public’s ability to afford new and larger schools.

So, any means of finding more classroom space for children without new construction or more trailers must be considered. Last week’s court ruling assures school boards they have the authority to make assignments to year-round schools.

Really, that’s no more severe than the power they already use to put children in trailers or overcrowded schools. Can school leaders picture a better way?

Wednesday's lead editorial.

If North Carolina wants a clear policy for admitting illegal immigrants to community colleges and UNC institutions, the legislature needs to write it soon. All is confusion now.

The past week has seen this baffling series of events:

• The N.C. Attorney General’s Office advised the state community college system to reverse its six-month-old directive that “colleges should immediately begin admitting undocumented individuals.”

• Gov. Mike Easley urged community colleges to keep enrolling illegal immigrants anyway.
• Both candidates for governor, Democrat Bev Perdue and Republican Pat McCrory, said they disagree with Easley and the community college policy.

• The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency contradicted the attorney general’s advice, saying federal law doesn’t prevent states from admitting illegal immigrants from public colleges and universities.

• The community college system announced it would follow the attorney general’s advice and, beginning immediately, “no longer admit individuals classified as illegal or undocumented immigrants into curriculum degree programs.”

This fast-paced zig-zag traces the nation’s convoluted thinking about immigration. People cross the border illegally to find work, and a U.S. Supreme Court ruling says their children are entitled to free public education through 12th grade. Some states have decided it makes sense to allow those who qualify academically to continue their education in public colleges and universities, enabling them to find more meaningful employment and become contributors to society ... except that employers technically aren’t supposed to hire undocumented immigrants.
The community college system waded into this stew, but only up to its ankles. It counted no more than 112 undocumented curriculum-degree students enrolled in its 58 colleges this year, and all pay tuition at the out-of-state rate. Certainly, many more would follow if they were permitted, but that won’t happen without further legal review or a vigorous public debate.

JB Kelly, the general counsel who wrote the advisory letter on behalf of N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper, admitted some questions about the application of federal law are unsettled. But in an interview Monday, he expressed certainty that the state legislature has full authority to enact an open-door policy in regard to immigration status for the UNC and community college systems.

There’s not much chance that Raleigh politicians will solve the immigration riddles that stump the best minds in Congress. The state can’t deport illegal immigrants or grant them legal status. It has no choice but to educate their children through high school. But it can decide whether to grant or deny them a path to public postsecondary education. It’s time to straighten out the zig-zag quandary on the enrollment question.

Tuesday's No. 2 editorial.

Legislative short sessions are supposed to be short on business. Yet that doesn’t mean the N.C. General Assembly can’t tackle a thing or two.

There are some issues that shouldn’t be too complicated or controversial for the small amount of time allotted to these sessions. One is legislation that would restore to Greensboro residents the right to use protest petitions.

All other residents of North Carolina cities can use these petitions to challenge land-use decisions. But the General Assembly took this option away from Greensboro residents in 1971, upon the City Council’s request. It needs to undo what it did.

Rep. Pricey Harrison has sponsored a bill that would do that. But for it to pass, the Guilford delegation must back it. With unanimous support, the bill would go forward, as other legislators would defer to what the county’s delegation wanted for this local bill.

One potential problem, though, is the action, or, rather, inaction, of the Greensboro City Council. It did not include restoration of the protest petition in its requests to the legislature.
It can be argued that the Guilford delegation shouldn’t act without a request by the council. But shouldn’t the widespread outpouring of citizen support in Greensboro for the protest petition, from individuals and neighborhood groups to the League of Women Voters, count for something?
The truth is the majority of Greensboro residents appear to support restoring the right to use protest petitions while only a few in the city’s development crowd oppose it. They argue that use of the petitions could impede growth.

Rep. Maggie Jeffus, who heads the Guilford delegation, hopes to convene its members Thursday to discuss the issue. We hope they decide to support Harrison’s bill, even without the City Council’s stamp of approval.

For 37 years, Greensboro residents have had to fight zoning decisions with one hand tied behind their back. There is no reason for residents to continue to be restrained this way for another year.

Thursday's No. 2 editorial.

Pursuing baseless allegations that Greensboro police officers intentionally destroyed evidence related to the 1979 Klan-Nazi shootings would be both futile and pointless.

An internal investigation concludes that, in 2001 or 2002, officers did indeed discard five to 10 boxes of newspaper clippings. Yet doing so clearly wasn’t a violation of departmental policy or state law.

That should be enough to persuade the U.S. Justice Department to drop the matter. It got involved after the state NAACP asked for a determination if any wrongdoing had occurred.
The City Council rightly said it would welcome an investigation. But much of this turmoil could have been avoided if city officials simply had responded several months earlier when the allegations first surfaced.

They chose not to, saying the information came from a then-anonymous source. So, in February, several local ministers went public with allegations that material relating to the deadly confrontation involving Nazis, Klansmen and protest marchers in an east Greensboro neighborhood was mishandled. Further, they claimed evidence was withheld from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission convened in 2004 to revisit the incident.

These were explosive charges, if true. But the nearly three-month internal police probe determined that only news clippings about subversive groups of that era were thrown out.

Although all of the files legally could have been destroyed in 1999, the city maintains 49 volumes of records pertaining to the shootings, and all were made available to the TRC.

Those documents correctly should be saved for posterity. In retrospect, keeping a few boxes of news clippings on the shelf would have been worth the trouble as well. But discarding them certainly doesn’t amount to a conspiracy to destroy evidence. That material is readily available elsewhere.

While some past departmental actions may merit outside scrutiny, it would be a waste of time to further investigate this one.

Thursday's lead editorial.

One thing you can say for Gov. Mike Easley: He’s sticking to his word.

He repeatedly has promised to raise teachers’ salaries to the national average. He also has vowed to fix the state’s mental health system.

His $21.5 billion budget would do both. It would raise teachers’ salaries by 7 percent, up to the national average. It also provides $66 million for mental health reform.

But Easley can’t fulfill his promises without the General Assembly’s backing. And he’s not likely to get that.

In a troubled economy (and during an election year), lawmakers probably won’t support Easley’s proposal to increase the so-called sin taxes.

Easley wants to raise the cigarette tax by 20 cents to pay for the teachers’ salary increase and to raise alcohol taxes to pay for mental health reform.

Teacher pay
In the last three years, public school teachers in our state have seen their salaries increase three times. That has provided about a 17 percent pay increase. Easley argues that another increase is needed for their pay to equal the national average. But just comparing salary figures without considering other factors provides a false picture.

The John Locke Foundation in Raleigh annually compares states’ average teacher pay but adjusts for cost of living, teacher experience and pension contribution. Its latest study found that North Carolina teachers’ pay is above, not below, the national average, ranking 10th-best in the nation.

Even if a pay increase were justified, Easley’s payment method isn’t. Why should a cigarette tax pay for teachers’ salaries? Shouldn’t money collected from smokers be directed instead toward health programs?

Mental health reform
At least Easley’s suggested increase on alcohol taxes has more of a connection to the mental health reform it would pay for.

Still, Easley’s proposal — 4 cents more on a can or bottle of beer, 3 cents on wine, 4 percent on liquor — might not be the best way to pay for needed reform. The state already taxes beer at a higher rate than most states. Maybe instead of increasing taxes, program cuts are in order. Surely, in a $21.5 billion budget there’s a way to find $66 million for the needed reform.
Highway Trust Fund

One good thing Easley has proposed is to divert less out of the Highway Trust Fund. State legislators have become accustomed to creative ways of financing. One of their more egregious acts has been to move Highway Trust Fund revenue into the general fund. Easley has recommended a $25 million reduction from the expected $172.6 million transfer, a first step in phasing it out.

But why take years to end the transfer? Over the next 20 years, the state faces $65 billion in transportation projects. Easley should end the diversion of highway fund money — and leave a legacy honoring fiscal responsibility in government.

Friday's lead editorial.

Greensboro quit trying to pump up a regional water project when council members concluded last week that the city’s help wasn’t wanted.

“In other words they just skipped the whole step of having the PTWA turn us down again,” City Manager Mitchell Johnson wrote in an e-mail to High Point officials Monday.

PTWA is shorthand for the Piedmont Triad Regional Water Authority, which created Randleman Lake and still has to build a water-treatment plant on its shores. Plans also call for a pump station on N.C. 62 to push Randleman water toward Greensboro and High Point. In February, the two cities offered to jointly finance, build and operate that facility, saying their experience with similar projects means they could finish faster and at less cost.

The water authority board rejected the original proposal, then asked for revisions. Every time one issue was addressed, another would be raised, Johnson said.

“We could go back and forth on it for a long time,” he said Wednesday. “We didn’t sense there was really an interest on their part to do it.”

“The water authority would never let High Point and Greensboro do it,” Greensboro City Councilwoman Trudy Wade said. “I didn’t want to be responsible for any more delay than we already have.”

High Point City Manager Strib Boynton thinks Greensboro gave up too soon. He said authority board members told him the cities’ offer was acceptable with modifications, which High Point agreed to make.

But authority member Tom Phillips, a former Greensboro councilman, said it was hard to overcome a sour history.

“There are some members of the water authority that would not trust anything that High Point says,” he said. “And High Point isn’t alone on that,” he added, alluding to Greensboro. “This thing’s gone on a long time.”

Resentments go back to the formation of the project, which Randolph County members saw as using their land mostly for the benefit of the Guilford County cities.

High Point Mayor Becky Smothers finds it frustrating that decisions are made for reasons “that have very little to do with the project,” lamenting that the authority now will build the pump station “and they’ll send us a bill. Cost-containment is not an issue for them.”

Phillips said it is, asserting “absolutely” that the authority can build the pump station just as well as could the cities. “There’s not going to be a problem of delivering water.”

The target is late 2010.

“I assume they’ll do what they’re supposed to do,” Johnson said.

“We’ll be there with our lines,” Boynton said. “I’m sure Greensboro will, too. I’ll bet you the water authority won’t be ready.”

What once was touted as a model of regional cooperation now shows the strains of distrust and resentments. Maybe it’s too late to expect amiability, but all parties owe a professional attitude. Their job is to pump clean water to communities that have waited long enough.

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

Three years ago, the General Assembly tightened laws restricting the use of off-road all-terrain vehicles to better protect kids. Legislation, however, doesn’t trump adult responsibility.

When that comes up short, tragedy results. This week in Guilford Superior Court, a Whitsett man pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter in the ATV-related death of his 3-year-old step-grandson. He reportedly lost control of the four-wheeler, which hit an embankment, rolled over and crushed the child.

As a result, he will spend a few weekends in jail and several years on unsupervised probation. But a family will never be the same again. Try as we might, there’s no taking back a fleeting lapse of common sense.

A spate of fatal ATV mishaps in the state led the legislature to act. After some waffling, lawmakers wrote guidelines for youthful operators, set safety equipment requirements and called for some riders to attend approved safety instructional courses. The law doesn’t apply to farm use.

At the time, critics correctly pointed out that setting more rules is no substitute for adult responsibility. But the law did establish a much-needed framework for confronting and reducing ATV misuse.

If riders do comply, they lessen their chance of serious injury. For example, studies show that wearing a helmet can reduce ATV injuries by almost half.

And rider-safety courses regularly held by law-enforcement agencies and some motorcycle clubs also can help by familiarizing operators with an unfamiliar vehicle. The atvsafety.org Web site offers helpful safety tips and course information.

With the arrival of warmer weather, ATVs will come out of winter hibernation. The hard lesson learned in a local courtroom is that adults must make sure they’re operated safely.

Saturday's lead editorial.

PTI Airport was never considered for a substantial aviation project that landed at the N.C. Global TransPark near Kinston Wednesday.

Triad airport and economic-development officials applauded the TransPark’s triumph this week. Kansas-based Spirit AeroSystems will build a design-and-manufacturing facility to produce the center fuselage frame section for the Airbus A350 XWB. The company said it will employ more than 1,000 workers at an average wage of $48,000 within six years.

“It’s great for the state,” said Dan Lynch, president of the Greensboro Economic Development Alliance. “In the world of aviation, this just puts another pin on the map for North Carolina.”

“The key is to develop the commercial aerospace industry in North Carolina so every success redounds to the benefit of all NC sites,” UNC-Chapel Hill professor John Kasarda wrote in an e-mail from Russia. Kasarda is consulting with Triad leaders on the development of an “aerotropolis” surrounding PTI and doesn’t see the TransPark as a competitor.

“I’m sorry we don’t have it,” added Henry Isaacson, chairman of the Piedmont Triad Airport Authority. “We can’t win them all, but we’re going to get our share, plus.”

PTI didn’t have a chance for this one. Spirit looked for locations as close as possible to a major port, spokeswoman Debbie Gann said Thursday. North Carolina has two, in Wilmington and Morehead City. The 65x20-foot fuselage sections have to be hauled, by truck or train, to the coast for overseas shipping.

Spirit also wanted to be near the state’s military bases and their “retiring military labor force,” Gann said.

There are reasons to believe Lynch is right about statewide benefits. This helps the relatively depressed eastern North Carolina economy. It also spotlights the community college system’s ability to train workers for high-skilled aviation industry jobs — the same thing GTCC is doing here already, with plans for expansion. Very few workers will be hired with only a high school education, Gann said. And then there’s industry attention won by the state’s favorable business climate — sweetened in this case by generous incentives.

The Triad still maintains the advantage it claimed a decade ago when FedEx chose PTI over the TransPark as the location for its mid-Atlantic air-cargo hub, Isaacson believes. He cited Dell, HondaJet and Polo.com as some of the companies that located here in anticipation of the FedEx facility’s opening next year. FedEx liked the Triad’s extensive rail and highway network, among other advantages.

The TransPark, created by the state in 1991, has been under-utilized. Its overdue development is good for the state, and it won’t deny the Triad opportunities to further build an aviation industry here.

Saturday's No. 2 editorial.

Greensboro police Officers Patricia Wright and M.E. Merritt earned their Medals of Valor the hard way.

Especially Merritt, who was shot twice while he and Wright grappled with a suspect on East Market Street last year. Fortunately, he was protected by his bulletproof vest and was able to prevent the suspect from also shooting Wright. She was knocked down but immediately returned to the fray. “She’s a fighter,” said her sergeant, Tom Kroh.

Wright, Merritt, Officer of the Year Robert Mayo and others were honored Thursday by the Greensboro Merchants Association at its annual Police and Citizens Appreciation Dinner. It’s an outstanding event that appropriately recognizes the extraordinary acts of courage and devotion law-enforcement officers perform in the line of duty.

Harrowing tales of battles with armed bad guys command attention, but doing everyday tasks exactly right can be just as important. A case decided just last week by the N.C. Court of Appeals illustrates the point.

The court looked at a suspect’s complaint that she was subjected to an illegal search when she was found to be carrying cocaine on East Market Street two years ago. The court denied her appeal, spelling out that Greensboro Officers Roman Watkins, Nicholas Ingram, S.J. Langholz and Jennifer Mauney acted properly at every step. As a result of good police work, the suspect’s conviction for trafficking cocaine will stand.

Not every officer can win a Medal of Valor, but every one who deters criminal activity, arrests a suspect and gathers evidence correctly helps make the community safer. The work is often difficult and sometimes very dangerous. It always demands patience, persistence and professionalism.

While it’s necessary to hold police to high standards of conduct and to report mistakes, the public also should thank them for their daily service and sacrifice.

Sunday's editorial.

Victims of crime deserve better than excuses from agencies that are supposed to protect the public
.
Blaming the next level of government is one of those excuses, even when the complaint is valid.
City leaders in Charlotte, dealing with high crime and a public that’s angry about it, can point fingers with the best of them. Their police officers keep “re-arresting repeat offenders for the same crimes,” City Manager Curt Walton noted recently, implying the criminal-justice system isn’t getting its job done. “Until there are increased options for prosecuting, incarcerating or at least monitoring the behavior of these targeted group of offenders, (police) efforts will be minimized.”

That’s a familiar refrain across North Carolina. Police and sheriff’s departments make plenty of arrests, but many suspects are released on low bonds or no bonds, only to commit more crimes. Or, when convicted, offenders are put on probation and in some cases scarcely monitored, giving them ample opportunities to continue their illegal activities.
Last week in Charlotte, however, the City Council accepted unusual responsibility. It pledged $4.8 million to strengthen the criminal-justice system locally. The money will provide additional staffing and technology in the District Attorney’s Office, 100 electronic-monitoring devices, crime-lab staffing and other improvements.

It’s a dramatic approach to commit city funds to supplement the budgets of state agencies, but Charlotte leaders think the expenditures will make local police efforts more effective.
Guilford County District Attorney Doug Henderson has watched Mecklenburg County developments, which he calls progressive, but he doesn’t expect a similar commitment here. Leaders in prosperous Charlotte have “more tax dollars at their disposal,” Henderson said.
There isn’t spare money in Greensboro or High Point, which are on track to approve lean, no-tax-increase budgets for next year. Yet leaders in Charlotte concluded, logically, that the impact of their law-enforcement dollars is minimized unless police work is supported up the line.
Is anyone listening in Raleigh?

Funding for probation and parole services has lagged for years, with the problem generally unnoticed until the highly publicized murder of UNC-Chapel Hill student body president Eve Carson in March. It turned out the two suspects were on probation but barely supervised. Now there are proposals that the state create a database that local agencies can use to learn the probation status of offenders in their communities. That very basic sharing of information could help police prevent crime and maybe save lives.

District attorneys across the state, including Henderson in Guilford County, have pushed Raleigh to provide more legal tools for fighting gangs. Henderson said his prosecutors ask the courts to take gang membership into account when passing sentences, although that’s not listed as an aggravating factor in sentencing guidelines. It should be. Unfortunately, gang legislation has become a “political football,” Henderson said, pitting those who favor tough punishment against those who prefer “education and avoidance of the problem altogether.” But there’s no reason why prevention programs and punishment both can’t be stressed.

State and local agencies dedicated to public safety must build the closest relationships. People who ought to work together often find themselves at cross purposes. Greensboro and High Point police gripe about lenient judges or magistrates letting dangerous criminal suspects walk free, but part of the reason lies with Guilford County commissioners who did nothing for years about overcrowded jails. Ordinary citizens who don’t feel safe in their homes don’t have patience for “it’s their job, not ours” explanations. They don’t want to hear that “the system” is fragmented and inefficient because, well, that’s just the way it is.

Guilford County’s jail problem is being addressed, finally, thanks to the May 6 approval of a construction bond. Voters understood that was a public safety issue. They should demand that their elected representatives at every level of government start to figure it out, too. The fight against crime must be comprehensive and cohesive, including prevention programs, law enforcement, prosecution, punishment, rehabilitation and follow-up

Passing the buck isn’t acceptable. Charlotte leaders saw gaps in the system and tried to fill them. Not every city can do the same, but every agency probably can do something. What’s stopping them?

Will you honor the dead on Memorial Day weekend? If so, how?

Mark's story today about an effort in Raleigh to reject federal REAL ID Act requirements prompts our editorial board to take a look.

Here's the bill filed by Rep. Nelson Cole, D-Rockingham, and supported by an interesting collection of liberals and conservatives.

More background:

Real ID Q&A from the Department of Homeland Security.

A letter from South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford to DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff outlining his objections.

As it stands, noncompliance by the latest deadline of Dec. 31, 2009, means North Carolina driver's licenses won't be accepted as valid identification for boarding commercial airliners or gaining entry to other federal facilities. I would take that to include a federal office building or military base.

That could pose a hardship for North Carolina residents, so the objections to compliance should be very good ones. We're not sure they're that strong, but we'd like to hear your opinions.

Personally, I've started taking my passport with me when I fly. It's not that a North Carolina driver's license isn't legitimate, although until fairly recently the pr