News-Record.com

Wednesday's No. 2 editorial.

In a heartbeat, the long post-Hurricane Ike gas lines in Charlotte or the Panthers’ Sunday NFL win seemed unimportant. The big story was Citigroup’s takeover of hometown Wachovia Bank, which will have a lasting impact on the state’s largest city.

For now, just what that might be isn’t clear. But it seems certain that “Banktown” will never be quite the same again.

Banking has been the key to Charlotte’s emergence as a major national economic player. And although in-town competitor Bank of America still maintains its strong corporate presence there, the city’s business landscape has been forever altered.

Having two banking giants enhanced Charlotte’s ability to attract young professionals and relocating out-of-staters. It also fostered an intense, friendly competition that boosted charitable giving, fostered a sense of civic pride and projected a “big-league,” vibrant image to the rest of the nation.

While the Citigroup deal leaves some banking operations alone, redundancy and cost-slashing will eliminate as many as 4,000 jobs systemwide. No one knows yet how much of a corporate presence may remain in Charlotte, not to mention the fate of 3,000 Wachovia jobs in the bank’s former home base in Winston-Salem.

With seven other Fortune 500 companies and a solid business base, Charlotte will survive Wachovia’s stunning decline. It remains a regional economic power, transportation hub and tourist destination.

Even so, there still will be a familiar, painful void like the one felt in dozens of the state’s smaller cities and hamlets when the local furniture factory or textile mill closes down.

The good news is Wachovia, with its deep roots in North Carolina, survives. And despite the wallop it has taken, the smart money says a resilient Charlotte will not only bounce back, but prosper as well.

Wednesday's lead editorial.

The economy is nothing to play politics with, so leaders in Washington of both parties need to work for the American people rather than cast blame or seek partisan advantage.

When people see their stock portfolios and future retirement income dive, they become frightened. Monday was scary. Tuesday was a much better day on Wall Street, but mainly because investors still believe Congress will approve some kind of rescue measure after the first try failed.

The worry in Washington seems to have at least two dimensions: Most voters oppose what they see as a boondoggle bailout for greedy millionaires whose mismanagement made the mess in the first place; and the proposed cure might be worse than the disease.

To the first point: Members of Congress are elected to lead, not follow. If they won’t take action that’s necessary for the general good, even if unpopular, they don’t deserve to hold public office.
To the second: There’s another opportunity to fix whatever was wrong with Monday’s plan, and the Bush administration and Congress better make the most of it.

Before a new measure arrives for a vote, however, the administration and congressional proponents must do a better job of communicating its importance to the American people. They must relate the tremors on Wall Street to the likely aftershocks on Main Street. This is not only a collapse of reckless financial institutions, but a credit crisis. If unchecked, it will mean people won’t be able to borrow money to purchase homes, cars or other large items, in turn denying income to everyone whose living depends on those transactions. Large and small businesses that also rely on access to credit will suffer. Layoffs will result, which in turn will further restrict the amount of money circulating through the economy. If Americans understand more clearly what’s at stake, they will be more inclined to support strong action to avert a disaster.

The irony is that too much risky lending and foolish borrowing helped bring about this trouble. From the federal government, which owes trillions, to ordinary consumers, strapped with crushing mortgages, maxed-out credit cards, big car payments and college debts, this is a country that’s lived beyond its means. The pinch is so tight that shoppers snap up cheap goods from China rather than support domestic manufacturers, forcing the local folks out of business. The transition to new, high-tech industries has been too slow and not inclusive enough, partly because of insufficient investment in education and infrastructure.

Now there’s a need to patch a huge hole in the economy, even though $700 billion will sap resources from more productive initiatives. It’s easy to see why some bailout opponents fear the correction, or at least question the cost and urgency. But sinking can’t be an option. Nor can political posturing. It’s time for bipartisan agreement on the basics of an economic rescue this week.

Thursday's No. 2 editorial

High Point City Council candidates were unanimous when answering one question at a Guilford County Unity Effort forum last week: Meetings should be televised.

They’re right, and those elected Nov. 4 should make sure it happens.

Guilford County commissioners, the school board and Greensboro City Council put their meetings on public-access cable, and High Point ought to catch up.

Few constituents attend meetings in person, but nearly everyone would find it more convenient and comfortable to watch from home. Television promotes greater access to and understanding of local government, which likely would lead to broader participation.

The candidates in Ward 2 see it that way. Televised meetings would allow transparency and inclusiveness, Foster Douglas said. It would help hold elected leaders accountable, Tony Davis said. There should be nothing to hide, Jerry Mingo added. Pride Grimm and Julius Clark concurred.

The only small disagreement surfaced between Ward 6 contenders James Corey and John Faircloth. Corey said some personnel matters might be too sensitive to show on television.
Faircloth countered that anything conducted in a public meeting is suitable for television.

This issue has been discussed in High Point before but tabled because of cost, Mayor Becky Smothers said. She’s running for re-election unopposed. The council chambers need “upfitting” to accommodate live television transmissions, she explained.

“I don’t think there’s any objection other than the cost. ... It’s like anything. All it takes is money,” she said.

Yet, county commissioners will spend money to televise their meeting today in the High Point City Council chamber. Although a live broadcast isn’t possible, the meeting will be taped and shown as promptly as possible, the board’s clerk, Effie Varitimidis, said last week. Not doing so is unthinkable: “The public demands so much these days,” she said.

It should. And, in return, the public should be willing to pay the price of opening government to more viewers.

Thursday's lead editorial.

McCain versus Obama may be the main event on the Nov. 4 ballot. But don’t forget to read the fine print.

As compelling as the main event may be, dozens of other races and initiatives probably will have a more profound effect on local voters’ daily lives.

Among other items on the second-longest ballot in the country are critical bonds in Greensboro and a second attempt to add a quarter-cent to the sales tax in Guilford County.

Proponents of the sales tax increase argue that it will raise revenue to pay for school construction and would help relieve the burden of those whose property taxes provide the lion’s share of the revenues. They also remind voters that an estimated 40 percent of the revenue would come from nonresidents.

Opponents say voters already said no to the increase in May and will say no again, but this time it has a champion.

A group calling itself Citizens for a Better Guilford on Tuesday announced an organized campaign that will press its case.

Then there are the city bonds, which will ask voters for a second straight election to invest in the community’s future. They will be asked to approve:

-- $134 million for street improvements;
-- $50 million for upgrades to War Memorial Auditorium;
-- $20 million for parks and recreation projects;
-- $1 million for affordable housing programs and assistance.

Each item consists of multiple pieces. For instance, the street bonds include a variety of projects: streetscaping on High Point Road; parts of the city’s proposed downtown greenway; sidewalk improvements. But the vast majority of the money ($94.5 million) will go to road construction, $26 million of it to fix snarled traffic on Horse Pen Creek Road.

The parks and recreation bonds include funding for parks, city athletic facilities and swimming pool upgrades. But more than half would go to a $12 million competitive swim center that was added at the 11th hour.

Some questions voters should consider:

-- What qualifies as a want versus a need?
-- Does the impact justify the investment?
-- Must it be done now or can it wait?

If voters approve all four bonds, the city property tax rate could increase by 2.5 cents, or an extra $50 per year for the owner of a $200,000 home.

That’s a lot to consider and not a long time to consider it. Early voting begins on Oct. 16.
Wherever you decide, it’s important to be fully informed and not so dazzled by the light of the presidential race that you get burned in your pocketbook right here at home.

Friday's lead editorial.

No one’s trying to sell gas for $5 a gallon around here anymore.

Clearly, Gov. Mike Easley and Attorney General Roy Cooper grabbed the attention of gas stations that pumped up prices well beyond $4, and in some cases $5, on Sept. 12 when Hurricane Ike was bearing down on the Texas coast and its refineries.

The governor declared a state of “abnormal market disruption,” triggering the state’s price-gouging law. Cooper announced he meant to enforce the law vigorously and began investigating complaints. Prices quickly retreated.

That result can’t be an accident. It seems that station managers don’t want to run afoul of the law.

Nevertheless, there’s no happy ending yet. While prices have settled down since Sept. 12, North Carolina’s average price for a gallon of regular was $3.871 Thursday, according to AAA. The national average was $3.598, and prices were higher only in Alaska, Hawaii and Georgia. Related to that problem: Supplies are spotty in the Triad, and shortages are more acute, and prices higher, in Charlotte, Asheville and other parts of western North Carolina.

In an interview at the News & Record Thursday, Cooper vowed to pursue his investigation up the supply chain. The gouging law applies to distributors, wholesalers and manufacturers, as well as retailers. Cooper said he intends to find out if there’s been any manipulation in the North Carolina market.

Meanwhile, the debate has shifted to the city level — with a dose of statewide politics in the mix. Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory, the Republican candidate for governor, is under fire for not ordering gas rationing. He alternately explained he didn’t think he had the power to intervene, and it wouldn’t have helped if he did.

Greensboro Mayor Yvonne Johnson sought an answer to the question about emergency powers and found that the City Council could regulate the sale of gasoline. She would have to make a determination of an “imminent threat to life and safety,” which could be caused by rioting at gas stations, for example. “If I needed to do that, I would do it,” she said Thursday.

The best approach, Cooper said, would be to ask retailers to restrict customers’ purchases. But, if retailers have to be restrained by law from raising prices, could they be expected to limit sales voluntarily?

UNCG economist Andrew Brod argues that rising prices constrain demand. Gas shortages have been exacerbated by motorists’ eagerness to line up to pay less than $4, which they wouldn’t do if stations charged $10.

Politicians naturally won’t promote policies that encourage price-gouging. Doing so would favor the wealthy over the less-affluent who need gas to get to work, Cooper said.

He’s right, and his threat to enforce the law certainly has helped hold down prices. But prices are still higher in North Carolina than almost anywhere else, and the law isn’t pumping up supplies. There isn’t a quick fix for every market disruption.

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

In 2002, three years before the Greensboro Bicentennial Commission was created, Michael Anthony Williams began piecing together information on one of the city’s more important — and often overlooked — historical events: the Dudley High School/N.C. A&T “Student Revolt” of 1969. Tonight, “Walls that Bleed,” the documentary that resulted from six years of effort by Williams and many other local people, premieres at 7 at A&T’s Harrison Auditorium. It also runs Oct. 6-11 at the Carousel Cinemas. Those interested in Greensboro’s history, especially its civil rights history, should see it.

The almost two-hour documentary intersperses archival photos and footage with recent interviews to tell the story of how a protest of an election at Dudley led to a community’s larger civil-rights-focused protest.

Administrators wouldn’t put Claude Barnes on the ballot for student body president at the segregated high school because they considered him too radical. Yet that didn’t stop students from writing his name in. Barnes got the most votes but wasn’t allowed to serve. A student protest grew to encompass many from A&T and elsewhere in the city, who also raised related issues, and resulted in the National Guard being called in.

Tragically, it also led to A&T student Willie Grimes being killed one night by an unknown gunman.

A panel discussion at 6:30 p.m. Oct. 9 at A&T’s Gibbs Hall will give the public a chance to ask questions about the film and the times: Williams and Barnes (now a political science professor at A&T), along with historian William Chafe and former Greensboro Mayor Jack Elam, are participating.

Are issues raised by the 1969 protesters still issues in the city now? Why has this event, which involved local people, been eclipsed in memory by the 1979 Klan-Nazi shooting, which involved many not from the city? These are just two questions the film raises for us.

Greensboro’s bicentennial isn’t just for celebrating the city’s history but for reflecting on it. “Walls that Bleed” (myspace.com/wallsthatbleed) provides an opportunity for such reflection.

Saturday's lead editorial.

The not-so-faraway tremors on Wall Street are shaking floors and peeling plaster in City Hall.

So city leaders are right to begin pruning their spending now. Nor should they be satisfied with temporary fixes.

Anticipating smaller tax revenues and tighter budgets, City Manager Mitchell Johnson has asked department heads to find $1.1 million in spending cuts. That’s a good start. Johnson hasn’t gone so far as to order layoffs, but City Councilman Mike Barber believes job cuts have to be part of the equation. Councilwoman Trudy Wade agrees and notes that many private businesses are trimming 5 percent to 10 percent in operating expenses.

Their sense of urgency is understandable. A troubled economy means falling sales tax revenues. Government shouldn’t be exempt from the same hard look at budgets that private companies have been forced to take. But, unlike private business, government is obligated to protect the public’s safety and welfare. The manager and council should bear that in mind when deciding what goes and what stays.

That said, tough economic times increase demands in some areas, among them public safety. But they also lessen demands in others, such as building permits and inspections.

At Barber’s urging last summer, the city eliminated 49 positions and has held open more than 100 jobs. The city also has pulled the plug on all out-of-state travel for employees and is searching for additional savings through energy conservation.

But the council and manager need to look further. Longer term, they should explore lasting changes such as the consolidation of some services that overlap with county government. For instance, preliminary talks to merge the Greensboro and Guilford planning departments have begun. Those talks should move forward and move faster.

So should the delicate process of building a regional transit system to meet growing ridership demands, relieve crowding and improve on-time performance.

Barber suggests outsourcing some functions, not only to private businesses but to sister governments, including the county. Good idea.

Even in the vital area of public safety, the city may need to put off a worthy but costly proposal to allow police officers to take their cruisers home.

Meanwhile, a $205 million bond package awaits on the Nov. 4 ballot. Cuts to recurring spending would put the city in a better position to handle the additional debt the bonds could create.

Finally, the city should solicit savings ideas from its employees and the general public. After all, we’re in this together. And it is our money.

Saturday's No. 2 editorial.

The Guilford County commissioners were right to reject Commissioner Steve Arnold’s challenge Thursday to the county’s early voting sites. But Arnold has raised a legitimate concern that should be addressed before the county elections board next chooses sites.

Arnold wants early voting to take place only in courthouses and town halls. He doesn’t like the location of most of the county’s sites because he says they have been placed in areas favoring Democrats.

It’s true that some sites are in heavily Democratic areas. That’s inevitable, as the county’s voters are half Democrat and only a third Republican. Still, there are voting sites in areas — such as in Oak Ridge — that lean more Republican than Democratic.

Looking at a map of the county’s 19 sites, one gets the sense that the three-person elections board mainly was trying to pick places that would be convenient to the most voters.
Still, that doesn’t mean that there isn’t room for improvement in site selection. North High Point — a Republican stronghold — didn’t get an early voting location, but two are located near one other in the city’s core, where more Democratic voters live.

While population density appears to have determined site picks, in the future it might be good for the board to pay more attention to making sure all geographical areas are served.
Arnold’s idea of limiting the sites to a few government buildings is not wise. Fewer sites would likely mean fewer early voters. Is that what Arnold is after?

It may be. The truth is that Arnold doesn’t much like early voting. “I move farther and farther away from appreciating the value of early voting,” he told News & Record reporter Gerald Witt.
Arnold may not like the practice, but personal preference is no reason for trying to discourage it throughout Guilford County.

Who won Thursday's vice presidential debate? Or was it a draw?

Tell us what you liked or disliked about the debate. Did it meet or exceed your expectations or did it disappoint you?

Sunday's editorial.

For years, Kay Hagan has been Guilford County’s go-to state senator in Raleigh. Smart, energetic and well-connected, she’s drawn high ratings for effectiveness.

One example stands out: state support for the furniture market in High Point.

High Point isn’t part of Hagan’s Senate district, but she recognized its economic importance to Guilford County, the Triad and all of North Carolina. Then she made sure that leaders in Raleigh — in the administration and the legislature — understood, too. With other area representatives of both parties, she won backing for state funding for transportation and marketing to improve the important furniture show. The amounts of money have been modest compared to state incentives deals, but they’ve made an impact in bracing High Point’s competitive position against a potent rival in Las Vegas.

Hagan, 55, has worked vigorously on behalf of Greensboro interests as well, while becoming a leader in forging statewide spending priorities.

What she has done in Raleigh, she’s ready to do in Washington. She deserves election to the U.S. Senate seat held by Elizabeth Dole, 72.

The incumbent, a Republican, has represented North Carolina honorably, crowning a long career of distinguished public service with a term in the Senate, but the times call for a change.
With the state’s other Senate seat held by Republican Richard Burr, a respected Democrat like Hagan can see to it that North Carolina interests aren’t overlooked by Democratic majorities in Congress and a likely Democratic administration. She’s already proved she won’t sit for long on the back bench in a legislative chamber.

Hagan’s record has been moderate and business-friendly. She should remain on that centrist course, embracing the best ideas from either side of the political divide. Her priorities include fiscal responsibility, investing in effective education policies, health care reform, new energy development and what she calls “a whole list of pocketbook issues.” She exudes confidence, frequently promising that things will get done when she goes to Washington.

Unfortunately, voters haven’t always seen Hagan at her best during the campaign. More TV ads have attacked Dole than featured Hagan’s achievements. Dole’s campaign has responded in kind. Portraying Dole as a captive of the oil industry or out of touch is unfair and inaccurate. Tagging Hagan as “Fibber Kay” is unconscionable. These two women should be running for office in a manner that would convince North Carolinians that either would be a worthy winner.
The third candidate, Libertarian Christopher Cole, 44, said last week the relentless attack ads would prompt him, if he could afford his own TV messages, to declare: “They’re both right.”

Actually, they’re both wrong. Dole, before the barrage began, was liked by most North Carolinians. Although she has not gained as much influence in the Senate as her Washington experience should have earned for her, nor been as visible in North Carolina as she should have, she can count some accomplishments. Among them: helping give sheriffs more federal support to deal with illegal immigrants who commit crimes; negotiating a favorable tobacco buyout program; watching over a military realignment that strengthened North Carolina’s position. She also several times pushed for stronger regulation of lenders Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, but unsuccessfully.

Dole is vulnerable politically because of her alignment with President Bush on most issues over the years, from the Iraq war to massive deficit spending. All the nation’s troubles have fed voters’ desire for change in Washington, and Dole could be a casualty of that understandably restless mood.

Hagan, if elected, may be exactly the right replacement. She’s responsive to constituents, communicates well, works hard, comprehends complex issues, makes good decisions and is not content to be average. She can become an outstanding U.S. senator. With appreciation for Dole’s service, voters should give Hagan the chance to take her talents to Washington.

Monday's lead editorial.

Suzanne Reynolds would make an excellent addition to North Carolina’s Supreme Court. But subtracting Bob Edmunds would be a significant loss.

On balance, it’s better to keep Edmunds. Voters should re-elect the Greensboro resident to a second eight-year term on the state’s highest court.

Edmunds, 59, is a respected and well-liked justice, an anchor on the state’s centrist high court. In addition to experience in his current seat, he served two years on the N.C. Court of Appeals, was the top federal prosecutor in North Carolina’s Middle District for seven years and practiced law privately in Greensboro. He’s a U.S. Navy veteran and holds a master of laws degree.

Reynolds, 59, also practiced privately in Greensboro before beginning a career teaching law at Wake Forest in 1981. She’s known as a brilliant academic who keeps in close contact with lawyers’ groups. She’s regarded as the state’s leading authority on family law.

Edmunds is the only justice whose seat on the seven-member Supreme Court is up for election this year. His six colleagues, however, shouldn’t think they’re not involved. In a sense, Reynolds is running against the entire court — and she has raised serious concerns about the way it operates.

Reynolds notes the court’s declining output, a years-long trend. It accepts fewer cases and writes fewer opinions, more often adopting either a majority or dissenting opinion from the Court of Appeals without writing a full opinion of its own.

This leaves too many legal questions inadequately resolved or explained, Reynolds contends. Many lawyers share her concern, and some suspect the court is shielding itself from political fallout by minimizing its handling of controversial cases. If that’s true, the court is failing to meet its responsibilities. North Carolina needs a productive Supreme Court that shines a bright light on important issues and illuminates the shadowy corners of the law, giving clear guidance and direction to all the lower rungs of the judicial system.

Whatever the court’s shortcomings, however, holding Edmunds solely accountable isn’t the answer. The whole court has to address its deficiencies, and he’s as capable as any of its members. While Reynolds is brave to raise these issues, there’s no promise she could accomplish more than Edmunds. In addition, though her knowledge is formidable, it only exceeds his in some areas of the law. His many years of courtroom experience dealing with the full range of legal matters give him an overall advantage.

Edmunds deserves a second term, and he should use it to strengthen the court as a whole.

Monday's No. 2 editorial.

Since his appointment to the N.C. Court of Appeals by Gov. Mike Easley last year, Judge John Arrowood has made a positive impact.

The court handles a heavy case­load, and Arrowood is a swift worker, insiders say. He’s also sure, taking time to confer with colleagues to seek the benefit of their insights and reach consensus.

Arrowood, 51, was known as an outstanding lawyer in Charlotte dealing mostly with complex commercial litigation before serving a short stint as a Superior Court judge. He’s quickly learned the ropes on criminal cases, sometimes livening opinions with phrases worthy of Mickey Spillane: “Reyes told Queen that he wanted crack cocaine and sex, and Queen promised to provide both,” Arrowood recounted in State v. Thompson. And: “Queen judged Calfee to be insufficiently stalwart for a robbery.”

Of course, these are serious cases, and Arrowood shows an earnest appreciation for the court’s proper role: “We conclude that balancing the humanitarian, environmental and economic factors implicated by these issues is a task within the purview of the legislature and not the courts,” he wrote with judicial restraint in another case.

Arrowood is opposed in the November election by Robert N. Hunter Jr., 61, a veteran Greensboro attorney described by colleagues as an exceptional lawyer who possesses a remarkable legal mind. He has represented the Republican Party and Republican politicians in political cases, including Trudy Wade in the long-contested 2004 Guilford County commissioners’ race. His partisanship raises some concerns about impartiality on the bench, but Arrowood was a Democratic Party activist and he has left his politics at the courthouse door. Hunter has similar integrity. This race is nonpartisan and should be decided on qualifications alone. Arrowood already has proved he’s a good fit.

Tuesday's lead editorial.

Wachovia’s whirlwind corporate courtship with New York’s Citigroup went almost as quickly as it came last week.

The foundering, Charlotte-based banking giant’s shotgun wedding with Citi had seemed a done deal until Wells Fargo suddenly swept Wachovia from the altar with a cool $15.1 billion stock offer.

Good thing, too. Wachovia and San Francisco-based Wells Fargo are much better suited as a couple.

But the nuptials may not last. Citigroup, which had offered $2.1 billion, refuses to go quietly, accusing Wachovia, essentially, of breaching its promise. In the latest tortured twists, Citi filed a lawsuit Monday, seeking more than $60 billion in damages, then agreed to a standstill on all litigation.

Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve was pressing for a Solomonic compromise. Wachovia’s northeast and mid-Atlantic branches would go to Citigroup. Wells Fargo would get the California and Southeast branches.

That plan is neither in the best interests of Wachovia or North Carolina. Wells Fargo is the superior match for Wachovia, hands down.

Both banks traditionally have been conservative and well-run. Each neatly complements the other geographically. Most of Wells Fargo’s branches are located in the West, most of Wachovia’s in the East.

Both have strong brand names and reputations for integrity, customer service and cool-headed business practices — at least until Wachovia fell prey to the mortgage-lending crisis. Remember, when larger First Union acquired Wachovia in 2001, it so valued Wachovia’s brand that it took on the smaller company’s name.

And, as one of only a few major banks that have remained profitable during the credit crisis, Wells Fargo is healthier than either Wachovia or Citigroup. As significantly, the deal likely would mean Wachovia would keep more jobs in North Carolina. That’s not as clear a possibility in a merger with Citigroup.

Now, hardly anything is clear, except the stakes. Wachovia would have had its assets seized by the government had no one stepped forward to buy it. It employs 120,000 workers nationwide, 20,000 in Charlotte, where it’s a major player in the community and the economy. The financial services and insurance industries accounted for $5.6 billion, or 20 percent of Charlotte’s private wages, in 2007. The bank also employs 3,000 workers in its former home city of Winston-Salem, where its white, domed skyscraper still dominates the skyline.

Who ultimately will get Wachovia’s corporate hand? And what will it mean?

It’s hard not to be hopeful. And nervous. And saddened that one of the state’s corporate titans has been humbled so quickly and so completely.

Even so, two suitors are better than one. Three options are better than none.

But one suitor is clearly preferable to the other.

Not many decisions by the N.C. Court of Appeals make the news, but an opinion written by Judge Doug McCullough deservedly attracted attention when it was released last month. It overturned a Durham man’s convictions on serious charges because he was denied a speedy trial.

The defendant wasn’t a wealthy Duke student but a crack-cocaine user with a criminal record who, in this case, appeared to be the victim of sloppy work by Durham police and the District Attorney’s Office. The court’s ruling not only found a prejudicial violation of his rights but took “judicial note” of facts pointing to another man as the more likely culprit.

McCullough, 63, isn’t apt to be mistaken for a liberal, activist judge. He was a federal prosecutor for 15 years and has steered a generally conservative course since his election to the court in 2000. But he’s also a guardian of individual rights, as in another ruling this summer that said possession of a firearm by a felon is one charge, not two, even when the felon is found with two weapons. The state’s possession law, he said, is not clear, and “ambiguity in the statute should be resolved in favor of lenity.”

McCullough’s one legal blemish was a DWI charge in 2006. He pleaded guilty, lost his driver’s license and expresses regret for a serious mistake.

McCullough is opposed by Cheri Beasley, 42, a District Court judge in Cumberland County. She presides frequently in family court and sees a need for more domestic law expertise in the appellate courts.

Beasley appears to be a good judge who will have other chances to rise in the court system as she gains experience. McCullough is a valuable member of the court now and should be re-elected for another term.

Thursday's No. 1 editorial.

It may be a far piece down the road, but a proposal to replace gas taxes with a road-use tax is worth a test drive.

And 200 volunteers in the Triangle will join drivers in five other states to get a handle on how a new approach to raising money for road repairs and construction might work. For their efforts, they’ll be paid $895 each.

Before the experiment begins, global positioning units that cost about $50 will be installed and track how far and where each test vehicle has been driven. Once a month, participants will get fake state and federal bills for their accrued mileage, based on the EPA fuel-economy ratings for their vehicles.

For the sake of fairness, the tax rate will be higher for large trucks than for hybrids. And the test compensates by including a credit for fuel purchases based on vehicle miles per gallon.
Sounds complicated and a bit contrived, but a new taxing system to raise money for highway costs is inevitable, although it could be 20 years away. Gas-tax collections already feel the pinch as new cars get more miles per gallon and high gas prices impact miles driven.
The outlook becomes even cloudier as more hybrids with smaller engines take to the nation’s highways. Should plug-in electric cell cars and fuel-cell models reach their potential, the situation could get even dicier.

But fairness is critical if a road-use tax is to gain traction. First, federal and state governments must carefully set rates for different vehicles. Also, drivers must be assured that governments don’t use global positioning devices as an excuse to track their whereabouts. Proponents say exact times and locations won’t be recorded.

One positive result is that under a user plan, road taxes go to the state where the miles are logged. For example, an out-of-state tourist headed to the North Carolina coast would be taxed on miles driven here, no matter where fuel was purchased.

A new approach must be found because revenue necessary to shore up the nation’s transportation infrastructure lags far behind what’s needed.

There are other options. Toll roads can be a revenue source, but they amount to double taxation if motorists have paid a fuel or road-use tax. And impact fees directed at those who develop land or live in areas served by new roads can stunt development.

On the downside, mileage taxes don’t address environmental issues such as air pollution or road congestion. Single-occupancy car use, in all probability, will continue to prevail.

Even so, a taxing alternative for highway needs will have to be found as gas-tax revenues decline. While there may not be a simple solution, tests like the one set for December should help provide answers.

Thursday's No. 2 editorial.

Court of Appeals Judge John Tyson isn’t defending his seat in next month’s election. He finished third, and out of the running, in the nonpartisan May primary. He’ll be replaced by either Sam J. Ervin IV, 52, or Kristin Ruth, 52. Ervin is the better choice.

Yes, he belongs to that Ervin family. Sam IV, who goes by Jim, is the grandson of the late Sen. Sam Ervin Jr. and even tried a jury case with him after the senator had retired from Congress and the young Ervin was fresh out of law school. And Jim Ervin’s father was a highly regarded federal appellate judge.

One lesson he learned from his grandfather, an N.C. Supreme Court justice before going to Washington, where he famously presided over Senate Watergate hearings: Nobody’s above the law, not even a president.

The family pedigree doesn’t grant Ervin an entitlement to serve on the N.C. Court of Appeals, but it has instilled in him a strong sense of responsibility. Additionally, his credentials — extensive private practice in Morganton, including plenty of appellate work, and nine years dealing with complex issues as a member of the N.C. Utilities Commission — provide ample qualifications.

Ervin was an honors graduate of Davidson College and Harvard Law, and is known as a hard worker with an impressive intellect.

Ruth, too, is equal to the job. A Wake County District Court judge for 10 years, she’s a nationally known innovator in the field of child-support enforcement. She believes she could help deliver more clarity at the appellate level to family law cases. She has a strong work ethic and a commitment to impartiality on the bench.

On balance, however, Ervin’s broad experience and his desire to live up to high standards make him the superior candidate in this race.

Friday's lead editorial.

It’s still nearly 2,000 miles from Las Vegas to High Point, but in another sense the distance is decreasing.

For High Point’s furniture market, Las Vegas is getting too close for comfort and needs some pushing back.

The World Market Center in Las Vegas announced Wednesday it will change its schedule of shows from February and July to February and September starting next year. The September date puts the Las Vegas event only one month before the High Point Market’s fall show each October. High Point’s spring market is in April.

The shift to September is an aggressively in-your-face move that intensifies the Las Vegas-High Point rivalry. It will be harder for exhibitors to show in Las Vegas and High Point each fall with so little time in between, and more buyers will reconsider their own plans. Las Vegas seems to be forcing the industry to make a choice.

The challenge is right in character for the western upstart, which initially proclaimed a desire merely to become a top regional market but lately has revealed the goal of achieving market pre-eminence, the position held by High Point for decades.

“No one could have imagined that in three years we would be at this point,” World Market Center President Robert Maricich said after the summer show. “At a time when people are looking at the glass being half empty, we are playing to win.”

High Point’s attitude must be the same. Tough times in the furniture industry threaten to depress business and attendance at every market, but that just raises the stakes. Gambling is the stock-in-trade in Las Vegas, and the World Market Center is making a play to survive by grabbing a larger share at High Point’s expense.

High Point Market leaders probably are right that, despite claims to the contrary, the Las Vegas summer show wasn’t doing as well as promoters hoped. But they’d be foolish to take this move lightly. If the industry has to choose between markets, High Point must work harder than ever to influence that decision in the right direction. High Point still has a huge advantage in sheer size, but Las Vegas is steadily building up to match it. And, it consolidates its showrooms on a single campus while High Point’s are spread across several downtown blocks. Las Vegas naturally also touts its superior hospitality and entertainment attractions.

High Point should not change its own market dates, but it must continue to make improvements in accommodations, transportation, entertainment and the overall visitor experience. Every market must be more customer-friendly than the one before. And, promoters must sell the strengths of the High Point Market to a worldwide industry.

That requires commitment, creativity and resources. Responsibility rests not just with High Point, but with Triad neighbors and the state. If Las Vegas is crowding High Point, it’s crashing the whole neighborhood.

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

N.C. Court of Appeals Judge Jim Wynn isn’t shy about letting colleagues know when he thinks they’ve gone in the wrong direction.

“Judicial prudence requires us to leave these policy questions to our legislative and executive branches of government. ... Our role is to apply the law, not to make it,” he wrote in a dissenting opinion to a ruling issued this summer.

Even when taking the minority position, Wynn commands respect. There may be no more distinguished member of the North Carolina judiciary — or one who’s experienced bigger disappointments.

First elected to the Court of Appeals in 1990, Wynn was appointed to the N.C. Supreme Court in 1998. He lost election that November to a full term by fewer than 4,000 votes.
The next year, he was nominated to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals by President Clinton but was denied a confirmation hearing by Sen. Jesse Helms. Another nomination before Clinton left office was returned by President Bush.

Nevertheless, Wynn has served admirably on the state Court of Appeals over a span of nearly 18 years. In addition, he’s been a top military judge in the U.S. Navy and serves as chairman of the American Bar Association’s Judicial Division.

Wynn, 54, also holds a master of laws degree in judicial process from the University of Virginia. He’s a national leader in his profession, a creative thinker, clear writer and champion for the rule of law. Without question, he’s the strongest candidate for re-election of any judge on the statewide ballot.

His opponent is Greensboro attorney Jewel Ann Farlow, 50, who, despite practicing law for 20 years, has garnered little support locally. There’s no call for a dissenting opinion in this case: Wynn should be re-elected.

Saturday's lead editorial.

As North Carolina’s top cop, Roy Cooper made national headlines in 2007 when he stepped into the infamous Duke lacrosse case and dropped all charges.

Cooper was scathing in his assessment of former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong’s shameful and willful mishandling of the case of three Duke athletes falsely accused of rape by an exotic dancer.

Small wonder that Cooper, a Democrat running for a third term as attorney general, reran the moment in his first campaign commercial. As sad an occasion as it was for Nifong, it was one of Cooper’s finest, the culmination of a thorough, 12-week investigation that his office handled coolly and professionally.

But his record in office neither begins nor ends with the lacrosse case.

Cooper’s Republican challenger, lawyer Bob Crumley, 51, blames Cooper for “clogged courts,” an “explosion of gang violence” and “backlogged crime labs.”

That’s debatable. Cooper, 51, actually worked with local law enforcement to establish an SBI crime lab for the Triad in Greensboro. The 10,000-square-foot lab opened in July, serves 12 counties and is expected to handle 6,000 cases per year.

Crumley argues that the lab should have been equipped to process DNA evidence, which is still sent to Raleigh.

But Cooper says that would have significantly delayed the local facility’s opening and he leaves open the possibility for DNA analysis there in the future.

Cooper also has done a good job stemming the epidemic of meth labs in the state, a cause he aggressively took on several years ago.

He has added his office to a national electronic database of information about gangs.

He has taken an aggressive look at charges of price-gouging by gas stations throughout the state.

And he has increased arrests of online sexual predators.

Crumley, who ran unsuccessfully for state Senate in 2002, has built a thriving law practice and has served in previous jobs as Randolph County manager and county attorney.
He says he won’t use the office as a political stepping-stone, as others have done.

He also advocates “a more common-sense approach to reviewing and implementing regulatory practices which affect our business community.”

There’s no doubting Crumley’s impressive resume in business and government.
But Cooper is the clear choice based on the breadth of his experience and the quality of his record.

Saturday's No. 2 editorial.

In North Carolina, the job of lieutenant governor primarily is defined by the person who holds it. And the three men seeking the state’s second-highest elective office have distinctly different views on how to do it.

Two, Democrat Walter Dalton and Republican Robert Pittenger, have legislative experience. Libertarian Phillip Rhodes is a first-time candidate.

Based on experience and his vision of the job, the nod goes to Dalton, 59, a 12-year state senator from Rutherford County. He’s forcefully guided state legislative initiatives dealing with economic development, education, job retraining and health care.

Pittenger, 60, also served in the state Senate, representing Mecklenburg County. But as a member of the minority party, he had less of an opportunity to play a decisive role. While his focus commendably was on eliminating government waste, a sometimes-quixotic agenda failed to attract much support.

Rhodes, 35, a Chapel Hill resident, echoes his party’s call for a smaller, less-invasive government and doing away with what he describes as corporate welfare. He hasn’t been a major factor in the campaign.

As a senator, Dalton has shown leadership in helping resolve appropriations issues, funding programs like Earn and Learn, lobbying for affordable health care for kids and seniors and attracting new industry.

While some of his time will be taken presiding over the Senate, Dalton has a better take than his opponents on how to promote initiatives that could prove beneficial to state residents. As lieutenant governor, he can play a leadership role on both the State Board of Education and the Board of Community Colleges.

Dalton also takes aim at what he calls “two North Carolinas” — economic disparities between rural and urban counties. Besides rural job recruitment, he wants to make broad-band Internet more accessible in those areas.

Although Pittenger is a formidable and competent opponent, Dalton’s proactive approach and emphasis on accountability make him the best choice to carry out the many facets of a very nebulous job.

Will you vote early? Why or why not?

Sunday's editorial.

Pat McCrory’s stump speeches and debate performances make a good case for his candidacy. But his record as the longest-serving mayor of North Carolina’s largest city makes an even better one.

McCrory, 51, a Republican who grew up in Jamestown, has won seven consecutive terms as Charlotte’s mayor.

You don’t receive that many votes of confidence without doing something right.

In a city, which unlike Greensboro, holds partisan elections for its leaders, McCrory has worked effectively across party lines to get things done on a majority-Democratic city council. Also unlike Greensboro, where the mayor is merely one of nine equals, Charlotte’s mayor wields veto power to go with the title.

On McCrory’s watch, Charlotte’s downtown has become a model for other cities. On his watch, city voters resoundingly backed a sales tax increase to create the first light-rail system in the state. McCrory has favored mass transit for years, as well as sidewalks and green spaces.

Success in Charlotte
Obviously, McCrory can’t take all the credit for Charlotte’s prosperity. It has had many champions over the years, among them a formidable banking industry.

But he has helped keep the city moving forward and reaching higher. And he has remained front and center as Charlotte copes with the uncertain future of one of its major employers, struggling Wachovia Bank.

McCrory also was the founding member of the N.C. Metropolitan Coalition, which unites mayors from towns and cities to work on common issues, including street gangs.

McCrory’s Democratic rival, Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue, 61, points to her own impressive resume as an educator and a legislator.
Before becoming lieutenant governor, she spent two terms in the state House and five terms in the N.C. Senate. During the latter part of her Senate tenure, she served as one of the state’s chief budget writers. As lieutenant governor, she lobbied to keep North Carolina’s military bases open and was chairwoman of the state’s Health and Wellness Trust Fund.

She has been a relentless advocate for public education.

But McCrory is steadier and more assured on the issues. He takes a more meat-and-potatoes approach to leadership, a pattern that has played out more often than not in Charlotte. That’s what the state needs in its next governor.

McCrory pledges to bring Democrats and Republicans to the table. That definitely won’t be as easy to manage in Raleigh as it has been in Charlotte. But so many of his proposals make sense that it should be hard for either party to say no.

For instance, McCrory calls for a 50-year state transportation plan and rightly suggests that North Carolina’s transportation projects should be based on need, not politics. Even though he pressed hard for Charlotte’s nearly 10-mile-long new light-rail line, he rightly adds that such a system isn’t the solution for every North Carolina city.

He recognizes the wisdom of fighting gangs not only with tough enforcement, but with preventive efforts.

He favors lower corporate and income taxes over incentives and sees a more assertive role for the governor in business recruitment.

And he questions whether the state’s community colleges are straying from their core mission of vocational education, a fair question.

Forward-thinking and forthright
McCrory is willing to step forward and defend his positions. Even as Perdue chose not to take part, he debated the issues last week in a televised forum with Libertarian candidate Mike Munger, 50, chairman of Duke University’s political science department. This was the second time Perdue bypassed a debate with her two opponents.

Not that we agree with everything McCrory has to say. For instance, he overshadows the crying need for alternative energy with an almost single-minded focus on offshore drilling. And his message on immigration reform is too shrill and alarmist.

But the governor is rarely a cultural warrior in North Carolina, nor should he be one. McCrory’s skills and experience are best suited to provide what Raleigh needs most right now: a broad view, a clear plan and an ambitious vision.

Monday's lead editorial.

State Rep. Dale Folwell has called for a $62 million bond for Forsyth Technical Community College to be removed from the Forsyth ballot. He thinks the economic crisis should preclude a project that would increase taxes.

While Folwell may be well-meaning, his call for the bond’s removal seems like grandstanding. In Guilford County, removing items from the ballot at this late date isn’t an option. Guilford’s ballot was approved months ago by the State Board of Elections and the U.S. Justice Department. It’s too late to revise it. Also, many absentee voters already have sent in their ballots.

If voters don’t think it’s the right time for bond projects, they can easily show that by voting against them.

Still, it’s unwise to think bad economic times mean that all bonds should be rejected. Projects should be decided on a case-by-case basis.

In Greensboro, voters will decide on $205 million in bonds. An owner of a $200,000 home would face an annual property tax increase of about $50 if all four initiatives passed. Today’s economic conditions shouldn’t be the deciding factor on these bonds. The city’s long-term needs should be.

If passed, the bonds wouldn’t all be issued immediately and thus subject to higher interest rates often found in troubled economic times. The proposed issue plan, says city finance director Rick Lusk, is “four bond issues over the next eight years.” He adds that “bonds approved by voters have an initial seven-years authorization period that can be extended to 10 years.”

Also, voters should keep in mind that local governments in North Carolina are in better shape to handle bond issues than cities in many other states. That’s because of a system of state oversight put into place during the Great Depression. During the Depression, more North Carolina local governments defaulted on debt than in any other state except Florida, says government consultant Mayraj Fahim. That led, in 1931, to the creation of the N.C. Local Government Commission.

“The LGC has been careful in making sure localities are able to sustain their debt burden,” says Fahim.

Lusk agrees: “The oversight provided by the N.C. Local Government Commission has been very beneficial for North Carolina local governments for decades. The LGC approves all bond
referendums and the terms of all debt issues.” Lusk says the state’s conservative financial laws for local governments and the LGC’s work have resulted in higher bond ratings for governments here versus other states.

Higher bond ratings benefit taxpayers because they lead to lower interest rates. Of the nation’s cities with populations of 100,000 or more, only 23 are rated AAA (the highest), with six of them (Greensboro, Raleigh, Charlotte, Durham, Winston-Salem and Cary) in North Carolina.
The prudence of North Carolina’s Depression-era leaders gave us a valuable legacy. Voters can help sustain that legacy by evaluating bond projects individually.

Monday's No. 2 editorial.

Sue Burch was 33 and only five years out of Wake Forest law school when she was elected as a Guilford County District Court judge in 2000.

Tabatha Holliday, 38, completed law school at N.C. Central only six years ago. She’s running against Burch now.

Five or six years isn’t much time in legal practice to prepare a lawyer for the bench. The difference between Burch and Holliday today, however, is Burch’s judicial training and on-the-job experience. Now 41, she’s worked hard to become one of Guilford County’s most skilled and knowledgeable judges.

Burch wins high praise from some observers, who say she’s a leader in drug court and mental-health court; on the “cutting edge” in domestic court; handling the “lion’s share” of complex equitable distribution cases; willing to help other judges with their caseloads; “never bamboozled by a lawyer.” She even learned to speak Spanish to facilitate communications in increasingly multicultural courtrooms.

Burch is regarded as fair, not playing politics on the bench, but tough. “Sue’ll drop the hammer now and then,” an observer said.

Holliday is an assistant district attorney who’s nevertheless well-liked by defense lawyers. The latest campaign finance reports show she has raised more money than Burch, $23,000 to $4,000, much of it from local attorneys. Holliday came up through the court system, having been an assistant clerk before earning a degree in accounting from UNCG and going on to study law. She’s smart and personable.

Twelve of Guilford County’s 14 District Court judicial seats are up for election this year, but only five are contested. Burch adds greatly to the local bench strength. Holliday might be able to match her expertise someday but certainly not for many years. It’s better to keep Burch, who’s already an effective judge.

Tuesday's lead editorial.

West College Drive once formed the western boundary of the High Point University campus. Now it runs straight through the middle, thanks to the university’s westward growth.

This has happened in just three years under the ambitious leadership of HPU President Nido Qubein. The campus has expanded from 92 acres to 135, with most of the acquisitions coming in small parcels. The university has purchased dozens of houses across West College — paying better-than-tax-value prices, Qubein said in a recent interview.

Yet, HPU’s hard push has caused some sellers to feel they were crowded out. Other residents now are near neighbors to student housing, a proximity some find literally disturbing.

The debate about HPU’s phenomenal growth has been conducted several times in High Point’s municipal building, most recently last week when the City Council voted 6-2 to grant the university’s request to close part of West College and two other streets, giving ownership to the university. HPU wants to reduce speed limits to 15 mph and add speed bumps and pedestrian crosswalks. With classroom buildings and residence halls on both sides of West College, Qubein said, daily crossings exceed 4,000. That’s a legitimate safety concern.

At the same time, public use should be guaranteed, except when special events like graduation require temporary closings. Qubein has made that promise but hasn’t convinced everyone. “I doubt very seriously if they will be left open to the public,” said Councilwoman Bernita Sims, who represents the area and opposed the change. None of the streets carries through traffic or provides the only access to neighborhoods, but local residents still use them and deserve consideration.

Security is another priority for HPU, and control of the streets gives campus police more authority to respond to potential threats. Qubein also insists, however, that visitors are welcome to walk through the main areas of campus, although not near residence halls without invitation.

The university must balance openness and caution. And, while campus security officers are watching for possibly dangerous outsiders, they should make sure that students don’t disturb neighboring residents. Sims suggests the university improve relations by encouraging students to perform community service work in nearby neighborhoods. It would help everyone become more comfortable with each other.

HPU’s amazing transformation was bound to cause some friction. Three years ago, fewer than 1,000 students lived on campus. Now the number is more than 2,000. Booming enrollment, with corresponding increases in facilities, faculty and staff, adds dramatically to the university’s economic impact. It’s probably the best thing happening in High Point, which is why the city would be foolish to impede HPU’s growth. But change must be managed with care to ease unintended impacts — especially so much change so fast.

Tuesday's No. 2 editorial.

Robert Enochs and Angela Foster both led first-term Guilford County District Court Judge Linda Falls in the May primary, ending the incumbent’s bid for re-election. It was an unusual display of apparent voter dissatisfaction with a sitting judge.

The best bet to avoid a similar occurrence again is for voters to elect Enochs, 44, over Foster, 45. He’s an assistant district attorney with 13 years’ experience as a prosecutor who does a good job preparing and trying cases. He’s more familiar with criminal law than civil, but if he works hard he should be able to gain the skills needed to preside in every court.

Enochs’ wife, Wendy, has been a District Court judge for 14 years. A courthouse rumor has it that she’ll resign if he’s elected. She says that’s absolutely not true. Nor is there any reason why a husband and wife can’t both serve on the bench.

Foster’s record is puzzling. A former public defender who now represents indigent clients in private practice, she’s given credit for doing good work in juvenile court and in many other cases. But she was disciplined this summer by the Committee on Indigent Appointments, a board of 13 local lawyers, and removed from all criminal appointment lists for instances when she did not adequately represent her clients. The committee chairman, Greensboro attorney Charles A. Lloyd, noted in a letter to Foster that she had been counseled and warned by the committee in the past for other failures.

Foster blames her problems on overcrowded dockets and poor scheduling of cases by the courts, and suggests her critics have political motivations. The excuses are not convincing. Enochs seems more reliable and a much better choice for election to the District Court bench.

Thursday's lead editorial.

Finally, the polls open today. Early voting begins at 8 a.m. at two locations in Guilford County and in 99 other North Carolina counties.

The presidential candidates have been running so long it’s hard to remember when their campaigns actually started. By now, and especially with the last debate completed, most Americans have seen and heard more than enough to make up their minds. They’re ready to choose, and in North Carolina they don’t have to wait until Nov. 4 to cast their ballots.

Early voting contributes to easier voting. Guilford County offers exceptional convenience: 19 early-voting locations and 15 days to vote early, including a Sunday — this Sunday — for the first time. The last opportunity is Saturday, Nov. 1.

As more people vote early, voting should proceed faster on Election Day. And many people are likely to vote early. This has proved to be a popular service, and state and local election officials deserve credit for making it work well.

There’s an additional service available this year. People can register at early-voting sites and vote on the spot. They simply have to fill out the registration application and show proof of residency. Many kinds of documents are acceptable. What these new registrants cannot do, however, is wait until Election Day to vote. If they register early, they must vote early. Nor can they wait until Election Day to register and vote. Election officials need some time to verify a new registrant’s information before the votes are counted.

Before voters get in too much of a hurry to cast their ballots, they should make sure they know something about the candidates and issues below the presidential ticket.

Also up for election are candidates for an array of national, state and local offices. They range from U.S. Senate and North Carolina governor to Guilford County school board to Greensboro bond proposals. Voters ready to mark a ballot for Barack Obama or John McCain might draw a blank when reading the names of candidates for state treasurer or District Court judge for the first time. They can skip those contests or make a random choice, but it would be better if they were prepared ahead of time.

The election system is becoming more user-friendly, and that’s a boost for democracy. More people are exercising their right to vote. But the success of our system of government ultimately depends on informed voting. Voting first but foolishly doesn’t gain anything. Early is good for voters who are ready but premature for those who are still undecided.

Thursday's No. 2 editorial.

Judge Lawrence McSwain’s retirement at the end of the year will leave a hard-to-fill vacancy on the Guilford County District Court bench. Fortunately, two capable candidates are running for his seat.

Betty J. Brown, 58, and Charles L. “Chuck” White, 54, both have long and varied experience in the legal system. We recommend Brown in a close call.

She has worked her way up the courthouse steps, from being a legal secretary, to criminal and civil magistrate, to an attorney in the Public Defender’s Office. She’s garnered praise all along as someone who’s fair, efficient and hard-working, often taking the initiative to get things done in new and better ways. She has more practice in criminal cases but could apply herself to learn the civil side just as well.

White, now an attorney in private practice, was a judge from 1992 to 1999 and was considered a good one. He was known for being respectful, perceptive, affable, versatile and impartial — all the right qualities.

He made one wrong move, resigning in 1999 when he anticipated being appointed to the Superior Court bench by then-Gov. Jim Hunt. The job went to Lindsay Davis instead. White says he vacated his seat to give a replacement time to fit in well before the 2000 election. Letting go of a bird in hand for another flying out of reach was a miscalculation.

While that in no way diminishes White’s qualifications to return to the bench now, it argues for giving Brown a chance this time. She would be a fine judge, and she’s progressed steadily toward this opportunity. She’ll be a worthy successor to Judge McSwain.

Friday's lead editorial.

In tough economic times, it becomes even more important to ensure state programs are in place to help workers. The N.C. Budget and Tax Center wisely calls for continued support of two such programs — one in its early stages, one that’s long established — that do that.
One program it supports is the state’s development of “sector strategies” — job training designed to mesh with a region’s most acute employee needs.

The idea is not new: The concept led to the creation of community colleges. In our area, the Piedmont Triad Partnership has done much to promote the strategy, through a three-year, $15 million federal grant that links regional economic development with worker training. Through its WIRED program, the Piedmont Triad Partnership has promoted educational training in areas from logistics to nursing assistants.

Now, Gov. Mike Easley has created a “regional skills partnership” initiative run through the N.C. Commerce Department. That program has provided modest grants to several regions so they can plan how best to meet needs in the allied health industry.

The focus on health care is wise as it’s one of the state’s highest-growth industries. From 1999 to 2005, the state’s overall employment grew only by 0.2 percent, but allied health jobs — positions such as dental, pharmacy and physical therapy assistants — grew almost 46 percent in that time.

The regions’ deadline for plan submission to the state is December, which means that the program’s fate will be decided by the next governor’s administration.

John Quinterno, a research associate affiliated with the N.C. Budget and Tax Center, is concerned about the modest program.

“I wouldn’t want it to get lost before it gets the chance to prove itself,” says Quinterno.
Let’s hope that the governor, whatever his or her party affiliation, will support this practical program.

Let’s also hope the next governor makes it a priority to maintain the strength of the state’s unemployment insurance system, which provides weekly payments for up to 26 weeks for those who lose jobs. If not, the system, facing increasing claims because of the poor economy, may go broke.

The center thinks that raising taxes is essential to keeping the system on sound fiscal footing. Now the payroll tax that funds the system is placed only on the first $18,600 a worker makes. Even a slight increase to that figure would bring in additional millions.

Also, the tax rate levied varies per employer, from zero to 5.7 percent, depending on the amount of funds in the system and the employer’s layoff history (more layoffs lead to a higher tax rate). The center recommends eliminating the zero rate as well as increasing the top rate.
No one likes raising taxes, but that’s better than what could occur without a tax increase: an insolvent system that would have to borrow money from the federal government, which then would have to be paid back with interest.

Saturday's editorial.

Arguably many statewide offices would be better appointed than elected by voters already faced with an overlong ballot. But it is tradition in this state to give voters a voice, even when they might be unaware of who some officials are and what they do. Such is the case with the Council of State, which essentially serves as the governor’s cabinet. These offices may be overshadowed by more glamorous races but they shouldn’t be overlooked.

Auditor
Some say State Auditor Les Merritt, 56, was a proverbial bull in a china shop during his first term in office. The Republican has aggressively monitored waste and abuse of state money. He even has found efficiencies in his own office by outsourcing some audits.

But sometimes his zeal to do good goes bad. In 2007, Merritt urged lawmakers to back off a bill permitting voter registration only days before an election. He based his concern on a then-incomplete audit suggesting dead people were registering — and that turned out to be dead wrong. “In hindsight, I wouldn’t do it the same way,” Merritt said in a recent interview.
Some say Merritt was motivated by politics in this instance and others, but, on balance, his work has been solid.

His opponent, Democrat Beth Wood, 54, is a CPA like Merritt, and worked for 10 years in the auditor’s office as a trainer. She suggests good ideas: better communication with lawmakers, more concise and readable audit reports, training upgrades.

But despite his missteps, Merritt’s office has done good work on taxpayers’ behalf. He deserves re-election.

Treasurer
If only every race had two candidates as impressive as the pair running for state treasurer.
Democratic state Sen. Janet Cowell, 40, is by profession a strategic planning consultant. Republican state Rep. Bill Daughtridge, 55, is president of a gas and oil company as well as the owner of several other businesses.

Both candidates hold MBA degrees. She has worked as a securities analyst in Asia and Europe. He was a Morehead Scholar at UNC-Chapel Hill who has built and grown a successful company.

Both pledge to preserve the state’s top-tier AAA bond rating and to keep the state employees’ pension fund healthy. Both say they will improve communication and transparency. Cowell wants a high-powered advisory board of investment professionals to help her make the best decisions. Daughtridge wants to push counties and municipalities to include maintenance costs in bonds for infrastructure such as water and sewer.

Either is a very good choice. But Daughtridge gets the edge on the strength of his business experience.

Secretary of State
Democrat Elaine Marshall, 62, the first woman to win statewide office in 1996, is seeking a fourth term. She is opposed by Jack Sawyer, 36, an Alamance County real-estate lawyer and businessman.

Sawyer raises questions about departmental deficiencies and security breaches cited in a 2002 state auditor’s report. However, Marshall responds convincingly that fixes are in place.
The secretary of state’s responsibilities include ethics rules enforcement, legislative lobbying oversight, security fraud and copyright infringement.

Marshall wants to put more public records online and to continue an aggressive, nationally recognized campaign against knock-off merchandise. Her experience makes her the better pick.

Insurance commissioner
With Insurance Commissioner Jim Long retiring, his deputy, Wayne Goodwin, is the best choice to succeed him. The 41-year-old former state legislator, a Democrat from Hamlet, wants to re-examine the state’s Beach Plan, which underwrites coverage for coastal storm damage, make auto insurance rates more equitable and boost state funding for firefighters.

His opponents are Republican John Odom, 61, a Raleigh businessman, and Libertarian Mark McMains, 46, owner of a Fuquay-Varina towing company. But Goodwin’s hands-on experience put him ahead of the field.

Agriculture commissioner
The sitting commissioner, Republican Steve Troxler of Guilford County, knows farming. He has raised wheat, tobacco, soybeans and cattle on his land for 38 years. But he also has embraced the broader responsibilities of his office.

When a salmonella scare broke out in July, it was Troxler who helped ensure that North Carolina-grown peppers were safe and helped reassure the state’s consumers. Troxler, 56, also has pushed hard for the development of biofuels. More significantly, he has rebuilt his department’s reputation after the scandal surrounding former Commissioner Meg Scott Phipps.
His Democratic opponent, Wake Forest attorney Ronnie Ansley, 46, is bright and energetic and not lacking for ideas. But Troxler has earned the right to return to Raleigh.

Labor commissioner
Republican Labor Commissioner Cherie Berry points proudly to the dramatic drop in workplace injuries, illnesses and fatalities on her watch. She says she views businesses as partners, not adversaries.

But Berry, 61, has been reluctant to address reports of dismal work conditions in some poultry-processing plants. When offered additional poultry inspectors by the General Assembly, she used the positions elsewhere.

Democratic challenger Mary Fant Donnan proffers a more thoughtful, balanced approach that is equally sensitive to the needs of workers and business. Donnan, 46, a program officer for the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation, served as director of research and policy at the labor department for seven years before leaving in 2001. She would bring a forward-thinking new attitude to a department that sorely needs one.

State superintendent
Democrat June Atkinson, 60, the current superintendent, is making the most of a position that doesn’t have much power. A former high school business teacher who worked her way up in the state Department of Public Instruction, she remains as enthusiastic about the profession. Atkinson’s goals include improving drop-out rates, aiming for all children to become excellent readers and providing students access to “engaging” technology.

Her challenger, Republican Richard Morgan, 56, of Eagle Springs, is a former state House co-speaker. He touts his experience on the House Education Committee and says he would be a strong and visible advocate for public schools.

But Atkinson is doing a good job as an advocate, and a career spent in education gives her the clear advantage.

Sunday's editorial.

For Guilford County voters, congressional races rarely produce much in the way of fireworks or close contests.

The campaigning has been quiet as usual this year. Whether voters express enough dissatisfaction with any of the familiar incumbents to make changes remains to be seen. For the most part, Howard Coble, Mel Watt and Brad Miller have served their constituents well.

6th District
Twelve-term GOP Rep. Coble admits to being “a little long in the tooth” but hasn’t yet set a timetable for retiring from the 6th District.

Although Teresa Sue Bratton is asking voters to make the decision for him, the inexperienced Democrat faces an uphill battle in the heavily Republican district that takes in parts of Guilford, Alamance, Rowan and Davidson counties and all of Randolph.

Accessibility, outstanding constituent service and a strong work ethic have been the hallmarks of Coble’s lengthy tenure. To many constituents, he’s just “plain, ole Howard.”

On congressional votes, he seldom strays from the party line. However, he did dig in his heels and criticize the Bush administration’s Iraq policy and opposed the troop surge, citing the lack of a post-invasion strategy. And as a backer of Mitt Romney, he offers only lukewarm support for GOP presidential candidate Sen. John McCain.

In this campaign, Coble, 77, sees priority issues as the economy, illegal immigration and developing new energy sources. He would like to lower capital gains taxes and cap estate taxes. Concerning immigration, he opposes amnesty and wants more secure borders.
As a physician, Bratton, 60, makes revising the nation’s health care system a critical part of her agenda. She also wants U.S. troops removed immediately from Iraq and tighter financial market restrictions.

While Bratton’s years as a physician are noteworthy, she lacks critical firsthand knowledge of the workings of the political system. Rather than setting her sights on Congress, starting a political career at the local or state level would seem a wiser choice.

Coble, on the other hand, must guard against coasting through what could be a final term before retiring. His loyal constituents deserve the same commitment to the job that he has delivered over decades of dedicated service.

12th District
The 12th District — “the I-85 District” — runs from Charlotte to Greensboro and takes in parts of six counties. Its representative, Democrat Mel Watt, 63, a Charlotte attorney, deserves to be re-elected. He is a perceptive man who isn’t afraid to take an unpopular stand.

Most recently, Watt supported the economic bailout plan, despite the objections of some constituents. He did so because he felt the Bush administration provided compelling evidence that such action was needed to avert further financial crisis. However, as a member of the House Financial Services Committee, he took a leadership role in revising the legislation to check executive powers and to address other concerns.

Watt did not see eye to eye with the Bush administration on Iraq. That caused him to take an unpopular stand at that time: He was part of the minority of Congress members who voted against the Iraq war resolution, saying the administration never made the case that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.

Watt sees the economy as a priority, saying the Bush administration’s lack of regulatory oversight led to much of the economic pain the nation is now enduring. Like his colleague, 13th District Rep. Miller, Watt has sought to impose such oversight by sponsoring legislation to end predatory lending practices and to provide more regulation.

Watt is a supporter of innovation in the area of energy, thinking that can both spur the economy and help the country reduce its dependence on foreign oil.

Watt’s opponent, Republican Tyrus “Ty” Cobb Jr., 68, of Salisbury, is a graduate of West Point who had a career in the military, which included service in Vietnam. He has not held elective office.
Cobb sees energy independence as a central concern and supports both drilling and the development of alternative forms of energy. He would like a withdrawal of troops from Iraq “as soon as practical,” but says it would have to be gradual. He has been quoted as saying he would have voted against the bailout.

13th District
North Carolina’s newest congressional district — the 13th — stretches from the Virginia border, picks up parts of Greensboro and Burlington and continues into Raleigh. Democrat Miller, 55, a Raleigh attorney, has represented the district since its inception and is nearing the end of his third term. Voters should send him again to Washington.

In six short years, Miller has become a congressional leader. Events have helped propel him to such a position: The expertise he carved out on the issue of predatory lending as a member of the House Financial Services Committee has been sought by many as the subprime mortgage crisis unfolded. Miller consistently has been on the side of homeowners and has pushed for changes in the law to help people facing foreclosure hold on to their homes.
Miller also supports programs for job training and growth. Since his days as a state senator, he has backed community colleges.

In 2005, he initiated creation of the Congressional Community College Caucus. Miller also has been supportive of Small Business Administration programs.

A member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Miller has sponsored a resolution calling for the president to provide a detailed exit plan from Iraq. His other areas of focus on the committee are Europe and Africa.

Miller’s Republican opponent is former state Sen. Hugh Webster, 65, of Burlington. Webster, an accountant, wants to simplify the federal tax code, which he says is an “abomination against humanity.” He lists energy independence and illegal immigration as other priorities.
Webster opposes the federal bailout (which Miller voted for) and also has pledged not to support congressional earmarks. (Miller favors “greater transparency” in earmarks and has said he will support them if “community leaders request them” and they serve the public good.)
Miller’s hard work and accomplishments benefit the district and should secure him a fourth term.

Has the presidential race distracted you from or made you more interested in local races?

With one of the nation's longest ballots, Greensboro residents have a lot to consider. Have you tuned it out or has the presidential race caused you to tune in?

What they costt: $134 million

What they're for: A long list of road improvements and streetscape projects.

Pros: These bonds would address overdue fixes for problem roads and intersections throughout the city.

Cons: These bonds are easily the costliest on the Nov. 4 ballot, comprising more than half of the total $205 million package.

Our take: Anyone who has waited — and waited — in snarled traffic on Horse Pen Creek Road knows how desperately that tortured strip needs relief. Yesterday.
The transportation bonds include $26 million for adding lanes and sidewalks to the infamous stretch from New Garden Road to Battleground Avenue.

Bond money also would go to a wide variety of street improvements throughout the city, some as parts of larger revitalization efforts. From even a partial list of planned improvements — North Elm Street, Alamance Church Road, Florida Street Extension, Summit Avenue — it’s easy to see the broad impact of these projects.

For example, the package includes streetscaping for High Point Road, which offers a less-than-dazzling first impression to out-of-town visitors. The changes would include wider sidewalks and “bulbouts,” in which sidewalks jut out at intersections to decrease distances needed to cross the street. The end result, says Adam Fischer, the city’s acting transportation director, is “a nicer connection between the Four Seasons mall/Sheraton hotel and the coliseum.”
Also included in the bond package are bridge repairs, intersection upgrades, greenways and sidewalks in a city where 600 miles of roads still lack sidewalks.

Among the greenway projects is $7 million in partial finding for the planned 4.8-mile Downtown Greenway, which, when completed, would provide a landscaped path for walkers, bicyclists and joggers that circles the center city and connects neighborhoods.

As for the total package, a safe and efficient transportation network, for vehicles and for people, is essential to commerce and quality of life.

We say: Yes

What they cost: $1 million

What they're for: Assistance for homebuyers and homeowners threatened with foreclosure, specialized housing and housing rehabilitation.

Pros: The relative cost is tiny in light of the potential impact.

Cons: It’s hard to find any, though one might question why some of these programs aren’t part of the city’s annual operating budget.

Our take: The least-costly package among all the city bonds would provide ground-level support for those hoping to own homes and those struggling to keep the homes they already own.

The bonds would help fund the construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing. They would repair substandard housing and provide counseling to prospective new homeowners.

They also would aid residents facing foreclosure in the wake of the national mortgage crisis. Foreclosures not only are devastating to individual homeowners, but can threaten the stability of whole neighborhoods.

Relatively speaking, the mortgage crisis has spared much of North Carolina. Still, Guilford County has seen 3,061 foreclosure starts in 2008, a 23 percent increase over last year.

On the front end, the city would partner with established agencies such as the Guilford County Home Ownership Center to help families budget for new homes and set up savings plans. For those already facing foreclosure, it would help fund agencies that work with families to negotiate with lenders. In the case of people who lose their homes, the city would partner with nonprofits such as the Greensboro Housing Coalition to provide emergency assistance.

The bonds also would help fund specialized housing for the elderly and the disabled as well as entry-level housing for low-wage workers.

How to do all of this with just $1 million? Since 1990, every $1 the city has spent toward housing has attracted another $4.50 in federal, state and private investment.

In a city whose strength is its neighborhoods, these bonds would cast a laser focus on a critical need.

We say: Yes

What they cost: $20 million

What they're for: Upgrades to playing fields and parks, community centers, city pools and gardens, as well as a regional competitive swim center.

Pros: Greensboro is known for its parks and verdant spaces.

Cons: At $12 million, a new swim center seems more a want than a need, especially during an economic downturn.

Our take: Some wondered if City Councilman Mike Barber had bellyflopped off the deep end when he suggested adding a competitive regional swim facility to the Nov. 4 parks and recreation bonds.

A what? And for how much?

In all fairness, a swim center could generate precious revenue for the local economy. In addition, the city’s vibrant youth swim community must compete in cramped, outdated facilities and often must practice in other cities.

And why shouldn’t Greensboro dare to reach beyond its grasp?

But the project had not even been included on a list of bond items recommended by city staff. Nor was there public input on the center until it already had been placed on the ballot.

And while it is true that a single, 50-meter pool is included in the Parks and Recreation Department’s long-range plan for projects, this remains an idea whose time has not yet come.
In 2006, voters rejected a similar bond intended for a new competitive pool center on or near the Greensboro Coliseum grounds. They said no as well to the notion in 2000.

Unfortunately, some other, more reasonable projects are likely to be overshadowed by the swim center: an Americans with Disabilities Act-accessible entrance to Smith Senior Center; renovations to several neighborhood parks; city pool repairs; upgrades to playing fields.
Sad to say, these bonds will float or sink on the merits of the swim center.

Once again, no one is arguing that a competitive swim center wouldn’t be a wonderful local amenity. But in the midst of an unsure economy, and when measured against worthier, more urgent bond projects, this one won’t hold water.

We say: No

What they cost: $50 million

What they're for: Major renovations to aging War Memorial Auditorium.

Pros: Plans to remake the building are impressive and the facility would stay competitive for popular acts.

Cons: The project is the most expensive single item among all of the bonds. Voters said no in 2006 to auditorium bonds.

Our take: War Memorial Auditorium is one of the most popular public venues in the city.

It also is one of the most tattered, with every minute of its nearly 50-year existence etched into its leaking roof, its cramped foyer, its now-it-works, now-it-doesn’t plumbing system, its dingy dressing rooms and its patchy acoustics.

The facility, which is a part of the taxpayer-owned Greensboro Coliseum Complex, is the home concert hall of most Greensboro Symphony concerts.

But it is so much more.

It has hosted comedy shows, plays, Broadway productions, lectures, opera performances, dance recitals, graduations, pageants and student plays.

On Oct. 3, 765 new Americans took their oaths of citizenship there.

At one time or another, the auditorium arguably touches every corner of the community.
Problem is, the building is crumbling and risks deteriorating beyond repair. That could happen in as soon as five years, coliseum officials say.

The auditorium bonds would pay to renovate the inside of the auditorium and much of the facade. The improvements would include acoustic upgrades, elevators, larger restrooms, new seating and better access for disabled patrons. The building has few accommodations for the disabled and only added restrooms for the physically impaired on the main level in the 1990s, converting a changing room for ushers.

At $50 million, the total cost of renovating the facility is hardly small change. And voters said no in 2006 to a $36 million upgrade.

But doing nothing would lessen the city’s ability to attract top-shelf acts.

And ultimately it could mean losing the facility altogether.

We say: Yes

What it costs: One-fourth cent

What it's for: Additional revenue to pay off $536 million in school construction

Pros: It would ease the burden on those who pay property taxes.

Cons: Despite being sensible and necessary, it is still a tax increase.

Our take: Of all people, a conservative Republican county commissioner, Billy Yow, has been the most visible and ardent supporter of a quarter-cent sales-tax increase.

Even when the sales tax failed at the polls in May, Yow wouldn’t let it die and is still making the case for it on the Nov. 4 ballot.

Good for him. It takes political courage to champion a tax increase in any form, but Yow realizes the overall good it would do. Now he has company, among them two respected community leaders, Shirley Frye of Greensboro and Jim Morgan of High Point, who are co-chairing a committee that promotes the sales tax.

For a relatively painless cost, the additional sales tax would provide critical revenue for the county by adding 25 cents to every $100 purchase. It would exclude prescription drugs and unprepared food.

The tax is expected to raise $15 million a year, an estimated 40 percent of it from nonresidents of Guilford County. Further, the county commissioners officially pledged to spend the money for Guilford Schools and GTCC bonds voters passed in May. “It’s important that the money has a direction now,” Yow says.

Of course, this is not a legally binding promise. But any commissioner who reneged would have to answer to the voters.

Finally, and as importantly, the sales-tax increase would ease the load placed on property taxes, which will pay for the lion’s share of the bonds. This doesn’t mean the need for property tax increases would go away, but those increases would likely be smaller if the additional sales tax is approved.

There’s no question any tax increase is a tough sell, even tougher in a trying economy. But this one is smart, prudent and fair.

We say: Yes

Monday's editorial.

Voters in most state legislative districts covering Guilford County don’t have choices, thanks to the advantages of incumbency. That leaves three, including one where voters have to choose a replacement for Kay Hagan, who’s giving up her seat in Raleigh to run for the U.S. Senate.

State Senate, District 27
Following in Hagan’s footsteps won’t be easy for Democrat Don Vaughan or Republican Joe Wilson.

Vaughan, a former Greensboro city councilman, cites his experience and knowledge of the political system. Wilson, a real-estate consultant who ran unsuccessfully for Greensboro City Council, believes he can better represent constituents because he has no obligations to Raleigh power brokers.

Yet Hagan’s productive Senate career illustrates the teamwork it takes to deliver the goods for the folks back home. Vaughan, 56, is better suited to build relationships with legislative leaders. He projects a broader statewide vision than Wilson, 46, who seems more at ease discussing local issues.

Vaughan supports a stronger state education system, more state funding for law enforcement and growing the economy through job creation. Wilson also lists as priorities new jobs and crime control. But he wants to limit the ability of municipalities to annex land, which is vital to orderly growth.

Vaughan claims more than 25 years of successful law practice as part of his advantage in experience. But in 2002, his application to be placed on indigent defense lists in Guilford County was disapproved by the Committee on Indigent Appointments. The decision was based on his ability, committee chairman Charles A. Lloyd said last week.

While Vaughan served on the City Council from 1991 to 2005, he seldom took a leadership role. In Raleigh, he will have to work very hard to match Hagan’s accomplishments.

State House, District 58
Veteran Greensboro lawmaker Alma Adams, whose stylish headwear is her trademark, keeps adding new hats to her wardrobe.

Adams, 62, who is seeking an eighth term in House District 58, is an appropriations chairwoman and helped craft the state budget. She is chairwoman of the Legislative Black Caucus, among other key leadership posts. She faces, for the third consecutive election, Republican Olga Morgan Wright, 49. And, again, Adams is the stronger choice.

Adams has served well and long enough that her experience and influence benefit Guilford County. She has been particularly effective in advocating for the poor, and pushed hard for an increase in the state’s minimum wage, which rose from $5.15 to $6.15 in 2007. Despite hailing from the home of Lorillard, she co-sponsored a bill in 2006 that banned smoking in all state legislative buildings.

Adams has had some less-distinguished moments. She argued, for a while, that there was nothing wrong with some Legislative Black Caucus Foundation scholarships going to relatives of caucus members, a practice that has since ended.

For her part, Wright, a paralegal, is spirited and determined. Every campaign she seems to manage to get under Adams’ skin because she simply won’t go away.

Wright says Adams has not done as well by her constituents as she should.
She describes District 58, which spans much of east Greensboro and reaches to the Alamance and Randolph county lines, as “broken.”

She cites poverty, housing and education as issues, and she has a point. But she probably overestimates the ability of one elected official to transform the community. Adams has the experience and the numbers. District 58 is heavily Democratic.

State House, District 59
House District 59 sees the third contest between Democrat Maggie Jeffus, 73, and Republican Jim Rumley, 51. Last time we endorsed Rumley; this time we’re not endorsing either candidate.
In 2006, we thought the Browns Summit real-estate broker was raising the right issues — especially concerning corruption in the General Assembly — and had the drive to tackle district concerns in Raleigh. This time around, Rumley seems less focused, which makes it hard to believe he would be an effective legislator.

Still, Rumley continues to point out problems that need addressing, such as the last General Assembly’s decision to approve so many capital projects without first putting them on the ballot.
With 16 years in office, Jeffus is Guilford County’s senior legislator. She is a friendly woman who is a chairwoman of the House appropriations committee, a retired teacher who has been involved in the Greensboro community for decades. It should be a no-brainer to endorse her. Except that it isn’t.

Jeffus has failed to take on controversies that cry out for strong stands. The most egregious recent example was her belated and weak criticism of the corrupt practices of former N.C. Rep. Thomas Wright.

And on the legislature’s decision to approve capital projects without putting them to voters, she lamely defends the action, saying the projects “were needed right away” and were “seen as a jobs program.”

Jeffus showed some spine recently when she was one of a handful of legislators to oppose an override of Gov. Mike Easley’s veto of a bill allowing the towing of boats too big for our roads. But usually not rocking the General Assembly’s boat is Jeffus’ mode of operation.

High Point is among only a handful of North Carolina cities holding municipal elections this fall. In response to low off-year voter turnout, its City Council decided to switch to the general election this year. The thinking was that the wider appeal of high-profile national and state races would lead to bigger numbers on the local level.

However, the change didn't result in heightened candidate interest. Most incumbents, including Mayor Becky Smothers, are unopposed on the ballot. Yet High Point voters, if undeterred by ballot fatigue and lengthy waits, can vote in two contested ward races and to fill two at-large seats.

At-Large

Four candidates, including incumbent Latimer Alexander, filed for the two openings. And to complicate matters, former Councilman Al Campbell launched a late write-in campaign.

Alexander, 51, a council member since 2002, is seeking another two-year term. None of his opponents has held elective office.

Mary Lou Andrews Blakeney, 64, is a retired nurse who moved back to her hometown from California in 1996. She says she wants to give senior citizens a voice on the council, support small businesses and extend bus service.

At 31, Michael J. "Jason" Cox is the race's youngest candidate. He proposes the city enhance its Internet presence as a way to attract new business.

John Wesley Sneed II, 36, calls for greater economic diversification as the city's furniture base erodes. He also envisions a more vibrant downtown area and expanded tourist trade.

Alexander, a hard-working council member, deserves another term. He fulfills the requirement of an at-large member to see the city in broad terms and concentrate on retail and residential areas that could use a boost.

The best way to accomplish that, he believes, is to extend to inner-city locations the same kind of infrastructure improvements that have benefited fast-growing north High Point. He also supports judicious use of city incentives to bring in new jobs.

The second seat should go to Blakeney, whose interest in public affairs goes back to high school. She participated with other William Penn students in High Point's lunch-counter sit-ins in 1960. She's been active in the community since returning to the city and offers a mature outlook on issues.

Ward 2

When longtime Councilman Ron Wilkins said he wouldn't seek another term, six candidates filed for the chance to succeed him. One, Fitzgerald Waller, later changed his mind about running. The other five have raised similar concerns about rundown conditions and lack of opportunities in the east-central High Point ward.

Ward 2 needs a councilman who can focus on problems and channel city and community resources into effective solutions. Four candidates seem well qualified for that role.

The best choice is Julius Clark, 57, who's been deeply involved in High Point concerns for many years. He serves on the Core City Steering Committee and is past president of the city's NAACP chapter. He wants to push for implementation of the Core City Plan, stronger efforts to stem gang activity and enforcement of ordinances against littering, loitering and vandalism.

Jerry Mingo, 61, chairs the High Point Weed and Seed Committee, which employs community-level anti-crime strategies. He's brought attention to the problem of young people roaming the streets during school hours and late at night.

Promising younger candidates are Tony Davis, 41, and Pride Grimm Jr., 31. Davis says he would bring the most passion and energy to the job and focus on equitable services for the ward. Grimm has put forward a detailed agenda, starting with use of targeted incentives to create inner-city jobs.

Foster Douglass, 47, calls for better youth programs and bus service improvements. His candidacy is harmed by nearly $20,000 in a court judgment he's owed the city for years.

Ward 6

Council member Lisa Stahlmann's decision not to run again to represent this north High Point district prompted at-large Councilman John Faircloth, 69, to throw his hat into the ring. Both he and his opponent, retired High Point political science professor Jim Corey, 70, are strong candidates.

Faircloth is a former police chief who is well-experienced in the ins and outs of city government. He hopes, if elected, to make more connections between his booming district and the older areas of the city.

Corey hopes to rejuvenate the city with a few big ideas, such as a jobs incubator in south High Point that would boost that area and small businesses. He also sees the furniture city's future in diversifying its industry base: He especially thinks the manufacture of solar panels would be good to pursue.

Faircloth's many years of practical service to the city make him the candidate best suited to deal with the nuts and bolts of local governance. Still, High Point should take advantage of Corey's enthusiasm and big-picture thinking. Surely, there's a committee on which he could serve.

District 4, which encompasses most of northeastern Guilford County, is represented by Democrat Kirk Perkins, who is chairman of the Guilford County commissioners. Perkins, 52, of McLeansville, has done a good job representing his district and bringing order to a governmental body prone to disorder. He deserves a second term.

Perkins’ opponent is Eddie Souther, 39, a building supply sales representative who also is from McLeansville. Souther, a Republican, opposed Perkins in 2004. He is vice chairman of the county’s board of adjustment.

Souther has a passion for local government and has ideas that are worth exploring. For instance, he thinks students and local businesses would benefit if the district placed more emphasis on vo-tech. He also thinks school construction costs run high and that adopting uniform school building plans would bring costs down. He supports the quarter-cent sales tax.

He says he would “bring a conservative business approach to the board” and would “listen to the people of Guilford County and be a spokesman for them, not just talk at them.”

Perkins, self-employed in contracting and real estate, made the most of his first term, rising to a leadership position. He also serves on many boards as the commissioners’ representative.

Like Souther, Perkins is concerned about school construction costs and would like a study to be conducted to determine whether the commissioners should take over school construction. He supports the quarter-cent sales tax and has as a priority providing unincorporated areas of the county water and sewer service.

Perkins has done much to tone down the rhetoric at commissioners’ meetings, which has upped those meetings’ quality. That in itself is a major accomplishment. For it, his hard work, knowledge of the issues and willingness to advocate for necessary funding for county programs, he deserves a second term.

In the partisan Guilford County commissioners at-large race, voters can choose two from a field of five candidates with varying experience levels and philosophies.

Incumbent Democrats Paul Gibson and John Parks are being challenged by Republicans Larry Proctor and Wendell Sawyer. Also on the ballot is Libertarian Paul Elledge.

Both Parks and Gibson have served two nonconsecutive terms on the board. In the 1980s, Sawyer was a state senator. Proctor is seeking his first elective office but is a member of the appointed Guilford County Planning Board. Elledge is a first-time candidate.

While Gibson, 62, has taken a leadership role on the oft-contentious board, Parks, also 62, seldom contributes. That’s particularly troubling since he prevailed in a lengthy court battle with former commissioner Trudy Wade for the contested seat. Although he’s knowledgeable on issues, his reticence to speak up doesn’t serve constituents well and precludes re-election.

Gibson, on the other hand, gets our endorsement. He’s been a strong backer of the county’s strategic planning initiative and has addressed divisive issues that put county and municipal governments at arm’s length.

Of the challengers, Proctor, 61, is our choice for the other at-large seat. Being on the planning board since 2001, including three consecutive terms as chairman, has provided valuable experience and exposed Proctor to countywide issues. As the owner of a small business, he shares and will voice concerns of a large segment of the local business community.

Although Sawyer, 57, may come across as merely a perennial candidate, he raises relevant questions about fiscal accountability. His call for itemization and transparency in budgeting is worth the board’s attention.

Elledge, 30, espouses the Libertarian mantra of individual rights and a view that government has its hand in too many things. That philosophy does not translate well in addressing pressing local government obligations.

Even though Gibson and Proctor are at odds politically, there is agreement. For example, both favor Guilford’s proposed quarter-cent sales tax again on the ballot this fall after failing last spring. They see it as a way to lessen the tax burden on county property owners and pick up tax revenue from out-of-towners shopping here.

It’s important that at-large commissioners have a broad overview of county needs. Unlike representatives of protected districts, they answer to a larger, more diverse constituency. Gibson and Proctor should do that well.

The Guilford County Board of Education has six of its 11 seats up for election, but only two have contested races: the at-large seat being vacated by Dot Kearns and the District 3 position now held by Darlene Garrett.

Carlvena Foster, a YMCA administrator, is running unopposed for the District 1 seat now held by High Point’s Walter Childs, while Paul Daniels is running for the District 5 seat, which represents southeastern Guilford, being vacated by Anita Sharpe. Kris Cooke is running unopposed in District 7 as is District 9’s Amos Quick.

The new school board faces a raft of issues. It must oversee the wise use of school construction bond money. Members must do what’s in their power to address the system’s drop-out rate. They must address student enrollment growth and weigh in on policies ranging from grant applications to gang intervention. Board members also are often called upon by the districts they represent to address specific problems in them — everything from crowded classrooms to appropriate attire.

In short, being a board member entails much more than attending board meetings. Following are our endorsements for the two contested school board races.

At-large

Dot Kearns’ departure leaves some big shoes to fill. Kearns has been a key force in Guilford education for decades, having served on the High Point Board of Education as well as the consolidated school board. Two strong candidates are vying for her seat: Sandra Alexander and Michael McKinney. Both seem to have a passion for education and for the wider community that’s needed for the job. But McKinney’s background in finance gives him the edge.

McKinney, 44, is a vice president/commercial banker with Southern Community Bank and Trust in High Point. He has served on the board of directors of the United Way of Greater Greensboro; spurred fundraising efforts for the International Civil Rights Museum; sits on the board of TREBIC, the Triad Real Estate and Business Industry Coalition; and is involved in many other community organizations. Another plus: He and his wife, who live in High Point, have a 9-year-old daughter in the school system.

McKinney sees a primary role of the board as providing financial oversight to the school district. “We have to run it like a business,” he says. “I have knowledge about money management, investing, allocating, construction financing, saving and other aspects that would make a contribution to the board.”

McKinney supports an “operational assessment” being done to determine whether there are redundancies in the system and whether it can be operated more efficiently. The board must “consider any/all feasible reductions or minimizations,” he says.

But McKinney is interested in more than fiscal issues. Long involved in the international mentoring organization 100 Black Men, he thinks mentoring programs could help close the achievement gap in Guilford schools. He also supports “out-of-the-box” thinking on issues — an open-minded approach that would serve the board well.

McKinney’s opponent, Greensboro resident Alexander, 61, is a retired N.C. A&T English professor who now runs a tour company. Alexander is interested in curriculum issues and cites her teaching background as providing insight on “academics, discipline and student retention.” “There’s a need for more educators on the board,” she says, though she also touts her experience as an administrator and small business owner as giving her knowledge about personnel and financial matters.

Alexander has interesting ideas: She says all-male middle schools could be a way to address the achievement gap, and she supports more teaching assistants, particularly in the lower grades.

District 3

You would be hard-pressed to find a school board member who works as hard as District 3’s Darlene Garrett. She deserves another term.

Garrett, 54, bills herself as “a full-time school board member,” and she’s not exaggerating. Her northwest Guilford constituents know that she’ll be there if they ask her to visit a school or speak at a community meeting.

Garrett, a Greensboro resident, has made school construction a priority during her two terms. To that end, she chairs the construction advisory committee, which researches efficient construction options.

Garrett seems well-acquainted with other issues the board handles. She would like to hire more teaching assistants and would like the district to stop using the Haberman interview process as a way of screening teachers and principals, as she believes it causes the district to lose good employees.

Her opponent, Mike Stone, 47, a manufacturing manager who lives in Oak Ridge, opposed Garrett in 2000. The main thrust of his campaign against Garrett is that she is wrong to support granting the school board taxing authority. We agree with Stone on this issue, but we don’t think it should be the deciding factor, as the General Assembly isn’t likely to provide school boards such power any time soon.

It’s said the world would be a better place if children voted. This election, children will be able to do just that and have their voices heard. Children are setting an example for their parents by showing them the importance of voting.

On Nov. 4, children will join their parents at polling stations as part of the Kids Voting USA program. Children are exposed to the voting atmosphere, something many eligible voters aren’t even familiar with. They will learn the importance of voting, an idea that is lost with older generations.

Guilford County is one of 18 programs in the state that participates in Kids Voting. Even with a record number of voters expected this election, voter turnout is low. Kids Voting is helping to fix this. There is an average of 5 percent more adult voters in communities with Kids Voting programs.

In addition to parents, teachers play an important role in the process. They organize classroom activities that inform students about the hot issues and the democratic process.

Don’t worry, teachers won’t try to explain the economic crisis to first-graders. There is a wide range of age-appropriate activities done within the classroom.

Activities teach skills of decision-making, becoming more knowledgeable on social issues and learning to be more cooperative. These skills teach students to be informed voters and better citizens.

Also, children who participate in Kids Voting read the newspaper and watch TV news more than their peers who don’t participate.

The executive director of Kids Voting Guilford County, Pat Vreeland, receives positive feedback on the program. She said she continues to hear children feel important when they vote.

Let’s continue to show our children how important they are. Remember, they are the future. The more educated children are about voting, the more engaged citizens we will have.

It’s not easy to make a positive change in the world. But Kids Voting can be a simple way to get us on track.

A North Carolina redistricting case argued before the U.S. Supreme Court last week could alter minority voting districts in Guilford County.

The question is whether the Voting Rights Act requires that minority districts give minority voters an absolute majority of the electorate.

The N.C. Supreme Court ruled in the affirmative last year, striking down the state House district spanning Pender and New Hanover counties. But the state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

House District 18 was challenged by Pender County officials because it crossed county lines, a violation of the N.C. Constitution’s Whole County Provision. The WCP can be trumped by the federal Voting Rights Act, but only if the multicounty district is drawn to meet VRA requirements. That put before the court the question of whether that district did indeed comply with the VRA.

The state Supreme Court, in a 4-2 ruling authored by Justice Bob Edmunds of Greensboro, said no because African Americans made up only about 39 percent of the district’s voting-age population. Chief Justice Sarah Parker’s dissenting opinion countered that 39 percent was sufficient for black voters to elect the candidate of their choice. That made the district not a “majority minority” district but a “coalition” or “crossover” district.

Ironically, the candidate of choice in the 2006 election was Democrat Thomas Wright, who received 64 percent of the vote against a Republican opponent. This year, Wright was removed from the House and jailed for corruption.

This was hardly the only example in North Carolina of a district drawn to elect African Americans that lacks a “majority minority” voting-age population. Others include the 12th Congressional District, represented by Mel Watt, which takes in portions of Guilford County; and N.C. Senate District 28, represented by Katie Dorsett of Greensboro.

The N.C. Supreme Court based its ruling on previous court decisions but also cited the practicality of setting a simple and consistent standard. A black voting-age population of more than 50 percent gives absolute assurance that black voters can elect representatives of their choice. If legislatures try to determine lower thresholds, they invite constant legal challenges. But 50 percent isn’t a fixed line: The number is based on the decennial census; as years go by, the real population shifts.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens seemed to express some frustration during last week’s arguments: All rigid mathematical rules have a common flaw. They assume that minority communities are all alike.

That’s the shame of racial assumptions. Maybe this year’s presidential election will throw some of them aside. It’s time to put away notions that only black voters will support black candidates. The court must support what the Voting Rights Act requires, but the strictest interpretation seems to be outdated.

North Carolinians’ votes are so valuable that outsiders are spending more than $20 million to influence them. That’s not flattering, however. It’s infuriating.

Attack ads run by out-of-state organizations have made it a misery to turn on the television. Most portray Senate rivals Kay Hagan and Elizabeth Dole, and gubernatorial contenders Pat McCrory and Bev Perdue, as something like a public menace. And that’s not even considering the presidential race.

It’s impossible to pick out the most offensive untruths and distortions, but one egregious example takes aim at Hagan. An ad sponsored by the National Republican Senatorial Committee calls her a “creation of Washington power brokers.” That ought to sound stupid to Greensboro-area residents who elected Hagan to the state Senate five times and knew her as a community leader before that. But what do Washington Republicans care?

Not to be outdone, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has been the biggest outside spender in the Dole-Hagan race, funneling millions into televised hits on Dole.

Out-of-state individuals have gotten involved, too. The News & Observer of Raleigh reported Friday that novelist John Grisham of Virginia is one celebrity who has donated the maximum allowed $4,600 to Hagan’s campaign plus thousands more to the Democratic committee working on her behalf.

A U.S. Senate seat is a national office, so outside interest is understandable even if unwelcome. But other organizations are injecting millions into the governor’s race, a strictly state affair.

The result has been an unrelenting negative tone to all the campaigns. Whoever wins these elections will take office with nearly half the voters holding a poor image of him or her, thanks to all the attacks. North Carolinians should resent the big-money meddling by ill-mannered outsiders and make up their own minds.

Transportation improvements can and should enhance air quality, but they don’t come cheap. So, when federal funds become available, local government should put them to good use.

It may not be entirely the fault of some Triad communities that federal grant money remains unclaimed. Less than clear guidelines and communication problems might be partly to blame.

On the other hand, as News & Record Staff Writer Taft Wireback reported Sunday, Greensboro has done well with $6.7 million made available through the federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program. Some of it helped fund the popular Higher Education Area Transit buses, and some paid for upgrading the traffic-signal system. Additional money will contribute to an expansion of city bus service.

High Point and Winston-Salem have been slower to utilize the grant and could see funds rescinded if they don’t come up with plans in the next few months.

Many kinds of projects would qualify, from sidewalks to bike paths to buses. High Point is lagging in all areas. Extending its daytime-only bus schedules and expanding routes to cover more of the city have been issues stressed by some current council candidates. Those who are elected should push for tapping into this funding source to get something done.

No one should favor spending money just because it’s there. Federal money isn’t free for local governments; everyone chips in for it. And more allocated for transportation might reduce what’s made available for sanitation, law enforcement or other services. Furthermore, projects must be designed to achieve maximum effectiveness. If the goal is reduced vehicle emissions and better air quality, then every proposal must include measures that will show clearly it will make a difference. A greenway, for example, might be a popular amenity, but if its use is purely recreational — meaning it can’t be used as an alternative route to work by foot or bicycle — it shouldn’t qualify. Even mass-transit proposals must be examined carefully to make sure they meet a demonstrated need in a cost-effective manner.

There should be no shortage of sensible ideas for helping people reach their destinations without need of personal vehicles. Relieving traffic congestion and reducing pollution are necessary objectives that require more funding than government at any level has at hand right now. Local leaders should have ready plans, however, for utilizing clean-air money as it becomes available. This is going to be a high priority for decades to come and no opportunity to make progress should be missed.

Has the economic downturn caused you to change your spending habits? If so, how?

The Guilford County Register of Deeds office seems an odd target for Internet safety expert Linda Criddle. At last week’s commissioners meeting, the Washington state resident recommended that the county pull the plug on online records over concerns for potential identity theft.

Damaging information used to steal someone’s identity could be obtained at the deeds office itself or on the Web site — primarily Social Security numbers. However, identity thieves are more likely to get what they want by sifting through discarded documents such as bank statements and credit card receipts or by searching online financial transaction sites.

And Guilford Register of Deeds Jeff Thigpen leads his counterparts in the state’s other 99 counties in redacting from online documents as much personal information as state law allows. The ongoing deletion process should be completed within several months.

In fact, the state clearly dictates how registers of deeds record property and vital statistics and how they make them available, including online. Furthermore, individuals can ask that information be removed from those Web sites, in accordance with state law. Seldom are such requests received.

Sooner than later, the General Assembly, the attorney general and secretary of state must join with registers of deeds in updating procedures governing online dissemination of records to satisfy 21st century technology.

It would be a mistake, as Criddle suggested, to shut down online access to the county’s vital and property records. Thigpen says that each month more than 9,000 people search his office’s Internet site. Serving even a portion of them in person would require additional personnel at a time when the county is cutting back.

While hazards exist, Thigpen has been a leader in confronting security issues. Now, the state should take the initiative and address those concerns.

Universities and the communities surrounding them often have competing interests. In recent years, that conflict has been one of expansion vs. preservation, with neighborhoods feeling threatened by colleges gobbling up properties around them. As Judith Rodin, former president of the University of Pennsylvania and author of “The University and Urban Revival,” has said, universities often act like “4,000-pound gorillas, exercising their interests in a way that isn’t always neighborhood-friendly.”

That scenario looked like it was playing out in Greensboro, with some Warnersville residents feeling threatened by Greensboro College’s plans for a sports complex in their neighborhood.

But recent actions show the college acting less like King Kong and more like neighborhood preserver. Still, at least one neighborhood group — the Warnersville Community Coalition — continues to have questions.

Last week, the college unveiled its plans for the former GTCC property, which were created with the assistance of a community advisory council. Residents didn’t want the college to tear down the J.C. Price School, an historic African-American school on the property. They also didn’t want it to build a football stadium there, as they said it would disrupt their neighborhood.

The college obviously has listened. It no longer plans to build a football stadium there. It also said it will preserve the Price school and will use some of it for a museum about the neighborhood. The college also went the extra mile by deciding to establish all-tuition-paid scholarships for qualifying Warnersville residents.

But the Warnersville Community Coalition wants to know more. The coalition’s Otis Hairston says the college’s meeting with the community didn’t provide enough time for examining architectural drawings or enough information on the scholarships and museum. The coalition wants the college to send someone to its 7 p.m. Monday meeting at the Warnersville Community Center to answer questions.

Is the group too demanding? Not if you look at its request in context — the context of a neighborhood harmed by 1960s “redevelopment.” Greensboro College didn’t run the wrecking ball for that disaster. But the college is another outside actor.

Still, in light of the college’s positive proposal, it and Warnersville have a chance to move beyond this painful past. Greensboro College President Craven Williams says the college desires “to remain open to suggestions to guide us” and doesn’t want to move “headlong in a unilateral sort of way.” A college representative attending the coalition’s meeting would put Williams’ sentiment into action. Who knows? Maybe the meeting could be the catalyst for an alliance between college and coalition. The coalition’s members, with their knowledge, experience and talent (Hairston, for one, is a well-respected photographer with books to his credit), could help lead the college’s effort “to honor Warnersville” through its expansion.

No place for political vandalism

Political yard signs stolen. A campaign bumper sticker painted over. Tires slashed while the owners attend a rally.

These acts of hostility have been inflicted against people on both sides of the partisan divide. They strike a low blow against American ideals — the freedom to participate in the political process and to express one’s beliefs. The desire to punish someone on account of his or her opinions is inexcusable in this society. Even stealing a cheap yard sign shows complete disrespect for someone else’s beliefs and property.

Emotions are running high this election season. That’s not new. But Americans are supposed to tolerate differences. Otherwise, why even have elections? Just let the side with the most bullies win.

Deny, forget and regret

A North Carolina congressman lowered the level of political discourse even further recently and made his own predicament worse by initially failing to own up to it.

“Liberals hate real Americans that work and accomplish and achieve and believe in God,” Republican 8th District Rep. Robin Hayes said, warming up the crowd before John McCain’s rally in Concord.

Then he denied saying it ... until a perfectly clear audio tape was produced by a local radio station. At that point, he claimed he didn’t recall the comment but admitted it came out wrong.

It’s hard to believe that Hayes, a candidate for governor way back in 1996, has been in politics so long without learning to think before speaking.

Uncork the wine at State Fair

North Carolina wine producers are welcome to display their wares at the State Fair, as they should. They’re proud members of the state’s agricultural community.

They can offer limited free samples. Of course! Folks expect to get a taste.

But selling a bottle? That’s not allowed.

Please. Fair officials have a proper concern about visitors’ behavior, but wine lovers who buy a bottle to take home aren’t going to cause trouble. And producers aren’t in business to give away free samples. They might as well stay home if they can’t make sales. Is the N.C. Department of Agriculture interested in promoting the state’s wine industry or not?

Andy and Opie for Obama
Not all “Andy Griffith” fans are going to like the reunion of Opie and Andy in support of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. And it’s not just going to be John McCain fans who will be displeased.

The retro video was conceived by Ron Howard, who is shown shaving his beard and putting on a red hairpiece and striped shirt to once again become Opie. “I’ve never done this before and I hope never to do it again, but I guess you could say I’m feeling pretty desperate these days,” he says in the video as he transforms himself.

Griffith, who now lives in Manteo, fares better in the short black and white clip than Howard/Opie, who looks like a weird, aged version of his former self, with wrinkles replacing freckles.

Howard fares better in his second incarnation: as Richie Cunningham in “Happy Days.”

Henry Winkler, though, is tops: Once again The Fonz, he almost doesn’t seem to have aged.

Don’t look for this ad on your TV anytime soon. You’ll have to go to www.funnyordie.com to see it.

Reaction, at least in the funnyordie comments sections, is predictably running along partisan lines.

Tuesday's lead editorial.

A school gang policy starts with definitions: What’s a gang, and who’s a gang member?
A state Court of Appeals decision issued last week hints that Durham schools might have gone wrong in trying to answer the second question. Indirectly, it warns Guilford County’s school board to be careful if it proceeds with its own policy.

The Durham County Board of Education and school system officials were sued by students who claimed they were wrongly identified as gang members and disciplined under a policy that, among other faults, was unconstitutionally vague.

Their suit was dismissed on technicalities by Durham Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson, and the Court of Appeals agreed he was mostly right. But it sent parts of the case back to the lower court, including a portion having to do with defining gang members.

The Durham policy listed certain indicators, including wearing clothing, jewelry and emblems “which may be evidence of membership or affiliation in any gang,” as well as communicating verbally or with gestures in a manner that would “convey membership or affiliation in a gang.”

The appeals court noted the policy doesn’t specify what kind of clothing, gestures and other signs demonstrate gang affiliation and cited federal court rulings finding similar policies unconstitutionally vague.

Guilford County Schools’ first draft of a gang policy in June seemed to be headed in the same direction. School board attorney Jill Wilson read last week’s appeals court ruling with keen interest and said Guilford board members are well aware of the problems cited.
Listing specific gang characteristics is probably futile when they change constantly — and when those indicators might apply to students who have nothing to do with gangs except for similar taste in fashion.

Still, gangs and gang-related activity pose big trouble for schools and have to be dealt with. The Guilford board is right to look for ways to steer students away from them, even if it can’t agree yet on the most effective methods.

But the surest approach is to focus on student behavior more than affiliations. After all, the most dangerous students might not be gang members. Neighborhood conflicts that spill over into schools might not be related to gang turf wars. Principals and other front-line school officials have to be empowered to impose disciplinary measures and employ system and community resources that help them respond to students’ actions, not clothing. If what students wear is a problem, dress codes should be implemented.

It’s often difficult, and sometimes unfair, to label a young person as a gang member. Vague or overly generalized criteria can lead to mistakes or even invite legal challenges. While it’s important to recognize gang members if that can be done accurately, it’s more critical to identify criminal or disruptive conduct and implement strategies to stop it.

Tuesday's No. 2 editorial.

Picture giving visitors to marquee events such as the ACC Tournament something more to see on High Point Road and West Lee Street than vacant lots and prostitutes.

All it takes is a village. Or in this case, three villages, say city planners, in a new, 124-page report that re-imagines the tattered, 3.5-mile urban gateway as a kinder, gentler place to visit, work and live.

Those villages would emphasize the area’s considerable but threatened assets. One village would focus on hospitality, another on sports and recreation and still another on the corridor’s physical closeness to UNCG.

It’s really not that much of a stretch to see the possibilities.

For instance, a hospitality emphasis is a natural, given the location of the Sheraton Hotel/Koury Convention Center complex in the area, as well as the city’s Convention and Visitors Bureau and the new Doubletree Hotel.

The same holds true for the “University/Mixed Village,” which capitalizes on UNCG’s need for room to grow and the need for new development on High Point Road and Lee Street.

Some thoughts to consider as the plan moves forward:

Make it walkable. The plan could receive a crucial jump-start from voters if they approve $7 million in streetscaping (and they should) as part of a $134 million transportation bond package on the Nov. 4 ballot. Those improvements would include wider sidewalks and more pedestrian-friendly crossings.

Make it safer. Although the report notes that, in 2007, only 7 percent of major criminal offenses in the city occurred in the corridor — which, in fact, saw its fewest major offenses in three years — perception is reality. The city should consider overtures by Koury Corp. to provide a site there for a police substation.

Make it more livable. Businesses are only part of the story. All along High Point Road and Lee Street are proud, old neighborhoods such as Glenwood that are struggling to survive.
For all that this area once was, it can become even better. Under all that cracked pavement, there’s gold.

Wednesday's lead editorial.

North Carolina might have “this year’s butterfly ballot,” The New York Times asserted in an editorial Monday.

The comparison refers to Palm Beach County, Fla., in the 2000 presidential election, when a confusing ballot layout caused some people to miscast their votes. Those errors could have turned the entire election from Al Gore to George W. Bush.

What in the world is so terrible about the North Carolina ballot — possibly “the country’s worst,” according to the Times — that could produce similar turmoil? Nothing.

Yes, there is an oddity that should be changed before 2012. It was created for political reasons more than 40 years ago to pose an inconvenience for voters. It’s the provision that separates a straight-party vote from the presidential vote. If a voter casts a straight-party Democratic or Republican vote, it will not count for Barack Obama or John McCain.

In 1967, North Carolina Democrats feared losing state offices if voters who preferred Republican presidential candidates could vote the GOP ticket all the way down the ballot in one stroke. They rigged the process to require at least two strokes.

That directive should be rescinded. It simply places an unnecessary hurdle before voters who want to support all candidates of a single party. Making the change also might reduce the occurrence of presidential under-voting, which happens about twice as often in North Carolina as the national average. It’s possible some straight-party voters don’t understand they have to vote separately for president.

There could be other reasons contributing to the under-vote, however. North Carolina typically allows fewer third-party and independent presidential candidates on its ballot. In 2004, more than 1 percent of presidential votes nationally were cast for candidates other than Bush or John Kerry, but that number was fewer than 0.4 percent in North Carolina. Tar Heel voters who don’t support either the Republican or the Democrat but find fewer alternatives on the ballot may be more likely to make no presidential selection.

At any rate, North Carolina election officials are working hard to educate voters about this ballot quirk. It’s explained on the ballot, on signs at polling places and verbally at the voting tables. Few voters should be unaware.

The much greater under-vote will result from straight-party voters stopping before they reach all the nonpartisan races at the bottom of the ballot.

Despite precautions, could there be enough confusion to alter which candidate wins a close presidential race in North Carolina? Not likely. The law of averages says mistakes ought to be made in equal numbers by supporters of both Obama and McCain.

There’s little reason to think North Carolina’s ballot will produce another Palm Beach County scenario. The outcome of the presidential election here should reflect the will of the voters and nothing else.

Wednesday's No. 2 editorial.

With $2.2 million in unpaid parking tickets and overdue penalties, the city needs to get serious about collecting the money.

But there’s nothing wrong with a brief amnesty before calling in the tow trucks. Last week, the Greensboro City Council voted unanimously to give miscreants a break during December by letting them pay off old parking tickets minus the late fee.

That’s a good deal. Most tickets start at $5. However, a $25 fee is added if it isn’t paid within 45 days and that happens a lot. Of the money owed the city in outstanding parking tickets, 62 percent involves overdue charges.

It’s no secret that until now the city hasn’t been very diligent about zeroing in on repeat violators. That’s about to change. Starting in January vehicles of flagrant violators will be fair game for booting and towing. Should that happen, cars won’t be returned until city fees are collected.

In fairness, before tougher measures take effect, people with two or more outstanding tickets will be notified. Also, a new online city payment system may encourage compliance.

Yet, until attitudes improve, progress may be negligible. A 2006 study showed that a quarter of motorists using downtown on-street parking violate the city’s two-hour limit. For some people, inserting coins in meters and accumulating tickets is a daily ritual.

Besides collecting back fines, the city should upgrade parking enforcement. Winston-Salem, Charlotte and Raleigh already have privatized it. Downtown Greensboro Inc. is conducting a study to see if that might work here, too.

No longer can cities look at minor offenses like parking violations with a wink and a nod. As budgets tighten, all revenue sources must be actively pursued. At the same time, spaces must be freed up to help merchants.

So, December may well be a last chance for chronic violators: Pay up now or prepare to get the boot.

Thursday's lead editorial.

The voting process should be made as easy as possible. So it’s a disappointment that the state’s elections board didn’t hear the Guilford County Board of Elections’ request this week for lengthening early voting hours on Saturday. It’s also disheartening that a member of Guilford’s board opposed the request.

While the state has allowed some counties to extend early voting, it said Tuesday that it’s too late in the voting process for more changes. The last day of early voting is Saturday.
Granted, there has to come a point for schedule revisions to end. Still, it doesn’t seem like adding voting hours to a day already set for early voting would have been unmanageable. (Florida Gov. Charlie Crist just issued an emergency order to extend hours at his state’s early voting sites to meet high voter turnout.)

Kathryn Lindley, the Republican on Guilford’s three-member elections board, even opposed asking for an extension, saying that adding machines and moving to bigger rooms at some polling places had eased the crowds.

She’s right that changes have improved things. Before they were made, there were reports of three-hour waits and people fainting. But these changes aren’t going to help the tightly scheduled Monday-Friday worker with family duties that include Saturday morning athletics who would have appreciated a weekend polling place open later than 1 p.m.

With that said, Guilford’s elections board staff is to be commended for its efforts to improve the voting process, including an innovation it began just this week. They should help ease conditions during the rest of Guilford’s record-turnout early voting and on Election Day, which is also likely to be a record breaker.

The county has started running information on waiting times at early voting places. See “Early Voting Poll Wait Times” on the Elections Board site at www.co.guilford.nc.us/elections_cms/. There you’ll find which early voting places have the shortest waits and which have the longest.
Don’t have a computer? George Gilbert, Guilford elections director, says the Gateway University Campus (5900 Summit Ave.) and Barber Park (1500 Dan’s Road) sites usually have short waits of about 15 minutes while the Bur-Mil Club (5834 Bur-Mil Club Road) and Friendly Center (3106 Northline Ave.) sites usually are the most crowded.

(The wait at Friendly often was more than an hour when we checked the times Wednesday.)
Gilbert thinks that this year the county has provided voters “their best-ever opportunity to vote,” and that because of early voting, Election Day lines won’t be long. If the state had allowed the county to lengthen early voting hours, we’d be more likely to share his optimism.

Thursday's No. 2 editorial.

If Elizabeth Dole is still the gracious person North Carolinians have admired for many years, she’ll pull her new attack ad off the air. It’s worse than dishonest in its depiction of rival Kay Hagan as a “Godless American.”

Hagan raised a strong defense Wednesday, addressing the media in front of Greensboro’s First Presbyterian Church, where she’s been an active member and elder. Talking about her Christian faith and works, backed by family, friends and former minister Joe Mullin, she revealed a side of herself most voters haven’t seen.

Dole’s ad forced the political debate into the realm of religious beliefs. It exploits what now looks like a campaign misstep by Hagan — attending a Boston fundraiser at the home of atheist activist Woody Kaplan, a founder of Godless Americans.

The event did not promote the agenda of that organization, which Hagan says she opposes. The gathering was sponsored by a Democratic group, not Godless Americans.

From that one association, the Dole ad links Hagan to unpopular views. With Hagan’s picture on screen, a female voice avows, “There is no God” — a deceptive attempt to put an atheist’s words into a Presbyterian’s mouth, with the goal of helping Dole’s election chances.

Even in a campaign long ago driven down in tone by Democrats and Republicans, this is a low blow. Making false insinuations about a candidate’s religious beliefs is beyond the bounds of acceptable political disagreement.

Hagan said Wednesday she thought about calling Dole and asking her to pull the ads. She should have. Instead, her campaign will respond with ads of its own refuting the allegations.

Politically, it probably has no choice. But it would be nice to think that, if the two spoke directly and honestly, Dole might realize she was wrong, and both candidates could finish this very competitive campaign on a higher plane.

Friday's lead editorial.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Friday's No. 2 editorial.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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