Riiiiiiiight

GREENSBORO, NC -- Roy Carroll, recipient of $2 million in City tax credits, a block of a city street onto which he will build apartments and a noise ordinance specially crafted to (successfully) close the rooftop bar below his penthouse condo, supports a proposed redistricting of Greensboro city council because he doesn't think city council has been business friendly enough.

Is Carroll a business whiz or less than sincere?

The following from the Triad Business Journal makes one wonder:

"[Carroll] sent an unsolicited $16 million bid for the News & Record to Warren Buffett, the Omaha billionaire who bought the daily two years ago."

and

"Carroll wrote in the letter to Buffett. 'If a local daily publication is out of touch with the needs of its constituents, I can only wonder about its financial performance.'"

Carroll added to his letter "This is not a publicity stunt."

If it's not a publicity stunt, we have to take it at face value: It's a $16 million offer for a newspaper, the value of which the prospective buyer admits he can "only wonder."

Is this revelation a reflection of Carroll's sincerity or of his business acumen?

Cityfi would inspire inventions like this

GREENSBORO, NC -- In our entry to Greensboro's Strong Cities, Strong Communities Challenge, my partner Andrew Brod and I discuss the numerous benefits of city-wide public Wi-Fi. We are calling it Cityfi.

One of the things we suggest is that a city blanketed with public Wi-Fi would make Greensboro a hotbed for innovation and invention, especially for wearables (fitness bands, smart watches, etc.) and for the Internet of Things.

In describing the Internet of Things, we wrote this:

"The Internet of Things generally describes connecting ordinary things to the Internet so that they can convey information about their location or condition. A smoke detector might alert the fire department, for example, or a refrigerator might text to its owner a reminder that it’s out of milk. A municipal environment in which there is pervasive wireless Internet will be an attractive place for the innovators and inventors of such devices."

Today there is news of a company inventing a battery that uses Wi-Fi to bring smoke detectors online. From MIT Technology Review:

"A startup has come up with a simple way to make smoke and carbon-monoxide detectors more useful: a nine-volt battery with built-in Wi-Fi. The battery can alert you on your smartphone if the alarm goes off or the battery itself is about to die."

Nineteen years ago, I made the rounds in Greensboro talking to anybody who would listen about this great thing that was about to explode called the Internet. It is going to revolutionize just about everything, I'd explain to anybody willing to listen. Some people got it.* Some people were way ahead of me, kindly patient with how little I actually knew.

Others, doubtful and not to be convinced, said things like "Why would I need email when I have a fax machine." Really. An important man, rocking back in his big chair behind his polished oak desk actually said that to me.

Sometimes technologies reach a tipping point — a point where it is not hard to see that a significant leap forward—better yet, a wave—is coming. I see the same thing with the new generation of Wi-Fi and I'm hopeful our entry into the SC2 Challenge will do well so that Greensboro will take notice of this: There is a transformative opportunity here. We should prove ourselves vibrant and progressive and take it.



* I continue to have a special fondness for Ed Mathews, the meteorologist from WFMY, because he was one of the early "visionaries" -- one of the first people of influence to say yes in my search for collaborators. I am certain it sounds like no big deal now, but at the time, around 1996, when Ed and I arranged for him to email me the weather forecast twice a day, which I copied, added some graphics to, and pasted "by hand" onto The Wire's local weather web page, it was a pretty damn big deal. Even Ed's employer wasn't online yet, much less with twice-a-day weather.

There were plenty of other people who saw the future too. But not enough of them among the movers and shakers to put us in the fast lane of the nascent Internet industry. On the eve of what would prove to be the decimation of of our textile and furniture industries, there was simply a lack of enthusiasm among the powerful and entrenched economic forces to kickstart Internet related business. I imagine, sometimes, how different things might be now for Greensboro if we had diversified some of our capital and tried to lead in technological innovation.

I hope we do things differently this time. I hope we can see that there is something coming and that it is our chance to reach for something better than the status quo. Better than our fax machines.

.

This chart about Greensboro will shock you

GREENSBORO, NC -- It is common knowledge that pay for women lags that of men in the United States. Nationally, women earn about 78 cents for every dollar a man earns. There are various guesses about why that may be, from gender bias to other possible factors.

Overall, women in Greensboro earn about 83 percent of what men do, but that hides a shocking disparity. Break it down by education, and things look worse — for those with the greatest and the least educational attainment. The chart below illustrates the pay gap between men and women over 25 in Greensboro with information from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Fact Finder. 

Women with a bachelor's degree earn only 78 cents for every dollar a man earns while the most educated, those with a graduate or professional degree, earn just 60 percent of what men with equivalent educational attainment earn in Greensboro.

The pay disparity for women in Greensboro is the worst though for those who do not finish high school, with those women earning 59 percent of what their male counterparts are paid.

The Data

MEDIAN EARNINGS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS
(IN 2013 INFLATION-ADJUSTED DOLLARS)

Population 25 years and over with earnings, all 
Male: 34,771
Female: 29,056
Female percentage of male:  84%

Less than high school graduate
Male: 23,317
Female: 13,717
Female percentage of male: 59%

High school graduate (includes equivalency)
Male: 26,143
Female: 21,287
Female percentage of male: 81% 

Some college or associate's degree
Male: 29,596
Female: 25,599
Female percentage of male: 86% 

Bachelor's degree
Male: 45,902
Female: 35,754
Female percentage of male: 78% 

Graduate or professional degree
Male: 72,211
Female: 43,178
Female percentage of male: 60% 

You may want to think twice before working for Jimmy Johns

From the Huffington Post:

As Huffington Post reported on Monday, many workers at Jimmy John's sandwich shops have been asked to sign the sort of strict noncompete agreement usually reserved for high-level executives. According to the clause, the worker agrees not to take a job at a competing sandwich shop for a period of two years following employment at Jimmy John's.

The company's definition of "competitor" is rather broad: any business that derives 10 percent or more of its revenue from the sale of sandwiches, and that resides within 3 miles of a Jimmy John's location.

[snip]

 Using the addresses of Jimmy John's roughly 2,000 locations, [Sean] Maday created a map that reveals the effective blackout areas under the restaurant chain's noncompete clause. The red circles indicate zones in which a worker who signed the agreement would technically be forbidden to pursue sandwich-related work:

Opaque "Union Square Campus" demands answers

GREENSBORO, NC -- I have a wish. I wish that someone in our local paid media would stop, take a breath and realize they've gotten ahead of themselves in reporting on what has come to be described as the "Union Square Campus." This project, to be located on publicly owned land at the south sides of the downtown intersection of Elm Streets and Lee Streets, was once considered too contaminated for development until I identified federal funds to pay for for environmental remediation.

Twelve years later (nobody ever accused Greensboro of being supersonic), the site is ready for development and, in the blink of an eye, it has become "Union Square Campus." While the impression created so far is that this will be some sort of satellite campus for area universities, the ownership and money interests have been hard to follow. Instead we've had misrepresentations of the role of project's first building and tortured descriptions like this that are obviously more about hype than clear explanation:

"[A] catalytic higher education development with a first-building focus on training and education for health care professions..."

A catalytic higher education development?

It doesn't help that there is no online resource that describes the project in any detail—no web page, no Wikipedia entry—nothing other than disparate press release-driven announcements regurgitated by local media.

Between few public records, sparse news stories and the rumor mill, there are more questions than answers. Here are some things the professional media ought to clear up for us:

Who will own it?
Currently, the land for the project is owned by the City of Greensboro. Unpublished sources say that a developer was chosen who was to purchase the land but was disqualified for some unknown reason and a new developer was chosen but they have not taken possession of the property. In other words, they haven't purchased it but remain identified as the developer. Who is the intended eventual owner of the land and is the City of Greensboro going to sell it to them at fair market value or will be it be "donated"? Was the developer chosen through an open and fair process in the best interests of the citizens of Greensboro? Who will own the buildings, and not just the first; what is the ownership plan for additional buildings? Who is deciding?

These are matters of fiduciary responsibility of public property. Answers to these questions are of the utmost public interest.

How much is education related? Really.
Supporters hype the project as devoted to education—"A catalytic higher education development"—but only a single building has been described as being education related. Previous discussions and people who claim to know say that the property is also to include apartments and condos as well as commercial and office space.

Is the project being promoted as education related to procure public funding and public support when some portion, if not most of it, will be for other purposes?

Who gets the money?
It has been announced that the first building is to house classroom space, to be rented, hopes are, to local universities. Presumably, there will be other future rents, no matter the purpose of other eventual buildings. To whom will those rents go? Is that arrangement, whatever it may be, in the best interest of the citizens of Greensboro?

The next time reporters type "Union Square Campus" in a story, I wish they'd stop and ask themselves, "How much do my readers know about what this is? How much do I know?"

Councilwoman Hoffman mum on business relationship with city loan recipients

GREENSBORO, NC -- In a recent post about a company receiving city development funds despite being out of compliance with the terms for receiving those funds, I cited local bloggers who claimed that Greensboro City Councilwoman Nancy Hoffman is partners in a separate business with the principals of the company that received the loan, Greensboro Parking Group, LLC. An anonymous commenter questioned the veracity of the claim that Hoffman and the loan recipients are business partners.

So I attempted to verify it directly with Hoffman. After more than a week of multiple emails, to her city account and personal account, and numerous attempts to reach her by phone, including two messages left on her voicemail, I have not heard back from her. If Hoffman is not in business with people to whom she voted to give city funds, it would be a simple thing to say as much—with a phone call or email reply.

Did Hoffman vote to give city funds to business partners (who also happen to have failed to have lived up to their end of the agreement)? People who claim to know say yes. Hoffman, for her part, isn't talking.

Mayberry wanting to be Chicago

GREENSBORO, NC -- The Troublemaker recently wrote about a company that had a contract with the City of Greensboro to make certain improvements to a downtown property and open a restaurant to have employed a certain number of people as conditions for receiving $200,000 of public funds.

As The Troublemaker documented, the company, Greensboro Parking Group, LLC,  missed deadlines, became delinquent on their property taxes, had the original contract with the city extended four months after it expired and missed milestones that were to be met before the public funds were given to them. The city gave them the full $200,000 anyway, before the milestones were met—some of it even after the contract extension expired.

Could there have been any early warning signs that these guys needed a close watch? The corporate seal they affixed to the contract with the city might have been a clue. In case you can't tell, that's a pencil rubbing of a quarter (click to enlarge).

Meanwhile, another blogger notices that one of the principals in Greensboro Parking Group (who is also a partner in a separate downtown property with city council woman Nancy Hoffman) is living high on the hog.

The question remains why the company received public funds when the terms of the contract were not met.

Adobe woes and your profit had you followed my short advice

GREENSBORO, NC -- On March 6th, I wrote a post saying that I was wary of the business prospect for Adobe, the maker of the very excellent website design software Dreamweaver. The title of the post was I'd short the heck out of Adobe, a reference to the stock trading method of placing a bet that the stock price will decline in the future. The day I wrote that post, Adobe's stock closed at $68.92. Yesterday it closed at $60.20. If you had followed my short advice, you would be sitting on a gain of 12.7%.

My opinion then was that Adobe was making a mistake by no longer allowing customers to buy and install Dreamweaver (and other flagship products, like Photoshop) on their computers. Instead, they moved those products exclusively to a cloud based subscription service. I thought that was a dubious move—a roll of the dice that did not justify the then 121 price to earnings ratio (P/E).

[P/E: The price of a share of stock divided by the annual earnings per share. At 121, it would take 121 years of earnings to total the current share price. The S&P historical average is currently 16]

Even with the stock's decline, Adobe's current P/E ratio of 117 is still way too high, for the same reasons I posited previously: I doubt the ability of the cloud-only software model to sustain Adobe's revenues, much less grow them.

Indeed, Adobe's entire cloud service went down yesterday. Customers who no longer have Adobe's software installed on their computers, who had moved to the subscription service, were left in the lurch. I cannot imagine how businesses are supposed to put any confidence in mission critical infrastructure vulnerable to these kinds of sustained outages. From Reuters:

Adobe Systems Inc said on Friday that access to its Creative Cloud was restored following an outage that disrupted the Web-based, subscription service to top-selling software programs including Photoshop, Illustrator and Flash for about a day.

Customers can apply to get compensation for the outage, which company spokeswoman Vanessa Rios said lasted about 24 hours and was due to a database software failure.

News & Record's superficial endorsement of superficial candidate

GREENSBORO, NC -- Is the News & Record even serious any more? In endorsing Greensboro district three city council person Zack Matheny in the Republican primary for United States House of Representatives, N.C. district 6, they ask readers to ignore important issues, ignore the realities of the political climate, local and national, and suggest we join them in a willful suspension of critical thinking.

The News & Record touts what they see as Matheny's:

"[W]illingness to work across party lines for the benefit of the people [he] represent[s]. That approach is sorely needed in Congress."

The fact is, Matheny is a member of a non-partisan city council where party matters so little that the mayor has served on council as a Republican, then unaffiliated and now as a Democrat. Such an environment gives us no indication of how Matheny will operate in the partisan pressure cooker of the U.S. House of Representatives. A better indication is in Matheny's campaign platform and here, the News & Record gives Matheny cover from scrutiny. They write:

"Matheny’s top issue in this campaign isn’t repealing Obamacare, opposing same-sex marriage, banning abortion, denying climate change or impeaching the president — topics that occupy some of the other candidates. It’s finding ways to create more jobs."

In congress, Matheny will have to—we, his potential constituents, will want him to—act on health care, marriage equality, reproductive issues, climate change, economic inequality and more, including budgetary, foreign affairs, defense, and entitlement issues such as Social Security. Yet, the News & Record is asking us to dumb down our examination of Matheny by suggesting that we ignore how he might act on these important issues and, instead, be swayed by rhetoric on "jobs." Voters will be wise not to oblige.

Despite what the News & Record may wish us to ignore, Matheny has staked out some positions that give a better picture than the News & Record's wishful thinking of how he'll operate if elected. No matter one's political inclinations, it will interest voters to know what Matheny has to say on the issues (and on what he has remained silent).

Health Care:
In January, Matheny's website called for an unequivocal repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: "Congress must repeal Obamacare," he wrote. Now, along with some good news about Obamacare, Matheny's website no longer calls for repeal. While he still remains critical of what he calls "government intrusion" in health care and maintains that Obamacare "hurts far more people than it helps," he seems confused about the role of government in health care as he cites as a good example of the delivery of health services the medical testing company LabCorp, which happens to be North Carolina's single largest recipient of Medicare payments (i.e. "government")  — some $157 million in 2012. (As it turns out, LabCorp made a $5,000 campaign contribution to Matheny days before he came to use them as an example on his website.)

I wrote to Matheny, in whose congressional and city council districts I live, to ask if he still opposes Obamacare and why. I also, separately, asked if he supported Republican changes to expand Obamacare signed into law by President Obama. Matheny replied that he was out of town and would get back to me when "time permits." That was two weeks ago. Matheny's views on health care have been inconsistent, confused and self-contradictory. Had the News & Record been serious, it would have explored the implications of Matheny's muddled thoughts on this issue. Voters will.

The Budget:
Matheny promotes a Constitutional amendment "requiring the federal government to balance its budget every year." As with the Affordable Care Act, it's not clear to what extent Matheny has thought this through or his level of commitment as he qualifies his support by saying we should "consider" it.

Taxes:
We'll let Matheny speak for himself here and leave it to the reader to decide if this is something the News & Record would have ignored in a serious endorsement.

"As your Congressman, I will fight for legislation to sunset our current tax code and create a simple, fair, and honest tax system. Our current code is too complex, 70,000 pages and growing every year. No one knows what’s in it, or understands the current system. If we sunset our tax code after 3 years, that gives Congress 1000 days to take out a clean sheet of paper headed 'Fair, Simple, Honest.' "

Education:
Again, Matheny's words themselves are the most illustrative and, again, the reader will evaluate the seriousness of a News & Record endorsement that, in a city with six colleges and universities, ignores Matheny's idea for education:

"We must TEACH FOR THE JOB." [Emphasis in original]  

Guns:
Yet again, another topic on which the News & Record would have had something to say, were they serious. Here's Matheny:

"As your Congressman, I will continue to support gun owners and protect their right to bear arms. Protecting Second Amendment rights is not only a Constitutional issue. Our region has an economic interest to protect these rights as well. Remington Arms has been headquartered in North Carolina’s 6th District for nearly 20 years and Ruger Firearms opened a manufacturing facility in Rockingham County just last year. Guns equal jobs in North Carolina’s 6th District."

Foreign Policy, National Defense, Social Security, Agriculture, Domestic Surveillance, Climate Change, Poverty, Marriage Equality, Reproductive Rights/Abortion, Income Inequality, Civil Liberties, Energy, Trade, etc:
On these issues, Matheny offers no comments on either of his two websites. Yet, silence on these issues is a plus in the minds of the News & Record editors. That should tell you all you need to know about the quality of their endorsement: A superficial endorsement for a superficial candidate.

News & Record's online security gets an F

GREENSBORO, NC -- Online testing sites report that the News & Records online ad placement, AdExpress, has vulnerabilities in its encryption configuration that earn it an F. Specifically, the testing sites warn of the site using obsolete and insecure protocols.

See: https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=adexpress.news-record.com

and: https://www.wormly.com/test_ssl/h/adexpress.news-record.com/i/70.60.250.66/p/443

Harris Teeter's false bargains may be illegal

GREENSBORO, NC -- I've noticed a pricing practice at Harris Teeter that is deceptive at best and may even be illegal. Here's how it works, using some actual examples. After months of a steady price on a particular item, such as Harris Teeter brand tuna fish in a can at $0.79, the price suddenly shoots up astronomically to, in the case of the tuna, $1.19. Luck you though, at the same time, the item immediately goes "on sale." The tuna's sale price, the same day as the price increase, was $1.00.

The unsuspecting shopper sees the yellow sale tag and the "savings" of 19 cents without realizing that, far from any discount, they are actually being conned into paying 21 cents more than yesterday's price.

The same thing just happened with Harris Teeter's gallon of organic milk. For a while, it had been $5.99, often it was on sale for $5.77. Yesterday, the price jumped to $7.79 but was "on sale" for $6.99.

I don't know why Harris Teeter feels they have to try to trick their customers. It's not only mean and manipulative, but it may well constitute the illegal practice of deceptive pricing.

Extra: In the case of the tuna, it has now gone back to $0.79. It never sold for $1.19. It was only advertised as on sale from that price at $1.00. In other words, Harris Teeter promoted a months long temporary 21 cent increase in the price of its tuna as a "sale."

Grits Gauger is oblivious

GREENSBORO, NC -- While he is no longer obsessed with grits, wringing his hands about his inability to find a hot bowl of soup in the South or doing his insulting best to mock his new neighbors, Ohio transplant and News & Record editor and publisher Jeff "Grits" Gauger is still demonstrating himself to be incapable of accurately perceiving the community in which he now lives.

In a rambling defense of his paper's misfires on coverage of the Friendly Avenue/Hobbs Road rezoning, Gauger sticks his head in the sand and blows smoke from his exposed end. Incredibly, Gauger writes this:

"These people, the Trader Joe’s fans, were less visible because they had no leaders and did not organize, speak out or attend meetings. They were the silent many, with a less direct stake in, and thus less passion about, the outcome." 

Gauger is apparently oblivious to what's going on around him — oblivious even to what gets reported in his paper.

FACT: Trader Joe's fans were visible. As early as January, 2012, Trader Joe's fans had started a website called "Bring Trader Joe's to Greensboro"

FACT:  Trader Joe's fans were visible II. The News & Record, in a front page lopsided piece, reported on enthusiasm for Trader Joe's in the area.

FACT: Trader Joe's fans did speak out. The News & Record published a number of letters to the editor from Trader Joe's fans on this issue over the past few months.

FACT: Trader Joe's fans did speak out II. The Bring Trader Joe's to Greensboro website encouraged people to email Greensboro city council in support of the rezoning to accommodate Trader Joe's. Council member Mike Barber is reported to have said that, of the emails he received, a lopsided number were in support of Trader Joe's, as reported by the News & Record.

FACT: Trader Joe's fans were organized. As reported by the News & Record, they formed a committee to coordinate their pro-Trader Joe's message, they put online the aforementioned website and put a sign on the proposed location.

FACT: Trader Joe's fans did have leaders. Identified as far back as January 2012 on their website, they included prominent citizens such as Tony Collins and Chris Lawyer.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. Clearly Gauger is wrong that Trader Joe's fans were not organized, not vocal and not visible. They were. Their number may have been small, but it is lame for Gauger to ignore their visibility, organization and involvement only so that he can speculate, ignoring facts to the contrary, that their number constituted a "silent many."

If Gauger thinks there was some large second wave of fans beyond those he has ignored, then let him demonstrate as much. Otherwise, Guager is simply offering us more unthinking blather.

Related: Ed Cone: "Show your work, Gauger"

Hayworth, Collins opinion takes flight in myth

GREENSBORO, NC -- There is an opinion piece on the Friendly Avenue/Hobbs Road rezoning by Cyndy Hayworth and Tony Collins published in the News & Record. It wags a callous finger at neighbors concerned about commercial encroachment into their neighborhood and is crafted primarily on name-calling, questionable assumptions and irrelevancies.

One of the few "facts" Hayworth and Collins put forth in their attempt to justify their opinion that neighbors shouldn't complain about development threating the peace and sanctity of their homes is this:

"We didn’t want FedEx but it is one of the reasons our economic losses weren't greater during the recession."

The recession lasted from December of 2007 until June of 2009, ending the very month in which the hub opened — and worse for Hayworth's and Collins' assertion, it opened by transferring some 160 existing airport facility jobs to the new hub.

Name-calling, supposition and fantasy do not make a persuasive argument.

An open letter to Greensboro's mayor

Dear Mayor Vaughan,

I hope you are enjoying your time as mayor. Just a few months in and you and your colleagues have tackled some big issues. From the cheap seats, it looks like you are doing a pretty good job (I really appreciated your willingness to engage a speaker from the floor at the last meeting who had questions about the performing arts center deal — you were respectful and knowledgeable, as was he, and that exchange addressed some important matters. It was a refreshing change from the curt and arrogant dismissals of your predecessor.)

Remember when you had just been elected and I made you aware of the giant Chinese electronics manufacturer Foxconn's announcement of its intentions to open two new manufacturing plants in the United States—one east and one west—and suggested that you should take the initiative to personally, as mayor, begin a dialogue with Foxconn to recruit them here? You replied that you intended to do as much as you could to recruit new industry to our city.

There is news today of another economic opportunity that could benefit greatly our fair city, news that should, once again, motivate you to take on the role of Greensboro's ambassador and personally act on our behalf. RST fiber, a North Carolina company, has announced it has activated a new super fast internet backbone in the state. It intends to provide internet and other broadband services to rural and urban customers.

I know nothing about this company, nothing about their capabilities and reputation, but we can get to that later. Today, you should call the CEO of RST, his name is Dan Limerick, tell him what a great market Greensboro would be for his company's services and invite him to begin an exploration of how to bring his broadband to Greensboro with you as a personal liaison between him and Greensboro's government.

You could tell him of Greensboro's long dissatisfaction with Time Warner Cable's price gouging, how, with TWC about to be taken over by Comcast (two companies that consistently both rank near the bottom of customer service surveys) it is sure to create even greater demand for an alternative in this market where TWC is the only broadband provider, how Greensboro demonstrated great exuberance for Google fiber, how our 110,000 households and broad range of industries will all make an excellent market for RST and that we should be at the top of his list.

Now, I'm sure there will be people waving you off of this idea with the caution that this is just not how it's done, that there are certain protocols and experts in economic recruitment at your disposal who can work up a proper pitch involving the eleven county greater piedmont triad conglomeration of sticksvilles, hicksvilles and backwater boonies but, in the words of the late great George Harrison, "F*** all that."

For now, today, let's have Greensboro — yes Greensboro, our city, not the nebulous "region" — get its foot in the door, first, prominently and personally, for a change.

Will you do that for us?

Cordially,
Roch

Speak up when it's not your backyard

GREENSBORO, NC -- There is a letter to the News & Record today in which writer Spence Miller complains about the News & Record's lopsided coverage of the Hobbs Road/Friendly Avenue rezoning which, if approved, would accommodate expansion of commercial development into a residential neighborhood. The development would, reportedly, include a Trader Joe's grocery store.

Miller is right to complain. The News & Record has a very long history of slanting its reporting, often not so subtly, when it decides to abandon its role as a news organization and become, instead, a champion of some project or development. I can remember lopsided reporting as far back as the coverage of the FedEx cargo hub, some fourteen years ago, when information in support of the hub was put forth as unassailable gospel while the concerns of neighbors were misrepresented or challenged at every turn. That's what happens when the News & Record chooses boosterism over reporting and it's a choice it makes time and time again. Even now.

Miller is right that the News & Record has, as he put it, "confused the issue" surrounding the rezoning threatening his neighborhood. The N&R has once again decided to cheer-lead instead of report with clarity. One need look no further than Jonelle Davis' recent front page puff piece stuffed with Trader Joe's employees, public relations consultants and out-of-town fans singing the praises of the chain and lacking any substantive reporting of the reasons for the objections to the rezoning to see what the News & Record is doing.

Their cheering continued yesterday with a "report" about a seemingly grassroots "pro" Trader-Joe's group that failed to explore who is behind the group or what their interests might be.

So, yes, Miller is absolutely correct, the News & Record is engaged in "lopsided journalism," as he wrote. Here's the thing though: If you wait to speak up about lopsided reporting only until it affects your backyard it will never change. The next time Miller sees neighborhoods being unfairly overwhelmed by News & Record boosterism, he should speak up even if it is not his backyard under threat — just as I am doing now on his behalf on an issue that does not affect my neighborhood. We have to stand up for each other, not just ourselves.

Rolled

GREENSBORO, NC -- You know what would be good for the struggling News & Record? Another big advertiser. One who isn't in this market yet - a brand new revenue source; one that would regularly do large advertising runs a few times a week. Someone like a grocery store.

Thus we get this shameful puff piece of front page crap boosterism by Jonelle Davis singing the praises of Trader Joe's. Although neighbors are fighting the location of a Trader Joe's in their neighborhood, pushing back against further expansion of commercial development, Davis' cheer leading barely acknowledges their existence much less their concerns.

Instead of balanced reporting or actual news, Davis brings us a lopsided Trader-Joe's sploogefest, droning on with enthusiastic anecdotes from media relations people. Once again, the News & Record has thrown a neighborhood under the bus, but never have its self-interested motives been so obvious. This marks a new low.

News & Record: Sleepwalking through illusion

GREENSBORO, NC -- The News & Record has reported on more than one occasion of the economic projections of the proposed "Project Haystack" and attributed them to a study paid for by the City of Greensboro.

Indeed, the City paid a company $48,000 to conduct a study of the project. I've obtained a copy of what the City of Greensboro says is that study (you can see it here) and it contains none of the economic projections the News & Record says it does.

Why would the News & Record report the contents of a study they obviously did not read?

From an article by Joe Killian on December 14, 2013:

"A feasibility study funded by the city of Greensboro projected a possible $6.5 billion in private investment and the creation of 5,349 jobs over the next 20 years. "

From an article by Nancy McLaughlin on January 24, 2014:

"A study paid for by the city of Greensboro describes a 3-square-mile campus in eastern Guilford and western Alamance counties that could create more than 5,300 full- and part-time jobs and attract $6.5 billion in private investment over the next 20 years."

Those estimations are just not there. Not in the source to which they are attributed. Take a look at the study for yourself. There is nothing that relates to job projections or that estimates investment. The study evaluates available infrastructure: roads, broadband, electricity, etc. It does not make any economic projections and mentions nothing about jobs or private investment.

Why does this matter?

Economic studies, when the do evaluate jobs and investments, begin by making a set of assumptions. We—one assumes that includes local journalists—must have access to those assumptions to evaluate the legitimacy of the conclusions. It is not enough to simply take it for granted that because there was a "study" its conclusions are reasonable and it is certainly not enough to report on the contents of a study without taking a look at it so that we will avoid coming to think it reports something it does not.

It is essential for us to have accurate information in order for us to have a reality-based understanding of our public policy. If local media cannot provide that to us, they have no value and are simply encouraging us to sleepwalk though a dreamscape of illusions.

An open letter to mayor-elect Nancy Vaughan

Dear Mayor-elect Vaughan,

Congratulations on your victory. On the campaign trail, you emphasized job creation as one of your priorities—a priority consistently shared by your predecessors since we started bleeding our traditional manufacturing jobs some fifteen years or so ago. Unfortunately, our economic exsanguination has continued despite the sincere desires of mayors before you to find some antidote.

Each of your predecessors, however, took essentially the same approach to job creation, manifesting their hope in the capabilities of others, primarily various "economic development" officials and organizations. While the mayors pitched in with efforts to make land "shovel ready" or to make us an attractive place by improving our quality of life, those efforts, while not unimportant and not unappreciated, essentially consigned the mayors to an ancillary role. I think you should do things differently.

I suggest that you take the lead as a corporate recruiter for Greensboro. Cooperate with and utilize the expertise of the professional "economic developers," but take the lead. What would that look like? A job. Each day, you would do some research into business and industry trends. You'd read. A lot. Then, act. Each day, you would make some calls and send some emails or letters to companies that might be expanding or relocating.

Start with this: Foxconn, the mammoth Chinese manufacturer of iPhones and iPads is looking to establish manufacturing plants in the United Sates; one on the west coast, one on the east. You and I know that with our three-runway airport, confluence of highways, ground and air shipping companies, mobile chip maker RFMicro, and our tech colleges training potential workers in modern manufacturing, Foxconn should know about us. We could be the perfect fit.

Put yourself forward for us. On our behalf, begin to navigate your way to the people who will be deciding where the east coast Foxconn plant will be, introduce yourself to them, identify their needs and offer to personally help them consider Greensboro. Be their problem solver and our ambassador.

There will be, I'm sure, people who will tell you "that's not the way it's done." Tell them you want their help, but you'd like to do it a little differently this time, that you think we'll have more success if companies get the personal attention, and persistence, of Greensboro's mayor. Say that, then take charge. That's my advice.

Best of luck!

Yours,
Roch

FedEx hub and logistics jobs may never materialize

GREENSBORO, NC -- When Greensboro was debating the merits of spending what has become nearly half a billion dollars on tax incentives and capital outlays of public funds to accommodate the FedEx "regional overnight cargo sorting hub," the invincible gorilla in the discussion was the promise of hundreds and hundreds of jobs. 600 new jobs were to be filled when the hub opened, 750 new jobs would be created in its first two years of operations, 1,500 new jobs a few years after that... we were told. The mantra was repeated by op-ed writers, reporters, economic developers and every elected official in the county. It became indisputable gospel.

While the new hub opened in 2009, the number employed by FedEx four years later remains nearly the same as before the new facility opened. The new jobs did not materialize. The promises were hot air.

Undeterred by such evidence to the contrary, the region's economic developers and elected officials continue to push—as they have for the past 15 years—the idea of Greensboro as a "logistics" hub to drive job growth. Now, a new study out of Oxford University (article, study) shows that, even if good airport capacity and a confluence of highways distinguishes a city enough to give it a competitive advantage in logistics, it may not bring jobs with it; or, the jobs it brings may be outpaced by technology in short order—possibly bringing about a repeat of this region's turn of the century economic wounding when tobacco, textiles and furniture jobs evaporated.

"The study, based on 702 detailed job listings, found that computers could already replace many workers in transportation and logistics, production labor and administrative support." 

To the extent that Greensboro's decision-makers continue to stake our economic future to the dubious notion of us as a "logistics hub," they would do well to recognize that such industry is not likely to provide significant numbers of jobs for package handlers, laborers and sorters as was once predicted. Educating people to invent, design, build and program the machines that will do those jobs instead might make more sense.

The greater piedmont triad north central regional area, NC

GREENSBORO, NC -- I have long been of the opinion that the concept of "regionalism" is a detriment to the people of the largest city of the "piedmont triad." It works against the efforts and accomplishments of the people of Greensboro to have us blended away into the amalgam of the "region." I've never been able to articulate it, however, with the skill and clout of Guilford County's former economic development head Rob Bencini, who adds some perspective in When Regionalism Does a City Wrong.

An excerpt:

Perhaps that’s the source of all this “piedmont triad” marketing effort at the expense of your own brand.  You were trying to prove you weren’t the bully any more.  Well, it’s really not working.  By year 2000 the McKinsey study commissioned by Greensboro’s foundations found Greensboro to be falling behind and the city was labeled “pleasantly mediocre”.  Now, it’s even worse.

The acceptance of "The Triad" as a place, with meaning only to those insulated in its nebulous boundaries, has become so engrained that, at this point, I'd be happy with small steps, like removing "Triad" from among the real places plotted on WGHP's weather maps. Every little burgh gets a point on the map but the area's largest city is invisible.