Greensboro Guardian editor Davenport tells a whopper

GREENSBORO, NC --Editor Charles Davenport, Jr. at the Greensboro Guardian:

[H]ere is an excerpt from a “fact check” feature at WRAL: “If you look at the graph, it looks like the General Assembly [controlled by Democrats at the time], cut the K-12 education heavily in 2010-11. It also seems to show that after Republicans took over in 2011-12 they put more into the schools than was there even [in] 2009-10. In terms of state spending, that is correct."

The Guardian laughably reinforces the worst stereotypes of its contributors—that they are insulated and detached from the world— by rarely embedding hyperlinks to the sources it cites, and Davenport did not do so for this quote either. That may be with good reason, because the next paragraph from WRAL, which was not included by Davenport, destroys his point:

But the graph is misleading in terms of the money that was actually available to schools. It ignores key pieces of the 2009-10 and 2010-11 budgets. Taking a more complete view, the budget proposed for 2012-13 is actually $330 million less than the one enacted in 2009-10.

Good enough for federal workers... and the rest of us.

GREENSBORO, NC -- The News & Record's Doug Clark recently wondered why the health care available to federal workers wasn't also available to the public at large. Noting that the federal government provides health insurance to its employees by "contracting with private insurers," Clark asks (sarcastically, if I'm reading him correctly):

"So if this approach works for millions of federal workers and retired employees, why is it such a horror to consider comparable options for the rest of us?"

It turns out, such an option is, in fact, included in Obamacare. So if Clark really thinks this is a good idea, he will be happy to learn it's coming, unless Obamacare is repealed. From the News York Times:

"The Obama administration will soon take on a new role as the sponsor of at least two nationwide health insurance plans to be operated under contract with the federal government and offered to consumers in every state.

"These multistate plans were included in President Obama’s health care law as a substitute for a pure government-run health insurance program — the public option sought by many liberal Democrats and reviled by Republicans. Supporters of the national plans say they will increase competition in state health insurance markets, many of which are dominated by a handful of companies.

"The national plans will compete directly with other private insurers and may have some significant advantages, including a federal seal of approval. Premiums and benefits for the multistate insurance plans will be negotiated by the United States Office of Personnel Management, the agency that arranges health benefits for federal employees.

"Walton J. Francis, the author of a consumer guide to health plans for federal employees, said the personnel agency had been “extraordinarily successful” in managing that program, which has more than 200 health plans, including about 20 offered nationwide. The personnel agency has earned high marks for its ability to secure good terms for federal workers through negotiation rather than heavy-handed regulation of insurers.

"John J. O’Brien, the director of health care and insurance at the agency, said the new plans would be offered to individuals and small employers through the insurance exchanges being set up in every state under the 2010 health care law."

City committee rides roughshod over Fourth Amendment in inspections discussions

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. -- (Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution)

GREENSBORO, NC -- Minutes from the committee looking to update the City's inspections of possible substandard housing show a troubling disregard of renters' Fourth Amendment rights. The Supreme Court has established that the Fourth Amendment applies to renters too, that their rights may not be overridden by a landlord and that government officials may not conduct a search of a rented property without the consent of the tenant or a warrant.

Indeed, that was the reason why, when Greensboro was implementing a rental unit inspections regime, it added this to the city ordinances to make sure that the city avoid violating anybody's Constitutional rights:

No entrance shall be made into the premises without the permission of the person in legal possession thereof, or absent permission without first obtaining an administrative search warrant issued upon a finding of probable cause that a violation of the building code may exist. --  (Greensboro Municipal Code, Sec. 11-31(b)3b)

Despite this, the committee's minutes show that it is considering:

• Targeting properties for inspection based on neighborhood crime rate.
• Targeting properties for inspection based on demographics.
• Targeting all properties of owners with more than 2 code violations at any properties.
• Targeting areas based on the recommendations of the Chief of Police.
• Targeting some areas for "concentrated" inspections.
• Setting a threshold for multifamily units to be able to inspect all units if some are found in violation.

Worst of all, though, was this, a proposal that city staff shall:

"[H]ave a right to enter on any premises within the jurisdiction of the department at all reasonable hours for the purposes of inspections of inspection (sic) or other enforcement action, upon presentation of proper credentials."

The city cannot confer rights unto government officials that are contrary to those guaranteed to renters by our Constitution. While new state law permits cities to conduct these kinds of inspections with reasonable cause, that law, by itself, is deficient in meeting the demands of the Constitution which require a warrant based on probable cause or the permission of the TENANT. Renters are not second class citizens and have no less a right to privacy than home owners. That's not me, that's the U.S. Supreme Court.

An inspection regime that relies on deficiencies in state law to violate the Constitution is a prescription for trouble for the City and should not be pursued. Any new efforts to improve housing standards must preserve the existing city ordinance that requires permission of the tenant or a warrant. The Constitution demands it.

Here is a summary of some of the relevant case law:

Camara vs. Municipal Court of San Francisco--This landmark 1967 US Supreme Court decision laid the groundwork for many court decisions regarding property rights that have followed. The court held that a San Francisco ordinance allowing warrantless inspections in nonemergency situations was unconstitutional, that the renter therein did indeed have the right to refuse warrantless inspections of his apartment by a city inspector, and could not be prosecuted under the ordinance for doing so. The right to refuse a warrantless search of one's home in nonemergency situations has been reaffirmed many times--see, for example, this 1999 Philadelphia case.

In Park Forest, Illinois, renters of single family homes were being subjected to warrantless inspections, ostensibly to "ensure the quality of the housing stock." Read a summary of the case, a litigation background and a 1995 press release. In 1998, a federal district court judge struck down major portions of the law that allowed warrantless searches of Park Forest homes. The judge also held that the $60 fee the Village charged when an individual demanded a search warrant was an unconstitutional condition on the exercise of Fourth Amendment rights, but left open some issues. Finally, in 1999 a settlement was reached that resulted in the Village amending its housing code to prohibit unathorized, warrantless inspections, as well as paying $58,000 in attorney's fees for the plaintiffs.

[More here that incorporates, without attribution, some of my observations from when the City was first undertaking a rental certificate program.]

Friendly advice for the Greensboro Partnership

Dear Greensboro Partnership,

When you announce to the media a report you've published that will likely have people visiting your website to read it, you might want to:

a. Put it on your website
b. Remove the trojan horse malware from your website.

Love,
Roch

P.S. I've given you this advice before.

N&R fails to fact check competing opinions on employment report

GREENSBORO, NC -- Last week, the News & Record, in writing of a report (not online) from the Greensboro Partnership (link not provided, malware at source), said:

"Between January, 2008 and July, 2012, Greensboro’s workforce grew by 2.6 percent, meaning that 3,270 more people were working."

The Partnership claimed this growth set Greensboro apart from other North Carolina cities and was a sign that economic development efforts here are working.

But, today, in another News & Record article, local economist Andy Brod challenges the reasons for that growth and says that the bulk of it was due to the city's annexation of over 10,000 people from the Cardinal area. Brod:

Then “boom, (employment) goes up by 5,600 people. That’s clearly the annexation,” Brod said.“That annexation swamps the 3,200 increase that they claimed” in the number of employed people, he said.

Pat Danahy, president of the Partnership, countered:

Pat Danahy, chief executive officer and president of the partnership, said the group recognizes the annexation’s impact.

Still, Danahy said, most of the recent growth happened between 2010 and 2012. The annexation is just an anomaly in the overall employment trend in the city, he said.

“The growth is after the anomaly,” Danahy said. “It’s a pretty strong story from then on out.

Here is where the News & Record's reporting methods confound, although no longer surprise, me. Two people are saying two different things about the same empirical data... and the News & Record leaves it at that; as if the underlying facts of each man's opinions are not of any importance; as if it would be impolite, or something, to fact check them. So I will.

Who do the facts back?

Brod.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there was a spike in Greensboro employment after the Cardinal annexation of 5,595. While employment has continued an unsteady climb from there, without the annexation, Greensboro's change in employment for the period the Partnership considered would have been minus 1,772 jobs.

Employment with annexation:

Employment without annexation included:



When Danahy says, "the growth is after [annexation]," he's misleading. There has been growth after the annexation but the growth that made today's numbers higher than 2008, which is what the Partnership was touting as evidence of successful economic development, is directly and solely attributable to annexation. Without it, today's numbers would be lower than 2008. So the Partnership's takeaway, that economic development efforts have resulted in higher employment now than in 2008, is not supported by this data.

Correction (12:52 P.M.)
The graphs originally published in this post had errors of scale because of improper Y axis values. They have been replaced with accurate graphs.

Sanders on Bermuda trip: "Everyone paid their own way"

On the question of who paid for the vacation to Bermuda that found downtown greenway contractor John Lomax lounging in a pool with greenway project manager Dabney Sanders' husband Walker Sanders, Dabney Sanders writes in an email:

"walker and i have been close friends of john lomax since we first moved to greensboro about 12 years ago. and as friends do - we often spend social time together including trips."  [sic]

and

"everyone paid their own way - it was purely personal - no business involved." [sic]

Sanders also took issue with the idea that she "steered" the contract to her friend. She says that while she is the project manager for the downtown greenway, she does not have the authority to steer construction funds for the project and that "the downtown greenway oversight committee made the decision."

Sanders did not respond to my request for the minutes from the meeting at which the committee decided to recommend Lomax.

So, did you hear the one about the contractor and his swim buddy?

You have to admit, there's some humor here. Maybe not if you are one of the guys in the pool, but still your buddy's wife steers a big fat public works contract your way and then, a few months later, there you are with her husband in a swimming pool in Bermuda. Funny! In an ABC sitcom sort of way.

Purportedly, Walker Sanders of the Community Foundation (left) with John Lomax of Lomax Construction in Bermuda.

Still, I know blogger Billy Jones (AKA, Billy the Blogging Poet) didn't bring it to our attention for our amusement. He legitimately wondered, was there some quid pro quo or some hinky back-scratching going on when a picture surfaced purportedly of John Lomax, of Lomax Construction and Lomax Properties, in a pool in Bermuda with Walker Sanders whose wife Dabney, as downtown greenway project manager for Action Greensboro, had steered $788,690.01 in public funds for construction of a portion of the greenway to Lomax' control as construction manager just a few months prior to the vacation. (Greensboro City Council minutes, p. 23)

So, follow the money, right? I did. When City Council approved these funds, it required that Lomax follow the city's bidding procedures and hire a company to do the work. In other words, the nearly $800,000 was not going to Lomax, he was asked to manage it through a bidding process that adhered to the City's guidelines right down to minority business participation.

With swift, complete and much appreciated help from the City's department of Engineering & Inspections, I have received the winning bid, it was awarded to Yates Construction, Inc. in the amount of $779,466.25. That money goes not to Lomax, but to Yates.

While the City allowed Lomax to charge a 6 percent management fee for the project, the total fees and construction costs cannot exceed the $788,690.01 approved maximum. As it worked out, only about 1 percent of that remains for Lomax's management fees after construction costs. That's $9,223.76.

Not to be lost in the math is the fact that there is no indication that Lomax paid for the Sanders' trip to Bermuda (for that matter, I am not even aware of any indication that Dabney Sanders was on the trip). Even if he did, however, he would have paid what Orbitz says would be at least $7,000 in travel and hotel alone as a reward for his roughly $9,000.

Even if it was just, "Hey, let's go spend the nine grand I made on the project," however, it might rightly rub some people the wrong way for Lomax to have paid for Mr. & Mrs. Sanders to go to Bermuda under these circumstances. But if that's what happened (and remember, there is no indication that's what happened or that Dabney Sanders was on the trip) the contract was put out to bid. The public's interests were protected. How Lomax spends his small compensation is his business and the appearance of any impropriety by Mr. & Mrs. Sanders is between them and the organizations they represent, in my opinion.

I have emailed Dabney Sanders, referred her to this post and asked if John Lomax paid for the trip.

Where did you go public affairs?

GREENSBORO, NC -- When did the City of Greensboro get rid of its Public Affairs department? There is no longer such a department listed on the City's website, no staff member engaged in public affairs who doesn't also seem to be pulling double duty with some other department and replies from emails sent to the information contact are signed with a disembodied "Sincerely, Public Information Desk" — which is simultaneously creepy and rude.

Maybe the City has found a leaner means of operating, but the results from the customer side so far are mixed; not that there weren't periods off great disarray when the City had an actual public affairs department, but the current setup has some discernible shortcomings. On the other hand, yesterday I picked up some records from Inspections and Engineering in response to some questions I had that were remarkably complete, readied swiftly and handled with great cordiality and professionalism. Can public affairs be better without a department dedicated to it? We can hope.

WFMY scrubs press relase; still gives cover to hate group

GREENSBORO, NC -- Yesterday, WFMY posted what appeared to be a press release from a local sheriff under the byline of one of their reporters. The press release failed to report, and therefore, so did WFMY, that the "border training" the release announced the sheriff was attending is hosted by a group identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group. I wrote about it.

WFMY subsequently scrubbed the press release "article" without comment and replaced it with another story (at the same URL) that also fails to explain just who is conducting this "training," describing Federation for American Immigration Reform as merely as a "non-profit group."

Here is the now-vanished press release that originally appeared on WFMY's site under the byline of one of their staffers.

WFMY shills for white supremacists

UPDATE (9/21/2012): WFMY scrubbed, without comment, the article referenced in this post. More about that, including a full copy of the vanished article here.

GREENSBORO, NC -- One of the most important activities of journalists is to check the claims of those in authority. That's why news organizations are often referred to as the lofty "fourth estate" — as in a fourth leg of the checks and balances of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of our republic.

This makes WFMY's willingness to republish the proclamations of local authorities without scrutiny all the more depressing. You see, it's not just the plagiarism; it's not just the inescapalbe dishonesty of WFMY putting their names to things they did not write — not just that "Written by WFMY" is a lie, and stealing, and a con — it is also that WFMY is giving its stamp of approval to the facts, tone and context asserted in the press releases it regurgitates. They are allowing themselves to be used. As tools. Useful idiots.

And that's dangerous.

Here's why. When WFMY vomits up a glowing press release that touts a local sheriff heading off to some "border training" sponsored by Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) without any of their own investigation, they miss the rather important fact that FAIR is tied to white supremacy and bigotry.

WFMY not only gives their poor audience the impression that everything is just peachy with the sheriff's trip — just as the press release promises and just as they've affirmed by putting a staff person's name to it — but they also fail to see the news right under their nose and ask the obvious question which is why the hell are local sheriffs attending a "training" event sponsored by this group?

WFMY puts their stamp of approval on "stories" like this all the time without checking them out: "Written by WFMY," for what that's worth... which is proving to be not squat.

Update: Wait, what? WFMY has attached some happy video to the story that says the Alamance County sheriff is also going — the same sheriff who the U.S. Department of Justice accused yesterday of racial profiling.

"To write is to think"

To write is to think.
— Peggy Noonan

It's why I love blogging and bloggers.

Higher thinking

Although they came in a critique of Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, I found these words from conservative thinker Peggy Noonan to be poignant and relevant beyond her immediate subject, even applying to the myopia, rigidity and shallowness that are the lifeblood of some local blogs.

We are a big, complicated nation. And we are human beings. We are people. We have souls. We are complex. We are not data points. Many things go into our decisions and our political affiliations.

You have to be sophisticated to know that.

 This is true.

Data visualized: Timeline of City responses to public records requests

GREENSBORO, NC -- How quickly is the City of Greensboro responding to public records requests? This interactive timeline illustrates the response times to records requests submitted to the city over a recent 45-day period.

Update: An earlier version of this post mentioned a request not contained in the data provided by the city. It was, in fact, nearly identical to another request that was among the data provided by the city so it has been removed from the timeline and the averages and numbers of records updated on the timeline accordingly.

News & Record no longer providing free papers to Guilford County classrooms

As a participant in the Newspapers In Education program, The News & Record has, for years, offered free newspapers to Guilford County public school classrooms. Teachers used these papers in a variety of instructional activities in a variety of subjects and grade levels.

The News & Record's description of the program says:

Classroom papers are sponsored by local businesses at the cost of 14 cents per paper. The News & Record pays the balance of the cost per paper and does not profit from the NIE program. 

Although the News & Record's description still says that the papers are being provided "at no cost," that's out of date and schools are being asked to pay this year.

I'm wondering why. We all know times are tough for newspapers, but what drove this change? Did the business sponsors dry up? Is the N&R trying to develop a new profit center? I've emailed News & Record publisher Robin Saul a link to this post and asked him to comment.

How's Greensboro doing on transparency and access? A great idea.

GREENSBORO, NC -- I was speaking to Jeff Martin today and he had a great idea. Every Friday, the City of Greensboro Manager Denise Turner-Roth publishes Items for Your Information (IFYI), in which she provides followups to and information about current City issues. It's a great resource. A regular section of the IFYI is Call Center Feedback, that reports on citizen questions, compliments and complaints as handled by the call center.

Jeff thought it would be of great interest, and I agree, to have a weekly summary of the requests for public records and their disposition. If there was a report every week of the requests received, closed and remaining open, everybody—citizens, representatives and staff—could then see on an ongoing basis how transparent and responsive our government is.

I've requested such a weekly summary before, and the City's public information request tracking (PIRT) system is able to spit them out with ease. Here's a sample of what the PIRT system can generate and that could be included in the City Manager's weekly IFYI:

UPDATE: This blogger has created a timeline of the City's responses to records requests over a recent 45 day period from PIRT information.

Records request will put City retention and access procedures to the test

GREENSBORO, NC -- George Hartzman made the following records request of the City of Greensboro:

Please provide any City Council and City of Greensboro Government communications not directed to City Council's government email addresses since the beggining [sic] of 2012.

That's an interesting request. It will reveal the extent to which city staff and city council abide by public records law regarding private email accounts. The Government Records Branch of the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, which oversees government records retention and access policies says this about such communications in their guide to the retention and disposition of email:

If a personal e-mail account is used for government business, employees are required to forward all e-mail messages to their government e-mail account. Those employees who do not have a government e-mail account are expected to print those e-mail messages following the terms of a records retention and disposition schedule.

and...

If an employee has been approved to use an alternate technology, all messages created, received, or sent using IM, Short Messaging Services (SMS), mobile e-mail devices (such as BlackBerry™) or other alternate technologies during the course of government business are to be managed with the same care as e-mail messages, which includes activating the audit log and forwarding all e-mail messages to their government e-mail account. All messages created, received, or sent using alternate technologies are subject to the rules outlined in this e-mail policy.

Obviously, there are going to be plenty of emails and text messages floating around in private hands that will serve as tests for whether or not the respondents to Hartzman's request are properly retaining and providing access to these types of public records.

From the Public Misinformation Desk: Third is the best

GREENSBORO, NC -- The City of Greensboro issued a press release yesterday announcing:

The City of Greensboro received the Savvy Award of Excellence for the best overall website at the 24th Annual City-County Communications and Marketing Association (3CMA) Annual Conference.

The best? No. Not really. According to the 3CMA:

In addition to the coveted Savvy Award, judges designate a Silver Circle Award for second place and an Award of Excellence for third place. 

Greensboro received the third place Award of Excellence. The first place Savvy Award went to Austin, Texas and second place Silver Circle was awarded to Frisco, Texas. No word on how many cities paid the required fee to enter the competition.

News & Record scrubs race from police descriptions of robbery suspects

GREENSBORO, NC -- Why does the News & Record remove race from descriptions of criminal suspects provided by the police?

Here is how the News & Record describes two robbery suspects from a re-purposed police pres release:

Both suspects were described as having average builds and being about 20 years old. One suspect was about 6 feet tall and wearing a red hooded sweatshirt, police said. The other was about 5-foot-10, wearing a gray hooded sweatshirt.

Here is how the suspects were described in the press release.

Suspect #1 is a black male, 6’, average build, approximately 20 years old, last seen wearing a red hooded sweatshirt.  Suspect #2 is a black male, 5’10”, average build, approximately 20 years old, last seen wearing a gray hooded sweatshirt. 

The police provide build, age, gender, clothing and race. The News & Record provides everything but race.

Former News & Record staffer Lex Alexander says that the newspaper's style guide dictates that descriptions include a sufficient number of details before they are published. Clearly that criterion, however questionable to begin with, was met—descriptions were published, so it can't be that. 

What benefit is derived, what value does it provide to the consumer, for the News & Record to remove race from the suspect descriptions? 

I've emailed News & Record editor Jeff Gauger a link to this post and asked him to comment.

On 9/11 WFMY jumps to unfounded conclusion: Terrorists strike local town!

GREENSBORO, NC --

Turkish Terrorists Hack Town of Yanceyville's Website

So read the headline of the WFMY story that begins "Yes, you read correctly, Turkish terrorists hacked into a Triad town's website."

"Once again, Caswell County is being connected to terrorism," anchor Frank Mickens says in introducing the video report.

Terrorists?

Google translates the Turkish as "We can not separate the two us wrapped in a flag of a universe."

As WFMY tells it, the town of Yanceyville's website was defaced with a new home page. It happened two weeks ago, but WFMY reported it yesterday, 9/11.

The hacked webpage attributed the hack to "Turkish Muslim hacker," and included the message "Real Terrorist ABD and Zionist Israel - Russia - France - BOYCOTT! Down with Israel & US & Russia & France!" Disturbing, but the work of terrorists?

The word "terrorist" on the hacked page is an accusation against others, not a claim of self-identification. How WFMY came to know the hack to have been the work of terrorists, they don't say. They just assert it without substantiation. Which terrorists? They don't say. Who, exactly, they don't say.

Call me old fashioned, but I think the word terrorist should be reserved for people who commit or plot to commit acts of terror—as the Office Of the Coordination for Counterterrorism defines them, acts of violence intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or government. That sounds about right. Does, WFMY know such a group to have been responsible for the hack? They don't say.

Even without evidence of who committed the hack, it sure makes for a great headline to say it was terrorists—extra special to report it that way on the anniversary of 9/11 attacks. Maybe WFMY has some more convincing information that didn't make it into this report that they'll be sharing with us soon. I just hope this doesn't turn out to join the Great Downtown Flash Mob Beatdown and the Police Black Book stories among the ranks of over-sensationalized untruthful garbage from WFMY.

Civitas poll: 30% of black N.C. voters favor Romney

According to the results of a poll by Civitas/SurveyUSA released today, Mitt Romeny leads Barack Obama in North Carolina by 10 points. The poll reports that 30 percent of black voters will vote for Mitt Romeny and 66 percent support Barack Obama. The poll also found Romeny making inroads among another Obama constituency, having Romeny the preference of 60 percent of 18-24 year-olds.

Another poll of North Carolina voters released today, conducted by Public Policy Polling, has Obama up 1 point over Romney. It has 8 percent of black voters favoring Romney and 89 percent supporting the president; and 53 percent of 18-24 year-olds favoring Obama with 45 percent supporting Romney.

The PPP poll surveyed 1,087 likely voters from September 7-9. The Civitas poll surveyed 500 registered voters from September 4-6.