Primary Primer For District 7 City Council Race
Incumbent Councilmember Warren Cooksey squares off against challenger Jay Privette in the GOP primary for District 7 on the Charlotte City Council. And it’s for all the marbles – there is no Democrat on the ballot for November’s general election, which means the winner of next Tuesday’s primary will represent the southeast Charlotte district on the city council for the next two years.
We asked Cooksey and Privette to answer a few questions relating to myriad issues facing the City of Charlotte. Their unedited responses follow:
Do you support extension of the Lynx Blue Line light rail to UNC-Charlotte and the proposed Red Line commuter rail to north Mecklenburg?
Cooksey: Yes, because four years ago voters overwhelmingly supported the transit tax and the plan it funds. However, the local tax dollars used for transit construction and operation should come only from that voter-approved half-cent transit tax. I oppose using any other local tax revenue for transit development.
Privette: ABSOLUTELY NOT!! The little known fact the city council doesn’t want to discuss is the current light rail line costs taxpayers over $20 per rider in subsidies. The extension to the north is projected to cost over twice as much to build, so subsidies for the northern routes will be correspondingly higher. WHY ARE WE DOING THIS?? Currently much less expensive buses perform the job very well of transporting commuters from numerous mass transit pick-up points that can be changed as demographics change.
Rail transit is a 19th century technology that is being sold as a transport system of the future that will stimulate economic growth, but a ride down South Boulevard will convince anyone that promise isn’t coming true. I am alarmed by those on our city council that call themselves conservatives but are still pushing forward with light rail after this evidence has been presented to them on numerous occasions. After exhaustingly posing the question, “WHY,” to Warren Cooksey, my councilman, the most frequent answer I get is the voters voted for it. He fails to consider only 16% of eligible voters turned out for that vote, and that vote was influenced by a pro-rail campaign built on faulty premises. Also, that campaign was well financed by a collection of “Who’s Who” of downtown interests and city contractors (including $5000 from the taxpayer funded CRVA that manages downtown properties).
District 7 has been a hotspot for the debate on subsidized housing. Do you support the city’s current locational policy for affordable housing?
Privette: I think spending a lot of money on housing for the needy and putting them in affluent neighborhoods has about as much chance of elevating the poor as forced bussing did in improving education. If we spent a fraction of the money we spend on subsidized housing making our poorer neighborhoods safer and better, I don’t think we would have a low-income housing problem. Instead we continue the policies of raising taxes to pay for expensive failed social programs, which often forces low-income people out of their homes into subsidized housing where they have little pride of ownership or sense of community.
Cooksey: No, and I voted against it. I believe the voters of Charlotte approved housing bonds in order to help people get roofs over their heads, not to restrict that help by limiting where subsidized housing can be built.
I’d prefer that the city not be in the business of subsidizing housing at all. However, a majority of Charlotte’s voters want the city to perform that function, which makes it my responsibility to help develop policies that best carry out their preference.
Given the nature of the first two questions, I’ll take this opportunity to note my basic philosophy of represenation: Under a republican form of government, the people determine what government should do; elected officials determine how government carries out those tasks, and in what order of priority.
On a scale of 1 to 5, rate the performance of Police Chief Rodney Monroe, with 5 being superior performance and a justification of your rating.
Cooksey: 4; overall, Chief Monroe demonstrates a much-needed focus on both actually reducing crime and increasing the public’s perception of safety, but all has not been perfect.
Chief Monroe reorganized CMPD to put 90 more officers out on patrol, and he has pointed out that a city Charlotte’s size needs a larger police force. In speaking with neighborhood groups in District 7, I have found people to be very encouraged by the Chief’s work, noting they see more police officers out on patrol in their neighborhoods.
Since the Chief’s reorganization, Charlotte’s overall crime rate is down, the homicide rate is down, and calls for service are down. CMPD is developing a stronger partnership with the District Attorney’s office.
Admittedly, there have been some missteps. None, however, has been as bad as they seemed at the time after a review of the facts. The post-Speed Street shooting of two young men should not have happened. Nevertheless, a comparison with the type of mayhem experienced by Vancouver in June and the United Kingdom this summer shows that using the term “riot” for Charlotte’s incident is overstating the case.
Because public safety is the most important responsibility of government, no one should minimize the impact of crime. The challenge for Chief Monroe—for any police chief, really—is to lead in a city in which all crime is unacceptable, but the idea that there will be absolutely no crime ever is unrealistic. I believe he works well with that challenge.
Privette: I will not pass judgment on Chief Rodney Monroe without a more thorough examination of the facts. There has been too much media noise surrounding the information I have heard about him. He deserves my support to do his job as he sees fit until I am convinced otherwise.
Do you support Charlotte Center City Partner’s 2020 Vision plan?
Privette: NO, NO and NO! I downloaded a copy of the 2025 plan and only had to skim over it to realize it represents social engineering by an elitist group that thinks they know better than us how we should live. I recommend the citizens of Waxhaw, Huntersville, Pineville, etc. download this “vision of the future” and take a good look at the illustration on page 2. They are portrayed as spokes in a wheel that lead to downtown Charlotte. This concept is very desirable to the Charlotte City Center Partners because their mission is to revitalize downtown Charlotte. They must promote the success of that mission in order to justify the compensation of their CEO who pocketed $347,000 last year, an additional staff of sixteen (several of which make six figures) and a board of thirty-five of the “Who’s Who” of downtown Charlotte promoters. The CCCP has been working toward the 2025 vision for decades on the promise our taxes are being invested for a better Charlotte. So why are we the highest taxed, largest debtor city with the highest unemployment (and arguably the highest crime) in NC? Is the CCCP turning downtown into a thriving metropolis, or does the utopia they are spending massive amounts of our money for only exist in their well-produced illustrations? How many downtown condos have to go bankrupt before someone on the city council starts questioning the CCCP about their vision?
Cooksey: Yes, because I support planning in general, whether by individuals, businesses, governments, or other organizations. Without a plan, there is only aimless wandering. With a plan, there is a guide for the future.
In the public and nonprofit sectors, adopted plans make transparent to the public what the goals of the planning organization are. They create accountability for progress as well as the basis for criticism when circumstances change.
As an example, consider the fact that one of the ways I was able to help stop the use of $1 million in tax dollars for an uptown market, which Center City Partners requested last year, was by pointing out that the 2010 Center City Vision Plan never mentioned the idea.
The Charlotte Center City 2020 Vision Plan lets the entire city see the kinds of ideas uptown has for itself, and I definitely support the ability of everyone to have that information.
Should Charlotte accept federal grants to help fund local infrastructure projects?
Cooksey: No, if the grants are funded by the so-called “stimulus” bill. I am the only Council Member who has voted “no” on every request by the Council for “stimulus” dollars. That bill created pure, unadulterated debt, and it was and is a bad idea for this nation.
For federal grants funded through the established Congressional budget procedure, though, I have more difficulty. The best time to be against such programs is during the authorization process in Congress. The next best time is during the appropriation process in Congress.
Once a program is authorized and funded, though, the situation is not as clear. At that point, the money will be spent somewhere. When it comes to local responsibilities, Charlotteans’ tax dollars should be spent in Charlotte.
One of the ways I typically categorize votes is by whether I lose sleep over them. When it comes to federal grants for local projects, I lose sleep over both the idea of the spending itself and the redirection of Charlotteans’ tax dollars to other cities. Until there is greater reform in Washington, this subject will continue to be a lose-lose proposition.
Privette: Yes, we should accept Federal grants. The Fed gets its money from us just like the city, county and state. However we need to be concerned about strings that are attached to it. When our forefathers wrote the Constitution their vision was local governments should be responsible for 95% of the needs for which we look to government. Now the Federal government has grown so big they are restricting our freedoms by setting the terms by which we can get back our money. I hope one day we will find our way back to a true Federalist system, but until then we have to live with what we have.
Is it appropriate for the city to use percentage goals for the inclusion of minority-owned firms that are awarded city contracts?
Privette: I prefer a race/gender blind system of awarding contracts. I’m not sure how much leeway the courts will allow the City Council in setting these standards.
Cooksey: No. Fortunately, the city doesn’t do that, and I will vote against any attempt to change current policy.
Do you support consolidation of city/county governments?
Cooksey: Yes, under the following conditions:
1.There is a clear and affordable plan to consolidate the debt of the two governments.
2. All Mecklenburg voters should elect only one Council (or whatever the governing body will be called). If Charlotte has to give up its council, the other towns should give up theirs.
3. All Mecklenburg property owners should pay the same general property tax rate. The revenue from any supplemental property tax rates should be administered by separate organizations, as occurs with municipal service districts.
4. Voters should know before voting on consolidation whether elected officials will be part-time or full-time.
5. There must be a genuine grass-roots effort for change, just as occurred over 30 years ago when Charlotte changed its City Council to a district/at-large structure. Citizens should establish the form of government for elected officials; elected officials should not impose a form of government on citizens.
Of course, those who favor consolidation look at that list and usually conclude it means that I oppose consolidation. So be it.
The real discussion about consolidation should involve the Board of County Commissioners and the Board of Education. They serve the same geography and the same electorate, and they are the two units of local government that consistently disagree about spending priorities.
Privette: No. This idea is often sold as an appealing concept, but in reality it doesn’t work. Where it has been tried it has resulted in more bureaucratic, less responsive governments with confusing trails of accountability. Also, imagine the outrage of Pineville, Matthews, and Huntersville if Charlotte and Mecklenburg decided to merge.
Mayor Anthony Foxx is scheduled to make a trip to China to help bolster local economic development. Is this an appropriate use of taxpayer money?
Privette: No. I don’t exactly know what Anthony Foxx expects to accomplish for the citizens of Charlotte in China. What specifically is he selling?
Cooksey: Possibly. As of this writing, I do not know enough about the details of the trip to evaluate it fully. However, Charlotte does have a sizable presence of companies headquartered in other countries, and building relationships is a critical element of business success. The Charlotte International Cabinet exists to build and maintain those relationships.
Furthermore, the position of Mayor of a city is generally viewed as an important one, and having the Mayor involved in economic development discussions is often significant to getting the deal done. Thus, it is not unreasonable to include the Mayor in a business recruitment trip.
Do you support the city’s post construction control ordinance and tree ordinance?
Cooksey: No. I voted against the recent revisions to the tree ordinance; unfortunately, the PCCO was adopted before I was elected.
Privette: Post construction and tree ordinances have become catch all’s for a host of issues as the power of the EPA expands. I believe government has a role in making sure someone’s actions upstream don’t jeopardize the quality of life for those living downstream. There is no one size fits all rule for these ordinances. My hope is these ordinances are written with enough wiggle room to allow for the application of common sense.
Should the city continue to fund the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority at its current level?
Privette: No! I think the CRVA should be dissolved. If business people want to form a group to promote themselves with their own money, that’s fine. When a stream of “cheap” taxpayer money becomes involved in supporting their efforts, corruption and waste will inevitably result.
Cooksey: No. If the system were structured the way it should be, destination sales and marketing for Charlotte’s hospitality industry would be handled following the Chamber model: member businesses would pay into an independent organization for general visitor promotion.
However, that’s not how the world works, for only a small minority supports that structure.
Turning to policymaking in the real world, then, the City Council doesn’t have much choice other than to provide the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority with $10 million of its $40+ million annual budget. Furthermore, it is likely that what little choice there is will be taken away soon.
State law mandates that hospitality taxes levied on hotel rooms and prepared foods and collected by Mecklenburg County be used for purposes that promote travel and tourism. Thus, those taxes support the debt service on the convention center, the uptown arena, and the NASCAR Hall of Fame. In addition, the taxes provide about $10 million a year for efforts at visitor promotion—that is, sales and marketing of the city. (I should note that the prepared food and beverage tax is used exclusively for the convention center.)
The Board of County Commissioners has the power to decide to levy hospitality taxes; the General Assembly has the power to repeal the authority to levy the taxes. The City Council’s sole decision regards who receives the tax money. Back when the recipient was an agency other than the CRVA, there were constant complaints that the sales and marketing agency didn’t work well with what was then called the Auditorium-Coliseum-Convention Center Authority. That’s why the organizations merged in 2004. The complaints then stopped.
This year the General Assembly passed a law requiring the three north Mecklenburg towns to give a percentage of their portion of hospitality taxes to the Lake Norman Convention and Visitors Bureau. I suspect there will be a similar bill passed next year or in 2013 regarding Charlotte and the CRVA.
What are three items you would cut from the city’s budget?
Cooksey: Only three? Well, the streetcar, the business corridor revitalization fund, and financial partners (e.g., the Arts and Science Council) that don’t have dedicated revenue sources would be a good start. It’s a pity there haven’t been six votes on Council to cut any of them, though Andy Dulin and I have tried.
In each of the past three years, I voted against the city budget because it didn’t represent the correct priorities for Charlotte.
Privette: Light rail, the Charlotte Center City Partners and the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority
Has Charlotte’s expansion of the 311 call center been worth the substantial investment of taxpayer dollars?
Privette: I need to know more facts before rendering an opinion on this subject.
Cooksey: Yes, though it is still a work in progress. Before 311, Charlotte residents had to look up the phone numbers for the correct departments they needed to contact. As a former student and teacher of Civics 101, I well remember how many people found it difficult to match their concerns with the appropriate city or county department.
311 changed that. It has also brought to the fore the fact that local government’s information technology infrastructure has not kept pace with the modern world and also needs a thorough upgrade. 311 operators must learn 14 different systems. What ought to be a simple call regarding an animal control issue requires the operator to navigate through three different screens.
No call center in the private sector would survive long working like that. Fortunately, the work is underway to improve local government’s technology, centered around a more robust and centralized citizen relationship management system.
I’d prefer, though, that the changes moved at the speed of business, not government.
BONUS ROUND:
What model car do you drive?
Cooksey: 1994 Buick Park Avenue
Privette: Buick LaCross
What was the last book you read?
Privette: “The Fair Tax Book” by Neal Boortz
Cooksey: “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” by Robert Heinlein; it’s one of several books I make a point to re-read every few years.
What’s your favorite movie?
Cooksey: “ Patton”
Privette: “The Shawshank Redemption”
We need your help! If you like PunditHouse, please consider donating to us. Even $5 a month can make a difference!
Short URL: https://pundithouse.com/?p=7237
