NIMBY

Notes from a failed Municipal campaign

I'm still licking my wounds after a second failed attempt to win a seat on our Town's Board of Aldermen, so it might have been wiser to wait until some of the bitterness fades to talk about it. But if I were one of those "wise course" people, I probably would have won. And therein lies the crux of the problem: Honesty and a genuine desire to inform the voting public might sound like a winning approach, but the average voter uses reductive reasoning in choosing candidates. They're often not looking for reasons "why" to vote for you. they're looking for reasons "why not" to choose your name on the ballot. Follow me below the fold, if you can stomach it:

The battles over Durham-Orange Light Rail project continue

And the naysayers are getting creative:

To kill the project, opponents know they can’t appear to be anti-transit. Instead, they must convince you there are better, cheaper options. In their latest campaign, opponents revive their old claim that bus rapid transit (BRT), which uses buses on dedicated roadways instead of trains on light rail tracks, is inherently better and dramatically cheaper. But, they say, stubborn train lovers at GoTriangle refuse to examine a bus alternative.

Dedicated roadways for buses makes about as much sense as personal "pods" that individuals can hop into like their own little taxicabs. The traffic issues in driving a car from downtown Durham to downtown Chapel Hill and back have become horrendous, and further development *is* going to happen, whether people want it to or not. Between the two hospitals (Duke, UNC) alone, there are some 17,000 employees. That's not counting other University staff from the schools themselves. Light rail may not solve all the transportation/parking problems, but it is a critical element of the solution. Here's more from Orange Politics' Molly de Marco:

Subscribe to RSS - NIMBY