Durham Dispatch

In 2022, Mary Black was elected to the District A seat of Raleigh’s city council. During her first term, she was associated with support for city workers on labor issues, the restoration of citizens advisory councils, and community-oriented development. Black's 2024 re-election campaign has run into a formidable challenger, Mitchell Silver. He is a former New York City Parks Commissioner and has held other prominent roles.   Campaign finance disclosures show that Silver’s campaign has significant support from top figures in Raleigh’s business community, particularly in the real estate and construction sector. He raised about $55,000 between April and June 2024 [ 1 ]. Silver’s donors include real estate CEOs, entertainment entrepreneurs, powerful lawyers, and even a controversial mining family. A striking number of Silver’s donors are affiliated with the real estate and construction business. Ten of his 25 top donors work in these industries as their current, main profession. When other meaningful links to the real estate and construction sector (previous career, secondary business, etc.) are included the figure rises to 16 out of 25. For instance, Brenda Gibson currently serves as the chairperson of the Raleigh Police Department Foundation, a philanthropic group, but she previously worked as a real estate broker. Gibson donated $2,500 to Silver.   Eric Braun is the Vice Chair of the Raleigh Housing Authority, so the table (above) does not include him in the “Real Estate and Construction” category. However, Braun is a retired lawyer who “represented developers and property owners in a wide range of land use matters” according to LinkedIn. He donated $1,000 to Silver’s campaign.   A recent opinion piece in the News and Observer observed that a major issue in the 2024 city council races is the Raleigh Comprehensive Plan [ 2 ]. Last revised a decade ago, the document which " will shape how Raleigh evolves" is set to be rewritten and approved by the next city council.   Black's approach to development that would infringe on the profits of the real estate and construction sector [ 3 ]. In October 2022, she was asked about building a sports stadium in downtown Raleigh. Black was in favor, but with conditions:   “My position on a sports and entertainment stadium is contingent on the developer’s plans to include a community benefits agreement for stormwater protections, permanent affordable housing, living-wage jobs and workforce development”.   Naturally, developers would prefer support that isn’t “contingent” on anything.   Black has also advocated for “missing middle” housing, which she said, “is intended to be a solution that meets the growing demand for housing options between subsidized housing and market-rate housing. What’s missing in [recent zoning changes] is equity, and respect for the character and quality of the community.”   The upcoming revision of the Raleigh Comprehensive Plan, paired with Black’s views on community-oriented development, could explain why major figures in Raleigh's business establishment are opposed to the District A incumbent.   One of Silver's top donors is Bonner Gaylord, whose political committee gave the maximum legal amount of $6,400. Gaylord is the COO of Kane Realty, a real estate and construction company in Raleigh. Even a senior executive like Gaylord is a rather small fish in Silver’s pond. An outright majority of Silver’s 25 top donors are principals at their place of work. Fifteen are founders, chairpersons, presidents, owners, or CEOs. Only three of the 25 are not  senior figures at their businesses or institutions.   Daniel Lovenheim is another donor who gave the maximum amount of $6,400 to Silver’s campaign. He is the CEO of Oak City Group, an entertainment company based in Raleigh that owns restaurants, nightclubs, and a few other businesses. Lovenheim gained a bit of notoriety for using the valet zone of his nightclub, Alchemy, solely as a parking spot for his white Lamborghini. That led to the city council revoking the permit for Lovenheim’s valet zone in 2016 [ 4 ]. Michael Sandman, an attorney, donated $2,500 to Silver. Sandman is one of the three donors in the top 25 who isn't a senior executive, but even he is fabulously rich. His mansion in north Raleigh has been written up in Walter Magazine for its French gardens [ 5 ]. The article said that the Sandmans “visited Versailles” for inspiration as they designed a new home in the style of a “18th century chateau”. The magazine notes that the Sandmans aren’t skilled gardeners. Instead, the couple hires specialists to maintain the grounds so they can focus on  “cutting roses for [the] home and playing with tomatoes and basil and tarragon ”.   Out of eight members on Raleigh’s city council, Black is the only member who does not own a home. More than 200,000 people in the city, about half of its population, are renters [ 6 ]. Silver is also supported by the family that owns Wake Stone, a controversial mining company. Samuel and Theodore Bratton, who inherited the company from their father, each donated $1,000. Another top executive at Wake Stone also gave $1,000 to Silver's campaign.   Samuel, CEO of Wake Stone, has donated to dozens of Republican candidates since 2005 [ 7 ]. Theodore, the company’s chairman, is a registered Republican. However, the Brattons have also given money to many Democrats, suggesting more concern with protecting their business interests than partisan politics.   Wake Stone has been embroiled in a years-long battle to expand the Triangle Quarry onto land adjacent to Umstead State Park. Environmental groups like the Umstead Coalition, Conservation Fund, and Sierra Club have fought bitterly to prevent the expansion, warning of permanent damage to the natural beauty and recreational value of Umstead. In 2024, Wake Stone won a major victory when Judge Donald van der Vaart, a member of the right-wing Federalist Society, blasted through NC DEQ objections to pave the way for the quarry's expansion [ 8 ].   Black considers herself a “climate justice organizer” and she was endorsed by the Sierra Club during her 2022 campaign . However, it’s not clear whether the Raleigh city council has any authority over Wake Stone’s expansion into Umstead, so the Brattons’ support for Silver could arise from other considerations.     At the bottom of Silver’s list of donors, far below the top 25, is a different kind of problem for Black. Eric Solomon, the senior rabbi of the Beth Meyer Synagogue, is shown to have donated $100 to Silver. While the contribution is small, Solomon is a prominent citizen of District A.   In March 2024, Black spearheaded a resolution in Raleigh city council calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. According to the News and Observer , the measure called for a “sustained bilateral ceasefire”, “release of all hostages in Gaza”, and an “end of U.S. military aid to the Netanyahu government”. The ceasefire resolution did not pass, receiving a tied vote of 4-4 [ 10 ].   Solomon wrote about his opposition to Black’s re-election in an August 2024 post on Facebook. He said he’d been “privately beseeching her to stop speaking and posting about the Gaza War” and that he’d asked “her privately to stop terrorizing the Jewish community”. One of Solomon's objections was that Black had been “holding numerous District A community discussions on the Jewish Sabbath”, which occurs every week from sunset on Friday to sunset on Saturday [ 11 ].     Mary Black faces a high-profile and well-funded challenge from Mitchell Silver for her city council seat in District A. Black is recognized for her advocacy of sustainable development, city workers, as well as for her support of Palestinian liberation. Silver is a former New York City Parks Commissioner and has held other high-ranking jobs.   Raleigh’s business community, especially in the real estate and construction sectors, have donated generously to Silver. A main theme in the race is set to be the influence of property developers over public affairs in Raleigh.   Work Cited   1. "Mitchell Silver for Raleigh - Mid Year Semi Annual Report - Detailed Receipts", North Carolina State Board of Elections , 26 Jul. 2024, cf.ncsbe.gov/CFOrgLkup/ReportDetail/?RID=218665&TP=REC . 2. Barnett, Ned. “Two 2024 Races Will Play a Key Role in Raleigh’s Vision and Future.” News and Observer , 15 July 2024, www.newsobserver.com/opinion/article289953744.html . 3. Johnson, Anna. “Mary Black, Candidate for Raleigh City Council District A.” News and Observer , 25 Oct. 2022, www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/voter-guide/article267530473.html .   4. Zeugner, Abby. “You Can’t Park Your Lamborghini Here Anymore, Raleigh Tells Nightclub Owner.” News and Observer , 25 June 2018, www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article213657384.html .   5. Walter Magazine. “A North Raleigh Couple Embraces La Vie En Rose in Their French Garden.” WALTER Magazine , 27 Mar. 2022, waltermagazine.com/home/sandman-garden .   6. “Raleigh City - Housing”, U.S. Census Bureau ,  data.census.gov/profile/Raleigh_city,_North_Carolina?g=160XX00US3755000#housing . Accessed 17 Aug. 2024.   7. “Donor Lookup - Samuel Bratton.”  Open Secrets ,  www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Samuel+Bratton . Accessed 17 Aug. 2024.   8. Stradling, Richard. “Inside the Fight Over What’s Known as the RDU Quarry. Here Are Key Moments of Dispute.” News and Observer , 5 Apr. 2024, www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article287009530.html . 10. Johnson, Anna. “Raleigh City Leaders Split 4-4 on Surprise Gaza Cease-fire Resolution.” News and Observer , 6 May 2024, www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/wake-county/article286295850.html .   11. “Post by Eric Michael Solomon”. Facebook, 11 August 2024, www.facebook.com/eric.m.solomon/posts/pfbid02BUWGkgry6Ssy9K82f4gJj15fFuZC1DtbhognEjpUNZG3Hv9UnbVdbdhjsnZDxiWyl . Accessed 17 Aug. 2024.

The UE Local 150 Council in the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has launched a major campaign for Safe Staffing which included demands for raising wages by 20 percent or to $20 per hour minimum wage. In response to our agitation and news coverage around extreme understaffing and even patient deaths, Secretary of DHHS Kody Kinsley organized a listening tour across the state, hosting town hall meetings. Our union had previously won a 10 percent premium pay for the understaffing faced by all direct care staff. However, when the 4 percent state salary increase became effective in the July 1, 2023 budget, DHHS decided to take away this 10 percent, resulting in a 6 percent pay cut that angered workers. Our members were able to successfully attend and speak-out at hearings in Greenville, Morganton and New Bern. Union leaders confronted DHHS and key legislative oversight committee members on the major struggles on the job maintaining quality services and a safe workplace with severe understaffing. These ultimately resulted in a re-establishment of meet-n-confer sessions with Deputy Secretary Mark Benton, who has now met with our members three times. Our members are dedicated to increasing our coordinated collective action across the state. In late 2023, the DHHS Council launched a petition campaign that was able to get several hundred signatures across the department and resulted in actions at Longleaf Center, Cherry Hospital and Central Regional Hospital (CRH). The petition demanded not just higher wages, but also holding management accountable. Workers at CRH, in particular, began documenting and working to expose abusive management. The actions engaged many new workers in collective action. Several workers at Longleaf participated in a rally in the middle of the rain! Similarly, for the first time in recent years, workers at Cherry Hospital organized a delegation to confront their new CEO with the petition signatures. Workers then delivered the petitions in a meeting with Deputy Secretary Benton, continuing to expose that not only low wages, but also abusive management has lead to brain drain and loss of staff at key DHHS facilities, most notably at CRH, Murdoch, Caswell and Cherry.

In spring 2024, housekeepers at UNC Chapel Hill continued a campaign to eliminate fees for workers to park on the job. In February, workers wrote to the university: “Many employees received a double parking deduction from their paychecks due to university error. Many of these employees are in the lower pay bands at the university, and this error deeply affects their ability to pay their bills and survive to the beginning of the month.” Workers launched a petition campaign, collecting nearly 200 signatures from campus workers and supporters, in addition to the 1,200 they collected in fall 2022. They challenged the UNC Parking and Transportation committee to take up their demands, to no avail. Then, on March 20th, housekeepers rallied, gathered allies, spoke to the press, and delivered their petitions. Workers learned that the new five-year parking plan would increase revenue for the university by $2 million. Meanwhile, their proposals to eliminate parking fees for all workers earning less than $50,000 per year would only cost the university $1 million per year. Yet, the Employee Forum representatives, who are supposed to represent all workers, on the Parking Committee claimed it was because of “equity” that they could not eliminate parking fees for some workers, and not others. The union had to educate them on the definition of equity! After a few months of struggle, UE Local 150 was able to secure a decrease in the monthly parking fee, putting hundreds of dollars per year back in workers pockets, but the fight continues! This article was published first by UE Local 150 .

The rural community of Green Pond in South Carolina is vigorously challenging Duke Energy’s plans to plow through residential and business properties with high voltage transmission towers, lines and a substation. The energy giant has responded by invoking eminent domain, a controversial law allowing utilities to seize the use of private property in exchange for a negotiated monetary payment. This is the very type of situation NC WARN and allies have warned about since 2021, when our engineer discovered a  small, blurry map  in the back of a voluminous Duke document [ 1 ]. It referred to plans to greatly expand Duke’s transmission system in North Carolina, supposedly in order to expand renewable energy years from now. The major difference? The Duke corridor plowing through the middle of Green Pond, if ever completed, will be 4.5 miles long. In eastern North Carolina, Duke Energy leaders apparently plan  hundreds of miles  of new transmission lines and towers. For nearly three years NC WARN and allies in rural North Carolina have sought details about Duke’s plans to build those transmission corridors, which can be up to 200 feet wide, through areas that are often low-wealth, communities of color, or both. The corporation has grown even more secretive over time even as dozens of community groups have  openly demanded  full transparency [ 2 ]. We have warned that many of these are communities that forced Duke and Dominion Energy to cancel the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a fracked gas project, in 2020 after spending more than $5 billion to construct it. Green Pond residents have called on Duke to use other routes, according to the  Greenville News [ 3 ]. If completed, the high-voltage corridor would impact a church, a cemetery and a beekeeping farm, among others. State Senator Shane Martin said in a  letter to Duke Energy  that the project should be constructed “on existing commercial or industrial sites and/or along existing four lane highways. This is a practical and equitable solution for the rural, farming community which I represent" [ 4 ]. “Duke’s effort to engage the potentially affected landowners before proceeding on this project was somewhat disingenuous given it had purchased the substation property before seeking community input,” said  Martial Robichaud , resident of the Green Pond area and former member of the Spartanburg County Planning Commission [ 5 ]. A Looming NC Challenge Duke Energy, a few big environmental groups, and large-scale solar companies seem to downplay the concerns, and community muscle, of those living in small town areas in North Carolina. This coalition generally supports the utility’s risky attempt to build tens of billions worth of huge transmission lines and larger-than-ever solar fields despite the 12-15 year timeframe that totally fails the climate science test. That high risk is amplified by the likelihood that communities will block them altogether. The companion strategy to Duke’s land seizure scheme in North Carolina is the crushing of local solar-plus-storage. The utility  forced a rule change  on rooftop installers late last year that has threatened that industry’s very existence, and Duke projects almost no local solar growth within its territory for decades to come [ 6 ]. Choking rooftop solar is key to Duke Energy leaders who prefer to gamble billions of captive customer dollars on fracked gas and failed nuclear technologies along with a high-risk transmission and solar buildout that would take a decade or more to complete – if ever. Instead of Duke’s high risk, climate-wrecking Carbon Plan, NC WARN and allies are pressing regulators and North Carolinians to support a sweeping shift to our  Sharing Solar proposal, where all customers’ power bills pay for local solar power instead of dirty power [ 7 ]. Sharing Solar would greatly expand solar plus battery storage on small and large rooftops, parking areas and solar fields located near towns and cities. This is the fastest, cheapest, fairest way North Carolina can phase out fossil fuels. Duke Energy is trying to block discussion of Sharing Solar, but see our  30-second video  ad depicting the basics of this state’s climate-energy challenge [ 8 ]. This article was published first by NC WARN . Work Cited “Duke Energy's Map: Intentionally Obscured?” NC WARN , 17 July 2023, www.ncwarn.org/mapcomparison . “84 Solar Companies, Targeted Groups and Allies Call for Investigation of Duke Energy.” NC WARN , 13 Dec. 2023, www.ncwarn.org/2023/12/84-solar-companies-targeted-groups-and-allies-call-for-investigation-of-duke-energy-nc-warn-news-release . Swetlik, Sarah. “Duke Energy Selects Route for Controversial Transmission Line in Rural Green Pond.” Greenville News , 15 July 2024, www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/2024/07/15/duke-energy-selects-route-for-controversial-transmission-line-in-rural-green-pond/74383962007 . “Letter From SC State Senator Shane Martin to Duke Energy CEO Lynn Good.” Green Pond Rural Alliance , 26 Jan. 2023, www.greenpondruralalliance.org/_files/ugd/1b3360_7c5bf242d4484ef597752aa69989f9d1.pdf . Martial, Robichaud. “ Rural Residents Want Answers on Substation Plan from Duke .” Green Pond Alliance , www.greenpondruralalliance.org/copy-of-the-woodruff-times-12-22 . “Duke Energy on Defense at NC Court of Appeals Over Regulators’ Agreement to Slash Solar Incentives.” NC WARN , 13 Feb. 2024, www.ncwarn.org/2024/02/duke-energy-on-defense-at-nc-court-of-appeals-over-regulators-agreement-to-slash-solar-incentives-news-release-from-nc-warn-ewg . “Sharing Solar: A Sweeping Climate Proposal.” NC WARN , 5 July 2024, www.ncwarn.org/our-work/sharing-solar . “NC WARN Sharing Solar: Fastest, Cheapest, Fairest Climate Approach.” YouTube , 16 July 2024, www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfvLMouXIVk .

Reflections on a recent pipeline public hearing. This blog post was written by POWHR’s Advocacy Manager, Lief Hurt. Recently, I attended a public hearing in Chatham for the Williams Company’s proposed new Southeast Supply Enhancement Project (SSEP). As I pulled into the parking lot, I was surprised to see rows of cop cars. I glanced at my phone to make sure I was in the right place.  I had expected a boring hearing in an old agricultural complex. I approached one of the officers and he told me the precinct had expected hundreds of  protesters. Standing in the quiet complex, it was clear such an outcome was unlikely. As I walked into the meeting room, my disappointment and discomfort grew. The room was incredibly unwelcoming – no tables or chairs were arranged for sitting or talking. The whole atmosphere felt deliberately uninviting and cold.  Multiple Williams Co. employees were in attendance and were quick to dismiss any critical discussion about the project. One Williams Co. staffer claimed they had already spoken with every impacted landowner for the section of map shown at the meeting – part of NC and all of VA.  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) Office of Public Participation (OPP) staff were conveniently absent. The entire set-up felt disingenuous and seemed to purposefully discourage meaningful engagement. FERC’s OPP should have been there to help explain and encourage public participation in the regulatory process, especially in the face of such strong project developer presence. A public hearing should be an open place for conversation; what I witnessed was exaggerated police presence and stonewalling by fossil fuel employees. As a climate activist, I challenge the status quo of the fossil fuel industry, one of the richest and most powerful industries in the world. The fossil fuel industry is deeply embedded in our government, pouring millions into lobbying , political campaigns, and deliberately spreading misinformation  about the climate crisis, thus heavily influencing powerful politicians like Senator Joe Manchin [ 1 ][ 2 ]. Our movement faces increasing state surveillance and violence because our work threatens their reign at a time when fossil fuels are causing recognized widespread harm and the world is transitioning to renewable energy. People who challenge the status quo frequently face state oppression. In the mid-twentieth century, civil rights activists  faced high degrees of state-sanctioned violence (including through inaction when non-state actors committed violence) because they were challenging the status quo of white supremacy and because the activist’s efforts to achieve equality and justice were seen as a direct threat [ 3 ]. During the decade-long fight against the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP), one of the biggest companies behind the pipeline, the EQT Corporation,  coordinated extensively with local law enforcement  along the route [ 4 ]. Tree sitters in the MVP fight were targeted by anti-terrorism agencies  who were contacted through the fusion center network [ 5 ]. This network was created to coordinate counter-terrorism intelligence but has expanded to monitor any First Amendment-protected activity. The fusion center network has helped fossil fuel companies like MVP and state and federal agencies share information to monitor peaceful protestors. The Virginia Fusion Center coordinated directly with EQT to share “ pipeline situation reports ” that included information about how many people on Facebook were “interested” in meetings held by groups such as the Sierra Club, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, and Preserve Floyd – likely meetings similar to the SSEP hearing I went to [ 4 ]. Currently, MVP is suing 41 people  for $4 million [ 6 ]. This case has been called a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) suit, which is used by corporations to intimidate opposition. Considering the heavy police presence at the Chatham SSEP meeting, it’s understandable why anyone would feel intimidated, and this is purposeful. Silence and discreditation of opposition has always been the fossil fuel industry's goal. Globally, the situation for environmental activists is dire. Five climate activists just received the longest ever sentences  for nonviolent protest in the United Kingdom [ 7 ]. Climate activists are getting slammed with steep charges by Citibank  in New York City [ 8 ]. Over 100 environmental activists are murdered each year. Between 2012 and 2022, the number reached almost 2,000 [ 9 ] . This is a devastating reality for environmental defenders whose activism protects us all. As a young climate activist, I see the increasing state violence, fossil fuel crimes, and government inaction as a terrifying landscape for environmental advocacy. Yet our work is more important than ever, given the rise of fascism and climate change. It is clear that only we will chart our own path forward to the future we deserve. One concrete step we can take towards a better future is stopping all new fossil fuel projects, including Williams Company’s Southeast Supply Enhancement Project. You can take action by telling the federal government to oppose SSEP [ 10 ] . This article was first published by POWHR . Work Cited “These Fossil Fuel Industry Tactics Are Fueling Democratic Backsliding.” Center for American Progress , 5 Dec. 2023, www.americanprogress.org/article/these-fossil-fuel-industry-tactics-are-fueling-democratic-backsliding/ " Denial, Disinformation, and Doublespeak: Big Oil's Evolving Efforts to Avoid accountability for Climate Change." House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Democrats , 2024, www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/fossil_fuel_report1.pdf . Thigpen, Kameryn. “State-Sanctioned Silence: A Look Into the Repression of Black Voices.” Vulcan Historical Review , vol. 25, art. 16, 2021, digitalcommons.library.uab.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1031&context=vulcan . Harris, Jeffrey. “Dollars vs. Democracy 2023.” Greenpeace USA, 25 Oct. 2023, www.greenpeace.org/usa/reports/dollars-vs-dissent . Wilson, Patrick. “Anti-terrorism Agencies Involved in Monitoring Protesters of Mountain Valley Pipeline.” Richmond Times-Dispatch , 1 June 2018, richmond.com/news/local/government-politics/anti-terrorism-agencies-involved-in-monitoring-protesters-of-mountain-valley-pipeline/article_2c0ee2e0-a700-5a18-a5c3-cde2e109776f.html . Hammack, Laurence. “Mountain Valley Pipeline Sues Its Opponents.” The Roanoke Times , 11 Sept. 2023, roanoke.com/news/local/government-politics/mountain-valley-pipeline-protesters-lawsuit-resistance/article_41163394-50f0-11ee-bd8f-33c5ea279fd2.html . Gayle, Damien. “Five Just Stop Oil Activists Receive Record Sentences for Planning to Block M25.” The Guardian , 19 July 2024, www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jul/18/five-just-stop-oil-supporters-jailed-over-protest-that-blocked-m25 . Harrison, Derek. “An Activist Will Defy a Restraining Order to Play a Cello Protest at Citibank’s NYC Headquarters Thursday.” Inside Climate News , 10 Aug. 2024, insideclimatenews.org/news/07082024/new-york-citibank-cello-protest . “Standing Firm: The Land and Environmental Defenders on the Frontlines of the Climate Crisis.” Global Witness, 13 Sept. 2023, www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/environmental-activists/standing-firm .

Mark Robinson recently released a new ad appearing  to take a more moderate stance on abortion [ x ]. His stance on abortion hasn’t changed; he’s only fine-tuned his talking points to prepare for the upcoming election. Robinson has been vocal about his extreme anti-abortion beliefs for years. He previously said, “Abortion in this country is not about protecting the lives of mothers. It’s about killing the child because you weren’t responsible enough to keep your skirt down,” and, “If I had all the power right now, let’s say I was the governor and I had a willing legislature, we could pass a bill saying you can’t have an abortion in North Carolina for any reason” [ x ]. Yet, in the ad he pivots to supporting “commonsense” legislation with “exceptions.” This ad is a perfect encapsulation of the GOP’s rhetorical strategy since Dobbs v. Jackson . This article is going to detail how and why this is just the latest attempt by the anti-abortion movement to save face now that the harsh reality of abortion bans has really come to light post- Dobbs . The anti-abortion movement thrives off of abortion stigmatization, medical misinformation, and emotionally charged rhetoric. This 30-second ad is full of it. Fueling Abortion Stigma In the ad, Robinson says, “30 years ago, my wife and I made a very difficult decision – we had an abortion. It was like this solid pain between us that we never spoke of”. Then his wife, Yolanda, states, “It’s something that stays with you forever” . Robinson continues, “That’s why I stand by our current law. It provides commonsense exceptions for the life of the mother, incest, and rape … Which gives help to mothers and stops cruel late-term abortions. When I’m governor, mothers in need will be supported” While neither Robinson went into detail about Yolanda’s abortion during the short ad, it’s important to note a few things. Research shows that people experience a mix of positive and negative emotions in the days after having an abortion, with relief  predominating. The intensity of all emotions diminishes over time, mostly over the first year. The vast majority, 95%, of people who get abortions said that it was the right decision for them. People who are denied abortions have worse  physical, mental, and economic outcomes than those who seek and receive abortions [ x ]. Robinson starts by contributing to the idea that abortion itself is a difficult decision. Abortion is sometimes difficult and sometimes not - there are many nuances around having an abortion. Every decision to have an abortion is unique, individual, and deserving of respect. Just like the Robinsons were able to decide to have an abortion 30 years ago, all people should be trusted to make the reproductive healthcare decisions that are best for them, including abortion, on their timeline and with the resources they need. The beginning of the ad further implies that abortion is something regretful and shameful and therefore the wrong decision to make. Abortion stigma is perpetuated by abortion restrictions and inevitably leads to criminalization even when there are no authorizing statutes [ x ][ x ]. Abortion stigma is everywhere, whether it’s the protesters at the clinic harassing you on your way in for your appointment, your parents threatening to kick you out, a teacher you confide in who tells you that’s not something you should talk about, a toxic romantic partner pressuring you against what you want for your pregnancy, the societal pressure to become a mother while ostracizing child-free people, or the laws creating barriers to abortion care [ x ]. The anti-abortion movement’s post- Dobbs  rhetorical pivot More and more horror stories have emerged since the overturn of Roe v. Wade of people being forced to carry doomed pregnancies, give birth in a car after being turned away from the emergency room, or forced to travel out of state for abortion care - and the anti-abortion movement knows this [ x ]. Post- Dobbs , Republicans have had to deal with how unpopular and harmful their abortion bans are. Rather than admitting that pregnancy is too complex to legislate and addressing how these bans are detrimental  to pregnant people, the anti-abortion movement is focused on fine-tuning their talking points by focusing on exceptions  in abortion bans that do not work , moving away  from calling abortion bans “bans” and instead calling abortion bans "commonsense consensus” or “compromise” , and performative amendments  that do nothing but attempt  to repair their image. By Design, Exceptions Do Not Work On paper, abortion bans may include exceptions. In reality, these exceptions are nothing more than PR points for the anti-abortion politicians who pass these nightmare bans. These supposed “exceptions” are intentionally vague and so narrowly defined that it’s impractical to actually use them - and that’s the point . When Republicans fall back on how the current ban has exceptions for the life of the mother, incest, and rape, this is a rhetorical strategy to defer the actual problem, which is the wide-ranging harm caused by banning abortion. It's a pivot that appeals to less stigmatized reasons for getting an abortion. In North Carolina, abortion is banned after 12 weeks with a few vague exceptions up to 20 weeks. For example, the state’s exception for the life of the mother defines a medical emergency as the following ( emphasis added ): “Medical emergency. – A condition which, in reasonable medical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of the pregnant woman as to necessitate the immediate abortion of her pregnancy to avert her death or for which a delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function , not including any psychological or emotional conditions. For purposes of this definition, no condition shall be deemed a medical emergency if based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman will engage in conduct which would result in her death  or in substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function”. The language used does not define what exactly constitutes a “major bodily function” or what constitutes a “substantial and irreversible physical impairment” to a major bodily function. This intentionally vague language puts physicians in a bind when pregnant patients need an abortion for health reasons. It shifts the decision away from the medical providers and patients and over to the facility’s lawyers. The second part of this definition shows how Republicans anticipate that abortion bans will make people suicidal, so they specifically outline that abortions are not allowed to preserve psychological or emotional well-being of the mother. How much of an “exception” is it if people have to wait for their vital signs to crash before they’re legally  allowed treatment? How much permanent harm to one’s organs is an acceptable trade-off? Exactly how close to death does one have to get to receive treatment? On Substack , feminist writer Jessica Valenti points out, “This is all by design; Republicans deliberately write in exceptions that will be near-impossible to use. So why in the world aren’t Democrats shouting as much from the rooftops? Instead, they’re giving Republicans a tremendous gift: The ability to point to exceptions that no one can actually use as proof that they’re ‘softening’ on abortion … If the exceptions meant to save people’s lives aren’t usable, what makes anyone think those for rape and incest would be?” [ x ] Reporting requirements and time limits place barriers in the way of survivors of sexual assault seeking abortion care in states with abortion bans [ x ]. When you add in a culture that doesn’t believe victims about sexual violence, the purpose and ineffectiveness of rape and incest exceptions become more evident [ x ]. When the state forces victims to provide proof of their assault to receive healthcare, the state inevitably creates policy that protects sexual abusers. This is the side that wants you to think that they’re the moderate ones. Compromise? Who? Common Sense? Where? In the ad, Robinson says, “30 years ago, my wife and I made a very difficult decision – we had an abortion. It was like this solid pain between us that we never spoke of”. Then his wife, Yolanda, states “it’s something that stays with you forever”. Robinson continues, “ That’s why I stand by our current law. It provides commonsense exceptions for the life of the mother, incest, and rape which gives help to mothers and stops cruel late-term abortions. When I’m governor, mothers in need will be supported.” When Robinson calls North Carolina’s 12-week abortion ban “common sense” and intentionally  avoids calling it a ban, he's using tactics that appeared last year when the state senate debated SB 20. As Valenti points out , “Bill sponsor Sen. Joyce Krawiec says, ‘this is a pro-life plan, not an abortion ban.’ (Let that sink for a moment: Republicans are so afraid of abortion rights’ popularity, they’re not even willing to call their bans ‘bans’ anymore )” [ x ][ x ]. Mandating humiliating, burdensome, and time sensitive barriers to healthcare is far from "common sense”. Going directly against medical providers warnings about the harms caused when abortion is banned is not “common sense”. Post- Dobbs , polling shows that the vast majority of Americans want abortion to be legal. Over 80 percent of Americans don’t want pregnancy to be legislated, 78 percent believe the decision to have an abortion should be left between the patient and doctor, and 70 percent voters support access to abortion medication [ x ]. Republicans began to really embrace the stance that they believe in exceptions for abortions to make it seem  like they are willing to compromise to appeal to moderate voters in the aftermath of the overturn of Roe v. Wade . In reality, they aren’t compromising on “common sense” legislation - they’re compromising the health and well-being of the very people they’re claiming to protect. Medical Misinformation: Late-Term Abortion Edition In true Republican fashion, Robinson mentions "late-term abortions" at the end of the ad. The anti-abortion movement thrives off of emotionally-inflammatory rhetoric and abortion stigma, which are two characteristics of the phrase “late-term abortion”. This was Robinson’s subtle way of appealing to moderate voters with extremist policy that’s been rhetorically watered down to make it more palatable in order to gain votes come November. In the ad, Robinson says, “30 years ago, my wife and I made a very difficult decision – we had an abortion. It was like this solid pain between us that we never spoke of”. Then his wife, Yolanda Robinson, states, “It’s something that stays with you forever”. Robinson continues, “That’s why I stand by our current law. It provides commonsense exceptions for the life of the mother, incest, and rape which gives help to mothers and stops cruel late-term abortions . When I’m governor, mothers in need will be supported.” The phrase “ late-term abortion ” is a political buzzword that anti-abortion proponents have latched onto as a talking point to demonize abortions later in pregnancy when the vast majority , 98.7%, of abortions are before  21 weeks [ x ][ x ]. The anti-abortion movement has a reputation for using stigmatizing, emotionally-charged rhetoric to justify banning abortion and to ostracize the people who get and provide abortions [ x ]. Anti-abortion opponents made up the phrase “late-term abortion” and embrace it because they define it however they want as a part of their language war [ x ][ x ]. According to experts like the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology ( ACOG ) , the term “late-term abortion” has no medical significance and is not used in a clinical setting or to describe the delivery of abortion care later in pregnancy [ x ]. When health care providers use language like “full term” and “late term” in the context of pregnancy, they’re talking about how far along the pregnancy is, with “full term” meaning between 39 and 40 weeks and “late term” meaning more than 41 weeks. It’s important to note that they do not  use these terms to categorize types of abortion care.  The reasons people seek abortions later in pregnancy include medical concerns such as fetal anomalies or maternal life endangerment, as well as barriers to care that cause delays in obtaining an abortion [ x ]. What’s cruel is delaying and denying people the healthcare they need. Despite all this, leaders in the anti-abortion movement can’t even agree on exactly when  a "late-term abortion" supposedly happens. It seems to be determined by whatever Republican or anti-abortion organization writing the bill wants it to be. For example, in 2021, congressional Republicans sponsored the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act  ( model legislation  created by the National Right to Life Committee ), a bill that determined abortions after 20 weeks to be “late-term”. The next year, they sponsored the “ Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act ,” that determined “late-term” to be after 15 weeks. The anti-abortion Charlotte Lozier Institute  claims the phrase is appropriate for abortions performed after only 13 weeks of pregnancy. Taking A Page Out of the Playbook Since abortion bans are highly unpopular and harmful, Mark Robinson is using the rhetorical tactics directly from the post- Dobbs  playbook. It’s easier to fine-tune an extreme candidate’s political messaging in the months before the election than it is to address the wide-ranging devastation caused by their own policies that harm the people they claim to protect. For years, Mark Robinson has been vocal about his anti-abortion stance by perpetuating abortion stigma and medical misinformation. This pre-election rhetorical shift is no different. Don’t let him fool you. As he said, if it were up to him, we would have a total abortion ban with no exceptions. Remember this in November when you go to the voting booth, and remember to donate to the local abortion fund [ x ] . This article was first published by Triangle DSA .

Between March and November 2023, Dr. Monique Holsey-Hyman suffered a political attack that led to her losing re-election to the Durham City Council. The campaign was started by property developer Jarrod Edens and then bolstered by influential city officials, "pro-developer" members of City Council, and local media outlets. The attack on Dr. Holsey-Hyman was deeply unjust, and also highlights the power of the real estate and construction sector over political factions, campaign finance, and media narratives in the Bull City.   Before joining the City Council, Monique enjoyed a distinguished academic career that had taken her from Berkeley College to Shaw University and finally to NC Central University. She had won 25 teaching awards by the time she was unanimously appointed to Durham City Council in May 2022. Councilman Leonardo Williams (now mayor) was asked why Dr. Holsey-Hyman was chosen. He said, “We were missing a bit of tenacity.” [ 1 ] Factions on Durham City Council Dr. Holsey-Hyman showed her tenacity quickly. Shortly after being appointed, she took a tough line with a powerful group in Durham politics – property developers. Monique shared her approach with two other members, DeDreana Freeman and mayor Elaine O’Neal.   “Freeman is close to O’Neal and Holsey-Hyman, with the three typically voting together, reliably rejecting annexations and non-affordable housing developments, especially in rapidly growing southeast Durham.” – News and Observer  [ 2 ]   One could call this trio the “pro-benefits” faction for the way they sought public benefits from property developers with business before City Council. For example, the Fairhaven Walk Rezoning in August 2023 met the group’s standards and passed by a 7-0 vote.   The News and Observer summarized the Fairhaven Walk project as “192 apartments — all priced affordably — and a daycare onsite” [ 3 ]. The pro-benefits faction also aligned on non-development issues like raising wages for city workers. When the group tried to raise firefighter pay during a budget debate in June 2023, they were defeated in a 4-3 vote [ 4 ].   Dr. Holsey-Hyman and her allies suffered many 4-3 defeats, especially on development votes. The losses were inflicted by the pro-developer faction - Mark Antony-Middleton, Leonardo Williams, Jillian Johnson, and Javiera Caballero. This group formed a governing majority that almost always approved the developer projects. Pro-developer members would claim that if mediocre projects were approved, developers would be incentivized to improve their offers. In the same breath, they’d warn that rejecting the developers would have no effect.   The Leesville Road Annexation passed by a 4-3 vote in September 2022. A developer wanted to build 330 townhomes and offered to make three percent of them affordable for people making 80 percent area median income (AMI).   “What we get out of this case puts pressure on the next case… They’re not going to do better if we just vote no on everything” – Caballero [ 5 ] The commonest justification of the pro-developer faction was that developer requests had to be approved or else they’d build low-quality “by-right” projects.   In April 2023, the City Council debated the Cornwallis Road Annexation. A developer sought to build 90 townhomes to be rented for $1,800 per month. Five of the units would be made affordable at 60 percent AMI.   During the Cornwallis Road debate, Middleton pointed out, “All of our “noes” are “yeses” to something else”. He meant that, if rejected, the developer could build a less desirable project such as “six single-family units and a drive-thru restaurant”. [ 6 ]   The pro-developer group sometimes flirted with the pro-benefits approach, but with a much lower standard of success. One case where this occurred was the Lumley Road Annexation in September 2023, a project for 480 townhomes and apartments.   “The developer came into the meeting offering three percent of the units as affordable, but council member Javiera Caballero asked if they could increase that percentage Schwedler whispered to her client for a brief moment and agreed to five percent.” – News and Observer  [ 7 ] The pro-developer faction made a point to heap scorn on environmentalists who criticized the developers. Groups like Preserve Rural Durham and Sound Rivers would often attend City Council meetings to warn that building practices like mass grading of uneven land, clear-cutting of forests, and use of explosives were harming local people and ecosystems. Pro-developer members waved these criticisms away with glib comments like these two from Williams: "We have a housing crisis, and if I have to choose between a deer and a person, then that’s what I’m going to do.” [ 8 ] “First of all, Falls Lake is a man-made lake. It was made back in 1981 and it was jacked up when it was created... It was made then it can be made again, so I don’t think it’s going anywhere.” [ 9, timestamp 4:50:00 ] The 4-3 split on development issues defined the City Council during the time Dr. Holsey-Hyman spent in office, May 2022 until December 2023, and the division continues on the current City Council. Then, as now, the pro-benefits minority tried to set a higher standard for development projects. Meanwhile, the majority would rubber-stamp most annexation and rezoning, ready to grab a concession or two from developers, but unwilling to reach for more.   Jarrod Edens and Carpenter Falls   In March 2023, Dr. Holsey-Hyman made a decision that ended her political career. She voted against the Carpenter Falls Annexation, a project of property developer Jarrod Edens.   The owner of Edens Investments, Edens wanted to build 235 homes in southeastern Durham. Except, the Carpenter Falls plot wasn’t quite within city limits. So, Eden came to the City Council and requested annexation. If the lawmakers approved, the city of Durham would provide his homes with water and sewer services.   Edens had a small problem. Johnson, a pro-developer member, would be absent from the March 6th vote on Carpenter Falls. The project wasn’t in real danger. It would pass by a vote of 4-3 when Johnson was present, but a 3-3 draw would delay the developer for months [ 10 ]. On March 6th, Edens called one of the expected “no” votes, Dr. Monique Holsey-Hyman.   According to a lawsuit filed by Monique, Edens didn’t directly ask her to vote for the Carpenter Falls Annexation. Instead, he offered to support her next campaign and he “talked about the fact that he sponsored a football team with many African American boys” that he'd bring to her campaign kickoff. A tempting, slightly racist quid for an unstated quo – a “yes” vote for Carpenter Falls.   Dr. Holsey-Hyman’s lawsuit says she told Edens she wouldn’t accept because “she didn’t want to go to jail”. The same night, she voted against the Carpenter Falls Annexation. The vote was 3-3.   The developer didn’t give up, according to the lawsuit. Edens tried to contact Dr. Holsey-Hyman on March 7th and March 8th without success [ 11 ]. An Axe to Grind   Edens ended Dr. Holsey-Hyman’s political career on March 11th. He called Sara Young, the city’s planning director and accused Monique of extortion. Edens said she’d demanded a campaign donation in exchange for a “yes” vote on Carpenter Falls. Young then passed the story along to Kimberly Rehberg, the City Attorney.   On March 13th, Rehberg emailed out Eden’s accusation to the entire City Council. Her email contained another sharp jab – an allegation that Dr. Holsey-Hyman had used city staffers for campaign work. Both allegations, extortion and city staffer, were referred to the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation (SBI). In September 2023, the District Attorney announced that the SBI had found, “ no probable cause to pursue charges against Council Member Holsey-Hyman … In fact, the SBI was unable to discover any credible allegations against her at all”  [ 12 ].   Dr. Holsey-Hyman didn’t have the luxury of fast-forwarding to her exoneration. Her reputation would be dragged through the mud for six months, an ordeal that only ended seven weeks before election day.   In the March 13th email, Rehberg said, “It is unlikely that a developer would report conduct that has no factual basis or to maliciously cause harm, particularly a developer who regularly brings matters before the city.” [ 13 ]   The fact that Rehberg gave Eden’s allegation so much credibility was stunning. Monique was a member of the pro-benefits faction, the group most likely to draw the ire of developers, and she'd voted against Eden’s project only a few days prior . Rehberg should have been hyper-aware that the developer could be seeking to retaliate.   Edens' story was dubious on its face for another reason. Why would a City Council member extort campaign funding from a developer? Durham’s politics are flooded with perfectly legal donations from property developers, real estate agents, zoning attorneys, general contractors, etc. If Dr. Monique Holsey-Hyman wanted their donations, she could have endeared herself to them by voting in favor of their projects. Source: Durham Board of Elections, Pre-Primary and Pre-Election Reports   [ 14 ] For instance, Dr. Holsey-Hyman could've taken the pro-developer path of Caballero. In 2019, Caballero received only one $250+ donation from the real estate and construction sector. After a four-year term spent approving most requests by developers, her re-election campaign got eight $250+ donations.   Instead of voting for developer interests, Monique belonged to the pro-benefits faction. Another member was Freeman, whose experience suggested the obvious - voting against developers doesn’t open their wallets. In 2023, Freeman ran for mayor against Williams, a member of the pro-developer bloc. His mayoral campaign got eleven $250+ donations from the real estate and construction sector. Freeman got only two.   A City Council member could have many principled or political reasons for joining the pro-benefits faction - wanting donations from property developers was not one of them. On the contrary, voting like Dr. Holsey-Hyman was a good way to make powerful enemies out of developers like Edens.   The Pro-Developer Faction Piles On   Rehberg sent the email with Edens’ accusation out to the entire City Council on March 13th. The pro-developer faction pounced on their rivals. Attempts by the pro-benefits members to defend themselves were met with further attacks and accusations.   Within minutes of getting Rehberg's email, Middleton called for Monique's resignation. After the SBI exoneration, the pro-developer member would plead that he’d been duped, “We didn’t wake up one morning and convince some wealthy white man to make up things about one of our colleagues” [ 15 ].   Another pro-developer member, Johnson, attacked from a different angle. On March 23rd, she introduced a resolution to censure Dr. Holsey-Hyman using the city staffer allegation. As mentioned, the SBI later found “no evidence” to support the accusation [ 12 ]. Freeman, a pro-benefits member, tried to defend Monique against the sudden avalanche of criticism. At a City Council meeting on March 23rd, she scolded Rehberg and shouted at Middleton for their treatment of Dr. Holsey-Hyman. The pro-developer faction and local press turned on Freeman with a vengeance.   A statement condemning Freeman for her comments on Rehberg was endorsed by the entire pro-developer bloc — Middleton, Johnson, Williams and Caballero [ 16 ].   Then on April 3rd, IndyWeek reported that two anonymous sources said Freeman had physically assaulted O’Neal, Williams, and Middleton after the March 23rd meeting of City Council. News cameras in the chambers picked up audio of shouting but no video footage.   Freeman and O’Neal from the pro-benefits faction denied many parts of the IndyWeek  report. Pro-developer members Middleton, Williams, and Johnson backed up the anonymous accounts in whole or in part [ 17 ][ 18 ].   Megaphone for Allegations, Whisper for Exoneration   In less than one month, two members of pro-benefits group stood accused of three serious crimes by a property developer, senior city employees, and the pro-developer bloc on City Council. The local press descended into an impressive frenzy.   The "crimes" of Dr. Monique Holsey-Hyman and Freeman were broadcast in a succession of headlines and articles that lasted for months. Between the first public allegations on March 23rd and Monique's re-election loss on November 7th, the News and Observer  and IndyWeek  ran 19 articles that mentioned the extortion allegation, 19 for the city staffer allegations, and 12 for the assault allegation. The press campaign broke through the fog of local politics. Anecdotally speaking, the allegations against Dr. Holsey-Hyman and Freeman reached a huge number of people in Durham. For many Bull City residents, the accusations became the only "fact" they knew about local politics. The general impression for many was that Monique was probably corrupt and Freeman was probably insane. What did not come across in News and Observer and IndyWeek coverage? In more than 30 articles examined, there was not one editorial suggestion (ie. not a quote) that Edens' allegations against Dr. Holsey-Hyman might be dishonest retaliation for her vote on the Carpenter Falls Annexation. This remained true even after the SBI exonerated Monique and said that Edens had avoided talking to law enforcement. The papers might claim that straight-news coverage must be objective, so the worth of allegations could not be assessed. At least for IndyWeek , that principle isn't always followed. The following quote appeared in a pre-election article about City Council politics in August 2023: "The explanations for the acrimony quickly devolve into conspiracy theories that wouldn’t be worth considering if they weren’t amplifying the hostility among elected officials. The theories range from mundane political ambition (that Middleton hoped to be mayor), to baseless allegations of corruption (that Williams is being paid by developers), to outlandish and convoluted setups (that Middleton manufactured the claims against Holsey-Hyman as punishment for not voting with him)" [ 19 ]. In straight-news coverage, IndyWeek was able to conclude that allegations against Middleton were "outlandish and convoluted". Couldn't this have been done for the accusations against Dr. Holsey-Hyman, particularly after the SBI exoneration? There was also not a single example of News and Observer or IndyWeek using their op-ed pages to cast doubt on Eden's allegations. On the contrary, there was one editorial in particular seriously misled its readers: "To some, the extortion allegation is just another reason to believe that developers and the city are working hand-in-hand with little regard for the people whose families built this city." - News and Observer [ 20 ] The op-ed inverted the political factions. In the real world, Dr. Holsey-Hyman was a member of the pro-benefits group, whose main feature was a willingness to stand up to developers. The author also failed to note that, strangely, the City Council members attacking Monique were those best known for voting "hand-in-hand" with developers.   When the SBI exonerated Dr. Holsey-Hyman, the News and Observer  and IndyWeek  covered it, but with far less intensity than was used spread the allegations. For example, there were six headlines  about the extortion story but only five articles that even mentioned  the SBI exoneration.   Edens Wins?     The Carpenter Falls Annexation, crucial to Edens’ project, was approved by a 4-3 vote in May 2023. During the debate, Mayor O’Neal revealed that Edens was Dr. Holsey-Hyman’s accuser. Before then he’d remained anonymous.   After Edens made the extortion allegation in March 2023, the SBI assigned Special Agent Nicholas Deming to the case. The developer proceeded to “avoid every attempt SA Deming made to interview him. Edens did not answer calls nor return messages left by SA Deming. When Deming did get him on the phone, Edens agreed to an interview and then did not appear.”   The SBI even offered to accept a written statement, and “Edens agreed but ultimately failed to provide such a written statement.” The investigation ended with “the SBI unable to discover any credible allegations against her at all” [ 12 ].   Dr. Monique Holsey-Hyman was exonerated on September 19th, shortly before her re-election vote on November 7th. It proved difficult to overcome six months of character assassination in only seven weeks, and she was badly beaten at the polls. Monique finished in fifth place in the second round. Her re-election campaign got zero $250+ donations from people or organizations involved in the real estate and construction sector.   At present, Edens' gambit seems to have been a huge success. The Carpenter Falls Annexation was approved and the esteemed academic who briefly stood in his way has been tossed out of office. Dr. Holsey-Hyman is currently suing Edens as well as Young, Rehberg, Middleton, Williams, and Johnson. However, free speech protections in the U.S. are (thankfully) very strong. Monique has to prove that the defendants lied with "actual malice", that they intentionally lied to harm her. Against Edens, it's hard to say which direction things will go. The other five can just claim to be gullible, which shouldn't be difficult.   The public shouldn't rely on a legal response against the pro-developer faction. Instead, Durham residents should consider giving their political support to the pro-benefits group and deliver them a governing majority at the earliest opportunity. The pro-benefits faction is currently made up of Nate Baker, Chelsea Cook, and DeDreana Freeman. Aside from heeding the endorsements of these individuals, it's urgent for the public to learn how to identify and bring forward candidates who are willing to demand affordable housing, green spaces, multi-modal transportation access, and other public benefits from property developers who need approvals from City Council.   As Durham grows, it’s important for Bull City residents to decide for themselves what kind of development is in the public interest, especially when their interests don't align profit-driven wishes of property developers.   Work Cited   1.     Geller, Lena. “Meet Durham’s Newest City Council Member.”  INDY Week , 11 Jan. 2023,  indyweek.com/news/durham/new-durham-council-member-holsey-hyman .   2.     Moore, Mary Helen. “Durham City Council Member DeDreana Freeman Is Running for Mayor.”  News and Observer , 19 July 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/voter-guide/article277431058.html .   3.     Moore, Mary Helen. “Durham Affordable Apartments, Townhome Developments Get Green Light. Here’s Where.”  News and Observer , 8 Aug. 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article278021838.html .   4.     Moore, Mary Helen. “Durham’s Budget Passes at Fiery Meeting. What Each City Council Member Had to Say.”  News and Observer , 21 June 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article276583981.html .   5.     Moore, Mary Helen. “Hundreds of New Townhomes Headed to Eastern Durham After Tense 4-3 City Council Votes.”  News and Observer , 9 Sept. 2022,  www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article265451211.html .   6.     Moore, Mary Helen. “Durham approves new apartments near Duke Forest over neighbors’ objections.”  News and Observer , 5 Apr. 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article273933195.html .   7.     Moore, Mary Helen. “A Request, a Whisper and Durham OKs Hundreds of Apartments, Townhomes on Wake Line.”  News and Observer , 20 Sept. 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article279468029.html . 8. Hammond, Colleen. “By Split Vote, Durham Rejects Annexation for Development in Falls Lake Watershed.” News and Observer , 20 Jan. 2023, www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article271320677.html . 9. “Durham City Council May 20, 2024.”  YouTube , 21 May 2024,  www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYlIzuMeVI4 . 10.    Moore, Mary Helen. “Name of Longtime Developer Who Accused Durham Council Member of Extortion Revealed.”  News and Observer , 16 May 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article275444346.html .   11.     Anderson, Ashley. “Former Durham councilman files lawsuit against city, various leaders after ‘categorically false’ extortion claim.”  CBS17.com , 15 Mar. 2024,  www.cbs17.com/news/local-news/durham-county-news/former-durham-councilwoman-files-lawsuit-against-city-various-leaders-after-categorically-false-extortion-claim .   12.  Geller, Lena. “Durham Council Member Cleared by State Investigators Over Developer’s Extortion Allegation, Claims of Using City Staff for Campaign Work.”  INDY Week , 19 Sept. 2023,  www.indyweek.com/news/durham/durham-council-member-cleared-by-state-investigators-over-developers-extortion-allegations .   13.   Moore, Mary Helen. “Inside ex-Durham Official’s Lawsuit Against the City and Developer Over Extortion Claim.”  News and Observer , 21 Mar. 2024,  www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article286531350.html .   14.  Index of /Boe-ftp/Campaign Finance/Open Committees/Candidate Committees .  www.dcoftp.net/boe-ftp/Campaign%20Finance/Open%20Committees/Candidate%20Committees .   15.  Moore, Mary Helen. “‘You Tried to Ruin My Life’: Accused Durham City Council Member Confronts Colleagues.”  News and Observer , 23 Sept. 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article279610749.html .   16.  “Durham City Council Condemns Freeman for Placing Blame on City Attorney for Outburst.”  WRAL.com , 29 Mar. 2023,  www.wral.com/story/durham-city-council-condemns-freeman-for-placing-blame-on-city-attorney-for-outburst/20785473 .   17.  Moore, Mary Helen. “‘Are You Going to Hit Me Again?’: Tensions Reignite at Durham City Council Meeting.”  News and Observer , 27 Nov. 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article282199063.html .   18.  Moore, Mary Helen. “Durham City Council Calls for Healing as Allegations of Physical Altercation Surface.”  News and Observer , 4 Apr. 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article273909285.html . 19. Hartman, Matt. “Chaos in the Bullring: Ahead of Municipal Elections This Fall, Durham Grapples With What’s Next for a Scandal-Plagued City Council.”  INDY Week , 6 Sept. 2023,  www.indyweek.com/news/durham/ahead-of-municipal-elections-this-fall-durham-grapples-with-whats-next-for-a-scandal-plagued-city-council . 20. Pequeno, Sara. “After City Council Controversy, Mayor Elaine O’Neal Must Lead Durham Forward | Opinion.”  News and Observer , 28 Mar. 2023,  www.newsobserver.com/opinion/article273568160.html .

On August 5th, around two hundred people gathered downtown to mourn the loss of Sonya Massey, a 36-year-old Black woman killed by police in Springfield, Illinois. Monday’s vigil was organized by a coalition of eight groups, including the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), Durham Beyond Policing, and Mothers for Ceasefire.   Summoned largely by social media, people began to fill CCB Plaza at 7:30 p.m. Visitors at the Marriott could be seen looking down from high windows into the crowded square. In the trees by East Chapel Hill Street fluttered a banner that said, “Black Lives Matter – Fight Back for All Victims of Police and State Terror”.   Massey was killed on July 6th when a Sangamon County deputy  “shot her in the face in an exchange over a pot of water and advised his partner against rendering medical aid” [ 1 ]. Her last words were, “I rebuke you in the name of Jesus”.   The vigil began around 7:50 p.m. As daylight turned to darkness, the crowd heard speeches from Victor Urquiza from PSL, Shanise Hamilton from Durham Beyond Policing, Reverend Allen Jones of Change Path Ministries, Charla Rios from Mothers for Ceasefire, Kelia Evans from PSL, Kalia Fitzgerald from the Green Party, Marcus Summers with PSL, human rights activist Desmera Gatewood, and the Durham Ceasefire Choir. Many speakers mentioned the disconnect between Kamala Harris’ presidential run and the continued police killings of Black women. To paraphrase one speech, “Our lives are not just valuable when we’re running for president, or when we have college degrees, or when we win gold medals, our lives are valuable because we’re human beings.”   Marcus Summers cited a list of police killings to show a pattern of reckless disregard toward Black communities. He said, “We must not forget Senior Airman Roger Fortson, Breonna Taylor, Botham Jean, and countless others who have been shot by overzealous police officers who either forced their way in or shot into houses. In two of these cases, the police were even at the wrong place. One of them wasn’t even on the job at the time.”   Desmera Gatewood, another speaker, called on the Durham community to look for ways to safeguard itself against the police. In her speech, Gatewood said, “We’re not here because we want to beg again for somebody to spare us. Instead, we want to make a demand for people to protect Black women.”   Gatewood and many other speakers linked the movements for Black Lives Matter and Palestinian liberation. She talked about going to the West Bank and meeting Ahed Tamimi, an anti-occupation activist whose 15-year-old cousin Mohammed Tamimi was shot in the head by the IDF for throwing stones. When Gatewood asked the audience to link their concern for Black people killed by police to victims of U.S.-backed wars, several Arab people in the audience openly wept. Shanise Hamilton, an activist with Durham Beyond Policing, gave two speeches at Monday's vigil. In her second speech, Hamilton walked the crowd through Durham’s adoption of the Holistic Empathetic Assistance Response Team (HEART) program in 2022.   After George Floyd’s murder in 2020, Durham Beyond Policing and city leaders cooperated to establish HEART, a program that uses unarmed specialists to respond to certain kinds of 9-1-1 calls, such as those related to mental health and homelessness. As of 2024, HEART services are available 12 hours a day and the program's funding has steadily risen [ 2 ].   The establishment of HEART-like programs in Durham and other U.S. cities show that the Black Lives Matter movement has achieved partial victories. Although slogans like “Defund the Police” were vilified in mainstream opinion, many groups which rallied around that call have moved in productive directions. If efforts like HEART are combined with economic redistribution, it’s easy to imagine a much-reduced role for law enforcement in the future.   Around 9 p.m., when it was fully dark, organizers distributed hundreds of candles. The glow of neon lights from the Unscripted hotel was joined by countless tiny flames that illuminated keffiyehs and slogans on shirts like “Black Lives Matter”, “Mothers for a Ceasefire”, “Say Her Name” written in Sharpie, “We Have Nothing to Lose but Our Chains”, and “Rest in Power”. The police killing of Sonya Massey on July 6th is a new entry in the long annals of white supremacy. Racism against Black people has been a pronounced, stable feature of U.S. history. Its only rival as a defining theme is 400 years of near-constant war.   There has been mixed progress against white supremacy in recent decades. Since the civil rights movement of the 1960s, the more privileged sector of Black life has accumulated more rights than at any point in history. However, the neoliberal assault since the 1980s has caused stagnation or decline for most of the U.S. population, with a distinctly harsh effect on Black communities. The worst crime of white supremacy in this period has been mass incarceration, a kind of race-class war aimed disproportionately against Black men.   During the August 5th vigil, the Durham Ceasefire Choir contributed the only musical act. The choir taught the crowd a brief song called “Carry This All” and the people in CCB Plaza sang it together four or five times.   “You do not carry this all alone , No, you do not carry this all alone, This is way too big for you, To carry this on your own, So, you do not carry this all alone.” Work Cited Petri, Alexandra. “Deputy Fatally Shot Woman Over Pot of Hot Water, Records Show.” New York Times , 17 July 2024, www.nytimes.com/2024/07/17/us/sonya-massey-illinois-deputy-charged.html . Moore, Mary Helen. “On The Call With Unarmed 911 Responders During NC’s Life-threatening Heat Wave.” News and Observer , 10 July 2024, www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article289499876.html .

On July 21, over 100 farmworkers met in Wilson, North Carolina for the third annual meeting of El Futuro Es Nuestro or It’s Our Future (EFEN/IOF), more than twice the turnout for previous gatherings. It was an eventful and inspiring farmworker-led meeting, in which leaders established processes for membership, addressed major issues of concern in the fields, and held IOF’s first open election process to elect new leadership. Workers joined the meeting from counties across North Carolina and represented states from across Central Mexico. The meeting focused on three main priorities - reports from the many IOF working committees, the No More Deaths campaign, and election of new IOF leadership. Committee leaders reported on IOF activities under their purview, including: Membership Committee : Establishing a membership structure and process for members to join. Farm & Food Workers Relief Committee : Assisting more than 2,100 workers apply for the USDA $600 assistance for those who lost income due to COVID, for a total of over $1.2 million. Many IOF members helped sign up other workers for this benefit. Comms Committee : Operating a robust communications plan focused on Facebook and TikTok, and sharing the many media spotlights garnered by IOF members and staff. Organizing Committee : Supporting collective action campaigns in specific labor camps around housing issues like forced meal plans, air conditioning, and washing machines. Policy Committee : Participating in advocacy initiatives aimed at Mexican policymakers related to ending corruption at the border and accessing Mexican social security benefits. Union Democracy Committee : Continuing to push for democracy within the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC) by holding the union accountable when members grievances are not addressed and ensuring the union is not using member dues for internal election campaigning. Health & Safety Committee : Training members on collective responsibility for heat protection, collecting and distributing heat kits, as well as using the OSHA Heat Safety app. Food Assistance Committee : Guiding workers who need food assistance when work is slow on how to approach food pantries. Grievance Committee : Supporting the resolution of worker grievances with individual employers, the NC Growers Association, FLOC, and the US Department of Labor (DOL). The farmworkers' main issues include mistreatment, recruitment violations, and age discrimination. In a recent case, an older worker was fired within two days for not working fast enough. Executive Committee : Establishing the IOF organizational structure, in addition to overall priorities, and internal election procedures. Not One More Death Campaign At the IOF meeting, the Health & Safety committee led small group discussions on the primary demands of the Ni Una Muerte Mas or Not One More Death campaign. This is more important than ever as high temperatures are breaking heat records every week in eastern North Carolina, leading to worker deaths in the fields such as the passing of Juan Jose Ceballos . Below are the campaign priorities which IOF members are pressuring the NC Growers Association to adopt, along with comments from meeting participants about the importance of these items: Right to Medical Attention: “Sometimes we don’t get medical attention, and we don’t speak up about it for fear that they will take away our chance to work. But medical care is necessary, especially when working in tobacco because without that care, we won’t be able to work at all.” Breaks : “Breaks are essential to be able to regain strength so that our body can keep doing the work. If they give us breaks, we can rest a little while and be able to hydrate so we can recuperate our energy.” Emergency Plan : “[It’s important to] help out in the case of heat stroke or heat cramps. We should make sure that all our coworkers are drinking enough water so that they can work, not only when they are feeling bad. We should have emergency numbers like 911 and follow the heat statuses in the [OSHA] app.” No Retaliation: “We shouldn’t experience any retaliation for standing up for our labor rights, either from the grower or the supervisor.” Functional Kitchens: “We all have the right to have a kitchen, or for the boss to give you the opportunity to cook your own food.” Air Conditioning: “It’s important [to have air conditioning in the housing units] because of the high temperatures and to be able to get a good night’s sleep. It’s also important so that kitchen goods can be kept at a healthy temperature.” Access to Water: “Having access to water is vital. We need it for drinking and also for our personal use in the camp.” Access to Bathrooms: “[It’s important to] have access to basic services like hot and cold water, and in some cases making sure there is an indoor bathroom, so that you aren’t confronting any danger like snakebites. Having portable bathrooms in the fields is an obligation of the growers.” As part of the Not One More Death campaign, and in remembrance of farmworkers who have died in the fields, IOF is hosting an event on September 1st in Rocky Mount. We will need drivers to help workers participate in the event. Stay tuned for more details . Our heat-safety drive continues! Help IOF supply health and safety advocates with items from this Amazon Wish List . You can help prevent heat stroke and save lives. Farmworker Leaders for a Farmworker Organization: IOF’s First Election IOF leaders are committed to democracy within our organization, especially considering that we were founded out of an attempt to make FLOC more democratic and worker-led. That’s one reason our first election is so significant. The board of directors, which has served over the last year and a half, has done an incredible job of launching our organization and we are so proud of all they have accomplished. And we’re also proud of the board’s desire to foster and grow new leadership. The rules for the election were set by the board, who determined that there would be an open nominations process. Workers were nominated from the floor for the roles of president and vice president, and each made a statement about why they wanted the role and what their priorities would be. Each of the six nominees lined up in the front of the hall, and workers lined up behind their candidate of choice, creating a visual representation of this democracy in action. The highest vote-getter won the role of president, and the second highest won the role of vice president. Another, similarly organized, vote took place for the role of secretary-treasurer, and an additional four members were elected at-large to the new board. Former president Felipe Montán then officially transferred the leadership, marking a very peaceful and supportive start to the new season of IOF officers. Outgoing board members reflected on their service and what it meant to support new leadership. Eladio commented, “It was an honor to pass on the torch and to hear other comrades congratulate us for the work that we have done, and to accomplish an organization of all farmworker leaders. Many workers were enthusiastic to see the work and accomplishments that we have done.” Outgoing board member Marino reiterated that the past board would be available to support the new leadership: “We will continue to stay connected, each and every one of us that has moved on to make space for the new board members. I want to make it clear that we will not leave you, we will support you all.  When I started, I did not know much and will continue to learn.  What happened on Sunday is a good thing.  We are not leaving, we are sharing and passing on the torch.  It was very democratic, we have a new group of leaders.”   Congratulations to the new board members - Pascual, Victor, Armando, Abel, Pedro, Juan, and Adan! We wish you all the best. Volunteer Drivers Helped Make it Happen Workers could not have attended this important meeting without the support of more than 40 volunteers who drove sometimes hundreds of miles to pick up workers from their isolated labor camps in rural North Carolina to bring them to the event. We are incredibly grateful to the dozens of supporters who took so much time to help make this happen. It was a meaningful experience both ways. Erin Callahan, a first time driver, reflected on how much she learned from Felipe on their drive to Duplin County, about agriculture in Mexico and in North Carolina, about the process of and reasons for coming to the US to work for nearly 20 years, as well as about the forming of the IOF organization. Callahan commented, “Being able to support such a unique and important gathering was gratifying in itself. But through the conversation, I feel like I was given so much more than I gave. I just offered a ride!” Not all drivers had such an easy time. Farmworkers have so little control over their schedules that there were many last-minute cancellations. At least 30 workers had to cancel on Sunday morning due to a number of factors, including grower-introduced roadblocks. Read on for examples of why some workers had to cancel. One driver arrived at the labor camp only to have the grower tell the workers that they were free to go to the meeting, but couldn’t come back to the camp if that’s the choice they made. One camp of 20 workers, who were all signed up to attend the meeting, had been asking the grower for more hours of work all week and were denied the opportunity. That was the case until Sunday, the usual day off, when they were told they’d be working until 4 p.m. The IOF meeting was at 2:30 p.m. One driver was five minutes away from the camp when we heard that the grower showed up to take the workers to get their checks cashed, and told them that was their only opportunity. By the time the driver arrived, the workers were already gone. One camp of workers who had RSVP-ed to the meeting was surprised on Sunday morning with orders to clean up the entire camp that day. Despite the roadblocks, over 100 workers were able to attend the IOF meeting because of such an amazing show of volunteer support. We are so grateful for this solidarity! Former IOF President Felipe Montán expressed his appreciation for the drivers and said, "The outgoing Board of Directors of El Futuro Es Nuestro or It’s Our Future thanks you for your immense support as volunteers and drivers. Thank you immensely for your time and collaboration with us and for believing in our organization. We hope to continue with that enthusiasm and support from each one of you. A big hug and a thousand thanks." FLOC Election: A Brief Update The US Department of Labor (DOL) has continued to investigate matters surrounding the a new FLOC election, mandated after the DOL found gross irregularities in the 2022 election. The new election was supposed to take place by September 2024, but it seems unlikely that deadline will be kept. IOF was informed that there would be an election site in North Carolina, unlike in 2022, and that mail-in ballots would be accepted, also unlike in 2022. However, there are few other details. We still do not have an official list of FLOC members as required. We presume FLOC has not turned over this information to the DOL. We do know that FLOC’s numerous “associate members”, non-farmworkers who make a $30 donation to join the union, will again have the same right to vote as farmworkers covered under the FLOC contract. Unfortunately, that means that non-farmworkers, friends and family of FLOC president Baldemar Velasquez, politicians, and even random individuals could still potentially determine the outcome of this election, if and when it happens. We are aware of four individuals who have filed election-related complaints against FLOC and Velasquez that the DOL is investigating, including use of union resources for Baldemar’s campaign, threats towards workers who don’t support Baldemar, and lack of representation for workers protected by the union. We will keep you posted and regardless, the workers will be at the forefront of everything IOF does. This article was adapted from an email newsletter written by El Nuestro El Future or It's Our Future .

On July 26th, a dozen protesters spent the morning on the sidewalk in front of Gateway Women’s Care, an anti-abortion center in Raleigh. The activists held up signs for drivers on Hillsborough Street and handed out literature to people walking by. According to Triangle Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and NC State Young DSA , the event was part of a campaign to get Gateway’s lease canceled.   On the surface, Gateway seems like an odd target for progressive fury. A website for the center says it offers “free, confidential pregnancy and sexual health services”, a mission aligned with left-wing stances on abortion rights and universal healthcare [ 1 ].   The protesters say that Gateway’s public image is a façade. The organization’s tax documents list a goal of getting “women to choose life for themselves and their unborn child” [ 2 ]. On evangelical websites, Gateway says its purpose is to save souls in “sexually broken and abortion-minded communities”, presumably including Raleigh [ 3 ].   The North Carolina legislature, dominated by Republicans, passed a budget last year that awarded nearly $20 million in taxpayer money to “crisis pregnancy centers” (CPCs) like Gateway [ 4 ]. In 2023, the state legislature also sharply curtailed reproductive rights in North Carolina, making it illegal to seek an abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy.   The protesters at Friday’s event said that places like Gateway are designed to “run out the clock” for patients who think they’re accessing free reproductive care. According to the Cardinal and Pine newspaper , CPCs often “delay, reschedule and even lie to women until it’s too late into the pregnancy for them to get an abortion” [ 4 ].   Wendy Bonano is the executive director of Gateway Women's Health in the Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill area. In a 2023 interview with the North Carolina Family Policy Council, Bonano said that the center “on Hillsborough Street is within two miles, I think, of seven universities and colleges, over 50,000 students. And that was primarily why Gateway was established in that location ”. She also said Gateway’s services are part of a “process to slow down their rush to the abortion clinic” [ 5 ].   The Gateway center in Raleigh isn't a licensed medical facility but they're not required to inform their patients of this fact. In place of professional healthcare, the center offers quackery like an “abortion pill reversal”, a procedure called “unproven and unethical” by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) [ 6 ].   Gateway also offers what it calls a “limited ultrasound”, an examination that does not look for life-threatening fetal or placental problems, unlike normal ultrasounds. Free from any regulation or oversight, CPCs are free to misinterpret the images from ultrasounds, lying to their patients about how far along they are.   The 19th News , a Texas newspaper, described a case where a CPC said an ultrasound image “was dated as being at 10 weeks gestational age. Her ultrasound at Houston Women’s Reproductive Services (a real clinic) showed her to be 20 weeks pregnant” [ 7 ]. Ted and Pam Van Dyk are the landlords of the Gateway center on Hillsborough Street. When they began their campaign, the activists were hopeful that the Van Dyks would be receptive to their demands. According to their research, the couple were registered Democrats and perhaps unaware of Gateway’s anti-abortion ideology.   During the picket on July 26th, the protestors were disabused of this hope. Mr. Van Dyk, who was biking to his office, stopped briefly to chat with the people on his property who were holding signs that read “Fake Clinic” and “Honk for Abortion Rights”.   According to the activists, Van Dyk said something close to, “You know you guys should hold some Kamala [Harris] signs, she will take care of all this.” The activists said they were baffled by the comment. Harris is known to be strongly in favor of reproductive rights and presumably would not support anti-abortion centers.   The protestors said that Mr. Van Dyk continued to speak with them and offered other defenses for his relationship with Gateway. He also said he wasn't completely comfortable with Gateway's mission and wished they would "modulate it". However, Van Dyk thought cancelling the center's lease would be too harsh and he expressed worry about finding a new tenant. However, the landlord said he understood the activists had the right to free expression, promised not to call the police, and then walked to his nearby office.   Organizers with Triangle DSA and NC State YDSA said they considered Friday’s event to be a success. Many passing cars had honked their support and rolled down their windows to ask for a pamphlet. Activists also reported that many neighbors were shocked to find out that Gateway was an anti-abortion center. Many community members agreed to sign the campaign’s petition, which encourages the Van Dyks not to renew the center’s lease [ 8 ].   Friday’s picket ended at 12 noon. The protesters said that their plan was to return monthly until the campaign is successful. Work Cited   Gateway Women’s Care.   https://gatewaywomens.care . “Gateway Womens Care - Full Filing- Nonprofit Explorer.” ProPublica , https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/581584775/202342089349301154/full . Gateway Women’s Care (Accredited Organization Profile) - ECFA.org . www.ecfa.org/MemberProfile.aspx?ID=4129 . McElroy, Michael. “NC Budget Gives $20 Million to ‘Clinics’ That Lie to Women About Abortion.” Cardinal and Pine , 26 Sept. 2023, https://cardinalpine.com/2023/09/26/nc-budget-gives-20-million-to-clinics-that-lie-to-women-about-abortion . “What a Pregnancy Resource Center Really Looks Like.” NC Family Policy Council , 22 July 2024, www.ncfamily.org/what-a-pregnancy-resource-center-really-looks-like . “Medication Abortion Reversal Is Not Supported by Science”. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. www.acog.org/advocacy/facts-are-important/medication-abortion-reversal-is-not-supported-by-science . Gerson, Jennifer. “Crisis Pregnancy Centers’ Ultrasounds Are Free. But Are They Accurate?” The 19th News , 29 Oct. 2021, https://19thnews.org/2021/10/crisis-pregnancy-centers-ultrasounds-accuracy-stakes . Stop Leasing to Anti-Abortion Center Gateway Women’s Care . https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/anti-abortion-center-out-of-raleigh .

Illegal solar panels on the roof of Faith Community Church in Greensboro, NC. Image credit: Inside Climate News Duke Energy’s years-long strategy remains intact - keep the public clueless about alternatives to the utility’s climate-wrecking expansion of fossil fuels and its crushing of climate solutions.  Will one of the world’s largest climate polluters keep succeeding? NC WARN has launched another statewide, multi-platform advertisement based on a 30-second video that leads with scores of empty roofs and parking lots across North Carolina cities and towns [ x ]. The video then transitions to rooftops and parking filled with solar panels, a reality that is possible for North Carolina through the use of local solar-plus-storage (SPS). The video then shows Duke Energy crushing clean energy and expanding the fracked gas plants so central to its monopoly-driven, rate-hiking Carbon Plan.   NC WARN engineers and lawyers are making a strong case for the " Sharing Solar" proposal [ x ] . However, Duke Energy doesn’t want the North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC), or the news media, to even talk about alternatives.  Multiple independent experts have concluded that generating and storing power close to where it's used can save money for utility customers, protect against power outages, and help to phase out fossil fuel power plants and transmission infrastructure [ x ]. The climate crisis is harming millions and quickly getting worse, but North Carolina is speeding in the wrong direction. Our state should not defer to the recklessness of Duke Energy executives.  This article was first published by NC WARN . Work Cited “NC WARN Sharing Solar: Fastest, Cheapest, Fairest Climate Approach.”  YouTube , 16 July 2024,  www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfvLMouXIVk . “Sharing Solar: A Sweeping Climate Proposal.” NC WARN , 5 July 2024, www.ncwarn.org/our-work/sharing-solar . “Supporters of Local Solar and Distributed Generation.” NC WARN , 1 July 2024, www.ncwarn.org/dg-supporters .

In a thorough, favorable opinion, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas D. Schroeder ruled against Clayton Property Group’s motion to dismiss Sound Rivers’ Lick Creek case last week. “This is an encouraging step in our legal effort to stop the sediment pollution in southeast Durham,” said Neuse Riverkeeper Samantha Krop. In September of 2023, the Southern Environmental Law Center filed a lawsuit on behalf of Sound Rivers to stop the sediment pollution of Martin Branch, Hurricane Creek and Lick Creek, and ongoing violations of the Clean Water Act from Clayton Property Group’s development of a large residential subdivision in southeast Durham. Lick Creek is a tributary of Falls Lake, a major source of drinking water for Raleigh residents. At the time the lawsuit was filed, Sound Rivers had documented more than 16 instances where Clayton Properties Group, Inc. violated its Clean Water Act permit at its Sweetbrier residential construction site – a 616-lot subdivision on a 216-acre site in Durham. Numerous water samples adjacent to and downstream of the construction site in Lick Creek showed, and have continued to show since, that the developer has consistently discharged sediment at concentrations 20 times greater than permit limits, which is illegal under the Clean Water Act and in excess of North Carolina’s turbidity standard. Shortly after the lawsuit was filed in September, Clayton Property Group filed a motion to dismiss the case. “With Judge Schroeder’s ruling, the Lick Creek lawsuit can now move forward, which is good, because the pollution of Lick Creek, and Falls Lake, has only continued since we filed it,” Samantha said. This article was first published by Sound Rivers .