“Viewpoints” is a place on Chapelboro where local people are encouraged to share their unique perspectives on issues affecting our community. If you’d like to contribute a column on an issue you’re concerned about, interesting happenings around town, reflections on local life — or anything else — send a submission to viewpoints@wchl.com
Endorsements, Inc.
A perspective from Pam Cooper
Like many others, I was bothered and disappointed to read that five out of seven members of the Chapel Hill Town Council have endorsed Pam Hemminger for another term as mayor. This looks to me suspiciously like an attempt to sway voters from inside the town’s leadership establishment. The move is cliqueish and suggests an entrenched team closing ranks to preserve a status quo with which many Chapel Hillians are dissatisfied and which they seek to change.
How much greater was my disappointment when I read a recent article in the local media which throws considerable shade, on the eve of the election, on one of Hemminger’s challengers in the mayoral race, Hongbin Gu. Council member Jess Anderson claimed that Gu “cited faulty information when she spoke out against the approval of luxury apartments and discussed the town’s financial position” – presumably in a Council meeting. No evidence was provided for this claim. She concluded: “We can disagree on policy, but we can’t disagree on fact. Especially in 2021, it is incredibly important to make sure we are giving the public accurate information to the best of our ability.” This is quite right, but it also arbitrarily labels Gu as incompetent and misinformed. Is this true? In the Town Council meetings I’ve attended, Gu has struck me as one of the most data-driven members of the Council and meticulous in her reading of documents discussed at meetings. She is after all a researcher and research is guided by science, numbers, and facts. But quite apart from Anderson’s specific criticism, it’s disappointing to see sitting Councilors commenting negatively on their colleagues and publicly choosing to be partisan. Especially since Anderson goes on to suggest that Gu would be a source of contention should she become mayor: “I am sure there would have to be some relationship rebuilding should Council Member Gu win.”
Let’s think about that for a minute. It’s an interesting statement which implies that the cliqueishness of the current Council shouldn’t be disrupted by a sharp and rigorous intellect looking to explore alternatives to the fetish of development and fantasy of unfettered growth that marks Town policy. Do we need a mayor who will rubber-stamp lucrative building projects without interrogating their value relative to the full spectrum of town needs? Surely democracy thrives on debate and requires the rebuilding of relationships in response to healthy disagreement. Coteries seek uniformity. From what I’ve seen in the last year of Council meetings, relationship rebuilding would be in order, whoever wins on Tuesday. The fact is that Gu is well-qualified for the mayor’s job. She is smart, detail-oriented, a very good listener, and a thoughtful, informed participant in town affairs. Her views, especially her favored concept of “gentle density,” are far-seeing and crucially important at this juncture in the Town’s history. She has earned the respect and admiration of her many supporters.
Back to my disappointment in, and embarrassment by, this practice of Councilors endorsing one candidate and casting aspersions on another. We need to question the ethics here and to look carefully at the records and values of the three mayoral candidates. Hemminger’s go-getting energy and Zachary Boyce’s understatement are appealing in different ways and have their merits. There’s something about both these candidates that draws media attention and publicity. Gu’s approach is not flashy but solid and clear-sighted. Strength and integrity mark her presence, together with a deep commitment to the present and future well-being of the town. These traits are what we need as Chapel Hill confronts a watershed moment; different sets of values are vying for priority and each set envisions a different future for the town. Let the voters decide without our leaders resorting to dubious tactics. There is much at stake.
“Viewpoints” is a place on Chapelboro where local people are encouraged to share their unique perspectives on issues affecting our community. If you’d like to contribute a column on an issue you’re concerned about, interesting happenings around town, reflections on local life — or anything else — send a submission to viewpoints@wchl.com
Chapelboro.com does not charge subscription fees. You can support local journalism and our mission to serve the community. Contribute today – every single dollar matters.
Comments on Chapelboro are moderated according to our Community Guidelines