WRAL.com Weather

www.flickr.com

User login

2009 Chatham County, NC Video Clips


Chatham County BBS

xx Who is paying for Ms. Mann's fancy campaign stuff?
September 01, 2015, 06:20:11 PM by Heffrey Larchfeather
She is brand new in town and is unemployed. Who Iis funding that circus?
9 comments | Write Comment

xx Randolph Telephone Fiber to the Home!!!
September 01, 2015, 11:31:21 AM by Silk_Hope
Randolph Telephone is backhauling fiber like crazy in the Western part of the County on the rural roads. I got a call that now they are ready to run it to the houses from the street and need to site survey my yard for the dig. I was told in about a month they will be ready to light up Fiber to the Home!!!  Party
1 comment | Write Comment

xx Why 501 closed at courthouse?
August 28, 2015, 03:52:47 PM by Muddylaces
Around 3:40
3 comments | Write Comment

xx Randy blasts Pittsbor Matters member!???
August 25, 2015, 02:38:57 PM by Jack Stevens
At the PBO BOC meeting August 24, 2015, during the "Citizen's Matters" portion of the meeting,  Randy got p and castigated a group of people who just happen to be Pittsboro Matters members.  I was at that meeting and heard them make the accusations.  I didn't make it to the county BOC meeting he mentions.

It's the second issue I'll go on record for as to agreeing With Randy.  The other one came true; Bill Terry would be a one term mayor.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/wOSofUqGxAE&amp;rel=0" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/wOSofUqGxAE&amp;rel=0</a>


11 comments | Write Comment

xx This will teach you rubes who really owns the land!
August 20, 2015, 11:57:19 PM by Heffrey Larchfeather
You think you own your land but WE rent it to you.


Quote
Chatham County OKs two-year fracking moratorium


http://www.thetimesnews.com/article/20150819/NEWS/150818828
1 comment | Write Comment

xx Busted! Subsidy Queen Casey Mann using Voller's campaign PO Box!
August 20, 2015, 08:03:12 AM by zorro
Saw Casey Mann's email in the Chatham chatlist this morning about how much she would love to be on the Pittsboro town council.

Did a quick Google search on the post office box she listed in the email -

Casey Marie Mann
Candidate for Pittsboro Town Board
Post Office Box 878
Pittsboro, NC 27312

And guess what I found? The post office box she is using is Randy Voller's campaign post office box
http://www.randyvoller.com/Re-elect/Welcome.html

Not only is she living in subsidized housing provided by Randy Voller she's even using a subsidized post office box provided by Randy Voller.

Wonder if Casey is going to report all this as an in-kind campaign contribution?

Knowing how the Chatham Coalition works, I've gone ahead and grabbed a screen capture of the page. You can see the post office box information at the bottom of the page.


18 comments | Write Comment

xx Misuse of funds by Pittsboro Matters
August 20, 2015, 07:50:29 AM by zorro
From this morning's Chatham Chatlist that just came out -

Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 07:15:39 -0400
From: Mike P
Subject: Misuse of funds by Pittsboro Matters

Seems that some people are a litttle upset about how Pittsboro Matters has been spending their donated funds.

I did a little research this week and I found that if you're a donor to the Pittsboro Matters 501(c)(3) organization and you feel that your money has been misused by the group you do have some options available to you under the laws of North Carolina.

First you can contact the treasurer of the Pittsboro Matters group and ask that they return your donation. According to the State of North Carolina records the treasurer of Pittsboro Matters is Mike Wakins and his phone number is 919-280-1970

If you don't get satisfaction dealing with the Pittsboro Matters treasurer you may contact the NC Department of the Secretary of State to register a complaint https://www.secretary.state.nc.us/csl/contact.aspx Their toll-free phone # is 1-888-830-4989. Email address is csl@sosnc.com.
They also have a form online at https://www.secretary.state.nc.us/CSL/pdf/CSLComplaintForm.pdf that you can fill out and either mail in of fax in to the Secretary of State.

According to their web site, when the the Secretary of State's Charitable Solicitation Licensing Section (CSL) opens an enforcement-related inquiry, the section typically mails an inquiry letter to relevant parties seeking further information. After receiving a response, if any, the section evaluates available evidence and determines if a violation has in fact occurred. If the section finds a violation, the section will issue an administrative order making official findings of fact and ordering an appropriate penalty. Penalties range from issuing official letters of concern or monetary fines up to and including the suspension or revocation of licensed status for the offending person. inalized enforcement findings become a part of the relevant licensed organization's file maintained by the section.

They also have a very nice FAQ section at https://www.secretary.state.nc.us/CSL/cslfaqtree.aspx?solicitors

You will find answers to questions like this -
Does 501(c)(3) mean a charity is legitimate?
501(c)(3) refers to the federal tax code, and is a designation given to certain organizations exempted from paying federal income tax. This is a tax designation only, and is only one factor in determining the legitimacy of a particular charity. Organizations exempted from federal taxation as 501(c)(3) entities are required by federal law to provide certain financial information upon request. We advise donors to always ask for and examine written program and financial information provided by charities prior to making a donation.

Hope this helps.

Mike
0 comments | Write Comment

xx Chatham Journal requests Board of Elections investigate Pittsboro Matters
August 19, 2015, 07:15:48 AM by Gene Galin
Chatham Journal newspaper requests State Board of Elections investigate Pittsboro Matters
August 19, 2015
http://chathamjournal.com/2015/08/19/chatham-journal-newspaper-requests-state-board-of-elections-investigate-pittsboro-matters/



Pittsboro, NC – On August 18, the Chatham Journal newspaper submitted a request that the North Carolina State Board of Elections investigate the possible political activities of Pittsboro Matters.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Voter education with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, constitutes prohibited participation or intervention.

Therefore, as a 501(c) (3) non-profit organization, Pittsboro Matters is not supposed to endorse candidates for election.

However, in a newsletter email that they sent out dated July 25, 2015 Pittsboro Matters has put out a list of candidates for the local Pittsboro elections and the group appears to be publicly supporting certain candidates.

A copy of that email newsletter was submitted to the board of elections and the content of that email is located below.

************************** Pittsboro Matters Email Newsletter **************************

From: Pittsboro Matters
Date: Jul 25, 2015, 11:36:52 AM
To:
Subject: Election News and Analysis

Who’s Running in Pittsboro 2015?
View this email in your browser
– Pittsboro Election –

A Referendum on Chatham Park Approvals
Town Board elections are always a referendum on the actions of the incumbent board members when they are running for re-election. That is even more the case in Pittsboro’s November 3 municipal election because there is one issue that has totally dominated the actions of the current town board for the last two years. That issue clearly divides the eight candidates, including four incumbents, now seeking three town board seats (out of five total board members). The issue is the current Town Board majority’s continued rubber-stamping of a “blank slate” master plan for Chatham Park, which put the Cary developers, Chatham Park Investors, in the driver’s seat for Pittsboro and Chatham County’s future.

As a 501 (c) 3 non-profit organization, Pittsboro Matters will not endorse candidates for election. However, our educational mission allows us to keep you informed on candidates’ positions and actions. We explain this further at the bottom of this article.

Only Three Candidates
Clearly Oppose Chatham Park Plans

Three candidates running for three seats on the Town Board have voiced clear and specific opposition to the current Chatham Park Master plan.

In announcing his candidacy on Facebook, environmental professional John Bonitzsaid he was running to “return to governance by the people, rather than by developers,” and he asked his friends to join him in this “referendum.” Bonitz testified twice in public hearings to oppose a master plan that ignored objections raised by citizens and the Lawrence Group consultant.

Bonitz made his Chatham Park views even clearer when he wrote that a January 9, 2015 letter to the editor of the Raleigh News and Observer from Mayor Bill Terry “struck a deep nerve in me and was a big part of my motivation to serve Pittsboro, now and in the future.” The Mayor’s letter explained why he had refused to sign the rezoning approval as Mayors normally do; Mayor Terry accused Chatham Park Investors of deceiving the Town in order to obtain another rubber-stamped approval of the proposed master plan. See Bill Terry letter to the editor
The other two candidates raising objections to the Chatham Park master plan are incumbent Commissioner Bett Wilson Foley (who has consistently raised concerns about the master plan) and incumbent Mayor Bill Terry (who decided not to seek re-election as Mayor and instead opted to seek a Town Board seat where he would have a vote and the possibility of joining a new majority committed to addressing concerns about Chatham Park.) “I was willing to run for a Commissioner’s seat and be that third person dedicated to eliminating what I believe to be the inappropriate and excessive influence of the developers of Chatham Park on the administration of the Town government,” he said in the local media. “It is my judgment that this criterion was met when John Bonitz and Bett Wilson-Foley filed for Commissioner seats.”

Four Other Candidates Voted FOR
or Spoke in Favor of Current Master Plan

Town board incumbents Jay Farrell and Beth Turner are seeking re-election; both have consistently voted to approve all of Chatham Park Investors’ planning requests. A recently appointed town planning board member Oakley Bennett, who voted twice in support of Chatham Park, is also seeking election to the Town Board. He voted to recommend approval of both the Chatham Park master plan and the revised Planned Development District Ordinance as proposed by Chatham Park Investors. “I’m for Chatham Park and economic growth in our town and ETJ,” Bennett recently wrote on the Chatham Bulletin Board list serve, adding that while the master plan isn’t perfect, “the BOC (Board of Commissioners) and the developers worked together on it.”

Also seeking election to the Town Board is Heather Johnson, local conservative activist and downtown business services owner, who testified at a November 25, 2013 Town Board meeting in support of the first Chatham Park master plan proposal because she claimed it would directly benefit her business.

Voller Associate Also Running
But Silent on Chatham Park

Also running is Casey Mann, a former NC Democratic Party operative and close political and business ally of former Mayor Randy Voller. (It was Voller who unsuccessfully pushed for a rushed vote on the Chatham Park master plan in November 2013 and has been championing CPI plans ever since.) Mann is new to Pittsboro and has been a Chatham registered voter for less than a year (since September 23, 2014). Voller had hired her to be Executive Director of the State Democratic Party in February 2014; she resigned that position a year later when Voller declined to seek re-election as party chair. ) Mann’s LinkedIn resume shows that her only experience related to local and state government has been as a political party operative and campaign organizer.

Mann’s statement announcing her candidacy omitted any reference to Chatham Park or development and she declined to share her views on Chatham Park with the local media. She has spoken one time at a Pittsboro Town Board meeting to make a personal request unrelated to Chatham Park. Her candidacy does raise a possible conflict of interest concerning her board membership on the community development corporation (CDC) Sustainable Prosperity, which was founded by Voller and over which he still serves as President. Mann recently made a presentation to the County Commissioners on behalf of the CDC seeking public funds and support for a proposed affordable housing project on land the CDC owns in the town. Former Mayor Voller recently wrote that the CDC also wants to do local projects on sustainable energy, water reuse, the provision of clean drinking water, management of solid waste and wastewater, downtown revitalization, social and health welfare, and jobs that pay living wages. It is hard to see how this CDC could do such projects locally without support of the Pittsboro Town Board and cooperation with Chatham Park.

Mayoral Candidates Decline to Provide
Statements on Chatham Park

Two candidates are seeking election to the Mayor’s seat: retired Pittsboro real estate attorney Cindy Perry and Pittsboro Ford employee Averisto (Al) Mendez. They have not made statements about their views on the current Chatham Park master plan.
Pittsboro Matters will Keep You Factually Informed
But will Not Endorse Candidates

Pittsboro Matters as a 501 (c) 3 non-profit cannot endorse candidates in local political races. Nor can it actively support any candidate for a partisan or non-partisan local government race. We do not intend to do that. However, we have a right and obligation to educate and inform our members, supporters and the public about issues related to our mission: the preservation of the local economy, environment and culture of their community. Without question the town board’s two year-long and ongoing deliberations and decisions concerning the proposed 8,000 plus acre, 55,000 resident Chatham Park is directly related to that mission.

We plan to keep our members, supporters and the public informed throughout the election process about the qualifications, statements, positions, and relevant organizational associations of primarily the eight candidates running for three town board seats. It is clear from the events of the past year, it is the three member majority of the town board that can decide Pittsboro’s fate concerning Chatham Park and other policy decisions related to the preservation of the local economy, environment and culture of our community. We plan to stick strictly to reporting public facts, which can speak for themselves. Of course, we will continue to give our views about Chatham Park and other policy plans related to our mission as they are presented to and deliberated by the town board. But we will not suggest whom you should vote for. That is up to each voter to make up their own minds, hopefully based on facts as they relate to each candidates’ policy positions and actions.

Of course, anyone associated with or supporting Pittsboro Matters is free to publicly express their views about the candidates and even actively support candidates, in their roles as individual residents, but we ask everyone who does that to make clear they are not doing this on behalf of Pittsboro Matters. Thank you.
We’re deeply grateful for all who have previously made a donation. If you would like to support our ongoing legal battle, please consider making a donation now, online or by mail to:
Pittsboro Matters
PO Box 1001
Pittsboro NC 27312

Your help will make a difference as we continue to press forward with the Town and in the courts. Together we will succeed. Thanks again for all you do for our amazing community.
Follow Us!
Facebook
Twitter
Website
Share
Tweet
+1
Forward
Copyright © 2015 Pittsboro Matters, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you signed up to receive the Pittsboro Matters newsletter and/or updates from Pittsboro Matters on Chatham Park.
6 comments | Write Comment

xx Is Pittsboro Matters misclassified as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization?
August 18, 2015, 09:07:43 PM by Gene Galin
A 501(c) organization, also known colloquially as a 501(c), is a tax-exempt nonprofit organization in the United States. Section 501(c) of the United States Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. § 501(c)) provides that 29 types of nonprofit organizations are exempt from some federal income taxes. Sections 503 through 505 set out the requirements for attaining such exemptions. Many states refer to Section 501(c) for definitions of organizations exempt from state taxation as well. 501(c) organizations can receive unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations, and unions.

The most common type of tax-exempt nonprofit organization falls under category 501(c)(3), whereby a nonprofit organization is exempt from federal income tax if its activities have the following purposes: charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering amateur sports competition, or preventing cruelty to children or animals. The 501(c)(4) and 501(c)(6) categories are for politically active nonprofits

501(c)(3)

A 501(c)(3) organization or 501c3 organization, also colloquially known as a 501c3, is a United States nonprofit organization that has been approved by the Internal Revenue Service to be tax-exempt under the terms of section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Most charitable non-profits in the United States that Americans commonly know of, and often make donations to, are 501c3 organizations.

An approved 501(c)(3) exemption allows donors to the organization to reduce their own taxable incomes by deducting the amounts of their donations given, and thus to reduce their personal income taxes. And it allows the 501c3 organization to avoid federal income taxes on the difference between revenues (donations, grants, service fees) received vs. expenses (wages, supplies, state & local taxes paid, etc.) in its main operations. In a for-profit business, that difference would represent taxable income and be taxed at Federal corporate tax rates of 15 to 39 percent. 501c3 status may also provide exemption from state and local corporate income taxes that range from 0 to 12 percent.

501(c)(3) exemptions apply to corporations organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational purposes, or for testing for public safety, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. 501(c)(3) exemption applies also for any non-incorporated community chest, fund, cooperating association or foundation that is organized and operated exclusively for those purposes. There are also supporting organizations—often referred to in shorthand form as "Friends of" organizations.

Another provision, 26 U.S.C. § 170, provides a deduction, for federal income tax purposes, for some donors who make charitable contributions to most types of 501(c)(3) organizations, among others. Regulations specify which such deductions must be verifiable to be allowed (e.g., receipts for donations over $250). Due to the tax deductions associated with donations, loss of 501(c)(3) status can be highly challenging to a charity's continued operation, as many foundations and corporate matching programs do not grant funds to a charity without such status, and individual donors often do not donate to such a charity due to the unavailability of the deduction.

Testing for public safety is described under section 509(a)(4) of the code, which makes the organization a public charity and not a private foundation,[24] but contributions to 509(a)(4) organizations are not deductible by the donor for federal income, estate, or gift tax purposes.

The two exempt classifications of 501(c)(3) organizations are as follows:

    A public charity, identified by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as "not a private foundation", normally receives a substantial part of its income, directly or indirectly, from the general public or from the government. The public support must be fairly broad, not limited to a few individuals or families. Public charities are defined in the Internal Revenue Code under sections 509(a)(1) through 509(a)(4).
    A private foundation, sometimes called a non-operating foundation, receives most of its income from investments and endowments. This income is used to make grants to other organizations, rather than being disbursed directly for charitable activities. Private foundations are defined in the Internal Revenue Code under section 509(a) as 501(c)(3) organizations, which do not qualify as public charities.

Churches must meet specific requirements in order to obtain and maintain tax exempt status; these are outlined in IRS Publication 1828: Tax guide for churches and religious organizations. This guide outlines activities allowed and not allowed by churches under the 501(c)(3) designation. A private, nonprofit organization, GuideStar, also provides information on 501(c)(3) organizations.

Before donating to a 501(c)(3) organization, a donor may wish to consult the searchable online IRS list of charitable organizations[28] as well as lists that may be maintained by a state on a portion of its web portal devoted to its "department of justice" or "office of attorney general".

Consumers may file IRS Form 13909 with documentation to complain about inappropriate or fraudulent (i.e., fundraising, political campaigning, lobbying) activities by any 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.

Political activity

Section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from supporting political candidates, and are subject to limits on lobbying. They risk loss of tax exempt status if these rules are violated. An organization that loses its 501(c)(3) status due to being engaged in political activities cannot then qualify for 501(c)(4) status.

Elections

Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) are prohibited from conducting political campaign activities to intervene in elections to public office. The Internal Revenue Service website elaborates on this prohibition:

    Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

    Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

    On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity.  Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances.  For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.
6 comments | Write Comment

xx CCBC has adopted a two-year moratorium on oil and gas fracking
August 18, 2015, 10:42:55 AM by Muddylaces
Well done.   Can we also have a moratorium on mining for gold since there is as much there is about as much shale in Chatham as gold?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole
1 comment | Write Comment

    follow me on Twitter

    UNC Tar Heels Twits

    Chatham County News Network

    Chatham Photos

    gg090812056.jpg

    gg090812056.jpg

    Chatham Area Twitters