05/20/2009

Associated Press

From The Fayetteville Observer, May 20

Interim police chief is good first step for Spring Lake PD

Something good happened in Spring Lake Town Hall on May 18. It's been a while since we've been able to report that. We hope it's the first of many such reports.

To dig out from the rubble of a horrifically tarnished Police Department, the town picked the right shovel — retired Chapel Hill Police Chief Gregg Edward Jarvies of Hillsborough. Jarvies left the Chapel Hill department in 2007 after 32 years. He is executive director of the N.C. Police Executives Association.

The interim chief started May 18 and will likely direct the Spring Lake department through the summer. Jarvies won't rush into changes, but rather will take some time to get to know the town's police officers and assess the department.

He immediately began talks with the Sheriff's Office, which took over patrol duties when Chief District Court Judge Beth Keever stripped the department of its authority. He is seeking training opportunities for the remaining 14 officers, after two sergeants were charged with felonies and Chief A.C. Brown resigned.

The Jarvies hire was Town Manager Larry Faison's first good call in his shaky two-year oversight of the department. We hope he and Jarvies are able to continue on the path to success.

___

From News & Record of Greensboro, May 19

A big mess for Easley and his family continues to get messier

Former Gov. Mike Easley may be out of sight. But he's hardly out of mind. The bad news keeps coming so fast it's hard to keep up.

This just in: On May 18, N.C. State University Chancellor James Oblinger said Easley's wife, Mary, should resign from a lucrative job she received with the university while still serving as first lady.

That latest development in a growing series of embarrassments for the former governor and his family seemed inevitable. Already both the provost and the chairman of N.C. State's Board of Trustees have resigned under pressure for their connection to Mary Easley's job, which raised suspicions of favoritism, and rightly should. Trustee Chairman Campbell McQueen stepped down shortly after UNC President Erskine Bowles demanded it. Provost Larry Nielsen, who hired Mary Easley, also resigned, citing "unbearable" scrutiny of how and why she received not only her first job, but a promotion at more than double her salary.

In 2005, the former first lady received a three-year contract as executive in residence in Nielsen's office at $80,000 a year, then a new job in 2008, and a new contract worth $850,000 over five years.

The Easleys' troubles hardly begin and end there, however.

Federal authorities revealed May 15 that they are investigating who paid for flights Easley, a Democrat, and his family took on private aircraft while in office. The News & Observer of Raleigh reported that Easley flew on at least 25 private jets provided by various businessmen, some of which the governor didn't pay for — others whose value appeared to exceed campaign donation limits. That would make them illegal.

The FBI has subpoenaed the state Highway Patrol and a trooper who headed personal security for the governor for documents related to those flights.

Then there were the complimentary vehicles provided to Mary Easley and the Easleys' son by auto dealers. And a questionable land purchase in Carteret County that followed political appointments for the sellers.

Through all of these messes the former governor has not said much. But when he does, it seems to emanate from an alternate reality.

Easley said May 15 in a written statement: "I am comfortable with the federal authorities collecting and reviewing all records relating to my 30 years of public service to the people of North Carolina. I am confident of the outcome, and we look forward to moving on with our private lives."

That cheery resolve seems more and more wishful as each new revelation surfaces. At the very least, the governor kicked ethics to the curb and took favors he shouldn't have.

For now, Mary Easley should do the right thing and comply with Oblinger's "suggestion." As for the rest of this mess, we'll have to wait and see where it takes us.

Odds are, it won't be a very pleasant place.

___

From Asheville Citizen-Times, May 19

No smoking law reflects changing times in North Carolina

The state that made Tobacco Road famous — indeed, a state in many ways built on the golden leaf — has entered a new era.

Thanks to a close vote in the state House, legislators signed off on a law outlawing smoking in bars and restaurants across the state beginning Jan. 2, 2010.

The move reflects a change of the public attitude toward smoking. Perhaps even more, it reflects the waning power of Big Tobacco over Tar Heel politicians. It's hard to recall that the legislative building itself was one of the last public places where you could light up indoors as recently as 2003. Legislators pointed to the dangers of secondhand smoke as a reason for the recent 62-56 vote. American Heart Association volunteer Lee Storrow, a student from Asheville who attends UNC Chapel Hill, said the move means his peers "can choose to go out with friends and not have to choose between their health and having a good time on a Friday or Saturday night."

The news was not greeted with such enthusiasm in all corners. Don Gundry, owner of Mack Kells on Tunnel Road, said, "I'm looking down the bar right now, and it's probably 90 percent of my customers smoking in here. Now we've gotten down to where our government is controlling the actions of individuals, which is absolutely absurd." Mack Kells is a private club. Critics have pointed to exemptions in the law for country clubs and cigar bars — the stomping grounds, in all likelihood, of the powerful and well-connected. Say, state legislators. Regarding the Jan. 2 initiation date, Gundry said, "So I have enough time to sell this place, right?"

North Carolina is not the first state to take such steps. According to the N.C. Alliance for Health, it will be the 23rd state to mandate smoke-free workplaces. It is, however, the first tobacco state to make a move of this nature. The legislation, HB2, is designed to protect people from secondhand smoke at work and in public places like grocery stores, restaurants and gas stations. It doesn't prohibit smoking at outdoor sections of restaurants and bars. The debate over the health effects of smoking, and of secondhand smoke, is over. Tobacco represents the leading cause of preventable deaths in North Carolina, and estimates of its cost to the health care system runs into the billions of dollars. Still, it's astounding to think how quickly the ground shifted in this state regarding attitudes toward tobacco. Come Jan. 2, it's going to shift even more.

___

From The News & Observer of Raleigh, May 19

State House makes common sense move on a change in contributory negligence cases

Under North Carolina law, a person who is injured in an accident and sues for damages can be denied any award if it is determined that he or she was even slightly to blame in the incident. It is called "contributory negligence," and it's favored by insurance companies, of course. The state shares this legal "distinction" with only three other states.

Now the state House has passed a bill to do the fair thing. Under the legislation, which still must pass muster in the Senate, damages can be awarded based on the fault of all parties as measured by percentage. As The News & Observer's Ben Niolet reported, that means that if the defendant, the person being sued, is determined to be 70 percent at fault, that defendant would pay 70 percent of the damages awarded by a jury.

This obviously is preferable to denying someone who may have been seriously hurt all damages because that person had a fraction of responsibility for what happened. An example: Stephen Gates, then 27, had a flat tire one night in 2003 on Interstate 40. Gates, a reporter for the Tar Heel Sports Network, pulled over but was hit by an SUV and dragged a distance. He died. Because his left tire was a few inches on the road, the insurance companies representing those in the SUV said he contributed to the accident. Thus they did not intend to pay off on liability insurance. They did, however, settle just before a trial was to begin.

There is something here, however, to make the awarding of damages more fair from the perspective of those being sued. The bill would see to it that in cases where there are multiple defendants, damages paid would be based on the degree of fault. A current quirk allows plaintiffs to recover some or all damages from any of the parties on the other side. That means a business, for example, that wasn't as much at fault as another defendant could be hit for damages for which it was not entirely responsible. This bill corrects that.

The insurance industry believes that because there will likely be more awards, premiums may rise as a result of this bill. Perhaps, but that remains to be seen, and this is a fairness issue, pure and simple. Why should people in North Carolina who are injured as a result of someone's negligence have a harder time getting just compensation than a person in another state? That doesn't make sense. It is one thing to be "business friendly." It's quite another to be victim unfriendly.

This bill goes to the state Senate. For the sake of their constituents, let us hope senators keep the measure intact.