Chapel Hill Town Council: Israel and Hamas, Bus Rapid Transit, Parties in Northside
An NS bus on part of what will become the North-South Bus Rapid Transit route. Source: Bbfd.
On January 24, three issues dominated the Chapel Hill Town Council’s meeting: the conflict in Gaza, a proposed “social host ordinance,” and an update on the North-South Bus Rapid Transit program. Because of heightened interest in the discussion of the conflict between Israel and Hamas, public comment was divided between a general public comment and one specific to Israel and Palestine. The discussion of Israel and Palestine was heated but not chaotic. Speakers mostly obeyed Mayor Jessica Anderson’s periodic reminders not to applaud, cheer, or display signs during the meeting.
The general public comment was devoted principally to discussing a “social host ordinance” that would provide an additional tool for punishing hosts of loud and disruptive parties, which speakers raised as an issue particularly in the historically African-American Northside neighborhood. The only unrelated comment came from self-described “failed Town Council candidate” Jeffrey Hoagland, who claimed that the town had told him a much lower number for town debt than a state audit had given.
Following the public comment, the Town Council heard a presentation led by the town’s Transit Planning Manager, Caroline Dwyer, about the ongoing North-South Bus Rapid Transit program. This project, which is due to begin construction in 2026 before being completed in 2029, will speed up bus service along the current route of the NS bus, stretching south to Southern Village and north along MLK Jr. Boulevard.
Israel and Hamas
A plurality of the attendees in the town council meeting were principally there to express views on the conflict in Gaza between Israel and Hamas. Speakers were limited to two minutes each, which was enforced with a timer. Deputy Town Clerk Amy Harvey tried to alternate between speakers in support of a resolution calling for a ceasefire and those opposing such a resolution.
Speakers raised a variety of points in support of a ceasefire. Some emphasized the humanitarian toll of the conflict in Gaza. In contrast, others connected it to local issues, such as the relationship between landlords and investors and the safety net for children who are kicked out by their parents in Chapel Hill.
A speaker who identified himself as a descendant of Holocaust survivors stated in support of a ceasefire resolution that, “What Israeli leaders are saying about Palestinians is what Nazis once said in my family.”
Many favoring a ceasefire resolution identified themselves as UNC students, a marked contrast to the mixed-age crowd that spoke against the resolution. This is in concordance with national trends identified by Data for Progress that show increased support for a ceasefire and opposition to pro-Israeli measures among voters under the age of 45. People on both sides –but particularly the side against a ceasefire resolution – mentioned being Jewish, which also accords with larger trends. Both sides, furthermore, tried to claim a popular mandate, a debate reflective of the mixed polling about what Americans want as national policy towards Israel.
On the side against the Town Council calling for a ceasefire, speakers asked the town to focus on local issues and denounced the proposal for a ceasefire resolution as divisive. However, the speakers also emphasized the claim that, in the words of speaker Kathy Kaufman, “Israel is waging a war against Hamas that it did not start and did not want.”
After public comment, Mayor Anderson and Town Council member Camille Berry spoke in response to the comments. Both stated that while they recognized the concerns of community members about the war in Gaza, they were not in favor of a resolution calling for a ceasefire. Anderson particularly cited that this one would be divisive, unlike many Town Council resolutions.
“I do not believe it is this council’s right to ask for a ceasefire,” Berry said. “What is my personal right is, to ask, for, as an individual, that human life be valued. That we continue to sit together. Share our pain. That we not turn on each other.”
Bus Rapid Transit
The major item on the Town Council’s planned agenda was a discussion of the North-South Bus Rapid Transit program. The cause for this update was that the process of planning out the Bus Rapid Transit project had reached 60% design, including a mock-up of what the design of new stations would look like. These stations, which are larger than the typical Chapel Hill Transit structures, feature covered areas for passengers to wait in, as well as white-on-light-blue signs stating the names of Bus Rapid Transit stations.
Besides the new stations, there are many planned improvements to the route that spans Chapel Hill from the Eubanks Road park-and-ride to the Southern Village park-and-ride. It will feature a dedicated lane for buses on most of the route, as well as a mechanism for stoplights to adjust their cycle to minimize delays for buses. Furthermore, the town is also planning to build a path for cyclists and pedestrians and additional sidewalk connections, as part of an overall process of encouraging Chapel Hill denizens to use non-automobile transportation.
“The benefit of the bus rapid transit is that it’s going to be fast,” Town Council member Melissa McCullough said. “It’s going to be frequent, and it’s going to have more capacity. And one of the biggest holdups, in getting people to ride transit, is, ‘Oh, I have to know when it’s coming, and I have to get there a few minutes ahead, and then wonder if it doesn’t come.’ And so Bus Rapid Transit has the benefit of being predictable.”
Town Council member Amy Ryan asked about the potential for putting more utilities underground as part of this process. Ryan also inquired about the status of an update to Chapel Hill Transit’s facilities that had been linked to the Bus Rapid Transit project. In response to that question, Transit Director Brian Litchfield said that the process of planning was also ongoing and had already been funded and that there would be opportunities to gain funding for construction further down the line.
The next steps for the project include an update at 90% design and, hopefully, funding from the Federal Transportation Administration.
Social Host Ordinance
Samantha Luu, the director of the Campus and Community Coalition, led a group of speakers discussing the proposed “social host ordinance” to further restrict loud late-night parties around town. Luu’s group, which is a collaboration between the University and local organizations such as the Marian Cheek Jackson Center, has a mission of reducing dangerous drinking in Chapel Hill.
A succession of speakers, many of whom were UNC students with connections to the Jackson Center, which serves the Northside neighborhood, testified about the impact of extremely loud parties on families and the elderly living in the historically black neighborhood.
Parties often continued past midnight and played music loud enough that neighbors asked student households to turn it down. However, the speakers also reported that student households were often not responsive to these requests. Even requests from the police only resulted in short-term reductions in the loudness of the music. The Council also heard complaints about trash, particularly red plastic cups, being strewn across the neighborhood in the aftermath of these parties.
Ryan Kalo, the Deputy Director of State and Local Relations for the Executive Branch of UNC Student Government, voiced some concerns about the proposed ordinance, although they noted that their organization had been involved in the process of developing the measures. As a representative of student government, they expressed concerns about high fines for violators and proposed that an option for community service instead of a fine be added.
There are pre-existing measures that have been taken to reduce the impact of loud parties. For instance, there is a program for community members to register parties so as to help deal with noise complaints.
No votes were held in regard to the proposed social host ordinance. However, given the support shown for the proposed ordinance at the meeting, including an endorsement from the Marian Cheek Jackson Center, it seems doubtful that this is the end of the road for it. This is an issue that’s likely to pop up again on the Town Council’s docket in the coming months.