UNCC Inquiry is Ordered

Bowles ordersUNCC inquiry
VICTORIA CHERRIE
University of North
Carolina system President Erskine Bowles assigned a member of his staff to investigate whether there was misconduct by UNC Charlotte in its study of the future light-rail system in Charlotte. The controversy centers on a university study earlier this year that was mostly favorable to the Charlotte Area Transit System, saying its operating and construction costs were in line with those of other transit systems. Voters will decide in November whether to keep a half-cent tax dedicated to mass transit. The tax would help pay for light rail.

Critics have said taxpayer money shouldn't have been used for the report, released in early May. And they question the Charlotte Chamber's role in the study,especially since the chamber has taken a public stance in favor of the tax. University officials have defended the study.
On Tuesday, David Harrison, a UNC system attorney, said he was appointed by Bowles to investigate complaints about the study, mostly from people opposed to the half-cent sales tax. After about two days of culling through e-mails and other documents, Harrison said he felt a misconduct investigation was warranted. He declined to give specifics as to why. "That's a huge concern for anyone in my job, in academia. The biggest question is, `Was the research sound?' " said Harrison. "The key is that we do it objectively, fairly and without misconduct." When he contacted UNCC, it was already conducting its own investigation, Harrison said. He said he will take the report, review it and make a recommendation to Bowles.

Several Charlotte residents said Tuesday they had asked for an outside investigation. "This needs to give way to common sense," said Tom Ashcraft, an attorney who opposes the half-cent sales tax. "It makes sense for someone who doesn't work with the university to take a look at it." A spokeswoman for the Attorney General's Office said her office would investigate only if the Board of Elections asked. Don Wright, an attorney for the state Board of Elections, said the office did not have jurisdiction to determine whether public money was being properly spent to support the bond issue. He said Bowles' office should investigate any concerns about UNC Charlotte's spending.

What about bias? This report was done egregiously, it was colluding with public officials to obfuscate facts, twist truths, and sway public opinions. What makes matters more concerning is the fact that this was an orchestrated campaign, using public funding. The City of Charlotte's official policy for responding to requests for information or analysis, is that Staff may answer questions and provide information to the Mayor and City Council, citizens, and the media in normal and appropriate ways. Staff shall not however, engage in the development or implementation of referendum/campaign strategy.

There is evidence through email, of this happening and it is improper for them to engage thusly. Just like there is truth in billing, there is ethic concerns with truth in representation, after all the public has to be able to trust the information given is unbiased and untampered with. Yet here is evidence to the contrary. All I can say is stayed tune.