sodu week in review

[SeeGov] Durham Homelessness Plan, Potential Election Changes, Police Tech, and Brenntag Pollution Concerns

Durham council members reviewed a homelessness strategy, possible election changes, police technology spending, and water quality concerns tied to the Brenntag site.

Durham City Council’s May 21 work session was less about one headline vote than about four big questions now facing the city:

How does Durham respond to visible homelessness?
Should the city change how it elects its leaders?
How much police technology is too much?
And who's responsible for protecting neighborhoods downstream from the Brenntag industrial site?

City Manager Bo Ferguson identified two of those issues at the start of the meeting as priority items: a resolution adopting Durham’s Strategic Framework to make homelessness “rare and brief” by 2031, and an overview of municipal elections. The agenda also included the Axon contract to renew and expand police technology services and a water quality investigation presentation tied to Brenntag.

Durham’s Homelessness Plan Aims for Housing within 30 Days

Ryan Smith, director of the city’s Community Safety Department, described the homelessness strategy as “ambitious” but “credible,” emphasizing that it was developed with partners across Durham’s continuum of care, including Alliance Health, Duke Health, Families Moving Forward, Urban Ministries, Housing for New Hope, HSAC leadership, the city, and the county.

The need, Smith said, is stark. Durham has more than 600 people living unsheltered, more than 140 active encampments, more than 200 single adults waiting for shelter, and more than 50 families waiting for shelter. He stressed that those are wait lists for shelter, not permanent housing.

One of the biggest bottlenecks is permanent supportive housing. Smith said only about 12 permanent supportive housing units become available each year, leaving outreach workers with little to offer people living in encampments beyond a place on a waiting list.

The 2031 goal does not mean no one in Durham will ever become homeless again. Instead, Smith said the objective is to build a system strong enough that when someone becomes homeless, the community can house them within 30 days. In the language of homelessness policy, that is what “functional zero” means.

The first-year milestones are aggressive. By next summer, the plan aims to reduce unsheltered homelessness by 30%, youth homelessness by 50%, veteran homelessness by 30%, and senior homelessness by 30%. The strategy calls for a $13 million shared community investment next year, with about $9 million going toward direct financial assistance for people experiencing homelessness and the next-largest portion going to systemwide case management.

Smith also pointed to case conferencing as part of the system-building work. Before the current effort, he said partners were case conferencing about 10 people a week. That has grown to about 80 or 90 people a week, bringing case managers together to identify barriers that prevent specific people from moving into housing.

Election Changes on Table, but No Decision Yet

Council also heard an informational presentation from Durham County Board of Elections Chair David Boone and Elections Director Derek Bowens. Mayor Leonardo Williams clarified before the presentation that no action was being requested at the work session, but the information could support future council action.

The presentation covered Durham’s current election structure, election costs, possible charter changes, and even-year municipal elections. Durham uses an at-large ward combination: candidates for three ward seats must live in those wards, but every city voter gets to vote in every council race. According to the presentation, 32 municipalities in North Carolina use that kind of at-large ward combination, while 45 require both candidates and voters to be tied to the ward or district.

Durham also uses a nonpartisan primary and election method. Staff told council that only 17 municipalities in the state use that approach, while most North Carolina municipalities use a nonpartisan general election or plurality method. Larger cities such as Raleigh and Asheville were mentioned as comparisons because they have moved municipal elections to even-numbered years through local acts.

The practical issue is cost and turnout. Election costs are rising because of salaries, inflation, voter access initiatives, and statutory or regulatory changes. The city also has to reimburse neighboring counties for Durham municipal voters who live in parts of the city that cross into Orange and Wake counties.

No change is imminent, but the discussion signals council may revisit whether Durham should keep its current odd-year municipal election system, shift to even-year elections, change its primary structure, or reconsider how ward representation works.

Axon Contract: Safety and Surveillance

The Axon contract drew some of the sharpest public comments of the day. The agenda item involved renewing and expanding services with Axon Enterprise, the company known for Tasers, body cameras, evidence storage, drones, and related public safety technology.

Supporters framed the technology as a public safety and accountability tool. Former District Court Judge Drew Marsh said Durham should not “hamstring” law enforcement by denying officers modern tools. Walter Jackson, another speaker, supported technology that would activate body cameras when Tasers are used, arguing that recordings can protect both residents and officers by documenting what happened.

Other speakers from Durham Housing Authority communities and public safety circles used the broader budget discussion to argue that police are understaffed and need more resources. Several described fear in communities affected by shootings and urged council not to pull back from police funding or equipment.

Opponents focused on surveillance and cost. Rayna Rosenko, a Durham resident and member of the Have a Heart coalition, said the expanded Axon package would double annual spending from about $1 million to $2 million. She said the new products included six drones, the Fusus platform, and data storage services, and she argued the proposal would move Durham closer to a real-time surveillance system that many residents have not asked for.

Brenntag: Limits of City Authority

The Brenntag water quality presentation focused on the industrial site near N.C. 147 and an unnamed tributary to Rock Creek. Michelle Wolfwick, with the city’s Environmental and Stormwater Services Department, told council that the city’s stormwater authority comes from its stormwater pollution control ordinance and is limited to pollution entering the drainage system. The city stormwater program does not have authority over streams, air, soil, or groundwater, which are governed by state agencies.

The creek flows from the Brenntag area under N.C. 147, then through Burton Park near Burton Elementary School and McDougald Terrace before ultimately reaching Third Fork Creek and Jordan Lake.

Wolfwick said the site has been used for industrial activity since 1884, long before modern water pollution laws existed. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act came in 1948, and the Clean Water Act followed in 1972. In other words, she told council, much of the site’s industrial history predates the regulatory system now used to investigate pollution.

Several agencies are now involved. Wolfwick said the North Carolina Division of Water Resources issued a notice of violation to Brenntag in November, while the N.C. Division of Waste Management and the N.C. Division of Energy, Mining and Land Resources also have been to the site. But she emphasized there is no joint enforcement structure. Each agency acts under its own authority.

Wes Platt
Neighborhood News Guy

Check out all our compilation reels on SeeGov!