Candidate Housing Responses
CITYBUILDER, in collaboration with RDU New Liberals, Yes in My Triangle!, and Strong Towns Raleigh Local Conversation, invited every candidate in this year’s municipal races to complete a housing questionnaire.
Our goal was simple: to see which candidates understand that our region needs to build more homes of every kind, from market-rate to subsidized affordable housing and every missing middle solution in between.
Below are the full responses from those who responded. Published so voters can better understand where candidates stand on housing in their communities. These responses informed the Durham Housing Report Cards and Triangle Pro-Housing PASS Stamps of Approval we previously published.
The responses for each Municipal Race:
Mayor: Leo Williams, Anjanee Bell
City Council Ward I: Matt Kopac, Elijah King
City Council Ward II: Mark-Anthony Middleton, Ashley Robbins
City Council Ward III: Diana Medoff, Terry McCann
Town Council: Shane Reese
Mayor: Barbara Foushee
Town Council: Cristóbal Palmer, Danny Nowell, Fred Joiner
Town Council: Erik Valera, Louie Rivers III
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Board of Education: Riza Jenkins
Town Council: Dan Barbour
Town Council: Gra Singleton
Town Council: Kathleen Ferguson
Town Council: Kara Foster
Mayor: TJ Cawley, Satish Garimella
Town Council At-Large: Harrison Kesling
Town Council District 4: Patty W. Cheng, Vicki Scroggins-Johnson
Board of Commissioners: Corey Forrest, Tina Thurber, Nikkolas Shramek, Ashley Gross, Tobias Palmer
Board of Commissioners: R. Keith Shackleford
Board of Commissioners: Deans Eatman, Dustin Ingalls
Mayor: Gilbert Todd, Jr.
2025 Durham Candidate Responses
Click here to view our report card and see how we graded their responses!
Durham Mayor
Leonardo (Leo) Williams (incumbent)
Q: Do you believe Durham is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes, I do believe that Durham is experiencing a housing shortage. The underlying reasons for it are nuanced and unfortunately involve many factors that are beyond the municipal government’s ability to control, but one of the main ways we can combat this is by ensuring the continued expansion of housing quantity and working to uphold housing quality within our municipal boundaries.”
Q: Are there any current policies or regulations that you believe make it harder to build housing in Durham? What would you change?
“I believe there are various facets of the current UDO that due in large part to the passage of time are not as effectively geared for the needs of 2025 Durham, and I am confident in that the proposed updates will address those needs while staying true to the inherent character of what makes Durham the outstanding and diverse community that it is.”
Q: What are some pro-housing policies or specific housing developments you’ve supported in the past that you’d like voters to know about?
"I’ve supported housing developments with the majority of my votes because I understand the basic reality that our community deserves and needs mass benefit with the least amount of burden. I supported SCAD (Simplifying Code for Affordable Development) for various reasons. Specifically, I supported to the deregulation of the restrictive and outdated zoning policy that prevented churches from building housing on their own property. To date, i’m still perplexed with what caused public backlash on something that would be so beneficial to so many in Durham. Now, churches are contributing to not only our housing stock, but to our housing type and affordability.”
Q: Durham passed major zoning reforms in 2019 (EHC) and 2024 (SCAD) that eliminated exclusionary single-family zoning, removed parking mandates, and made it easier to build small commercial and infill housing. Do you support keeping these reforms in place? Why or why not?
“I do support keeping these reforms in place, just as I am proud to have helped bring about SCAD and the pro-environmental changes it brought to our community, while incorporating a myriad of community-supported issues via amendments to the proposed legislation. In local government, every day brings new challenges that we are tasked with addressing within the limited framework of the authority granted to us by the State of North Carolina. Is SCAD perfect? No. But nothing is. So our job is to shoot for as close to perfect as we can get, and spend every day in office as elected officials working to chase down that elusive standard of perfection, which is exactly what I have done and will continue to do if granted a second term. In any public-private partnership, as many cases of development and ordnance modification are, we must critically scrutinize every inch of proposed policy, work collaboratively with our partners at all levels of government to address community concerns, and act in the best interest of the community. Rome was not built in a day, and neither was Durham. But with every new day, we are presented with an incredible chance to deliver for Durham and its people.”
Q: What specific additional zoning reforms would you like to see in the new UDO for Durham to meet its housing goals?
"I have and will continue to support a zoning plan that allows us to continue the work that we have accomplished in the prior to years, including but not limited to new construction with negotiated affordable housing allocations, preservation of existing housing, N.O.A.H. Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing, A.D.U. Accessory Dwelling Units, social Housing concepts with shared common space, bolstering mixed income housing option with Durham Housing Authority.”
Q: Do you support by-right permitting— (where cities set clear, objective rules) and projects that follow those rules can move forward without subjective delays? Why or why not?
"I am admittedly skeptical of any arrangement where the city cedes authority to influence the permitting process to ensure public safety and prosperity. I think by-right permitting is good in theory, but I also see many ways in which it could be abused in practice."
Q: What specific permitting processes in Durham do you believe slow housing production or make infill harder? What would you change?
“One of the lags in the process of permitting is simply navigating the multiple departments/agencies with a 2 week signing window post inspection. What I would change is actually happening; bringing all development engagement under one umbrella and forming a more ombudsman approach within the customer service experience.”
Q: Do you support increased public funding for subsidized or income-restricted affordable housing in Durham? Why or why not?
“I do support increased public funding for subsidized/income-restricted housing in Durham because I think it’s the morally correct thing to do and I strive to combat homelessness and housing insecurity in whatever areas they present themselves, but I also support–and have lead the charge for–encouraging developers and other private entities to utilize their funds to help expand affordable housing availability across the Durham community.“
Q: Is there a specific type of affordable housing, public investment, or nonprofit housing model you’re especially passionate about? Why?
"Absolutely. The city of Durham has a Triple A Credit Bond Rating. If we were to partner with capable nonprofits by “backing” them in markets for “Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing,” it would afford them a much more formidable chance in acquisition opportunities. Acquiring apartment buildings that are coming to term would create turnaround housing units within 90 days, contributing to the city’s overall housing stock at a higher percentage than what we traditionally gain from new developments. This is using P3’s to mitigate growth and need."
Q: Do you think Durham should revisit or reduce the taxes and fees it places on new housing, particularly small-scale or affordable projects?
"I will always be in favor of utilizing Durham’s tax policies to best serve the needs of the community. If presented with facts that show a tax revision would assist in the proliferation of affordable housing projects, I would certainly be open to supporting such a proposal."
Q: What incentives (fee reductions, grants, technical support, etc.) could Durham offer to help more small-scale or community-based housing get built?
"We have started support for small scale development by removing parking minimums, addressing stormwater mandates, and expediting projects that offer high affordable housing options."
Q: Historically, some of Durham’s wealthier neighborhoods have resisted change while lower-income areas have absorbed more than their share of growth. Do you support housing policies that promote more equitable, citywide development?
"Absolutely. Equity has been one of my main points of focus during my first term, and it will continue to be a priority in the second term."
Q: While many tenant protection tools are limited by state law, what local tenant protections or renter support policies do you support or hope to implement?
"I hope to implement a preliminary review process for tenant and landlord mitigation; specifically case management. This would reduce court appearances and legal fees, adding insult to financial strain."
Q: What does pro-housing locally mean to you?
“Mass benefit with the least amount of burden. Cities grow, and when they don’t, they die. I often hear about desires to keep taxes low while also restricting growth. This is logically misaligned. Expanding our tax base is a way to share the burden of cost for a decent quality of life in Durham."
Anjanee Bell
Q: Do you believe Durham is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes. Durham is experiencing a housing shortage—most acutely at the price points where people live. The gap is not only how many homes exist, it is which homes, where, and for whom. Deep affordability. Rents and entry-level prices outpace local wages; long waitlists for subsidized units signal severe undersupply for seniors, working families, and returning citizens.
Missing-middle and starter homes. Zoning, land costs, and financing favor large, high-end projects while older starter homes are torn down or flipped, shrinking NOAH. Location and fit. Too few homes are near transit, jobs, and schools, or sized for multigenerational and single-parent households.
Loss and displacement pressure. Investor acquisitions and teardown cycles remove naturally affordable units, destabilizing long-time residents. People and purpose first. The solution is diverse, mixed-income housing opportunities—gentle density like ADUs and duplexes, preservation of NOAH, and expansion of public and nonprofit housing—delivered with development without displacement and high-quality, climate-ready design. Affordability also requires good jobs and wages so residents can remain in Durham. This is how we build a better Durham for everyone."
Q: Are there any current policies or regulations that you believe make it harder to build housing in Durham? What would you change?
“Yes. Several rules and processes make community-rooted, mixed-income housing harder than it should be—especially small, starter, and deeply affordable homes.
What makes it harder today:
Case-by-case rezonings and negotiated conditions that create uncertainty and cost. Parking minimums in transit-served areas that raise costs and consume buildable land. Lot and form constraints that suppress “missing-middle” options. Fragmented, sequential reviews across agencies and utilities with unclear timeline ownership. One-size-fits-all fees that hit small and affordable projects hardest. Adaptive-reuse friction for office, motel, and faith-property conversions. Limited by-right capacity near jobs, schools, and frequent transit.
What I will change:
By-right gentle density where it fits. Allow duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, cottage courts, and ADUs by right near transit, schools, and jobs with clear form standards. Right-sized parking without paywalls. End blanket minimums in Frequent Transit Areas; require practical Parking & Mobility Plans; enable shared and unbundled parking; protect neighbors with Residential Parking Districts and guest passes; preserve ADA access; no new meters on residential blocks. Unlock small lots and lot splits and enable tiny-home villages with strong life-safety codes.
One-stop “Green Lane” with service levels. Concurrent reviews, a single accountable project manager, optional third-party plan check, and time-certain targets (e.g., first completeness check in 10 business days; consolidated comments in 20; resubmittal review in 10), plus a public dashboard. Pre-approved plan sets for ADUs, duplex/triplex prototypes, and courtyard apartments.
Right-size fees with predictability. Scale to unit size and income level; allow deferrals for income-restricted units; publish a two-year fee calendar so teams can underwrite with confidence. Make adaptive reuse simple and fast. A single change-of-use pathway with life-safety focus, optional third-party inspections, and target timelines. Protect Durham’s zoning leverage where impacts are large. By-right projects that meet objective standards will move forward without discretionary delay. For exceptionally large map amendments (defined by clear thresholds for size, units, or intensity), use a published community-benefits menu tied to deeper affordability, climate readiness, context-sensitive design, and local hiring.
Collaboration by design. Early, structured input with Preservation Durham, neighborhood leaders, faith institutions, and mission-driven developers—aligned with equity-impact reviews—so solutions are co-created, not retrofitted. Align infrastructure with housing on priority corridors. Public land for public good via long-term ground leases, community land trusts, and local-developer set-asides for permanent mixed-income affordability.
All reforms will be paired with energy-efficient, climate-ready standards so Durham builds more—and builds better."
Q: What are some pro-housing policies or specific housing developments you’ve supported in the past that you’d like voters to know about?
“Pro-housing policies and developments I will champion:
As a candidate, I have been clear about the types of policies and projects I will champion to add homes and protect people. I will advance diverse, mixed-income housing opportunities with strong anti-displacement standards and high-quality, climate-ready design. Examples include ADUs and gentle density near transit; acquisition-rehab to preserve NOAH; adaptive reuse of underused motels, offices, and faith properties; and public- and nonprofit-led housing on public land under long-term ground lease. I will prioritize community land trusts, limited-equity co-ops, rent-to-own pathways, and permanent supportive housing—especially for seniors, working families, and returning citizens. On major rezonings, I will use Durham’s zoning leverage to secure enforceable community benefits—deeper affordability, quality design, green infrastructure, and local hiring—so growth uplifts legacy and builds a better Durham for everyone.”
Q: Durham passed major zoning reforms in 2019 (EHC) and 2024 (SCAD) that eliminated exclusionary single-family zoning, removed parking mandates, and made it easier to build small commercial and infill housing. Do you support keeping these reforms in place? Why or why not?
"Yes to the inclusive direction; refine for results. Ending exclusionary single-family zoning, enabling small-scale infill, removing blanket parking minimums near frequent transit, and allowing neighborhood-serving uses are steps worth keeping. However, I did not support SCAD as passed because it emphasized speed over affordability, accountability, and community voice. I will keep the core pro-housing elements and refine the rules to: require stronger anti-displacement tools and right-to-return in City-supported projects; fund preservation of NOAH; set clear curb management that does not create paywalls; and preserve Council’s zoning leverage on exceptionally large map amendments through a published community-benefits menu, while keeping by-right predictability and speed for projects that meet objective standards.”
Q: What specific additional zoning reforms would you like to see in the new UDO for Durham to meet its housing goals?
"By-right gentle density near transit, schools, and jobs: duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, cottage courts, courtyard apartments, and ADUs with clear form standards. Established Neighborhoods framework to discourage teardowns of NOAH, offer conservation or local historic districts where communities want them, and apply demolition-delay tools. Adaptive reuse made easy: expedited change-of-use for office-to-housing, motel conversions, and faith-based/nonprofit projects. Neighborhood-serving corner uses: small groceries, childcare, and clinics within walking distance. Right-sized parking without paywalls and ADA priority.
Climate-ready standards: tree-canopy and green-infrastructure requirements, EV-ready and solar-ready provisions, flood-resilient siting and materials. Public land for public good: zoning that supports mixed-income communities on long-term ground lease and community land trusts.
Equity-impact review, codified and time-certain: a checklist with a fixed review window, published at pre-application, aligning entitlements with measurable anti-displacement and affordability outcomes—no moving goalposts."
Q: Do you support by-right permitting— (where cities set clear, objective rules) and projects that follow those rules can move forward without subjective delays? Why or why not?
“Yes. Predictable, by-right standards reduce cost and time for small builders, nonprofit partners, and mixed-income housing. I support a form-based, by-right approach with objective design, height, and setback rules; strong life-safety and climate-ready standards; and clear, upfront community-benefit expectations. For significant map amendments with large impacts, Council discretion will remain so Durham retains leverage to secure binding public benefits.”
Q: What specific permitting processes in Durham do you believe slow housing production or make infill harder? What would you change?
“Pain points: fragmented, sequential reviews; unclear timeline ownership; utility-capacity surprises; historic-district and change-of-use friction; fees that burden small projects.
Fixes: a one-stop Green Lane with time-certain service levels; pre-approved plans; early, all-agency pre-application meetings; a public tracking dashboard; utility-coordination compacts; and climate-ready checklists that resolve stormwater and heat-mitigation needs early, not late."
Q: Do you support increased public funding for subsidized or income-restricted affordable housing in Durham? Why or why not?
“Yes. Market production alone will not reach deep affordability. I support renewed housing bonds; an acquisition-preservation fund for NOAH; gap financing for nonprofit and mission-driven developers; and strategic use of public land under long-term ground lease to deliver permanent, mixed-income affordability built to high-quality, energy-efficient standards.”
Q: Is there a specific type of affordable housing, public investment, or nonprofit housing model you’re especially passionate about? Why?
“Community Land Trusts and long-term ground leases to keep homes affordable across generations. Limited-equity co-ops and rent-to-own to build stability and wealth for working families. Permanent supportive housing and motel conversions paired with services. Employer-assisted and faith-based partnerships that add mixed-income homes near jobs and transit.
These align with development without displacement, preservation of NOAH, and climate-ready design."
Q: Do you think Durham should revisit or reduce the taxes and fees it places on new housing, particularly small-scale or affordable projects?
“Yes. Fees should be scaled to unit size and income level and aligned with City goals. I support waivers or reductions for long-term affordable units; deferral of certain charges to certificate of occupancy; streamlined connection costs for modest infill; and green-building incentives for energy- and water-efficient projects.”
Q: What incentives (fee reductions, grants, technical support, etc.) could Durham offer to help more small-scale or community-based housing get built?
“Small-Developer Toolkit: pre-approved plans, step-by-step guides, and City navigators.
Fee relief and micro-grants for code-compliant ADUs, duplexes/triplexes, and preservation rehabs.
Shared-parking template agreements and brokerage with faith institutions and offices to unlock small sites near transit without paving homes or creating paywalls.
Acquisition-preservation loans for local owners and nonprofits to keep NOAH in place.
$1 ground-lease opportunities on select public parcels to CLTs and mission-driven builders.
Green-building bonuses (fast-track and grants) for climate-ready projects."
Q: Historically, some of Durham’s wealthier neighborhoods have resisted change while lower-income areas have absorbed more than their share of growth. Do you support housing policies that promote more equitable, citywide development?
“Yes. People and purpose first. Every neighborhood must be part of the solution. I support gentle density and mixed-income options in high-opportunity areas, strong anti-displacement investments where burden has been highest, and transparent metrics—such as a NOAH Preservation Scorecard—so growth is shared citywide. Collaboration with neighborhoods, builders, and nonprofits will guide design and ensure better outcomes block by block.”
Q: While many tenant protection tools are limited by state law, what local tenant protections or renter support policies do you support or hope to implement?
“Eviction Diversion and Right-to-Counsel funding with early legal help, mediation, and rental assistance. Proactive housing code enforcement for habitability (including heat and cooling) with rapid hazard remediation. Relocation assistance when City enforcement actions displace tenants through no fault of their own. Problem-property focus and landlord education to correct chronic violations. First-look policies on City-assisted properties for tenants and local nonprofits. Source-of-income acceptance in City-funded housing and City contracting.
Renter resource center with counseling on rights, utility relief, and pathways to homeownership. All City-assisted housing will be conditioned on just-cause protections, longer notice windows for rent increases, and compliance with health and safety standards—measured and enforced."
Q: What does pro-housing locally mean to you?
“More homes and more equity at the same time. People and purpose first. It means diverse, mixed-income, well-located, climate-ready homes; preservation of NOAH; and protection from displacement. It means aligning zoning, permitting, public land, and funding with access, equity, and wages, because affordability depends on income and rent. It means collaboration—with neighborhoods, Preservation Durham, nonprofits, employers, and builders—to expand real opportunities for everyone who chooses Durham. Durham is moving fast; it must also move fair—so we build a better Durham for everyone.”
Rafiq Zaidi
Did not respond.
Angela (Janie Love) Reddick
Did not respond.
Lloyd A. Phillips
Did not respond.
Pablo Friedmann
Did not respond.
Durham City Council Ward I
DeDreana Freeman (incumbent)
Did not respond.
Elijah King
Q: Do you believe Durham is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“In short, yes. The fact is Durham does not have sufficient housing supply to meet the demand at all income levels. While I acknowledge a vacancy rate among luxury units, I also recognize that these are just out of the reach of everyday Durhamites like myself. Durham needs to be building more units at the price points that working folks can afford.”
Q: Are there any current policies or regulations that you believe make it harder to build housing in Durham? What would you change?
“In short, yes. Expanding Housing Choices (EHC) and Simplifying Codes for Affordable Development (SCAD) were steps in the right direction to streamline our building process here in Durham. While I am concerned that broad, unchecked upzoning (without guarantees for affordability, tenant protections, or anti-displacement measures) will accelerate gentrification, I also believe that density is necessary to ensure affordability, connectivity, and protection of greenspaces.
I would like to streamline the process for upzoning when appropriate without giving blanket approval for high density development in historically underinvested, Black and brown communities."
Q: What are some pro-housing policies or specific housing developments you’ve supported in the past that you’d like voters to know about?
"A lot of housing developments, especially the ones that end up in the news or on the pages of reddit and substack, are honestly in the gray area, which is to say there are reasons to both approve and deny requests for rezoning. As a candidate and not a sitting City Council member, I’m most interested in the votes that should have been easy. Fox Crossing II, for example, was a project that, while approved, was voted against by one of my opponents on Council, and another on Planning Commission. Both voiced the somewhat valid concern of connectivity, and while I generally agree with the need for connectivity in new developments, this particular development was limited by location and surrounding infrastructure. By this metric, no development could have reasonably met this criteria, allowing unattainable perfection to cheat Durhamites who don’t own our homes, like myself, out of what we need. Had the majority of City Council denied this zoning request to develop within the Urban Growth Boundary, Durham would have missed out on 320 units that, while 95% would not be classified as “affordable”, would be more attainable than many of the other options before us.
In our current political landscape, there is no way to construct sufficient public housing to meet the needs of our residents. As such, we have to find ways to make the system work for builders as well as our residents. This isn’t theoretical to me. I moved 11 times before age 18, I’ve seen an eviction notice, and I am unlikely to ever own my own home. The fact of the matter is that many of the folks on Council currently (and some of those vying to be on Council) are in a position to vote no on such developments because they don’t have to live with the increased rent that happens as a result of too few units for too many people. Longtime Durham residents, seniors, young folks, and wage workers do, and those are the communities I’m fighting for."
Q: Durham passed major zoning reforms in 2019 (EHC) and 2024 (SCAD) that eliminated exclusionary single-family zoning, removed parking mandates, and made it easier to build small commercial and infill housing. Do you support keeping these reforms in place? Why or why not?
“Yes. The flexibility provided to developers allows us to meet Durham’s growing needs while still maintaining regulations on the things that matter most like the environment.”
Q: What specific additional zoning reforms would you like to see in the new UDO for Durham to meet its housing goals?
“I believe the new UDO must expand housing options while protecting our communities from displacement. That means building more “missing middle” housing like duplexes, triplexes, and ADUs, especially near transit and job centers, so working families have real choices beyond luxury apartments. I want to continue to evaluate Durham’s zoning and permitting processes so we identify areas of improvement, as we did with parking minimums in the adoption of the SCAD amendments, and incentivize building the housing Durham needs. Durham’s zoning should work for the people who live here now and the neighbors we’ll welcome in the future.”
Q: Do you support by-right permitting— (where cities set clear, objective rules) and projects that follow those rules can move forward without subjective delays? Why or why not?
“In general, by-right permitting allows developers to know at the outset of the project what the rules are instead of moving through a series of hearings where they may or may not get approval for the zoning change. Durham needs to do a better job of zoning areas based on our place-type map and comprehensive plan, laying out a clear rulebook for developers to follow and structure their projects accordingly.
While I am generally opposed to bureaucratic red tape, I am also concerned that allowing all projects to proceed by right would result in development that does not include the affordable housing that Durham needs."
Q: What specific permitting processes in Durham do you believe slow housing production or make infill harder? What would you change?
“I think the biggest problem is the need for rezoning in many neighborhoods, even for small multi-family developments such as duplexes, triplexes, and small apartment buildings. While I am deeply in favor of community input, I also recognize that some input boils down to little more than folks not wanting “those people” to destroy their property values. In those cases, I am always going to side with providing more affordable and attainable housing.”
Q: Do you support increased public funding for subsidized or income-restricted affordable housing in Durham? Why or why not?
“Yes. In fact, I support another affordable housing bond to ensure that everyone in Durham has a place to call home.”
Q: Is there a specific type of affordable housing, public investment, or nonprofit housing model you’re especially passionate about? Why?
“While I support public and nonprofit investments in affordable housing, I am also deeply aware that these are largely unsustainable. In fact, both of these are short term solutions, albeit necessary ones. Long term, I want to see increased incomes through economic development while simultaneously ensuring streamlined development so that housing supply can keep pace with growth.”
Q: Do you think Durham should revisit or reduce the taxes and fees it places on new housing, particularly small-scale or affordable projects?
“Yes, Durham should revisit fees — but only in a way that directly supports affordable and small-scale housing. We can’t give blanket breaks to big developers; the savings must translate into affordability for Durham families.”
Q: What incentives (fee reductions, grants, technical support, etc.) could Durham offer to help more small-scale or community-based housing get built?
“During my small business tour, which included local, small-scale developers, I noticed an overarching pattern. Bureaucratic red tape is killing small businesses of all types, but especially builders. Raleigh’s approach, condensing all business support info into a single, easy-to-use PDF, is exactly the kind of streamlined communication Durham needs. A more functional local government would create centralized, user-friendly tools and ensure consistent messaging so that entrepreneurs don’t get bogged down in the red tape.
We need to create a space where small businesses not only have a seat at the table, but have a chance to build it. Several cities across the United States have established small business commissions or advisory councils led by local entrepreneurs to strengthen the voice of small businesses in city governance. Similarly, Durham can, and should, establish a similar small business commission, including local small-scale developer voice, to ensure the city is able to identify and correct potential issues."
Q: Historically, some of Durham’s wealthier neighborhoods have resisted change while lower-income areas have absorbed more than their share of growth. Do you support housing policies that promote more equitable, citywide development?
“Yes.”
Q: While many tenant protection tools are limited by state law, what local tenant protections or renter support policies do you support or hope to implement?
“First, I think tenants are protected when they have options. In our current housing crisis, tenants have no alternatives and landlords are acutely aware of this. This leads to predatory practices. Step one is to empower tenants by giving them choices. We can only do that by increasing the supply of affordable and attainable units.
Second, Durham needs to literally invest in our residents. We can do this by investing in eviction diversion, but also through downpayment assistance that would allow tenants to begin building wealth.
Third, part of the job of a City Councilmember is advocacy. There is no reason to sit on our hands locally because Raleigh has prevented us from doing the things that our residents need. In fact, my experience as Third Vice Chair of the NC Democratic Party has prepared me to advocate for Durhamites on the state level. We’ve seen some success on this front with a whole slate of bipartisan pro-housing bills in the legislature this cycle. If elected (and even if not!), I intend to elevate the stories of Durham residents to move meaningful policy forward."
Q: What does pro-housing locally mean to you?
“As somebody who knows what it’s like to get off the school bus to an eviction notice, who has felt what it’s like to sleep on their pastor’s living room floor because it was literally the only option, being pro-housing isn’t political; it’s personal. And while I appreciate the Durham City Council members who advocate for the needs of folks like me, I’m ready to have “folks like me” actually shaping policy ourselves. Even members of council who may have grown up similar to me are currently homeowners who don’t have to live with the consequences of voting no time and time again. And while I know that not every project is perfect and some of them need to be denied, I also recognize that saying no to housing, however well-intentioned, results in kids just like me coming home from school to eviction notices. So being pro-housing locally is about creating systems that don’t just allow for housing development, but actively encourage and foster the housing development that Durham needs.”
Andrea Cazales
Did not respond.
Matt Kopac
Q: Do you believe Durham is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“I’m not certain Durham is experiencing a housing shortage, but we seem to have an imbalance of supply and demand. We have done better in recent years to build more homes for people, and median rents and home prices have begun to stabilize. However, affordability remains one of our greatest challenges, with dramatic increases in rents and home prices over the past ten years which have resulted in significant displacement and have left our marginalized neighbors severely cost burdened and without good alternatives. We have high vacancy rates for higher priced apartments, but we are lacking in supply for more affordable and accessible housing, where we still see strong demand and increasing prices.”
Q: Are there any current policies or regulations that you believe make it harder to build housing in Durham? What would you change?
“Yes, restrictive zoning in high-demand areas has made it harder to add small-scale incremental density. In addition, our byzantine permit and site plan approval process has made it harder to build housing and has made housing more expensive. I would allow more flexibility around height, set-back and lot coverage, permit more multi-family and mixed use projects in suitable areas, and would seek to streamline the permitting process. I believe it is possible to maintain neighborhood character while meeting the need for more diverse housing stock in Durham, including more affordable and more accessible housing.“
Q: What are some pro-housing policies or specific housing developments you’ve supported in the past that you’d like voters to know about?
“I supported the $95M Affordable Housing Bond, Expanding Housing Choices to allow more ADU development, and advocated along with the Environmental Affairs Board for elements in SCAD like more housing types and eliminating parking minimums. I also have a background as an affordable housing and community development advocate in Washington, DC, where I fought for federal support for communities like Durham.”
Q: Durham passed major zoning reforms in 2019 (EHC) and 2024 (SCAD) that eliminated exclusionary single-family zoning, removed parking mandates, and made it easier to build small commercial and infill housing. Do you support keeping these reforms in place? Why or why not?
“I do, yes. These changes were valuable tools to reduce displacement of low-income residents, allow incremental evolution in our neighborhoods to accommodate new residents, and bring greater vitality to our urban areas, while maintaining neighborhood character. They also make our communities more walkable and connected and can reduce pressure on growth at the periphery of the city.”
Q: What specific additional zoning reforms would you like to see in the new UDO for Durham to meet its housing goals?
“In the new UDO, I would like to see more missing middle housing, more mixed use development, and expanded allowances for cottage homes/accessory dwelling units. I would like this l to be combined with affordable housing incentives and possibly inclusionary zoning (like what Chapel Hill has been able to maintain despite state preemption) to build our stock of affordable housing.”
Q: Do you support by-right permitting— (where cities set clear, objective rules) and projects that follow those rules can move forward without subjective delays? Why or why not?
“There must be a balance in where and how we expand by-right permitting, and Durham would benefit from this change. A process that is rules-based, clear and predictable helps us build more homes, reduce costs – which can benefit homeowners and renters, particularly in the case of affordable units – all while maintaining compliance with local development guidelines.”
Q: What specific permitting processes in Durham do you believe slow housing production or make infill harder? What would you change?
“The special use permit and site plan review process can lengthen approval times and increase costs, including in cases like duplex conversions and infill projects. Building permit application rules that require review by multiple city departments can add weeks or months to project timelines. Parking requirements can also make infill harder, though that has been addressed at least temporarily in Durham. I would allow more rules-based by-right permitting for qualifying projects, streamline building and site plan reviews, and maintain no parking minimums.”
Q: Do you support increased public funding for subsidized or income-restricted affordable housing in Durham? Why or why not?
“Absolutely. Durham needs a comprehensive affordability strategy, including public funding for subsidized affordable housing. Durham has already shown leadership with a willingness to fill the gap left by disinvestment at the federal and state level with initiatives like Forever Home from the $95M affordable housing bond. I also support community land trusts, public-private partnerships on public land, and strategic acquisitions of land for more affordable units. While most residents will have to compete for housing in the private market and we need a plan for that, we must still do everything we can to provide more affordable options for people at 80%, 60%, and 30% of area median income. Especially with costs going up so significantly in recent years, it is hard to afford to live in Durham. Even someone making a living wage of $25/hour only makes about $52,000 a year, or 41% of the area median income. This is an entry-level salary for a teacher or a firefighter – we must do what we can to provide options for these residents to be able to live in Durham.”
Q: Is there a specific type of affordable housing, public investment, or nonprofit housing model you’re especially passionate about? Why?
“We need all the models to try and address the challenge we face.
Keeping people in their homes is a top priority, so we need to fund eviction diversion, legal aid, repairs, and energy-efficiency improvements. These alone aren’t sustainable, long-term interventions, so we need more subsidized affordable housing like through land trusts and pathways to economic mobility.
One program that stands out is the Durham Affordable Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Loan Pilot Program. I would like to see us expand this revolving loan program for ADUs and other kinds of missing middle housing, along with training and support for local developers. I want to see more of our local housing needs built by our residents and local developers. "
Q: Do you think Durham should revisit or reduce the taxes and fees it places on new housing, particularly small-scale or affordable projects?
“Yes. Right now, due to restrictive local zoning, large-scale outside capital, and federal policy, large scale developers that can afford lawyers are privileged in our local development process. We need to find ways to make it easiest for small-scale and more affordable projects to succeed. I’m not as sure about how we would be able to reduce taxes, but fees are a clear opportunity area to priorities the kinds of developments we want and need most. Some of the fees Durham can reduce or waive include building permit review fees, site plan fees, and water and sewer utility connection and extension fees. These would help reduce the cost basis for small-scale and affordable projects.“
Q: What incentives (fee reductions, grants, technical support, etc.) could Durham offer to help more small-scale or community-based housing get built?
“I have touched on these topics in prior questions, but I’ll expand here that I’d like to see greater partnership with Durham Tech to help train and support the next generation of local builders, while also offering pre-approved designs that can be fast-tracked through the permitting process.”
Q: Historically, some of Durham’s wealthier neighborhoods have resisted change while lower-income areas have absorbed more than their share of growth. Do you support housing policies that promote more equitable, citywide development?
“Yes.”
Q: While many tenant protection tools are limited by state law, what local tenant protections or renter support policies do you support or hope to implement?
“While Durham’s ability to provide tenant protection is limited by state law, there are meaningful steps I will pursue locally. It’s critical that the city rigorously enforce housing maintenance codes and tenant complaint processes through Neighborhood Improvement Services. One key action should be increasing fees and penalties for landlords who fail to comply with housing code orders to incentivize better property management. To protect tenants from retaliation and empower them, the city must expand tenant education programs and legal aid access, helping renters understand and assert their rights.”
Q: What does pro-housing locally mean to you?
“Pro-local housing to me means more building more incremental, small-scale housing development, built by local people, that is responsive to local demand, rather than promoting large-scale, top-down growth models.”
Sheryl Smith
Did not respond.
Samaria McKenzie
Did not respond.
Durham City Council Ward II
Mark-Anthony Middleton (incumbent)
Q: Do you believe Durham is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Like other American cities experiencing steady growth, Durham is challenged by a housing supply stock that can accommodate that growth. My belief is that if we don't continue to build we will experience a shortage. This is why this election is so critical.”
Q: Are there any current policies or regulations that you believe make it harder to build housing in Durham? What would you change?
“While scrubbing for efficiency is always in order, there aren't any particular policies or regulations that I would consider overly burdensome or at odds with industry best practices. However, I do believe that the subjective views and positions of voting policymakers can and at times have made it harder to build housing in Durham.”
Q: What are some pro-housing policies or specific housing developments you’ve supported in the past that you’d like voters to know about?
“I'm very proud of my past and present support of using city owned land to expand our city's affordable housing stock. Before being elected I was one of the grassroots leaders of the movement that led to the Willard Street and Ashton Place Affordable Housing initiatives. It was very gratifying to be able to cast a vote in favor of those projects after assuming office. I am also proud of my advocacy in ensuring that the redevelopment of 505 W. Chapel Hill St. includes a robust affordable housing component. Finally, the market rate projects that I supported rezoning for consistently contain proffers that accrue to the public good that were not part of the original proposal prior to my engagement and inquiries.“
Q: Durham passed major zoning reforms in 2019 (EHC) and 2024 (SCAD) that eliminated exclusionary single-family zoning, removed parking mandates, and made it easier to build small commercial and infill housing. Do you support keeping these reforms in place? Why or why not?
“I was proud to cast affirmative votes for both of these significant reforms and yes I do support keeping them. Both of these policies expand Durham's toolbox to manage urbanization without doing violence to our city's core values.”
Q: What specific additional zoning reforms would you like to see in the new UDO for Durham to meet its housing goals?
“I'd like to experiment with a more robust density bonus. I'm also curious about what requirements can be relaxed (not eliminated) for development that is LEED compliant and dense infill projects within the Urban Growth Boundary.“
Q: Do you support by-right permitting— (where cities set clear, objective rules) and projects that follow those rules can move forward without subjective delays? Why or why not?
“By-right permitting if clearly delineated seems to be a logical and organic extension of by-right development itself. There are always instances where a clarifying or corrective inquiry may be required as even autopilot needs to be disengaged at times. However, I am fully committed to efficiency and experiency in delivering housing to our residents. “
Q: What specific permitting processes in Durham do you believe slow housing production or make infill harder? What would you change?
“Over the years I've had to navigate the tension between the reasonableness of our permitting processes vs the speed of staff responsiveness. As the industry goes, I'm not certain that Durham is an outlier in terms of what we ask but I am certain there are steps we should explore to expedite our process. By way of change I would seek a prioritization of infill projects in light of public concern about "car centric suburban sprawl" and the urban growth boundary contained in our new Comprehensive Plan.“
Q: Do you support increased public funding for subsidized or income-restricted affordable housing in Durham? Why or why not?
“Insofar as the state of North Carolina doesn't allow for inclusionary zoning local governments have to put their money where their values are. I am a long time proponent of affordable housing and a truth teller when it comes to the dynamics of captalism and market forces. Durham already taxes itself to build affordable housing and has on an ad hoc basis used public funding to subsidize housing. My support for increased public funding mirrors my advocacy for developers to offer more when seeking to do business in Durham.”
Q: Is there a specific type of affordable housing, public investment, or nonprofit housing model you’re especially passionate about? Why?
“Perhaps the most dramatic and effective public investment is when Durham decides to donate city owned land for Affordable Housing initiatives. In our economic system it is the most direct on ramp to shaping the Durham the government wants to see. Not the exclusive on ramp, but the most direct. The Willard Street and Ashton Place projects are shining examples of a public private partnership that honors Durham's commitment to thriving economically diverse neighborhoods.“
Q: Do you think Durham should revisit or reduce the taxes and fees it places on new housing, particularly small-scale or affordable projects?
“Progressive and tiered taxation is something that has long been dreamed of in Durham relative to a number of different variables including agevand income. I'd have to explore the legal guardrails with respect to taxes but I am certainly open to a revisitation of our fee structure particularly connected to affordable projects and dense infill projects within our urban growth boundary.”
Q: What incentives (fee reductions, grants, technical support, etc.) could Durham offer to help more small-scale or community-based housing get built?
“This is a simple proposition - money. Technical support could also certainly be provided for community based housing. Durham's voracious appetite for dense and plentiful housing sometimes creates tension between our growth and many residents' desire for small scale and community based housing. These types of projects, similar to affordable housing, could be greatly aided by the donation of city owned land along with technical support and expertise.”
Q: Historically, some of Durham’s wealthier neighborhoods have resisted change while lower-income areas have absorbed more than their share of growth. Do you support housing policies that promote more equitable, citywide development?
“Absolutely. Perhaps one of my more controversial defenses of SCAD was that some of the pushback was not about helping minority neighborhoods but rather preserving the fabric of historical wealthier neighborhoods that have not changed. I have often said from the dais that I'm one of the most influential people in our city and I can't insulate my own neighborhood from the impacts of growth. All of Durham must be prepared to be impacted by urbanization and development.“
Q: While many tenant protection tools are limited by state law, what local tenant protections or renter support policies do you support or hope to implement?
“I believe that a landlord roundtable convened by the mayor and/or council could be a very helpful tool in improving the tenant experience. A city subsidized security deposit fund is something that should be explored in addressing some if the issues potential tenants experience when using Section 8 vouchers.“
Q: What does pro-housing locally mean to you?
“It means that no neighborhood, district, or zip code is exempt from new neighbors and varied housing types. I'm not talking about willy nilly hodgepodge projects that do violence to the "character" of a community; but rather thoughtful projects that honor the old and welcome the new simultaneously. It's not always easy but we can not deem some area as "off limits" to welcoming new Durmites.“
Shanetta Burris
Did not respond.
Ashley N. Robbins
Q: Do you believe Durham is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“No, I do not believe there is a housing shortage. I believe the housing shortage is manufactured to benefit developers, venture capitalists, and investors. Durham continues to build luxury, high priced apartments downtown in spite of high vacancy rates and the dire need for more housing for poor and working-class residents. These units are vacant because they are not affordable! The supply and demand, "trickle down" approach to housing is ineffective. Nothing trickles down but water and waste. Building more housing only incentivizes developers and speculative investors who buy properties not to live in but to rent out and sell for profit. None of this helps with affordability.”
Q: Are there any current policies or regulations that you believe make it harder to build housing in Durham? What would you change?
First, I believe capitalism is the primary source of all of our socioeconomic issues, including housing. Zoning and land use policies make building housing in Durham a long and sometimes arduous process. Hopefully with the UDO rewrite, these policies will be taken into careful consideration with changes that are beneficial to the community, not just to developers. Material costs have also gone up significantly since the the pandemic, making construction costs higher.
Q: What are some pro-housing policies or specific housing developments you’ve supported in the past that you’d like voters to know about?
"I was a facilitator for a housing policy work group as part of Engage Durham, serving as an engagement ambassador and contributed to writing the Comprehensive Plan. I support the Walltown small area plan that was recently approved by City Council. I believe other communities in Durham, specifically historically Black and poor/working-class neighborhoods should proactively organize around what type of future they want for their community and see if small area plans address their concerns about development and gentrification."
Q: Durham passed major zoning reforms in 2019 (EHC) and 2024 (SCAD) that eliminated exclusionary single-family zoning, removed parking mandates, and made it easier to build small commercial and infill housing. Do you support keeping these reforms in place? Why or why not?
“Although EHC and SCAD reforms may have been initiated to address housing affordability, like many policies, they have the ability to be exploited by unscrupulous entities who are just looking to make money and do not have a genuine interest in addressing the needs of Durham residents. I do not think a one-size fits all approach can be made for housing initiatives as there are different needs for different communities and neighborhoods. Our policies should take this into account. Zoning reforms should prioritize community needs, not simply reduce and remove barriers that make it easier for developers to further enrich themselves. Before taking a definitive stance on these reforms, I would want to confer with experts, examine the data carefully, and get feedback from the community.”
Q: What specific additional zoning reforms would you like to see in the new UDO for Durham to meet its housing goals?
“I would like to see more public land ownership, community land trusts, land value tax policies, exclusion of single-family homes and gentrification, collective land use planning that centers residents and actively involves them in the process. I support limiting minimum lot size requirements, and reconsidering parking mandates (contingent on the needs of specific communities). I support more small area plans created with intentional engagement with residents who will be most impacted.”
Q: Do you support by-right permitting— (where cities set clear, objective rules) and projects that follow those rules can move forward without subjective delays? Why or why not?
“I believe that some of the red tape should be cut for projects that abide by the clear objectives, however, it is still important to have community input and feedback to ensure resident's concerns are adequately heard and addressed. This doesn't need to be a long, drawn out process but the community engagement is imperative.“
Q: What specific permitting processes in Durham do you believe slow housing production or make infill harder? What would you change?
“I do not feel qualified to answer this question without consulting with the Planning Department and other experts.“
Q: Do you support increased public funding for subsidized or income-restricted affordable housing in Durham? Why or why not?
“Yes! I believe public housing is the real solution to the housing crisis. Privately owned housing does not serve public interests and exists to generate more wealth for developers and investors. This wealth does not trickle down to the community. "Affordable" actually has no real meaning. Affordable to who?“
Q: Is there a specific type of affordable housing, public investment, or nonprofit housing model you’re especially passionate about? Why?
"I actually believe that more social or public housing is the only way to secure long-term housing affordability. Affordable housing is unattainable under capitalism. Housing policy under capitalism is predicated on fattening the pockets and portfolios of developers, mortgage lenders, and landlords without regard for the needs of the poor and working-class. Many of our pension funds and investments are linked to real estate, so there is a vested interest in maintaining the systems that keep housing unaffordable and unattainable. Like many cities across the country, Durham relies heavily on enticing private investors to build ""affordable"" housing by changing zoning laws. These developers often do not deliver and receive a much higher return on their ""investments"" than the communities they disrupt.
The long-term solution to housing affordability is socialized housing owned and operated by local governments and non-profits with REAL community connections (not organizations that exemplify the nonprofit industrial complex and hoard resources). As long as private equity is responsible for housing, it will not be affordable. Under our current housing models, profit is the motive, not people! Socialized housing ensures residents are not cost-burdened, spending more than 30% of their income on housing-related expenditures."
Q: Do you think Durham should revisit or reduce the taxes and fees it places on new housing, particularly small-scale or affordable projects?
“Yes, Durham should revisit the tax structure of affordable projects if it is in the public's interest and the community benefits are aligned with community needs.”
Q: What incentives (fee reductions, grants, technical support, etc.) could Durham offer to help more small-scale or community-based housing get built?
“Durham should reduce applicable fees, provide tax incentives, help entities secure grants, provide technical support, and any other assistance that may be needed to help community-based housing get built.“
Q: Historically, some of Durham’s wealthier neighborhoods have resisted change while lower-income areas have absorbed more than their share of growth. Do you support housing policies that promote more equitable, citywide development?
“Yes, I support housing policies that promote more equitable development. Low-income and working class neighborhoods who have experienced historical disinvestment and gentrification require more robust, intentional community engagement to ensure we are not repeating the mistakes of the past and are not further burdening communities who have the least amount of access and resources.”
Q: While many tenant protection tools are limited by state law, what local tenant protections or renter support policies do you support or hope to implement?
“In my opinion, it is wholly insufficient to cite state law as a barrier for tenant protections. Local governments who are serious about addressing the housing crisis have to be ready, willing, and able to challenge state laws such as Dillion's Rule that prohibit certain regulatory measures around housing. I support tenant unions, eviction diversion programs, blacklisting of property owners who use tools such as RealPage to artificially inflate rents, blacklisting of property owners who purchase properties as investments to provide short-term rentals through sites such as AirBnB, creating a landlord registry with a ranking system and incentivizing "good" landlords.”
Q: What does pro-housing locally mean to you?
“I believe pro-housing means de-commodifying housing and treating housing as a human right. Housing cannot be both a right AND a commodity subject to market fluctuations. I believe in eliminating speculative investors from the process and redistributing public owned land to build social housing. I believe in tenants rights and the ability for tenants to unionize. I believe in the rejection of housing segregation based on income, race, etc. and I promote intergenerational, publicly owned, tenant lead housing co-ops.“
Durham City Council Ward III
Chelsea Cook (incumbent)
Did not respond.
Terry McCann
Q: Do you believe Durham is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes - There is not enough supply to meet the demand for the influx of people coming into the city.“
Q: Are there any current policies or regulations that you believe make it harder to build housing in Durham? What would you change?
“SCAD and the fact that most homes and residences are stick built instead of pre-fabricated is making it harder to build. Regulation often prevents builders from doing what they do best - BUILD. However, builders should be made to build more pre-fabricated dwellings since they can be built at 1/3 the cost and our gentler on our environment. Barrier just as this should be removed to promote rapid quality building WITHIN THE CITY versus out in the suburban area of Durham. Vacant commercial areas will structures present need to be rezoned to residentual so that the propeties their can be sold and gutted to make places to live.“
Q: What are some pro-housing policies or specific housing developments you’ve supported in the past that you’d like voters to know about?
“I propose that the City of Durham have a lower property tax rate on commercial apartments that are for rent that the landlord must FLUSH down to their renters in the form of lower rents. The rate would be set for a certain amount of years(4-5) but landlords receiving this rate must have building up to code. Renters in these properties can better budget their rent since it will be lower and set. They two can start to save the difference if their next step is home ownership. For landlords, those that want to acquire or build more commercial apartments would have an increased interest to do so with the goal of increasing dwellings and competition in the city with lower rents.”
Q: Durham passed major zoning reforms in 2019 (EHC) and 2024 (SCAD) that eliminated exclusionary single-family zoning, removed parking mandates, and made it easier to build small commercial and infill housing. Do you support keeping these reforms in place? Why or why not?
“Smaller is wiser! We must build smaller homes in the city for greater density and to infil areas in the city. We can build more homes per square foot and with infllng, use space that is either already there but vacant, but also create zones in Durham that can be walkable communities.“
Q: What specific additional zoning reforms would you like to see in the new UDO for Durham to meet its housing goals?
“I am not versed in the UDO very well but generally know that it lays out rules for development. What I would like to see are more smaller homes (under 1000 square feet) being constructed as well as more new communities that meet this design. As a former resident of SE Raleigh, where my parents bought their first home in 1974, ALL of the 700+ homes in my community were under 1000 square root with 1 bath and 2 bedrooms. Many converted the den into an additional bedroom - as my parents did. My mother still resides in the house to this day. In Durham we can do the same but with 2 baths maybe instead of 1 or a 1/2 bath.“
Q: Do you support by-right permitting— (where cities set clear, objective rules) and projects that follow those rules can move forward without subjective delays? Why or why not?
“I would be in limited suport of by-right permitting ONLY if what is being built in Durham does not push people out because the cost to build is high and prices for renting or purchase astronomical. There needs to be a good mix of higher end homes and lower end homes so that everyone wins. Builders need to suit the needs of the citizens of Durham and our agenda for housing instead of having builders come in, build, make a profit and leave and not having produced enough housing for citizens on the lower end of financial latter. THEY MUST BUILD DURHAM TO OUR SPECIFICATIONS - not there.”
Q: What specific permitting processes in Durham do you believe slow housing production or make infill harder? What would you change?
“Reluctant vendors that do not want to sell make it harder to infil. They are looking for a higher price but know they can hold onto it since it is theirs. Perhaps policies that will force landowners to sell vacated properties at market rate within a certain period of time will force them to sell before being assessed penalties. However, vacant propeties that become eyesores, hovels and places of drug activity need to penalized very serverly as this becomes a health concern to the city at large.“
Q: Do you support increased public funding for subsidized or income-restricted affordable housing in Durham? Why or why not?
“No. We have HUD but Durham handles their HUD housing more locally instead of like other cities that do it federally. Too many hands are touching the HUD money so that today we have many low income sites that are falling apart or in ill repair. Durham has made a complex problem morph into a complicated problem. She needs to take the middle man out and let the feds handle HUD here in Durham. The HUD money is needed for certain residents including Section 8. Able bodies citizens should be required to work but regulations against how much they work should not be a hinderance Keep their Section 8 rent set for a certain period of time and every 3-4 years reevaulate their rent. The goal is is to get people off assistance and into self sufficiency and off the government dole.”
Q: Is there a specific type of affordable housing, public investment, or nonprofit housing model you’re especially passionate about? Why?
“Habitat for Humanity - Some people just need a ittle help to get into a home. There is integrity in work and achieving what some call the American dream. Individuals working with Habitat is great since it does just that while requiring the future homeowner to put in sweat equity.”
Q: Do you think Durham should revisit or reduce the taxes and fees it places on new housing, particularly small-scale or affordable projects?
“I am all for lower taxes so yes but as long as they are not passed on to larger scale projects. If it can be done legally, when a homeownder refinances their home, "some" of the reduced fees, "not all" canbe paid back to the city.”
Q: What incentives (fee reductions, grants, technical support, etc.) could Durham offer to help more small-scale or community-based housing get built?
“Durham needs to use a parcel of land that is specifically for this development and with input from the community decide what will go into the community. From the grocery stores, barbers and salons, drug stores to the dwellings, Durham needs to build like this. Find a local builder preferably that understand Durham and have them build the community. I can see it being a walkable community on the bus line with a shopping center in the center for grocery and other services that attract people from other portions of the city but surrounded by 800-1200 square foot homes. Durham just needs to remove regulations and let builders build these mosty pre-fabricated homes within a set period of time. When achieved by the designated time and if there are no hiccups, reward the builder with an incentive(reward). Any future design flaws that might come up over a period of years (TBD) would be deducted.”
Q: Historically, some of Durham’s wealthier neighborhoods have resisted change while lower-income areas have absorbed more than their share of growth. Do you support housing policies that promote more equitable, citywide development?
“Back in the eary 1940's Harlem, the wealthy and not so wealthy lived amongst each other. As things changed there, the wealthy left and the less wealthy dominated the area including the schools and business community. While they were together, both thrived and benefitted from each other. Durham is designed now where you can go from an affluent area and drive into a lesser affluent one in minutes. The outskirts (Treyburn) are more exclusive are they are more removed from inner city Durham. City development should not have any class of citizens more concentrated in one part and less in another. They should flow & blend together. This WILL work will a well-funded Durham Police Department and a City Council that backs law enforcement.”
Q: While many tenant protection tools are limited by state law, what local tenant protections or renter support policies do you support or hope to implement?
“.”
Q: What does pro-housing locally mean to you?
“It means removing barriers to acheive housing.”
Durant Long
Did not respond.
Diana Medoff
Q: Do you believe Durham is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes. Durham is growing rapidly, with more growth expected, but building hasn’t kept pace. The result is that rents and home prices are rising faster than wages for so many of us, families are struggling to find homes we can afford, and more of our neighbors are experiencing housing instability and homelessness.
While some would argue that Durham’s vacancy rate indicates there is no shortage, we lack the right kinds of housing for working people. We must be proactive about zoning reform, cutting red tape for small-scale infill development, and use city resources to support deeply affordable options. In short, we need to be building more."
Q: Are there any current policies or regulations that you believe make it harder to build housing in Durham? What would you change?
“One key change I would make is ensuring Durham’s Comprehensive Plan is more closely tied to specific zoning updates that allow for greater housing density within the Urban Growth Boundary. Right now, too many of our policies contribute to housing scarcity, which makes displacement not just likely but inevitable. We need to say yes to building more homes at every income level, especially small multi unit homes and middle income housing in areas close to transit, schools, and jobs.”
Q: What are some pro-housing policies or specific housing developments you’ve supported in the past that you’d like voters to know about?
“Just last night, September 2, there was a case before City Council, Durham Gateway at Brier Creek. No development will ever be perfect, but this project was a model in terms of how Durham could use public-private partnership to accomplish our development goals. Specifically, this project has strong community support, is going to contribute $40 million in infrastructure to the city, includes commercial/light industrial to further help expand the tax base, and has an innovative and promising approach to incentivizing affordable housing. The project was conscious of sustainable building practices and met the goals articulated in the Strategic Plan. It checks the important boxes, and while other members of the council expressed the need for housing solutions like these, my opponent still voted no to this development.
Every time we say no to one development, we increase the need to say yes to others, developments that are likely to be less beneficial to our community. Unlike my opponent, I do not want perfection to be the enemy of the good, especially when so many families in Durham are facing housing insecurity and homelessness as a result of our current housing shortage."
Q: Durham passed major zoning reforms in 2019 (EHC) and 2024 (SCAD) that eliminated exclusionary single-family zoning, removed parking mandates, and made it easier to build small commercial and infill housing. Do you support keeping these reforms in place? Why or why not?
“Yes. Housing options, especially the ability to build more densely, create opportunities to cater development to the needs of a particular neighborhood instead of blanket policies that may or may not be helpful. The market will still produce builders building parking when appropriate while not requiring them to when not appropriate. This sort of flexibility allows for infill development over suburban sprawl, which protects our natural resources and builds climate resiliency.”
Q: What specific additional zoning reforms would you like to see in the new UDO for Durham to meet its housing goals?
“I am in favor of the zoning reforms proposed in the new UDO, especially those that allow for more dense development in established neighborhoods. The construction of duplexes, triplexes, fouplexes, and even small apartment buildings should not be bogged down in administrative red tape. Instead, building these options should be more accessible to create workforce housing that makes sense for Durham.”
Q: Do you support by-right permitting— (where cities set clear, objective rules) and projects that follow those rules can move forward without subjective delays? Why or why not?
“As a general rule, I support removing bureaucracy to make the building process more streamlined and effective. While I understand the complexities of some housing projects, I also think the process should be as simple as possible to allow for builders to spend their time and resources optimizing for affordable and sustainability over navigating an arduous administrative system.”
Q: What specific permitting processes in Durham do you believe slow housing production or make infill harder? What would you change?
“The approval process for rezoning is overly complicated and drawn out, especially for small-scale and affordable infill development. This is why I would support expediting this process and doing so in a way that incentivizes affordability and moves us away from unsustainable suburban sprawl.”
Q: Do you support increased public funding for subsidized or income-restricted affordable housing in Durham? Why or why not?
“Yes. I appreciate the ways in which Durham has, and continues to, invest in affordable housing. While I support this approach, I also recognize that this is not a long-term solution to Durham’s housing crisis, and am most invested in solutions that build affordability long-term and for all of Durham.”
Q: Is there a specific type of affordable housing, public investment, or nonprofit housing model you’re especially passionate about? Why?
“I fully support public and nonprofit investment in affordable housing. However, I also understand that this is little more than a bandaid on Durham’s gaping housing wound. Durham needs to prioritize a system where building makes financial sense to the people doing the building.”
Q: Do you think Durham should revisit or reduce the taxes and fees it places on new housing, particularly small-scale or affordable projects?
“I support waiving impact fees on small-scale and affordable infill development as well as expediting the review process for projects prioritizing affordability. These would both allow builders to save money and directly translate into more affordable options for Durham residents.”
Q: What incentives (fee reductions, grants, technical support, etc.) could Durham offer to help more small-scale or community-based housing get built?
“Please see above regarding taxes and fees. My priority is not to cut costs for builders across the board, but instead incentivize developers building the housing Durham needs, resulting in real cost benefits for Durham residents.
I also want to create a system where such ideas could continually be brought to council, whether formally or informally. Part of this is about intentionally building relationships with small-scale developers and being more intentional about understanding their needs and challenges rather than only focusing on “accountability” of deliverables."
Q: Historically, some of Durham’s wealthier neighborhoods have resisted change while lower-income areas have absorbed more than their share of growth. Do you support housing policies that promote more equitable, citywide development?
“I want to be clear that I don’t support density in theory when it doesn’t impact me. I support density in actuality – literally in my backyard. In fact, my husband and I have built an ADU into our own home and have supported efforts to subdivide lots and increase density in our own neighborhood. We all have to do our part, and while I could have easily gained the support of personal friends in this campaign by choosing to be vague in my stance on building, I have actively made my preference for greater density clear, even when I knew it might lose me supporters. My work on city council would not just be to take sometimes unpopular votes, but to actively work to move the community towards a more pro-housing perspective.”
Q: While many tenant protection tools are limited by state law, what local tenant protections or renter support policies do you support or hope to implement?
“To strengthen tenant protections against unfair rent increases and poor living conditions, we need a multi-layered approach that addresses both immediate needs and long term solutions.
First, I would advocate for increased resources for eviction diversion. Too many tenants face housing insecurity without access to legal support or mediation services. Expanding funding for eviction prevention programs, like those currently supporting Legal Aid, would help more residents stay in their homes and avoid the long term consequences of eviction.
Second, I fully support continuing and expanding the Forever Home affordable housing initiative. This investment has already helped hundreds of individuals and families access permanent housing, and it remains one of Durham’s most powerful tools for supporting low income renters and preventing displacement.
We also need to modernize our zoning regulations to reduce barriers to building diverse housing types. By allowing more density within the Urban Growth Boundary, including small homes, duplexes, and accessory dwelling units, we can increase housing supply and affordability. This directly reduces the pressure that allows landlords to raise rents unfairly and helps prevent poor living conditions driven by a lack of options.
In addition to renter protections, I believe in helping tenants become homeowners when possible. That is why I support expanding down payment assistance for first time, low income buyers, with a focus on essential service workers like teachers, nurses, and first responders. Homeownership offers stability, builds generational wealth, and reduces vulnerability to rising rents."
Q: What does pro-housing locally mean to you?
“When we say no to more density within the Urban Growth Boundary, we are choosing a path that pushes people out of Durham. That displacement is not accidental, it is the direct result of policy decisions. It is also a departure from both my vision for Durham and the stated goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
I want to say yes to building more housing at every income level, including affordable, workforce, and missing middle housing, within our existing footprint. Denser housing in areas with access to transit, jobs, and schools is the most effective way to reduce housing costs, improve connectivity, and fight displacement. It also helps us avoid costly and inefficient sprawl that stretches our city services and isolates residents from opportunity.
If we are serious about equity, then the Comprehensive Plan must be connected to real zoning reforms that allow us to build the housing we say we need. We also need stronger policies that prevent displacement, including support for community land trusts, homeownership programs for longtime residents, and tenant protections.
Equity, gentrification, and displacement are not abstract concepts. They show up in who gets to stay in Durham and who is forced to leave. I am committed to turning the values in our Comprehensive Plan into action, so Durham can grow in a way that truly includes everyone."
APEX
All Apex races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Apex Mayors race is on staggered terms and won’t be until 2027.
Apex Town Council
8 candidates are running for 3 seats. As one of the fastest growing towns in Wake County, candidates have already made it clear that housing and growth are key election issues.
Ed Gray (incumbent) did not respond
Shane Reese
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes, Apex is experiencing a housing shortage, and I believe we have an opportunity to more fully address housing affordability and accessibility initiatives in Apex. As a recent presentation to the Town Council pointed out, without incentives and funding for housing at and below 80% area median income (AMI), Apex’s essential workforce cannot afford to live in town, making it more challenging to staff these roles in the local community and economy which, in turn, negatively impacts the economic health of our town. If elected in November, ensuring the Council adopts policies that unlock our housing potential will be a priority of mine.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
Yes, while the Town offers incentives to incorporate housing affordability initiatives into development projects, the benefits are relatively modest and sometimes do not offset the added cost associated with building <100% AMI homes. I believe we need to advocate for acquiring and land-banking property directly to de-link land costs from home prices where it makes sense much like the Raleigh Area Land Trust (RALT) model. As Apex town staff have stated, aside from financing deals altogether, one of the most direct ways to ensure new developments include a housing mix that reflects the community’s goals is to contribute land to development deals. Because land often represents one of the largest development costs, the Town can help shape significant project parameters in exchange for offsetting this expense for a developer. By dedicating town‐owned parcels and seed funding from our housing fund, we can partner with local nonprofits to purchase and steward land in perpetuity. Homebuyers lease the land at nominal rates, keeping their monthly housing costs stable even as property values rise. I support exploring opportunities to allocate funding and work with county and state partners to secure ongoing financial support, as limited as those funds may be going forward. The growth should be focused on appropriately located developments based on variables such as school capacity and transportation infrastructure.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Yes, one in particular is the lack of streamlined, pre-approved designs/processes. Without standardized design guidelines or pre-approved pattern books to draw from, developers are confronted with designing more affordable home blueprints from scratch. This adds time and cost to the permitting process, while introducing risk to the extent the designs proposed do not satisfy staff expectations. Pre-approved designs combined with a faster review process may assist developers in incorporating affordable units into projects with more confidence.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
Households at the younger and older ends of the age spectrum tend to converge in terms of the types of housing they prefer. Less likely to have children, these households are more likely to choose smaller homes. According to a recent report delivered to the Town Council, these age groups combine to comprise nearly 75% of the net-new household growth expected over the next decade. While traditional housing types will always be an important part of the mix, more modest-sized options are needed to improve the balance between current supply and anticipated demand trends.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
I support Apex’s current by-right permitting, because Apex has been losing moderate-income homeowners. This may be due in part to a lack of affordable smaller homes. Allowing by-right development of more types of housing can help reduce development costs and, in turn, unlock more opportunities for moderate-income buyers to secure homes.
Sue Mu did not respond
Andre Powell did not respond
Mary Miskimon did not respond
TJ Evans did not respond
Aditya Ahlawat did not respond
Kyrone Nebolisa did not respond
CARRBORO
All Carrboro races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Carrboro Mayor
2 candidates are running for 1 seat.
Barbara Foushee (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes, from an access and affordability standpoint. The demand is clearly outpacing the available supply of both for sale and rental units, especially at accessible and reasonable price points. The limited new construction, lack of diverse housing stock and rising prices reflect a structural mismatch between who wants to live in Carrboro and what housing is available to them across socio-economic statuses.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
I would say yes and add that we are in the process of creating a unified development ordinance to replace our existing land use ordinance. In addition, the town of Carrboro agreed to preserve the rural buffer in exchange for higher density in town which has not been fully realized; existing regulations also prevent other creative housing solutions and there may be issues with design and height restrictions that could limit redevelopment and/ or higher density in our downtown. I think our new UDO alongside our comprehensive plan will help with how we are addressing housing in Carrboro. We should be nimble and willing to pivot when past and current approaches are not yielding good results.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Carrboro’s current Land Use Ordinance dates back to the 1980’s and has become increasingly complex with multiple amendments over time. This makes development harder and limits housing diversity which could lead to more affordable options. We also have a lengthy review and permitting process that can slow down housing production and make infill more difficult.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
Carrboro needs more duplexes, triplexes and townhomes as well as supportive and very low income housing to provide more diversity of housing types which could improve affordability. Growth should be focused in our downtown and along the Jones Ferry Road corridor. The town should also continue to inventory town-owned parcels and evaluate our residential zoning which could lead to more equitable and affordable housing opportunities. Public input continues to be key with these efforts.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes, I could support “by-right” permitting in Carrboro if the rules are thoughtfully designed. It could reduce delay and support housing equity. By-right permitting should not be considered as a type of fix-all; pairing the process with a new UDO and affordability incentives could be useful safeguards. Lastly, this process can be successful if the town aligns zoning with our Carrboro Connects comprehensive plan. Our comprehensive plan keeps the emphasis on affordability, equity and sustainability.
Joe H. Lloyd, Jr. did not respond
Carrboro Town Council
3 candidates are running for 3 seats (uncontested).
Cristobal Palmer (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes, we have a housing shortage that is at crisis levels. Here’s a 2024 study focused on folks associated with UNC-CH: https://reo.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/969/2024/01/unc-chapel-hill-housing-demand-analysis-2023.pdf
I would emphasize page sixteen, which shows that Carrboro has added only 250 market rate rentals since 2010, while our neighbors have added an order of magnitude more housing. This has impacts on both prices and commute times.
This should go without saying, but everyone, not just those who need to commute to the university or hospital, feels these price pressures.
“
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
“Yes, it is currently too hard for most builders to do anything other than renovations or single family home rebuilds. We need more housing types that support the population we have and welcome the growth that will keep our community livable and vibrant. This includes maintenance workers, teachers, home nurse aids, and many others who currently need to get here and can’t afford to live here, or what they can afford here doesn’t meet their needs. These folks may want any of several different things, including triplexes, duplexes, cottage courts, ADUs, or other housing types. We need more of these.
We have two parallel processes that are ongoing that should make building better housing radically easier. One is the Downtown Area Plan Project, which should come before Carrboro Town Council this Fall for adoption. It will give potential developers much clearer guidance on our priorities for dense housing development downtown. Folks can read more about that project here: https://engage.carrboronc.gov/carrboro-downtown-area-plan.
The second is an extensive project to both reorganize and modernize our Land Use Ordinance (LUO), which was one of the first comprehensive sets of municipal land use ordinances in the state, into a new Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). We should see more presentations this Fall, and I look forward to working with the CodeWright team to identify ways to incentivize and speed up redevelopments that provide the types of housing our residents want and need. Your membership can read more about the UDO project at https://engage.carrboronc.gov/udo .
Our 2022 Carrboro Connects Comprehensive Plan emphasizes Race Equity and Climate as foundational, and I agree. As we revise town code to incentivize better housing, we must be sensitive to the risks and concerns of Black residents, Latino residents, and other minority groups who have historically been displaced by redevelopment efforts.”
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Our current process is so bespoke and complex that essentially all new multifamily construction in the last decade has gone through either conditional rezoning, SUP-A, or both. It is my goal to make sure the new UDO provides by-right paths that align with our values and provide better housing than the current by-right default. For instance, I would love for the Town of Carrboro to have plans for one or more ADU, triplex, and duplex designs that, given certain existing conditions that are common (eg. lot size, existing dwelling first floor area), may move forward with fewer steps.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
“There is no one answer, but some common housing types that already exist in Carrboro are much more affordable and sustainable from a town services perspective than others. Some, such as one story, four unit brick apartments, will not be built again due to factors that are outside of our control. Others, such as two-story duplexes, ADUs, two story, four unit condos or townhomes, cottage courts, and other medium density types have plenty of nearby design-build firms to draw from. Many of these fit into existing neighborhoods in a way that is no more disruptive than a single family home rebuild from the perspective of the neighbors, and do so much more for affordability and sustainability at the same time.
In the area defined under the Downtown Area Plan, there are sub-zones with different density priorities, and given the extensive feedback we’ve gotten from our community engagement process, I’m optimistic about the town’s enthusiasm for adding significantly to our housing stock while simultaneously adding public green space and other quality of life improvements.”
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
“I’m going to reframe this slightly, since there will always be by-right development unless radical change happens at the state legislature. The question is not whether we should have by-right development, but what housing types we support for by-right development, and my answer is that we should choose as many of the missing middle types as possible to enthusiastically say yes to. We should support and incentivize a variety of housing types so that they become the default, rather than the current default of larger and larger single family homes, which are the worst option when it comes to affordability, climate resilience, and town service delivery.
I think we can go beyond duplexes and triplexes being by-right everywhere, and we can provide free and open designs that, if chosen, speed up the time from lot purchase to finished triplex. The question then becomes whether that is enough to make that the most attractive choice for the market actors in our area. Again, we will be pushing CodeWright to help us answer these questions.
Thank you for putting these questions to local candidates. Housing affordability is a major challenge to residents everywhere in the Triangle, and hits our most vulnerable neighbors the hardest. It’s gratifying to see groups pushing us to do better.”
Danny Nowell (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes, for a few reasons. One reason is that we have built far too few new units of housing—Carrboro’s construction over the past decade is near its lowest rate over the last 70 years, and this shortage of building has resulted in an affordability crisis that threatens the accessibility of our town for renters and homeowners alike.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
Our current Land Use Ordinance is far too oriented around single-family housing development, with onerous and inefficient discretionary review processes that have allowed sensible construction to be blocked far too frequently. In my next term, we’ll be finalizing our newly revised Land Use Ordinance, which will strongly prioritize more efficient building of multifamily housing, more diverse types of single-family housing, and strongly incentivize more affordable units through efficiencies and expedited review practices.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
yes—our underlying zoning is a problem in the first place, as is our reliance on persistent discretionary review at multiple steps of project development. Discretionary review can be a useful tool in limited circumstances to make sure community needs are met, but in Carrboro it has very often had the effect of preventing us from growing in the ways we need to to meet the affordability crisis.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
We need a town-wide focus on denser, more diverse, more vertical, and more integrated development. Our downtown needs more residential, and our entire town needs more commercial opportunities mixed in with homes at different price points. We need to allow byright development of the maximal number of units on parcels across town, build more vertically in many places, and ensure that people can buy into our housing market at more affordable prices than are currently available with large-footprint single family homes.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes. Carrboro does an exceptional job of gathering input from our community, and I feel like we are capable of reflecting that input in our ordinance, and remaining accountable as elected leaders to enforce or change the ordinance as needed. Discretionary review tends to follow well-researched patterns that ultimately allow a small focus on particular projects to prevent towns from meeting development goals our neighbors broadly share.
Fred Joiner
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
I do. On one level we have low inventory for the well heeled who can afford the when rise in housing costs that we have seen just in the 9 years that I have been living here. If my wife and I were trying to buy our house today with our 2 solid incomes I am not sure we would be competitive. Although this is anecedotal I raise it because my wife and I are well compensated professionals, which brings into relief another pressing issue with housing in our area which is high-quality, well located, conencted , middle income housing. Many of our teachers, police officers, public works staff, etc cannnot afford to live in the town they serve. I think the lack of more middle income and workforce housing (not necessary UNC workers) is one of our most pressing issues with regard to housing.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
These are issues that I am still learning about as related to our context in Carrboro, but I can imagine that there are zoning strategies as well as clear guidelines about what we as a community want to see in new housing we can employ to make it easier for developers and current property to build. I look forward to learning more in this area.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
These are issues that I am still learning about as related to our context in Carrboro.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
“As i stated previously I think more middle income and workforce housing so that the people that serve can afford to live where they serve.
I think this could have residual positive impacts on some the other initiatives we seek to deploy. For example, if we would like to see more community based policing solutions, we should have housing that allows for police officers, social workers and mental health workers to live in the community.”
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
“This is another issue i have to understand more in our context, but from the little bit that I do know, I think that if we give enough care to defining and framing what goes into the rules we set forth about what we want to see in building projects and also stay vigilant about executing and monitoring adherence to those rules I think “”by-right”“ permitting can work.
I have seen in other cities the rules of some “”by-right”“ permitting not reach the intended potential by failing to apply the rigor of care in defining need or in the execution/monitoring to make sure all conditions are met through the lifecycle of a project.”
CARY
As of this election year, Cary no longer has a primary runoff prior to the general election. All Cary races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Cary Mayoral race is on staggered terms and won’t be until 2027.
Though these races are all technically non-partisan, Cary’s council races see competition from Democrats and Republicans alike, with affordable housing, development pressures and cost of living being key issues across party lines.
Cary Town Council At-Large
2 candidates are running for 1 seat.
Carissa Johnson (incumbent) did not respond
Marjorie K. Eastman did not respond
Cary Town Council District A
2 candidates are running for 1 seat.
Jennifer Robinson (incumbent) did not respond
Brittany Richards did not respond
Cary Town Council District C
2 candidates are running for 1 seat.
Renee Miller did not respond
Bella Huang did not respond
CHAPEL HILL
All Chapel Hill races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Chapel Hill Mayor
1 candidate is running for 1 seat (uncontested).
Jess Anderson (incumbent) did not respond
Chapel Hill Town Council
6 candidates are running for 4 seats. This is one of the only contested races in this western part of the Triangle this year and will be one to watch. Last election cycle in 2023 was the first time we saw the council majority shift to be pro-housing.
Camille Berry (incumbent) did not respond
Paris Miller-Foushee (incumbent) did not respond
Erik Valera
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes. Slow housing growth, high cost burdens, and rents outpacing what local residents can pay confirm a real shortage. Supply has not kept pace with demand. Since 2010 the town’s housing stock grew by only 1% while the median home sale price jumped 53% from 2020 to mid 2025, creating displacement pressure. Supply hasn’t kept up with demand. More than half of renters (about 60%) are spending 30%+ of income on housing—according, underscoring how tight the market is for households that rent.
On the rental side, UNC’s 2023 housing demand study found the median rent in Chapel Hill is $1,665, above what most graduate students can afford, and that a large share of employees would be severely stretched to buy at current prices—evidence that demand from students and workers overwhelms available, attainable units.
“
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
“Yes. Several existing rules in Chapel Hill’s Land Use Management Ordinance (LUMO) can add time and cost to homebuilding. Some hurdles include: discretionary approvals- like conditional zoning or special use permits. This lengthens timelines and raises risk for builders. Minimum parking and other site standards that increase project costs; and stringent environmental overlays—notably the Resource Conservation District’s 50–150-foot stream buffers—and tree protection requirements, which reduce buildable area and require added compliance work.
The Town is undergoing a Land Use Ordinance Management (LUMO) rewrite that is intended to reduce barriers by aligning with the Future Land Use Management (FLUM). Yes. Our community is experiencing a real housing shortage—made clear by slow housing growth, rising costs, and more and more neighbors struggling to keep up with rent or buy a home.
“
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
“Yes. The permitting process in Chapel Hill is often slowed by complex, multi-step reviews that can be overwhelming—especially for smaller, community-scale projects. Even modest infill like ADUs, duplexes, or lot splits must go through the same rigorous process as large-scale developments, including multiple rounds of technical review across departments like stormwater, transportation, environmental protection, and tree coverage. These reviews can require repeated resubmissions and are often followed by neighborhood meeting notices and board reviews that add weeks or even months of delay. In some cases, proposals are also subject to conditional rezonings, quasi-judicial hearings, or development agreements that further complicate the path to approval. This “small-project overkill” creates unnecessary barriers to building the kinds of affordable, incremental housing our community needs.
One way Chapel Hill could improve this process is by assigning centralized case managers to guide applicants from start to finish. A dedicated case manager could serve as a single point of contact, helping applicants navigate reviews, spot issues early, and keep projects on track. This would improve transparency, reduce frustration, and help ensure more timely and equitable development—especially for infill and affordable housing.”
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
Chapel Hill needs more homes of all kinds—especially those that meet the needs of people across income levels, ages, and stages of life. We should prioritize deeply affordable rentals and permanent supportive housing for our unhoused neighbors, family-sized homes for growing households, and accessible units for older adults and people with disabilities. To expand options between single-family homes and large complexes, we need more “missing middle” housing like duplexes, triplexes, cottage courts, and small apartment buildings. Purpose-built housing for students and university employees can relieve pressure on surrounding neighborhoods, and community land trusts can help make homeownership more attainable through townhomes and condos. Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) should be allowed throughout town, and we must do more to preserve Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) before it disappears. Growth should follow a Complete Communities approach—prioritizing compact, walkable neighborhoods that are connected to transit, jobs, and green spaces—so everyone feels welcomed and has a fair opportunity to live, work, and play in Chapel Hill.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes, I support by-right permitting—especially when it’s built on clear, community-informed standards. It’s one of the most effective tools we have to reduce unnecessary delays, lower housing costs, and bring more predictability to the development process. When a project meets the town’s adopted rules—on things like design, stormwater, affordability, and tree protection—it should be allowed to move forward without months of hearings or political hurdles. This approach is especially important for small-scale and affordable housing, which often can’t survive long delays or uncertainty. By-right permitting helps us stay focused on our shared goals: building walkable, inclusive neighborhoods with a range of housing choices that serve everyone in our community.
Jon Mitchell did not respond
Wes McMahon did not respond
Louie Rivers III
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes, we do not have enough market rate housing to serve the people that work in our community that have incomes that meet the area median income (AMI). Even more pressing, due to the high AMI in Chapel Hill we are severely understocked in terms of housing for people that are at 80% AMI and under. The shortage of housing is even more critical for people at 30% AMI and lower.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
Yes, a key aspect of Chapel Hill’s regulatory landscape that needs to be updated is our Land Use Management Ordinance (LUMO). Our current LUMO was adopted in 2003 and has been adjusted since then but not in a comprehensive manner. This has led to a set of land use and development ordinances that are complex and often difficult to meet. We need to rewrite our LUMO to reflect that values and housing needs of Chapel Hill in 2025.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Our current LUMO provides a development pathway for single family residences and downtown development. In effect, this means that other projects have to go through an extensive review process with town staff and often with council members during council meetings. This makes development in Chapel Hill cumbersome.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
I think that we need more types of housing and development across the board. We need dense apartment buildings and mixed use developments along our transit corridors. We also need greater housing options in our existing neighborhoods, specifically the leeway to build duplexes, and triplexes in areas that have traditionally been zoned for single family residences where appropriate.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes, this would lower the cost of building and would allow Chapel Hill to produce more housing units. It would also allow local builders to more easily enter Chapel Hill’s housing market. The development of these “by-right” processes would need to engage our local community, especially voices that have traditionally been left out of these processes (such as renters, young professionals and young families).
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Board of Education
4 candidates are running for 3 seats. This should be an active race. With housing and schools being deeply connected issues, let us know if you want us to talk about these too.
Riza Jenkins (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes, we are experiencing a housing shortage. Although development and construction are happening in
Chapel Hill and Carrboro, we are experiencing a shortage of affordable housing. Community members are
using hotels as their housing solutions because other affordable options are not available to them.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
On the school board, we do not address the town policies related to housing. The housing issue does
impact us because many of our employees cannot afford to live in Chapel Hill or Carrboro. I believe
programs for town, county, and school district employees would provide housing options for employees to
live closer to where they work.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
The biggest issue in our community isn’t necessarily the permitting process, but rather the availability of
land to build afford housing. We will need to think of creative solutions to development these properties.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
As I mentioned in another question, the affordable housing issue doesn’t just impact families or school
district employees but also town, county, and even private sector employees who may be lower to middle
class. Our community needs more housing for families that are affordable and not luxury or student
apartments.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Since this is not an issue we address on the school board, I will need to defer to colleagues in the town and
county responses. I will say that permitting should not slow down the process for affordable housing;
however, it should not sacrifice ensuring projects meet environmental requirements.
George Griffin (incumbent) did not respond
Lynnee Argabright did not respond
Melinda Manning did not respond
CLAYTON
All Clayton races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Clayton Town Council
6 candidates are running for 3 seats. As I-540 is completed, housing development, and the conversations around growth, have rapidly extended to Johnston County.
Andria Archer (incumbent) did not respond
Porter Casey, Jr. (incumbent) did not respond
Dan Barbour
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes, especially when it comes to affordable housing and non-apartment options for young adults and families. We’ve seen a lot of growth, but most of it has been large subdivisions or high-rent apartment complexes. There is a real gap in what is often called “missing middle” housing, like townhomes, duplexes, and smaller single-family homes. These could offer more attainable options for people who want to live and work here but can’t afford what is currently being built.
We don’t have a housing volume problem. We have a housing variety and accessibility problem.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
Yes. Some restrictions make sense, especially given our serious water and sewer capacity issues and how stretched our infrastructure already is. But many of the current policies and regulations don’t seem to address those core problems. Instead, they come across as unnecessary government red tape that slows down well planned projects without solving the real issues.
I would focus on streamlining the process for quality, well-planned developments while being stricter about infrastructure accountability. If a development isn’t helping us fix the strain it adds, it shouldn’t move forward.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Yes, definitely. The review time in Clayton has gotten out of hand. Permit applications are now taking up to 60 days to process, which creates major delays for builders, small developers, homeowners and business owners trying to invest in infill or renovation. That kind of lag time slows down progress, discourages quality projects, and adds unnecessary cost to housing.
We need to speed up reviews without sacrificing standards. A more efficient, transparent permitting process would go a long way in supporting smart growth.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
We need more truly affordable single-family housing, especially for young adults, working families, and long-time residents being priced out. That kind of housing helps keep our community diverse and rooted.
At the same time, we desperately need more commercial development and light industry. Right now, too much of the tax burden falls on residents. We should be encouraging growth that broadens our tax base, brings in jobs, and supports local infrastructure—especially in areas already zoned or primed for mixed-use development.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
I think blanket rules rarely work. While I support the idea of clear, predictable zoning regulations, I also believe that good planning requires flexibility and common sense. A well-written UDO is important, but it should still allow for thoughtful review and compromise when needed. With a process that doesn’t hold up progress for months or even years.
I support property owners’ rights whenever possible, but those rights have to be balanced with what’s best for the broader community. Growth should be guided, not rubber-stamped.
Keith Branch did not respond
Jason E. Carter did not respond
Amanda Underwood did not respond
FUQUAY-VARINA
All Fuquay-Varina races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Fuquay-Varina Mayor
2 candidates are running for 1 seat. Re-match of 2021 election. with what are sure to be critical conversations on housing and growth.
Blake Massengill (incumbent) did not respond
William (Bill) Harris did not respond
Fuquay-Varina Board of Commissioners
4 candidates are running for 2 seats.
Bryan Haynes (incumbent) did not respond
Nolan Ray Perry did not respond
Gage Cook did not respond
Kristopher Vorren did not respond
GARNER
All Garner races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Garner Mayors race is on staggered terms and won’t be until 2027.
Garner Town Council At-Large
6 candidates are running for 2 seats. With Garner recently being ranked amongst the fastest growing towns in the entire country, this election is all about growth, infrastructure investments, transportation and housing.
Gra Singleton (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Based on the most recent report, which was presented to the Town Council on August 26th, there is a 76 unit shortage for households under 60% AMI, and a severe shortage for households at and below 30% AMI. Garner’s development pipeline includes 375 approved units for households at 80% or below as of August 2025.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
Some possible changes to the ODO may include considering eliminating the SUP process as it takes time and may add to the uncertainty of a project, increase opportunities for density, improve the permitting process to save developer some time, and possibly expedite review and permitting for affordable housing projects that meet the Town’s goals.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Possibly the Special Use permit process, which does add time and also can create some uncertainty as a project goes thru the process.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
We need upper end SF detached homes to help recover the cost of services for our older housing stock in town, and we need affordable / work force housing to meet the needs of a more blue collar clientele in some parts of Garner.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Honestly, I am not as familiar with this process as other existing processes in Garner, but my feelings would be that zoning classifications would need to be reviewed and possible updated to accommodate this process, and the standards to build in these specific zones would need to have very specific standards that are in writing in the UDO that everyone recognizes and accepts so the projects then meets these standards and goals for development and it can proceed with staff approval instead of the public hearing and town council process. But the standards need to be spelled out in writing.
Kathy Behringer (incumbent) did not respond
Rex Whaley did not respond
Mike McIver did not respond
Patricia T. Uzzell did not respond
Kelvin Stallings did not respond
HILLSBOROUGH
All Hillsborough races are uncontested, so we won’t see anything new here.
Hillsborough Mayor
1 candidate is running for 1 seat (uncontested).
Mark Bell (incumbent) did not respond
Hillsborough Town Board of Commissioners
2 candidates are running for 2 seats (uncontested).
Kathleen Ferguson (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes. Apartment occupancy continues to be 95%+; deficits in housing options for 0-150% AMI, pressures on NOAH homeowners to sell to REITs and investors, particularly absentee would-be owners, and very limited options for new developments or redevelopments.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
Growth is pegged to water and wastewater treatment capacity. The Town focuses on long-term sustainability. We are in the process of reviewing and rewriting our development ordinances. My goal is for our regulations to balance between pay-now / pay later ramifications. While I advocate for incentives that support availability of lower price points and accessible housing, I also don’t want to be blinded by regulations that lower building / purchase prices by inflating and deferring hidden or visible maintenance and living costs. We also intentionally seek to balance commercial / residential tax ratios to 40/60 to ensure long-term fiscal sustainability: The cost of providing municipal services to residential property costs $1.25 for every $1 of residential property tax received while services delivered to commercial property costs $0.86 for every $1 commercial property tax received.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Tying development to water and wastewater treatment capacity has both positive and negative ramifications. However, having watched the consequences of allowing growth despite lack of sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacity is the worse option. Otherwise, the town frequently is complimented by developers in writing and verbally to staff and board members for being developer-friendly. Where developers become frustrated is that housing demand is so high that we could easily end up with commercial taxable property falling below 20% or less, placing even higher tax burdens on residential property owners.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
We need more affordable housing in the 0 - 150% AMI price points. Density is the most cost-effective service delivery condition; however, density requires residents to willingly support and live in multi-story rental and ownership residential properties. While the Town board supports density, many residents remain NIMBY for multiple reasons. Our current ordinances and what I anticipate will be our future ordinances will continue to incentivize density. We already support ADUs by right in all residential zones, and we already have full board support, including me, for increasing missing middle duplexes, triplexes, quads, as well as incentivizing vertical mixed use commercial/residential. The latter, I and my fellow commissioners continue to ask for and continue to be told by developers that the available developable parcels are too small and our location isn’t sufficiently amenable from a developer perspective for vertical mixed use to be a profitable option. I and my fellow board colleagues continue to seek ways to incentivize.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes, which is why our existing UDO includes this and future UDO will continue to include this with my support. This allows us to determine priorities and strategies as well as guidelines and policies for staff up front while empowering staff to implement.
Robb English (incumbent) did not respond
HOLLY SPRINGS
All Holly Springs races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Another fast growing town, situated with access to Raleigh and RTP, the Holly Springs candidates will be talking about housing, growth and planning for development.
Holly Springs Mayor
2 candidates are running for 1 seat.
Sean Mayefskie (incumbent) did not respond
Mike Kondratick did not respond
Holly Springs Town Council
6 candidates are running for 3 seats.
Annie Drees (incumbent) did not respond
Tim Forrest (incumbent) did not respond
Joe Cuccurullo did not respond
Josh Prizer did not respond
Kara Foster
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes, Holly Springs is experiencing a housing shortage, and we see the effects every day. Prices and rents have risen sharply in recent years, outpacing local incomes and making it harder for teachers, first responders, young families, and seniors to afford to live here. At the same time, our rapid growth has been met with limited housing diversity, leaving mostly large single-family homes and not enough smaller, more attainable options.
When families cannot find housing that fits their budget or life stage, they are forced to leave the community or face being cost-burdened. That not only hurts those families, it hurts our local economy, our schools, and our sense of community. To me, the housing shortage is not just about numbers, it’s about people being priced out of the place they call home.”
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
“Yes, some of our current policies make it harder to build the homes our community needs. Zoning still prioritizes large single-family lots, which limits the diversity of housing and drives up prices. Parking minimums and restrictive density caps also make it more expensive and less feasible to build smaller, more affordable options. In addition, the permitting process is often slow and costly, adding unnecessary delays and expenses that get passed on to residents.
If elected, I would support updating zoning to allow a wider variety of housing types, townhomes, duplexes, accessory dwelling units, and mixed-use developments, especially near schools, jobs, and transit. I would also advocate for reducing outdated parking minimums, which increase housing costs without always reflecting real demand. Streamlining permitting and encouraging thoughtful density can help us lower costs, protect green space, and create more walkable, connected neighborhoods.
By modernizing our policies, we can expand attainable housing choices, prevent displacement, and build a Holly Springs where families at all stages of life can thrive.”
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
“Yes, some of our current processes slow down housing production and make infill development harder than it needs to be. Lengthy site plan reviews, multiple rounds of approvals, and overlapping requirements add time and cost that smaller builders often cannot absorb. This results in fewer infill projects, which are exactly the kinds of housing that could provide more affordable options and strengthen existing neighborhoods.
If elected, I would support streamlining the permitting process for infill and small-scale projects while maintaining safety and environmental standards. We can set clear, predictable guidelines that reduce unnecessary delays, lower costs, and make it easier for responsible builders to create diverse housing options within the fabric of our community.
These delays and added costs ultimately hurt families the most, especially those already struggling to afford housing. By encouraging thoughtful infill, we can grow without sprawl, make better use of existing infrastructure, preserve green space, and create attainable housing that ensures more families have the chance to put down roots in Holly Springs.”
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
“Holly Springs needs more housing variety so families at different life stages and income levels can find a home that fits. Right now, we mostly see large single-family houses, but we need more starter homes, townhomes, duplexes, accessory dwelling units, and mixed-use developments. These options make homeownership and renting more attainable, and they help young professionals, seniors, and first-time buyers stay in our community.
Growth should be focused where it makes sense, near schools, jobs, and transit, so people can live closer to where they work and shop. That reduces traffic, lowers transportation costs, and supports a more walkable, connected community. Infill housing and mixed-use centers are also important, because they let us grow without paving over every open space, preserving the parks and greenways that make Holly Springs special.
As a healthcare provider, I know stable and attainable housing supports healthier families and stronger communities. By prioritizing thoughtful, people-centered growth, we can make sure Holly Springs stays a welcoming place where everyone has a chance to thrive.”
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
“Yes, I support by-right permitting when projects meet clear, established rules. The current system often forces builders into lengthy, discretionary reviews even when they are following the guidelines, which adds cost and delays that ultimately get passed on to families in the form of higher rents and home prices.
By-right permitting provides predictability, encourages responsible builders, and helps produce housing more efficiently. It also allows us to focus staff and community input on larger projects or on updating the rules themselves, rather than re-litigating each proposal one by one. That said, the rules must be fair, transparent, and designed to protect safety, environmental standards, and the character of our community.
Streamlining the process through by-right permitting is not about cutting corners, it is about removing unnecessary barriers so that we can build attainable housing faster, prevent sprawl, and make it possible for more families to live and thrive in Holly Springs.”
Sarah Larson did not respond
KNIGHTDALE
All Knightdale races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Knightdale Town Council
5 candidates are running for 3 seats. With several incumbents running to maintain their seats, they’ll likely keep the conversation focused on housing affordability, land use and growth.
Steve Evans (incumbent) did not respond
Mark Swan (incumbent) did not respond
Latatious Morris (incumbent) did not respond
Grady Bussey did not respond
Shannon Russell Hardy did not respond
MORRISVILLE
All Morrisville races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Morrisville races are important to watch. As the closest city to RTP, right between Raleigh and Durham, Morrisville actually has a greater population density than Raleigh and is consistently one of the most diverse towns in the region.
Morrisville Mayor
3 candidates are running for 1 seat.
TJ Cawley (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes. All communities in Wake County are facing a housing shortage. With 65 new residents being added every day, Morrisville is running out of developable land. While we are actively working to provide housing to meet this demand, it’s clear that supply is insufficient to keep pace with growth. My perspective aligns with both CITYBUILDER’s belief that everyone deserves housing choices and Yes! In My Triangle’s focus on expanding housing supply to meet demand.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
While I believe our policies are largely balanced to ensure sustainable and high-quality development, I support enhancements such as increased tree preservation and incentives for solar and energy-efficient construction. These priorities align with CITYBUILDER’s values around sustainability, walkable urbanism, and incremental, transparent change. I’m open to working with groups like Yes! In My Triangle to ensure our regulations don’t unduly slow housing development and are compatible with streamlined, equitable growth.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
We currently permit accessory dwelling units and our main constraint remains the availability of land. While permitting processes are functional, I’m committed to collaborating with organizations such as Yes! In My Triangle, which advocate for streamlined, fair housing permits to maintain housing supply—and with CITYBUILDER’s emphasis on transparent, community-driven change. I’ll remain open to identifying and revising any unnecessary or cumbersome steps.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
Our community would benefit from additional single‑family detached housing, which offers opportunities for first responders, staff, veterans, and public-school employees to build generational wealth. Ideally, development should be near greenways to promote walkability and alternative transportation. That said, I’m also open to exploring broader housing types—including more diverse, inclusive options—in line with Yes! In My Triangle’s support for missing‑middle housing and CITYBUILDER’s embrace of walkable, sustainable urbanism.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes, I fully support ‘by-right’ permitting—Morrisville has implemented a similar administrative process that provides predictable, efficient approvals with minimal subjective judgment. This aligns with Yes! In My Triangle’s advocacy for fast and fair permitting and with CITYBUILDER’s values of transparency, reliability, and equitable growth. Have a great weekend everyone.
Satish Garimella
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes, Morrisville is experiencing a housing shortage.
Over the last decade, our community has grown rapidly, but the supply of housing—especially affordable and workforce housing—has not kept pace. Home sales prices have soared since 2020, and rents in our region have risen over 20% since 2001. Income cannot keep up with these rapidly growing costs of living, in part due to housing costs. Nearly half of renters in the Raleigh-Cary metro area are now cost-burdened, paying more than 30% of their income toward housing.
This shortage is not just about the total number of homes—it is about the type of homes we lack. Starter homes, townhomes, and other “missing middle” housing are in short supply, leaving young families, seniors, and essential workers with few attainable options. At the same time, rising land values put pressure on naturally affordable homes and increase the risk of displacement.
Morrisville has already acknowledged this challenge through its Affordable Housing Incentive Policy, but we must go further. Without expanding housing supply, diversifying housing types, and preserving existing affordability, families will continue to be priced out, undermining our community’s diversity and long-term sustainability.
In short: yes, there is a shortage—not only in numbers but in affordability and variety. That is why I am committed to policies that produce new affordable units, preserve naturally occurring affordable housing, expand homeownership opportunities, and protect long-time residents from being displaced.”
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
“Yes, some of Morrisville’s current policies and regulations make it harder to build housing—especially affordable housing.
Morrisville is only nine square miles, and most of our land is already built out. With roughly 55% commercial and 45% residential, our last UDO update still left zoning restrictions that limit where townhomes, duplexes, and other “missing middle” housing types can be built. Minimum lot sizes, strict height limits, and high parking requirements drive up costs, making smaller or more affordable units harder to deliver. A lengthy development review process adds delays and expenses, which ultimately get passed down to renters and buyers. In addition, airport overlay restrictions further reduce opportunities for new housing near the airport.
As Mayor, I will modernize these policies so they support housing supply and affordability instead of restricting them. Specifically, I will:
Update zoning to allow townhomes, duplexes, and missing-middle housing more broadly, especially near transit and job centers.
Reform parking requirements so affordable projects aren’t burdened by unnecessary costs.
Codify density bonuses and create fast-track approvals for projects that deliver affordable housing.
Simplify design and lot size requirements to make starter homes and smaller ownership units financially viable.
By removing unnecessary barriers while holding developers accountable for delivering affordability, we can expand housing supply, diversify choices, and keep Morrisville a community where families at all stages of life can thrive.”
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
“Yes. Our current permitting and review process can slow down housing production, especially for infill projects.
Morrisville’s development review process is often lengthy and complex, with multiple approvals that add both time and cost. For smaller infill developments—such as townhomes, duplexes, and affordable housing—the costs of long review timelines can make projects financially unfeasible.
Key challenges include:
Sequential reviews across planning, engineering, fire, and transportation that could be streamlined or run in parallel.
Unclear timelines that create uncertainty for builders, especially for smaller or affordable projects.
Site plan approvals for modest projects that could be handled administratively when they already meet zoning and design standards.
Public hearing requirements for some housing types, even when proposals comply with zoning, adding delays and costs.
As Mayor, I will modernize and streamline permitting while still upholding safety and quality. Specifically, I will:
Deploy one unified software tool for planning, engineering, fire, and inspections to improve coordination and transparency.
Create a public permitting dashboard so developers and residents can track progress in real time.
Implement fast-track review for affordable housing and missing-middle infill, with clear deadlines for staff response.
Expand administrative approvals for projects that meet zoning, removing unnecessary hearings.
Consolidate review steps across departments to reduce duplication and shorten timelines.
By cutting unnecessary delays while keeping accountability in place, we can make it easier to deliver the infill and affordable housing that Morrisville families urgently need.”
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
“Morrisville needs a more balanced mix of housing types so families at every stage of life and income level can call our town home. Right now, our options are too limited—mostly large single-family homes or big apartment complexes. What we’re missing are the “middle” choices: townhomes, duplexes, condos, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs) that serve young families, first-time buyers, essential workers, and seniors looking to downsize.
We also need more affordable and workforce housing tied to our job centers and transit corridors. By encouraging mixed-use development in places like Park West Village, McCrimmon, and along Chapel Hill Road, we can add affordable units while also creating walkable neighborhoods with shops, jobs, and green space.
Growth should be strategically focused where infrastructure already exists—near transit, major roads, and commercial hubs—so we protect our existing neighborhoods and open space. New development must come with developer-funded infrastructure improvements for roads, greenways, and parks, so growth doesn’t outpace the services families depend on.
In short, Morrisville doesn’t just need more housing—we need the right types of housing, in the right places, built the right way. My goal as Mayor is to make sure growth strengthens our community, expands affordability, and keeps Morrisville a welcoming place for everyone.”
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
“Yes, I support by-right permitting—when it is paired with clear, predictable rules that reflect our community’s goals.
Right now, even projects that fully comply with zoning and design standards can be slowed down by lengthy reviews or unnecessary hearings. This adds cost, uncertainty, and delay, which ultimately makes housing—especially affordable and starter homes—harder to deliver. For infill projects like townhomes, duplexes, and ADUs, these delays can be the difference between a project moving forward or being abandoned.
By-right permitting means that if a project meets our zoning, design, and safety requirements, it should be allowed to proceed without discretionary delays. This approach increases transparency for developers and residents alike, while holding everyone accountable to the same published standards. It also ensures that Town staff can focus time and resources on projects that need careful review, rather than duplicating steps for straightforward applications.
As Mayor, I will work to:
Expand by-right permitting for townhomes, duplexes, ADUs, and mixed-income housing, especially near transit and job centers.
Pair by-right approvals with strong upfront standards on design, affordability, and neighborhood compatibility, so residents have confidence in the process.
Use administrative approvals and fast-track review for projects that meet our rules, reducing unnecessary delays.
Increase public transparency by publishing zoning and permitting rules in plain language, along with a permitting dashboard to show timelines.
In short: clear rules, fair standards, and predictable processes benefit everyone—residents, developers, and the Town. By-right permitting, done right, will help Morrisville grow responsibly while making housing more attainable”
Richard Reinhart did not respond
Morrisville Town Council At-Large
4 candidates are running for 1 seat.
Subba Reddy Madireddy did not respond
Liz Dann did not respond
Harrison Kesling
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes. We need development that meets the needs of working families and protects our environment. We need to limit sprawl by prioritizing pedestrian oriented, mixed use, mixed-income development along transit corridors. Having to drive from sprawling suburbs to our places of employment, education, and community building degrades our environment, our health, and our well-being. Additionally, prioritizing car centric development means less land overall for housing which has contributed to our housing shortage.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
“Yes. Morrisville, like most towns in Wake County, still has minimum parking mandates. These rules require a set number of parking spaces per home or per square foot of development even in our Transit Oriented Development and Main Street districts. Many of the commercial shopping areas are affected by this as well as too many have excess unused parking. This may sound harmless, but in practice, these rules drive up housing costs, waste scarce land, and make it harder to build the kind of housing choices people need. Land used for parking lots could hold more homes, small businesses, or greenspace. Impervious parking areas also increase flooding risk, pollute our streams, and worsen traffic by making car travel the only realistic choice which adds to congestion. On top of that, Morrisville has almost no more vacant land left to be developed and is further limited by the Airport Overlay District which limits residential development in proximity to the airport.
I would change and will advocate for:
-Establishing lower parking minimums in the town’s Mixed-Use Planned Development and Main Street Planned Development Districts where walking should be the norm.
-Eliminating parking minimums in the Transit-Oriented Development District so residents are not forced to pay for parking spots that might not be used.
This approach is about choice. If a builder thinks people will want more parking, they can still provide it. But we shouldn’t force every project to build more than the community really needs. The changes outlined above would make housing more affordable, support walking and transit usage, and keep stormwater runoff and heat islands from making Morrisville’s problems worse.”
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
My initial assumption is no, considering the fact that Morrisville is the densest municipality in Wake County at 3,400 people per square mile per the 2020 Census. Raleigh is only 3,200. On its face, it seems that any permitting processes or review steps have not gotten in the way of housing production. The biggest bottleneck with housing production now is lack of land. Any infill will need to be pedestrian and transit oriented to help alleviate traffic congestion since most of the development to this point has been car centric. By prioritizing these types of development and removing parking minimums, the case for infill development will be more palatable. This will also allow us to preserve our tree canopy and possibly expand it if we can facilitate more compact, mixed use, and walkable infill developments.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
Walkable, mixed-use, mixed-income development along existing and future transit corridors such as the Transit Oriented Development District around the McCrimmon Parkway and NC-54 intersection as well as along McCrimmon Parkway towards Aviation Parkway. Any new development on the west side of the train tracks should allow for a mix of residential and small-scale commercial uses such as the New Town Center Project.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes. By setting the guidelines for what communities want in specific areas through zoning and ordinances, housing production can be advanced efficiently in a way that retains community cohesion. As an example, the Town has implemented several areas where higher density is preferred and can be built by right: The New Town Center, The Transit Oriented Development District, and the McCrimmon Corridor Extension. Expanding this approach will help us deliver more housing in a way that strengthens our town and supports incremental and sustainable development.
Pete Martin did not respond
Morrisville Town Council District 2
2 candidates are running for 1 seat.
Jashi Abhirajan did not respond
Ashit Patel did not respond
Morrisville Town Council District 4
2 candidates are running for 1 seat.
Patty W. Cheng
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
In the “Heart of the Triangle”, Morrisville continues to have much demand for housing. However, there
currently appears to be excess supply now that Apartments are offering a month or two of “free rent”. We
need to be smart about approving developments that will allow local residents to build equity in their own
homes.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
I would encourage developers to build “owner occupied condominiums” instead of more large-scale, high
density apartments. This would allow new homeowners to build equity in their own homes. I know this is
common in Maryland and in Massachusetts. We need to appoint people to the Planning & Zoning Board and
encourage Staff members and Developers who will support and encourage “alternative housing designs”.
Many people in Morrisville refuse to consider other housing styles that may have a negative effect on the
value of existing neighborhoods.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Morrisville Needs Major Roads such as the NC DOT Airport Blvd Extension Prioritized and Developed in
order to open up access for housing infill. The Church St to McCrimmon intersection as well as the
Morrisville-Carpenter to Church Street intersection are both highly congested. Without moving forward on
the Airport Blvd Extension, any new development in the area will simply add to the current, already
congested traffic. Eliminating the Traffic congestion and bottlenecks will allow for housing production in
undeveloped areas of “Morrisville Center”.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
Affordable housing, an entire planned community/complex, possibly government subsidized in
development, not just 5% or only 5 units in an apartment complex of 300 to 400 units. This needs to be
integrated along with other developments. We need to better integrated walkable Retail spaces in
residential communities such as Town Hall Commons. Once Airport Blvd is developed through Town Center
Connecting NC 54 to Davis Drive, there will be much more access to parcels of land along Church St and
along Airport Blvd.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Morrisville has too many issues with Over-Crowded Schools and Traffic Congestion for large development
projects to move forward without oversight phasing them in with new infrastructure projects and available
space in our local schools.
Vicki Scroggins-Johnson (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes. Morrisville is experiencing a housing shortage due to high demand and limited available land. In the last 25 years, Morrisville has blossomed into a hub of commerce, culture, and connectivity.
The town is thriving with a strong business base that embraces innovation. Morrisville offers a variety of amateur and professional sports. Residents can enjoy a wide selection of food and entertainment. Morrisville also boasts an award winning park and greenway system, streamlined municipal services, and nationally accredited police, fire rescue, and public works departments. Additionally, the town has maintained a triple A credit rating from all three national bond agencies since 2013. “
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
Morrisville has a Unified Development Ordinance which is the town’s playbook for its physical future - balancing growth, aesthetics, and livability. Most large land parcels are developed, so infill has become increasingly important. Many of these smaller parcels cannot meet all requirements to build housing (e.g. set backs, parking, driveway). To address this issue I would request an in-depth review of barriers and potential options.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
The Town of Morrisville permitting process is highly efficient, supported by an ERP system that enables digital application submissions, reviews, and inspection reports. For by-right housing development -- both commercial and residential-- this process is managed by staff. Proposed projects that exceed density thresholds, or request other exceptions, may require a review by the Planning Board and Town Council. While this additional step does add time to the process, it also provides applicants with a channel to advocate for their projects with the community, allowing for a transparent exchange of benefits and barriers.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
“Morrisville is nearly built out. Smaller homes that are offered at a lower price point are needed. Mixed housing developments provide a variety of housing options -- including smaller homes -- and offer nearby retail, services, and transportation.
The areas in Morrisville where mixed use is most viable is the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), Town Center, McCrimmon Corridor, and Park West Village. “
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes, I support by-right permitting. In recent years, the Town of Morrisville has approved a land use plan that provides a shared understanding of the permitted uses and allowances within the town. Projects that fall within these by-right uses and requirements follow the standard process without discretionary delays. This approach builds trust with both land owners and the community.
PITTSBORO
All Pittsboro races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Pittsboro Mayor
1 candidate is running for 1 seat (uncontested).
Kyle Shipp (incumbent) did not respond
Pittsboro Board of Commissioners
8 candidates are running for 2 seats. With multiple national housing projects (including Disney) happening in Chatham County in the next several years, this small election might be one to follow, especially since the seats are open.
Candace Hunziker did not respond
Alex M. Brinker did not respond
Freda Alston did not respond
Corey Forrest
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes. The growth of Pittsboro has brought a housing shortage with it and we are not alone in that. A combination of Pittsboro being such a wonderful place to live and the years of limited development due to sewer and water issues are major factors along with a lack of density in current and past residential projects.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
The towns review processes can be very lengthy and incredibly complex. I would focus on the efficiency of the plan review processes and make sure that responsible projects are not being penalized by excessive review cycles and endless red tape while also not sacrificing QA/QC.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
The whole process from rezoning/annexation to building permits is incredibly complex and it is expensive to navigate every piece of this process. Making these processes more efficient would alleviate some of that expense and would be a major step forward for many of the town housing issues.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
Density, density, density! I’ve heard it over and over again and I think it’s absolutely right, there’s just no way around it. We need more affordable options whether that be townhomes or apartments and we need them where people are working. We need density in and around our downtown areas.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes! I believe it is possible to create clear, concise regulations that would allow streamlining of the permitting and review processes with proper oversight. By-right permitting would also facilitate decreased costs that make their way to the consumer and in a time when affordable housing is on the top of everyone’s mind, it would be irresponsible not to take serious look at implementing by-right permitting.
Tiana Thurber
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
I believe our community is experiencing a shortage of affordable housing. Many residents and families are finding it difficult to secure homes that fit their budgets, which makes it harder for people to live, work, and raise families in Pittsboro. Addressing this issue is important to ensure our town remains inclusive, thriving, and sustainable.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
I believe some of our current policies and regulations make it harder to build affordable housing in Pittsboro. Zoning restrictions, limited incentives for developers, and lengthy approval processes can slow progress and increase costs. I would work to update these regulations to encourage responsible development that provides more housing options while still preserving the town’s character and natural resources.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Yes, I believe certain permitting processes and review steps can slow down housing production and make infill development more difficult. Lengthy approval timelines, multiple layers of review, and complex zoning requirements can discourage developers from building much-needed housing. I would work to streamline these processes while ensuring that growth is responsible and aligns with Pittsboro’s character and environmental priorities.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
I believe our community needs more affordable and mixed-income housing to ensure that people of all ages and backgrounds can live and thrive in Pittsboro. Growth should be focused in areas that support smart, responsible development, including infill opportunities in town and projects that complement our downtown, while preserving green space and the town’s unique character.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
I would need more information about “by-right” permitting before forming a strong opinion. I want to make sure any approach balances encouraging development with protecting Pittsboro’s character, environment, and quality of life.
Nikkolas Shramek
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes, Pittsboro and the broader Chatham County region are experiencing a housing shortage, and it’s not just anecdotal. The data backs it up.
The main drivers being:
Infrastructure Bottlenecks: Wastewater capacity has throttled new housing across Pittsboro.
Skyrocketing Prices & Lot Costs: Median prices exceed $600k—far above NC’s average of ~$367k.
Affordable Housing Gap: Over 30% of renters are cost-burdened; nonprofits build fewer than 10 homes/year.
Workforce Housing Needs: Teachers, first responders, and healthcare workers struggle to live where they serve.
This shortage affects affordability, workforce retention, and community stability. Without proactive planning—like zoning reform, infrastructure investment, and streamlined permitting—Pittsboro risks pricing out the very residents and workers it needs to thrive.”
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
“Pittsboro’s outdated housing rules are driving up costs and slowing down progress.
Key obstacles include:
Zoning Limits that do not encourage townhomes, duplexes, and multifamily housing
Large Lot Requirements that inflate land prices and reduce affordability
Wastewater Constraints that have stalled development for years
Design Mandates that raise costs and delay approvals
Slow Review Cycles that discourage small builders and infill projects
What Needs to Change
Zoning Reform to allow higher density, and mixed-use near downtown
Streamlined Permitting for projects that meet affordability and sustainability goals
Infrastructure Investment to unlock housing-ready areas
Affordability Incentives like density bonuses and fee reductions
Transparent Engagement to build trust and support smart growth
Pittsboro deserves housing policies that reflect its values—affordable, inclusive, and community-driven. Let’s build a future where everyone has a place to call home.”
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
“Pittsboro’s permitting process is complex, slow, and costly—especially for infill and small-scale housing. Here’s where it breaks down:
Challenges
Scoping & Reviews - Multi-department coordination delays approvals
Rezoning & Conditional Use - Public hearings add weeks or months to timelines
Final Plat & Inspections - Fragmented reviews multiply complexity
Environmental & Landscaping - Strict standards raise costs and slow progress
Sewer/Water Access - Infrastructure limits block shovel-ready projects
How Pittsboro Can Streamline Infill
Pre-Approved Templates: Standardize duplex/triplex designs to fast-track approvals
Fast-Track Small Projects: Limit hearings for low-impact infill
Concurrent Reviews: Let applicants schedule TRC steps in parallel
Fee Reductions: Lower upfront costs for affordable housing components
Clear Infill Playbook: Publish step-by-step guidance to reduce guesswork
Pittsboro needs a permitting system that supports smart, inclusive growth, not one that stalls it. Let’s make infill easier, faster, and fairer.”
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
“Smart communities thrive on diverse, well-placed housing.
Affordable & Workforce Housing Homes for teachers, nurses, and young families—near jobs, schools, and transit.
Missing Middle Housing Duplexes, triplexes, townhomes—perfect for walkable neighborhoods and moderate incomes.
Senior & Accessible Housing Single-level, age-friendly units close to healthcare and daily essentials.
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Higher-density housing near transit hubs—reduces traffic, boosts local business.
Mixed-Use Communities Housing blended with retail and offices—ideal for downtowns and underused commercial zones.
Sustainable Housing Energy-efficient homes with solar, insulation, and water-saving features—good for people and planet.
Where Growth Should Go:
Near existing roads, utilities, and transit
Downtowns and main streets for revitalization
Transit corridors to cut car dependency
Repurpose aging commercial sites into vibrant mixed-use hubs”
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
“By-right permitting is essential for delivering housing faster, more affordably, and with greater transparency. When developers follow clear rules—height, setbacks, density, affordability—they should be able to build without discretionary delays.
Why It Matters:
Predictability: Clear rules reduce uncertainty and speed up approvals
Lower Costs: Fewer delays mean lower legal and consulting fees—keeping housing more affordable
Faster Delivery: Pittsboro’s current review cycles can take 30+ days; by-right streamlines compliant projects
Fewer Political Bottlenecks: Shifts debate to rule-setting, not case-by-case approvals
Smart Growth: Encourages density, walkability, and sustainability—if rules are well-crafted
But It Must Be Balanced:
Strong design standards to protect neighborhood character
Equity measures like affordable housing set-asides
Geographic fairness so all areas share in growth
Public input upfront—when writing the rules, not delaying each project
Bottom line: By-right permitting works—when paired with thoughtful planning, infrastructure investment, and community values.”
Ashley Gross
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Absolutely. Chatham County is facing a serious housing crunch fueled by rapid population growth and limited supply. The average home price has climbed to $725,000, which means a family now needs to earn $150,000–$200,000 just to afford a median home.
Rental properties are vanishing within days of being listed, driving intense competition among renters. In the last decade, our population has grown more than 20%, and essential workers (teachers, firefighters, healthcare professionals) are increasingly priced out of the very communities they serve.
Even with a 14% bump in housing inventory compared to last year, we’re still in critically low supply. This isn’t just a market blip, it’s a deeper mismatch between demand and what’s being built. “
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
“Yes, regulatory barriers are slowing housing development. From my understanding, the biggest roadblock is inadequate sewer capacity, especially in places like Siler City where projects are stalled and shortages are growing. Recent state legislation (SB 382) has also tied local hands by banning down-zoning without property owner consent.
The key areas to focus on are:
• Expanding infrastructure capacity quickly, especially water and sewer.
• Streamlining development reviews while still protecting the environment.
• Promoting mixed-use and higher-density projects near existing infrastructure.
• Creating fast-track permitting for affordable housing that meets specific criteria.
That said, I’d like the chance to talk with more subject matter experts to fully develop this perspective. Balancing responsible growth with urgent housing needs requires both urgency and informed insight.”
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
“From my understanding, the permitting process in Chatham County needs modernization. Environmental reviews are critical for protecting water quality, but they can also create lengthy delays.
The areas to focus on include:
• Digital permitting systems to reduce processing time
• Concurrent reviews instead of strictly sequential ones
• Clear timelines with automatic approvals if deadlines aren’t met
• Pre-approved plans for common housing types to speed up development
• Dedicated staff for affordable housing projects
At the same time, strong environmental protections must remain in place. Oversight is essential, we’ve already seen multiple violations at major developments like Chatham Park.
The goal is efficient, not lax, permitting that supports both housing development and environmental quality. “
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
“Chatham County urgently needs more workforce housing. Homes affordable to families earning $60,000–$120,000 annually, including teachers, first responders, and healthcare workers. Right now, market conditions are pushing these essential workers out of the communities they serve.
The priorities should include:
• Townhomes and small-lot single-family homes in the $250,000–$400,000 range
• Quality apartments and condos for young professionals and seniors
• Accessory dwelling units to add gentle density in existing neighborhoods
Growth should be concentrated where infrastructure can support it, around Pittsboro and along major transportation corridors. We also need to leverage proximity to Research Triangle jobs while ensuring new development contributes its fair share to infrastructure costs. “
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
“I support by-right permitting for projects that meet clear, upfront standards. With rentals disappearing in days and average home prices at $725,000, we can’t afford unnecessary delays for housing that already complies with the rules.
By-right does not mean no oversight. It means predictable, efficient processes backed by strong criteria. The goal is simple, set comprehensive rules that protect the community while cutting subjective delays. Projects that meet environmental requirements, infrastructure thresholds, and design guidelines should be able to move forward efficiently. This reduces costs for developers, which can help deliver more affordable housing—while keeping community safeguards in place.”
Tobais Palmer
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Pittsboro has had issues over the years with infrastructure especially supplying access to wastewater or sanitary sewer. Without sanitary sewer communities cannot create infill and density by going vertical which are two strategies that can address housing demand. Pittsboro, Chatham County and Siler City have merged with Tri-River Utilities to create a unified utility district in Chatham and Lee County. This will allow more housing and potentially mixed use communities to be developed. Chatham Park has the entitlements to put for housing on the ground and will make use of more available sanitary sewer. The question will be whether the community can increase its supply of all housing categories including middle housing and what strategies it can employ to work with the builders and developers to shift supply to address the high median cost of housing in Chatham County and Pittsboro. (The median price of housing in Chatham County is actually higher than Orange County and is over $600,000.) Bottom line: there is a healthy demand for housing options in and around Pittsboro and policy makers need to meet this head on to ensure that housing is available to rent and/or or own for all income categories.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
I grew up Pittsboro and I want Pittsboro to be a place where small town values meet big city amenities. Pittsboro went through a process to create a Unified Development Ordinance (”UDO”) and updated land use plan. The UDO has been amended periodically by the Town Board through a process led by Town Staff. This is the current process that Pittsboro has used to keep abreast of the issues it has had with its UDO and to sand off any of its rough edges. As for policies/regulations, Pittsboro passed a resolution thsi Spring opposing House Bill 765 which had a number of policies that likely would have been good for the community including the allowance of duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes in all residential zoning districts; reforms of conditional zoning agreements; and reforms of off-street parking for new development. I am in favor of allowing duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes in all residential zoning districts and I see this return of the “missing middle” as a key component of addressing housing needs in our community. We need to be flexible and creative.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
I will need more specific experiences and input to better answer this question. The Town does need to have a fully funded and staffed planning and engineering department to ensure that housing supply keeps up with demand. I also believe that the permitting process would be a lot simpler and more affordable for the community if we could just convert to a simple residential zoning for residential parcels that would allow for more flexibility, creativity and no limit on density other than the underlying conditions of the property such as wetlands, streams, etc and access to infrastructure such as water and sewer.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
Pittsboro has a very large master planned community called Chatham Park which will drive a lot of the growth in housing and other types of development in Pittsboro for the next 20 to 30 years. Pittsboro does have a large ETJ with land available to develop on the Northwest and Southwest side of Town. This area will allow for development that will not be in Chatham Park and likely at different price points and housing types such as more duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes as well town homes and apartments. One area that could benefit from more creativity, infill and density is the area in and around downtown Pittsboro.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
I think clear and coherent rules that cut out unnecessary delays are better for the process of getting needed housing built in Pittsboro. As I mentioned previously we could convert to a simple residential zoning for residential parcels that would allow for more flexibility, creativity and no limit on density other than the underlying issues that affect the property such as wetlands, streams, etc and access to infrastructure such as water and sewer.
ROLESVILLE
Rolesville Board of Commissioners
3 candidates are running for 3 seats (uncontested).
April Sneed (incumbent) did not respond
Dan Tyrone Alston (incumbent) did not respond
Jennifer Bernat did not respond
WAKE FOREST
All Wake Forest races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Wake Forest Mayor
2 candidates are running for 1 seat.
Vivian Jones (incumbent) did not respond
Ben Clapsaddle did not respond
Wake Forest Board of Commissioners
5 candidates are running for 3 seats. Wake Forest faces development pressure as Raleigh continues to expand north of I-540. Candidates have already signaled growth and preservation of historic charm (essentially housing development) will be a key decision point for this race.
Nick Sliwinski (incumbent) did not respond
R. Keith Shackleford (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes. Our community has a shortage of affordable housing.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
There are several factors that are affecting the construction of more affordable housing.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Not specifically. But I am sure there are fees that the building industry would increases costs that are passed on to the consumer.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
We need more affordable housing. The definition of affordable is different depending upon whom you are speaking with. We need housing that is affordable for young families and our workforce.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
I am not familiar with “by right” permitting and would have weigh the pros and cons before answer this questions.
Jasmine Zavala did not respond
Haseeb Fatmi did not respond
Thomas Dement did not respond
Pam James did not respond
WENDELL
All Wendell races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Wendell Mayors race is on staggered terms and won’t be until 2027.
Wendell Board of Commissioners
8 candidates are running for 3 seats. With recent mixed use development in downtown Wendell and around Wendell Falls, this town has already signaled housing and allowing growth to continue will be on the ballot.
Deans Eatman (incumbent)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes. Wendell is growing faster than many of our systems were designed to handle, and housing demand is a
big part of that. People are moving here because it’s one of the few places in Wake County that still offers
relative affordability and small-town character, but our limited housing supply is pushing prices up and
putting pressure on renters, first-time buyers, and working families.
I believe we have a responsibility to guide growth in a way that expands housing choices, keeps our town
accessible, and supports long-term affordability. That includes allowing more types of housing, especially in
areas with infrastructure in place. Wendell won’t solve the Triangle’s housing challenges alone, but we can
and should do our part.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
Yes. Wendell’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) hasn’t had a full rewrite since it was adopted in 2008,
and while some sections have been updated, it still reflects an older, more restrictive approach to land use.
Right now, most townhome and multifamily housing types aren’t allowed by right anywhere in town. Instead
they require conditional zoning or special approvals, which adds time, cost, and uncertainty to the process.
That’s one of the reasons I’ve advocated for a full UDO rewrite, which is now underway and expected to be
completed in 2026. I want to see a modern code that reflects Wendell’s growth and expands housing
options in a way that’s connected, consistent, and designed to meet our infrastructure and community
goals. Allowing more housing types by right in appropriate areas is an important part of that.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
Yes. One of the biggest challenges is how we treat infill and missing middle housing under our current
development code. In Wendell, nearly every townhome or multifamily project requires a rezoning, even when
proposed in areas with existing infrastructure and compatible land uses. That adds delay and uncertainty,
especially for smaller-scale or infill projects that can’t absorb the same upfront costs as large subdivisions.
Because our UDO is outdated, it often takes time for both town staff and applicants to work through how to
apply it to modern uses and evolving development patterns. That complexity slows things down further and
increases the risk of inconsistency or missed opportunities. Public hearing requirements can also create
added pressure on applicants to scale back or walk away, even when a project aligns with the town’s goals.
Wendell needs a modern UDO with clearer by-right allowances and updated design standards that support
infill in walkable, connected areas already served by public infrastructure. Making these updates would
reduce barriers and allow more housing to be built where it makes the most sense.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
Wendell needs more housing types that provide options for a range of incomes, life stages, and household
sizes. That includes townhomes, duplexes, small apartment buildings, accessory dwelling units, and mixed-
use buildings with residential above retail. We should make it easier to build these housing products in
places that already have the infrastructure to support them.
Our downtown is one of Wendell’s greatest strengths. With the bones and character of a traditional early
20th-century market town, it offers a walkable core that people love. It is also surrounded by undeveloped or
underdeveloped blocks in almost every direction. That area is my top focus for infill and redevelopment to
increase housing density in a way that supports local businesses, preserves our small-town feel, and makes
better use of the infrastructure we have already built.
More broadly, growth should be focused in areas where it can be well connected, walkable, and integrated
into the broader community. That includes neighborhoods near downtown and along key corridors like
Wendell Boulevard and Wendell Falls Parkway.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes, I support by-right permitting when we have clear, well-designed rules that reflect community priorities.
Right now in Wendell, even modest housing types like townhomes or small apartment buildings almost
always require a rezoning or special use permit. That adds unnecessary cost, delay, and unpredictability,
especially for infill projects that already face tight margins.
I supported launching a full rewrite of our Unified Development Ordinance to address these issues. If we
want to expand housing choices, especially in areas with existing infrastructure, we need a code that sets
clear expectations and allows good projects to move forward without political bottlenecks.
By-right permitting brings consistency to the process and helps deliver the kinds of walkable, connected
neighborhoods we say we want. Getting the standards right up front is essential, and I am committed to
making sure that happens in Wendell.
Wes Jones did not respond
B.J. Barham did not respond
Kate Benson did not respond
Dustin Ingalls
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
Yes. Wendell’s population is about 21,000 now, and some estimates project we will be at 50-60,000 in five years. The town board has approved the construction of units to house only about 15-20,000 more. That’s a deficit of at least 10,000 units.
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
Building townhouses requires a special use permit. I’m hoping the next UDO, currently being written and set to be finalized by the new board next year, allows more housing types and more density by right.
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
See above.
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
In downtown, I want to encourage infill and activation of second floors, some of which could potentially be used as apartments. But most development is and will continue to be on land that has never been developed, and I want to be smart about using it well. The choices we make now can’t be undone or redone for a long time, if ever. I want to reduce car trips on major roads by putting housing as close to new and existing commerce, jobs, and recreation as possible, including multiuse development. We must continue building out our multiuse path connecting Wendell Falls to downtown, as well as our greenway system and sidewalks.
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
Yes. I’m a strong proponent of defining how our town should look for several years into the future with periodic UDO updates that allow certain types of development in certain areas without having to go through rezoning.
Jorge Cordova did not respond
Philip Tarnaski did not respond
Christopher M. Critzer did not respond
ZEBULON
All Zebulon races will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. Early voting runs October 16–November 1.
Zebulon Mayor
5 candidate is running for 1 seat. This looks like it could be one of the most highly contested races in the region, and conversations that are sure to include growth and housing pressures in the town.
Glenn York (incumbent mayor) did not respond
Gilbert Todd, Jr. (former town manager)
Q. Do you believe your community is experiencing a housing shortage? Why or why not?
“Yes, absolutely. While the overall number of new homes has increased, Zebulon is experiencing a critical shortage of the right types of housing. We have a mismatch between what is being built and what our community actually needs.
Specifically, we lack quality, attainable options for first-time homebuyers and for seniors who wish to downsize but stay in the community they love. We also need more modern multifamily housing with the amenities required to attract and retain young professionals. True “”thoughtful growth”“ means ensuring we are building a diverse range of housing that serves every generation and income level in our town.”
Q. Are there current policies or regulations in your town that make it harder to build housing? What would you change?
“The primary obstacle is not the regulations themselves, but the unpredictable and subjective interpretation of our Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) by the current elected board. When the rules are applied inconsistently, it creates uncertainty, delays, and added costs that are ultimately passed on to homebuyers.
As Mayor, I will work to restore predictability and professionalism to this process. Drawing on my experience as a Residential Plan Reviewer, I will champion a more collaborative approach where the UDO is treated as a clear guide, not a tool for political maneuvering. We must ensure that our town is a reliable partner, not a roadblock, to responsible development.”
Q. Are there specific permitting processes or review steps that you believe are slowing down housing production or making infill harder?
“Yes. The current process suffers from a lack of clear, upfront communication from the elected body. Developers often find the goalposts are moved late in the process, after significant time and money have already been invested. This creates an adversarial environment and slows down the delivery of much-needed housing.
I will advocate for a more robust and meaningful pre-application conference process. This ensures that developers, town staff, and the board are all on the same page from day one, establishing clear expectations and a predictable path forward. My nearly 20-year career in local government has taught me that efficiency and transparency in the early stages are the keys to successful outcomes.”
Q. What types of housing or development do you think your community needs more of, and where should that growth be focused?
“Zebulon needs more mixed-use development, particularly residential-over-retail projects. This type of development creates vibrant, walkable neighborhoods where residents can live, shop, and dine, which strengthens our local economy and builds a stronger sense of community.
This growth should be strategically focused in and around our downtown core and along key transportation corridors. By concentrating density in these areas, we can revitalize underutilized spaces and create new energy without disrupting the character of our established single-family neighborhoods.”
Q. Do you support “by-right” permitting, where cities set clear rules and allow projects that follow those rules to move forward without discretionary delays? Why or why not?
“I strongly support “”by-right”“ permitting. It is a cornerstone of a government that is fair, predictable, and transparent.
When we set clear rules and then honor them, we create a system that is more efficient for everyone. For developers, it reduces costly delays, which helps with housing affordability. For our town staff, it frees them up to focus on more complex projects instead of navigating political uncertainty. Most importantly, for our residents, it ensures that development is based on established community standards, not the political whims of a few. “”By-right”“ permitting is simply good governance.”
Shannon Baxter (current town commissioner) did not respond
Larry R. Loucks (former town commissioner) did not respond
Jessica Daniels Harrison (current town commissioner) did not respond
Zebulon Town Board of Commissioners
6 candidates are running for 2 seats (uncontested).