Connect with us

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

Soccer stadium development was in works months before UNCA acknowledged it, business records show • Asheville Watchdog

Published

1 day ago

on

avlwatchdog.org – JACK EVANS – 2025-07-16 11:57:00


The University of North Carolina-Asheville faces backlash over a proposed $200 million soccer stadium development on 45 wooded acres of campus. Critics accuse the university of misleading the public, as business records show the developer registered months before UNCA claimed to begin considering the project. Despite public statements denying plans, evidence of early surveying and soil work emerged. The university withheld the developer’s identity—Mark McCullers, a veteran in stadium development—until a recent closed-door meeting. Local residents and faculty decry the lack of transparency, especially while the community was still recovering from Tropical Storm Helene during the project’s early planning stages.

The prospective developer for a 5,000-seat soccer stadium and surrounding development on the University of North Carolina-Asheville’s campus was created months before the university publicly acknowledged its intent to develop 45 acres of wooded land, state business records show.

Asheville Stadium District Real Estate Project LLC registered to do business in North Carolina on Nov. 27, according to filings with the office of the North Carolina Secretary of State. 

That was about six weeks before UNCA, without announcement, began assessing the development potential of the acreage, and nearly seven months before it proposed the project: A stadium for Asheville City Soccer Club matches and other events, surrounded by parking lots, market-rate housing and retail units. In the interim, UNCA officials repeatedly said they’d made no decisions about how to develop the woods, which have long been embraced by students, faculty and neighbors for both recreation and research.

“That’s a bold-faced lie on their part, because they claimed they didn’t know anything, and they obviously did,” said Callie Warner, an advocate for the preservation of the woods.

Neither UNCA nor Asheville City SC responded to questions about how and when the development plan came together.

UNCA announced the stadium proposal June 13, and Chancellor Kimberly van Noort said then that the school was working with a private developer. But the university withheld its identity for nearly a month, despite multiple requests from Asheville Watchdog, before naming it during a closed-door presentation to Board of Trustees members last week.

A closed-door presentation given to Board of Trustees members last week included this map of the soccer stadium development. // Credit: UNCA

The university’s partner on the project, Asheville City SC, also declined last month to identify the developer. The Asheville Citizen-Times first reported the identity of the developer Monday, along with the news that the Board of Trustees had given approval on a ground lease key to the development plan after nearly two hours of private deliberation.

State records list one manager for Asheville Stadium District Real Estate Project: Mark McCullers, an Ohio-based sports real-estate consultant with a history of working on soccer stadiums. He did not respond to requests for comment for this story.

McCullers spent more than 15 years as an executive with Major League Soccer’s Columbus Crew: He joined the club in 1998 to oversee the construction of its stadium and later became its general manager, then president, before leaving in 2014. 

He then founded the McCullers Group, which has been involved in the development of stadiums for FC Cincinnati — a key part of the club’s transition from the United Soccer League to the top-tier MLS — and in Mauldin, South Carolina, where a new stadium for Greenville’s pro teams is set to open next year. The McCullers Group also has a long-term relationship with the USL, the umbrella organization that covers many of the secondary and tertiary soccer leagues in the U.S., including the leagues that Asheville City SC’s teams play in.

But McCullers’s involvement in Asheville raises new questions about the university’s transparency and honesty, critics of the stadium proposal said.

“At each stage in this process, the university has chosen to be evasive, opaque and just plain dishonest,” Woody Davis, another woods advocate, told Buncombe County commissioners Tuesday night. “By all appearances, the decision was made about what they wanted to do no later than November of last year. They have spent the intervening months publicly lying about it while working to push it through behind closed doors.”

Critics of plan have decried lack of transparency

The developer’s business registration in November adds one definitive point to a timeline that has long lacked clarity.

UNCA and Asheville City SC have a yearslong relationship: The club has played its games at UNCA’s Greenwood Field since 2023, when renovations to its previous home, Memorial Stadium, made the field unsuitable. But neither party has said when they began discussing the possibility of working together toward a new stadium.

“I can’t help you,” Roger Aiken, the chair of the university’s Board of Trustees, said Tuesday. “I don’t know anything about when the timeline was.”

The possibility that planning began as early as November is shocking, especially given that the university and its neighbors were still reeling from Tropical Storm Helene, said Chris Cotteta, president of the Five Points Neighborhood Association. // Watchdog photo by Starr Sariego

In January, neighbors of the woods — which connect the main campus to the Five Points area — were surprised to find heavy machinery boring soil and clearing vegetation. Their outrage prompted a Jan. 16 statement from UNCA, which said that “no decisions regarding development have been made at this time” and promised a “commitment to transparency and collaboration.” In March, van Noort wrote in a Citizen-Times op-ed that the university had decided to develop the woods but maintained that it had not settled on any specifics. Aiken told The Watchdog the same thing later that month.

Also in March, John Dougherty, UNCA’s general counsel and chief of staff, responded to a Watchdog public records request, filed the previous month, for documents related to the development assessment. He provided agreements, dating to as early as December 2024, for boundary surveying on the property. But he said no other documents existed: There were no site plans, no contracts with the companies that had drilled soil and cleared undergrowth, no development agreements between UNCA or the UNC System and outside parties.

The promise that no decisions had been made underpinned a series of community-input sessions the university offered in April, for students, faculty and staff, and the general public. At the latter, attended by reporters, UNCA leaders — including van Noort and Aiken — listened as attendees unanimously criticized how the school had handled its exploration of development. Already, rumors about a soccer stadium were swirling, as at least one speaker noted. Afterward, van Noort declined to take questions from the media.

The university was publicly silent on the matter until June, when van Noort laid out the $200 million stadium proposal in a presentation to members of the UNC System’s Board of Governors. 

Van Noort and some Board of Governors members have described the plan as a boon for a school that, in recent years, has struggled with its budget and enrollment. It would sit on what the state has designated as a Millennial Campus property, which gives schools more flexibility to enter into revenue-generating public-private partnerships. 

The school has said the developer would foot most of the cost; in return, the developer would design, build and operate the whole development and own the retail, housing and parking. The school also intends to seek $29 million in public subsidies, though it has not said how it plans to do so.

UNCA has yet to fulfil a June 16 records request from The Watchdog for documents that would illuminate the plans and how they came together, including planning documents, communications between university and Asheville City SC officials, and economic development analyses (the school has claimed the development would generate hundreds of millions of dollars in investments, create hundreds of new jobs and bolster sales tax revenue).

The possibility that planning began as early as November is shocking, especially given that the university and its neighbors were still reeling from Tropical Storm Helene, said Chris Cotteta, president of the Five Points Neighborhood Association.

“Where were we all in November?” he said. “We still didn’t have clean drinking water coming out of the tap. We were still clearing trees from the roadways. And meanwhile UNCA is planning this massive stadium development.”

Speaking to county commissioners Tuesday, Davis framed the revelation as a failure of transparency.

“A public institution, founded with public money and situated on public land, now treats the public it is supposed to serve with contempt,” he said. “Many are feeling bewildered and betrayed.”

Asheville Watchdog welcomes thoughtful reader comments about this story, which has been republished on our Facebook page. Please submit your comments there.

Asheville Watchdog is a nonprofit news team producing stories that matter to Asheville and Buncombe County. Jack Evans is an investigative reporter who previously worked at the Tampa Bay Times. You can reach him via email at jevans@avlwatchdog.org. The Watchdog’s reporting is made possible by donations from the community. To show your support for this vital public service go to avlwatchdog.org/support-our-publication/.

Original article

The post Soccer stadium development was in works months before UNCA acknowledged it, business records show • Asheville Watchdog appeared first on avlwatchdog.org


Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This content focuses on government transparency and environmental preservation, highlighting criticisms of a public university’s decision-making process regarding development on public land. The framing is skeptical of institutional opacity and questions the influence of private developers on public resources, themes commonly emphasized by center-left perspectives. While not overtly ideological, the emphasis on accountability, community interest, and environmental stewardship aligns with a center-left bias, critiquing establishment actions from a standpoint that values public engagement and cautious development.

Related Topics:

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

Missing voter information the objection of NC search

Published

32 minutes ago

on

July 17, 2025

By

carolinapublicpress.org – Sarah Michels – 2025-07-17 14:07:00


North Carolina State Board of Elections Executive Director Sam Hayes is launching the Registration Repair Project to rectify missing identification info in 103,270 voter records. Missing data include driver’s license numbers, last four Social Security digits, or affirmations of lacking both. The board will send letters in August requesting these details; non-compliant voters will be flagged and cast provisional ballots, counting only for federal contests. Voters providing alternate ID at polls can vote regularly but are still encouraged to update records. The plan, approved unanimously despite concerns about voting barriers, aims to ensure accurate rolls amid ongoing legal disputes and compliance issues.

by Sarah Michels, Carolina Public Press
July 17, 2025

North Carolina State Board of Elections Executive Director Sam Hayes is setting off on a mission to correct 103,000 North Carolinians’ voting records from which some information is missing. 

He maintains that the process, dubbed the Registration Repair Project, will not remove any eligible voters from the state’s voter rolls. 

According to the state elections board, 103,270 North Carolina registered voters have records that lack either their driver’s license number, the last four digits of their Social Security number or an indication that they have neither. 

[Subscribe for FREE to Carolina Public Press’ alerts and weekend roundup newsletters]

Last year, this missing information became the stuff of headlines, lawsuits and the high-profile election protest of Republican Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin, who lost his bid for state Supreme Court to the incumbent justice, Democrat Allison Riggs, by 734 votes. 

In April, the North Carolina Supreme Court declined to remove ballots from the count based on missing identification numbers; they said the state elections board, not voters, was responsible for a faulty voter registration form that didn’t make it abundantly clear that this information was required. 

While Griffin lost, the issue he raised remains salient for a newly Republican elections board and the U.S. Department of Justice, which promptly sued the state board over alleged violations of the federal Help America Vote Act’s voter registration provisions.

Thursday, Hayes told reporters that a process he unveiled in late June to gather these missing identification numbers had begun in earnest.

“We must put this issue behind us so we can focus our attention squarely on preparations for accurate and secure municipal elections this fall,” he said. 

The plan to collect missing information

There are two groups of voters under Hayes’ plan. 

The first group includes registered voters who have never provided a driver’s license, the last four digits of their Social Security number or an affirmation that they lack both. The state elections board has asked county election boards to check their records for these numbers, in case they were provided but not correctly entered into the voting system. 

In early August, the state elections board will send letters to the remaining voters in this group requesting the missing information. If affected voters do not comply, they will vote provisionally in future elections. The elections board will create a flag on these voters’ records for poll workers. 

The second group includes registered voters whose records do not show that they’ve provided an identification number, but have shown additional documentation at the polls proving their identity and eligibility under HAVA. These voters may vote a regular ballot. 

However, the elections board will still send them a letter in a second mailing asking for the missing identification number to bolster the state’s voter records. Even so, if they do not oblige, they still will not be at risk of being disenfranchised, NCSBE General Counsel Paul Cox said. 

County election boards have already made progress, and their work will continue as the mailings go out, Hayes said. 

Voters can check to see whether they’re on the list of those with missing information by using the Registration Repair Search Tool. If voters don’t want to wait for the August mailing, they can submit an updated voter registration form using their driver’s license through the online DMV portal or visit their county elections board in person with their driver’s license or Social Security card. 

“We anticipate the number of voters on the list will decrease quickly as word spreads about this important effort,” Hayes said.

The State Board of Elections unanimously approved the plan last month, despite some concerns from Democrat Jeff Carmon about putting up an extra obstacle for voters because of a problem with missing information that the voters didn’t cause. 

“It’s hard to understand starvation if you’ve never felt the pangs of hunger,” Carmon said. “It’s the same situation with voting obstacles. Your perspective of an obstacle may not be the same as someone who’s consistently had their identity and their validity questioned.” 

Nonetheless, Carmon and fellow Democrat board member Siobhan Millen ultimately voted in support of the plan.

Same ballot, different rules 

Normally, when a voter casts a provisional ballot, the county elections board determines whether their ballot counts by the post-election canvass, held nine days after an election. 

Voters may have to provide documentation or information to prove their eligibility to vote in order to be accepted. 

The same process applies to the 103,000 affected voters, with a catch. Their vote may be accepted for federal contests, but not state contests, due to a difference in law. 

According to the DOJ’s interpretation, the National Voter Registration Act requires all provisional votes of “duly registered voters” to count, Cox said. 

But the state elections board has interpreted the state Supreme Court and North Carolina Court of Appeals’ decisions in the Griffin case as requiring a driver’s license, the last four digits of a Social Security number or an affirmation that a voter has neither before accepting their votes in state and local contests. 

Under a recent election law change, county election boards have three days to validate and count or reject provisional ballots. 

But sometimes, mismatches happen during validation due to database trouble with reading hyphenated names or connecting maiden and married names, for example, Cox said. The board has designed a “fail safe” in case this comes up. 

When there’s a mismatch during the validation process, state law allows voters to provide additional documentation — like a driver’s license, bank statement or  government document with a voter’s name and address — to prove their eligibility. 

“A big chunk of these voters will have already shown HAVA ID, and that’s because in the past, when this information was not supplied, the county boards would still require these voters to show that alternative form of HAVA ID when they voted for the first time,” Cox said. 

Poll workers will ask provisional voters to provide this additional documentation so that they can mark it down for later, if validation doesn’t work, he added.  

Democrats threaten countersuit 

Last week, the Democratic National Committee threatened the state board with litigation if they went ahead with their plan regarding those with missing information. 

The letter claimed that the plan would remove eligible voters from the rolls illegally. 

Hayes disagrees. In his view, he’s just following the law. 

“It’s not the fault of the voters,” he said. “But at the same time, we’re required by the law to go back and collect this information, which should have been done at the time, and it certainly should have been done in the intervening time.”

He also clarified that North Carolina’s photo voter ID requirement won’t suffice for the impacted voters. They still have to vote provisionally so that their identification numbers can go through the validation process, he said. 

As for whether his fully fleshed out plan will appease the DNC? 

“We hope so,” Hayes said. 

This article first appeared on Carolina Public Press and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The post Missing voter information the objection of NC search appeared first on carolinapublicpress.org


Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Centrist

This article presents a balanced and factual report on North Carolina’s voter registration issue, focusing on the administrative process and legal context without overt editorializing. It includes perspectives from both Republican and Democratic figures, highlights legal rulings and procedural details, and covers concerns from Democrats alongside the state elections board’s explanations. The language is neutral, aiming to inform about the complexities of voter ID requirements and the Registration Repair Project without endorsing a particular political stance or framing the issue through a partisan lens.

Continue Reading

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

Trump Contiues To Last Out at MAGA Supporters Who Call for Release of Epstein FIles

Published

8 hours ago

on

July 17, 2025

By

www.youtube.com – WRAL – 2025-07-17 12:55:57


SUMMARY: President Trump is criticizing some MAGA supporters demanding the release of Jeffrey Epstein investigation files, calling their efforts a Democratic hoax and labeling those involved as weak or foolish Republicans. This stance has sparked rare pushback within his base, with allies like podcaster Charlie Kirk urging calm and others challenging Trump’s dismissive attitude. The divide deepened after Trump previously hinted at supporting more transparency on Epstein-related matters during his 2024 campaign. Despite the controversy, Trump continues to back Attorney General Pam Bondi, who claims she has provided all credible information available on the case.

When Jeffrey Epstein died in prison, then-President Donald Trump speculated that authorities might be wrong in ruling it a suicide.

Many of his allies in the pro-Trump media went further, casting Epstein’s death as a murder meant to continue a decades-long coverup of pedophilia by elites.

WRAL App: https://www.wral.com/download-wral-apps/5787234/
The Latest Weather: https://www.wral.com/weather/page/1010362/

News Tips:
Online – https://www.wral.com/report-it/
Email – assignmentdesk@wral.com

Subscribe to WRAL:
https://youtube.com/c/wral5

Follow WRAL:
Facebook: https://facebook.com/WRALTV
X: https://twitter.com/WRAL
IG: https://instagram.com/wral

About WRAL-TV:

WRAL is your Raleigh, North Carolina news source. Check out our videos for the latest news in Raleigh, local sports, Raleigh weather, and more at https://WRAL.com
#localnews #northcarolina

Source

Continue Reading

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem hints at more TSA changes

Published

9 hours ago

on

July 17, 2025

By

www.youtube.com – ABC11 – 2025-07-17 11:38:47


SUMMARY: Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem indicates upcoming changes to TSA airport security, including potential new limits on the size of liquid containers passengers can carry. Current rules, dating to 2006, allow containers no larger than 3.4 ounces due to past threats. This follows the recent TSA update permitting travelers to keep their shoes on during screening. The TSA aims for a smoother process where passengers can walk through scanners with carry-ons directly to flights. Separately, Transportation Secretary Shawn Duffy revealed a \$31.5 billion cost to modernize the outdated U.S. air traffic control system, urging urgent funding discussions to avoid long delays.

The department recently announced people can keep their shoes on when going through security. More: abc11.com Download: …

Source

Continue Reading

Trending