Call it “sour grapes” if you like since I was on the losing end of these votes at last night’s council meeting. But the old adage - “He who does not learn from his mistakes is destined to repeat them” – keeps coming back to me today.
First case in point:
One of the ways Project Homestead was so successful in getting city funding for its past projects was the ability to perform “end runs” around city staff and the Community Resource Board (CRB). Rev. Michael King would come directly to the city council and get a political decision to raid this fund or that fund to pay for a proposal not recommended for funding by staff and/or the CRB.
Déjà vu! Beacon Management/George Carr, a past sometimes-partner with Homestead on projects, came straight to the city council last night to get money for a project that had not been recommended for funding by the CRB. (I must note that Beacon has an excellent record and their proposal is a good one, but there just isn’t enough money in the regular housing budget to fund everything.) Raiding a contingency fund set up to cover a possible required reimbursement to HUD for failed projects, six councilmembers agreed to allocate that money to Beacon’s project IF HUD releases that money.
The processes the city uses to allocate funds are there for good reasons – to make sure the best projects are chosen, a variety of needs are covered, and everyone has an equal and fair chance of accessing scarce money resources. This process was bypassed AGAIN with last night’s action. For example, if the “found money” had not been promised to Beacon, the CRB would have had the opportunity to reprogram it for other (perhaps more urgent) housing needs in the future through Habitat for Humanity or the Housing Coalition. But they were totally blocked out with this political maneuver.
So it’s obvious Mr. Carr studied and learned his lesson well on how to successfully access city funding. On the other hand, a majority of council obviously DID NOT learn about the pitfalls of this dubious practice that led to the loss of so much city tax money when Project Homestead failed.
Second point:
Being an “old timer” on the city council, I well remember the days when we had a “Speakers from the Floor” segment at the beginning of the council meetings. Folks, why do you think we changed it?!!! IT WASN’T WORKING! Council was being bombarded by anything and everything, delaying consideration of the scheduled council business and making those citizens who came to comment on those business/public hearing items have to wait. Looks like we’re headed down that same road AGAIN too.
“He who will not learn…”
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Hi Sandy,
I missed the cablecast. Was there a decision on whether or not to televise the speakers from the floor? If so, how did the vote break down?
Roch, We never voted on that, after discussing the controls the Mayor would have over the content, the consensus was that televising was not an issue.
Roch,
The short answer to your question is "probably." You'll probably need a scorecard to keep the long answer and explanation straight.
We split the proposed meeting changes into three separate votes, and here is what I THINK happened, vote counts are to the best of my memory.
The first vote was to begin our council meetings at 5:30PM. That one passed unanimously.
The second vote was whether or not to allow TELEVISED speakers from the floor in the 5:30-6PM time slot. That one passed 5-4,but since it is an ordinance change, it has to come back for a second vote at the next meeting to make it official. The Mayor, Florence Gatten, Tom Phillips and I voted against it - all opposing speakers from the floor at all at the beginning of the meeting.
Assuming the vote stays the same and it passes at next reading, all speakers from the floor - at the beginning AND at the end of the meeting - will be limited to 3 minutes and will not be able to cede their time to other speakers. Topics at the first session MUST pertain to city-related items and the Mayor will have the discretion to not call on speakers if their listed topic is outside that guideline. (That's going to be very tricky to enforce, I'm sure.)
If the entire 30 minutes is not used up by speakers, we will proceed with city council business items, the consent agenda,items from council members, etc., but no public hearing items will begin until 6PM so folks getting off work will have enough time to get there for those public hearings. Complicated!
The third vote was supposed to be to end our meetings by 11PM, but we were unable to identify workable options for when the rest of an adjourned meeting would be rescheduled and completed. So we decided to eliminate speakers from the floor and comments from council once we reach 11PM and push on through and finish the public hearing and business items. That passed 8-1 with Diane Bellamy-Small voting "no."
Since these actions took place right at 11PM, we immediately invoked that new procedure and adjourned after identifying budget work session dates, much to the consternation of the Mayor and Mrs. Bellamy-Small who apparently had items to share. Someone cracked' "This is just like the county commissioners'" to which Tom Phillips replied, "That is the ONE THING they do right!"
Thanks for the reports, Tom and Sandy. I understand the concerns about topics for speakers from the floor, but good luck enforcing that. If I want the council to consider passing a resolution declaring space aliens are real, is that a city-related item?
Regardless, if your interest is in limiting public discussion so that you can efficiently move ahead with city business, perhaps council might consider regularly scheduled town hall meetings -- and not just the three or four we'll get in the months prior to the election, but on a regular schedule (every quarter?) and televised.
First and foremost, to Mr. Phillips, I was quite saddened to learn of your tragic loss in the aftermath of Ginny's passing.
Losing a loved one (canine companions included) is a sorrowful experience. As the proud owner of two canine companions (West Highland White Terriers), I could identify with the level of emotional strife that you incurred.
Notwithstanding, I think that the remedy to the inability to disseminate meeting information via cablevision is negated somewhat by nascent technologies such as streaming media systems, weblogging and podcasting.
Since the majority of City Council members are active bloggers, perhaps podcasting is an avenue that either Ms. Carmany, Mr. Phillips or a liaison to the City Council could utilize in an effort to "stream" vital information to the masses online.
Moreover, the concept of podcasting is incredibly more cost-efficient than initiating contractual negotiations for a dedicated streaming media company.
However, one of the compelling reasons to initiate contractual negotiations with a dedicated streaming media company is the brand management issue. Specifically, the Greensboro City Council, Guilford County and representatives themselves could be perceived as uber-sophisticated cosmopolites in the eyes of North Carolina jurisdictions that may use technology sparingly.
Personally, the fact that the Greensboro City Council is largely blogger-based in its participatory functions is a compelling reason for prospective residents to consider relocating to Greensboro, in my opinion.
"Since the majority of City Council members are active bloggers..."
"...The fact that the Greensboro City Council is largely blogger-based"
I am only aware of Sandy and Tom blogging regularly. Yvonne and Don have blogs, but neither has been updated in over a month.
Anonymous, Thanks for your comments regarding my dog. Regarding your other comments, the day the City Council or County Commissioners are perceived as uber-sophisticated cosmopolites you better look out the window because pigs are sure to be flying. It took me fifteen minutes just to figure out what a uber-sophisticated cosmopolite was.
Roch,
Thanks for the suggestion about holding town hall meetings. We did something very similar to this for several years when we held "District meetings" in each of the five city council meetings to concentrate on issues that pertained to specific districts. We found that unless there was a burning issue (such as the closing of the White Street landfill which was being discussed at one of those times), attendance was extremely poor - on several occasions, there was more city staff present than there were citizens. Unfortunately, we have found that citizens tend not to show up and express themselves unless they are upset about something.
We've moved more towards topic-specific meetings/public hearings to deal with issues such as the city manager search, transportation issues, the Comprehensive Plan development, creation of the revised Land Development Ordinance, etc. While council members are not always in attendance at those meetings, we do receive the feedback from them.
And of course, I attend every neighborhood association and community watch meeting in my district that I know about and can get to.
Tom:
I apologize for my inability to clearly, concisely and succinctly articulate my thoughts regarding "uber-sophisticated cosmopolites."
The central nexus of my initial thesis was that the lion's share of publicly elected officials are not actively involved in the blogosphere or other forms of nascent technologies and the Greensboro City Council establishment appears to be the exception to the rule. Personally, I wish that every constituency in the state of North Carolina was represented well by technologically-savvy dignitaries to the extent which Guilford County denizens are represented in the contemporary blogosphere.
Regarding Patrick's assertion that few publicly elected offiicals in Guilford County are active blogging participants, I have reviewed weblogs created by Tom Phillips, Sandy Carmany, Yvonne Johnson, Don Vaughan, Jeff Thigpen, Bert Jones and Pricey Harrison.
While Mr. Thigpen and Mr. Jones may not be technically publicly elected officials, the aforementioned representatives are serving as public officials and utilize the blogosphere to disseminate vital information to their respective constituents.
In all sincerity, my attempt was noble, in that, I was trying valiantly to convey a compliment to the Greensboro City Council (and other Guilford County-based representatives) for their innovative, "outside of the box" methodology of analytical thought.
I think what Patrick was saying as far as city council members' blogging is concerned, Tom and I are the only ones doing it on a regular basis. Yvonne's last post was in early January, Don's in March.
I understand. Patrick is becoming a blogging celebrity, according to the Greensboro News-Record.
Moreover, I've heard that Patrick was mentioned on another prominent politically-oriented news blog (perhaps InstaPundit) in the recent past as well.
Yes, I think Greensboro bloggers are getting quite a bit of attention these days. Hats off to Roch, Sue, David, jw, theShu and others who have really promoted blogging and helped others like me learn how to do it.
Post a Comment