Making Chicken Salad out of Hickory City Government

Sunday Morning in the Hickory Daily Record we once again were brought journalistically to the scene of the Buffalo's Sinkhole fiasco (Will the sinkhole ever be more than a hole in the ground? & Sinkhole timeline). Personally I don't see how this is a pertinent story, I thought we were past all of this. Must have been a slow news cycle. I guess since the L-R Boulevard extension issue was brought to closure in April that somehow the HDR thinks they can magically wave a wand and see this process brought to an end also.

Personally, I feel that the Sinkhole issue is old news in and of itself. I thought so when I wrote the editorial on August 10, 2007 entitled Buffalo's dumpsite drama too personal for city's leaders? After nearly three years, I still believe that the city can remedy all of this by condemning the property and cleaning it up, but the city has steadfastly refused to do so.

I love the Orwellian double speak from the City Manager that is provided in this article:

Hickory Manager Mick Berry said that's because currently, Mason's not violating any ordinances, despite the fact there's grass and small plants growing out of the mound of dirt on the property.

"Our code supports the property owners," he said. "We're not heavy-handed. He had to get the water flowing through the culvert, which he did. And he had to push the dirt into the hole or level it out, and he did. It doesn't look pretty, but he's in compliance."

The property also has to be fenced in, which Mason has done.

And although Hickory has sent Mason letters in the past, saying he was violating the public nui-sance ordinance, Mason has never had to pay a fine, Berry said.

"We use the possibility of the fines to get the property owner to (fix the property)," he said.

Raise your hand if you haven't heard the Mayor (and inferences from the City Manager) berating Mr. Mason over this issue in the past and using this issue as a political talking point. Do you remember all of the heavy handed propaganda that took place over this issue, especially in 2006 and 2007?

The light is shown on this issue by a comment at the bottom of the HDR article that relates to what many of us have heard behind the scenes:

Because of Rudy running his mouth, the City of Hickory (through its insurance carrier) paid the sinkhole folks $400,000.00 (no, that's not a typo - Four Hundred Thousand Dollars) to settle the lawsuit. They then tried to cover it up by making the settlement "confidential", despite the fact that state law says you can't do that.

It's interesting that in this timeline and article the HDR chose to completely forget about that little bit of info.

There seems to be a pattern here of the city using Civil Litigation in combination with Closed Session City Council meetings for political purposes. Apparently, City parties have consistently tried to usurp North Carolina General Statutes by requesting that settlements be kept confidential. If what they are doing is above board, then why does the city keep requesting that these settlements be kept out of public view? The appearance of impropriety is impropriety.

Look at the following comment posted on this blog in relation to the Randolph's Billiards Issue - Randolph's Billiards versus the City of Hickory and the Drinking Establishment Ordinance.

This relates back to the cleansing of Union Square that the Council has sought to accomplish.

People might recall that Cersil Brothers, who owned the old Ferguson Plumbing Building, sued the City over the refusal to issue their permits in August, 2008. They used a bunch of "funny math" about the number of arrests / incidents / etc at bars to support their call for a moratorium on the issuance of permits.

After several months, the City settled that case -- by paying out $10,000.00 to the Cersil Brothers, and that doesn't take into account the thousands paid to the various law firms to defend the action.

Ten Grand of Taxpayer's Money, not to build a taxpaying business within the City.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Oh, and the timing of that Settlement is pretty interesting, too -- it was approved on Election Day last November -- after Rudy, Sally and Jill had safely retained their seats. The vote came after the polls had closed, and after it'd been bumped on no less than three consecutive council meetings.

Wouldn't want those pesky facts out there to confuse the voters now, would we?

Coincidence? Then consider this - the Council also tried to sit on the release of the Settlement Agreement by inserting a "confidentiality" clause in it, despite the fact that state law specifically prohibits agreements with such provisions.

I was informed on Friday evening that Randolph's was granted their permits back on Friday May 7th at 5:30pm. This happened even after the Hickory Police Department had contacted Randolph's lawyer via certified mail, stating that they did not want to work with Randolph's management and the city wanted to go back to court to finish the hearing. The scheduled date would have been in September.

I have been told that before the alcohol permits were taken that Randolph's patrons were being written tickets left and right for parking in the City parking lot behind Randolph's. Apparently the issuance of these tickets has pretty much ceased since January. I have also heard that city employees have been directed not to frequent Randolph's and there would be consequences if they did.

The presiding Judge Beecher Gray stepped in and said he would rule on the motion to dismiss and he did. The City contended that they wanted to finish their case in court. The judge told them their case had already been heard and he would rule over the phone and then he proceeded to dismiss the case.

You see folks, this seems to be the rule around here. This is the heavy handedness that Mr. Berry states doesn't go on around here. Remember the open storage ordinance, was that not heading down a heavy handed path until certain people realized that they didn't have the numbers on council and cooler heads prevailed. I have also heard that the City of Hickory could possibly have to legally settle with the former establishment "127 North" over their heavy handed dealings with them and the losses of revenue that are directly attributable to those dealings.

When these city officials act in this manner are they representing you? Anything that city officials do, which the city is held monetarily liable for, is paid for by the taxpayers of the City of Hickory? Do you feel comfortable with the city throwing its weight around in this manner? Are you happy that a large portion of your tax fees are going to pay for unnecessary legal fees and settlements? All for what appear to be personal preferences, vendettas, and political purposes?

What are the rules pertaining to this Drinking Establishment Ordinance? I have never seen anything laid out in Black and White. Ambiguous ordinances, such as this, are what this city is known for creating and are just begging lawsuits. They are arbitrary and not equally enforced. Any laws constructed in such a manner are not worth the paper that they are printed on and are basically a waste of energy and effort.

Another good example of mismanagement is the Airport. Mind Blowing - The City's Mismanagement of the Hickory Regional Airport (and once again the story behind the story isn't pretty).

Part of what hasn’t been recognized here is that the sweetheart deal that Riverhawk’s predecessor got is DIRECTLY attributable to Mayor Rudy Wright.

Just after Mr. Wright took office, it was time to renegotiate with Profile Aviation. City Staff members had researched the earlier agreements and noted the problems – there was no control over Profile’s actions, essentially, and they acted as though they owned the airport. Hickory’s airport had a horrible reputation among pilots because of the way they were treated by Profile. Many opted to go to Morganton or Statesville for fuel (which was cheaper), service and overnight accommodations rather than to have to put up with the lack of service at Hickory.

There was a plan of action for improving things during the contract renegotiation. Unfortunately, Mayor Wright was good buddies with the guys that owned Profile. The result was that the discussion would occur in closed session at a council meeting and by the time Staff could meet the following morning already knew the negotiating parameters. Thus, nothing could be fairly negotiated because the other side already knew not only the strategy but the details of how it would be approached. Rudy was seen numerous times leaving Profile’s offices on Wednesday mornings, where presumably he’d briefed them on the prior evening’s meetings.

Imagine if the Panthers tried to play a football game, but the other side knew all their hand signals and how they intended to approach not only the game, but every single play. It’s much harder, if not impossible, to win that way – especially if the coach keeps intentionally sending you down the field the wrong way!

What ended up was a sweetheart deal that gave away the farm, all the cows on the farm, the crops yet in the ground and the farmer’s wife! That agreement was entered into over significant objections by virtually all of the staff members involved.

You can’t negotiate anything close to a fair deal under those circumstances. Look at the contract – there’s no independent audit provisions – Hickory’s income from the airport was based solely on what Profile TOLD them they made. There was no way to get to the books for an independent audit, no control over hours of operation, prices to be charged, etc.

Instead, all the control was given to Profile.

There was a chance to eliminate that when Riverhawk took over, but once again it was lost. We can thank Jill Patton and Brad Lail for failing to have any significant input into that, but in fairness, they had no records to review to know the issues. Instead, they knew only that which the contract allowed them to know – a contract that was overseen by Rudy for the benefit of his friends at Profile.

Hickory had a chance to take their airport back, but instead got a task force packed with people who either knew nothing about airports or were looking to skew the deal. How often does that kind of thing happen here? To figure it out, you really only have to look at who leaves and when. Tim Deike, who was the Airport Manager then, left about this same time. Coincidence? Or, like so many other department heads, did he realize that it’s not possible to fight that type of corruption without the support of a strong City Manager who has the balls to stand up for what’s right. Hickory could have easily taken over operations at the airport, and the income from those operations gone to make it self-sustaining. Instead, we end up with a tiny piece of the action, no control over the airport and once again the taxpayers get the short end.

Again, we see the City operating behind the scenes on this issue. From what I have heard the situation has worsened and there really is no chance of it getting any better. This issue is going to cost Hickory Taxpayers a bundle, when in essence the city has an asset of great value here. But, this venture is being operated under a buddy-buddy scenario and the guise of covering political missteps, instead of doing what is best for the citizens of the area at our airport. And is that not the essence of commonality that we are seeing involving all of these issues?

I heard Hal Row last week addressing the local economy. He stated that when the economy starts picking up, and times start getting better, that you usually start hearing things from people about business stirring up and things going on, but he hasn't been hearing anything. Well Hal, I'm hearing a lot of things about business in the area, but you and I aren't privy to those circles. We aren't invited. There seem to be all kinds deals being made in closed session at City Hall, at the meeting before the meeting, and/or on phone calls.

Which type of government do you trust, the meeting out in the open or the one behind locked doors? Didn't you always love the scenes when JR Ewing said, "Trust me?" These people are telling you to trust them. If everything is above board, then it is time to release all of these closed session minutes to the public. I seem to have misunderstood who these people are working for. Are they working for the Citizens of Hickory or Themselves?

I am also reminded of Ray Hunt, a property owner in Southeast Downtown (across from Clark Tire). He told me about his tenant, who has not paid rent in a substantial period of time. Mr. Hunt had previously told this tenant that he was going to have to get his stuff off of the property, because he needed to have work done on the building so that he could find a new tenant, one that would pay their rent. The current tenant proceeded to go to the city to report Mr. Hunt's building as untenable. The City sent officials to the building and issued code violations, but they never contacted Mr. Hunt, who is the owner of the building. Mr. Hunt is upset about the city never contacting him about the violations and how they could be remedied. The city is bound to have methods to contact the man. What if this were you? Wouldn't you be upset?

The Hound -- And this is the reason why I keep this blog independent and go to the council meetings and report as much as I can to you about them, even when I know that most of y'all scan over most of it.

I am your personal eyewitness at City Council meetings. 75% of the time, there is no other independent news gathering source present at the City Council meetings. They just get the information from the City's Communication Director Mandy Pitts. They get the information that the city wants them to have. Mandy does a great job doing what she does, but who does she represent? Does she represent the citizens of Hickory or does she represent the City Bureaucracy? She is no different than a PR representative at a corporation.

Look at a Corporation with $80+ million in revenues and hundreds of millions of dollars in assets. Would our local media outlets not dig further into issues involving that company, if they were doing things that negatively affected the stockholders of that corporation? Would a reporter go to the CEO or President of a company and ask them questions and take their word as the Gospel? Or would they dig for verifiable information and try to obtain corroborating information involving the story?

You see that is the City of Hickory, a corporation that takes in over $80 million in revenue and has a budget that is approximately the same. Mayor Rudy Wright is the Chief Executive Officer, City Manager Mick Berry is the President, and the other Council members are the Board of Directors of the City of Hickory Incorporated. And the Citizens and people who pay taxes and for services in Hickory are the shareholders.

I'm not going to beat the Hickory Daily Record over the head, if anyone wants to do so, then feel free to do so in the comments section. What was written on Sunday was about pulling an old issue out of the playbook without bringing anything new to the topic. What was the purpose of the article?

I just wish that the HDR would look into these issues more in depth and maybe do a series on some of them. Nothing notable or worthwhile can be written in 500 words or less. Demand some real answers from the City, and if they don't answer, then tell the public that they wouldn't. Look up some of the business agreements and relevant court documents... Talk to the relevant parties... And do some behind the scenes intelligence gathering. The Keys should be relevance and purpose. HDR, we need you to fulfill your role as the community's newspaper.