Newsletter about the City Council meeting of June 7, 2011 -- Addendum on "The Newly Proposed Ward Boundary Map"

Continuation of Public Hearing of May 17, 2011 – Proposed Ward Boundary Map Based on the 2010 Federal Census Results and Approval of Resolution

At its April 5, 2011 meeting, City Council received an initial (Alternative 1) map showing ward boundary changes which would balance each ward’s population based on the 2010 Census. City Council designated a subcommittee (Wright, Fox, Meisner) to analyze ward boundaries and recommend changes to City Council. Feedback from the Council meeting was used to develop Alternative 2, and the subcommittee met in open session on April 26, 2011. Alternative 2 was further refined to keep Planning Commission Members in their wards and takes into consideration City Council Members’ comments. Alternative 3 was developed, and the subcommittee met in open session on May 6, 2011. The subcommittee recommended Alternative 3 for City Council to receive public input at the public hearing and consider adoption of the requisite resolution.

At the May 17, 2011 meeting, Attorney Allison Riggs, Southern Coalition for Social Justice, presented an alternative ward redistricting map for City Council consideration. City Council unanimously voted to continue the public hearing to June 7, 2011. Further, Council directed that another meeting of the Subcommittee on Ward Redistricting be held prior to the June 7th Council Meeting. The subcommittee met in open session on May 25, 2011 and reviewed the option presented by Attorney Allison Riggs, Southern Coalition for Social Justice. Alternative 3 was unanimously approved and recommended to City Council for consideration along with the requisite resolution.

Four people spoke againt this proposal. The first person person to speak was Barbara Byrd, she spoke about what was going on back in the 1970s when she grew up. She spoke about there being no purpose at that time that kids were dropping out of school... had nothing to do and everything to lose, but who cares and who loses. She spoke about the Jim Crow law, which occurred during this era and it is still being practiced here today. Over 40 years, you would think that this would overcome and respect all races -- a lesson to be learned in itself. Why should we be reminded of racism, name calling, riots, seperate this, separate that, all of this for a huge political power struggle that you people hold offices to stand for us as people and citizens of Hickory. Questions are being asked, what can we do to end this era? What is expected from our city officials? More so, what is expected of us to help move this city of Hickory to the next level for all people? We need representation from all, including all races, to help make this happen. No one can begin to think or feel or never act upon our community, in which we live, which is Ward 4 Ridgeview. We all need to be on the same page, so let's try to realign and move forward. Leave all of this Jim Crow Law behind and thrive for the future. What is so wrong with wanting to move the Ward lines so that we can get better representation so that we can get proper representation so our voice can be heard. We have plenty of issues that need to be addressed as well, such as poverty out of our neighborhood... raise the standards for higher education and exemplify our place in society, so that we can improve all of our kids for the betterment of our children, our heritage, and our dignity. Let's lay down this Jim Crow law tonight, because we can only dream of an All-American City. Which one of these communities? Ours bleed so yours is going to bleed also. Don't take the soul and heart out of ward 4. Let it thrive. One day we can all stand proud and say to you, this is an All-American City in which we live. And tonight, please keep in mind that our children are our future. Our community belongs to each and every one of us. All we ask is that we have a voice, the same as you guys do, and that we feel comfortable in our homes at night. Say yes to some of these wrad lines that really need to be adjusted for all people.

The following comment will be summarizations of the statements of James Franklin Davis, Deborah McNeur, and Larry Pope:

J. Franklin (Jimmy) Davis addressed the Council. The decision that you've made indicates that The City is going to prioritize incumbency protection over minority voting rights and that is a pretty undemocratic position to take. The current method of elections is unfair. If future conditions of elections continue to bear out the trend that candidates that are the choice of minority voters cannot win when pitted against white candidates, in an at large election, then you will have to reevaluate your legal options. Jimmy then used a couple of segments that went over questions that have been asked on the Hickory Hound in the January Rant entitled the Pursuit of Excellence. He then speaks of a Bible quote, "Take heed who is chief amongst you and let them be your servant." Are you (the council) the he who is being referred to. The ultimate measure of a man or woman is not where he or she stands in moments of comfort or convenience, but where he or she stands at times of challenge and controversy. The true neighbor will risk his position, his status, and even his life for the welfare of others. Studies show Hickory at the bottom of the barrel in just about every national study that e have seen, yet Council members are patting themselves on the back and are proud of the work that they are doing -- Really? Jimmy then went into the State of Hickory 2011. "We don’t need leaders who are in the political arena to stroke their ego. We need leaders in this community who are thinkers and who are intellectually curious. We need leaders who know how jobs are created, because if they don’t, they could cause the loss of jobs and the empirical evidence of the last decade shows that this was a contributing factor in what happened to our job market. Our leaders lost sight of what businesses need to make employment viable."
Jimmy states that the essence of all of our work, regardless of what particular issue or activity in which we are involved, is to foster a spirit of authentic community. All of our work therefore should promote social, economic, and personal relationships that are firm and realize that equality, dignity, the worth and potential of every person and all peoples. We take care to stand with the poor, the oppressed, any group or person in such a way that we stand for the best interest of the whole.

The next person to speak was Deb McNeur. With all due respect, the Mayor stated that it was unfair to unseat an incumbent by eliminating a seat. That is not really the truth. It would not be in favor of eliminatinating a seat, byt it would be in favor of electing someone of low socio-economic status to the Council to give fair representation to all of the areas. Part of Ward 4 is West Hickory, Westmont, and Green Park also. It's not really a racial issue. (Deb) doesn't like it being divided along racial issues, but it is a south side of the tracks issue. The big issue is the socio-economics. No one from Ward 4 West Hickory could get elected either. She considers the wards having been gerrymandered to keep the status quo in place, which is not conducive to someone being fairly represented that does not have the socio-economics most of you sitting there (City Council) do.

Larry Pope was the next person to speak. Larry commended City staff who had helped him when he had low blood sugar while visiting city hall that morning. He is proud of how they represent the city. They need to be commended. He considers himself a citizen of a very good city. Larry has asked several times about going back to what we had in 1970, in which Council elections were purely ward based. With the blended at-large system, minorities and low income folks in our city don't stand a chance of being elected. (Larry) is a good example. He won his ward 4 times, but when it went to at-large he was defeated, because folks all over the city voted against (Larry), because they couldn't control Larry or he wouldn't vote the way that they wanted him to vote. (Larry) says to (Council) that the only way that we can make elections in the city representative is to let the folks of their ward be chosen by the citizens of their ward. (Larry) is asking tonight for (Council) to give us an answer so that he knows whether they intend to go to Ward election, He wants them to vote on it and how they vote on it. He wants to know whether they will vote to go back to NCGS 160a-104 and go back to ward elections so that citizens can choose who they want to represent them and not have citizens who do not live in that ward choosing who will represent them.



The Mayor stated that he believed that the 3rd proposal should be adopted. It is absolutely no better or worse than alternative 4, except that it unseats a sitting council member. It does not change voting patterns. It does not give more power or less power.

Alder Patton stated that she seconded the motion. Much of what has been discussed ignores that there has been a minority elected to the ward for many years. She truly believes that the city has moved past color. It is not based on color. If there is a viable good candidate that the city wants to elect, then that can incude not just a black, but Asian, Hmong, or Latino. She believes that Hickory would elect a minority.  

(Deb McNeur) later spoke up during an address of council and stated that she wanted to remind the Council that the person elected by the at-large vote (Z. Anne Hoyle) was not the choice of the people of that ward. She stated that is the reason why Alderman Guess is on the Council is because the people of ward 4 were not going to vote for M. Hoyle.


Alder Fox stated that she wants to say that she has thought about this and it was a numbers process. She considered it a fair process. All of us regardless of the wards that we represent spend a lot of time in other areas that are not basically our wards. She can speak for council members who have spent hours in areas that they don't represent. She is satisfied with what has taken place here. we were not charged with how to look at how we vote.

The Mayor stated that we had another open meeting and all we are talking about is two percent, but it eliminates a city council member. he feels comfortable with what they have done. It has nothing to do with depriving anyone's voting rights in any way. He can't think of anything realistically that would have changed things.

There was contention as the Council members voted 7-0 to adopt the resolution. Larry Pope demanded that as part of Title 2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act that they state their name and how they voted. The Mayor stated that he was not going to do that unless someone tells him that the law requires that. Attorney Crone stated that it was obvious that it was a 7-0 vote, but did not answer about the legality of the issue. Mr. Pope stated that if forced to that he would challenge the issue in court. He does not know which council members are here or not here. He cannot see a single individual. (Larry)asks for it to be done the way that the law requires it to be done. Hank Guess made a motion that the Council vote in that format. That motion was seconded by several council members. The Mayor stated that they have always voted in an appropriate manner, but in his opinion they should not start saying that they are going to do something that the law requires in one instance, but not another. If the law requires it... Alderman Guess stated that it's not that... Mayor Wright stated that before he votes he wants to know whether the law requires it. Atty. Crone stated that it was clear that every member here voted unanimously, but would not address the legal issue. Crone stated that he doesn't see what the big deal is one way or the other.  Lail, Seaver, Guess, Fox, and Patton voted Aye to the voice vote. Mayor Wright and Meisner voted No to the Voice vote. In the voice vote each member stated their name and voted yes to adopt the Ward line third proposal.

The Hound says Whew!!! This was contentious and really doesn't need to be. I don't believe that this is an issue of Jim Crow, separate but equal, law. I can understand the angst of the people of the Ridgeview community over issues with the city in the past. I agree with Deb McNeur that this is an issue of socio-economics and it is an issue of the two sides of the tracks. I don't see anything vitriolic about that being stated.


Look at the precincts that had the highest turnout. They were the Viewmont wards. In my opinion that is because there issues are taken care of. They are choosing who will represent every ward. As has been stated to me, the reason why you don't see neighborhood associations in North Hickory is because their issues are already addressed. They don't need a place to vent their frustrations about their neighborhoods issues.


I also agree that the wards are gerrymandered. There is no rhyme or reason to the way they are drawn. They could come up with these same numbers by drawing a sliced pie map- of Hickory that does not have wards drawn here there and everywhere. I do believe that there should be more direct representation of the specific parts of Hickory. An outside of the box idea and compromise would be to have each quadrant of the city have a representative, with some compromises for population distribution, elected specifically by that quadrant, and then have two at large council positions voted on by people throughout the city and the Mayor. Then have the mayor position with some superceding authority.


Right now, what gives Mayor Wright any more status than the other Council members? They all are voted on by the same electorate in the same manner. Truly, the other Council members have just as much power as the Mayor. If this is going to be the case, then why even have a formal election for a Mayor. Why not have a more parliamentary system with seven wards and let the council members choose who will be the Chairman of the Council.


One thing is for sure. This is an issue. It needs to be debated. We need to know why the Post-1970 electoral model works best. Why are we holding unnecessary primary elections? Why is there such low participation? Do we not want more people to participate? And I am not naive, do people really even care?