Newsletter about the City Council meeting of May 15, 2012 -- Addendum on Consent Agenda Policies & Public Participation

Council Policy Regarding Consent Agenda Procedure - Presentation by City Manager Mick Berry -



The Hound on the Deal: I am sorry that I have to be dead level forward about these issues. My intention is not about attacking the City Manager. It is talking about Principles of Governance. Sometimes I am told by people in positions of power that I don't understand. Here is the deal. If I don't understand something, then it is your responsibility to educate me. That doesn't mean that I am going to just regurgitate what you say. We already have several media representatives to do that. That is the reason the Hound came into existence.

Now, I'm sorry, but I think the City Manager was talking passed the issue and frankly those who read this blog have already seen me address this. He is talking about Citizen Participation in Terms of Public Hearings. He is reiterating the points that he has already made in the Hickory Daily Record:

1) He says this is a review not a recommendation for changes. This is the code of the Council per 1998.
2) The Consent Agenda is part of the Agenda code and he doesn't just make that up.
3) You can get on the Agenda the prior Wednesday before a City Council Meeting.
4) The Agenda comes out on the internet for all to see the Friday before the meeting, so there is public notice.
5) He talks about how most items placed on the Agenda come through the Departments and cites examples.
6) He goes over the process for Citizens requesting to be Heard. Done by noon on Friday to be in the Agenda, but that isn't a Deadline, you can sign up at the meeting.
7) He went into the issue of second readings, which he stated is unique to the City of Hickory for binding decisions.
8) He talked about changes to be made to the cover sheet. Which he states shows the rules of the meeting verbatim.
9) Public Hearings have their own set of rules. They have added a suggestion sheet to the agenda pamphlet.
10) Talks about the address of city council is not a dialogue or debate. From a staff standpoint they don't know the question ahead of time. They don't want to answer with misinformation or tell the wrong thing. It is an opportunity to voice concerns. They will get right back with the citizen. This is not a time for an exchange back and forth.

The Hound wants to reiterate that this was not about policies of City Council meetings. The people that I associate with as a collective know just as much if not more than the City Council about the processes of City Council meetings. How do you think this maneuver happened to start with? 

The Brass Tax is that the Consent Agenda has been abused. Items that deserve to have a public discussion have been put on the Consent Agenda to keep debate from occurring before a vote is taken. It may not say that the City Manager can't put $423,000 of spending on a Consent Agenda, but it also doesn't say that you can and the people that I have spoken to believe that nothing where tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent should ever go on the Consent Agenda. It is about Representation and Accountability. The rest of this discussion about how citizens are to address the council is apples and oranges stuff.

Citizens Requesting to Be Heard

Dr. Joseph Inglefield - He stated that he is disappointed that the opportunity to approach the Council before the meeting to have an item removed from the consent agenda is not more Democratic and more open. He said it is hard to hear the council and he thinks it is important that they speak into the microphone so that we can hear them. It is important that we hear what they say and that is part of what Mr. Pope is after. (The Hound - I will address Larry's standoff with the council in the full newsletter). He says that the proposed budget should be available on the internet. Still hasn't had an answer about when can we have a dialogue. People come before the council because this is the only opportunity we have to speak publicly. We think the City Council should go on the record. That does not happen in one-on-one situations. It is more Democratic and open.

Rebecca Inglefield - Talked about the (Hal Row) radio program and the Hickory Hound and how she thought it was just great that you could hear what was said. The mayor stated on Hal Row's show that whatever changes were made would be clarified in the interest of greater transparency and greater citizen involvement not less. We can ask that anything be removed from the consent agenda, but as she understands it it has to be (removed) by a majority vote. There is no guarantee that a citizen will have any kind of direct impact.

She talked about the Mayor on Hal Row talking about being in the sign business and understanding wind loads through a computer program. The mayor also said that there were no efforts to conceal the costs of the structure. She was encouraged to request public records and the staff was prompt. She asked for a detailed item list of what has been paid for so far, but unfortunately she can't understand what she received and it appears that only $30,000 has been spent and she isn't sure why they asked for the additional amount of money. The current balance is $275,000. She isn't clear as to why there had to be an additional infusion of money into the project. She asked if they would respond or should she put in an additional request.

She next addressed the Inspiring Spaces project. The public will be invited to be involved and she is looking forward to that. She said she would put a request in writing to request the itemized expenditures and budget (for the structure downtown) so that she can understand this next time, but also who is on the committee to choose the name.

Three minutes was called and Walter Witherspoon said that he would yield his time and the Mayor stated that yielding time is not covered in our Code.

Rebecca asked when is the time to discuss the issues we want to discuss, when is the time? Hal Row asked you that and you didn't answer it. The Mayor says you have it right now. Rebecca states there is no discussion. The Mayor says you have my cell phone. Rebecca says In public with the whole Council with the public involved on the record. When is the time to do that?

She talks about the December 20, 2011 meeting and states that it is fascinating. It was stated there that we have plenty of money. When we bulldozed the pools, we had plenty of money then to bring the pools up to code. We had $1.8 million in the parking fund and over $8 million in the capital reserve fund. The Mayor clarified on the radio that there are no legal restrictions to the parking fund. That money could have been used to fix up the swimming pools. The Mayor retorted by asking if "are you going to be able to wrap this up."

She stated that the Mayor had said that the pools were the very first matter on the agenda for Parks and Rec. We are looking for that as part of the Inspiring Spaces. She talked about grocery stores and Ridgeview being a "Food Desert." That is a part of the health downfall we see in our community. She talks about Exodus Homes lack of budget. She says she is glad to see that there is money to go ahead and do that now.

She finished by talking about the $30,000 survey to see if the city wanted pools and people from every quadrant of the city said yes. The Parks and Rec has changed the priority, because of the city council.


Walter Witherspoon stated he was there for the Downtown structure. Mr. Lail said it might have been a little hasty, in the paper the other day, and he appreciates him speaking out on it. He sees six members there and one member stuck up. On the swimming pool item from May 18, 2010. The City manager reports in his proposed budget that we are going to save $825,000 on the pools. Two years hence, we are talking about one and a half million dollars Where is that money?

Jimmy Davis asked to speak. He spoke about the responsibilities of government. He talked about two important questions. Who have out elected and appointed officials been helping and Why?

There are two ways to look at our city government -- It's structure and it's function. Structure equals the city charter. It is important to ask about function. What our people have or have not done this side of those structures both as individuals and as a group. We put you there to serve our interests and take care of our business. We gave you our vote and our trust so therefore we want to look closely at your official action on issues that are important to us.

When you look at the City Government function you look at two broad categories -- fiscal and legislative. The first has to do with city money. Who gets our tax money and the second has to do with the laws and acts of the Mayor and City Council.


The Hound enjoyed these addresses of the Council. There were certainly some nuggets to think about there. Yes, the sound is terrible in the Council chambers and something should have been done about that long ago. Second, the $1.8 million balance in the parking fund is a very interesting number. That is one heck of a slushy there. I understand Walter' question. It isn't pools every year, so it wouldn't be $1.5 million, but if it is $825k plus operations, then it would be a about a million and we would certainly like to know how we have benefited from that money not being spent. We certainly don't see any money being spent on much of anything other than the Tent being paid for by the Slushy funds. And Jimmy posed some pretty good questions there. Oh and we are working towards bringing you these Council meetings in more of a 21st Century fashion. Hope someone cares.


Newsletter about the City Council meeting of May 1, 2012 -- Rebecca Inglefield requests items F & G be removed from the Agenda