TEDx Hickory April 21, 2012 - Part 6 - Cooper and Washco

DeFeet International
People you should know on the Mesh

Video is Courtesy of Dave Washco's Youtube page




The Edison Project - Good News and Great Ventures - 9/19/2011
“Promoting Entrepreneurship in Our Community” - CVCC Forum - March 6, 2012

Harry Hipps submission to the HDR - (Unedited) - THE MAYOR’S POSITION ON FIRST TALK

The Hickory Daily Record requests that submissions for Letters to the Editor be limited to 400 words. Below is Harry's initial submission before edited. This submission is in today's May 11, 2012 Hickory Daily Record on page 4. Please print this out for your friends who may not have the internet and pass it along for them to read and fully understand that Harry's problem is not the structure per se. It is about the process that led to the structure and the problems associated with it. Harry would like to thank the HDR for allowing him the opportunity to express himself to the public in their forum.

THE MAYOR’S POSITION ON FIRST TALK

Much of the First Talk with Hal Row show on WHKY this Monday morning pertained to the tent being erected on Union Square. In time, we will see if this “investment” is worth the cost. It’s not what I would have done but I’ll keep an open mind until things come to fruition. What I see, though, which seems to be the source of a lot of the acrimony is how the City goes about selecting and implementing where funds will be spent.

Mayor Wright stated that there is now a partisanship in Hickory politics that hasn’t been there in the past and in his view is “a shame”. I find scant evidence that partisanship, that is to say Republican and Democratic party involvement is at work here. There may be some, and probably everyone on Council or attending meetings has some party affiliation, but does that make it partisan? There’s none that I can see.

The Mayor may have been referring to the fact that there are now more people looking at Council’s actions and modus operandi and not liking what they see. Well, grow up. Competition of ideas and aspirations are usually present in a healthy democracy, and it’s long past due in Hickory. For too long the Council has done whatever they wanted with virtually no checks on their actions. Most citizens do not vote in municipal elections due to apathy. The local media is very weak and in my opinion are mostly tied together with the status quo. It’s time people start taking notice and speaking up. It’s a good thing.

The City was embarrassed at the last Council meeting by not knowing about the instructions for citizens removing items from the consent agenda THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR YEARS. Why has it been there for years and it is just now an issue? Because no one has spoken up before now and Council runs partly on auto pilot and they obviously don’t even read their own publications. Now people are becoming aware and it’s a positive development. The Mayor has stated that they are reviewing the process on this issue and will make it more democratic, not less. I trust he will do what he has stated.

Beyond this, we should also have televised meetings like other municipalities have on cable government channels, records and transcripts should be on the internet within days. Public documents should be on the internet and a citizen shouldn’t have to travel to City Hall and grovel for staff to access a document for them. Closed session minutes aren’t released in a timely manner. And the agenda should be published on the internet with enough time for citizens to review it and plan to comment if desired. In short, it’s time to join the 21st century.

The City has a history of not listening to the public and showing citizens disrespect. A survey was taken years ago about the farmers market. A majority wanted the Springs Rd area, it went downtown. A survey was taken on the pools, the majority said they wanted pools in each quadrant of the City, the Council said no. People from neglected areas of the City have sought some efforts at revitalization but to no avail. While I want a nice downtown area, as most do, there seems to be scant concern for the whole city and there seem to be conflicts of interest on downtown issues. So it’s not a surprise that there is not unanimity of opinion on City issues.

Finally, and in my opinion most importantly, these projects seem to come off the cuff. We need a strategic, long term plan to get Hickory back to good health again. The Mayor is on record, on the First Talk show, going back years stating that he thinks "this is going to be Hickory’s year. Things will soon be turning around." It seems that we are just drifting and hoping something will turn up if we just put a little more money into downtown development. There is no cost/benefit analysis done, little or no public vetting or input, and no review after the fact to see if, in fact, public dollars did lead to a positive return on the investment. A little more professionalism and public dialogue would go a long way to getting the public to buy in and less acrimony. Partisanship is not the problem, a government that is not adapting to the 21st century is.


Rudy Wright's and this Council's Philadelphia moment?

TEDx Hickory April 21, 2012 - Part 5 - Carroll and Carson

http://www.fullmetalchicken.com/
The Future Economy Council, Houston Harris, The Granary
Free Range Chicken Thinking 1: What Is It?
Free Range Chicken Thinking 2: Livermush

The Orchard at Altapass - Family Fun by the Bushels!
Clinchfield Railroad - Wikipedia
Overmountain Men
Overmountain Men - Altapass
More Bill Carson Stories

TEDx Hickory April 21, 2012 - Part 4 - Yoder and the Worthingtons

https://plus.google.com/115130617390933909861/posts

Puddingstone










Foothills Transition

The Sustainable Living Project 

Rainwater Harvesting

Rudy Wright's and this Council's Philadelphia moment?

A major factor in what brought Mayor Rudy Wright into office was the spending by a previous City of Hickory Administration and officials at a restaurant in Philadelphia around 1999. As I recall, thousands of dollars were spent frivolously on a dinner by these officials during the visit to this renowned Philadelphia establishment including hundreds of dollars on single bottles of wine. When Rudy Wright ran for Mayor in 2001, he used this issue to beat Pat Moss over the head with and stated that he was going to cut out the waste in Hickory City Government.

Pat Moss was former (and in 2001 the current) Mayor Bill McDonald's hand picked successor. We know the parties that were involved in bringing Mayor Wright to office back then. That is public record. This Mayor said this morning on Hal Row's show that the issue about the Tent on Union Square was a partisan political issue and seemed to state that they had kept partisan politics out of City Council meetings until recently. Although the Mayor didn't explain this, the only conclusion that I could draw is that he is referring to the typical Republican versus Democrat politics. I don't think this has anything to do with Donkey versus Elephant issues. It has everything to do with the connected versus the disenfranchised in this community.

A legitimate question was asked about the tent on Union Square... about the cost overrun and the possibility that even more money will be asked for in the near future. The lady that called in (at the 5:30 mark in the presentation below) with concerns about cost overruns concerning the tent did not say a word about the pools, but the Mayor introduced the pool subject and said that this issue was all about the pools. The Mayor seems to believe that he shouldn't have to take ownership of the process involving the Union Square structure. He is the CEO of this city and as such everything has his stamp of approval. That is the common thread between the pools and this tent project on Union Square. That he, the Council, and City Administration own these processes. When this lady was talking about "Who is Auditing this tent on Union Square?" she was not asking who was doing the accounting. She was asking why wasn't someone keeping an eye on what was going on so that we didn't incur this additional $137,000 cost overrun/expenditure? That is obvious to anyone who listened to what she asked.



The Mayor opens up a lot of questions here. Who knew what when? You decided to move forward with this project on December 20, 2011. At what point did you find out that it was going to cost $423,000 instead. If you found out that it was going to cost $423,000, then why didn't you reassess whether you should move forward with the project? If you found out in January that you were going to incur this additional expense, then why have you waited until now to come forward and make this public? That sure seems like a Bait and Switch scheme to me.

When looking at the pools that the City Council chose to demolish, Hickory Citizens emphatically stated that they wanted Aquatic recreation and this City Council denied them their desire. Charettes, more like Charades, were held and people undeniably requested Aquatic Recreation for the public and wanted it throughout the city. Remember Mayor Wright standing in that swimming pool in the USA Today? And the City was basically dishonest in this process every step of the way for two years. First they would be only closed for one summer, then they come up with this huge cost number to justify them being shut down for the foreseeable future, and then they demolish them six months later under the guise that it was a liability safety issue. When people talked about alternatives they were shut out.

That in my opinion led to this closed process involving the tent on Union Square. The consent agenda process was abused to carry out the apparent directive that this be moved through without people being allowed to have input, discuss cost-benefit analysis, competitive bidding, alternatives and to top it all off we now see that there was no architectural or engineering design built into the original structure. Who came up with the original $285,000 budget for this project that didn't take proper factors into account? This is what happens with closed processes.

The common thread between both processes is that they were manipulated towards the desires of the Mayor, Council, and City Administration who are all of one mind.

The Mayor seems to think it is alright to take a fund created to build a parking deck in downtown and use it for anything other than its directed purpose. The money in that fund should be used for its intended purpose and then the fund should be decommissioned. The fund is not called "The Union Square Capital Project Fund" and it should not be used for that purpose. That is the definition of a slush fund - Chicago style. That is a bait and switch. That is what we complain about in Washington. Why is that okay in Hickory?

Here are some questions pertaining to this issue that would be asked by a responsible "4th Estate" media party pertaining to the Parking fund. What was the balance on the parking fund last year? What is it today? Is there money left to build a parking deck now? What else has it been used for? Could we have built that parking deck if this money had not been used for other purposes?

What we have seen are not Republican or Democrat issues. They are Hickory issues. We have members of both parties that are upset with this Mayor and City Council. If anyone has made issues partisan it is this Mayor and Administration with their dictates and insistence that everything be done the way that they want without question. Anyone who questions what they do has at some point in time been deemed a radical or a trouble maker or partisan. We are supposed to take for granted that they are operating in the interest of the public without scrutiny or accountability.

During this (Hal Row) show, the Mayor talked about businesses moving forward before all of the pieces of a plan had come together, as though that is what they had done. First of all, if you invest your own money then I get your point, but you are responsible for other people's money in this process, so you should have had those architectural and engineering plans and costs established from the get-go. You didn't have the very foundation of a plan in order. All you had was an idea and you threw dollars at the idea. That is the very thing that conservatives complain about when it comes to Big Government. Businesses who operate in this fashion end up out of business. That is alright when it is your personal risk. That is not alright when you are acting as a Fiduciary. That is what we have seen from the current lot of politicians of this era; privatize profits, socialize losses. Most of us don't want to go down that path.

When we look at issues of scrutiny and accountability, let's look back at the $25,000 spent on Graffiti (May 4, 2010 - Bottom). That was two years ago and they said that they were going to come back and discuss how the money was spent six months later. Again two years later and they still have never come back before the public to reconcile the money that was spent.

We look at the Rental Property Task Force that was created on September 7, 2010. Its recommendations were accepted by the City Council on December 7, 2010. One recommendation was that an additional Code Enforcement Officer be hired to deal with the issues of Rental Properties and Chronic Code Violations - ie Slum Lords. Code Enforcement officials were supposed to come back after a couple of months and address priorities and necessities and the task force was to be reconvened after six months to address the Council on whether the recommendations were working. So, a year ago the Rental Property Task Force was supposed to be reconvened and come back before the Council to tell the Council and Public whether its recommendations were working and that has not happened yet.

Those are a few examples of the issues that we see in this City. It boils down to accountability. No one is attacking the Mayor's personal being. What they are addressing are issues of representation and accountability. Who does the mayor represent?

At the end of this interview Rebecca Inglefield calls up (28:15 mark in the presentation above) and talks to the Mayor about when is a good time for discussion, as in give and take with the public. The Mayor never really answers and obfuscates the question.

The Mayor doesn't seem to understand that this is an issue of trust. He and the Council are in charge of Hickory's Public Trust. How many times over the last several years have we heard politicians decry that everyone was out to get'em? How many times was it about disenfranchisement, accountability, and trust? There seems to be a disconnect here. All anyone who is questioning all of this is asking is that local government be of, by, and for the people; instead of of, by, and for the chosen few.

Economic Stories of Relevance in Today's World -- May 6, 2012

The Size And Strength of Banks Is Detrimental - The International Forecaster - Bob Chapman - May 2, 2012 - Taxes and bonds to pay for retirements, as well as all the debt and mismanagement, Apple goes offshore to hide its riches from paying taxes, Europe in a new age of austerity, Banks exerting more power than ever, manufacturing cooling as investment eases.                Real estate investors competing to buy Manhattan apartment buildings have sent prices to record highs as rental demand surges, reducing yields on the properties to the lowest in more than six years. The capitalization rate, a measure of investment return that declines as prices rise, averaged 4.4% for Manhattan multifamily buildings in first three months of this year… ‘It’s the strongest of all asset classes,’ said Doug Harmon, senior managing director at Eastdil Secured LLC… ‘There is still plenty of room to run on rents, and I see absolutely no reason why this action will or should stop anytime soon.’”                         “Illinois residents, whose income taxes rose by a record last year to help close a budget deficit, are paying the price again for the state’s fiscal mismanagement. With its pile of unpaid bills growing about 30% this year, the weakest pension-funding ratio among states and falling federal aid, Illinois and its municipalities are paying a penalty above AAA debt that’s twice their five-year average. Illinois plans to issue $1.8 billion of debt as soon as next week…”                             “U.S. municipalities from California to Florida are selling the most debt in three years to pay for their workers’ retirements in a bet that investment returns will exceed borrowing costs. Fort Lauderdale, Florida, is among issuers considering a sale this year, following an offer by Pasadena, California, last month. Illinois borrowed a combined $7.2 billion in 2010 and 2011. The governments are placing taxpayers at risk by papering over pension deficits with taxable securities. The strategy can backfire if the proceeds don’t earn enough to pay off the bonds.


Business Activity in U.S. Grows at Slowest Pace Since 2009 - Bloomberg through the San Francisco Chronicle - Timothy R. Homan - April 30, 2012 - Business activity in the U.S. expanded in April at the slowest pace since November 2009, a sign that manufacturing may be cooling as business investment eases.                    The Institute for Supply Management-Chicago Inc. said today its barometer decreased to 56.2 during the month, lower than the most pessimistic forecast in a Bloomberg News survey, from 62.2 in March. Readings greater than 50 signal growth. Economists projected the gauge would fall to 60, according to the median of 55 estimates in the survey.                 A slowdown in demand may prompt companies in the U.S. to slow the rate of inventory accumulation, while exports to Europe and Asia may cool. Auto purchases may prevent a prolonged deterioration in the industry that spurred the recovery.


Disinformation On Every Front - Paul Craig Roberts.org - Paul Craig Roberts| May 4, 2012 - Some readers have come to the erroneous conclusion that the Matrix consists of Republican Party disinformation as if there is no disinformation from the left. Others think that propaganda is the business of Obama and the Democrats. In fact, propaganda from the right, the left and the middle are all part of the disinformation fed to americans.                         If I may give some examples: The other day Chuck Colson, one of the Nixon officials imprisoned for Watergate crimes, died. This gave NPR the opportunity to relive the Nixon horror.                      What precisely was the Nixon horror? Essentially, there was no such thing. Watergate was about President Nixon lying about when he learned about the Watergate burglary.                  When Nixon learned about the burglary, he did not act on it prior to his reelection, because he reasoned, rightly, that the Washington Post would blame him for the burglary, although he had nothing to do with it, in the hopes of preventing his reelection.
                         By going along with a cover-up, Nixon enabled the Washington Post to make an issue of the precise date on which Nixon learned of the burglary. White House tapes indicated that Nixon had learned of the burglary before he said he learned of it. So Nixon had permitted a cover-up and had to go, but what was the real reason?                         What was the Watergate burglary? We don’t really know. A group of men including former CIA operatives were hired by the Committee to Re-elect the President to break into a Democratic campaign office in the Watergate complex. We don’t know the purpose of the burglary. Some claim it was to wire-tap the telephones in the belief that the Democratic Party was getting re-election money from communists in Cuba or elsewhere. Others claim that the burglars were looking for a list of call girls, that compromised a White House official, as his fiancee was allegedly one of the call girls.                    Looking back from our time during which Bush and Obama have deep-sixed the US Constitution, violated numerous US and international laws, and behaved as if they were caesars unconstrained by any law or any morality, Nixon’s “crimes” appear so trivial as to be unremarkable. Yet, Nixon was driven from office and is regarded as a criminal.                      What was Watergate really about?




Unemployment rate at 8.1%, only 115K jobs added, participation rate shrinks again to new low - Hot Air - Ed Morrissey - May 4, 2012 - The April jobs report fell short of analysts expectations, as only 115,000 jobs were added.  Consensus expectations had been in the 165K-170K range, which still would have been below the rate jobs were added in February, January, and December.  While the jobless rate dropped slightly, the number of jobs added came in short of March’s disappointing level:                       So how did the jobless rate drop?  The same way it’s been dropping all along — people exiting the workforce:                  The civilian labor force participation rate declined in April to 63.6 percent, while the employment-population ratio, at 58.4 percent, changed little.                    That’s a new 30-year low in the participation rate.  Here’s the chart from the BLS for the last 30 years:

People Not In Labor Force Soar By 522,000, Labor Force Participation Rate Lowest Since 1981 - Zero Hedge - Tyler Durden - May 4, 2012 - it is just getting sad now. In April the number of people not in the labor force rose by a whopping 522,000 from 87,897,000 to 88,419,000. This is the highest on record. The flip side, and the reason why the unemployment dropped to 8.1% is that the labor force participation rate just dipped to a new 30 year low of 64.3%.

95 Percent Of The Jobs Lost During The Recession Were Middle Class Jobs - The Economic Collapse Blog - Who is the biggest loser in the ongoing decline of the U.S. economy? Is it the wealthy? No, the stock market has been soaring lately and their incomes are actually going up. Is it the poor? Well, the poor are definitely hurting very badly, but when you don't have much to begin with you don't have much to lose. Unfortunately, it is the middle class that has lost the most during this economic downturn. According to Bloomberg, 95 percent of the jobs lost during the recession were middle class jobs. That is an absolutely astounding figure. Yes, some executives lost their jobs during the last recession as did some minimum-wage workers. But overwhelmingly the jobs that were lost were middle income jobs. Sadly, the limited number of jobs that have been added since the end of the last recession have mostly been low income jobs. A higher percentage of Americans are working low income jobs than ever before, and the cost of living continues to rise at a very brisk pace. This is causing an erosion of the middle class unlike anything we have ever seen in American history.                    When I was growing up I was taught that the fact that we had the largest middle class in the history of the world was evidence that our economic system was working incredibly well.                      So what does the fact that the middle class is shrinking at a very rapid pace at this point say about how well our economy is working?

Why? - 21 Unanswered Questions That They Don't Want You To Look Into - The End of the American Dream. com - Do you ever get the feeling that the mainstream media is feeding you a very watered-down and twisted version of the news? Do you ever get the feeling that the federal government does not believe that the American people can actually be trusted with the truth? It is exasperating to realize that the news that the public is being fed every single day is very heavily filtered and very heavily censored. In a world where "spin" is everything, simply telling the truth is a revolutionary act. Fortunately, the Internet has helped fuel the rise of the alternative media, and millions of Americans that are starting to wake up are turning to the alternative media for answers to their unanswered questions. Increasingly, people are becoming willing to question the orthodoxy that is being shoved down their throats by the major news networks, and that is a very good thing. The world is becoming an incredibly unstable place, and it is more imperative than ever that we all learn to think for ourselves. We live during a time of great deception, and the lies are going to get even bigger and even more bold in the years to come. If we don't know why we believe what we believe, then we are in danger of falling for just about anything.                    It is those that seek the truth that end up finding it. If you just accept the version of reality that the system wants to feed you, then you are probably going to become what the system wants you to become.                         But if you are not afraid to question everything, then you will have a chance to become everything that you were always meant to be.                     So what are some things that we should be questioning right now?

The following are 21 unanswered questions that they don't want you to look into....



The 10 things they really don’t tell you at graduation - The Washington Post - Alexandra Petri - May 3, 2012 - A piece at the Wall Street Journal has been making waves recently by billing itself as “What They Don’t Tell You At Graduation.”                      The one trouble with this piece is that all the observations seemed vaguely familiar — from graduation speeches.                     Here’s what they really don’t tell you.
 
1) Next year, you will probably be unemployed, or live in your parents’ basement, or be unemployed and live in your parents’ basement....
2) You will keep in touch with friends, but not the ones you thought....
3) When you hit a certain point in your 20s, everyone around you starts to get married, for no apparent reason and without any warning...
4) In life, no one rewards you for performing mundane tasks....
5) Regardless of anything the rampant college hookup culture has taught you, you are suddenly expected to Start Going On Dates....
6) Something strange happens to music as you age....
7) Being young isn’t everything, but it’s a good thing....
8) As Cynthia Heimel says, “There is a microscopically thin line between being brilliantly creative and acting like the most gigantic idiot on earth. So what the hell, leap.”
9) You have no idea how personal finance works.....
10) Some days will be better than others. Some days will be worse than others.....
11) No one in book club has ever read the book. 
   


A message from Rick Smyre the Director of "Communities of the Future."

Hi Friends....

Would encourage you to take a look at this five minute dialogue on CBS about the lose of faith in institutions and how the panel explains what is happening and why. My wife, Brownie, was the one who suggested I take a look at this because of our COTF work in many of the areas discussed in the interview.

I am having this type of conversation four days a weeks with varied organizations and people throughout the U.S. and other countries. In my opinion, the fact that so many people are now beginning to have these concerns and realizing the old institutional structures and the traditional forms of leadership (as well as the corruption of leadership only focused on self-interest) are facing challenges for which they are not prepared, are key reasons we are seeing such an explosion of interest in our COTF ideas and methods.

By the way, there will be an article about our COTF work nationally in the July/August issue of The Futurist Magazine published by the World Future Society. I sincerely appreciate the interest in and support for our work shown by Cindy Wagner, the editor of The Futurist, and Ken Hunter, Chairman of the Board of WFS.

Hope the link below connecting to the CBS interview is of interest. All my best. Rick

Hickory City Council Consent Agenda Rules -- Silence DoGood

The following two sections of code, 2-55 and 2-56 were accessed via the Hickory NC website which is linked directly to the MuniCode website. MuniCode is the compiler, printer, and repository for the Hickory City Code, if the city pays the annual fees to update the archive copy and provide for the appropriate updates.

The next item included below is North Carolina General Statute 160A-81.1. This statute was enacted by the North Carolina Legislature in 2005. It gives citizens the right to address council and sets the parameters whereby council may establish reasonable rules for such public address of council.

The last item is a definition from Black’s Law Dictionary.

As one can see from the City Ordinances referenced, there is no codified process, as provided in the Council Procedural Flyer of a process to remove items from the consent agenda. Now, does this take into account that such a process may have been adopted and passed by council and that it wasn’t added and thus amending the copy of the City of Hickory Code of Ordinances in the care of MuniCode? It does. Having said that, there is no reference to such an ordinance on the face of that flyer, if a source for the stated process exists. So the origins of the removal process is, at this point, dubious. All of that brings me to the first point. While Attorney Crone’s statement was in itself correct as to the process for adding items to the Agenda for Council, it is woefully inadequate and inapplicable insofar as the removal of items for the consent agenda is concerned. See Hickory City Code Section 2-55 (a) for Mr. Crone’s analysis. Please pay particular attention to what is missing from the City Code with regard to this process, as previously stated.

My next premise is one of general concern and focuses on how this council and administration ignores, or without due regard, fails to update its ordinances relevant to current legislative law and mandates. I’m referring to the law that was passed in 2005 that provides for units of local government to have a time set aside at each public meeting of the governing body to give the public access to council and comment about what’s on that individuals’ mind. This is not a time for interaction or debate, but a time to listen. Too many people try to use it as a time for redress or to engage council and that simply isn’t the case. To seek redress, there is a process that begins by getting on the agenda, outlined by Mr. Crone and by Section 2-55 of the Hickory City Code. But I digress. My point here is, the public address provision was passed in 2005 and the Hickory City Code has not been updated to include it. That’s 7 years folks. Yes, the Council for the City of Hickory has provided that time it appears during each meeting session, they are so detailed oriented so as to lay down the outline of their meeting agendas in an ordinance, but so concerned about State law to make provision in their code to mirror state law or to set the guidelines by which persons may address council during each meeting session. The absence of a set of codified rules says to me that it will be arbitrary and not uniform insofar as addressing council is concerned and quite possibly hinge on who is addressing council. And I think every member now sitting on council was a member in 2005 with the exception of Mr. Guess. There is just no excuse. While Section 2-56 does make provision for addressing council, it is outdated and does not comply with the criteria outlined in NCGS § 160A-81.1.

So that’s my little contribution to this debate. Once again, Hickory City Council is following rules or applying rules to others that are inapplicable or non-existent at least, by the references they themselves provide. Then they leave certain items open for spot interpretation so that they may discern who may or may not dance at their party, if you will. Over and over and over again, rules don’t seem to apply or exist. And when they exist, the legality of the rules existing and being used are likewise a point of contention. The Great State of Hickory… once again strikes fear and intimidation into the hearts of the governed. I’m so proud!

Sec. 2-55. - Agenda.
(a) The city manager shall prepare the agenda for the meeting. A request to have an item of business placed on the agenda must be received by the city clerk or the city manager by 5:00 on the Wednesday preceding the meeting. Only those matter included upon the agenda may be considered at a council meeting, except that the council may, by motion, second and majority vote, agree to consider other matters.

(b) Items shall be placed on the agenda according to the order of business as follows:

(1) Call to order.
(2) Invocation.
(3) Approval of minutes.
(4) Approval of second readings.
(5) Consent agenda.
(6) Items removed from consent agenda.
(7) Unfinished business.
(8) Information items.
(9) New business.

a. Public hearings.
b. Department reports.
c. Presentation of petitions and requests.
d. Recognition of persons requesting to be heard.

(10) Matters not on agenda (requires majority of council to consider).
(11) General comments by council of a non-business nature.
(12) Closed session (if needed).
(13) Adjournment.

(c) The agenda shall include, for each item placed on it, as much background information on the subject as is available and feasible to reproduce. A copy of all proposed ordinances shall be attached to the agenda. Each council member shall receive a copy of the agenda, and it shall be available for public inspection and/or distribution when it is distributed to the council members.

(d) All persons requesting an item to be placed on the agenda shall state the purpose and subject matter. If the city manager is of the opinion that the request is improper and should not be placed on the agenda, he shall make a notation at the end of the agenda, giving a short summary of the request and the reasons he feels it is improper to be considered. The council, if it so desires, may consider the matter as a matter not on the agenda as set forth above.
(Code 1981, § 2-1(d); Amend. No. 3, 8-18-98)

Sec. 2-56. - Public address to council.
When conducting public hearings, considering ordinances and otherwise considering matters wherein the public has a right to be heard, when it appears that there are persons present desiring to be heard, the mayor shall require those opposing and favoring the proposed action to identify themselves. Each side of the matter shall be given equal time. Those opposing the proposed action shall be allowed 15 minutes for presentation, followed by 15 minutes for those favoring the action, with the opponents then to have five minutes for rebuttal and the proponents to then have five minutes for sur-rebuttal. Those persons on either side shall have the right to divide their allotted time among them as they may choose. The council, by majority vote, may extend the time for each side equally. On matters in which the person desiring to address the council does not have a legal right to speak, the council shall determine whether it will hear the person. The refusal to hear a person desiring to speak may be based upon grounds that the subject matter is confidential, that its public discussion would be illegal, that it is a matter not within the jurisdiction of the council or for any other cause deemed sufficient by the council. Any person allowed to speak who shall depart from the subject under discussion or who shall make personal, impertinent or slanderous remarks, or who shall become boisterous while addressing the council shall be declared out of order by the mayor, or by vote of the council, and barred from speaking further before the council unless permission to continue shall be granted by a majority vote of the council, under such restrictions as the council may provide.


160A‑81.1. Public comment period during regular meetings.
The council shall provide at least one period for public comment per month at a regular meeting of the council. The council may adopt reasonable rules governing the conduct of the public comment period, including, but not limited to, rules (i) fixing the maximum time allotted to each speaker, (ii) providing for the designation of spokesmen for groups of persons supporting or opposing the same positions, (iii) providing for the selection of delegates from groups of persons supporting or opposing the same positions when the number of persons wishing to attend the hearing exceeds the capacity of the hall, and (iv) providing for the maintenance of order and decorum in the conduct of the hearing. The council is not required to provide a public comment period under this section if no regular meeting is held during the month. (2005‑170, s. 3.)

Excerpted from “The Hickory Hound” blogsite as a true and accurate representation of an instructional and informational pamphlet provided to citizens relating to the City of Hickory and Hickory City Council Meetings.

“The Consent Agenda is the first portion of the City Council Agenda and includes items which are considered to be routine by the City Council. These items are enacted by one motion with no discussion unless a council Member or a citizen requests an item to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion. The Mayor will ask if anyone present wishes to remove an item from the Consent Agenda at which time anyone present can ask for that to be done. As a citizen, if you wish to have an item removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion, please just stand and voice your desire to the Mayor and Council.”

Agenda. “Memoranda of things to be done as items of business or discussion to be brought up at a meeting; a program consisting of such items.” (Black’s Law Dictionary. 6th. West Publishing Company, ST. Paul, MN. 1990.)