news-record.com

Exam week will come to an end today with polygraph tests of three more City Council members. But what's unclear is when results will be made public and what impact they might have.

Eight of the council's nine members voted last month to submit to lie-detector tests to publicly state their innocence in the leak of a police department investigative report to the News & Record. But only Sandy Carmany, Florence Gatten and Sandra Anderson Groat have divulged an outcome: They said they passed but wouldn't provide any other details.

The city's top elected official, Mayor Keith Holliday, was tested Wednesday and would not say how he fared. Tom Phillips responded similarly Tuesday.

Some council members said Wednesday that there had been no discussion about how to release the polygraph results in part

because they're busy with other issues.

"The only people really going crazy over the polygraphs are the media," Carmany said, adding that she's frustrated the media has downplayed other council business in favor of polygraph coverage.

Holliday and Carmany said the reasons for the council not coordinating the release of results also include time spent on other issues, including a department-by-department review of city spending and discussion of a likely November bond referendum.

"This is part-time for all of us," Holliday said.

Dianne Bellamy-Small is the lone council member to decline to take the polygraph or submit an affidavit stating that she didn't share the report with anyone. She did not respond Wednesday to phone messages or a faxed list of questions.

Some council members have said they believe leaking the report, which contains personnel information, violates state law. If it's revealed that a council member leaked the report, some council members have said that person's ability to work with other council members would be compromised.

The tests are estimated to cost $5,000, which council members have said will come from their travel budgets.

The council has received support for its handling of the investigation of former Chief David Wray's administration from the city's business elite: the Greensboro Partnership. Partnership leaders on Tuesday presented a statement to the council condemning "the recent allegations of taping conversations of ordinary citizens and of racial profiling." The business group said it stood behind the council and city staff's efforts to investigate.

"We understand the need for limited public information to protect the investigation, but at the appropriate time (we) expect full transparency of what has happened and what will be done about it," said Patrick Danahy, the partnership's chief executive and a former Cone Mills official.

The partnership is a non-profit group formed by the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce, Action Greensboro and the Greensboro Economic Development Partnership. It made the statement to fill a "void" in such comments by the council members, who cannot speak about what happened because of legal constraints from the continuing investigation, Danahy said.

Danahy and members of the partnership's executive committee said their statement carried no overt or implied criticism of city government's handling of the Wray controversy . It was not a call for the council to change anything it is doing, he said.

"There was no hidden motive there," said Jim Melvin, an Action Greensboro leader, former mayor and member of the partnership's executive committee. "What the partnership was saying is that the whole community needs to give our council its support."

The council also voted 8-1 to instruct City Manager Mitchell Johnson and city staff to not appear at public meetings related to the police investigation, pledging instead that the council and city manager would provide periodic updates as new information is verified and as it's legally acceptable.

City Attorney Linda Miles said the motion is legal because the council wasn't directing city staff not to attend the meeting. Instead, they instructed the city manager to direct the staff not to attend public meetings on the topic.

Gatten made the motion after Bellamy-Small said she planned to hold a public meeting Monday on the investigation. Bellamy-Small said she wanted to give residents a chance to hear directly from city staff involved in the investigation.

"For some people, it's more reassuring to hear it face to face," she said.

The other eight council members objected.

Yvonne Johnson said it would raise residents' frustrations to hear city staff tell them they can't answer certain questions, while Mike Barber noted that Mitchell Johnson had provided an update on the investigation at the council's last meeting two weeks ago in response to questions from residents.

"There's an absolute intent to share every morsel of information within (state law)," Barber said. "We've released every bit of information we can release (to this point)."

Staff writer Taft Wireback contributed.

Contact Eric Swensen at 373-7351 or eswensen@news-record.com