news-record.com

NEWS

Council discord resurfaces at retreat

Sunday, December 13, 2009
(Updated 7:55 am)

GREENSBORO — If a two-day retreat is any indication, the next term of the Greensboro City Council might be as contentious as the last.

City Manager Rashad Young came away with a better idea about what things were most important to his nine council members.

But council members were left frustrated as old procedural and interpersonal debates reignited and new issues emerged.

“I thought it was going to be a new change and it was about 'Let’s just forge a much better consensus,’” Councilman Danny Thompson said after the retreat ended Saturday. “I don’t want to sound naïve, but I was really hopeful.”

The retreat — which cost the city about $2,400 — was the first work session for the new City Council, which includes four new members, three of whom have never held public office.

Beginning Friday night at the Center for Creative Leadership, council members and senior city staff met with UNC School of Government professor Carl Stenberg to learn about productive meetings and how to work successfully as a group.

Problems with group dynamics and sometimes unending debates plagued the last City Council. Some of the new members campaigned to run things more smoothly.

Much of Stenberg’s curriculum, however, was set aside by council members who wanted to ditch the “fuzzy-wuzzy issues” in favor of nuts-and-bolts discussions about what they wanted to accomplish during their two-year terms, which began Dec. 1.

The council members had some things in common — they all stressed that economic development, infrastructure upgrades and public safety were their top priorities.

They spent several hours Saturday discussing what those topics meant to them, giving Young some ideas of what should take precedence when he develops next year’s city budget.

But the meeting also opened the door for the City Council to air differences.

“There is an extreme lack of trust between the council members themselves and between the council and the staff,” Councilman Robbie Perkins said. “That goes both ways. I think until we deal with the trust issue as a group, dealing with a lot of this other stuff is not going to get us anywhere.”

The issue of trust — or distrust — was reiterated by other members, including Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw.

Council members rehashed an old discussion about whether members should be able to meet in groups of two or three with city staff — a policy banned by the previous council out of fear that some members were working in secret.

Others saw it as an issue of being able to effectively stay informed.

“It wound up being made that there was some conspiracy, but there wasn’t,” Councilwoman T. Dianne Bellamy-Small said.

Meanwhile, issues with new council members also emerged. Perkins questioned how Mayor Bill Knight planned to appoint people to boards, and Councilman Jim Kee asked whether the group would reconsider the seating chart for council meetings.

In both cases, council members suggested that Knight’s decisions might be overruled.

Those discussions, which came at the end of the retreat, left bad feelings among some members.

“I hope we get back to what Bill Knight said he wanted to do and quit the political jockeying,” Councilman Zack Matheny said after the meeting.

 

Contact Amanda Lehmert at 373-7075 or amanda.lehmert@news-record.com

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

dusenberry

December 13, 2009 - 5:28 am EST

Perhaps the voters needs to boot the rest of em out.

downtowngso

December 13, 2009 - 8:40 am EST

The problem is with the new council members, particularly Danny Thompson and Mayor Bill Knight. They are trying to come in there and do things their way. That Danny Thompson is terrible. hes already thrown a monkey wrench in the swim center which the voters approved. I'll also say that the fighting among city councilmen didnt start until former members of the guilford county commission were elected to city-council. looks like they brought that circus with them.

wstutts

December 13, 2009 - 9:25 am EST

The voters DID NOT approve the center. They approved $ 12 million dollars.

gsosteve

December 13, 2009 - 10:26 am EST

wstutts is correct. The voters DID NOT approve a swim center. What they approved was a Parks & Rec bond whose language was rather vague and indicated that new city pools would be installed at city parks. Once the bond was approved, it was handed to the Coliseum Board, an atrocity. Besides, what's wrong with them coming in and trying to do things their way? The previous way obviously wasn't working.

downtowngso

December 13, 2009 - 3:41 pm EST

if you read the ballot the swim center was mentioned despite the fact that it was included with parks and rec. If people didnt know what they were voting for, im sorry but they need to learn how to read. Conservatism is what got this country in a mess over the past 8 years. If you'll notice conservative towns tend to be small dried up and almost dead while more liberal cities are more prosperous. Im a liberal and im proud of it. republicans are the last thing Greensboro city council needs

countryboy

December 13, 2009 - 6:33 pm EST

WHAT? You are making my head spin downtowngso. The northeast and rust belt are the most liberal areas in our nation...and people are fleeing them in droves to the south and west. Never mind...it's not worth the time.

wstutts

December 13, 2009 - 8:51 pm EST

I knew exactly what I was voting for and I learned to read in the third grade. Maybe you liberalism blinds you to understand the difference between 12 million and 19 million dollars,

chickenlittle02

December 13, 2009 - 10:54 am EST

Try again. Danny Thompson was elected because the people didn't want the status quo, which has been mired in corruption and fiscal irresponsibility. He's doing exactly what the people elected him to do. You go, Danny!

Molly the Dog

December 13, 2009 - 2:27 pm EST

very well said. Thompson wants it his way, and he thinks he knows the way. He is founded on assumptions and his perceptions. Facts and logic are difficult to deal with when opinions are formed before hand.

buzzman

December 13, 2009 - 7:07 am EST

As expected, Robbie Perkins is going to do his best to keep things disrupted. He doesn't want this council to move forward since he plans to run for mayor, probably in 2011. dusenberry is right! The voters need to replace a few more of these knuckleheads.
And as usual, the folks at the N&R are doing their best to stir-the-pot.

Bang201

December 13, 2009 - 7:44 am EST

Buzzman, on one hand you've reached conclusions based on an article in the N&R, then you say the N&R is doing it's best to stir the pot? Maybe so but you appear to be the stew they are stirring. Thanks N&R for the coverage.

buzzman

December 13, 2009 - 9:18 am EST

Bang201, the N&R is not my only source of what happens with the council.

gsosteve

December 13, 2009 - 10:28 am EST

True. I stopped relying on the N&R as my main source of news after they started this whole issue with the police department after publishing unverified "facts" and assumptions as news. Read the Rhino Times if you want some real coverage of the Council. I'm interested in what THEY say about this retreat, because I'm sure its an entirely different account. I can guarantee you that they did far more journalistic investigation for their piece than the N&R.

WOODLYN

December 13, 2009 - 9:28 am EST

Perhaps the serior member,(the ones re-elected), should set down by themself and think who elected them and why. The council is supposed to represent the people of Greensboro and not their self. Learn to listen and learn from one another and the people of Greensboro. Be respectful to one another and learn that others have great ideas also, Please make this a good and productive two years. Bill Knight is a good and smart person. Give him a chance and he will make a very good MAYOR.
You work for the people of Greensboro and not your own ego.

Panacea

December 13, 2009 - 10:18 am EST

I'd say the pots are calling the kettle black on both sides.

I do think the policy of not allowing council members to meet with city staff should be continued . . . for the sake of city staff members who don't deserve to be caught in the middle.

gsosteve

December 13, 2009 - 10:31 am EST

Again, the N&R publishes this stuff without doing research. The reason Council members weren't allowed to work with staff members in small groups is not because of worries over "conspiracy" issues. The reason is that the City Attorney advised against it, as it could easily be a violation of the state's "sunshine laws" that set forth regulations for transparency in governmental meetings. As someone who holds degrees and political science and public administration, I would have to say that's a very sound recommendation.

Amanda Lehmert

December 13, 2009 - 12:35 pm EST

Hi gsosteve,

I'm sorry I didn't spell it out for readers. The last council purposefully voted to say they would no longer hold those "small group" meetings because meeting in private is a violation of the state's open meeting law. The issue as a point of contention between council members also highlights the fact that they do not trust each other.

hugh

December 13, 2009 - 4:23 pm EST

"The last council purposefully voted to say they would no longer hold those "small group" meetings because meeting in private is a violation of the state's open meeting law. The issue as a point of contention between council members"

Something is wrong when Council members seek to violate open meeting laws. Sounds like their beef is with the law, not those who uphold it. And their desire to break the law is disturbing.

hugh

December 13, 2009 - 8:35 pm EST

Why is the law against "small group" meetings a contention between council members? Does that mean one group of council wants to violate the open meetings law and the other group doesn't and this is an issue?

I wouldn't trust the ones that wanted to violate the open meetings law either.

Council members who violate the open meeting laws should be prosecuted.

hugh

December 13, 2009 - 8:36 pm EST

Sorry for the double post. I downloaded no script and the prior comment didn't show up a few hours later.

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search