NC 4th of July Festival

New logo for festival (very cool)

The Board of Aldermen heard a short report by NC 4th of July Festival Chairman Don Parker at the September 9th meeting.  He gave an overview of the festival's massive logistical challenges, the number of volunteers needed to make the event a success, the positive economic benefit to our region, AND express concern that "some aldermen have a problem with the festival and how it is operated."

Aldermen Boguskie, Poole and Potter did express some concerns, such as the impact on local retail merchants, the burden on city staff and services, and the veracity that the event helps our area economically.  A committee will be formed (led by Aldermen Poole and Potter) to hear feedback from citizens and merchants, then meet with Mr. Parker (and possibly others involved with the event) to address the concerns raised.

The NC 4th of July Festival has a long relationship with Southport, and now is a good time to evaluate its impact on our area.  It's believed by some that the event is coordinated and carried out by the Southport-Oak Island Chamber of Commerce.  While the festival is closely aligned with the Chamber, it is organized and operated by a separate entity.

Mr. Parker pointed out that the "life blood" of the festival is the money from the artisan and food booths.  Those booths are a big part of the concerns being articulated by local merchants--many who close their shops during the long weekend.  This is a serious conflict and it's good that all stakeholder's concerns will be aired out and (hopefully) addressed.

I'll let you know when the first meeting of the committee will take place.

Board of Aldermen Reject Planning Board Changes

The mayor of Southport formed a committee to evaluate both the rules and procedures of the Planning Board and the relationship between that board and city staff (primarily the City Manager, Director of Planning and Building Inspections).  The charge of the committee was to make the Planning Board procedures more efficient, and to institute measures to improve relations between the board and city staff--which had been tumultuous before the committee was formed back in March.

The committee included 2 members of the Planning Board, the 2 aldermen who were appointed as Planning Board liaisons (myself and Mary Ellen Poole), the City Manager and the Director of Planning.  The committee came up with a number of recommended changes to the current procedures in the UDO.  A few of the key changes were not agreed upon by the Planning Board members of the committee, but were endorsed by the 2 aldermen.  When the full Planning Board reviewed the proposed changes they disagreed with most of them because they felt it limited their authority.  Please keep in mind that the Planning Board has no official authority because they are an advisory board to the Board of Aldermen.  The vote when the aldermen reviewed the proposed changes was 3 to 3 on the most critical changes, and the mayor broke the tie by voting in favor of the Planning Board's position.

The question that lingers is: Why did the mayor form the committee if he rejected the most important changes?  Again, as I did with the mayor's violation of the Board of Aldermen Rules and Procedures in my previous post, I will defer to the words of the State Port Pilot and their editorial in the September 8, 2010 issue.

The State Port Pilot, Southport, NC, Wednesday, September 8, 2010

EDITORIALS

Policy issues remain

Those who are pleased that procedures in place for the Southport Planning Board will remain unchanged should not treat last month’s tie-breaking vote to keep them the same as some sort of victory.

Political power and wins by majority are not what this issue is about. At least, it shouldn’t be. What is at issue with the board’s policies is whether they are effective, efficient, up-to-date with the times, and conducive to reviewing and recommending development proposed in the city.

That is in fact the role of the planning board: to give more eyes to a proposal and advise the board of aldermen accordingly. That the aldermen felt there was need to revise how the board goes about that meant there were some things not being done as well as they needed to be. And one of those things was certainly how the board worked with the staff that is there to assist them.

But even if the planning board insists on reviewing requests in committee and outside of board meetings — a practice that drags out the process unnecessarily, and goes against the advice of staff — other issues remain in need of review if Southport is to be managed effectively and be a good place to do business.

Questions remain in need of decisions as to whether the board should review all requests or only provide recommendations on some. Should they provide recommendations on rezoning requests but be the ones to decide site plan sufficiency?

And those committee reviews — could that time be better spent prior to each meeting instead of after, with every board member reviewing the requests before ever discussing them in a group setting? Keeping in mind that staff checks the details, perhaps the degree of review is not what’s at issue, but rather the order in which it’s conducted.

These and other questions still need to be answered, and should be as part of a process that did not end last month, even if that’s what it seemed like. If the past few months reviewing procedures and trying to improve the relationship between boards and staff are to amount to anything, questions arising along the way need to be followed through, not kept at bay.             (C) State Port Pilot 2010

Staring Down The Barrel Of A Gavel

For those of you who attended the special meeting of the Southport Board of Aldermen on August 23, you certainly remember an episode when I was prevented by the mayor from raising a perfectly legal point-of-order.  When he refused to recognize my point-of-order--which is strictly forbidden by the Rules and Procedures we adopted just a few months ago AND by Roberts Rules of Order--I did what is recommended in Roberts Rules and continued to raise my point.  The mayor hit his gavel with extreme force on the block, then pointed it at me and growled, "Be quiet or I'll kick you out of here!"  It was my legal right to insist that my point be addressed, but without the city attorney there to cover me I decided to let it go.

BTW, the above quote from the mayor is 100% accurate, even though the State Port Pilot missed some of it. Please don't ask me and the mayor to attend a public meeting to verify the exact words.  I told the truth the last time my recollection of past events was questioned, and I'm telling the truth now.

Rather than give you my (admittedly biased) account and conclusions of this far-reaching incident, I thought the editorial in the State Port Pilot in their August 25th issue says it all.  Herewith are their words:

The State Port Pilot, Southport, NC, Wednesday, August 25, 2010

EDITORIALS

Out of order

Mayor Robert Howard deserves respect for trying to run a tight ship, for trying to get the Southport Board of Aldermen on a productive page and encouraging unanimity. But for trying to the point of controlling the actions of other board members, Howard is out of order.

Twice in as many meetings, Howard has denied the most vocal challenger to his authority, alderman Ken Karn, from being heard or from making his point effectively. Both times dealt with criticisms of the mayor’s conduct running meetings. Both times Karn called for a point of order about the mayor participating in board debates.

The first instance saw Howard simply ignore the comment. Most recently, Monday night, Howard struck his gavel, spoke over Karn’s protest and, when Karn refused to relent, struck his gavel again before pointing his finger at Karn and yelling, “Be quiet!”

Karn’s mouth dropped and his eyes widened in shock. So did ours.

What Karn was doing was what he’d attempted to do at the board’s regular meeting earlier this month: to point out a rule of procedure being broken, specifically the mayor participating in debate without first relinquishing his gavel and designating someone else as the meeting’s presiding officer
.
Whether Karn was using the rule to do to the mayor what he would do to him — silence an opposing view — what matters is that every board member deserves the chance to be heard. And what matters more is a rule was indeed being broken. According to the rules of procedure that the board adopted just a few weeks ago, the mayor generally presides over and runs the board meetings but cannot participate in a debate unless he relinquishes his gavel for that debate. The mayor can call motions out of order and maintain order by determining whether a speaker has overstepped bounds of decency or relevance, but such rulings are supposed to be subject to appeal by any board member.

That the mayor cut off and shut up Karn before he could state his objection fully does not give an impression of proper procedure. It gives an impression of a chairman bent on controlling the board and quashing any dissension. It was only weeks ago that the board adopted rules of procedure endorsed by the UNC School of Government. If those rules are to amount for anything, the mayor’s actions against Karn must be ruled out of order.

And if the mayor is not acknowledging Karn’s protests accordingly, someone else on the board needs to call the mayor on it.                                                                  (C) State Port Pilot 2010

The Power of the Written Word

It's been made very clear to me by a few individuals involved with our City's government that this blog will be scrutinized to be sure that I don't write anything that could be construed as negative towards any person, board or committee.  It almost makes me want to close down this blog.

Almost.

The Planning Board of your city has spent over 30 minutes each at 2 different meetings discussing 2 sentences from my blog post of April 2nd.  Here are the 2 sentences:

"I am one of the 2 aldermen appointed as a liaison to the Planning Board and tasked with getting that body in shape. We've had serious problems with the Planning Board over the past 6 months."

Planning Board member Dale McPherson brought up my quote at their July 15 meeting and took great exception to the way he felt it showed the Planning Board in a bad light.  I defended the statements by pointing out that these were the words used by the mayor to me before the February Board of Aldermen meeting.  I said that, if I had to do it over, I would not say those things and agreed to show more discretion in the future.

Not content to leave well enough alone, the Planning Board asked the mayor to attend their August 19 meeting to confirm or deny that he had said those words to me.  The mayor denied the remarks and said it was not the sort of thing he would say. To his credit, the mayor urged the Planning Board to move beyond this and get down to doing their work for the city.  He even refused to have me removed as a Planning Board liaison (as requested by Mr. McPherson) if I continued to criticize the board in my blog.

I have a clear memory about what the mayor said to me, but he avoided making it into a he said/he said situation.  His call was for unity, mutual respect and cooperation.  I took the stand after the mayor and made the massive mistake of saying that, while those were the mayors words to me, I agreed with them at the time I wrote them.

I was not saying the board was bad, I just felt there were some significant problems.  I was supported in my views by Mary Ellen Poole, my fellow Planning Board liaison and former Chairman of the Planning Board.  There was a little back and forth with a few board members, but clearly it was going nowhere.  Too much time had already been wasted on this and we needed to stick a fork in it.

I hope that folks who work in government can learn to be less sensitive about these things.  I truly believe that all the fuss here was completely unnecessary and only served to waste valuable time for the Planning Board. It could have all been taken care of in person rather than in public. The reason it was done in public was simply to embarrass me.

It didn't work.

Now that really is a waste of government time. Hopefully this is the last time anybody will hear about this "incident".

NEXT POST:  The special Board of Aldermen meeting and being threatened by a gavel.