Tuesday, July 23, 2013

City Manager confirms unequal treatment for candidates

GREENSBORO, NC -- Greensboro City Manager Denise Turner Roth announced last week that the city will be posting the records requests made by city council challengers, but not incumbents, to a special webpage on the city's website. Today, she confirms that this will apply only to challengers and that incumbents will not have their requests posted:
"Consistent with the way this has been conducted in the past, we will not list incumbent-requested items on the web-site with items requested by candidates unless otherwise directed by Council."
-- Denise Turner Roth, City Manager
The last time something like this was attempted, city council responded by voting not to have  an information sharing policy. It was then-council-person, now-mayor, Robbie Perkins who made a motion that council abandon the scheme. It passed 8-1, with T. Dianne Bellamy Small as the lone no vote.

Watch the video as city council takes action in response to now-candidate, at-large, Ben Holder:



Unless and until this policy is changed, the obvious solution for council challengers is to use an unidentifiable email address to make requests. The law does not demand that one identify oneself when requesting or receiving records.

-----

UPDATE: District 3 representative Zack Matheny, who joined Perkins in rejecting the previous sharing scheme, weighs in:
"We have to continue to do our jobs.  Being a Current Elected Official and being a candidate is not the same. For example, the way you present this would also imply that being a candidate would mean being able to attend Closed session meetings to discuss Personal Employment Issues, and you know that is not the case.

"I understand and support your fight for Public Records and traditionally support your arguments, this one however, is difficult to support."
Of course, whether or not to post the records requests of all candidates online or only the challengers has nothing to do with the limited situations prescribed by law where council may meet in closed session.

3 comments:

  1. Roch,

    Zach's response is silly and has nothing, not anything remotely close, to this topic. Closed session? Really? It's very much like, almost exactly like, TDBS's silly argument in the video you posted. Absolutely silly and completely off topic.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, it was a knee jerk reaction that wasn't thoughtful. Despite his protestations that he "traditionally supports my arguments" on matters of this kind, Zack, my district representative, remains as ineffective as the rest of council in actually DOING anything to improve the city's posture towards transparency.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'll get this fixed at the next council meeting. Same silly stuff of 09.

    ReplyDelete

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...