Sunday, January 5, 2014

Nancy Vaughan Could And Should Do More

In today's News & Record, George Hartzman writes:

"Mayor Nancy Vaughan has asked Greensboro’s City Council to adopt more transparent ethics disclosures for some very good reasons.

For example, at the Dec. 17 City Council meeting, Nancy Hoffmann nominated her business partner, Nick Piornack, to Downtown Greensboro Inc.’s board, after voting to loan Piornack’s firm $200,000 for a parking lot that created spots where patrons of her three recently purchased buildings will likely park for a fee.

Hoffmann also nominated the architect for her now-taxpayer-subsidized project at 304 S. Elm via a DGI grant, which city taxpayers funded via a Hoffmann City Council vote. The interior designer for the same property now serves on the Minimum Housing Standards Commission.

If council members place citizens who do business with them on city boards, they should disclose the connections. Members should disclose financial interests in businesses and nonprofits, as well as organizations they are involved with that may become reliant on City Council votes bequeathing everyone else’s money.

Even though participation would be voluntary, identifying and following the actions of those who choose not to provide sunlight on their financial dealings should be enlightening."

Problem is: Mauor Vaughan's new disclosure rules won's stop Councilwoman Hoffman from lying or force her to disclose her associations. Case in point: Council members are already required to disclose all property they own to the City staff and voters but back in 2012 when I pointed out that Nancy Hoffmann had intentionally hidden her purchase of  304 S. Elm, the same building Mr Hartzman writes of in his letter to the editor, Greensboro City Councilwoman Nancy Hoffmann faced zero consequences.

On November 16, 2012, Greensboro City Attorney S Mhjeeb Shah-Khan wrote a letter (PDF) to the City Council defending Councilwoman Hoffman of my charges. Time has proven the city attorney to be wrong-- again.

You see, I spoke on the telephone with Frayda Bluestein of the North Carolina School of Government back in December of 2012 when I penned The Plight Of Local Governance and it was with tears in my eyes that I wrote:

"Recently I wrote of my concerns that Council members Zack Matheney and Nancy Hoffman had not filed their property disclosure forms as is required by Greensboro City Law only to find out from the Greensboro City Attorney that property disclosures are not required by Greensboro City Law. Well, they are required but they're not required.

You see, there is no penalty, no loss of voting privileges, no fines, no fees, no nothing that can be done to a council person who breaks any council rule imposed by City Council.

I didn't believe it either. I thought the City Attorney was playing me for a dumb redneck so I contacted the North Carolina School of Government to find out. The NC School of Government agreed. When they returned my call yesterday just minutes before I rushed out to get an early place in line at last night's Greensboro City Council meeting, the experts from the SOG explained to me that while all local governments in North Carolina have the right to pass laws regulating their own conduct, none have authority to establish or impose penalties upon members of their  own boards.

Sadly, this is why it is impossible for the Greensboro City Council to police itself and any effort to impose self-regulation no matter how well intentioned, is merely a farce. This is why the rich will always control our local governments. This is why the poor will always suffer at their hands."

Nancy Baracat Vaughan can and should do better. Instead of wasting Council's and staff time drafting and passing feel good resolutions that will not be obeyed and have no means of enforcement, Mayor Vaughan should be asking the Greensboro City Council to pass a resolution to lobby the North Carolina House and Senate to enact laws with teeth-- laws that can and will be enforced.

But Nancy Baracat Vaughan, who first ran for city council on a platform of ending local corruption only wants to put up more smoke and mirrors-- why?

If you can't do something the right way then don't do it at all.