Say Something and be heard

    Thank goodness places like Benjamin and Bryan Boulevards, Lake Daniel Park, and Wendover River will be able to dry out some over the next two days after yesterday’s downpour.  

The entire Piedmont had reports of flooding after Torrential Tuesday and many school systems had to cancel classes or operate on a two-hour delay.

 Unfortunately, more rain is expected on Friday, and WFMY has already described this weekend’s weather as breezy and chilly.

Even though that sounds gross, there is a silver lining: It’s a wonderful time to recognize and celebrate National Soup Month.  

Think about it. After the weather we’ve had and the weather that’s coming, a pot of hearty,  delicious soup and the NFL  playoffs opening weekend go perfectly with National Soup Month. I‘m talking football, Taylor Swift, and National Soup Month. 

Now, you could grab a few cans of soup, hit up Panera Bread for some of their mass produced products, or even make your own from an old family recipe. 

But if you’re looking for arguably the best soup Greensboro has ever had, you need to hit up Chef Soup and get some made by local legendary restauranteur John Drees.  

Long time Greensboro dining aficionados fondly remember the iconic Southern Lights during its well documented 24-year run on Smyres Place, with John Drees front and center.  Greensboro residents will also remember Drees being a featured chef on WFMY’s Good Morning Show with Lee Kinard during the early 90’s.  

The original location was well loved during its award- winning tenure in the Sunset Hills neighborhood. It was a place where staff became family and the customers did too. It was also a major Greensboro “who’s who” spot. Southern Lights received praise several times by many local critics and was also credited for helping pull Greensboro out of its dreadful dining drought.  

In 2009, Drees decided that it was time to leave the Smyres location and move Southern Lights to Lawndale Drive. 

Needless to say, the Lawndale location was very successful in every aspect as well.  Greensboro remembers the dreadful day when Southern Lights closed after the pandemic interrupted its 10 year run on Lawndale Drive.   It was definitely a sad day for many.  But again, there was a silver lining.  

Drees became laser focused on his love for soup-making and created Chef Soup. He currently operates out of a commissary kitchen in Kernersville and sells his soup every Saturday at the Corner Market on West Market Street.  

Chef Soup delivers all over Greensboro.  In a few easy steps, Greensboro residents can order Drees-created soups from chefsoup.com and have it delivered Monday-Friday. 

Having a taste of his tomato basil soup may even conjure up nostalgic memories of the old Southern Lights locations and bring some brightness to an otherwise dreary upcoming weekend. 

No Greensboro official should ever respond to a public information request by asking “how did you become aware of this information?”

But that’s what happened when Eric Robert filed PIRT (the acronym stands for Public Information Request Tracking System) #23105, asking for “all texts, emails and attachments from Zack Matheny to anyone and everyone from the date of 7/10/2023 to present.”
 

On July 25, PIRT administrator Kurt Brenneman responded that “we need more information to respond to your request quickly and accurately.” The email from Brenneman then asked the following questions:

· What type of records were you seeking? Can you describe the records?

· What do the records concern?
 

· When were the records created?
 

· How did you become aware of the records?
 

Full disclosure: Eric Robert is the publisher of Yo! Greensboro. His antipathy for Matheny, whom he, I and many others believe should not be serving on city council as the elected district 3 representative while also being paid by the city to run the booster organization Downtown Greensboro Inc., is well-known.
 

I’ve had my own negative interactions with Matheny in the past, although his recent responses to me were entirely courteous, but the conflict goes beyond the personalities involved. One of the many problems with DGI is that both its attorneys and the city’s allege DGI’s records aren’t public, despite the fact the downtown booster organization has become so intertangled with city government that even City Manager Taiwo Jaiyeoba has responded to Matheny’s emails by asking if he is acting as the District 3 representative or the president of DGI.  The difficulty in distinguishing the two roles was, according to Robert, the reason for his “to everyone and anyone” phrasing.
 

Regardless of what one feels about either the scope or wording of the request, that obfuscatory response violates the spirt and possibly the letter of North Carolina public records law. The four questions do nothing to narrow the scope of the PIRT request, and the fourth is particularly egregious. A record is either public or not public. If it’s public, officials must provide it unconditionally, not use it as an excuse for a fishing expedition. The appropriate answer to “How did you become aware of the records?” is “none of your damn business.”
 

I remain unconvinced that Brenneman, whom I know from years of correspondence to be patient, gracious and eloquent, wrote this badly-phrased and ill-considered response. When we discussed this, I did not ask him if he had been instructed to use verbiage provided by someone else, but I did respond to his courteous email, in which he wrote “My understanding, and I’m glad to be corrected, is that any question acceptable. It’s just that the response cannot affect access to public records.”

Here's what I wrote back:
 

“The City may have every legal right to respond to a PIRT request by asking for the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow, and I understand that question would only be illegal if answering it was a requirement for releasing the information. Nevertheless, it seems an inappropriate response. Would ‘how did you become aware of these records’ have been an appropriate response for a PIRT explicitly asking for a specific record of alleged misconduct? In that context, it reads like an attempt to uncover the identity of a whistleblower. I think that is a valid concern even in this context, where the request was so broad that there was no whistle to blow.”

When Eric Robert forwarded Kurt Brenneman’s response to me today, I sent an email to Brenneman, Mayor Nancy Vaughan and Zack Matheny, in which I wrote “NC law does not compel anyone making a public records request to state when or how they became aware of the existence of said records, and the city has no right or reason to ask such a question.”

I also cited a June 28 email from Deputy City Clerk Victoria Howell to all council members, in which Howell requested any texts that they might have sent or received about a Prepared Food Tax. Howell did this as part of the city’s compliance with PIRT #22281, which was filed by Triad City Beat reporter Abigail Melcher, and requested that information.
 

I noted that, in response to Howell’s request, Zack Matheny replied "why is this not coming through Kurt, and who is making the request?" I then cited emails from Brenneman to Matheny, stating that Matheny had asked to be informed of all PIRTs regarding himself. 

My email concluded:

“Did Mr. Brenneman ask these unprecedented questions at the request of Mr. Matheny? Emails between [Greensboro Sports Foundation president] Richard Beard and [Tanger and Coliseum Manager] Matt Brown show those two parties expressing bemusement at other examples of Mr. Matheny's irritation. Such irritation is his prerogative -- there are no statutes against elected officials being prickly and thin-skinned. But when those attitudes interfere with FOIA requests, they become a matter of public concern.”

In all fairness, Matheny responded quickly and graciously even though my last paragraph was itself prickly and confrontational. The second and third sentence of his first paragraph are in reference to the request for all of his emails since July 10 (and include a statement suggesting it’s not such an extensive record as to require further parameters). 

No irritation here. Kurt can run whatever he wants. I was out of town and not working so there will not be very much. 

I don’t want to speak for Kurt, but it would be helpful to city staff, as in the past, to have specifics so they can find things faster and get you the information in a timely matter. 

We receive a lot of emails and thus you all will be getting emails regarding rezonings, etc. throughout the city from a lot of citizens you will have to read through, versus just helping you try and obtain what it is you may be looking for. 

In my opinion, Kurt was just trying to help. But by all means, please send every email attachment. Regarding my question to Ms. Howell of why isn’t this coming from Kurt, it is a simple question based on process. Ms. Howell is a city clerk, while Kurt runs the PIRTs. I was asking to understand why the change in responsibilities. Pretty simple question in my opinion. 

In addition, it seems reasonable for anyone to ask who is requesting information from you just as you are requesting information from us.

In my response, I did not note the incongruity of that closing sentence (the person filing the PIRT was clearly identified, so there was no question about “who is requesting information”). Instead, I asked “Did you or any other city official request or influence Kurt to ask that question, or did he ask it entirely of his own volition without consulting you or others?”

Again, Matheny replied promptly and graciously.

No, you will not find that from me. My question to Kurt yesterday was simply, the PIRT request from Mr. Robert for all emails attachments etc. seemed rather broad and time-consuming. It would be helpful to narrow the request so he, or anyone, could get what they want. I am sure you will find that email in the PIRT request. 

If there is an easier way for other cities do PIRTs, I think that would be great as well, so Kurt doesn’t have to search all day, but I am not sure that is possible.

Because I’d not noticed it until writing this opinion piece, I did not point out that Matheny had already said “there will not be very much” in an apparent reference to the requested correspondence, suggesting the volume of responsive records would not be so great as to require either a lot of time on Brenneman’s part or further search parameters.

Matheny then wrote: “In an effort to save Kurt time, here is our exchange with my question on narrowing it down. Regardless, I am sure Kurt will give y’all all my emails. and thus, you will see I am trying to help street paving and public safety more than anything lately.”

With this message, he forwarded what he stated was the entirety of his correspondence with Kurt Brenneman about Eric Robert’s PIRT request. 

On Monday, July 24th at 10:42 a.m., Brenneman wrote Matheny:
 

“You asked I inform you about records requests concerning yourself. We received records request 23105 from Eric Robert today: ‘Could you please provide all texts, emails and attachments from Zack Matheny to anyone and everyone from the date of 7/10/2023 to present’.”

At 11:07 p.m., Matheny emailed Brenneman, Mayor Vaughan, City Manager Jaiyeoba and City Attorney Chuck Watts:
 

“Kurt - This is an extremely broad request. Where does this fit in with local and state PIRT requests? It would seem the question should be narrowed to some type of specific item so as not to waste the city’s time. Truthfully, I have been on vacation so there is not a whole that will be in the system, but the question of narrowing remains.”

On Tuesday at 11:36 a.m., Brenneman replied: “Thank you for your email! I will ask the requester to narrow the request. Under NC’s Public Records law, as it reads, the request provides enough information for us to begin a search of our records, and thus meets minimum legal requirements for a records request. The requester will receive only records that are public, i.e., are sent and received in the conduct of City business and do not fall under a legal exemption that denies a right of access. I hope this his helpful!”

If nothing else, this shows Matheny involving himself in the public records process by giving instructions to Brenneman that Brenneman himself acknowledged as unnecessary when stating the original PIRT “meets minimum legal requirements for a records request.”

In a Tuesday afternoon text message, Mayor Vaughan wrote me that “Zack may not have been aware of the PIRT law (no excuse). Perhaps Kurt could have said City business related emails, texts, etc. Kurt reports to the head of library system. There’s no way that she would have answered that way. Kurt does not take direction from city council members.”

As I was finishing this piece, I received the following from Kurt Brenneman:
 

“Thank you for your thoughtful response! That question is from my email template that I send to requesters when more information is required. I appreciate your concern about that question and will remove it from my email template.”

“Who is ‘we’?” asked District 1 representative Sharon Hightower of Mayor Nancy Vaughan at the June 20 meeting of Greensboro City Council.

The question came after Vaughan read aloud a prepared statement about pursuing “additional funding streams” to finance the Greensboro Coliseum and Tanger Center. While it was not the focus of her statement, the mayor acknowledged that one such “funding stream” could be a prepared food tax on all meals served in Greensboro restaurants.

“Can I ask you a quick question?” interjected Hightower when Vaughan attempted to move on to the next agenda item. “You brought up a prepared food tax, and you interspersed that in your statement. Is that something you’re anticipating trying to accomplish here?”

“Well, as I said in this statement,” replied Vaughan, “we are still looking at it. We are trying to get good information. We want to make sure we have good plan that answers all questions.”

Which is when Hightower asked who the mayor meant by “we.”

“An exploratory group,” replied Vaughan. “There are a number of us looking at what different funding mechanisms could be.”

“I understand different funding methods, but the food tax discussion is troubling because only certain ones are having it and others are not.”

“Sounds like something we ought to discuss, it really does,” said District 2’s Goldie Wells, who unlike Hightower, did not query Vaughan further on the issue.

“No one has responded to the issues that I bought up on June 20, period,” said Hightower on July 6 after being asked by this reporter if she had received any subsequent information on the subject. “There was only a vague answer about who was the ‘we’ talking about the food tax. What the Mayor said that at that meeting was the only answer I got.”

An email sent by Greensboro Sports Foundation president Richard Beard to the mayor and selected council members five days before that meeting suggests that the “exploratory group” includes Greensboro’s white mayor and four white council members, but not Hightower, District 2’s Goldie Wells, at-large representative Hugh Holston, and mayor pro tem Yvonne Johnson, all of whom are Black.
 

To date, the city’s four Black council members do not appear to have been included in any of the dozens of emails discussing a prepared food tax that have been exchanged by Vaughan, Beard, Coliseum/Tanger manager Matt Brown, District 3’s Zack Matheny, District 4’s Nancy Hoffman and at-large representative Marikay Abuzuaiter since August of last year. Hightower and Wells told this reporter that they have not been included in these email discussions, although only Hightower expressed concern about being left out of the conversation. 

On June 15, Beard sent Vaughan, Matheny, Hoffman, Abuzuaiter and District 5’s Tammi Thurm an email with the subject line “Bold, Innovative and Progressive.” It was cc’d to Matt Brown, who is the highest paid city employee and has never responded to any press questions on the subject. Those questions arose after emails became public showing the involvement of Brown, Beard and Vaughan in efforts to engage the Raleigh-based firm KTS Strategies to lobby the General Assembly for a 1% prepared food tax on restaurant meals in Guilford County to finance the sports and entertainment venues managed by Brown. The county would need the state legislature’s approval to levy such a tax without a referendum.

Yo Greensboro broke this story on April 12 by reporting an August 26 email from Brown to Vaughan, which described a prepared food tax as “an essential tool in our efforts to maintain our Sports, Cultural and Entertainment facilities;” and then a Sept. 12 response from Vaughan, stating “We need to work quietly until after the November election to avoid a possible campaign issue.” A May 2nd Triad City Beat cover story by Gale Melcher reproduced this correspondence, along with earlier and subsequent emails on the subject. 

In June, journalist Jeff Sykes, skeptical of Vaughn’s claim to Melcher there that had been “no further movement” on a prepared food tax, reported further emails via his @byjeffsykes Twitter account. These included a December 2 one from Beard to KTS lobbyist Ches McDowell that called Vaughan and former mayor Jim Melvin “key stakeholders” in such a tax and which proposed a meeting between Vaughan, Brown, Beard and lobbyist Ches McDowell in Melvin’s office.

On June 20, two days after this reporter asked Vaughan if the meeting described in Beard’s email had occurred – a question Vaughan did not answer – the mayor read aloud her statement that Hightower responded to by asking “who is ‘we’?”

At the time of Yo Greensboro’s last article on this subject, “Greensboro Mayor Breaks Silence on Taxing Meals in Restaurants,” posted on June 21, Richard Beard’s June 15 email to Vaughan, Melvin, Perkins and the four white council members had not yet become available via the city’s cumbersome public archive of city council emails at:
 

https://budget.greensboro-nc.gov/datasets/greensboro::greensboro-city-council-emails-2/explore
 

That June 15 email, which appeared in that archive on June 22, remains the most recent one in in which Beard makes direct reference to a prepared food tax, albeit in this case via the acronym PFT. Addressed to Greensboro mayor and the four white council members, it was cc’d to Jim Melvin and developer Robbie Perkins.

The text of the email is reproduced below. Note that, while the context implies an attachment of some kind, attachments are not included in the city archive. On July 6, this writer filed a request for any documents or images attached to Beard’s email. That request is still listed as pending. 

“Another example of aggressively investing in sports tourism – with taxpayer dollars and other sources like Occupancy Tax and PFT [Prepared Food Tax]. We can find private partners of [Beard seems to have meant “if”] the public side is fully committed. Public commitment has to come first, IMO. Also, Burlington has proposed a 17 court pickleball facility and [is] investing $3.3 million to make it happen.” 

While Beard’s reference to the “public side” being “fully committed” may suggest that he, Vaughan and Brown are no longer discussing lobbying the general assembly to impose such a tax without a referendum, the fact that none of those discussions have included the city’s Black council members has caused concern among others in the community.

“The Greensboro NAACP is aware of racism and discrimination that’s happening on the Greensboro city council,” wrote that organization’s president Kay Brown in a statement sent to Yo Greensboro on Sunday. “It is abhorrent behavior and will not be accepted by the Greensboro NAACP or the honest residents of Greensboro.” Brown also called a prepared food tax “harmful to working-class people.”

“The reality is the mayor is leading the city of Greensboro in a culture that subsidizes projects like Tanger and the coliseum on the backs of working-class people in Greensboro. The reality is elections have consequences. The consequences we are seeing now are not only in food but also the inflated cost of housing.”

Justin Outling, who unsuccessfully challenged Vaughan in last year’s mayoral election, agrees. Outling was appointed to council in 2015 to replace District 3’s Zack Matheny after Matheny resigned to avoid any conflict of interest posed by Matheny’s being hired to run Downtown Greensboro Inc. Outling was then elected to that position in 2017. When Hugh Holston was appointed to replace resigning at-large member Michelle Kennedy in 2021, council had a 5/4 Black majority until the November 2022 election. 

In that election, Matheny successfully ran for his former District 3 seat vacated by Outling’s mayoral bid, stating he no longer considered it a conflict of interest to serve on council while running DGI. This shifted Council back to a 5/4 white majority. Shortly afterwards, the prepared food discussions secretly began among Council’s white members. 

“This apparent preference for the prepared food tax reflects a failed and really flawed way of approaching things I saw in my time on city council,” said Outling in a phone interview last week. “To me, what appears to have happened is that they started with the tax, which is nonsensical. To add insult to injury, you have a situation where elected officials are forced to publicly talk about plans that they apparently wanted to keep private. They’re saying that the city budget that they just adopted is bloated. But they won’t just start by acknowledging they already have a bloated budget and are inefficient; they apparently want to tax people more, which will not only place the burden disproportionately on poor and working-class persons, but create more bloat and waste.”

Outling said that, if Vaughan, Abuzuaiter, Matheny, Hoffman and Thurm “truly believe that the Tanger Center and the Coliseum need more public funding,” there are other ways to accomplish that goal.

“For example, one way would be to do work on the hotel/motel tax. Another would be to levy additional fees in connection with people who purchase tickets to events and performances at those facilities. Another way is the food tax. But when you look at those different options, one disproportionately falls on poor and working-class persons and the others do not. One taxes an essential item that poor and working-class people consume, while the other taxes activities patronized by people who are comparatively more affluent.”

At the June 20 meeting, Vaughan said that a prepared food tax was only one option being considered. “The city is doing its due diligence to determine the benefits to our residents, our businesses and what the budget implications will be. It’s a complicated issue, and we are still gathering information.

Outling called this “disingenuous.”

“When they were having closed communications, they revealed their true intentions, which were neither public engagement nor to consider all alternatives. The statement that the mayor made to Triad City Beat that there’s been no movement on a prepared food tax is categorically not true. It sure looks like the Sports Foundation has engaged lobbyists, and the job of lobbyists is not collecting information, they’re intended to move decision makers in a certain direction. Claiming they are merely researching the issue is so disingenuous it’s insulting. I don’t see how they can talk out of both sides of their mouths and claim no decision has been made.” 

When asked about the way that Black council members appear to have been excluded from these discussions, Outling said “it speaks for itself.”

“The actual costs of a prepared food tax are going to be disproportionately borne by those residents of the community who are in those areas with the highest proportion of Black residents. So, for the Black council members not to be active participants in this, and to be what looks to me as if they’ve been frozen out of those discussion, that makes it of even greater cause for concern.”

That concern is shared by at least one of the white candidates who did not win a council seat in the 2022 election. Chip Roth was Zack Matheny’s opponent in last year’s May primary, but dropped out of the general election after being diagnosed with cancer. His subsequent treatment appears to have been successful, and Roth responded to Yo Greensboro’s request for comment on this subject.

“While I embrace and support the concept that we need to adequately fund the Tanger Center and our other entertainment venues,” said Roth, “I am hesitant to do it through a food tax. This is true because I’ve always looked out for the best interests of working families. A food tax hits lower income families worse than it does others. For this reason, I just don’t think it is a good idea.”

Roth also said that, if he held the District 3 seat occupied by Matheny, he would ensure that the District 1 and 2 representatives had been included in these conversations.

“Absolutely, because District 1 and District 2 families will be hit the hardest with a food tax. Quite simply, they’ve got to rely oftentimes on fast food to meet their nutrition needs. Thereby, they would carry a disproportionate share of the burden.”

As this article was being prepared, Mayor Vaughan invited a select group of downtown restaurant owners to an upcoming discussion of the food tax issue. On Monday, Stacey Calfo, director of marketing for Downtown Greensboro Incorporated, sent the following email to multiple undisclosed recipients:
 

At the request of Mayor Nancy Vaughan, I am sending you this email to invite you to an informational meeting regarding preliminary thoughts around a Prepared Food Tax. It is important that we have your feedback and input.

 

The first meeting will be at The Windows on Elm (the former Greensboro Chamber building) on Elm Street next to the Tanger Center. Plenty of parking in the Tanger parking lot. Monday, July 17, 2023 from 10:00-noon. This is invitation only. Please RSVP to Nancy.vaughan@greensboro-nc. gov.

If you are unable to attend but would like to attend a future meeting, please let me know. I am also available one-on-one.

As this invitation came from a DGI address rather than a city one, it will not be included in the emails automatically uploaded to the city’s public archive this Friday. Replies to Vaughan’s greensboro-nc.gov email address presumably will be, but may not be available there until after the planned meeting has occurred. 

Franca R. Jalloh, founder and executive director of Jalloh’s Upright Service, a 501©3 organization based in downtown Greensboro, who unsuccessfully ran for an at-large council seat last year, was already preparing a statement for Yo Greensboro about the seemingly exclusionary nature of council’s prepared food tax discussions when Mayor Vaughan’s invitation became the subject of multiple public Facebook posts on Monday. Jalloh said that she is concerned that the invitation had been sent via a third party whose records are not public, rather directly from the mayor herself. 

“I am seriously baffled by this, and really wish our City Council would be more transparent and inclusive in decisions that affect all our communities such as this Prepared Food Tax proposal. When you look at the manner in which they 'secretly' released this communication to just the Caucasian members on Council, as well as the special invitation to the close 'friends' of the mayor and our white council members, I think it is wrong and outright disrespectful to our black council members and our Greensboro community members who deserves to know what is happening in our City by those we elect to serve them.”

UPDATE:

As this article was being posted, Justin Outling sent an email stating “I cannot think of a logical good faith reason” for Vaughan’s sending out invitations to a discussion with downtown restaurant owners via DGI employee Calfo. “There is a whole team of staff (Community Relations) which can send emails on behalf of elected officials. Further and obviously, elected officials can also send their own emails. When I put meetings together (e.g., to discuss a lighting issue in College Park immediately before the end of my term), I typically used the former for efficiency reasons.”

Also on Tuesday, Yo Greensboro contributor Jason Hicks posted Calfo's email inviting restaurant owners to RSVP Vaughan to the Facebook group Greater Greensboro Politics.

“And the secrecy continues” wrote Hicks, “Here we have Stacy Calfo, Director of Marketing for DGI sending an invitation to select stakeholders for a secret meeting with Mayor Nancy Vaughan regarding the Prepared Food Tax. Stacy Calfo states this is the first meeting; how many more secret meetings before this is addressed with the largest stakeholder, the community? As previously reported by Yo Greensboro, Mayor Vaughan resigned from her position on the Downtown Greensboro Board earlier this year to avoid any perceived conflict of interest. Why are our ‘leaders’ operating in such secrecy around the Prepared Food Tax, or is this standard operating procedure?”

“Secrecy?” replied Vaughan in a comment on Hicks’ post. “I am inviting Restaurant Owners to a meeting to get the their ‘feedback and input’. The last paragraph of my email is not visible unless you click on the image. ‘If you are unable to attend but would like to attend a future meeting, please let me know. I am also available one-on-one.’ When you send an email through a list serve there is NO assumption of secrecy. This will be the first of many meetings for stakeholders.”

Four hours into Tuesday’s Greensboro City Council meeting, Mayor Nancy Vaughan stated that she did not support the proposed 2023 budget because she suspects the city has too much revenue to justify the property tax increase the budget will require. Minutes later, she read aloud a statement saying the city needs to explore new methods for obtaining revenue, including a 1% “prepared food tax.”

A prepared-food tax is a blanket tax on all meals prepared in a restaurant, whether fast food, family dining or haute cuisine, and on establishments serving fresh pastries baked on site.

Vaughan broke her previous silence on this issue two days after being informed that this writer has read emails between the Greensboro Sports Foundation and lobbying firm KTS Strategies naming her as a “key stakeholder” in efforts to establish such a tax. Previous reporting by Yo! Greensboro and Triad City Beat revealed secret discussions between Vaughan, County Commissioner Skip Alston and Coliseum/Tanger Center manager Matt Brown, in which they and city attorney Chuck Watts discussed how such a tax could be enacted without a public referendum on the issue.

The Greensboro Sports Foundation (GSF) was created in 2018 as an organizing committee for sports events at the Greensboro Coliseum Complex and throughout the city. Richard Beard was appointed its president in June of last year. KTS Strategies LLC, which has offices in Raleigh, Atlanta and DC, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP.

The emails obtained on Friday end in a Dec. 9, 2022 one from Beard to Brent Christensen of the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce, with Vaughan cc’d, attaching a draft agreement that GSF will pay KTS $10,000 a month for “consulting services,” including “personal contact with legislative and executive officials.” The purpose of such consulting services is indicated by the subject line: “Potential assistance with Greensboro prepared food tax.”

When asked on Monday if the proposed December meeting with Mayor Vaughan and other “stakeholders” had occurred and if KTS has been hired by GSF to lobby the General Assembly for this tax, Beard replied with what he said would be his only comment, but which did not answer either of those questions.

 

“The Greensboro Sports Foundation,” wrote Beard, “will continue to advocate for building upon this successful economic impact and will explore opportunities to repair, maintain, enhance and expand our facilities to retain and create opportunities to host events in Greensboro and Guilford County that bring visitors to our area, filling hotels, restaurants and retail establishments.” 

On Sunday, this writer texted Vaughan and asked if the City had engaged KTS Strategies or any other entity to lobby the State Legislature for a Prepared Food Tax, if she attended a December meeting on this issue, and if there had been any discussions of it subsequent to the Dec. 9 email in which she was cc’d. 

“The City has not engaged KTS, the Sports Foundation or any other entity for the purpose of lobbying the legislature regarding a prepared food tax,” replied Vaughan, who did not address the questions about whether she had attended the December 9th meeting or if there had been discussions after that meeting.

Vaughan has not responded to a Monday morning email asking her and the rest of Council whether they support a prepared food tax without a referendum. At-large representative Marikay Abuzuaiter, who is on the GSF Board, has not responded to a separate Monday morning email asking if any meetings about GSF lobbying state legislators to enact this proposed tax have taken place.

On April 12 of this year, Yo! Greensboro reported an August 26, 2022 email by Coliseum/Tanger Center manager Matt Brown with the subject line “Preferred Food Tax Campaign,” in which Brown invited Vaughan to a luncheon to discuss “the need for and urgency to implement a Prepared Food Tax for Guilford County.” Brown called the proposed tax “an essential tool in our efforts to maintain our Sports, Cultural and Entertainment facilities in state-of-the-art condition.”
 

In the Facebook post, Yo! Greensboro reported a Sept. 12, 2022 email by Vaughan to Brown. “We need to work quietly until after the November election to avoid a possible campaign issue,” wrote Vaughan, as “County Commissioners will elect a Chair” and “I would like to see Skip maintain that position.” This was a reference to Skip Alston, who was cc’d in the correspondence between Vaughan and Brown, along with former Greensboro mayor Jim Melvin, City Manager Taiwo Jaiyeoba and District 3 rep Zack Matheny, among others.

Triad City Beat’s May reporting by Gale Melcher added 26 emails to the two reported by Yo! Greensboro in April, including a Sept. 16, 2022 one in which Brown wrote to City Attorney Chuck Watts that “we are compiling information to present to our committee such as: a listing of Cities/Counties within the State who have enacted this tax (WITHOUT THE NECESSITY OF A VOTER REFERENDUM)” [all-caps in original]. Those cc’d included Vaughan, District 4’s Nancy Hoffman, Jaiyeoba, and Beard.

An email sent by Vaughan to Brown later that day stated that “Chuck [Watts] said that he was involved when Durham tried to get the PFT [Prepared Food Tax], which “was by referendum and failed.” In his reply, Brown wrote that, when Wake, Dare, Mecklenburg and Cumberland Counties and the town of Hillsborough enacted a prepared food tax, they “were not implemented or required to use the Voter referendum method,” to which Vaughan responded “Yes, I was aware.”

On May 15, Vaughan told Melcher that “at this point, there is no movement” on the idea of a prepared food tax.

On Friday, Yo! Greensboro acquired a separate chain of correspondence roughly concurrent with the emails reported by Triad City Beat, indicating that “movement” towards a prepared food may have moved from secret discussions between city council members to attempts by KTS Strategies on behalf of Richard Beard and the Greensboro Sports Foundation to convince state legislators to impose such a tax on Guilford County without a referendum.

The correspondence begins with Hill Carrow, CEO of Sports & Properties Inc, introducing Beard to KTS senior managing director Kes McDowell and managing director Nelson Freeman, in which Carrow described Beard as “running point on an initiative in Greater Greensboro to get legislative approval for instituting a prepared food tax that would be additional to the existing hotel/motel tax.”

The subsequent October and November emails mostly revolved around scheduling a December meeting with Beard, McDowell and “key stakeholders” Vaughan, Christensen, and former Greensboro mayor Jim Melvin. The correspondence concluded with the one cc’ing Vaughan and attaching the draft agreement between GSF and the lobbying firm KTS strategies. 

At three hours and 48 minutes into Tuesday night’s meeting, Vaughan said that she could not support the proposed budget, as it will increase property taxes and “after the huge increase of last year, I can’t believe that there wasn’t any excess revenue,” adding “as I’ve said for many months, if it’s not a hold-the-line budget, I would not be able to vote for it.” 

At three hours and 56 minutes into the meeting, after the budget passed 7 to 2, with Matheny joining Vaughan in opposition, the mayor said “I want to read a statement that has to do with property tax.” Her entire statement is reproduced in the six italicized paragraphs below.
 

About a year ago after our last budget, I said that we should consider additional funding streams similar to those other municipalities use throughout our state, revenue streams that will not have a reliance on our property tax rate. I feel that not exploring all funding opportunities is irresponsible and puts our city at a competitive disadvantage, and continues to be a drain on property tax revenue. There have been exploratory discussions about potential revenue sources such as a prepared food tax, increased occupancy tax, or a facility fee added to coliseum arena tickets. There is currently a $4 fee added to Tanger tickets, and was part of the financing plan to reduce any reliance on property tax.

I requested attendance numbers for a number of Tanger and Coliseum events. 65% of the people who saw Hamilton over an 18-day period were form outside Guilford County. 80% of the people who saw Elton John were from outside Guilford County. 71% of the NBA pre-season Hornets/Boston Celtics game were from outside Guilford County. 67% of the people who saw The Lion King over a twelve-day period were from outside Guilford County. 84% of the people who saw Eric Church were from outside Guilford County. 77% of the people who saw Sting in Concert with the Symphony were from outside Guilford County.

This is just a random sampling, but it establishes a strong trend. The Greensboro Science Center is in the top ten attractions in North Carolina, and it should move into the top five this year. People from every state have bought tickets. The Civil Rights Museum is working towards a UNESCO World Heritage designation, which will increase visitors. There are currently 24 UNESCO sites in the US. This will be the only one in North Carolina.

This doesn’t include a lot of other venues such as the Aquatic Center, Bryan Park, Wyndham Golf, the Koury Center, just to name a few. Our colleges and universities are drivers of visitors from outside Guilford County. The way we currently budget is that City of Greensboro property tax payers carry the burden of building and maintaining our facilities, facilities that are used by people who live outside of Greensboro and Guilford County. A prepared food tax requires support of our residents, our delegation and our legislature. At the current time, the city has not submitted a request. The city is doing its due diligence to determine the benefit to our residences, our businesses and what the budget implications will be. It’s a complicated issue and we are still gathering information.

Wake, which is Raleigh, Mecklenburg, which is Charlotte, Dare and Cumberland Counties and Hillsborough all have a prepared food tax. We are in jeopardy of losing tourism, sports and cultural events to cities that are capitalizing on our visitors. There will be ample opportunity for input and discussion. It is our goal to have good information for our residents, our delegation and our legislature to decide if this is the right solution for our community, or if we are going to continue to rely on our property tax payers to carry that burden.

One of our strategic goals is to be the youth sports capital of the South. We cannot do that within our current budget restraints. We cannot offer our residents the quality of life they want within our current budget restraints. In today’s paper, Triad Stage announced their permanent closure. That’s sad. They started the downtown renaissance. Looking other revenue streams will help organizations like Triad Stage stay in business.

District 1’s Sharon Hightower had an immediate question.

“You brought up prepared food tax, and you interspersed that in your statement. Is that something you’re anticipating trying to accomplish here?”

“As I said in the statement, we are still looking at it and trying to get good information,” replied Vaughan. “It will require the buy-in of residents, our delegation and the legislature, so at this point we are not ready to move forward.”

“Who is we?” asked Hightower.

“It is an exploratory that, as I said, I brought up last year.,” replied Vaughan without specifying who she had brought it up with, adding “there are a number of us looking at what different funding mechanisms could be” without defining “a number of us.”

“I understand different funding methods,” said Hightower, “but the food tax discussion is troubling, because certain ones are having it and everybody is not having it.” 

Hightower was reiterating a point she had made to this writer on Saturday, when she called herself the last person to be included in discussions about the food tax, as “they won’t tell me anything; they think I’m too transparent.”

In that phone conversation, Hightower also said she was unsurprised to learn that Richard Beard was heavily involved in discussions about implementing this tax without a referendum, “because he wants the Coliseum fixed.” 

“I represent the Coliseum and know it needs repairs, said Hightower on Saturday, “but we’ve got to stop giving the Coliseum $3.6 million. You can’t give people a tax increase, a water increase and then a 1% prepared food tax. If they put it out as a referendum and it passes, then nobody can object, but this doing it in the dark isn’t right.”

Hightower also told this writer that “one of the things I said to them when they finally mentioned it to me was, if you want me to support it, you will have to commit some money to improving East Greensboro, improving public transportation, improving housing, you would have to dedicate a portion of whatever’s earned from that food tax to certain areas.”

She continued in that vein when responding to Vaughan on Tuesday night.

“As I said before when we had this discussion, I can’t support a food tax without a referendum, and it has to do more than just support sports, because there’s other things in this community that need support as well, not just sports arenas. For me a food tax has to do more than say let’s have a soccer field or whatever, because everybody whose eating is not a sports person, but they’re paying. A portion of your food tax revenue should go to support community where it needs uplifting and repair.”

“I think that’s what that statement said,” replied Vaughan. “We’ve had some preliminary discussions, but we don’t have all the data yet, and we’re going to make sure it’s the right solution for our city and our county.”

Both an award-winning downtown restaurant owner and a former county commissioner have already stated their opposition to a prepared food tax, especially one imposed without a public referendum.

Two days before the council meeting, Machete owner Tal Blevins  gave Yo! Greensboro this statement:
 

“Restaurants were one of the hardest hit industries by the pandemic, and it's a shame that additional taxes are being considered on businesses that already have low margins and are still struggling. A move like this is sure to slow the restaurant industry again during a time when most of us still haven’t regained our losses from the past three years. It's also a shame that those costs will likely be passed on to working families that are experiencing the worst inflation in decades, especially on their food bills. A prepared food tax is going to hit the working poor disproportionally, especially single working mothers who don't have time to prepare meals every night at home for their families. After most Greensboro residents saw a 35-40% increase in property taxes last year, it’s going to only increase their tax burden further. And I still don’t understand where that additional property tax revenue has gone, so it’s very cloudy what the prepared food tax will even be used for.”

Former District 3 Guilford County Commissioner Justin Conrad, who chose not to run in the 2022 election, told Yo! Greensboro that “a prepared food tax is just a bad idea that doesn’t make any sense.”

“You’re taxing one industry to support another, and that’s just inherently wrong,” said Conrad on Monday, “It’s like if you did a real estate transfer tax to pay for it. What does the real estate industry have to do with the sports community? You can make the argument for paying for sports tourism with a hotel/motel/Airbnb tax, but not restaurants. It’s completely unfair.” 

Conrad’s accusation that he’d been kept in the dark about the prepared food tax by fellow county commissioners echoed what Hightower implied about her fellow council members.

“I found out about this whole undertaking the day my replacement got sworn in to the county commission. I am actually sitting on the dais and one of my former colleagues says ‘what do you think about this prepared food tax?’ and I said ‘what are you talking about? Given my outspokenness and my family’s history, I don’t think that it was an accident that I didn’t know about it.”

Of the email last September in which Vaughan had stated her desire to avoid publicity about the issue until after the November 2022 County commissioners’ election, Conrad said “that doesn’t pass the smell test, does it?”

“That’s very alarming and extremely unfortunate,” he continued. “I know a lot of the people involved just from being around Greensboro my entire life, and I am disappointed in them. It’s incredibly shallow thinking, as far as ways they can increase sports tourism here. I was active on the Greensboro Sports Council Board when I was a commissioner. I was our designee. Doing things in the dark paints this whole process in a really bad way. Not that it needed any help, being such a bad idea anyway, but being sneaky about it makes it worse.”

Conrad called it “a bad regurgitated idea that comes up every five or ten years,” and “extremely unpopular across the political spectrum.”

The Durham tax cited by City Attorney Watts to Vaughan required the approval of a referendum. In 2008, voters rejected it. Due to this, notes a March 28, 2023 entry in the Coates’ Canons NC Local Government Law blog published by UNC School of Government, the Durham tax remains “on the books,” but has “no practical effect.” The blog entry also notes that the counties of Wake, Dare, Cumberland, and Mecklenburg, and the Town of Hillsborough, levied their taxes without securing voter approval via a referendum.

“There’s a reason they’re trying to bypass Guilford County voters now,” said Conrad, “because whenever these taxes keep coming up, they keep getting voted down. I know the North Carolina Restaurant Association is aware of what’s going on, and they have been clear to me that they will fight it if it comes up or is discussed.”

Supporters of fired Greensboro fire captain Dustin Jones have made inaccurate claims about what Jones was fired for and what actually occurred at the June 6th meeting of Greensboro City Council. No media have reported what happened after Jones’s critics and supporters left the council chamber, and District 1’s Sharon Hightower called out District 3’s Zack Matheny for what she later characterized as disrespect.

Unlike the verbal altercation between Matheny and Hightower, the passionate speeches supporting and condemning Jones occurred in front of a packed council chamber and multiple cameras, but that didn’t stop some on social media from misrepresenting what happened. 

On May 12, Dustin Jones posted a Facebook video stating he’d just met with Fire Chief Jim Robinson and Deputy Chief DeWayne Church, “both of whom I highly respect,” who informed him he was terminated after sixteen years with the department.

Jones said that the Chief and Deputy Chief called his Facebook posts “offensive and discriminatory.”

“The main one pointed out said Straight Pride, because it’s natural and men and women can have babies. So, my question was, when did it become a fireable offense to be proud to be a straight person in America?”

“I don’t have an issue with the LGBTQ Community, the gay community, the trans community, whatever,” continued Jones, who acknowledged “I don’t agree with that lifestyle,” but said “I love them just like I love anybody else” and “I don’t judge them, that’s not my job.” He also expressed dismay that LGBTQ and Black Lives Matter communities “can stand up for their beliefs, whereas I make a post showing my pride and I’m terminated.”

On the May 17 broadcast of the KC O’Dea Radio Program, host O’Dea stated that Jones was fired for posting “the opinion than only a biological man and woman are able to conceive a child.”

O’Dea’s guest was Lt. Governor Mark Robinson, who said “normal people knows [sic] what this man said was true” and called for “normal people to take a stand and absolutely flood that hall,” meaning the Katie Dorsett Council Chamber. “We need to go down to that city council en masse as people who disagree with this and tell city council, we’re not going to tolerate this.”

In his May 30 Rhino Times editorial “Greensboro brings back ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ with a twist,” John Hammer wrote:

“So, the City of Greensboro celebrates ‘pride’ for the LGBTQ community, but because Jones indicated that he was proud to be straight on his personal Facebook page, his employment was terminated. Jones wasn’t disciplined. He wasn’t asked to take his Facebook post down or even counseled on why being proud of being straight was objectionable.”

The May 26 letter in which City Manager Taiwo Jaiyeoba upheld Jones’s termination contradicts every claim in Hammer’s paragraph and the majority of Jones’ posts on the subject. That letter is a public record under NC Statute 160A-168, section (b)(11), and was available to Hammer via either city’s public records librarian or the office of the city manager (who has joined District 1’s Sharon Hightower as the most frequent target of Hammer’s criticism). It is unclear whether Hammer didn’t ask Jones about that letter or Jones didn’t tell him it existed.

Hammer’s claim that Jones “wasn’t asked to take his Facebook posts down” is contradicted by Jones himself, who has acknowledged on Facebook that command staff told him to delete two of the posts later cited by Jaiyeoba.

Jaiyeoba’s letter also contradicts Hammer’s claim that Jones wasn’t counseled, as it cites multiple “disruptive” and “disrespectful” posts for which he had been “admonished” and “cautioned” by command staff over the past two years. These included ones in which Jones described Guilford County Sheriff Danny Rogers as “a clown” and “a freaking joke” for dancing in the 2022 A&T Homecoming parade.

“If a Black firefighter had called B. J. Barnes that on Facebook,” said District 1’s Sharon Hightower after the council meeting, “he would have been terminated on the spot.” Hightower was referring to the white Republican who was Guilford County Sheriff from 1994 to 2018.

Jones’ supporters have framed the issue as one of constitutionally-protected free speech, with several citing Pickering v. Board of Education, the 1968 US Supreme Court ruling that teachers have the right to speak on issues of public importance without being dismissed from their position. To mount a Pickering defense, Jones’s attorney would have to argue that calling another public official “a freaking joke” is speaking on a matter of public importance.

Furthermore, in 2006’s Garcetti v. Ceballos, the court ruled that speech from a public employee is not protected if “made pursuant to their official duties,” and the Free Speech Center’s First Amendment Encyclopedia states that “public employees have a right to speak out on matters of public concern or importance as long as the expression is not outweighed by the employer’s interest in an efficient, disruption-free workplace” [boldface emphasis added].

Jaiyeoba’s letter characterized multiple posts by Jones as “disruptive,” both to the public and his fellow firefighters, including those who are “gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender,” and stated the posts “interfere with the City’s interest in maintaining an effective operation.” 

Jaiyeoba cited an April 7, 2023 post making transphobic comments about Admiral Rachel Levine, the United States Assistant Secretary of Health. He also noted that Jones had posted from a Facebook account in which his profile picture and multiple other photos depicted him in uniform and assigned gear, and in which he “self-identified as a member of the Greensboro Fire Department.” This, stated Jaiyeoba, made Jones “a representative of the City.” GFD directives state that employees should not “display department logos, uniforms, or official GFD paraphernalia” on social media.

Jaiyeoba’s letter stated that, in February of this year, fire department leadership met with Jones about his Facebook post regarding the killing of Tyre Nichols, the 29-year-old Black man beaten to death by five Black members of the Memphis Police Department’s now-disbanded SCORPION Unit following a traffic stop. “Mmmmmmm,” wrote Jones, “will we see another George Floyd reaction? Will city’s [sic] burn??? ALL LIVES MATTER.”

Jaiyeoba did not call this quote racist, but referenced it as “another disruptive post made to your social media account.”

GFD departmental directives state that all employees should “uphold the department’s value of respect for the individual and avoid making defamatory or disrespectful statements about employees, citizens, partners, vendors or other agencies.”

Jaiyeoba also cited a 2021 incident in which Jones took photos of alleged hoarding conditions at a fire scene, and while still on duty, posted those photos of the interior of the private home to Facebook. GFD directives state that personnel must not use smart phones or other wireless devices “while responding enroute to an emergency call or while on scene of an incident.”

After each incident, wrote Jaiyeoba, Jones was “instructed that all employees must uphold the Fire Department's values of respect for an individual and avoid making disrespectful statements about employees, residents, other agencies.” The letter also states he was “admonished” to go back and study the Fire Department’s Social Media Directive, and “cautioned” against similar behavior in the future. “Rather than take this coaching to heart, you appear to have grown defiant.”

As evidence, Jaiyeoba cited posts by Jones containing such statements as “If I ever offended you, I'm sorry...that you're a little bitch” and “You know what's insane...A white person can paint their face black and be accused of being a racist. Yet a man can dress as a woman and be called a hero.”

Due to “the numerous feedback and coaching sessions provided to you by your Fire Department Leadership concerning your social media posts,” the City Manager stated he was “upholding the Fire Department's decision to dismiss you from employment.”

Jaiyeoba commended both Jones’s military service in the United States Navy and his volunteer work, including Jones’s fostering children “of a different background from you” in his home. “I sincerely thank you for these acts of service to our country and our community. My review and decision in no way undermines that service.”

Not one of the six speakers expressing support of Jones at the council meeting acknowledged that Jones was fired for anything more than a single post expressing “straight pride.”  In total, 40 people signed up to speak. Of those, 12 addressed other matters such as the budget and taxes without mentioning Jones, and 22 thanked the City Manager for firing Jones.

The first speaker expressing support for Jones was Joe Barbagallo, who began “I was there when the towers fell, and I saw the reverence we held our firefighters,” but “I decided to put away my anger and speak to you the way we need to speak, like people, just from the heart.”

Next day on Facebook, Barbagallo wrote that he had witnessed members of the LGBTQ community carrying signs reading “Fascist Firefighters.” However, the only sign at the rally in government plaza that was similar to this description referred to Jones as a “Fired Fascist Firefighter,” with no reference to other members of the department. Outside the council chamber, several Jones supporters were called “fucking fascists” by members of the Working Class & Houseless Organizing Alliance (WHOA), but such outbursts were silenced inside after Mayor Vaughan ordered several WHOA members ejected for yelling from the audience and said they would be banned from one or more future meetings.

“I don’t hear hate from anybody but his opposition getting loud, yelling, screaming,” said Steve Wall, the next speaker to defend Jones. The following day, Wall made several public Facebook posts alleging he had been called a “Communist mother f*cker.” Another member of the public present in the chamber later told Yo Greensboro that “Fascist is a buzz-word insult with WHOA; there’s no way they called Mr. Wall a communist.”

In a June 7 public Facebook post, Wall wrote that every speaker who supported Jones’s termination was “loud and rude and disrespectful.” Actually, while four WHOA members angrily denounced Jones as a fascist, 18 other speakers avoided personal invective while calmly thanking Jaiyeoba for firing Jones. 

Wall also stated that Jones was fired for “a harmless truthful meme” (which is when a WHOA member was ejected for yelling “Fuck you, Fascist!”) and that Jones’s Facebook posts contained “nothing that said anything negative about any person or group,” suggesting he was unfamiliar with Jones’s posts about Danny Rogers and Rachel Levine. In his post the next day, Wall mocked a transgender speaker as “dude in a dress.”

Gwen Frisbee-Fulton, who later wrote a News and Record op-ed about the meeting, told Yo Greensboro that most of those present in the chamber were respectful to Wall, especially after he challenged any to stand up if they would save his son from a fire. Frisbee-Fulton said she was gratified by “the surprise on Steve Wall’s face when he asked who would save his five-year-old child from a burning home and most of the room stood up. Even my 16-year-old son stood up, as I raised him to. Just because we are politically different doesn't mean we aren't human. We are valuing all life and are opposed to someone who seems to only value some lives.”

After Wall reluctantly relinquished the podium, the next speaker supporting Jones was pastor Adrian Harris, who said “I have lived here for 71 one years, and I have never seen such hate,” even though the Sit-Ins began when he was 8 and the Greensboro Massacre occurred when he was 27.

The next speaker, calmer and less confrontational than Wall, identified himself only as “a citizen.” After discussion between the city attorney Chuck Watts and security as to whether he could speak without identifying himself, he was allowed to take the podium.

The speaker said he was not giving his name because threats had been yelled at him by activists outside the building. “I didn’t say one thing, and they threatened my life. They called me a dirty fascist. I just want to peacefully support someone whom I’ve known for many years, and whom I’ve never heard say a hateful thing to anybody.”

The last two speakers in support of Jones were Pastor Alvin Robinson, who in 2021 was fired from both the Greensboro Fire Department and Guilford County Sheriff’s Department for refusing to take a COVID test, and Robinson’s wife Rosalind. The Robinsons are Black, a fact cited by Jones’ supporters as evidence he is not racist.

The 22 speakers voicing support for the City Manager’s decision to fire Jones included Greensboro NAACP President Kay Brown and NAACP Chair of Labor and Industry Cecile Crawford. “I don’t want hate-filled, homophobic and transphobic posts to take up the space and overshadow the needs of city workers like it has tonight,” said Crawford. “Close to 500 firefighters put their uniform on daily to provide assistance to residents and most of them are honorable workers.” Two other Greensboro NAACP members expressed similar sentiments and called for a $20 minimum wage for city workers.

Other speakers expressing support for Jones’ termination while not insulting him included Jennifer Ruppe and Renee Saxon from the Guilford Green Foundation & LGBTQ Center.  “I support the city’s decision to remove any employee who is contributing to a homophobic and transphobic atmosphere,” said Ruppe. “Greensboro’s diversity is a big factor in what drives this region’s growth. I stayed because this is a place where I felt valued and seen.”

“I know that in my own role as a public servant, all of my social media pages are inherently linked to my identity as an educator,” said teacher Ryan Smith. “If I express harmful and or disrespectful content, I am keenly aware that it reflects not only on my personal views, but on my professional views as they are linked to each other.”

“Being the mother of an LGBTQ child, I have to give credit to city council and the city manager for supporting the termination of Dustin Jones,” said activist Paulette Montgomery, who then spoke directly to the council member she most frequently criticizes. “I do have to ask Mr. Matheny; do you support the city manager’s decision?”  Matheny did not respond. 

The public comments section of the meeting lasted approximately an hour and forty minutes. Slightly before 8 p.m., Council took a recess. When the meeting resumed at around 8:15, the public and the media were gone, and the chamber was empty of almost everyone except staff and council members.

Three and a half hours into the meeting, council discussed the final agenda item, a proposal to spend $1 million for the purchase of replacement police vehicles. Sharon Hightower asked where the money was coming from.  Assistant City Manager Larry Davis said it was being appropriated from the equipment services fund budget, of which Davis said “we want to use this million dollars to get these police vehicles while they are available.”

At 3:35 of the meeting, while Hightower was still asking questions of Davis, Zack Matheny tried to move the item.

“I’m still not finished asking my question,” said Hightower. “You can move whatever you want to move, but I’m not finished.”

“I thought we were full of love tonight!” said Matheny sarcastically. “What happened?”

“It ain’t here, brother,” said Hightower, who then asked Davis whether the money was being spent on new take-home cars or on replacing existing cars that police officers cannot take home at the end of their shifts.

Matheny again interrupted Hightower to tell Davis “This is an absolute no-brainer, and I look forward to getting his motion passed as soon as possible.”

“Well, I look forward to voting no, since you’re in a hurry,” said Hightower.

“Vote no, then!” said Matheny.

“You don’t allow me the opportunity to finish,” said Hightower.

“Sharon, you talk all the time!” snapped Matheny.

Her irritation also very obvious, Hightower referred to Matheny’s behavior at a previous meeting, when “you sat here and went on and on for 45 minutes and nobody said a word, but when it comes to me, you’ve got to interrupt! I don’t interrupt you.”

Matheny said something the microphone didn’t catch.

“What is it with you?” asked Hightower. “What is it about you?”

Matheny was silent as Hightower stated her concerns with council prioritizing money for police while allowing the city bus system to deteriorate. “And we can’t get a cross-town route to keep people from being on the bus for two hours. I just think it’s unfair. It’s wrong, putting all the money on one side, and be damned to everybody else. Transit is suffering, field ops is suffering, but police, you have put them on a pedestal.”

District 4’s Nancy Hoffman said that, without the replacement vehicles, the GPD will not have enough cars to patrol the city.

“They don’t patrol my neighborhood,” said Hightower. “They go and park behind Gateway University Research Park.”

Ultimately, the motion to spend $1 million on 24 more police cars passed 8-1, with only Hightower voting against it. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.

On June 8, the Greensboro NAACP shared the following statement on Facebook:

“On June 6, President Kay Brown and several members of the Greensboro Branch were in attendance at the Greensboro City Council meeting. While the action alert was issued in response to a city employee's actions, we did not allow that to overshadow our other concerns. We expect our Black elected officials and members of staff to be treated with respect and dignity. We have advocated for livable wages for our lowest paid city workers and that starts at the minimum of $20 an hour.”

When contacted for this article, Brown confirmed that the statement requesting that Black officials be treated with respect was a reference to Matheny’s behavior towards Hightower at the meeting.

“This happens whenever there is a discussion around Black issues,” said Hightower on Sunday. “Then it becomes stop her in her tracks. I quietly sat there and didn’t say a whole lot last Tuesday, yet I got accused of talking all the time, even though in May, Zack talked for 45 minutes about the homeless shelter pallets. As the representative of 58,000 people in my district, I have every right to ask questions, especially when I ask questions others don’t.”

She suggested that those watching council meetings should note when representatives are receiving or sending text messages from dais. “I’ve heard that one person has texted a council member several times about me, but I don’t care, they’re not going to shut me down or stop me from doing what I think is right.  And every now and then, I’m going to push back and stand up for myself. I didn’t take it from Justin Outling, so I’m not going to take it from Zack or anybody else. I know some see me as the angry Black woman who doesn’t like police or public safety, but that’s not true. Asking questions and seeking answers doesn’t mean you dislike anything; it means you’re trying to understand it and make the best decision.”

"I am sorry that our response is taking longer than five business days, and thank you for your patience."

Anyone who has requested a public record from the City of Greensboro is familiar with that phrase. Of the 90 such requests currently listed as open in the city's Public Information Request Tracking (PIRT) system, 78 are over a week old, 26 are over a month old, and four are over a year old. Two of those four were filed by me.

"There is no reason why that or any public records request should take over a month," said attorney and former Greensboro city councilman Justin Outling when I spoke to him about this issue. 

Outling served as the district 3 Representative on Council from June of 2015 until August of last year, when his unsuccessful attempt to unseat Mayor Nancy Vaughan led to his former district having no incumbent in the July 26 general election, an absence which may have helped the controversial Zack Matheny in his successful bid for Outling’s old seat. 

It is because of Outling that I filed the oldest of my two open public information requests, which has gone unfulfilled for a year and eight months.

I made that request after interviewing Outling for a 2021 article[IM1]  in YES! Weekly. In the course of that interview, Outling revealed that the city’s much-ballyhooed lawsuit[IM2]  against the notorious Arco Realty had been quietly settled on what he described as “very favorable terms” to the defendants, something with which he said he disagreed. I told him that I was not aware of any settlement.

"Almost nobody is," said Outling. "There’s been no transparency."

That 2019 lawsuit was filed by the city to recover what Mayor Nancy Vaughan described to the press as $682,000 in unpaid fines owed by the Agapion family, who owned Arco. Based on what Outling told me two years later, I reported[IM3]  that the city settled with the Agapions for $200,000 in March of 2021. According to Mayor Vaughan, the low settlement was due to the city having "lost" crucial evidence, something not made public until YES! Weekly broke the story.

On August 31, 2021, the same day that article appeared, I filed PIRT #16548, requesting records of the closed session in which council agreed to settle the Arco lawsuit. Since then, I have received five responses from PIRT administrator Kurt Brenneman. The most recent, sent April 26, was identical to the previous four:

“I am sorry that our response is taking longer than five business days, and thank you for your patience."

When I told Outling that this is one of four PIRTs that have been open for over a year, he expressed outrage but not surprise. I then told him of two instances in which the city had eventually (if partially) complied with public records requests after stating that such records did not exist. In both instances, the documents were only divulged after the requester insisted there had to be further records. In one, he filed a lawsuit.

Outling was already aware of the request filed by Yo Greensboro publisher Eric Robert when Outling was still a member of City Council. 

Robert's request was for information about how, on the instructions of Mayor Vaughan, Greensboro Coliseum managing director Matt Brown purchased the contract for the annual gun show from the show's owner so that the city could legally cancel the controversial event. In PIRT #16298, filed on August 5, 2021 (and which remained open until May 20, 2022), Robert requested "all internal communications and documents/contracts/agreements pertaining to the Greensboro Coliseum Gun show lease purchase." He also asked “if Matt Brown and/or anyone at the Greensboro Coliseum purchased the long-term lease from the long-term lease-holder for any and all gun shows held at the Coliseum or any other City properties.”

Along with managing the coliseum, Brown also holds that position for the Tanger Center, and with a salary of $368,392, is the highest-paid municipal official not only in Greensboro, but the Triad.

On Sept. 17, 2021, Brenneman wrote "I am still awaiting responses from the City of Greensboro Coliseum and Legal Department."

On January 11, 2022, City Attorney Chuck Watts emailed Robert that "we have searched our files, as we always do, and do not appear to have any documents responsive to your PIRT request. Full stop!" 

In an email later that day, Watts wrote, “I do not believe that [records of the sale] exist in our office” and “I am the City’s lawyer and I am not obligated to provide testimony or information about the actions of my client.”

On January 13, 2022, records administrator Brenneman emailed Robert that "the Greensboro Legal Department does not have any responsive records.”

On March 31, 2022, Robert requested all city email correspondence and documents containing the name Rodney Sorrel, the previous owner of the gun show. Robert's previous direct request for the purchase agreement between coliseum manager Brown and former owner Sorrell had yielded no results, nor did his request for any emails between Brown, the mayor and the city manager that mentioned the sale. 

On April 8, Robert filed a lawsuit against the City of Greensboro, Mayor Nancy Vaughan and City Manager Taiwo Jaiyeoba, alleging delay and falsification in responding to his public information requests.

On May 5, the city provided Robert with multiple documents. These included a Dec. 20, 2020 email from Matt Brown to the mayor and city council stating the city now owned the name and trademark “Greensboro Gun Show,” and that Sorrel “agreed not to produce another Gun Show within the City of Greensboro limits for five years.” The response included a “Draft Purchase Agreement” stating Sorrel “agrees to withhold any direct or public notification or confirmation” of ownership transfer. In it, the city agreed to pay Sorrel $80,000 upon signing of the contract; $80,000 on 01/20/2022; $80,000 on 01/20/2023; and $80,000 on 01/20/2024; and $80,000 on 01/20/2025, for a total of $400,000.

This was the transaction for which the city had previously claimed "no responsive results" existed.

"Why would it take so long to get the documents?" said Outling during our phone conversation on April 20. "They were aware of the existence of the documents and their location. Why would it take a month, if even that long, to produce them?" 

The same question could be asked about Robert's PIRT # 21543, which was filed January 27 of this year, and requested "the presentation that took place on Friday, November 18" and which described the "proposed downtown music venue."

On Feb. 13, Brenneman emailed Robert that "the Greensboro Information Technology Department searched the City’s email archive and retrieved 77 responsive emails," which Brenneman included in a linked folder.

Those responsive emails included invitations sent by Brown to District 4 representative Nancy Hoffman and Zack Matheny, the District 3 representative who is also CEO of the city-funded nonprofit Downtown Greensboro, as well as to a variety of other parties. 

“I would like to invite you to attend a luncheon and presentation by the Greensboro Coliseum Complex and the talented team Architects from CPL of a proposed new downtown live entertainment venue." wrote Brown. Most of the replies consisted of respondents stating whether or not they could attend, with Matheny, as he has previously done in such situations, expressing annoyance that this was the first time he was informed about the project.

After receiving these emails, Robert wrote to Brenneman that the city had not fully complied with his request, as there were no attached plans or schematics for the site, nor any location given for the venue. "Where is the actual presentation given on that day?" wrote Robert to Brenneman on February 15. 

In response, Karen Sharpe from the City Manager’s office emailed Robert that "Per your request, here is the document." Attached was 3-page PDF titled Friendly Market Music Hall that contained none of the introductory material customary to a professional presentation. The first page, an image of the proposed venue at night, was titled Exterior Rendering 1. The other two pages were titled Phase 1 Site Plan and Phase 2 Site Plan.

Robert responded that "I find it hard to believe there were three slides only," especially as those pages included "no numbers, no background, no description, no commentary, no analysis, no pro forma." He also wrote that "there is no mention of location [or] current property ownership is also puzzling," and "that there is a slide called exterior rendering 1 suggests there is a 2 and possibly a 3."

Robert concluded by appealing to city manager Jaiyeoba for "the whole presentation." Jaiyeoba did not reply. 

On March 17, Brenneman wrote "There are no records regarding a 11/18/22 presentation."

"We know there were two separate presentations made to council members," replied Robert.

On March 22, Robert received invoices sent to the city by CPL, the architectural firm that conducted the Nov. 18 presentation, but no PowerPoint slideshow or other presentation documents. 

"I need the downtown music venue presentation," replied Robert. "The numerous invoices from CPL support the fact that there must have been an elaborate presentation . . . at least $25,000 worth."

On April 11, Brenneman emailed Robert a link to an archive of 1,825 city emails and their attachments. His message did not mention the presentation that had been the bone of contention.

Robert emailed Brenneman, Jaiyeoba and assistant city manager Chris Wilson that the presentation he requested "was made to Nancy Hoffman first, and then to the rest of the council along with select stakeholders a day later." He also stated that he received "the $25,000 invoice from [architect] Ken Mayer for such a presentation, but I am still awaiting the complete presentation" and accused Matt Brown of "a history of not complying with public record legislations."

On April 17, Brenneman emailed Robert a link labeled"Architect's presentation files.” The 49 MB PDF bore little resemblance to typical slideshow presentations given to city officials at open meetings, as once again, there was no cover page, introduction, table of contents or any notes or other explanatory text. Three of these pages were identical to ones already supplied. The others consisted of Exterior Rendering 2, three interior renderings, and two site plans, one labeled LVL 01 and the other Mezzanine LVL.

Robert replied that this now nine-page document was “only a piece of what I am looking for” and again requested “the PowerPoint presentation that was presented to council, Taiwo, and select community members,” adding “I spoke to one of them and she confirmed there was also a PowerPoint presentation."

Neither Brenneman, Jaiyeoba or Wilson replied. Instead, PIRT #21543 was given the status "Record sent to requester" and marked COMPLETE and CLOSED.

When I described this process to Justin Outling, the former councilman characterized the city's response as inadequate and obfuscatory, if not illegal. "Obviously, his having to make a second request for the PowerPoint presentation mentioned in the emails is evidence the city doesn't meet the requirements of the law. They're supposed to get him everything that’s responsive to that request at that time, full stop. This speaks to how unreasonable these delays are. If this was litigation, the city would not have months to provide a document, nor would the other litigant have to make multiple requests. The city’s history as a defendant in lawsuits shows that it can and does produce documents in a timely manner. So, why can’t they do it when they have a statutory obligation to provide documents?"

These delays and incomplete responses, said Outling, “erode trust in the city.”

“In normal circumstances, what person would come back and keep on asking for the same thing over and over again, with the expectation that something is going to be provided the second time that wasn’t provided the first time? But that’s what happened, and it makes you wonder if you can ever take the city at its word that it’s provided all the documents responsive to the request as required under the law.”

When I told him that I have another PIRT that’s been open for more than a year, Outling chuckled, then said “I laugh because the only other response is to cry.”

I was referring to PIRT #18101, which I filed on February 2, 2022 and has been open for a year and three months, and in which I wrote:

“I request the transcript or minutes of the closed session that occurred during the Feb. 1 2022 meeting of the Greensboro City Council, during which council discussed the settlement with the family of Marcus Smith that they then announced once open session resumed. I also request the vote tally and all other records of any other session in which Council voted on the final settlement agreement.”

Two weeks later, and then again in March, April and July, I received the boilerplate response that “I am sorry that our response is taking longer than five business days, and thank you for your patience.” On October 7, after no replies in August or September, Brenneman wrote:

“We deny access to the minutes pursuant to NCGS 143-318.10(e), which says ‘Such minutes and accounts shall be public records within the meaning of the Public Records Law, G.S. 132-1 et seq.; provided, however, that minutes or an account of a closed session conducted in compliance with G.S. 143-318.11 may be withheld from public inspection so long as public inspection would frustrate the purpose of a closed session.’ The permitted purposes of a closed session are listed in NCGS 143-318.11(a). I am sorry our response took so long, and thank you for your patience.”

Upon receiving that message, I replied:

“At what point in time does it no longer ‘frustrate the purpose’? Judge Biggs has not officially signed off on the settlement yet, but once she does, I'm going to argue that the closed session's purpose can no longer be ‘frustrated’ by public disclosure.”

“I believe you are correct,” responded Brenneman. “Please let me know when Judge Biggs signs off on the settlement and I will request the City Attorney’s Office to review the minutes.”

When I emailed Brenneman again, it was because I had begun to research this article. On January 31 of this year, I wrote asked for PIRT #18101 to be reopened and the City's denial to be appealed, as the matter was no longer under litigation. “At the very least, the record of who on Council voted for and who, if any, voted against the settlement should be a public record.”

On February 1, Brenneman responded: “I will give the City Attorney’s Office a few days to release the minutes before presenting the appeal to Ms. Brigitte Blanton, Library Director.”

To date, I have received no further response, and the request is still listed as “Open.”

I asked Justin Outling if he thought the deliberations over how to settle with the Smith family, as well as whether to hold an independent investigation into the death of Marcus Smith and to settle the Arco lawsuit, should be public records.

“Absolutely, and to go further, those deliberations should have been done in public.”  He also questioned the necessity of the closed sessions in which these matters were decided.

“Furthermore, there’s no reason for the vote itself not to be done in public session. Negotiating a settlement, I understand why that’s private, as that’s a confidential communication, but in terms of finalizing it and actually accepting a settlement, that should be public. If for some reason there can’t be a public vote, there should be a communication to the public in an open meeting of what the voting tally was. And as Kurt acknowledged, once a litigation has been settled, there is no reason to keep those deliberations from the public. That’s a matter of both policy and law.”

I asked him if Council had truly voted in closed session on any of these matters, an action which is technically illegal. 

“It’s effectively a vote. I would say it’s a distinction without a difference. Council members indicate whether they are in favor or against. I would call what happened in closed session with the Arco decision a vote, but they might guild the lily on it and say it’s not, that it was reaching a consensus. But while it it lacks the formality of an open meeting, everybody is given an opportunity to indicate whether they are for or against. I call that a vote.”

On April 27, I emailed Greensboro City Manager Taiwo Jaiyeoba that I was working on an article about the City’s responses, or lack there thereof, to public information requests from a variety of individuals.

“On Sept. 28 of last year, I cc’d you my email to Kurt Brenneman, in which I pointed out that my PIRT # 16548 had been open since August 21, 2021. I also noted that my PIRT # 18101 had been open since February 2 of 2022 and that Hester Petty had three PIRTs that had either been open for over a year, or soon would be.” I then cited conversations I’d had with other journalists, who said the city seemed to be taking much longer with PIRTs than in the past. “Now, seven months later, both of those PIRTs are still open. One has been open for one year and seven months , the other for one year and two months.”

I informed Jaiyeoba of my discussion with Outling about the Arco settlement, and Outling’s stated belief that the deliberations over that and other settlements are public record, and that Outling had criticized the city’s piecemeal and possibly incomplete response to requests for the PowerPoint presentation about the proposed downtown entertainment venue.

“Do you have a response to his opinion? And will you tell me whether or not the PDF provided to Mr. Robert on April 17 represents a complete document of the presentation about the proposed Market Friendly Music Hall (meaning both projected slides and/or handouts) given by CPL architects on Nov. 18 of last year? In other words, will you state for the record whether or not Mr. Robert is correct when he asserts that this is not the complete PowerPoint presentation?”

Jaiyeoba has not responded to my email. 

That same day, I emailed Mayor Vaughan and the eight other members of Greensboro City Council that I was “seeking comment on allegations of inadequate and obfuscatory responses to public record requests,” and in which I summarized the same issues I’d described in my email to Jaiyeoba. I also attached a copy of the 9-page document about the proposed downtown music venue that the city had produced after initially stating there was no presentation, and asked Vaughan, Nancy Hoffman, and Zack Matheny “does this document match what was projected on the screen or given out as handouts, or do you recall more pages?”

Neither the mayor nor any council member has responded to this email. 

“It’s hard to communicate how important an issue this is,” said Outling, “as it’s something that most members of the community just don’t think about. However, it’s crucial to their understanding of the conditions that exist in our community, and the progress or lack thereof that the city has made. What it really exemplifies is how the PIRT and other government systems can be used in a way that, intentional or otherwise, results in the public being misled.”

[IM1]https://www.yesweekly.com/news/refusing-to-stop-recusing-gso-mayoral-candidate-outling-on-ethics-transparency-and-conflicts-of-interest/article_9a66f07c-1633-11ec-a62a-6b2683a60b85.html

[IM2]https://www.yesweekly.com/news/greensboro-mayor-housing-leader-call-out-agapions/article_b9ee789f-465f-5975-82a0-6d6fb02df9c5.html

[IM3]https://www.yesweekly.com/news/details-surrounding-greensboro-s-settlement-with-controversial-realtor-made-clear/article_49e6dfaa-10ce-11ec-a8f7-afb63df48375.html

“Zack Matheny needs to resign or risk a recall petition,” said activist Paulette Montgomery, one of the public speakers at the March 6 meeting of Greensboro City Council. “He is the complete opposite of what Greensboro needs from leaders.”

Montgomery began her allotted three minutes at the podium by reading from the Code of Ethics for the Mayor and City Council of Greensboro, North Carolina.

“Section A, #5. The mayor and council members should faithfully perform the duties of their offices. They should act as the especially responsible citizens whom others can trust and respect. They should set a good example for others in the community, keeping in mind that trust and respect must continually be earned.”

Then she turned her attention to the council member she has criticized on many previous occasions.

“Mr. Matheny, for an email dated January 27, 2023 to Mayor Nancy Vaughan, concerning your obvious drunk and abusive behavior to your girlfriend and children at the Tanger Center, do you feel like you adhere to this code of ethics? From this incident, to speeding through school zones, as witnessed by several Greensboro citizens, along with the blatant conflict of interest of your position as president of DGI, while being a current sitting council person with two previous DWIs, just how are you adhering to this code of ethics?”

Montgomery made two specific allegations about Zack Matheny in this speech. The only evidence for the first is an email sent to Mayor Vaughan on January 27 by a Greensboro business owner who described themself as concerned about the district 3 councilmember’s alleged behavior at the Jan. 26 performance of Cats. That person, who asked Mayor Vaughan to keep their allegations confidential but did not realize that their email would be automatically forwarded to everyone on Council (including the person they made the allegation about), or that it would automatically become a public document accessible on a city website, has made no response to a request for comment on this matter, other than to ask for the URL of where their email was posted by the city.

Evidence for Matheny speeding through school zones is more substantial. When I asked Montgomery about her reference to it, she messaged the following reply:

“I have had five different people tell me about him speeding through school zones. They have told me he does this on a regular basis.”

I have been able to identify and interview one of the persons who made that allegation to Montgomery. They asked not be named in this article, but stated “you can quote me as a resident of Sunset Hills who lives on West Market Street.” This person alleges that, in early February of this year, they witnessed Matheny as he “flew through the school zone at Our Lady of Grace,” meaning the Catholic school where Matheny’s children are enrolled. The source alleges this happened between 7:45 and 8:00 a.m. on a school morning and that the school zone warning lights were flashing. “It’s very clearly marked. The flashing lights are mounted right where Greenway Drive crosses West Market.”

A 2018 instance of “speeding through school zones” is cited Matheny’s traffic record in the NC court system, which also includes eight other speeding citations, one citation for expired registration, two citations for no tag or registration, and the much-publicized 2015 incident in which Matheny received a Driving While Impaired conviction after a police officer found him passed out behind the wheel of his SUV in the parking lot of an abandoned Harris Teeter at N. Church Street and E. Cone Blvd.

While the records downloaded from NCCourts.org include traffic offenses in Guilford, Montgomery, Randolph, Rowan, Tyrell and Wilkes counties, and date back to 1992, they do not include his first DWI conviction. That one occurred in Raleigh in July of 1993, when the now 50-year-old Matheny was 20. It was reported at the time of his 2016 trial for his 2015 DWI, and was acknowledged by him, but does not appear in the system. In North Carolina, DWIs are ineligible to be expunged.

Matheny is the only member of Greensboro City Council to have a record in the NC Courts system. Here are his 15 citations received during 13 traffic stops and their listed results, from 1992 when he was 19 until 2019, when he was 47.

05/08/1992, Tyrrell County. Charged with 80 mph in a 55-mph zone. Convicted of 74 in a 55 zone. Disposed by judge. Matheny was 19.

10/28/1997, Guilford County. Charged with Expired Card/Tag. Convicted. Waiver by Clerk. Matheny was 24. 

11/05/2000, Guilford County. Charged with 77 in a 55-mph zone and driving with no registration. Both charges dismissal without leave by District Attorney. Matheny was 27.

08/20/2002, Montgomery County. Charged with 80 mph in a 55-mph zone, convicted of Improper Equipment – Speedometer. Matheny was 29.

05/23/2003., Columbus County. Charged with 85 in a 60-mph zone. Convicted of Improper Equipment – Speedometer. Matheny was 30.

11/11/2004, Randolph County. Charged with 80 mph in a 55-mph zone. Convicted of Improper Equipment – Speedometer. Matheny was 31. 

08/03/2006, Rowan County. Charged with 80 mph in a 65-mph zone. Convicted of 74 mph in a 55-mph zone. Charged with expired registration/tag. Dismissal without leave by DA. Matheny was 33. 

08/31/2013, Wilkes County. Charged with 70 in a 55-mph zone. Convicted of Improper Equipment – Speedometer. Matheny was 41 and district 3 representative on Greensboro City Council, as well as a candidate for District 6 in the US House of Representatives (he was defeated in the May 2014 primary).

08/28/2014, Guilford County. Charged with 72 mph in a 55-mph zone. Dismissed without leave by DA. Matheny was 42 and the district 3 Representative on Greensboro City Council. 

05/13/2015, Randolph County. Charged with 80 in a 65-mph zone. Convicted of Improper Equipment – Speedometer. Matheny was 43 and President of Downtown Greensboro Inc., having recently stepped down from Greensboro City Council to run that city-funded nonprofit.

10/16/2015, Guilford County. Charged with and convicted of DWI Level 4 (Blood alcohol =0.20). Matheny, who had pleaded Not Guilty, was given 48 hours of community service, 12 months of unsupervised probation, and a 120-day suspended sentence.

5/11/2018, 7:59 a.m., Friday on a school day, Guilford County. Charged with Speeding in a School Zone (45 mph). Convicted of Improper Equipment – Speedometer. Matheny was 46 and President of Downtown Greensboro Inc. 

03/05/2019, Guilford County. Charged with Expired registration card/tag. Disposed without leave by DA. Matheny was 47 and President of Downtown Greensboro Inc. 

Nine of the above citations were received after he turned thirty, six in the last ten years. Of those nine citations for speeding, his attorney was able to plead five down to Improper Equipment – Speedometer. With the most recent instance of this in 2018, when the charge was speeding in a school zone, he had pleaded Improper Equipment on four previous occasions and had eight previous speeding offenses and two DWIs, but the strategy of pleading to the lesser offense of Improper Equipment still worked. For the other four speeding offenses, his attorney was able to get the charge reduced to a lesser speed. 

Following his 2015 arrest, an apparently contrite Matheny told the News & Record “At the time, recognizing my state, I pulled over to what I thought was a safe spot away from roads and parked. However, it was not correct, and I take full responsibility and am ready to move forward. Don’t end up like me.”

But ending up like Matheny would mean not only retaining what is now a $170,821 a year job running Downtown Greensboro Inc, the booster nonprofit mostly funded by the city, but in 2022, regaining his old seat on City Council that he had resigned several months before his 2015 DWI. At the time, he stated he was stepping down from council to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest while being paid to run a nonprofit funded by the city. 

He did not even lose his driver’s license for a month, much less a year. Ten days after his November 2015 arrest, District Court Judge Michelle Fletcher granted Matheny limited driving privileges at the request of DGI board chairman, Gary Brame. "Mr. Matheny needs to be able to drive for necessary work-related responsibilities from 5:30 a.m. to midnight seven days per week," Brame wrote in a letter to the court on Matheny's behalf.

As for the allegations about Matheny’s behavior during Cats at Tanger Center, I initially wrestled with whether or not that was a claim worthy of reportage. After speaking to veteran journalists, including one who teaches a class in journalistic ethics, I concluded that it is. My reasons are twofold.

The first is that, if nothing else, this allegation demonstrates something that the public may not realize, which is that any email sent to any member of city council is automatically forwarded to all members of council, and is automatically archived at City of Greensboro ArcGIS Online[IM1] . There appears to be no current avenue for written communication with a council member via that council member’s city address that is not automatically available to other council members.

That archive contains the following email, sent to Mayor Nancy Vaughan at 9:25 a.m. on January 27th.

I feel compelled to write you regarding the conduct of Zack Matheny, witnessed by myself and others, at the Tanger Center last night during a performance of Cats.

Zack was clearly intoxicated and was verbally abusive to his children and girlfriend. Multiple patrons were upset that he continued to berate his girlfriend during the performance.

During the intermission, Zach [sic] interacted with a well-known Greensboro businessman who I spoke with today. He confirmed that Zach was obviously intoxicated and he could tell that Zach’s girlfriend was not comfortable. He also went on to say that he witnessed Zach being intoxicated.

My biggest concern is for his girlfriend as no one should be subjected to such abuse.

As a Councilman, his behavior does not reflect well on the City of Greensboro and its leaders.

I understand that this is not the first time alcohol has played a factor in his behavior and decision making. This makes this incident even more troubling as it shows repeated behavior.

I very much hope that he was not driving his girlfriend and children home from the performance. 

I did not realize until I looked Zach up prior to email you that he lives on the same road as I do. I will be sure to be vigilant when driving down my street knowing his history and recent behavior with alcohol.

I trust you will take this information seriously. Feel free to reach out to me if you need any additional information or would like to discuss this matter further. 

Of course, given my close proximity to Zach’s home and me owning a business in Greensboro, I would like my identity to be kept confidential between us.

The first column on the table where this email is archived is labeled CE_SENT_FROM. In response to my email query, City of Greensboro public records administrator Kurt Brenneman confirmed that this actually refers to the recipient of the email, not the sender. 

“The ‘CE_SENT_FROM’ data field is the inbox from which the email comes when it enters the workflow for appearance in the Greensboro City Council Emails dataset on the Open Gate City open data portal. Yes, it actually means that the emails were sent TO those recipients. The ‘CE_SENT_DATE’ data field is the date the email was released on the Open Gate City open data portal. I am sorry that the labels are confusing, and thank you for your patience!”

These columns show that the email was sent to Mayor Vaughan and automatically forwarded to Greensboro City Council at 9:45 a.m. on that day. At 11:28 p.m., City Manager Taiwo Jaiyeoba separately forwarded it to Councilmember at-large councilmember Hugh Holston at Holston’s request.

On Feb. 22, I sent the following email to Greensboro’s City Manager, Mayor and City Council:

I have attached a screenshot of an email that was sent to Mayor Vaughan on January 27 with the subject line “Zack Matheny Conduct at Tanger,” which appears to make serious allegations about an elected representative’s conduct in a public space.

I had some initial hesitation about reporting on this, but having discussed this matter with colleagues who include past and current staff at the News & Record, a UNC journalism professor, a professor at NC School of Government, and an attorney, I have come to believe that this is newsworthy and a matter of genuine public concern. I realize that opinions may vary on this, and respect those who may claim otherwise. I regret the embarrassment this must surely cause to the councilmember named in this complaint. 

I realize that this is a subjective judgement made by a third party, but it’s a potentially serious accusation that warrants an important question to Council and the City Manager. Did any city official respond to this communication from [redacted]?

None of the recipients responded to this query. However, I also sent Zack Matheny a text, to which he responded the next day with the following statement:

“Ian, the letter is false, I wasn’t even sitting beside my girlfriend, I saw in between my kids, the only disappoint I had was with the show. Take care.”

I had reached out to Matheny (and to the Mayor, City Manager and rest of Council) after receiving an email with an attached screenshot of the email sent to Mayor Vaughan. Since February, that screenshot has circulated widely on social media, and has been posted to Facebook by the Working-Class & Houseless Organizing Alliance (WHOA) and administrators of the group Greater Greensboro Politics. 

On February 24th, a redacted screenshot of the email was posted to the WHOA Facebook page, along with the following statement.

This politician is a danger to the community. 

As revealed in an email sent to the mayor, Zack Matheny was publicly drunk and abusive to his children and girlfriend at an event downtown just a month ago. We know Matheny has been found guilty of DWI. We know he’s gotten a judge to give him special driving privileges because of his wealth and power. 

Matheny likes to make calls for “accountability”—like when he said he wanted to “hold accountable” groups who feed people by requiring them to get state permits to hand out food. 

Matheny does not, however, like to take accountability himself. 

Like so many other politicians who claim to serve the people, Matheny is a scam artist using his position for personal gain. The only difference is that he’s particularly bad at hiding it. 

Matheny is a danger to the houseless community, as has been made clear by his efforts to push out people from downtown. He’s also a danger to the entire community. He is abusive, reckless, and wealthy—the perfect toxic blend for furthering his own interests and those of elites like him, no one else’s.

On March 11, WHOA member Del Stone, who often speaks at Greensboro City Council meetings, replied to my request for further comment on why their organization shared the screenshot and from whom they received it. I asked Stone this because one city official had told me off the record that they believed those circulating the allegation were doing so at the behest of Yo Greensboro publisher Eric Robert. In actuality, the person who sent the screenshot to me has no connection with either Robert or Yo Greensboro, and had not shared it with Robert, who was unaware of the allegations at the time I learned of them. 

“We posted a screenshot of that email after being made aware of its existence,” replied Stone. “I looked up the original communication on the city website, screen-shotted a higher quality copy than the grainy version that was circulating, and edited it to highlight certain portions. We redacted the sender’s name to add some level of privacy, though obviously their identity is public information accessible to anyone willing to look it up.”

Stone addressed Eric Robert’s acknowledged dislike for Matheny by stressing that WHOA does not make alliances with or take suggestions from wealthy businessmen, and that anyone else’s reasons for circulating it are irrelevant to why WHOA did so.

“There is definitely more than one person circulating this, and it's not all based in a personal vendetta. Eric Robert may have that, but our interest here is emphasizing the systemic problems with politicians under capitalism. Irrelevant to whatever personal animus exists between Robert and Matheny, this document was public record and serves as additional evidence in a larger narrative of how politicians abuse power. The content of the communication is less important than the fact that it demonstrates how wealthy politicians are abusive and unaccountable.”

Greater Greensboro Politics administrators William Thornton Kenny and Terry Austin each gave me a statement about why they decided to post the screenshot to that group after receiving it from a person Kenny described as “a longtime friend who is involved with and cares about our community,” and who has no connection to Eric Robert or Yo Greensboro. 

Kenny then explained why he felt the allegation was worthy of wider exposure and discussion.

“If I witnessed that behavior of anyone out with their kids and significant other, you bet your ass I would seek a way to report it to someone that could make a difference. If I did not and he caused an alcohol-induced tragedy, I would regret my cowardice. That public display of intoxication is likely a sign of a deep problem with substance abuse. This is looking after the family and public's safety. Sweeping it under the rug is complacency that is tantamount to complicity.”

Austin’s statement was lengthier:

“Greater Greensboro Politics is a Facebook group focusing on politics in Guilford County, and in North Carolina,” she wrote in a Facebook message. “We have 5,400+ members. There have been a significant number of posts about Zack Matheny’s statements and proposals as a City Council member, and how they affect the homeless in downtown Greensboro. Matheny resigned from City Council when he became head of DGI, but later ran again and was re-elected. There have been many discussions on GGP about whether this is a conflict of interest. It’s widely known that Matheny was previously convicted of DWI, a crime because it endangers the public. His appearing to be alcohol-impaired at the Tanger Center is then of public interest. Because the author of the email we posted was concerned for their safety, we redacted their name. But once it was sent to Mayor Vaughan, it becomes a public record.”

Most of the comments on Austin’s post were highly critical of Matheny, with several mentioning his DWIs, but one commenter called it a “pearl-clutching” and “a drama queen allegation.”

The other reason I decided that the email is worthy of coverage is that Paulette Montgomery’s March 6 speech is not the first time a member of the community has stood before Greensboro City Council and publicly accused Matheny of public misconduct while intoxicated.

At least one previous accusation was made during the May 16, 2017 council meeting, when Ed McKeever, the owner of ECM Builders, exchanged angry words with Mayor Nancy Vaughan during McKeever’s three minutes at the podium. McKeever, who is Black, had on several previous occasions accused the city of overlooking minority contractors in violation of Greensboro’s rules regarding minority and women-owned business enterprises (MWBEs). But on this occasion, he was one of multiple speakers on the then-ongoing controversy over allegations of police brutality made by the mother of Jose Charles, a Black teenager thrown to the ground and arrested by a GPD officer during the previous year’s Fun Fourth celebration in downtown Greensboro. After the GPD cleared itself in its own investigation of the allegations, three members of the police complaint review board resigned in protest.

When McKeever took the podium, he began by stating that the Council and community needed “to come together to resolve these matters,” and criticized the GPD’s then-chief Wayne Scott, “who has allowed business to continue as usual.” McKeever then extended his criticism to the council members, stating “some of you won’t be here come this next election.” He singled out Vaughan, saying “I’m doing everything I can to ensure you’re not sitting in that seat.” (While Vaughan would win her re-election that November, at-large representative Mike Barber and District 5’s Tony Wilkins did not).

Vaughan interrupted McKeever’s allegation that “you didn’t open your mouth” about the Charles case until after District 1’s Sharon Hightower and Mayor Pro Tem Yvonne Johnson did, a statement Vaughan angrily called “100 percent incorrect.” She then told staff not to grant McKeever’s request that his time be restarted “because she was running her mouth.”

His time at the podium reduced, McKeever turned to another subject.

“We all know what the issue is with the police department. I want to deal with DGI, Downtown Greensboro. First of all, you got a drunk the city gives money to. DGI, a drunk is running the program. Zack Matheny, the former councilman that Mr. Outling took his spot. How in the world you going to give taxpayer’s money to a drunk? The City should not fund a dime. All of that money should not be given to Downtown Greensboro because you know he’s a drunk. Is he a drunk, Mayor? Now, he was caught in …”

“We are giving money to Downtown Greensboro,” said Vaughan.

“But he’s running it!” said McKeever. “Demand that he resign!”

“And downtown Greensboro has been doing a phenomenal job since he took over,” continued Vaughan, as the two attempted to talk over each other.

“Since he took over?” said McKeever in apparent outrage. “He was just drunk the other day up in Columbus! Now ask the people that went! He is a drunk and you should not give a dime to Downtown Greensboro until he resigns.”

No further statements about Matheny were made at that meeting, either by McKeever, any subsequent speaker, the mayor, or any other council member. McKeever concluded his time at the podium by requesting “all the information regarding the Tanger project,” including “every document from the MWBE office, because I know it’s a lie that they did not participate in that.”

Sharon Hightower asked if McKeever needed to file a public information request for those documents. City attorney Tom Carruthers said no, that “a request will be put in the system tonight” in McKeever’s name.

That public information request, PIRT #6842, includes McKeever’s email address and phone number. My attempts at contacting him via either have been unsuccessful, and the phone number now appears to belong to someone else. When I asked Sharon Hightower about McKeever, she said that she believes he no longer lives in North Carolina. 

Neither the News & Record, YES! Weekly, Triad City Beat, nor the Rhino Times reported on McKeever’s claims during the meeting, the video of which can be viewed[IM2]  on the city’s website. The only public commentary on it seems to have been on EzGreensboro News, a gossip-heavy blogger site with a URL, greensboroperformingarts.blogspot.com, that suggests it was intended to troll supporters of the Tanger Center.

A May 23, 2017 post on that site, titled “Zack Matheny Wrecks his Wagon with Nancy Vaughan Along for the Ride,” begins “Perhaps you remember when a group of economic development folks from Greensboro who went to Columbus, Ohio under the leadership of the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce. Downtown Greensboro Incorporated President Zack Matheny was among them.”

The post then alleges that, during the trip, Matheny was at a Columbus bar when the following incident occurred:

“Zack was visibly intoxicated and came back to the bar, close to the group of black Greensboro businessmen who paid $1500 apiece to be allowed to go along. He tried to make a joke with the bartender, one of those where you say something absurd about someone in order that they can hear you and then pretend you didn’t know they were there. He said to the bartender, ‘Watch out for these guys because they are all racists.’ The joke was not well received.”

After a sentence making further uncited allegations against Matheny, the blogger stated “Sources are telling me this is the reason for Ed McIver’s [sic] comments at the Greensboro city council meeting.”

Regardless of the accuracy of what EzGreensboro News and Ed McKeever alleged in 2017, the business owner who emailed Mayor Vaughan claimed to have witnessed at Tanger in January of this year, or the Sunset Hills resident alleges they saw at the Our Lady of Grace school crossing last month, Matheny’s two decades of speeding charges cast an ironic light on a statement he made at a March 2nd meeting with members of the public concerned about a proposed city ordinance that its critics say will allow more Airbnbs in residential neighborhoods. 

During the meeting, Matheny agreed that a $25 fine for owners or managers who allow noise or other violations at a short-term rental property is too low. He also agreed that raising that fine to $500 was a good idea. A member of the public said that the originally-proposed $25 fine would be as ineffective for these violations as it would be for speeding. “I can tell ya,” said Matheny, “lots of folks ignore $500 speeding fines, too.”

[IM1]https://data.greensboro-nc.gov/maps/greensboro-city-council-emails-2

[IM2]https://pub-greensboro-nc.escribemeetings.com/Players/ISIStandAlonePlayer.aspx?Id=fc72c701-5dc7-4e03-9ae9-6cd7d8169499

On October 3rd 2022, Greensboro City Council approved  additional amendments to an existing city ordinance, further targeting the most vulnerable in our community.

From destroying the belongings of people who already do not possess much, to posting signs preventing standing or sitting, to removing benches and tables in our parks, to enhanced sprinklers, our Mayor, Ms. Vaughan, together with her enablers, made a point to criminalize all that disturbs the white-washed, Disney World, Stepford-like environment that they are trying so hard to manufacture.

The foregoing objective is likely the reason behind the fact that, unlike most civilized cities around the world, Greensboro still refuses to provide basic human amenities, such as public restrooms, bus shelters and now benches.

On Wednesday, March 1st 2023, Lance Williams was murdered on MLK Drive here in Greensboro. 

For all those not familiar with Downtown Greensboro, Lance had been a full-time resident for years. 

He lived, ate, slept and socialized along Elm St. 

I am not going to wax poetic about Lance as this is not his eulogy.

This is simply an observation and a commentary on what I have witnessed first-hand as I have been in Downtown Greensboro almost every day since 2004.

While we currently do not know the why and how, what we do know is that Lance is dead.

Like too many others, he was targeted for “removal” and “displacement”.

I guess, congratulations are in order,  he did not die in Downtown Greensboro.

Instead he died where death is expected, accepted and all too familiar.

 At the Dec. 6, 2022 meeting of Greensboro City Council, Zack Matheny expressed indignation at not having been privately consulted about an agenda item.

“As the downtown representative, I’m baffled that this would even be considered without a conversation with the representative for District 3, and, by the way, the manager of the downtown social district.”

No elected Greensboro official has the title “downtown representative.” Matheny represents District 3, which occupies less than half of the central business district and radiates from it like a jagged pizza slice, with well over 70% of its geographic area outside of downtown and most of its approximately 58,000 residents living miles away.

But Matheny is also President and CEO of Downtown Greensboro Inc. (DGI), the private nonprofit that would not exist without the approval and funding of city council, and which, according to nonprofitlight.com, pays him an annual salary of $170,821. In the 2021-22 budget, DGI received $1,356,125 from the city, mostly via a tax paid by downtown business and property owners. 

As for Matheny being “manager of the downtown social district,” that’s the city program designated by the acronym BORO, for Border of Refreshments Outdoors, which regulates areas where alcohol purchased from BORO-member businesses may be consumed in public spaces. When the program was created last March, Matheny was not yet a member of City Council, which adopted the plan and map drawn up by DGI in collaboration with the GPD.

On Dec. 6, he was irritated that a resolution to expand BORO boundaries had been added to the agenda by Assistant City Manager Trey Davis and GPD attorney Andrea Harrell without first consulting the self-described “downtown representative.” It quickly became clear that the only council member supporting BORO expansion was at-large representative Hugh Holston, but Matheny expressed annoyance that the issue was being voted on.

Mayor Nancy Vaughan suggested that the subject of creating a second “social district” on State Street, also included in the agenda item (and to which Matheny did not object) could be moved to the Dec. 20th session, while discussion of expanding the current “social district” downtown would occur at the first meeting of 2023. “If you want to put that one on January 3rd . . .” said Vaughan, before Matheny cut her off with “I don’t want it on the agenda at all!”

In separate conversations with me last week, Deena Hayes-Greene and Jason Hicks said that that Matheny, or any elected official, being DGI’s paid voice on council is a problem.

Hayes-Greene is co-chair of Guilford County Board of Education, Managing Director of the Racial Equity Institute, and Co-Chair of the International Civil Rights Center and Museum at 134 South Elm Street. That address, like that of DGI headquarters at 536 S. Elm, is part of the historic blocks between Friendly Avenue and Gate City Boulevard that are not part of the district Matheny was elected to represent, but are affected by the organization he’s paid to run.

She called the Dec. 6 agenda item one of many council discussions that should not have included Matheny.

“I totally believe that Zack should not be participating in any conversations like this while receiving a salary from the city he governs, and that it’s a conflict of interest for him to have any conversation, any decision, any vote or otherwise interact with any city staff or elected officials in regards to downtown development and expansion.”

Matheny’s comments at the Dec. 6 council meeting are not the only time he’s rebuked city staff for not privately discussing something with him before having a larger conversation. 

At 3:46 p.m. on November 10, Coliseum manager Matt Brown sent an email with the subject line “Proposed Downtown Entertainment Venue,” which began:

“On behalf of Mayor Vaughan and City Manager Jaiyeoba, I would like to invite you to attend a luncheon and presentation by the Greensboro Coliseum Complex and the talented team of architects from CPL [the architectural, engineering and planning firm with an office at 400 Bellemeade St.] of a proposed new downtown live entertainment venue. I believe this proposed new venue can serve many of the Community and Arts organizations and patrons that each of you represent and can also be an alternative source of critical revenues to support your missions.”

Recipients included Matheny and District 4’s Nancy Hoffman, who when I asked her about the proposed venue, said that it is intended for the 100 block of North Church Street, now currently occupied by Lincoln Financial. Other recipients included Maddison Carroll (Chief of Staff and Director of Hotel Operations at The Carroll Companies), Mark Brazil (CEO of the Wyndham Championship), Laura Way (President and CEO of ArtsGreensboro), and Amy Grossman (President and CEO of the NC Folk Festival). The CC line included the mayor, city manager, and multiple city staffers and representative of CPL.

At 4:05 p.m., Matheny sent the following terse response to everyone in the email chain:

“Very surprised and disappointed this is the first I am hearing of such an important downtown project. I am unable [sic] for lunch on those days.”

Less than hour later, Brown sent the following conciliatory message to Matheny, Vaughan, Hoffman, and Jaiyeoba (but not to the CEOs Matheny had included in his expression of discontent).

“I take sole responsibility and apologize for not scheduling a separate meeting with you and CCM [city council member] Hoffman in advance of meeting with the larger group of potential users. The Mayor was emphatic that we include your position as a CCM, which should have warranted an advance discussion. The plans are very detailed and we were hoping to limit the presentation to only one larger group to benefit from everyone hearing everyone’s feedback. I regret again that I did not plan to allocate a separate time to meet with you and CCM Hoffman about this Project.”  

“Zack’s arrogance in this exchange is no surprise to me,” said Jason Hicks, an activist who has corresponded with council and the city attorney on matters relating to Greensboro’s houseless community and incidents of police violence. 

“He's really only getting prissy about not being treated with more reverence than anybody else, which is only the result of the city allowing such a conflict of interest. I see this as perfect evidence of exactly the kind of power trip he’s displayed while lobbying for DGI as its President and an elected council person.”

Hicks said he had not paid much attention to Matheny until last Fall.

“That’s when he began verbally attacking the unhoused folk in Center City Park. Researching him made me aware of his connection with DGI, which seems increasingly a branch of city government, albeit an unelected one with no community input. Between his salary as a council member and from DGI, Matheny makes nearly $200K a year, which is more than members of Congress earn yet is still all community funded.”

Hicks said it would be different if Matheny, who resigned from council in 2015 in order to become president of DGI, had not run for his old seat last year. “It would be fine if he came before them as a public speaker to lobby for DGI, but to be part of the decision-making process, and have a vote on something, and then try to sway the others in conversation prior to the vote, is not something that the president of the organization should be able to do.”

The concerns expressed by Hayes-Greene and Hicks are shared by veteran journalist and retired News & Record reporter Margaret Moffett, who spent 23 years as a reporter for the News and Record, and last year wrote “Below the Fold[IM1] ,” a devastating article for the statewide publication The Assembly about how decades of corporate cuts gutted Greensboro’s once bold and vital daily paper.

“It's not unheard of for a sitting council member to have this kind of conflict — meaning a situation where the city helps fund their ‘day jobs,’” wrote Moffett in an email to me last week, in which she noted that former at-large representative Michelle Kennedy was director of the city-funded Interactive Resource Center. She also noted that Mayor pro tem Yvonne Johnson receives funding for her nonprofit One Step Further, and that, like them, Matheny is required to recuse himself from votes involving his organization.

“But Kennedy and Johnson's nonprofits weren't nearly as integral to Greensboro's long-term plans for economic development as Downtown Greensboro Inc. So many of the deals that come to the council's chambers involve downtown — both as a direct vehicle for job growth and more broadly.”

She then offered a hypothetical example. 

“Let's say the council is considering giving economic incentives to a company that wants to move 250 workers downtown. Matheny's dual roles raise questions about exactly whose interest he's representing. Taxpayers? The DGI board that supervises him? How does he separate the two? What happens if the incentives are objectively a bad deal for taxpayers, but a good move for downtown development? Maybe Matheny is able to compartmentalize and ONLY vote in a way that best serves his city council constituents, not his employer. Perhaps those two things aren't mutually exclusive, and he can serve the interests of both the taxpayers and DGI at the same time. Problem is, every vote that touches on downtown brings a different set of conflicts.”

Which persist, wrote Moffett, regardless of whether those conflicts are “legal” (quotation marks in her email).

“It may even be ‘ethical,’ if the guardrails in place hold. But it's not a good look. There's a code of ethics written into state law for office holders, and among the responsibilities are acting ‘openly and publicly.’ Conflicts of interest, even when managed, make voters cynical. They feed into the notion that elected leaders are only out for themselves. Matheny himself recognized the thorniness of this issue in 2015, when the sitting council member first expressed interest in leading DGI.”

She cited his statement from eight years ago, in which he wrote "Due to the nature of the discussions and my desire to avoid any perceived conflicts of interest, as of today, I plan to resign from City Council at the June 16 meeting.”

Moffett closed with a question for Matheny. “What's changed about the situation between 2015 and today to make you less concerned about those perceived conflicts?”

While neither Matheny nor DGI board chair Tracy Myers has responded to my request for comment, Mayor Vaughan addressed one aspect of this issue by denying that Matheny resigned from council in 2015 on the advice of then city attorney Tom Carruthers. 

“There is disinformation out there that claims Tom Carruthers said Zack couldn’t continue to work for DGI and serve on council. Tom never said he could not do both.”

In 2015, Eric Ginsburg reported[IM2]  for Triad City Beat that “Matheny said he talked to some attorneys and that for negotiations with DGI to go forward, this seemed like the best course of action to avoid a perceived conflict of interest.” The article did not provide an actual quote from Matheny or identify the attorneys advising him to resign from council before accepting the DGI position.

In a February, 2021 Triad City Beat article[IM3]  about Matheny’s intention to run again in District 3, Jordan Green quoted Matheny’s opponent Chip Roth’s statement that Matheny “shows tremendous lack of judgement” in running for city council again without resigning from DGI, as “inherent conflict of interest will make it messy.”

Green then quoted Matheny as saying he consulted with city attorney Chuck Watts, who “sees no direct conflict of interest.” Green’s article made no reference to Watts’s predecessor Carruthers (who, according to Watts[IM4] , was fired for his handling of negotiations with Rocko Scarfone over the Davie Street parking deck easement) ever advising on the matter.

But in the March 9, 2022 Rhino Times article “Matheny wants his old seat back[IM5] ,” John Hammer wrote “At the time [of his 2015 resignation from Council] Matheny was advised by the city attorney that he could not serve on the City Council and as president of a nonprofit organization that received funding from the city.”

Vaughan served on the DGI Board of Directors before resigning last month, which she said was to avoid perceived conflict of interest in the wake of North Carolina General Statute 14-234.3, which forbids local officials from participating in contracts benefiting nonprofits with which they are associated. When speaking to council last December, Jason Hicks said that he planned to file a lawsuit against Vaughan for allegedly violating that statute when she voted on a $3,075,000 contract between the City of Greensboro and DGI. After City Attorney Watts informed Hicks that Vaughan’s vote was on June 15, 2021 and the law did not take effect until January 1, 2022, Hicks apologized, but said he still found her vote troubling.

“Your question about ethics is an interesting one in municipal law in North Carolina,” wrote Watts in a Dec. 9th email to Hicks. “On most boards, the ethical concern that you have raised would be legit. Board members could be accused if there were a mere image of impropriety. However, municipal law is different in North Carolina where we have a law known as positive vote requirement. In other words, council members have an obligation to vote, unless they have a direct financial interest in the matter. In fact, this is why the legislature passed that statute which actually requires recusal without getting the support of your colleagues, anytime you have an association with a nonprofit that comes before counsel for funding.”

By which Watts meant that, prior to Jan. 1, 2022, Vaughan was obligated to vote on DGI’s funding, and could not have refrained from doing so without council approving her recusal. 

“So, when council people vote on a matter where they don’t have an actual financial interest, like when they sit on a nonprofit board and don’t get paid, they were not in violation of the prior statute. That’s the reason for the new statute that you reference.”

Margaret Moffett said that did she not see Vaughan serving as an unpaid DGI board volunteer as presenting the same conflict of interest as Matheny serving on council while being paid to run DGI

“Having a member of Greensboro City Council on a nonprofit board is about the closest thing the public gets to full transparency of a private organization. Here's an example: Nonprofit XYZ isn't obligated to give me, Jane Q. Public, any documents beyond its annual 990 form. BUT any documents Nonprofit XYZ gives to the mayor automatically becomes public record. So, while I can't compel Nonprofit XYZ to give me squat, I can compel the mayor to give me the documents she received from Nonprofit XYZ under North Carolina law. Rather than automatically seeing it as a conflict, I see it as a key to unlocking transparency.”

Vaughan said that she has questions about the 2021 statute.

“I think we are going to go back to the legislature and ask for some clarification about what their intent was. I have officially resigned from both Downtown Greensboro and the Chamber of Commerce because I don’t want to be in a situation where I can’t advocate for things I feel strongly about.”

I asked her if she recalled attorneys for DGI advising Matheny to resign from City Council before applying to run the organization.

“That I don’t know. But I know that it was not Tom, it was the Board of DGI, which I was on at the time, that told Zack that they needed his whole attention and he had to choose.”

I asked her if she recused herself from DGI board discussions in 2015 about whether or not to hire Matheny.

“I was on the search committee that recommended Zack and I voted for him, but I have not been involved in personnel discussions on the board level and certainly have not been a part of salary and review.”

Simonne Ritchy, owner of M’Coul’s Public House, recalled being on the DGI Board in 2015, when, alleged Ritchy, “the fix was in” for Matheny.

“The whole process was really shady. We were told at the beginning that the search committee, which was Nancy Vaughan and some others who were in his corner, by the DGI attorney who came to the board and said to us, ‘that if there’s somebody you just want to give the job to, all you have to say is that they knocked the interview out of the ball park.’ Well, Zack had been looking for a job for four years at that point, and he certainly hadn’t knocked any of his previous interviews out of the ball park. So, when I expressed my concern, I was told by Nancy Vaughan that he knocked the interview out of the ball park, which was the exact same language the DGI attorney told us to use if there was somebody we wanted to hire.”

She said she made no secret, either to Matheny or other board members, of her opposition to hiring him.

“Shortly after Zack was chosen, my own term on the board was up, and they did not ask me to return.”

Ritchy is not the only person to claim the DGI board was pressured into hiring Matheny. In April of 2015, the News & Record’s Joe Killian reported on the allegation by acting DGI president Cyndy Hayworth that she’d been told to “Hire Matheny or else[IM6] ” DGI would lose its funding. According to Hayworth, this directive came from Mike Barber, who with Matheny was one of two Republicans on City Council.

Barber denied making that threat, but acknowledged suggesting the board should go ahead and choose his fellow council member. According to the article, “Barber said he told Hayworth that a long search for a new CEO wasn't necessary and wouldn't be in DGI's best interest. So, why not go ahead and hire Matheny?”

And that’s what happened, said Ritchy. “Zack needed a job and Zack got a deal.”

She called the conflict of interest “blatant and obvious,” and alleged that his recent return to Council gives Matheny more power for reprisals against those who opposed him.

“If you fall on the wrong side of Zack, he can be very petty, and the payback is frustrating. I get cut out of every festival, and if I say anything critical, they will line my patio with porta-potties.”

Another longtime downtown property owner who feels that Matheny should not represent District Three will also running DGI is Jeanne Davis, owner of the 120-year-old Jessamyn Bailey Elms Building LLC at 600 S. Elm Street.

“It’s such a severe conflict of interest, there’s no way it can be seen any other way. I would love to find a way for them to work for everyone and not just their own interests, which is what I’ve seen for quite a while. We have so many needs down here.  The Good Ol’ Boys needs to get out of the way and let them happen.”

Both Matheny and John Hammer have offered Mayor pro tem Yvonne Johnson as an example of a council member who also heads a non-profit organization. Jason Hicks disagreed about the similarity, and used the example of Matheny’s behavior during the vote to expand to BORO.

“I think this is very different from Yvonne Johnson, who doesn’t lobby for Cure Violence or demand discussions of it be removed from the agenda, whereas Matheny is blatantly lobbying for DGI and expressing outrage that he wasn’t consulted in a proposal regarding it.”

Deena Hayes-Greene agreed.

“The council has a couple of gray areas. One is the city funding the program that Mayor Pro Tem Yvonne Johnson founded and runs, but it’s not like they’re paying her salary, and that program is providing a service to the broader community, whereas DGI provides a service to a fairly small sector and its interest is limited to the downtown area.”

She also agreed with Ritchey’s allegation of vindictiveness.

“I absolutely think he can and has abused his power, authority and influence as President of DGI, and now has even more power and influence as a council member. Two examples immediately come to mind. One, him berating the city manager for whatever the city manager’s opinions and ideas are regarding anything that DGI makes decisions about, and two, when I was inquiring about becoming a member of the Board of DGI, as someone who is proximate to downtown Greensboro and is in the process of becoming an owner of a downtown property, Mr. Matheny shared that I have been critical of him and DGI in the past, and said this gave him concern about my potential membership on the DGI Board.”

As evidence, Hayes-Greene provided an email forwarded to her from DGI board member Skip Alston, after Alston recommended Hayes-Greene for the DGI board, to which Matheny wrote “Mrs. Greene and I have never officially met, but I am very aware of her outspoken and public comments about the DGI organization and me personally.”

Hayes-Greene made it clear she does not feel Matheny is a good fit for either his self-proclaimed role as “the downtown representative” on council, or as President of DGI.

“Greensboro, out of all the governmental units in Guilford County, has the most people of color, and is not majority-white. Downtown is the core and heart of the city, and to have someone like Mr. Matheny, who is very outspoken himself about his sort of worldview and the things that are important to him, does not match with the diversity of this city, and particularly of downtown. In his current and past tenure on council, he has voted against MWBE [the City’s Minority and Women Business Enterprise program] and he’s made negative comments about both the civil rights museum and what happened on Nov. 3, 1979 [the date of the murderous Klan/Nazi attack that Matheny voted against calling “the Greensboro Massacre” on a 2015 memorial]. So, here’s this man who is critical of a major civil rights magnet that brings so many to Greensboro, something of pride that you can build visitation and investment around, badmouthing the museum rather than uplifting it, while being upset at anyone critical of DGI.”

A 2015 News & Record op-ed [IM7] called it “only a mild surprise” that Matheny wanted to become president of Downtown Greensboro Inc. “If he gets the DGI job, no way in the world should Matheny be on the council as well. It would be an obvious and blatant conflict of interest.”

Several months later, he was advised by unnamed attorneys that he should step down from council, which he did. Yet in late 2021, when he announced his intention of running for his old seat, neither social nor traditional media seemed to bat an eye when he said he could do both jobs, and there was no News & Record op-ed taking him to task for this decision.

When I recently asked former N&R columnist and local blogger Ed Cone about this, he replied, simply, ‘Forget it, Jake, it's Chinatown.”

In the 1974 neo-noir with that last word as its title, that’s the famous final line, spoken to Jack Nicholson’s private investigator Jake Gites by his old buddy on the LAPD. It refers to Jake’s days as a beat cop in that district, where it was a catch phrase meaning he should ignore injustice and accept the status quo.

[IM1]https://www.theassemblync.com/media/the-news-and-record-below-the-fold/

[IM2]https://triad-city-beat.com/breaking-councilman-to-resign/

[IM3]https://triad-city-beat.com/two-heavyweights-jockey-district-3-greensboro-council-seat/

[IM4]https://www.yesweekly.com/news/local/rocky-vs-greensboro-round-two/article_67c1a150-91c3-11ed-bc1b-c73b9f30d496.html

[IM5]https://www.rhinotimes.com/news/zack-wants-his-old-city-council-seat-back/

[IM6]https://greensboro.com/hire-matheny-or-else/article_6145f3cc-2ade-5aaf-909b-a454e2e1753f.html

[IM7]https://greensboro.com/blogs/thinking_out_loud/matheny-and-dgi/article_61be195e-b969-11e4-a47e-87e96b42fc6b.html

 Matt Brown, Greensboro's Coliseum director , and highest paid city employee, orchestrated a meeting last November to discuss a game changing project, which he described as :"... this proposed new venue can both serve many of the Community and Arts organizations and patrons that each of you represent and can also be an alternative source of critical revenues to support your missions.”  The meeting was attended by select council members, city staffers,  representative of the Carroll companies, Arts Greensboro, as well as Windham's own Mark Brazil and CPL's unimaginative architect Ken Mayer.

Worth noting that, so far, none of Mr. Brown's endeavors have ever been profitable: not The Coliseum, not The Tanger Center, not the Aquatic Center, not Piedmont Hall, not Ovation, and, we anticipate, not this recently proposed venue.  Last week, Mr. Brown lobbied city council and received an additional $2,000,000+ for his shortcomings.  We can only guess that premium parking and Hotel/Motel tax are simply not covering the city's debt obligation as originally touted by Mr. Brown and our Mayor, Ms. Vaughan.

Regardless, Matt Brown seems determined to once again change water into wine, and is now promoting his new "grand scheme", even while  other city-owned exempt facilities remain mostly unused and unprofitable .We made a public information request in search of the documents presented to city council during the meetings which took place on 11/16/22  and  11/18/22. After much insistence, we received three (3) slides ... yes, you read it correctly, THREE SLIDES ! No background on the project, no location, no projections, no current land ownership, no contamination report , and, no pro-forma. 

In an email dated Nov 10, 2022, Mr. Matheny, after stating his surprise and disappointment for not being consulted, refers to this project as ”...  an important downtown project…” . Three slides for an "alternative source of critical revenues" and ” an important downtown project”. It seems clear that Matt Brown, enabled by his council cheerleaders, is up to his old tricks, and, once again violated public records legislations by not supplying what are considered public documents. 

Mr. Brown, the mover of mountains, gave a presentation to council to ask for millions of tax payer's monies with only three slides? While the city seems willing to sabotage existing live music venues with various onerous ordinances  (from which it exempts itself), easement violations and additional proposed taxes, it seems more than eager to give tax payers' monies to Mr. Brown for, what is certain to become another cronies' pleasing financial pit.

While Matt Brown refused to provide the proposed location for this Manna-like venue,  city insiders and a basic GIS research quickly identified that Mr. Brown is drawing castles on contaminated property it does not yet own. Our educated guess, based upon current tax bills shows, that , if purchased at current tax value, the additional land needed would cost in excess of $2,000,000. Contamination remediation and construction costs remain unknown. In the interim, we can only hope that Mr. Brown will not use the same world champion estimators that he did for the Tanger Center.

The site is bordered by  East Market, Friendly Ave and Church St.

We not only focus on the big local news, but also on the news that matters to our community. In our Local Interest section, you can read about cool people, cool places and cool stuff. Let us know of a local issue you think we should cover and please do not hesitate to on pass on tips and photos...like...for example, a drunk council member acting foolishly at a Mexican restaurant?, or a great band worth listening to, or a  great event.