Michael Bobbitt: Notes From The Peanut Gallery (City Council June 15, 2015)


The City Council’s special called meeting on June 15, 2015, was the opportunity for the city’s residence to add their input on the coming year’s budget. Unlike the county commissioners the city council actually holds a separate meeting for the public to comment on the city’s proposed budget before a consensus vote is taken. Unlike the county the council members do not have dinner on the taxpayers’ dime before they hold their meetings. Like the county residence the city’s residence choose not avail themselves to stand in public and voice their approval or objection to their city government’s budgeting efforts.

Public Hearings for consideration of citizen input on proposed budget and annual fee schedule.

Only two people came to the meeting prepared to discuss the proposed budget and both spoke of one issue, funding for downtown development. Phil Hart, owner and chief editor of this blog site was the principle speaker for downtown development commission. Curtis White joined Mr. Hart to encourage the city to fund the downtown development commission. The basic issue both men presented was the city’s failure to follow through on last year’s promise for an additional $10,000 to apply towards grants (federal or state tax dollars) to rejuvenate downtown building facades. Mr. Hart, whose business is headquartered on Garnett Street, has worked for several years with the city and through the Chamber of Commerce to bring life to downtown. The audio of the meeting is of surprisingly high quality and better serves to highlight the council’s discussion of Mr. Hart’s presentation. The council agreed to find the $10,000 that was included in last year’s proposed budget yet undelivered as the 2014 – 2015 budget year ends.

Mayor O’Geary said downtown had eleven businesses along the central part of Garnet Street. One of those businesses is Variety Wholesalers corporate office, a privately held corporation that employs some 800 people overall in Vance County. Will improved building facades bring life to downtown? The answer to that question is elusive.

I think the consensus among the city council members and moves shakers of Henderson something needs to happen if revitalizing downtown is a goal of the city council. Building a new landfill on the remnants downtown’s abandoned and dilapidated building only benefits those who own bulldozers, large front end loaders, and dump trucks yet leaves another question what to do with the newly vacant land. Saving some of the downtown’s icons of Henderson’s glory days seems to be based on the memory of their symbol of economic wealth and power.

What if the $10,000 of city taxpayers’ money plus grants (state and federal tax dollars) is concentrated on rejuvenating the building facades of locally owned and operated businesses, in good standing (property taxes are paid), and within a narrow two block area is a part of the catalyst that guides the re-inventing of Henderson?

[jwplayer mediaid=”66389″]