Monday, January 25, 2021

 Bennett Carpenter sent me this message at 9:26 a.m. I wasn’t happy with his assumptions. 

 

We were very pleased to see that $15 back pay had been moved to the consent agenda late last week, after Durham community members sent over 300 emails urging our County Commission to vote "yes" to the retroactive raise. We're so excited our commissioners are responding to their constituents and prioritizing a $15 minimum wage for DPS classified staff. 

 

Carpenter is the Lead Organizer with Durham For All. He is the author of a petition for Durham residents to pressure members of the Durham Board of County Commissioners to vote in support of retroactive pay for Durham Public School classified staff. 

 

I rapidly responded with a note to chill on claiming this as his victory. In moments where perceptions of wins are in high demand, it’s critical to consider the consequences of claiming victory. 

 

Bennett, this is what happens when community organizing takes place outside the context of actual relationship building. You have built a narrative placing your activism as the solution, and, in the process, labeling Heidi Carter as the shero among members of the BOCC. This issue was resolved from the beginning. There is NO doubt that the BOCC was set to approve retroactive pay, making this issue another weapon in painting Wendell Davis, and the two Black members of the BOCC, in opposition to public education. I hope you will consider the massive damage done here. Again, in my reporting on this subject, there are no negative votes here. NONE. Heidi Carter introduced retroactive pay without prior conversations with board members and staff, making it impossible for a vote when it was introduced. It had to be considered in reference to budget (unlike hazard pay, which is set in the budget and is a short-term matter) as a vote with lasting implications. Your position here reflects poor judgement, and a willingness to be used as a pawn in Heidi Carter's quest to disprove Wendell Davis' allegations of actions perceived as racist. The measure will pass tonight, but it has nothing to do with your activism. 

 

Many will conclude it doesn’t matter. A win for classified workers is more important than the game played to maximize positive votes. That is true when considered outside of the context of what has happened over the past year. As of today, members of the Durham Board of County Commissioners have failed to consider the recommendations in the final report of the investigator retained to consider the behavior of Heidi Carter, which Durham County Manager Wendell Davis complained about in a February 15, 2020 letter, was motivated by racial bias. 

 

In his report, James E. Coleman, the attorney paid $29,393.00 by the county, ruled that although none of Carter’s behavior was motivated by racial bias, it was reasonable for Carter’s criticism of Davis to be perceived as racially biased. In a separate report, Coleman determined Davis did not violate the International County/City Managers Association’s Code of Ethics for Appointed Elected Officials, the Code of Ethics for Appointed and Elected Officials of Durham County or state law. Wendy Jacobs, chair of the board, argued Davis complained to influence the primary election.  

 

Coleman’s report is critical in underscoring the process used in placing retroactive pay on the agenda immediately after $15/hr. was approved during the November board meeting. Carter pressed the issue prior to receiving input from staff. Coleman warned of a culture dismissive of the county manager and county staff. 

 

“In addition, the manner in which some Commissioners question the Manager and some members of the staff (or the tone of such questioning) could be perceived as micromanaging, disrespectful of their expertise, or biased,” Colemans concludes. 

 

Coleman noted a lack of communication that manifest as a highly dysfunctional system of governance.  

 

“These matters reflect a troubling lack of trust and communications between the Board, as the governing body, and the County Manager, and, to a lesser degree, a lack of collegiality among some members of the Board,” Coleman states. “As a result, the Durham County Government is in a state of periodic dysfunction, at a time when the residents of Durham County need it to be effective in dealing with several daunting issues, any one of which alone would be challenging.” 

 

In submitting retroactive pay without input from county staff, Carter disrespected process in the same way noted in Coleman’s critique. In villainizing Davis in opposition to public education, Durham For All negates policies honoring staff input in the quest of maintaining a sound AAA rating. The role of members of the board of county commissioners is to rule based on recommendations from county staff. The petition dismissed the importance of reasoned guidance prior to voting. 

 

The mistake here involves a variety of assumptions related to the will of commissioners, the manager and staff.  Support was never in question.   All members of the board, the county manager and staff want more for all county employees. The Durham For All petition named Davis in opposition to public education, and, by virtue of that assumption, resistant of $15/hr. for DPS classified staff. Premises like these feeds the us versus them mentality used in demeaning the role of staff. It makes Davis the target and enemy of public education, while the true foe is a culture aimed at empowering some at the expense of disqualifying others employed to protect taxpayer's interests.  

 

The outcome appears as a system of elevated white supremacy.  In this case, a white woman accused of racial insensitivity fighting on behalf of Black workers, and a Black man declared the enemy of Black prosperity. The real culprit is a massive load of assumptions that continue a trend of racial tension. 

 

All of it could have been avoided if people would stop long enough to listen. I suppose that’s too easy in a world consumed with winning. Problem is, we all lose. In this case, Black leaders lose at the expense of white posturing aimed at maintaining white privilege. 

 

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment