Mitchell Johnson’s lawyers preceded him through the glass door from the executive suites at Melvin Municipal Office Building before the March 3 Greensboro City Council as the city manager paused to speak to the private security guard posted at the entrance.
Johnson, like almost everybody else, already knew the script of the meeting, in which the split council would vote 5-4 to fire him. The air of spectacle and political bloodsport hung over council chambers, as the body moved through routine business punctuated with isolated volleys over the controversy surrounding the Greensboro Police Department and the manager’s performance that has embroiled the city for more than three years.
Blogger Ben Holder looked triumphant conferring with brothers John and William Hammer, respectively the editor and publisher of The Rhinoceros Times, as the three relished the prospect of their longstanding campaign to oust the manager finally bearing fruit. Police Chief Tim Bellamy turned up later, saying he hoped that his boss would keep his job, and then shrugging his shoulders in acknowledgement of his lack of control over the decision.
Bill Knight, a retired accountant, called on council to apologize to David Wray and reimburse officers suspended following the former police chief’s resignation for lost pay. A handful of Johnson’s supporters who had gotten wind of the impending action spoke in the manager’s defense. During council’s closed-session discussion, a reporter commented that the situation was like waiting for a jury verdict, to which the posted security guard quipped, “More like an execution.”
Mayor Pro Tem Sandra Anderson Groat, whose closeness with the former city manager was at one time underscored by a standing weekly meeting with Johnson, initiated his removal. After three unsuccessful previous attempts, Groat switched sides to join with the three members of the anti-manager faction on council. District 3 Councilman Zack Matheny followed suit. “It’s really not so much about Mitch,” Groat said after the vote. “This city needs to move on. There are 10 people that are in a really dysfunctional relationship. The rest of us can’t be fired until November…. Basically, I had to ask myself a question. I needed to be behind him 100 percent, or give it up and let it go. We have the split on council, and he’s a lightning rod. He keeps coming up, even if he doesn’t say anything, he’s dragged into every discussion. I have a concern that I have really hurt myself politically, but I feel like I did the right thing.”
Groat has twice received the endorsement of the George C. Simkins Jr. Memorial Political Action Committee, or Simkins PAC, which distributes its endorsements in the black community.
For at least two hard-line members of the anti-manager faction, the decision to fire Johnson was directly tied to the manager’s handling of the police controversy, and the recent acquittal of Detective Scott Sanders.
“It’s been one trumped-up charge after another,” District 4 Councilman Mike Barber said. “I think the Attorney General’s office was heavily influenced by [former City Attorney] Linda Miles’ drama, and I think they were given a lot of exaggerated information. I think the city administration decided what result they wanted and presented the information to get that result, instead of presenting the facts to get justice.
The result didn’t come. I think they need to issue a number of apologies and pay a number of back salaries.” At-large Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw echoed that sentiment from the dais. “Decisions that I will make reflect what I saw in that trial, because it was a lifechanging experience for me personally,” she said. “The decisions I make, I listen to both sides, but I only heard one side before I came to that courtroom. If all the information that we had been seeking was given to us, maybe I would not have had to attend that trial, but I’m glad I did because that was justice and the American way.” A handful of people urged council to retain Johnson.
“I came here to be an advocate for him,” said the Rev. Gregory Headen, who presides over the Pulpit Forum, an association of African-American pastors. “The reason is because of
my experience with him, the transparency he has given us when we meet
with him about controversial issues within our community. We feel that
we’re being listened to. “I experience this city as having too much
secrecy about it,” he added. “So many things happen and we don’t know
why. And I’m afraid that tonight that might happen again.
So I
wanted to comment as a citizen that that would only erode trust a
little bit more. It is very important in a city for citizens to trust
their city government and their city management. Mitchell Johnson has
done many things, in my opinion, to restore the some of the trust that
was lost. I would hope that you would not act in such a way to erode
whatever trust there is.” Julia Blizin, a Summit Avenue resident,
cautioned the council against concluding from Sanders’ acquittal proved
that Johnson
had mismanaged the city. “Because this particular police employee’s
trial ended in acquittal does not automatically provide reason to
blame, dismiss or harangue our current city manager, in public or in
private session,” she said. “I urge all members of this council to
proceed cautiously with the perceived outcome of this trial and whether
this impacts the city’s management or the management of the entire city
staff. And I urge each of you to be transparent in your workings
together as a council and to apply caution with your words and your
motions.
Greensboro’s future is in your hands.” Another
resident who came to speak before council suggested the investigation
of Wray’s administration that led to the chief’s resignation had been
unwarranted.
“Formal investigations and a recent court trial
have failed to show one shred of evidence that David Wray, or anyone
who served under him, did anything whatsoever in violation of law, city
ordinance, police ethical standards, or any other standard of
performance,” he said. “I call on the city council, at its next meeting
to issue a proclamation offering an apology to David Wray and his
subordinate officers for the wrong abetted against them by the city’s
inaction and failure to stand with them; and to undertake prompt
reimbursement for legal expenses incurred as a consequence of such
failures by the city government to stand by its long-serving employees
when it was called for.” After more than an hour, the manager and the
nine council members emerged from closed session.
Mayor Yvonne
Johnson, her voice quavering with emotion, read a statement announcing
that Mitchell Johnson was relieved of his duties, and would continue to
perform any assignments given to him by the new interim city manager,
Bob Morgan,
through July 15. The council voted 5 to 4 to terminate Mitchell
Johnson, with Mayor Johnson, atlarge Councilman Robbie Perkins,
District 1 Councilwoman Dianne Bellamy-Small and District 2 Councilwoman Goldie Wells voting in opposition.
Mitchell
Johnson got up from his seat and led a pack of reporters to his office,
where he gave a short prepared statement drafted on notebook paper, and
then went home. “I’ve been with the city for 26 and a half years,” he
said. “I’ve enjoyed every role. I’ll continue to enjoy being with this
organization. It’s a great group of people. I’ve appreciated the
support of the employees, and I will be glad to continue in whatever
role they choose for me.” The agreement hammered out between Johnson
and the city allows the former manager to continue receiving his
$179,478 salary through July 15, along with a $650 per month car
allowance. The city also committed to honoring Johnson’s contract by paying him severance equivalent to six months of salary and benefits.
Blogger Ben Holder, a former city employee and native of Greensboro who now lives in Winston-Salem, was among those who took credit for Johnson’s ousting.
“The
goal was for the city to move in a direction that was not filled with
contradictions and lies and the things he and Linda Miles did to
separate the city…. They told lies, they conflated things and they
tried to string things together.”
Municipal government in crisis
Despite
Johnson’s termination, none of the political alignments on the
polarized council appear to have shifted. Rakestraw and District 5
Councilwoman Trudy Wade campaigned in 2007 on a platform of providing
stronger oversight of the manager and received the endorsement of the
antimanager Rhinoceros Times, providing voters with reliable cues that they would work for Johnson’s removal.
District
3 Councilman Zack Matheny, who cast one of the two decisive votes to
remove Johnson, said his decision was not really about the city
manager’s job performance.
“Personally, I don’t think, whether
it was Zack Matheny or whoever it was that was hired to be the city
manager and had to take on what was inherited, it would be successful,”
Matheny said. “I don’t think he was really given an opportunity to show
his strengths of running the city…. I just want to move on. We hold on
to some things, we let things fester in Greensboro. I felt in my heart
that it was time for the city of Greensboro,
for our council, for the future of our city — it was time for everybody
to move on.” He added that he “didn’t base my decision on the nine
council members holding hands and singing ‘Kumbaya’ in council session.
It’s just not going to happen.”
Perkins, a staunch supporter
of Mitchell Johnson, underscored the sense that, if anything, the city
manager’s removal has left the atmosphere among council members even
more radioactive.
“One group wants us to be a board of
directors — and I sit on that group — where we come up with strategies,
and give the city manager direction,” he said. “Another group wants to
micromanage the city. Then we’ve got Sandra and Zack, who want to fire
Mitch, but don’t want to micromanage.
Removing Mitch doesn’t
change anything. I don’t think you’ve solved anything other than
creating a circus in the middle of the biggest budget challenge we’ve
had in 25 years.
Perkins suggested Johnson will continue to be
a lightning rod on the divided council until his ultimate departure in
July, noting that some of his colleagues might assume that the former
city manager will lend his expertise to crafting the city’s annual
budget. Perkins said he would oppose such a move because it would
confuse the lines of accountability.
For many of Johnson’s
detractors, his removal represents a vindication of former police Chief
David Wray, who resigned after being locked out of his office by the
manager. Emboldened by their success, they seek an apology and
reimbursement of legal costs. It appears unlikely that a majority of
council members would support either of those measures.
Asked for his position, Matheny told YES! Weekly: “Not interested.” Groat cast doubt on the possibility of the city issuing an apology to Wray.
“We had a hell of a problem saying sorry in the truth and
reconciliation process,” she said. “I don’t think it’s likely to
happen.”
The desire for vindication of Wray and the unease
among residents unsettled by Johnson’s removal has ratcheted up
pressure on dual fronts to pressure the council to act with more
transparency.
In a closed-session meeting on March 6, council members also discussed North Carolina
personnel law, which allows the city manager, with support of the
council, to release information about a disciplinary action if it is
deemed to be “essential to maintaining public confidence in the
administration of city services” and the state’s criminal investigation
statute stating that criminal investigations and records of criminal
intelligence information “may be released by order of a court of
competent jurisdiction.”
A majority of council members are on
record as expressing support for releasing additional documents, but
after the closed session meeting details about what records might be
released remained scant and no official action was taken in open
session.
Mayor Johnson said she thought the Risk Management Association report, which formed the basis of Mitchell Johnson’s loss of trust in David Wray, could be released.
She
said staff was also attempting to get permission from two to three
individuals to release their personnel files so the city would not be
at risk of being sued. Groat said she wanted to release “everything
from when the Wray situation began to now.” Rakestraw said, “I want all
the tapes we have on people. I want to know it, and I want everyone to
know it.” “I don’t want there to be any controversy,” Matheny added.
“The police department doesn’t want there to be any controversy.
No
one wants there to be controversy. Answer any questions. Let everybody
sift through the thousands of minutes of tapes and all the boxes of
documents.”
Barber has called for more transparency, but in a recent statement placed the onus on city administration rather than council.
Perkins,
meanwhile, said he would not support a broad release of information,
but supports the public release of the minutes from the closed session
portion of the March 3 city council meeting, in which Johnson’s termination was discussed.
Asked if he would grant permission, Johnson
said on March 6: “I would think so.” “I’d like the tapes to be
released,” Perkins said. “I think it will give the public a clear
picture of what was really going on with the firing of Mitch.”
Mayor
Johnson, Rakestraw and Matheny indicated they support the proposal, and
Perkins said Groat has also signed on. Wells said she was against it,
while Bellamy-Small, Barber and Wade did not respond to calls
requesting position.
Meanwhile, the city has other pressing
matters to address, including a cashstrapped budget, falling revenues
and hemorrhaging jobs in a recessionary economy.
“This is
going to be completely nonproductive,” Perkins predicted. “What this is
going to do is bog the council down even further. Somehow we need to
focus on our jobs: Economic development, creating jobs and a tax base.
We’re doing a whole lot of nothing on that.” He added that “the council
is not going to come together. The individuals are not going to stop
doing this stuff, and I don’t think based on the makeup of the
personalities you’re going to have a chance at having a functional
council. That’s a fantasy.”
Adding to the instability, whether
voters decide to punish sitting council members in November for their
vote on Johnson’s termination or for failing to cooperate with each
other and handle the people’s business remains to be seen. Likewise, a
sense of insecurity hangs over members of the staff amid recrimination
and a trend toward government downsizing.
“They’ve got a plan,
and I’m not part of the plan, and I don’t know what they’re thinking
over further cuts,” Perkins said. “Mike Barber has not been quiet about
his desire to cut staff and get into city government and micromanage.”
Holder, who has waged what appears to be a coordinated media campaign alongside The Rhinoceros Times to
discredit members of staff and several police officers, offered a list
of people who he believes should be fired alongside Mitchell Johnson.
In the Greensboro Police Department, they include Assistant Chief Gary
Hastings, Capt. Brian James, Lt. James Hinson, Officer Julius Fulmore
and Officer Allen Wallace.
Members of city administration on
the list include Engineering & Inspections Director Butch Simmons,
Deputy City Attorney Beckie Jo Peterson-Buie. Bellamy-Small was the
sole council member on his list. Johnson’s termination has also led to
renewed questions about the ousted manager’s handling of former Chief
Wray’s resignation, along with scrutiny of various media outlets’
reporting on the episode and ensuing controversy.
The Rev. Cardes Brown, pastor of New Light Baptist Church and president of the Greensboro unit of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, was one of four people who spoke in defense of the city manager.
“I’ll go with the knowable facts at hand for now,” blogger Roch Smith Jr. wrote in a comment on the YES! Weekly blog.
“Among other things, they tell us this undisputed story: Johnson (and
others) made assertions that there was ample evidence that a ‘black
book’ was used to racially target police officers. Not a single shred
of evidence has been
produced to support that, and the city and the city manager have
legally sworn that they have no evidence to support that claim.”
The
controversy hinges, in part, on how Johnson characterized concerns
raised by black police officers about the use photo lineup books by the
special intelligence section under Chief Wray.
“The
often discussed ‘black book’ — which contained pictures of African-
American officers, prepared and used in response to victim complaints —
was represented as an investigative tool, and the chief described the
possible existence of this sort of document to the city manager, in
theory stating that he was unaware of any actual document that fit the
description provided to the media by black police officers,” Johnson
wrote in a prepared statement following the departure of Wray in
January 2006. “However, when the possible existence of the book became
known to the public, Chief Wray instructed a subordinate to hide and
secure the book and did not inform his superior of its true existence
and actual purpose.
This act, and failure to act, caused much
inaccurate information and confusion within the manager’s officer and
among residents of Greensboro.”Tom Phillips, a former council member
who served on the council that hired Mitchell Johnson and retired in
2007, said he would hire Johnson again and recommend him to any
employer.
“These bloggers keep bringing up that Mitch admitted
under oath that he didn’t know exactly how the ‘black book’ was used.
He tried to find out, but the people involved wouldn’t talk. They keep
bringing this up: ‘He finally admitted.’ He said that from day one. I
know he told us in closed session.”
Johnson’s
supporters on city council argue that whether Wray violated any laws,
departmental policies or ethics standards is a moot point; he lost the
manager’s trust.
“I don’t think the city should apologize to David Wray,”
Perkins said. “I think the issue was a conflict between David Wray and
David Wray’s boss. David Wray’s boss locked him out of his office. And
instead of apologizing, David Wray quit. Somebody’s the head person,
and somebody’s the number-two person. And if you have a lack of trust,
the number-one person’s going to prevail.”
Justice Department steps in again
While calls for apology to Wray come forth, and members of council on either side of the split call for the city to move on while pledging more transparency, the US Justice Department has undertaken a review of discrimination claims made by dozens of black police officers.
Council members learned of the inquiry in late February from City Attorney Terry Wood. “They’re going to review all the EEOC claims,” he said. “We’ve been told that they take this type of thing very seriously. This is not something that is a cursory deal.” Meanwhile, Rakestraw played down the significance of the inquiry.
“I have heard that this is a normal procedure and that when you have so many lawsuits and maybe with the ilk of the EEOC claims, it may be just normal procedure,” she said. Groat said the Justice Department is reviewing 20 boxes of documents related to the claims, while Rakestraw said she had heard that the federal agency might interview various city employees and former council members.
This will be the second time the Justice Department has looked into allegations of wrongdoing in the Greensboro Police Department under the administration of former Chief David Wray. In early 2006, the FBI investigated to determine whether criminal prosecution was warranted.
“We received information that a former employee of your agency, David Wray, may have been involved in violating the civil rights of James Hinson,” wrote Mark J. Kappelhoff, section chief of the Justice Department’s criminal section, in a letter to Chief Tim Bellamy in May 2006. “After careful consideration, the criminal section and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of North Carolina have concluded that the evidence is not sufficient to establish a violation of the federal criminal civil rights statutes. Accordingly, we have closed our investigation.”
Thirty-nine
black officers have already received permission from the Justice
Department to file suit against the city after the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission failed to negotiate a settlement between the
city and the officers.
The lawsuit alleges that after Wray
became police chief and Randall Brady became deputy police chief, “they
directed subordinate officers to gather pictures of black officers for
use in lineup books, or other visual aides for the purpose of framing
and embarrassing and wrongfully charging black officers with crimes,
offenses and violations of both law and police policies” The black
officers allege that they were investigated by special intelligence,
while white officers were investigated by the more formal and
accountable criminal investigation division.
Amiel Rossabi, a
lawyer for Officer Julius Fulmore, said his client recently received a
letter from the Justice Department authorizing him to sue the city of Greensboro
for discrimination. A previous lawsuit filed by Fulmore against the
city, alleging that two white detectives undertook a plan to spread
lies about him to ruin his reputation and career, was dismissed by a
Guilford County superior court judge on grounds of sovereign immunity
and statute of limitations.
“I don’t know all the possible
outcomes,” Rossabi said, “but one of the possible outcomes is the
Department of Justice brings a lawsuit. Another possibility is the
Department of Justice itself tries to do what the EEOC could not do,
and try to reach an agreement.”
A spokeswoman for the Justice
Department declined to confirm or deny the existence of an
investigation. Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Justice
Department website states that “the Attorney General has authority to
bring suit against a state or local government employer where there is
reason to believe that a ‘pattern or practice’ of discrimination
exists. Generally, these are factually and legally complex cases that
seek to alter an employment practice, such as recruitment, hiring,
assignment and promotions.”
Handled by the Employment
Litigation Section under the Civil Rights Division, the website states
that the federal agency “obtains relief in the form of offers of
employment, back pay and other equitable relief for individuals who
have been the victims of unlawful employment practices. These cases
very frequently are resolved by consent decree prior to trial.”
Rossabi
said he welcomes the inquiry. “The Department of Justice has a lot of
power,” he said, “and I think on behalf of my client we’re perfectly
willing for the Department of Justice to come in and do what it needs
to make sure that this kind of stuff doesn’t happen again.”
Brian Clarey contributed reporting for this story.
