Today I must retract a statement I made yesterday in this post.

I assumed that Councilwoman Burroughs-White decision to forward her motion to adopt the T&R related resolution, and, "...The quick second of the motion by Bellamy-Small seemed to demonstrate that Claudette's motion had been in the cards all along."  It was not.

In a follow-up article on Tuesday's council vote to oppose the GTR process, the N&R provides a quote from Claudette about her motion and the widely reported "gentleman's agreement" among members of council that no resolution would be offered..."When they decided to do that, I wasn't there," she said. "I wouldn't have agreed to it anyway. I felt we needed to vote up or down."

In addition, Claudette called me this morning in response to what I wrote to make sure I understood her postion and reiterated that she had not been privy to any back room plans for the Council to not offer up a resolution.

Claudette and I had a long conversation about Tuesday night's vote and the events of 1979.  I expressed my consternation as to how this debate over the Truth and Reconciliation process had become a racial issue.  She set me straight with a few questions.

She asked that I not confuse issues of race with issues of racism - because they are not the same thing.  She explained that the events of Nov 3, 1979 were the result of a racist system so the issue surrounding the race of the people involved was secondary to the event.  Her point is that we need to take a fresh look at the whole affair because many of the trappings of the 1979 era system of racism still exists today in Greensboro.  When I told her that such racism is hard for me to see, she offered this, "Your perception of racism is dictated by your history.  You have never been on the receiving end of racism, so you don't really know what it looks or feels like."

She asked me to look at Nov 3, 1979 with my "black eyes" to get a different view.  As an example, she asked me to consider why the 'Death to the Klan" march was held in mostly black Morningside Homes instead of lilly-white Irving Park?  "I doubt that a parade permit would even have been issued for the march if they had wanted to do it in Irving Park", she said, "but if it had been held there, the entire Greensboro police department would have lined the streets.  That certainly wasn't the case in Morningside Homes" 

Hard to argue against her point, isn't it?

I'll say it again.  I support the work of the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission but I hate the fact that we seem to be splitting apart, along racial lines, on the question of if obtaining either truth or reconciliation is a good or bad thing - or needed at all. 

My conversation with Claudette this morning confirmed for me that we have a long way to go before everyone will see issues of race through the same eyes.  But one thing is for sure: we will never get there if white folks insist on keeping their eyes closed and if black folks insist on thinking white folks can never understand.

10:21:50 AM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks

During Tuesday night's T&R vote, several members of our City Council took the opportunity to explain their positions in great detail.  The N&R has made all nine Council member's comments available online in mp3 audio format. Simply check the size of the available files to discern who had the most to say (Mayor Holliday @ 3.2MB) or the least to say (Councilman Vaughan @ 212 kB) when their turn came

Additionally, the fine folks at the N&R have provided us with the audio files of Rev. Nelson Johnson's comments before council as well as Councilwoman Burroughs-White's surprise motion, which includes a reading of the carefully worded resolution that, if adopted, would have accomplished little.  The discussion following Claudette's motion should be required listening material for every Greensboro citizen.

Even though the comments, statements and pronouncements by our Council were brimming with impassioned pleas to either ignore or embrace the GT&R process, Councilwoman Gatten's indictments of the T&R process from her seat at the dais stand out.  She started out by stating her opinion that the "basic assumptions" upon which the T&R folks are basing their work, "are patently false" and things pretty much went down hill from there.  The N&R's Allen Johnson characterized Gatten's statements as being, "...especially pointed, almost contemptuous".  And I have to agree.  But...

Gatten asked some important questions within her comments (mp3).  She pointed out that our local media "has ignored asking basic questions" of the T&R folks in a "rush to embrace this project".  Her questions began 6min 10sec into her remarks and they really ought to be answered in the interest of full transparency.

• Who's funding this?
• How much?  $300,000.00?... $600,000,00?
• Who is the (ed: I think she said) Enders Foundation in New York? (ed note: Commenters say it is the Andrus Family Fund
• How is the money being spent?
• Who is profiting?
• Why is the money coming from out of state?  Possibly as much as 80%.
• Why are no local foundations funding this?
• What exactly is restorative justice beyond technical jargon beloved of sociologists......?
• What is the rationale for expending vital resources in this cause when there are so many worthy causes in our community that cry out for funding and attention?

The above questions not withstanding, much of the balance of Gatten's comments suggested a real disdain for all things related to the T&R 'process'.  Her disdain seemed to reach a tipping point during a subsequent exchange between her and a very nervous NC A&T political science student who took to the podium during the 'speakers from the floor' portion of Tuesdy's meeting.

It was obvious that this guy was testing his public speaking legs for the first time and his comments were a bit disjointed.  When he finished, Councilwoman Bellamy-Small lauded his efforts at getting involved in civic affairs.  Councilwoman Gatten took a different tack, however... she laid him out.

In typical Florence-I'll-be-your-mother-Gatten style (which I, too, have been a victim of), she let this black student know what she thought he should be trying to get out of his involvement with the T&R process.  Instead of thanking him for getting involved in the community, she chose to belittle him in a very public manner, she then flashed one of her trademark smiles as if to soften the blows she had dished out.  It didn't work.  Not knowing how to respond to such motherly grilling from this white councilwoman, the black student simply retreated to his seat.  It was an embarrasing and telling moment for me.

Gatten lamented during later comments how she regretted that none of the above questions were answered by speakers from the T&R Project.  They might have been if she had directed them to some of the substantial firepower that lined up to address the Council.  Gatten had ample opportunity to direct her ire and questions toward the likes of Nelson Johnson or Z. Hollar, but instead she picked on a child.

Pitiful.

6:46:44 AM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks