Views

Hidden: Fayetteville City Council conducts business away from public eye

Details

Tuesday, 25 November 2025

Written by Rachel Heimann Mercader, CityView Today

Rachel Heimann Mercader has done an excellent job of reporting in her recent CityView article, shining a light on Fayetteville’s little-known City Council dinner meetings. Her thorough coverage captures both the history and the controversy surrounding these gatherings. Yet the point that truly stunned me was learning why these meetings actually began in 2008: former Mayor Tony Chavonne revealed they were created because council members were failing to read their packets and come prepared for official sessions.
Both Mayor Chavonne and his successor, Nat Robertson, admitted the practice was meant to bring council members up-to-date and avoid embarrassment once the TV cameras rolled. That revelation raises a troubling question—why are we electing leaders who are too lazy or incompetent to understand the business of governing our city? These closed-door dinners either need to end or be made fully accessible to the public.
Transparency is not difficult, and Cumberland County Commissioners under Chairman Kirk deViere have shown how to effectively keep citizens informed with openness and accountability. Yet when Councilman Mario Benavente’s motion to make these meetings more transparent failed in a 5–4 vote, the message was clear: Mayor Mitch Colvin intends to preside over a rubber-stamp council beginning Dec. 1, with business as usual and little interest in bringing Fayetteville citizens into the sunlight. Not good. Thank you for reading Up & Coming Weekly.
—Bill Bowman, Publisher

Before the cameras roll, before the microphones click on, and before the public meetings begin, the Fayetteville City Council gathers in a cramped room on the third floor of City Hall.
These sessions are the council’s little-known dinner meetings. For nearly two decades, the gatherings have quietly shaped city policy—all without livestreams, video or audio archives, or easy public access.
The dinner meetings are where council members ask questions, rehearse talking points, and sometimes strategize what they’ll say later in the first-floor city council chamber, where the public is watching.
Critics say the practice reflects a broader culture of avoiding accountability, where key decisions can unfold with little public oversight. Supporters call the meetings essential for candid conversation and practical preparation.
In the November election, the city council candidates campaigned on promises of transparency. As the winners prepare to take office on Dec. 1, the private nature of these dinner meetings puts that promise to a test.
Former mayors said the dinner meeting was created to help unprepared council members get up to speed. But over time, it’s morphed into something more opaque, former and current council members said, where votes are sometimes taken, discussions veer off agenda, and the public is left guessing what happened.
“The city’s preference is always going to be to obfuscate,” said City Council Member Mario Benavente, who will leave office on Dec. 1.
The dinner meetings start at 5:30 p.m. and end by 6:30 p.m., when the regular council meetings are scheduled to begin. If the dinner meetings run long, as happened at a recent gathering in October, the council meetings start late.
Access to the dinner meetings is limited. The stairwell to the third floor requires a staff badge. If members of the public want to attend, as allowed by law, a city employee has to be summoned to let them in and take them up to the meeting room.
Once there, attendees will find limited space. The room seats maybe eight members of the public, shoulder to shoulder against the wall, next to the long table that the city council and staff sit around.
The city clerk makes an audio recording of each meeting, but the file is destroyed once the council approves the minutes at the following session, as permitted under state law, city spokesperson Loren Bymer told CityView.
In the last two months, council members used dinner meetings to discuss a new contract with developers to build a hotel and apartment tower atop the downtown Hay Street Parking Garage, and whether the city should re-file a lawsuit against the previous developers who never finished the project.
They also had a polarizing vote on Oct. 27 to postpone a council meeting until after the Nov. 4 election. Some members believed it was designed to avoid discussion of an audit of controversial and failed construction projects on the day before the election.
“I think they should be moved down to the first floor so they are more accessible,” Benavente told CityView. “It’s not truly public.”
Last week, Benavente put forth a proposal to make the dinner meetings more transparent. It failed in a 5-4 vote.
The dinner meetings have not had written agendas. Benavente’s proposal would have required a formal agenda set by the city manager. He said this would be a small step toward greater transparency and accessibility.
Benavente and Council Members Courtney Banks-McLaughlin, Kathy Jensen and Deno Hondros voted yes. Mayor Mitch Colvin and Council Members Lynne Greene, Brenda McNair, Malik Davis, and D.J. Haire voted no.
Council members said dinner meetings foster more candid conversations.
Greene, who voted against Benavente’s motion to have more formal agendas, acknowledged that dynamic to CityView.
“Do I think that sometimes with the public present, we are limited and we are more cautious in the way that we speak to each other? Yes,” she said.
Greene said it was her understanding that the meetings are intentionally structured to limit public access. “Not to prohibit the public, to just make it not as easy,” she said.
Critics say that’s exactly why the meeting should be more accessible.
“It’s important for us to gain the public’s trust by doing our business in public,” Hondros told CityView.
The dinner meetings weren’t always controversial. Former Mayor Tony Chavonne, who led the city from 2005 to 2013, said he started them in 2008 to address a basic problem: Council members weren’t reading their agenda packets.
“It was embarrassing,” Chavonne told CityView. “We had to get it together for the public.”
Chavonne’s successor, former Mayor Nat Robertson, had similar thoughts.
The dinner meetings, Robertson said, were meant to help council members prepare, especially those who hadn’t done their homework before the cameras turned on. Robertson left office in 2017.
Former Council Member Kirk deViere described the dinner meeting as informal. It was never a place for votes, just a space to ask questions and get clarity.
deViere was on the city council from 2015 to 2017. He is now the chair of the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners.

UCW Editor's note: This article has been edited due to space. To read the article in full, visit https://bit.ly/3XIPjFk

Troy's Perspective: How to empower those in poverty

Details

Tuesday, 18 November 2025

Written by Troy Williams

Democrats claim to have a plan for low-income individuals, but their strategy, such as [specific policy], does not empower those experiencing poverty; instead, it confines them to a life reliant on government assistance. Let me say from the outset that I have nothing but compassion for people experiencing poverty, having experienced it firsthand as a child growing up on the southern edge of Harnett County. Generational poverty is a challenging obstacle to overcome, but it is a task that, with the right strategies and support, is not impossible. There is indeed hope for change, and it's this hope that should guide our efforts, inspiring us to work towards a brighter future.
President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society program disproportionately affected Black families, a concern highlighted by his Assistant Secretary of Labor, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, in his influential publication, known as the Moynihan Report. Moynihan, who served under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, dedicated much of his efforts to the War on Poverty initiative. However, civil rights organizations, including the NAACP, strongly criticized Moynihan's 1965 report, arguing that its framework promoted racist ideas and stereotypes. This historical context is crucial in understanding the impact of past policies on our current social programs.
The Democrats and civil rights leaders won the argument, but the Black community suffered as a result. They continue to struggle, often following Democrats who seem more focused on providing 'handouts' and securing votes on election day than on pursuing true liberation for the underclass of individuals who are descendants of formerly enslaved people. The need for genuine freedom is urgent, and it's time we address it, instilling in us a sense of responsibility and motivation to act.
Unfortunately, over 25 years into the 21st century, very little progress has been made for the majority of African Americans living in the United States. This lack of progress should concern us all and motivate us to work towards a more equitable future, reinforcing our sense of urgency and commitment to change.
The recent government shutdown highlights the issues that need to be addressed for individuals who are generationally dependent on government assistance to survive in America. Let's be honest: Democrats seek votes by appealing to those in distress. They aim to capitalize on societal despair to enhance their chances at the polls. With mid-term elections approaching, there is no better time to create chaos in hopes that it will translate into votes in 2026.
Is America a perfect place to live? Of course not. However, there is no denying that it is the number one destination in the world for success, prosperity, and fulfilling one's dreams. Does racism exist in America? Some say yes, while others say no, I believe it does exist; however, it isn't a barrier to achieving one's dreams.
If politicians can keep voters focused on race, we will remain distracted from the big picture, and ultimately, the masses will lose.
In less than one month, filing for elections will begin again. America will face significant challenges, particularly those related to race. Buckle up; it promises to be a dynamic experience.

Generations passing the Torch—and the bucks

Details

Tuesday, 18 November 2025

Written by Margaret Dickson

I am a proud Baby Boomer—one of the millions of Americans born between 1946 and 1964. I have long been interested in the events and movements that shaped my generation—surviving the Cold War, the Vietnam conflict, and massive social changes involving civic and human rights. We even invented hippies.
That said, every generation is unique, shaped by national and world events and trends occurring during their lifetimes, just as birth order affects children born and raised in the same households.
This Boomer has been massively confused by the alphabet soup of generational monikers that followed mine, including Gen X, Gen Y (aka Millennials), and Gen Z. Behind them come the newest Americans, Generation Alpha or Gen A, whose oldest members are 13, and Generation Beta, Gen B, whose earliest members were born this year. Gens A and B are the first generations not to experience a world without AI.
Just so we know who we are talking about, here is a breakdown of recent American generations.
Baby Boomers, many of the children of World War II veterans who returned to civilian life and created a prosperous economy.
Gen X, born between 1965-1980 and sometimes called the “latchkey” generation, facing shifting social norms and the rise of technology.
Gen Y, or Millennials, born between 1981 and 1994/96, are the first digital generation and are highly connected. They value teamwork and want diversity and meaning in their lives.
Gen Z is considered entrepreneurial and financially conscious.
Gens A and B are still growing up.
The largest generation since the Boomers, the Millennials, complain with considerable justification about the world we Boomers have created and are leaving for them. They will cope with global warming because Boomers did not, political polarization, financial pressures and debt, and they are not happy about any of that.
Millennials, their children, and children’s children likely feel more positive toward a trend already and quietly underway, and which will accelerate as we Boomers go to our rewards—the greatest transfer of wealth in United States history. We are talking big bucks here, somewhere in the neighborhood of $84 trillion—yes, with a T—that Boomers will leave to our heirs between 2021 and 2045.
So, how did Boomers build such wealth, now estimated to be more than half of US household wealth?
First of all, we grew up in a strong and rapidly expanding post-World War II economy. Our parents were able to buy homes and to build financial assets which they left to us, and we continued where they left off. A US tax code that allows individuals to transfer such wealth without estate taxes continues to help build assets. Much of this wealth is in real estate and stocks, both of which have historically done well. Millennials and Gen X are expected to inherit the bulk of these assets, but there will be some left over for the younger sets as well. The ongoing transfer of wealth from generation to generation is expected to continue to widen the existing gap between rich and poor families, with the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans set to receive most of these assets.
All of us see major news events and trends that affect our lives—politics, accidents, armed conflicts, and climate change, among them. The largest transfer of wealth in the history of the United States is well underway and well under most people’s radar screens, even though its impact will touch Americans for generations to come.

Publisher's Pen: Mr. Mayor: Transparency isn’t a stunt, it’s a standard

Details

Tuesday, 18 November 2025

Written by Bill Bowman

Why Fayetteville's City Council must choose transparency over politics

In Fayetteville, trust in government is not a luxury—it’s a necessity. That trust is built on transparency, accountability, and the belief that our elected officials are working with—not around—each other. Recent events at City Hall have tested that trust, and we commend Council Members Mario Benavente, Kathy Jensen, and Lynne Greene for standing firm in their call for openness and clarity.
When Council Member Kathy Jensen asked why Mayor Mitch Colvin failed to share key emails and letters regarding the launch of a criminal investigation into allegations against Mohammad Mohammad’s construction company—including the use of a fake bonding company and the potential misuse of federal funds—she echoed a concern many in our community feel: How can our leaders lead if they’re not fully informed? “If we would have seen these letters when people were asking us questions, we could have been able to maybe answer them better,” she said. Jensen is right. That’s not politics—it’s common sense.
Council Member Benavente went further, calling out Mayor Colvin for what he describes as a tendency to obscure the truth. His push to publicly air a video statement from District Attorney Billy West was not a stunt—it was a principled stand for transparency. The public deserves to know what their leaders know, especially when serious allegations are involved.
Colvin claims council members were adequately briefed. But when multiple council members say otherwise, who should the public believe? Council Member Lynne Greene recalled only a vague and unsubstantiated mention of a “potential” investigation months ago—further reinforcing the need for clearer communication and transparency.
The council’s decision to move forward with a state audit was prudent. It signaled a commitment to accountability, regardless of political optics. The allegations at hand are serious: potential fraud across multiple cities and the misuse of federal funds. These are not issues to be handled behind closed doors or filtered through selective briefings. They demand full transparency and a united front from our city’s leadership.
Moreover, Fayetteville residents deserve answers. They want to know what happened, when it happened, how it was allowed to happen, and who at City Hall will be held accountable.
At Up & Coming Weekly, we believe in celebrating the best of Fayetteville—its people, its progress, and its promise. We also believe in holding our community and local government leaders to the highest standards. Council Members Benavente, Jensen, and Greene have demonstrated the kind of integrity and courage our community deserves. Their insistence on transparency is not a political maneuver—it’s a moral obligation. We hope that the newly elected city council members will be as diligent and assertive. Let’s support the community leaders who choose sunlight over shadows. Fayetteville’s future depends on it.
Thank you for reading Up & Coming Weekly. Comments and insights are always welcome.