The Raleigh City Council’s surprise dismantling of citizen advisory councils two weeks ago sent shockwaves through the city’s political circles.
Some neighborhood advocates accused the council of selling out to developers, as CACs offered them an outlet to voice objections to projects. The council’s pro-growth supporters rejoiced, calling the CACs a relic of a bygone era and brushing aside the cloak-and-dagger manner with which they were dispatched.
On Tuesday, the city’s staff is scheduled to update the council on its progress finding a consultant to develop a new framework for community engagement. Mayor Mary-Ann Baldwin says she doesn’t believe one has been chosen yet—selecting one may require a bidding process—but she’s hopeful the staff will sort it out within a month.
The decision to end CACs was spearheaded by council newcomer Saige Martin, who whipped votes in secret ahead of the February 4 meeting. Not even council member David Cox knew about the decision before he was handed a paper copy of the four motions Martin prepared. The public was blindsided, too; the motions weren’t on the agenda, and the public wasn’t given a chance to speak on them.
CACs have been around since the 1970s, when they were established in an effort to snag federal block grants. They became a fixture of Raleigh’s civic landscape, amassing political power and exerting influence over rezoning cases. (Ten rezoning cases are still slated to go before CACs in the next month; the council permitted them to hear pending cases through March 17.)
Bob Geary, a city planning commission member and former INDY columnist, says the system needed to be reformed. But ditching it all together “makes little sense.”
“CACs served an important purpose,” Geary says. “Still, despite the constraints imposed by the city, the CACs proved useful over many years’ time as a common ground for staff and residents to meet and share basic information and to discuss issues as they arose.”
Geary has proposed holding planning commission hearings at night to fill in the void left behind by CACs and make meetings more accessible for residents. That idea won’t be vetted until the commission’s March retreat.
Meanwhile, Cox, a CAC proponent, attempted to take matters into his own hands, vowing on his blog to hold community meetings of his own.
However, when he asked city manager Ruffin Hall if he could use staff members at these meetings, he was told he’d need the full council’s approval, Cox posted on Facebook last week.
Cox—who also suggested on Facebook that the council’s CAC vote could sour him on affordable housing and parks bonds expected to be on the ballot in November—did not return a call seeking comment.
Baldwin says Cox’s inquiry will be “clarified” at Tuesday’s meeting, although she did not elaborate.
Former city council member Stef Mendell has been an outspoken advocate online for bringing back CACs (she, too, did not return a phone call seeking comment). On Saturday, Mendell shared on Twitter that one of the more than 200 Wake County Democratic Party precincts voted unanimously in favor of a resolution to reinstate CACs.
The county party will consider such resolutions at its convention in March. (The city council is composed of seven Democrats and one unaffiliated member.)
Residents will still have the opportunity to learn about rezoning cases through meetings held by developers, as required by city code, Baldwin says, and the council might add a second required meeting for cases deemed “impactful.” Residents within 1,000 feet of the proposed rezoning would be notified about those meetings.
Since the council voted to eliminate CACs, Martin has been meeting with CAC chairs to discuss the next steps. Although he acknowledges that “the process sucked,” he says it was a necessary evil.
Now, he argues, there’s hope that the city’s 2021 budget might include an office of community engagement. That would allow residents to weigh in on the affordable housing and parks bonds.
“No matter what we did, there was going to be a storm,” Martin says. “There was no process that was going to be perfect. My goal was to move as quickly as possible to get to the end result.”
Contact Raleigh news editor Leigh Tauss at ltauss@indyweek.com.
Support independent local journalism. Join the INDY Press Club to help us keep fearless watchdog reporting and essential arts and culture coverage viable in the Triangle.
“Justifying” the slimy, underhanded approach to the disenfranchisement of all Raleigh citizens on this issue by saying “We didn’t want a fight” reveals Saige Martin’s disdain for opinions other than his own. An immediate recall of this decision is appropriate. An immediate recall of this official is necessary. This decision will haunt them all.
Amazing that “journalist” Leigh Tauss left out her role in the Mayor Baldwin/City Council shameful sneak attack on Raleigh’s CACs. She was alerted to the plan and cooperated to keep it secret until minutes after they sprung it. Even the Indy Week said nothing would wipe away the stink of the way this was done. Every councilor except David Cox and Corey Branch voted that nothing was better than our CACs. Let’s NOT give Councilor Branch much credit as he was aware of the secret plan and was complicit in their sneak attack. Even more shameful was that CACs were started to give African American and other underrepresented residents a voice in city affairs.
Raleigh is in DEEP trouble if this is how the new council will do business. Not having any discussion or keeping the CAC’s running UNTIL they have a replacement is the worst kind of governance possible. Reminds me of the way Washington is working right now. This is not a democracy.