WHQR's Sunday Edition is a free weekly newsletter delivered every Sunday morning. You can sign up for Sunday Edition here.
“Ur story kinda sucked.”
That’s the text message I got Friday night, referring to this week’s report that the City of Wilmington had fired the top two employees in its recycling and trash division. The texter was one of several people who had tipped me off about the terminations of Public Services Director Dave Mayes and Superintendent of Recycling and Trash Rick Porter late last month.
Now, the texter felt I’d reported a bogus version of events to help out Becky Hawke, the city’s new manager, who was hired last May.
“I put more credit in you being a reporter,” they wrote.
The truth is, I don't know Hawke and don’t have an interest in hurting or helping her career. But I admit, it was tough to report more than the basics on this story. I’d heard plenty of scuttlebutt, but nothing concrete. The only things we could really get on the record about the firings came from the termination letters, turned over by the city clerk’s office in response to a public records request I filed after getting the initial tip.
Those letters paint a troubling picture: “Allegations involving timecard fraud, task pay abuse, substance use while on duty, compromised drug-testing procedures, retaliation concerns, conflicts of interest, and unprofessional conduct by leadership were consistently supported by witness statements, documentation, and video evidence,” according to the termination letters.
Before I ran the piece, I’d heard from several people who were surprised by the allegations, particularly those against Mayes. In the past, I’ve heard many people speak highly of Mayes, including former Councilman Charlie Rivenbark, who routinely sent concerned residents his way to help solve a myriad of issues (I’ve read nearly a decade of Rivenbark’s emails, and I can attest to that). In December, Rivenbark told me Mayes hoped to keep that relationship going.
“Dave Mayes, God love him, he said, ‘Don't stop calling me just because you ain’t here.’ He said, ‘You always got good problems, and I can help,’” Rivenbark told me.
On Thursday, prior to publishing, Rivenbark told me he didn’t have a comment.
After we published, I heard from several more people. One, who claimed they were a former city employee who worked under Mayes, said, “he’s got more integrity than most people I know.” Another suggested Mayes might be the sin-eater for more widespread problems, and that an internal reorganization was coming.
After I posted the story on Facebook, Jessica Cannon, a retired physician who serves on the CFPUA board, commented, speaking highly of Mayes and expressing alarm at his firing.
“I have worked with Dave Mayes closely on the City’s Clean Energy Advisory Committee for four years. In my experience, he is a person of integrity and thoughtfulness, and has always demonstrated sound judgment. His leadership will be deeply missed. I am disappointed by this decision and sincerely hope the city exercised the utmost diligence before taking such a significant step," she told me when I followed up to ask her about it.
I don’t know the extent to which city council was aware of the situation – two members of council responded to my post with the eyeballs emoji, usually used to indicate someone is paying attention to something – or how much they’ll be able to discuss publicly. The city is also unlikely to provide more beyond this statement:
While we cannot comment on specific personnel matters, accountability, integrity, and adherence to established policies, rules, and laws are fundamental to any high-performing local government that strives to deliver excellent service to its customers. We are very pleased with the City's direction and look forward to the future.
(And yes, the incorporated ‘royal We’ of cityspeak causes some silly syntax and semantics, in this case, literally translating to, “the city is pleased with the city.”)
Some of this is due to the notorious opacity of the state’s personnel laws, which can only be surmounted when the public’s faith in the government is in sincere jeopardy (and I don’t think the city would agree we’re there, at this point). Some of this is also due to the city’s natural aversion to potential legal liability, I suspect.
Around the same time Mayes and Porter were fired, Zoning Administrator Kathryn Thurston resigned. On Friday, the city confirmed her resignation was not related to the investigation into the recycling and trash division. Thurston told StarNews that she was “consulting with counsel,” and couldn’t comment. There’s nothing conclusive about that – though it’s hard to imagine why you’d need an attorney if you were resigning to, say, spend more time with your family or pursue a long-neglected hobby.
But, looking at the bigger picture, as many have noted to me, Thurston isn’t the only top employee to have left recently.
Since Hawke was hired, I’ve been getting calls and messages about the comings and goings at the city. In November, I heard about the pending departures of Deputy Manager Chad McEwen and Economic Development Director Aubrey Parsley, who also oversaw the increasingly unfeasible rail-realignment project. Shortly afterward, the city confirmed they had both resigned.
McEwen and Parsley’s departures came just a few weeks after Hawke hired Dennis LaCaria for a new chief of staff position to make sure “the team aligns with the new leader’s vision.” The high-paid, high-ranking position didn’t require council approval, though the city said council was “aware and supportive.” I heard grumblings from some city staff – but I’ve also heard from community organizations that LaCaria has proved an effective addition to the city’s leadership team.
A downtown business owner, who has been sending me leads for a long time, wrote me to say he found all this “highly unusual.” I noted that turnover under a new administration isn’t uncommon, but he disagreed that this was run-of-the-mill. It does, to say the least, seem like something is certainly happening behind closed doors in city hall.
It’s hard for me to believe the city would make up the serious allegations against the recycling and trash division out of whole cloth. But, at the same time, there’s a lack of depth and detail to the termination letters – which both say more than they probably need to and less than a journalist might like. I’ve seen employees fired for less, and employees do far worse and not get fired. Context is everything.
More broadly, is it likely that Becky Hawke inherited a completely corrupt city government? A few hyperbolic posts online aside, I’ve seen no evidence of that.
Is it possible that there’s an entrenched status quo that has gone unchallenged under the administration of Tony Caudle and Sterling Cheatham before him? Sure. In fact, I’d bet money on it. And I wouldn't be surprised if some employees rather liked that status quo, and might leave if it changed, especially if they were on the fence about their job anyway.
Would I be shocked to learn that Hawke has pressured some top employees to either get with the program or pack up their desks? Not really – but as of right now, I don’t have anything concrete to show that’s what’s happened.
Do I think the shake-up in city hall is done? No
Editor's Notes: The Endowment, Novant, and Campaign Happenings
Novant: This week, Novant announced plans to invest a “monumental” $1 billion in the Wilmington region, including a new heart and vascular care patient tower on NHRMC’s main campus, a reconfiguration of two floors at the existing hospital facility to optimize clinical space, and a new rehabilitation hospital on the Wrightsville Avenue campus. It’s a major announcement that reflects Novant’s contractual agreement to invest billions in the region as part of its purchase of NHRMC five years ago.
The investment is planned over the next five to seven years, pending state review and – in some cases – approval under North Carolina’s certificate of need law.
On Monday morning, Ernie Bovio – former NHRMC president and current president of Novant’s coastal region – will present to the New Hanover Board of Commissioners. Based on their conversation at Thursday’s agenda meeting, commissioners may have some questions about whether the planned improvements will help alleviate some of the existing quality-of-care concerns, about which much has been written and said (certainly by me).
There’s a real demand for these services, and experts I’ve asked casually tell me it’s a crucial part of Novant’s role in providing healthcare for the region. But, by the same token, those experts note that heart and vascular care is extremely profitable. That’s not to demonize Novant for making money – that’s a necessary part of the business. But we’ll be asking whether Novant’s investment decisions are appropriately balancing what's best for attracting new patients with what’s best for the patients they already have.
(And yes, I know it takes some chutzpah to be critical of a $1 billion investment. But the bigger the pricetag, the bigger the questions.)
The Endowment: This week, The Endowment appointed Sophie Dagenais as its new CEO and President; she has served as the interim head of the foundation since July, when former CEO Dan Winslow left.
This, I hope, is a relief for local nonprofits, at least in terms of providing some stability and continuity. I’ve heard from many that re-learning and renegotiating their relationships with The Endowment, after founding CEO William Buster left and Winslow came in, was a trying experience. The prospect of doing the whole ‘getting to know you’ thing with a third completely new CEO in as many years wasn’t particularly alluring.
It’s also probably a relief for County Manager Chris Coudriet, as we alluded to this week after the announcement. Just about everyone I know who follows The Endowment has asked me if Coudriet was next in line. Reportedly, Coudriet was asked so often that, at one point, he’d considered putting out a statement just so he wouldn’t have to keep saying ‘not interested.’
Dagenais faces serious headwinds, including criticism from some campaigning Democrats, a host of seemingly intractable social issues and high-dollar capital projects clamoring for funding, curmudgeonly journalists, and a board of directors notorious for being overinvolved. And she has two years to ramp up The Endowment’s annual grant giving to $85 million or more, to satisfy IRS requirements – that’s cash out the door, by the way, not multi-year commitments. This year’s budget is around $58 million, so there’s a way to go.
(And yes, it takes even more chutzpah to look a $85 million gift horse in the mouth, let alone give it a root canal. But pushing that much money out into the community is daunting. The good news is that there’s a world of good to be done with that kind of cash.)
Elections: Early voting started this week, which means we’re on high alert for campaign shenanigans. That’s right, we’re talking stolen signs, misleading sample ballots, questionable comments or social media posts, and – of course – February Surprises (like October Surprises, but for the primary election).
It’s hard to track every one of these down and report it out, but I’m keeping a running list. Top hits so far include a candidate excluded from a cartoonified AI group photo, an F-bomb dropped at one of our campaign forums (I have no pearls to clutch on this front, but I’m curious about the emotion behind the language), the obligatory circular firing squads for both the Democrats and Republicans, and the first campaign video I’ve seen for a local primary candidate. Related: I sense that campaign spending is going to be berserk this year.
Maybe we’ll do some notes from the campaign trail in a future newsletter. In the meantime, send me your favorites
