Graham’s city council voted 4-0 to force mayor Chelsea Dickey to pay a $260 registration fee for a conference – which the council had blocked her from attending earlier this year – following a brief but contentious discussion during the council’s latest meeting Tuesday night.
The invoice was listed on the council’s meeting agenda for Tuesday night because city manager Megan Garner said she wanted direction from the council about whether Dickey should be required to reimburse the city for the registration fee for the North Carolina Main Street conference this spring.
The council also voted 4-1, with Dickey opposed, to recuse her from both the discussion and subsequent vote that ultimately directed her to pay the $260 registration fee for the North Carolina Main Street conference this spring, with council member Bonnie Whitaker reasoning that Dickey stood to gain financially from participating and voting on the matter.
Mayor pro tem Ricky Hall joined Whitaker and councilmen Bobby Chin and Jim Young in voting in favor of requiring Dickey’s recusal.
Prior to the council’s vote to recuse her from the discussion and vote, Dickey acknowledged that assistant city manager Aaron Holland had told her in March that she’d have to pay for the conference registration fee if the council did not vote to allow her to attend it.
“This was a little bit of a red flag then. I don’t know of a lot of mayors getting invoiced, but the timeline was so crunched then, I didn’t look into it. Since then, I have called the North Carolina League of Municipalities; they [said] if we had any ordinances, or laws, or protocols [instructing] us to pay back invoices, that is indeed what we should do.
“But if not, it really speaks to the communication between the city manager and the council – and what her authority looks like to make purchases or what policies we have in place so that these invoices have the policy. I am happy to pay this invoice. I just need to know that there is actually [a] policy.”
– Graham mayor Chelsea Dickey
“This was a little bit of a red flag then,” Dickey said Tuesday night. “I don’t know of a lot of mayors getting invoiced, but the timeline was so crunched then, I didn’t look into it. Since then, I have called the North Carolina League of Municipalities; they [said] if we had any ordinances, or laws, or protocols [instructing] us to pay back invoices, that is indeed what we should do.
“But if not,” she said, “it really speaks to the communication between the city manager and the council – and what her authority looks like to make purchases or what policies we have in place so that these invoices have the policy. I am happy to pay this invoice. I just need to know that there is actually [a] policy.”
Dickey acknowledged in an earlier interview with The Alamance News that she’d attended the conference for a few hours during the first day, March 10.
During their meeting later the same night, March 10, a majority of the council indeed voted not to allow the mayor to attend the conference. The council also voted 3-2, with Dickey and Young opposed, that same night to reject an anonymous donation of $1,500 that had been designated for Dickey’s cost to attend the conference.
“What we made clear was we didn’t think accepting donations for council travel was a good precedent to set [referring to the vote in March to reject the anonymous donation]. The mayor was made fully aware there was no funding for her to attend the conference.”
– Graham city council member Bonnie Whitaker
“What we made clear was we didn’t think accepting donations for council travel was a good precedent to set,” Whitaker recalled this week, referring to the vote in March to reject the anonymous donation. “The mayor was made fully aware there was no funding for her to attend the conference.”
Dickey started laughing – she told the newspaper Wednesday she couldn’t remember why – prompting an outburst by Whitaker.
“Hey, hey – take care of it; bang the gavel,” Whitaker told the mayor, apparently referring to audible comments from community members who attended Tuesday night’s meeting.
Dickey immediately stepped down from the dais, exited the council chambers, and stepped into an adjoining hallway at City Hall.
Garner recalled for the council Tuesday night that the council had “directed” the staff in 2022 that Graham would no longer participate in the Main Street program, and funding for the program was “zeroed out” in the city’s budget for the next fiscal year.
“I, as staff, assistant city manager Aaron Holland, as staff, [do] not have the authority to override a directive provided to us by [the] city council,” Garner explained Tuesday night. “It’s a similar situation with the prior mayor; there was attendance requested at a national Main Street conference. Staff handled it the same way: we put it as a budget amendment on the agenda for [the city council] because we as staff cannot override the directives given to us.” [Garner didn’t specify whether the earlier request by a prior mayor had been funded by the council’s budget for travel, or whether that mayor had attended the national conference.]
Chin: No benefit from Main Street program
Several years ago, the council had discussed what benefit the city had gained from participating in the Main Street program, Chin said Tuesday night. “The answer was nothing. They did not help us bring any new businesses to Graham.
“So when the mayor wanted to go to the conference, we talked about it, and we said, ‘why do we want to send you to a conference we have not gained anything from when we participated with them?’ But she went anyway, so that’s why we’re here now. So now she wants you, the taxpayers, to pay for something she was [instructed] not to go to. If you go to the Main Street website and read what it costs to be a member, it’s not cheap for the community. As you can see, our downtown is thriving, and more businesses are expected to come. So why should we pay for something we are bringing ourselves?”
– Graham city councilman Bobby Chin
“However, they wanted us to have somebody on staff who never brought any businesses to downtown, and then they expected the city to levy a tax on all the businesses downtown that they would get,” Chin said. “Why would we want to add a tax to our businesses? That’s why in 2023 we made the motion to strike that budget line and remove ourselves from the Main Street conference.
“So when the mayor wanted to go to the conference, we talked about it, and we said, ‘why do we want to send you to a conference we have not gained anything from when we participated with them?’” Chin added. “But she went anyway, so that’s why we’re here now. So now she wants you, the taxpayers, to pay for something she was [instructed] not to go to. If you go to the Main Street website and read what it costs to be a member, it’s not cheap for the community. As you can see, our downtown is thriving, and more businesses are expected to come. So why should we pay for something we are bringing ourselves?”
Whitaker said that Dickey should be treated the same as any other citizen that owed money to the city. “I need to be treated the same way; we all need to be treated the same way if we owe money. I do think she should have to pay it.”
Young asked, “So if I’d said I’m not going to reimburse the city for that $50 pizza I got from Jimmy V’s [Osteria & Bar in Raleigh, during the N.C. League of Municipalities’ 2026 City Vision conference from May 5 to May 7], we would be having the same conversation, right?”
“Correct,” Garner responded.
The council voted 4-0 on a motion by Young to “inform the mayor that she owes the $260.” Chin, Whitaker, and Hall all voted in favor.
The council also voted 4-0 to approve a motion suggested by Garner to bring Dickey back to the dais.
Dickey asks for ‘statute, ordinance, or legal reference’ requiring reimbursement
After Whitaker informed the mayor that the council had voted to inform the mayor that she owes the $260, Dickey asked, “Is there a place legally – in our ordinance or our policy – that outlines that? I had requested that of Ms. Garner three weeks ago.”
In an email June 15 – one of 10 emails between the mayor, Garner, and Holland about the Main Street conference registration fee that were included in the council’s meeting packet for Tuesday night – Dickey had said she would pay the fee, contingent upon the provision of an “applicable statute, ordinance, or legal reference” requiring her to do so.
“Because you were directed not to go and chose to do that anyway,” Whitaker responded. “We’re treating you the same way we would treat any citizen or any of us had we done that.”
Dickey conceded the point but reiterated, “We usually have ordinances and policies we can uphold for those citizens.”
Chin said, “There was no budget line item for your trip.”
“Right, and I didn’t purchase the ticket – that was the city manager’s office,” Dickey countered. “What I’m saying is: if we’re unhappy with how this is going, we either need to address the city manager’s process for spending so we can approve everything, or we can put a policy in place that dictates invoices should be paid back and go from there.”
For his part, Young reminded Dickey that she’d sent an email saying she would “take care of it several months ago.”
Dickey acknowledged doing so, but said she’d called the N.C. League of Municipalities first, and they directed her to ask some questions.
“Man, I should have talked to them before I paid for that pizza I got,” Young shot back.
Attorney: City can garnish mayor’s compensation
One of the city’s attorneys, Bryan Coleman, later told Dickey that her registration for the trip effectively constituted a legally binding contract, citing a state law that allows the city to garnish the compensation she receives in exchange for her duties as mayor.
“The determining factor is, did the city enter into a contract for services. It can be a seminar. . . You can garnish the wages of the mayor, or whoever went, to receive that money back. The registration fee makes it a contract, I believe.”
– City attorney Bryan Coleman in memo about garnishing mayor’s salary
“The determining factor is, did the city enter into a contract for services,” Coleman elaborated. “It can be a seminar…You can garnish the wages of the mayor, or whoever went, to receive that money back. The registration fee makes it a contract, I believe.”
Dickey said she wanted to discuss the matter further with the School of Government at UNC, and the city’s other attorney, Bob Ward, before paying the invoice.
“I understand, but at the time, it was still a red flag,” she added. “Like I said, I thought this was a bigger conversation about what policies we do or do not have in place.”
Young responded, “It’s worth it to me to pay the $260 just so we can get [done] with this meeting. Can I do that, Megan? You want to make it a bigger conversation; it doesn’t need to be. You committed that you would reimburse the city for that; you were told you would have to reimburse the city for that.”
“[I don’t know] what good the recusal was. All you did was come in here and start talking again. . . We directed you to pay it, so you need to pay it.”
– Graham council member Bonnie Whitaker
“[I don’t know] what good the recusal was,” Whitaker said Tuesday night. “All you did was come in here and start talking again. . . We directed you to pay it, so you need to pay it.”
Dickey told the newspaper Wednesday afternoon that she wasn’t sure about whether the council had exhausted its $7,000 annual allocation for travel by the time the 2025-26 fiscal year ended on June 30.
