logo
Charlotte councilwoman Tiawana Brown largely avoids discussing indictment at town hall

Charlotte councilwoman Tiawana Brown largely avoids discussing indictment at town hall

Yahoo7 days ago

Charlotte City Council member Tiawana Brown largely avoided discussing her federal fraud charges Wednesday in a town hall meeting — her second time facing constituents since being indicted.
It took two hours for the indictment to come up during the event at the Good Shepard Church in the Steele Creek area.
Instead, the vast majority of the town hall featured presentations from city staff on issues ranging from crime statistics to traffic and infrastructure. About 30 minutes of questions from attendees lined up at microphones followed, but no one asked about the charges.
Only in her closing remarks did Brown allude to her situation, calling the last six days some of the most difficult of her life.
Brown and her adult daughters, Tijema Brown and Antionette Rouse, were indicted last week on charges of wire fraud conspiracy and wire fraud. Charlotte's U.S. attorney alleged they falsified loan applications for federal pandemic relief funds and spent loan money on personal expenses, including a lavish birthday party for Brown.
They all pleaded not guilty during their first court appearance Friday, and she's pledged to stay in office and run for reelection. The 53-year-old Democrat is in her first term in office representing west Charlotte's District 3. She's the first formerly incarcerated person to serve on the Charlotte City Council.
Wednesday's event marked one of Brown's first public appearances since the indictment.
She spoke briefly to reporters while leaving court Friday and attended Monday's City Council meeting. The latter was her first time publicly facing constituents, and she spoke sparingly and declined to talk to reporters.
At Wednesday's town hall, Brown largely served as a moderator.
During the question and answer portion, where constituents primarily focused on the impacts of growth on District 3's infrastructure, Brown deferred to staff or offered to follow up with residents individually to provide a more detailed answer to their questions.
Attendees at the meeting did not appear to have their questions pre-screened.
In her closing remarks to the crowd, Brown said 'nothing has changed' and asked for prayers for her family.
'I'm committed to this community,' she said. '... I will continue to show up and do the work that I was elected by you to do. It's not my seat — it's your seat.'
Brown then shook hands and exchanged hugs with some in the crowd. She told reporters as she left the event she wasn't surprised by the lack of questions from attendees about her indictment.
'They care about my service. They care about me as a human being,' she said.
But some in the audience, including resident Christina Syndergaard, said getting clarity about the indictment was part of why they came out Wednesday evening.
'I don't know a ton about it, but what I do know is I'd like to see all the details that (prosecutors) have, what kind of incriminating evidence they have against her,' she said.
Syndergaard, who voted for Brown in 2023, said she didn't feel like Brown did 'a good job' addressing the indictment during the town hall and wondered why no one asked about the case.
She wanted to see the council member take a more direct approach to the issue.
'Be upfront about it,' she said. '... It didn't feel super transparent to me.'
Observer reporter Desiree Mathurin contributed to this story.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'
Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'

Fox News

time16 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'

FIRST ON FOX: Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., on Wednesday will introduce legislation that would ban congressional stock trading, serving as the House companion bill to Sen. Josh Hawley's, R-Mo., "PELOSI Act" in the Senate. Alford's proposed bill would ban lawmakers and their spouses from holding, purchasing or selling individual stocks while in office, but it allows investments in diversified mutual funds, exchange-traded funds or U.S. Treasury bonds. If passed, current lawmakers would have 180 days to comply with the legislation. Likewise, newly elected lawmakers must achieve compliance within 180 days of entering office. "As public servants, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard and avoid the mere appearance of corruption," Alford said in a statement. "Unfortunately, too many members of Congress are engaging in suspicious stock trades based on non-public information to enrich themselves." "These gross violations of the public trust make clear: we must finally take action to ban members and their spouses from owning or selling individual stocks," he added. Under the proposed legislation, lawmakers who continue to make wrongful transactions would be required to hand over any profits they made to the U.S. Treasury Department. The House or Senate ethics committees could also impose a fine on such lawmakers amounting to 10% of each wrongful transaction. House Speaker Mike Johnson endorsed a stock trading ban on Wednesday, saying "a few bad actors" have ruined Americans' trust in lawmakers on the issue. "You want me to tell you my honest opinion on that? I'm in favor of that, because I don't think we should have any appearance of impropriety here," he told reporters during a press conference. President Donald Trump himself endorsed the same ban for members of Congress in an interview with Time magazine last month. "I watched Nancy Pelosi get rich through insider information, and I would be okay with it. If they send that to me, I would do it," he said of a trading ban. "You'll sign it?" the reporter pressed. "Absolutely," Trump responded. Democrats in the House of Representatives have also expressed support for a ban, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., throwing his weight behind the proposal last week.

Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map
Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map

CBS News

time17 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map

Less than a day after Tarrant County commissioners approved a controversial redistricting proposal, a group of citizens filed a lawsuit claiming intentional discrimination. According to the Lone Star Project, the lawsuit claims that Tarrant County Judge Tim O'Hare and his followers engaged in intentional racial discrimination in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution by drawing the new district lines. "Intentional discrimination is still against the law," said lead legal counsel for the citizen plaintiffs, Chad Dunn. "The map they drew, the process they used to draw it, and the animosity shown to the citizens of Tarrant County violate the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution." Hundreds of residents speak out for, against the redistricting More than 200 people spoke out about redrawing boundary lines during public comment Tuesday night. The majority who spoke were against redistricting, including the mayors of Arlington, Mansfield and Forest Hills. There were still several speakers who expressed their support. Several used the phrase "don't Dallas my Tarrant." Tarrant County "I want to say that I fully support deterring redistricting efforts. These lines haven't been updated since 2010," said Carlos Turcios, the community development committee chairman for the Tarrant Republican Party. Commissioners moved into executive session around 3 p.m. on Tuesday after some tense moments between the two Democrats and the three Republicans. As Commissioner Alisa Simmons expressed all the reasons she is against redistricting, Judge Tim O'Hare abruptly moved to executive session in an effort to limit her comments. O'Hare is spearheading this process and has been clear that it's about partisan politics. He wants another Republican seat on the court to ensure conservative leadership for the next decade. "It's a very divided country and the parties, I'm not sure, have never been further apart in their beliefs," O'Hare said. "I don't apologize for being a Republican. I don't apologize for being a conservative." "It's not partisan. It is racism." Critics believe the redistricting is racial gerrymandering, saying it goes beyond partisan politics and say it dilutes the voting power of minorities. "Absolutely, it's not partisan. It is racism," Simmons said during the meeting. The new map does appear to take areas with high Black and brown populations from precinct two and put them in precinct one. SMU political science professor Calvin Jillson said what the court did is not unusual, but the legality of the new lines comes down to intentions. "Oh, this absolutely gerrymandering – it is the redrawing of electoral boundaries for partisan purposes," Jillson said. "The question is whether the purposes behind the redrawing were actually political, in which case gerrymandering is legal, or racial discrimination, in which case it would not be legal." Check out more on the CBS News Texas YouTube page: contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store