The widow of the late Aubrey Brent Jr. asks that the city council rescind their votes that allowed another name to be added as a memorialization honor to Prentiss Street.
During Monday’s city council meeting, Denise Brent said adding another honorary name to the city street was “disrespectful” to her and to the memory of her late husband, adding that she was not personally contacted prior to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen approving the addition.
During the Feb. 23 board meeting, the city council approved adding the late David Joe Starling, the father of Mayor David Starling, as a memorialization honor to Prentiss Street.
Brent said when she read the previously published notice of the hearing in The Herald, she said she contacted Starling.
“He (Starling) told me that he abstained from the vote and that the attorney looked into it and that it was OK to have more than one name memorialized on one street,” Brent said. “I told him that I had never seen that done in Yazoo City. It has always been one name per street in Yazoo City.”
During the Jan. 23 board meeting when the public hearing to add the late Starling’s name as an honorary street was set, Starling did recuse himself from the vote with the remaining city council members in support of the hearing.
When the hearing was held on Feb. 23, all five board members, including Starling, did vote in support of the addition. Brent was not in attendance during the public hearing.
“Why wasn’t there any common courtesy or dialogue with me, knowing…the street had already been memorialized in honor of my husband, my late husband, five and a half years ago,” Brent said. “This was done so disrespectful to me, and it did hurt me. I am still hurt by it.”
Starling told Brent that the public hearing notice was published twice in The Herald, adding that the public hearing was held.
“We certainly cannot be blamed that you did not see it, and you did not show up at prior board meetings to discuss your, as you say, disrespect,” Starling said. “We can have a hundred names if we want. They just have to be stacked. Your husband’s name will not come down. It will be both of them. I think that was disrespect.”
Brent said the Starling family are one of her neighbors, adding that Starling should have personally contacted her.
“Let’s not play games,” she said. “Don’t play games with me. You could have said something to me, and you chose not to. You know why you didn’t? Because you knew that I would not have liked it. You should not have been the one to spearhead this.”
Brent said her late husband served as a city alderman for 22 years.
“With respect to his service to this community, he has earned that honor that he has on Prentiss Avenue,” she said. “He earned that memorialization by himself. I don’t think another name should be on there. No disrespect to you or your father, but I don’t think it should be shared.”
Brent asked the city council to honor her late husband by rescinding their votes.
“This was based on disrespect and nepotism,” she added.
Alderwoman Elizabeth Thomas said she based her approval because she thought Starling had talked to Brent about the matter. With Brent not being present at the hearing, she said she assumed everything was settled.
“I said out loud, ‘I ain’t touching this,’” Thomas said. “He (Starling) said ‘I will talk with her.’ I thought had had talked to you.”
Starling said Thomas was “playing on words.”
“I said when this comes to pass, if it does, I will talk to Denise,” Starling said.
“Did you talk to me when this occurred,” asked Brent.
“Denise, I don’t owe that to you,” Starling replied.
“Well, you owe that respect to my husband,” Brent added.
After the city council meeting ended, Starling told The Herald he did not appreciate the way the matter was handled during the open meeting.
“I didn’t appreciate the play on words that came from it,” he said. “I said ‘I will deal with it.’ That’s not saying when I get up from here, I’m going to call her and discuss it with her. She had every opportunity to look at that newspaper like everybody else. But it gives the persona that I said something that I didn’t say. I said that when she had a fit, like she had today, then I would be the one to address it. There was some conspiring about what happened today.”
“I am not playing on words,” Thomas replied.
Thomas said she stood by her comment that she voted in support of the matter because she felt like Starling had spoken to Brent prior to the vote. However, Starling also stands by his comment, adding that anyone on the board could have approached Brent prior to the vote, adding that no one did.
