Monticello Council Re-Votes on Policy

The Monticello City Council voted 3-2 Tuesday to amend the current personnel policy to make it state that in the case of an appeal of termination it must go before the entire Council for a final vote.

Councilpersons Larry Thurman, Cornell Williams, and Randy Strozier voted for the amendment, and Mayor Pro Tem Bobby Jacobs, and Councilwoman Katherine Alexander against.

This change came as the most recent policy stated that an appeal had to be made to the City Manager, and if he terminated the employee initially, then some deemed it against due process to appeal to that same person.

The council also voted on this at last month’s meeting, however initially the vote was two for the revision, one against and one abstention. In the previous meeting Mayor Bryan Standifer was the tie breaking vote and was directed by City Attorney Joe Reitman to be the deciding vote. Upon looking into it further, in the city charter an abstention is the same as being absent during a vote.

Councilman Randy Strozier initially said “I move to revoke the policy back to the original where the Council has the final say in the final termination.”

{{more}}

He was then asked about a date, as to when the policywas worded in that form, and City Manager Bob Schwartz noted that it had to be before the date previously noted in 2011, and as far as he knows earlier, perhaps in the 1990s.

Mr. Strozier said, “I don’t have that in front of me.”

Mayor Standifer asked if it was a motion or if there were comments, in which Mr. Strozier replied, “I’m ready to vote on it. I want it to be the way it was before.”

Councilperson Katherine Alexander asked, “before? In 1809?”

Mr. Stozier replied, “I want it to be how it was when the council had the authority.”

He then made it in the form of a motion. “Under the appeal process, I want the final termination to come back to the Council.” Councilman Larry Thurman seconded.

Mrs. Alexander stated that there was already a chain of command in place and that if that ruling was brought back before the Council then the hierarchy that is already in place for that purpose is void. She said “we already have someone in place to deal with issues such as this. We are policy makers and there are people in place to handle these situations. We should not change the way we play in the middle of the game.”

“I truly believe that we have control of the City Manager and I believe that we shouldn’t intrude in the proper channels that have been in place,” said Councilwoman Alexander.

Mr. Strozier was then handed a paper by Martha Pompey, and he said “I have it now,” and read from a paper about when the Council had the authority on grievances that were brought before the city.

Councilwoman Alexander asked “When was that written?” She stated that the attorney had said at the last called meeting that the work place changes annually or even more often, so the date and the relevance of that in the City today was important to know.

Mr. Reitman then addressed the Council and the audience stating that once this personnel policy change was made, that the work needed to continue in the direction that the Council was moving. To keep an updated policy and to possibly look at Social Circle’s and other surrounding cities that were similar. He noted that the personnel manual needed to be up to par and that he was not sure of the due process but according to the current charter, the Council could uphold or reverse the City Manager’s ruling.

Mr. Jacobs said, “I understand that politics are at play here. I think that its sad that this board has been pulled and that people have set a precedence here. I know that we set a precedence here tonight and the pendulum only goes so far one way, before it comes back.”

The motion was then restated twice. When asked to restate by the Mayor, Councilman Strozier said “I make a motion that the final termination process will come before the council. Any termination.”

Then clarification was sought—asking if the appeal of termination or all terminations. The city attorney said that he had never seen it done before where all terminations come before the council. So then it was restated to say “the appeal of the final termination process will come before the Council, under the personnel policy.”

The Council heard from Russell Bennett on behalf of Monticello Baptist Church on the construction of a parking lot. He proposed that there was more parking needed for the church, and with the proposed layout that was done by Engineer Robert Jordan, it would provide parking for the Square and also for football games, aiding in the betterment for all in the community.

Mr. Bennett said that the land would be purchased by the church and a small piece was owned by the city between the Courthouse and the church. He said that the revamp would make an actual T intersection rather than the curve that is currently on Towee Street. Mr. Schwartz noted that this idea came before the Council in 2004, so it wasn’t the first time.

Councilman Stozier asked about a sewer pipe that ran back behind that lot, and if the city would absorb any costs.

Mr. Bennett answered that the sewer line runs behind the current church parking lot, and that there was no pipe in the intended area. He also said that it was more efficient to make a new parking lot rather than replace the old pipe and expand further behind the church as the drop off was too steep and it would be more work and more money.

As far as the cost goes, Mr. Bennett stated that it would cost the city something, hopefully minimal costs, but some. All of the council agreed that Monticello Baptist should proceed with the project and get back to them with any updates.

The consent agenda was brought to a vote and failed the first time with a 2-3 vote. This agenda included the payables for July, the minutes from the July meetings, the Municipal Competitive Trust Drawdown, and the approval of Janell Wild to the Downtown Development Authority.

Mayor Standifer asked if there were any questions, which was the second time he asked, and Mr. Strozier asked about the payables to Sabrina Cape, which was contracted at $1,000 a month and there were two checks written in July. City Clerk Peggy Billerman said that Mrs. Cape’s rate had not changed that she only wrote a check when invoiced and that the June invoice was late, therefore June and July had been paid in July, but August had not been paid yet.

There was also a question on the drawdown. Mr. Strozier asked “if we continue drawing down on that particular fund, I feel like it is a hurt rather than a help.”

Mayor Standifer said, “this drawdown is for police vehicles, a bucket truck, etc. that we had previously bought and are making payments on. These monies are budgeted and we planned for this.”

Mr. Schwartz said that “there is $276,461.46 in the Competitive Account currently and we pay as payments come in. We budgeted $470,000 for the year with the end of year balance being $187,101, which is where we like to be.”

Then each item on the consent agenda was voted on individually. The minutes passed unanimously, the payables passed with a 4-1 vote with Councilman Williams voting no, but offered no explanation.

The GMA drawdown was then voted on and failed for lack of a second on the motion to approve made by Councilman Thurman.

City Manager Schwartz said, “Council we’re going to default on our loans. They’re going to come and repo our equipment.”

The vote was then taken and passed with the Mayor Pro Tem making the motion, and Mr. Thurman seconding. Katherine Alexander voted yes, Councilmen Williams and Strozier both voted no.

Janell Wild was then unanimously voted to be put on the Downtown Development Authority (DDA).