City Council - Special Meeting

Mayor Pro Tem, you're looking for the first item on the agenda?

Mayor Pro Tem, point of clarity, do we need a motion to ratify the five-minute rule? To the attorney.

I move that we allocate a maximum of 5 minutes per person per item. On the agenda.

Remember to this is a temporary rule you put it in specifically for this call meeting. The only concern so it's temporary just want this call me to thank you very much you're welcome.

I'm stating that I have a question if you'll give me the floor I'd like to ask the question.

THE CHARTER SECTION THAT YOU'RE READING FROM INDICATING THAT THE MAYOR SIGNS, FIRST OF ALL DESCRIBES THE CEREMONIAL MAYOR THAT THIS CITY SO GRACIOUSLY HAS. IN THOSE CEREMONIAL DUTIES IT CERTAINLY DOES SAY THAT THE MAYOR DOES NOT HAVE DISCRETION IN THE MATTER. and that's as a matter of fact as you all are aware the mayor doesn't set the agenda doesn't put the items on the agenda doesn't vote and doesn't as you can see chair the meetings so you are correct in that the mayor simply signs documents with no discretion there is a caveat in law uh that is not in your charter that does not require the

How much time do I have left, Madam Clerk? I'll save my time, thank you.

Yes, councilman Turner. I don't want to get into a debate about the matter, but I do want to point out that all of these changes to the charter were created primarily by one person on the council, although the whole council approved the changes to the charter to remove that power from the mayor at the time. So the reason that it's in the position it's in now is because of that council member that put those requirements in place at the time. Be that as it may, the charter specifically says that the mayor is to sign all of these matters without any discretion in the matter, and I think it's very

the Councilman Turner, the section I'm referring to in the charter which is the violation of the appointment is not the Mayor Pro Tem and the Council making the appointment. That is, that was and did take place properly. THE SECTION THAT I'M REFERRING TO IN THE CHARTER VIOLATION REFERS TO 3.02A, THE CITY MANAGER SHALL BE APPOINTED AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION B OF THIS SECTION WITHOUT REGARD TO POLITICAL BELIEFS AND SOLELY ON THE BASIS, HERE WE GO, OF HIS OR HER EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE IN THE ACCEPTED COMPETENCIES AND PRACTICES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT. It is very specific to the qualifica

I would hope that there is a forum to address all of that and I don't think it would be at this point in time. When it comes to signing the contract. Go redress grievances and if anyone wants to challenge what has been done. I would hope that there is a platform for such.

Just to be clear as to what we been asked to do here, I think I am just want to make it perfectly clear and that is to authorize Mayor Pro Tem, collectively the council to sign this contract.

I move that the City Council authorize the Mayor Pro Tem to execute the City Manager employment agreement and any related documents necessary to implement the Council's previously approved appointment of the City Manager based on the Mayor's refusal to execute the agreement.

I think for the benefit of the public we should probably we need to feel the matters that had to be taken care of under the emergency. Agreement emergency operation.

And you do any of the few of the activities that took place by counsel in this period of vacancy of the city manager that will executed under the emergency declaration. such as the payroll having to be met because there was no one in place to do it under the normal circumstances because the city manager was out of place. There were some other matters with employment or personnel for the summer camp. Can we give an example of some of the others, or are we in order?

I understand. I'm just saying that the public, that's it. Just doing a few for the public's knowledge.

Thank you. On January 2nd, the city council adopted a resolution for banking a signatory authority and operational continuity to expand the sign and authority of the city and to preserve the city's ability to meet its financial obligation. On January 8th, the city manager resigned, creating an unexpected vacancy of the city chief administrative officer. and resulting in a period of organizational uncertainty requiring immediate legislative action to maintain government operation and ensure continuity of executive administration. And whereas the resignation of the city manager, the mayor did no

Mayor Pro Tem. If Councilman Turner is reading from an ordinance, that ordinance is not factually correct. In fact, in a meeting, the mayor did attempt to appoint an acting city manager and was the city council unanimously voted down. The mayor did not bring forth another recommendation as the city council had made it clear that the mayor's recommendations were not wanted. So your resolution is actually factually incorrect. It is on record that the mayor did attempt to make an acting city manager appointment. Should you move forward to adopt the resolution that was written that was Red, it is

I vote him. Again, I'm really trying to avoid any debate in the matter, but the fact of the matter is when the mayor makes an appointment, it must be ratified by the council. If the council does not ratify it, then the mayor has an opportunity to make another appointment. And that's where the breakdown occurred. That was never an attempt. In fact, it was stated, that's all I have, was one attempt of an appointment. So the opportunity to appoint someone else never disappeared until the time expired. So I think it's factual. The mayor failed to move to the next level to appoint an acting city ma

Councilman Turner you are absolutely correct however your resolution does not read that your resolution reads as if there was not an attempt at all and as if the city council was never presented with an acting city manager in fact the city council was presented with an acting city manager someone who by the way had already been a city manager before so no I did not have anyone else to offer to you as I mentioned that in that meeting I brought an offering You all voted it down. I'm asking that your resolution reflect that the actions were taken to attempt to appoint an acting city manager. As y

Move for approval of the resolution by the City Council for the city of Stonecrest Georgia to acknowledge and ratify the actions taken to preserve the continuity of the municipal government. Second.

I have a couple questions. In the policy, it says 5 percent above the, I mean, if you, there is a possibility to receive 5 percent above, or receive above the 5 percent standard, sorry. How is that determined? That's my question. How is it determined whether you receive 5 percent or receive above?

My remaining questions, and you can let me know if this is outside of your scope, then I guess I'll have to wait for the person who can answer the question. They're about the decision making and authority. So those questions are outside. That's correct. Okay. What about eligibility criteria? Outside. Okay. Documentation that's required.

Okay. So how are the additional duties documented for the acting status or the supplemental pay? Do you know how that's done? I have my scope of work. Okay. Okay. My next section of questions would be as it relates to budget and the financial impacts and if supplemental pay causes an increase to someone's salary, the budget line for their salary, is a budget adjustment made and is that brought before the council?

Yes, that would be for the finance director.

Yes. Oh, yeah. That would be for the. Finance Director.

So I'm glad this item is for discussion only. So the part that we missed, we can get at a later date in terms of the discussion. But the part that I wanted to make clear is when you are acting above your pay grade, then yes, there is an expectation of additional compensation. If you are acting in a lateral position, that's questionable. But if you fill in the position that might be below your pay grade, is there compensation for that other than overtime for those who qualify for overtime?

Okay. I'm going to have to compensate you for it. Okay, so it's for discussion, and it needs to be made clear. We put these rules in place, and hopefully we have them 100% correct, but we don't know that until we actually try them out, and we've had a chance to give it a go, and we'll see how well it's working, and we can evaluate it, and if we need to adjust it, we will adjust it, but we need to fully understand the... and if we are achieving the intent and uh without having to make any adjustments so i'm and we can get more discussion later on and fully understand what's going on and if we n

Yes, I would ask, what is it that you do? So we know how to direct our questions to you. Of course, of course.

Yes, yes. So according to the supplement pay, it says that it shouldn't extend no more than 12 months. Then after, do you let them know when the 12 months is up since you are doing that part? No, I don't. I don't. That'd be like the HR director would do that. I mean, it's supposed to be turned over to HR and the city manager if it's supposed to exceed past 12 months, according to the charter. So you don't know when the 12 months is up?

So, you said one thing that you may be able to answer for me. The signatures. Whose signature is required for supplementary pay?

So I have a number of questions on the supplemental pay policy. I've already stated the different categories for which those questions fall. We've had this on our agenda a couple of times at this point, and we haven't been able to address it. What would be our next steps? Because we still can't get the questions addressed that we need. I know it's above your payroll and outside, so nothing towards you. But we don't have the people here who should be speaking to this. And again, it's been on our agenda more than once. What would be our next steps in order to get the questions answered that we n

Okay i'm not sure how many minutes, I have left, but I will go ahead with my questions for the in the decision making category, I wanted to know, like I asked before, and I can pass these on to the city manager if need be. But I can read them.

OK. My question is, which I've already stated, is if there is an increase above the standard 5%, how is it determined? Who makes the decision to approve that increase above that 5%? And in what instances is a department director eligible to receive supplemental pay? can a department director be paid for taking responsibilities of their subordinate? And if that is yes, under what circumstances? I see that there is eligibility for a director and a city manager to recommend and approve supplemental pay for personnel. Is there anybody else who can recommend that's outside of those two? And who is

This will appear on the next agenda that fits your pleasure, just so we can have an in-depth discussion about it with all the parties necessary to be present.

I will make a recommendation to add it to one of our work sessions or to a council meeting, so I'll take care of it. No problem. I got it.

Oh, absolutely. Actually, I'd like my attorney to respond. Attorney Tyson, would you please come to the podium? As he's coming, I would also like to mention that the statement that you heard read just by the city manager was only in the words of one individual. AS WE KNOW, ONE SIDE OF THE STORY IS ONLY THAT. SO YOU'LL HEAR FROM OUR ATTORNEY WHO WILL NOT ONLY EXPLAIN THE PROCEDURAL VIOLATIONS THAT THIS COUNCIL AND THE CITY MANAGER JUST VIOLATED, BUT ALSO THE CONTINUATION OF THE INCORRECT AND INFACTUALLY STATED EVENTS THAT OCCURRED, WHICH WE ACTUALLY HAVE EVIDENCE AND PROOF OF. ATTORNEY TYSON, W

My city attorney is going to respond on my behalf. The question is, did you... Mayor Pro Tem, are you refusing to let me share my side of the story through my legal counsel? No, absolutely not. Okay, some attorney will speak on my behalf.

Yes, you gave me the floor. And in you giving me the floor, I am having my attorney to speak. So you're having your attorney speak. I can do. You're having your attorney speak. If the floor is mine, then I may proceed with... having the floor, and having the floor includes having my attorney speak. Again, would you like me to request from you personally to invite someone to the floor?

Can we ask legal, is that the right procedure, that he can come and speak on her behalf? I'd just like to hear it from legal.

Please legally explain that I need permission to indulge in the floor. and a meeting where I'm rightfully a member of the governing body.

Correct. We're having a meeting for the members of this body of which I am a part of. And so there's no law that says that as a part of my own discussion, I cannot bring others into it. As a matter of fact, you just had more than one person speaking on another item right before this. So with the body. with the body, right? So I am a part of this governing body. There are no stipulations in law that state that as I have the floor, I may not involve multiple parties in my presentation. As a matter of fact, council just involved multiple parties in their presentation. So if you can find law that

This is not a member of the public. This is my legal counsel. You're talking about a legal matter, a personnel matter, in which you've allowed the city manager to read one statement from one person to create, again, the theme of this meeting, a misrepresentation. and then you're now trying to take the right from me to give my side of the story so that at least the representation is equitable this is not a member of the public this is my legal counsel the council has already gone into a personnel matter publicly which violates our charter our human resource policies and many others And so now y

Absolutely, I'm personnel, per your personnel policy and your charter.

Yes, absolutely. Just because you said it doesn't make it lawful. Just because you said it doesn't mean there's law to support what you said. Just because you said it doesn't mean you get to take the rights from the mayor to have the floor. You gave me the floor. You do not get to dictate how I use said floor. I am a part of this governing body as everyone else is. You have invited multiple people in all of your items before this to have participation in you having the floor. But if you'd like me to ask you, may I invite someone to the floor you've given me? I certainly shall.

According to Robert's rules, can a person give the floor to someone else? They may yield to ask, allow them to make a comment. They may briefly yield for them to provide a bit of clarity. But I don't think they can actually give the floor to someone else.

Would you like me to use the word yield?

versus give yield for a question or a comment would you like me to use the words yield for a comment not for a statement so now we're going to i want comments i would i would like to find out according to robert's rules that we utilize here if that is allowable to my understanding it is not

I've never needed permission to bring anyone to a podium to speak on an item. Never. Not one council meeting, not one work session, not one community meeting, not one commission meeting, not a single one has the city council had the authority under no circumstances to dictate how any member of council, which includes me, uses the opportunity in front of the microphone. Never. Not one time. But have no fear. Attorney Tyson, please stand there. I will read. As the city manager read, I will read. I would like to make note before I begin reading this that we find it not coincidental at all that th

This item is listed for discussion only. No decision has been made, nor are we proposing to make a decision this evening. And that being the case, from what was read to us, I cannot imagine this happened without there being other witnesses to it. And their statements would be important for us to make a decision as to whether or not we go forward with this suggested resolution. This is not a hearing. This is us responding to a letter we got that we will simply not ignore because the accusation is very serious. And we treat it as such. And we will not be intimidated by the lawyers coming before

I first want to say that as much as we have to protect our staff and our constituents, the elected officials are also included in the respect and treatment, just as the staff and the constituents. Elected officials should not be verbally abused or physically assaulted. It is not just the responsibility of the electeds to ensure that there's respect only given. There also should be respect giving back to the electeds. I'm sure that through your investigation, you will see that respect is mutual. Violations happen when multiple people decide to disrespect or even physically interact with both th

They ask if they go in there. I apologize. I was interrupted and was not able to finish mine. So I'm almost finished. I was almost. That is.

I would like the floor. Are you asking? Yes, I would like the floor. Mayor Cobble. Thank you. Again, Stonecrest, what you're hearing are statements, one, that I have not been given, two, that are coming from a one-sided story, that I have proof and evidence is actually not true. Through an investigation, you will come to find that there are some people who will speak with integrity and some who will not. Many of the, as you can see, right, we're a smart city. This has been crafted so that one side of the story is what's prevalent. And you can see that there is an attempt to suppress the other

I would just like to state for the record something that is incorrect that the mayor just stated. City Council has planted statements. I, Carmisha Washington Smith, am a part of the City Council and I have planted no statements that is untrue.

Just to be clear, we are going to direct the city manager to initiate the investigation so we can get all questions answered before we address this question again of possible censure or not to censure. So I just want to be clear that that is the direction we're going in.

Councilman Turner, asking the city manager to initiate the investigation is a policy and charter violation. The charter and the policy dictates whom shall conduct the investigation. So if you are directing someone outside of the policy.

The question is still there. Are we going to direct the city manager or whomever to initiate this investigation so that we can get all questions answered before moving forward with this idea of a censure? Is that our conclusion?