Welcome to our new web site!
To give our readers a chance to experience all that our new website has to offer, we have made all content freely avaiable, through October 1, 2018.
During this time, print and digital subscribers will not need to log in to view our stories or e-editions.
“Madam Mayor, never in the history since I’ve been on council, have I had to put something on the agenda that I thought was so important for this council to look into. The reason I made the motion is due to the recent confusion that’s been made concerning the Public Safety Committee. My, myself, I’m a little confused,” said Davis. Davis went on to state his constituents have been regularly asking him what happened regarding the termination of Shaffer by the Public Safety Committee. However, he has had no answer to offer, as he doesn’t know either. He felt the decision should have been put before the full Council. Although Nelson stated that Ordinance 2018-04 was given final reading and approved on June 18 during the last Council meeting and stated the first reading was during the June 5 budget workshop, Davis still felt the decision to terminate an important position such as a police chief should have been brought back to the Council. Nelson informed the Council the Committee was strictly advised not to do so by their attorney, as there was now a grievance process in place. This process would allow a terminated employee to go before a grievance committee, and if the terminated employee’s complaint was found valid, it would then go before the full Council. Nelson claimed they were unaware that by forming the Public Safety Committee that it would result in keeping the entire Council from having a say in such terminations. She reiterated that the city’s lawyers advised at the time of the termination that full council could not be involved due to the grievance process. “I don’t believe we received bad advice, as this is an attorney’s office that has thoroughly informed us in the past on what we needed. So by no means was this underhanded,” said Nelson. This raises the next question regarding the ordinance. According to Nelson, the ordinance gives the committee the power to fire the chief of police. However, the ordinance itself does not back this up. In Section 2-31 (g), the ordinance states “any suspension or removal under the policy must be made by council.” This directly contradicts the statement that the Committee was given the power to fire Shaffer. “I feel like the grievance committee was just a loophole not to get it brought back to council,” said Davis during the Council meeting. “That’s the way I feel, that’s the way my constituents feel. It would not be fair for me to sit at this council table and not reflect my feelings about what went on, or my constituents’ feelings about what went on. I’m doing what I think is right and fair, and I’ll stand by my own convictions.” Davis again asked for a vote on abolishing all committees. The vote was called, with an initial two-to-one vote in favor, with two councilmembers who did not yet vote. After several minutes of deliberation, the vote ended at four-to-one to abolish all committees. Voting to abolish were Davis and Dukes, as well as Gordon and Councilwoman Diane Georgia. Pack, who was a member of the Public Safety Committee along with Mayor Pro-tem Sherry Welle and Nelson, was the only dissenting vote. The council went immediately into executive session for two hours. Upon returning, the council made no action based on what was discussed in executive session. However, the previous motion and vote was overturned. “I would just like to say officially, based on the fact that we had a printed agenda, and the motion made concerning abolishing the committees was not on the agenda, nor was it on there at the time of the approval of the agenda, that motion will be stricken from the record, and the council will get together to further discuss that matter and how we would like to proceed in the future,” said Nelson. Once again, a question arises. If the motion to abolish the committees was stricken from the record because it was not on the official agenda, because it is mandatory for an item to be on the agenda for it to be legally recognized, it stands to reason the first reading of Ordinance 2018-04 should also be stricken from the record, as it was also not on the agenda, neither originally nor placed there before the agenda was approved that night. With this many questions surrounding the creation of and validity of the Public Safety Committee, not to mention it’s legal right to have terminated Shaffer, it highlights the need to investigate the termination itself. “I am anxious to make a statement, and my statement will come soon,” said Shaffer. He has until July 25 to file a grievance, which he fully intends to do. His statement will come after he has finalized procurement of legal counsel.