By Barbara Augsdorfer, editor for the Effingham Herald
The City of Guyton has not had a city manager since Meketa Brown resigned in April. At the regular meeting Oct. 8, Mayor Pro Tem Joseph Lee presided as Mayor Andy Harville was attending the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) summit in Athens.
In addition to the city manager vacancy, the Guyton City Council discussed proposed changes to the city’s personnel appeals process, and adding elected officials to the city’s retirement plan.
The city manager job opening has been advertised for several months, but according to Councilmember Jeremiah Chancey and Mayor Pro Tem Lee, a fully qualified applicant has not been found. According to job posting on the city website, the position requires the city manager to have a bachelor’s degree in “a related field”; master’s degree preferred, five years’ experience in local government, extensive knowledge of public administrative policies, and demonstrated knowledge of accounting and budgeting processes.
Since the Guyton City Council has not found a suitable person on its own, the council unanimously approved spending $18,000 with Atlanta-based Sumter Local Government Consulting who will bring the top three candidates to the council. According to Lee and Chancey, the city has received just under 100 applications; but many of the applicants are not qualified.
“We’ve really tried to avoid doing this, but after multiple rounds of getting resumes and applications, (it’s) extremely difficult to find qualified candidates,” Chancey said. “I would say 99% of people that apply don’t even meet half the minimum requirements.”
Chancey added that the city did reach out to “three or four” candidates but was not successful in setting up interviews. “At this point, it’s becoming necessary to find somebody. I think this (hiring a consulting firm) will help,” Chancey said.
And even before a city manager could be sought, interviewed, and hired, the city council disagreed on what the city manager’s role would be in regard to city employees’ appeal process.
Employee appeal process
The city council proposed that the city attorney draft a resolution revising the appeal process in the city’s personnel policy.
The City Charter states, “The city manager shall be the chief executive officer and administrator of the city; and “when the city manager deems it necessary for the good of the city, suspend or remove all city employees and administrative officers.”
City Attorney Wes Rahn reminded the council of the current appeals process, which states, “The employee may appeal to the department head disciplinary actions, and then the department head makes a decision, and that decision is final -- except for two instances, one would be demotion,
and the other is termination,” Rahn said. He went on to explain that if the mayor agrees with the demotion, that decision is final. However, an employee who is terminated may appeal that decision before the city council.
Chancey expressed his disagreement with a terminated employee appealing to the city council saying, “That’s the whole purpose of hiring a city manager,” Chancey said. “That was the whole purpose of changing the city charter three years ago, to give the city manager more authority.
“(The city manager) is charged with oversight of all city employees, and giving that authority to city council, you’re taking that authority away from them,” Chancey said. He added that taking authority away from the city manager before one could even be hired would make it even more difficult to find a city manager.
Chancey then added that this step in involving city council with employee disciplinary proceedings make those proceedings public record.
“Of course they’re already public record. You can ORR (open records request) them,” Chancey said. “But now we’re advertising them -- oh such-and-such is appealing their disciplinary action, and we’re having a meeting on it, and you can come to the meeting and hear what the council’s decision on that. Is that really, what (you want) the position of employees in?”
Chancey then argued with Lee that what the proposed change in the appeals process would be doing is micromanaging and taking authority away from the city manager.
“It’s making sure each employee has a fair opportunity,” Lee said.
“So, you’re saying the city manager can’t be fair,” Chancey retorted.
Lee said a “good city manager would involve the council.” But Chancey disagreed saying, “We should not be scrutinizing the city manager’s and department head’s disciplinary actions, because at that point you’re politicizing a disciplinary process to a political process.”
Lee and Chancey continued their discussion about the recent changes to the charter, where Chancey said powers were taken from the mayor and council and given to the city manager. Lee contended that the city’s (employee) handbook and charter “do not line up.”
“The charter does not mention a disciplinary process,” Chancey argued. He added that the charter does say that the city manager may delegate authority to department heads and in the current personnel policy, the department heads have that final authority.
“There’s a lot of stuff (in the personnel policy) that needs to be updated, changed, and revised,” Chancey said.
Rahn offered to draft up a revised personnel policy. The council voted to give the city attorney authority to create a revised personnel policy and “create an administrative body to handle appeals.” Rahn proposed that the city council conduct a workshop to discuss the matter before taking a final vote.
Elected officials’ retirement benefit
The Guyton City Council also had the first reading of an amendment to the city charter granting retirement benefits to elected officials.
Earlier this year the council authorized spending $1,200 for a feasibility study from New York City-based Segal Co., even though previous councils had spent money to study the same issue and subsequently voted the proposal down.
Chancey has been a vocal opponent of this proposal, as is Mayor Harville. Councilmembers Lee, Michael Johnson, and Theodore Hamby are in favor of the proposal and voted for the study, and to send the proposal to the Georgia Municipal Association for its input.
“(The) cost is $12,447 yearly,” Chancey started. “It starts on Day One and there is no opt out. And every time someone new is elected to this council, the cost will go up.”
He compared the elected officials’ retirement proposal to the retirement benefit for hired city employees who earn 1.5% of their salary annually toward retirement, have to work five years to be fully vested, and have 10 years of service to receive the city’s retirement benefit when they retire.
Chancey proposed several ways to offset the cost of the proposed retirement plan for elected officials, including reducing the minimum benefit to $25 per month and even cutting the council members’ salary by half. Guyton City Council members earn $400 per month.
“How do we intend to pay for this?” Chancey asked. “Right now, we have a balanced budget and this is a nonbudgeted item. Are we raising taxes or cutting expenses?
“If we cut the council’s salary by $207.94 a pay period, that should pay for it. If we want retirement, we should have to pay for it,” Chancey said. “I think it’s ludicrous that I’m eligible for a $50 retirement check serving on this council for eight months and I have done absolutely nothing to deserve that.”
Lee extinguished the heat of the moment telling Chancey that his comments are noted and since this was the first reading, no action was being taken.
Johnson and Hamby were silent during the exchange between Lee and Chancey.
As a candidate for council last year, Hamby opposed adding elected officials to the city’s retirement plan.
Hamby posted on his Facebook page May 28 his reasons for wanting retirement benefits for elected officials. (The post was quickly deleted.)
“Did I vote for the retirement study? Yes. The reason why I voted that way is because it will give the citizens of Guyton a larger slate of candidates to choose from in future elections,” Hamby’s post began. “The citizens will hear policy debates from more than two people and we will no longer see uncontested races.
“If anyone would like to discuss my stance with me, I would be more than happy to do that,” Hamby’s post continued.
Hamby has not answered repeated emails nor voicemail messages from the Herald to explain his change of position.
