Baldwin council split on overriding mayor’s veto

During the called meeting no questions or comments were allowed from the public.

“This will be discussed among the council only,” Neace said in opening the called meeting.

Holcomb said, “I think this (the allegations) is more than a personality conflict. Citizens have called me asking why we are not doing the investigation. They want to know if somebody is trying to hide something.”

The council agreed, unanimously, at the Dec. 28 meeting to proceed with the investigation. Parrish abstained from this vote as well.

Baldwin administrator Jerry Presley requested the investigation of Parrish, claiming that he has tried to force city employees to take sides in a political dispute.

Presley claims that Parrish has “on repeated occasion issued direct threats and other acts of intimidation against city employees in an effort to coerce them into choosing sides in the ongoing political disputes among the city council.”

In the request for an investigation, Presley claims that on Oct. 11, Parrish, along with Mayor Neace, met with members of the Baldwin Fire Department at which time those in attendance stated that Mr. Parrish issued a threat that if employees did not support the mayor’s initiative to outsource fire service and openly engage in influencing other members of the council to support the mayor that they would lose their jobs with the city.

Baldwin Fire Chief Joe Roy and several of the city’s firemen turned out for Thursday’s called meeting.

Presley also stated in the requested that on Nov. 12 he and Parrish had a conversation at city hall and Parrish said that employees were going to have to choose sides in the current political disputes between council members and said those who chose the “wrong side” would be fired after the next election if he was successful in “securing a third vote.” Presley said he “warned him of the legal implications and the unethical and immorality of such behavior and actions.”

Presley said Parrish sent an email on Dec. 23 where he recommends his immediate dismissal as city administrator.

King said, at Thursday’s meeting, “We owe our employees the benefit of the doubt.”

“I think anytime there is a complaint an investigation should be done,” Bohannon said.

Neace questioned the way the request for the investigation was handled by Presley, saying it was not handled according to the city’s grievance policy in the personnel handbook.

Presley said, “Filing the complaint was done what the city charters states for an elected official.”

Bohannon asked Neace, “Why would you want to veto something you are involved in?”

Neace said, “I feel like procedure was not followed.”

After council comment that the meeting with the firemen created a hostile working environment, Neace said, “I didn’t create a hostile environment.”

Holcomb said, “I would like to hear what the firemen have to say, I see some of them are here tonight.”

King said, “The only way we are going to know how the firemen feel is to ask them.”

In reference to Neace, Parrish and council member Sandi Rudeseal, Bohannon said, “These people want you to know what they want you to know not what you need to know.”

Neace suggested that the council meet individually, or in pairs, with the firemen and talk with them.

City attorney David Syfan said, “There is not a mandatory legal duty that an investigation be done, but it is the best way to handle the situation that you have found yourself in.”

Parrish apologized to the firemen saying he never intended anything he said to be taken in a threatening way.

After the motion to override the veto failed, Rudeseal was asked to explain why she voted in favor of the investigation, but then voted against overriding the veto.

Rudeseal read her response from a prepared statement saying, “It is true that I voted in favor of the investigation on Dec. 28. I was hopeful that an investigation would clear Jeff’s name and at the time it was my understanding that in the city charter, section 2-5, the city council was required to conduct an investigation. I later determined that I had misinterpreted what the outlined responsibility of the council member was in this matter. The city charter states that we may investigate the conduct of any affairs of city government. I do not wish to exercise that authority at the expense of the city in this particular situation. I tried to look at the situation as objectively as I could. I feel that every employee should have fair treatment. I do not tolerate acts of intimidation. Threats of any nature from anyone are not acceptable. I believe the possibility of a clear resolution after an investigation is slim.”

“Had Mr. Presley followed the grievance policy, as outlined in Section 2, Regulation 5 in the personnel handbook, a fair investigation would have been obtainable. Mr. Parrish was accused of threatening all employees. I have no doubt that in an investigation all employees would be interviewed. I can tell you that if I were an employee of the city of Baldwin and have picked up a newspaper recently, I might feel a little uneasy. How can there be an unbiased recollection of events now that employees do not know who to trust?” Rudeseal stated.

“Another reason I have changed my mind is because at the last meeting, two of our council members (Mr. King and Mrs. Holcomb) stated that they knew about the allegations brought forth by Mr. Presley over 30 days prior to Mr. Presley’s email that was sent to the council and media. With that said, you all know as well as I do that these two are responsible council members and they do what they feel is right for the citizens and employees. Even with our political disagreements, I see that. Had they known about this over 30 days ago, it is my belief that they would have taken action. They would have held a meeting or at least called the other council members about it,” Rudeseal said.

Rudeseal went on to say, “Finally, I stand in my truth. I was called a liar twice at our last meeting by Jerry Presley. Once was for stating that I was not aware of his allegations towards Mr. Parrish until he sent out the email to the council and media. The second time was for asking him about a recording device that he showed me when I was first elected. In knowing these truths, how can I vote to spend possibly $6,000-$10,000 of our taxpayer’s money when I know we are starting out with lies? I had rather take the heat from the few than to do wrong by most.”

“If you think about it, you will see where the power is in this council. Jeff Parrish is only one vote. I am only one vote. One vote does not terminate any employee. It takes the power of three to get anything done and there is a power of three on this council now that will control it all,” Rudeseal said.

Presley apologized to Rudeseal, and her husband, on Thursday for calling her a liar at the Dec. 28 meeting.

Presley said, “I only use a recorder at council meetings or in a personnel meetings for recording purposes.”

After the vote was taken to override the mayor’s veto, the council agreed unanimously to allow Baldwin Fire Chief Joe Roy to speak.

Roy said, “I asked for a meeting with the entire council (back in October).” Roy stated he was notified by Mayor Neace that he and council member Parrish would be meeting with the firemen.

Roy said, “I interpreted the meeting and discussion on consolidating the fire departments as being for budget purposes.” Roy did say however he could understand how some of the firemen might have felt intimidated about the meeting.

“I think this could have been eliminated if I had gotten a meeting with the entire council,” Roy said.

Holcomb asked Parrish, “Did you not state to me that you promised the mayor you would stand behind his veto’s?”

Parrish replied, “I did say that I promised to do that for one year.”

Presley said, “I just want to put an end to all this wrangling and move forward.”