What started as a seemingly routine
email communication concerning an important city personnel matter
seems to have degenerated into sniping, accusations and further
examples of the animosity that remains between some Crossville city
council members.
Monday evening June 20, Crossville
mayor James Mayberry sent an email to interim city manager Steve Hill
pointing out that the interim police chief's contract was near its
end. Mayberry wrote, “with no other applicants from within the
department, and the excellent results with coordination of other
agencies, and the overwhelming community support, I request the city
manager to pole (sic) the council for their input on the appointment
of Mr. Shoap as permanent police chief.”
Mayberry continued, “The council is
not authorized to hire or fire city employees. Being the interim
city manager would cause reservations on the hiring and firing
process and I'm sure cause concern. Therefore, I think council input
is of utmost importance on the paramount decision for the city's
future.”
That email generated a response email
the next day from councilman Jesse Kerley asking that hiring a
permanent city manager be placed on the July regular council meeting
agenda and accusing the Mayor of violating the city charter by trying
to interfere with the city manager's decisions. Since the council
has not received any city manager candidate info from the city
consultant MTAS, it appears Kerley's proposal may be to hire interim
manager Hill permanently.
The following day, June 22, councilman
Pete Souza sent his own email. Interestingly enough, Mr. Kerley's emails are blocked by Mr. Souza and Mr. Souza does not copy Mr.
Kerley on their emails.
Souza wrote, “First of all the
comment of councilman Kerley that the Mayor violated the charter is
without merit. He made the same claim on me and I addressed this to
the city attorney. It is our (the council's) prerogative to let the
city manager know our desires not to be construed with ordering him
to hire or fire someone. Mr. Ridley can feel free to correct me if I
am wrong. I find it incomprehensible that councilman Kerley can
bring up former assistant chief Sherrill but the mayor can't bring up
Shoap.
Souza's email went on to praise the
work of chief Shoap and his value to the community. He said he added
his approval of Shoap with mayor Mayberry's and said while he
couldn't speak for council members Danny Wyatt and Pam Harris he did
say they had praised the chief in public meetings.
Souza's email continued, “Moving on
to councilman Kerley's agenda item to appoint a permanent city
manager, this was already decided in a motion. The selection would
take place after the upcoming city council election with the help of
MTAS.” Souza concludes, “So the question is how disruptive to
the community does the city council and for that matter the interim
city manager want to be?”
Based on looking at the email
forwarding trail, councilman Danny Wyatt forwarded Mr. Souza's email
to councilman Kerley and Kerley responded asking city attorney Will
Ridley to advise on Article V Section 6 of the charter. Wrote
Kerley, “I'm having trouble finding Souza's law degree license on
the internet. It APPARENTLY is filed with the state along with his
business license.” The last reference to an earlier squabble over
Souza's electrical business. Kerley concludes with a political
reference to Souza's race for county tax assessor adding in caps,
“SIMCOX FOR ASSESSOR.” Mr. Souza was not included in the
distribution list for Kerley's email.
City attorney Will Ridley responded to
request for information on the charter and quoted the article and
section in question.
“Except
for the purpose of inquiry, the council and its members shall deal
with the administrative officers and employees solely through the
manager. Neither the council nor any member thereof shall give orders
to the manager’s subordinates or otherwise interfere with
managerial functions through such means as directing
or requesting the
appointment or removal of any of the manager’s subordinates…………..”
Ridley
continued, “I can only provide information. I cannot make a
decision as to whether an individual council member has violated the
charter. To do so would violate my ethical duty to represent the
council as a whole. Nothing in the above section prohibits a council
member from giving their opinion or view point on an employee or
department's performance. However it prohibits a council member from
“directing or requesting” the city manager to make a particular
decision.”
This
reporter received some of these emails from Mr. Kerley in an email
that opened with his opinion that, “FYI. This is a clear violation
of article V section 6 of the city charter.” That remains to be
seen.
