03-30-1992 - Special
....
....,
CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER
SPECIAL MEETING
MARCH 30, 1992
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Tanya Wessler called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. in
the Community Center for the purpose of addressing the Bill Finch
appeal of the decision of the Merit Board regarding his
termination from the Fire Department.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Tanya Wessler
Councilman Kirk Jones
Councilperson Louise Martin
Councilperson NoraJane Gillespie
Councilman Michael Hays
City Attorney Krista Storey
City Manager George McMahon
City Clerk Susan Wadsworth
Police Chief Lawrence Schumaker
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Excused
Present
Mayor Wessler stated Attorney Bill Hathaway would present his
side and the City would present their side and then they will
have questions and answers.
Councilperson Gillespie stated she should make mention that Mr.
Finch and his wife came to her house. When he advised her of the
problem, she contacted the City Attorney and sent him right down
to City Hall.
At this time, Attorney Bill Hathaway gave his presentation.
When Attorney Bill Hathaway finished his presentation, Chief Vola
gave his presentation.
Mayor Wessler asked if anyone had questions for Mr. Hathaway or
Mr. Vola.
Councilperson Gillespie asked Mr. Hathaway if he requested live
witnesses at the Merit Board hearing. Mr. Hathaway stated no,
they did not, they requested Bill Finch attend.
Councilman Hays asked for Ms. Storey's account of the situation.
City Attorney Storey stated she did not agree with his contention
regarding the process that was utilized at the hearing. The
situation at the Merit Board hearing was an appeal. She does not
believe that it is legally appropriate to challenge the fact that
simply because the City did not hear first hand testimony of the
witnesses that therefore Mr. Finch was deprived of any due
process rights. From a legal perspective the Merit Board process
is informal. The rules of evidence do not apply. The lack of
first hand testimony could be weighed by the Merit Board and
Council if you have written documentation in front of you that
can be utilized.
Councilman Jones stated it was mentioned that Mr. Finch's due
process was not in jeopardy because of the way that we handled
it. His opinion is any time the city enacts any type of firing
the burden of truth is on our hands to prove our case. He
expressed his dissatisfaction with the way this case was handled
and stated it is of the utmost importance that the City present
the best case we can. Now, we as the Council, have to look at
the merits of the case. If it was handled in a different
fashion, maybe the Merit Board could have cleaned it up once and
for all and Council would not be in this position.
-.-.
......
Councilperson Martin stated,in her opinion, we have to determine
the ability of a person to work within a team. It is very
important that all members concerned work as a team. One person
not doing their share can put a whole team off its mark. If one
person can not work in harmony, then he or she is not working as
a team member. Not carrying your own load becomes a source of
aggravation for other members. It becomes a dangerous element
when in the midst of performing their duties.
Councilperson Gillespie stated she did not have Mr. Finch's 1991
evaluation. In Mr. Finch's first evaluation he received a five
for things he was later reprimanded for. Lieutenant Carson was
the training officer to correct the problem, the investigating
officer and the first paid officer on the scene following the
incident. He was also at this time teaching crisis counseling
for the death of the two firefighters who died in New Smyrna.
This put a lot of work on him.
Councilman Hays stated he thought he had a page missing and
questioned Chief Vola if he did. Chief Vola stated yes there was
a missing page.
Councilman Hays stated he would like to get into it somewhat page
by page because questions came up as he went through the package.
Councilman Hays presented questions to Chief Vola which he
answered.
Councilman Jones questioned Chief Vola at this time. He asked if
Mr. McMahon questioned every witness. He stated he would
way of knowing that.
Councilman Hays stated he asked Mr. McMahon that question
assured him he did.
have no . i
.~~If
"PIu.; ~.
and he
Councilman Jones asked Mr. McMahon if he interviewed everyone
involved. Mr. McMahon stated no, he did not. He stated he
interviewed the critical people involved.
Mayor Wessler then questioned Chief Vola. She stated, in her
opinion, he was antagonized by the dirty dishes in his boots.
Councilperson Martin then questioned Chief Vola.
Councilman Jones questioned Chief Vola again.
Mayor Wessler questioned Chief Vola again.
Councilperson Gillespie then questioned Chief Vola.
City Manager McMahon stated he interviewed Chief Vola, Lieutenant
Carson, and Mrs. Cousins.
Attorney Hathaway asked to have a rebuttal which he was granted
by the Council.
Councilman Hays then presented more questions.
City Attorney Storey stated, if you are serving in an appellant
capacity and you have a record before you that isn't clear, there
may be people you have to question. Those who are here and who
participated in the Merit Board hearing, who you can question,
are Chief Vola and Mr. Finch.
Mayor Wessler called for a recess at 4:17 p.m. The meeting
resumed at 4:25 p.m.
-2-
Council/Merit Board Meeting
March 30, 1992
--
~
councilman Hays asked Mr. McMahon who he interviewed personally
that was involved in or witnessed this?
Mr. McMahon answered he interviewed Chief Vola, Peggy Cousins,
George Barlow, Mr. Finch and Lt. Carson.
At this time Attorney Hathaway was allowed to give his rebuttal.
His first point was to take exception to the ruling made by City
Attorney storey's assessment of due process. He thinks if
someone is terminated, they are entitled to a due process
termination hearing; evidence must be submitted to uphold the
termination. His second point referred to the team work which
was brought up by Councilperson Martin. He does not feel there
has been sufficient evidence given to support insubordination in
this case, which is the only offense that warrants termination.
Progressive discipline was raised by Councilperson Gillespie;
the documentation does not prove progressive discipline because
he has never been suspended on an independent action. Mr. Finch
was given the ultimatum of either resigning or being fired.
Mr. McMahon stated he did offer Mr. Finch either of the openings
the City had at the time; Animal Control Officer or the opening
at the Wastewater Plant.
Attorney Hathaway closed in saying that when the City takes
someone's livelihood away from them, it should be done in the
appropriate fashion. It is the contention that this was not done
appropriately. The remedy available is to reinstate Mr. Finch
with the understanding that he is not entitled to the benefits
lost during the intervening period, which was the period of
suspension. Mr. Finch has a petition signed by approximately
150 residents supporting his position. The request is that he be
reinstated, considering the intervening six months as a
suspension.
City Attorney storey advised the Council about the relevancy of
the petition regarding the outcome of this matter. It was
determined that the petition was not submitted to the Merit Board
and therefore should not be submitted here.
Councilman Jones spoke of his concern regarding the mismanagement
of this case, the conditions the department will be working under
if he is reinstated, and the problem the Council has by not being
able to solicit testimony from certain people involved.
City Attorney storey explained if Council does not feel the case
presented was sufficient to make a decision, they should take
that into consideration. Everyone has had the opportunity to
make their case and the proceedings have been handled fairly up
to this point.
Bill Finch, 1703 Lime Tree Drive, answered questions from
Councilman Hays referring to the position he will now be in, if
his job is restored to him. Whether he will, for example, be able
to work as a team with these people? He stated he will do
everything he can to make this a smooth transition, he will work
hard to have a good working relationship.
Chief Vola answered questions also from Councilman Hays regarding
what he can do to make sure these people will have a good working
relationship and provide the fire and medical safety to the com-
munity. He stated, in his professional opinion, the problem is
going to be with the co-workers and the probabilities are not in
his favor.
-3-
Council/Merit Board Meeting
March 30, 1992
,...,
....,
Mayor Wessler stated she does not feel what Mr. Finch did was
right, however, she does not feel what the other men did was
right either. This is very childish, the firefighters should act
in a professional manner. She pointed out that Chief Vola will
be in charge of seeing to it they all act professionally, should
Mr. Finch get his job back.
Councilman Hays moved to reinstate Mr. Finch, with loss of
benefits to date, and to begin another six month period of
probation. Councilperson Gillespie seconded the motion.
Councilman Hays stated in the future, it is management's
responsibility to document, Mr. McMahon needs to put something
in process administratively regarding this. Neither side is
being condoned here.
Councilman Jones stated Mr. Finch needs to walk a tight line and
know he is being watched during this probationary period. He
went on to explain his understanding of this situation and
stressed that these men's lives depend on each other and they
have to constantly work on their relationships.
City Attorney Storey reminded Council that, pursuant to the
Charter, it takes a unanimous decision by the Council to over-
ride the decision of the Merit Board, which was to uphold the
termination.
Upon roll call on the motion, the motion DIED 4-1. Council-
person Martin voting NO.
Attorney Hathaway asked Councilperson Martin to reconsider her
vote.
Councilperson Martin asked if this is legal?
City Attorney Storey stated it is legal to have another motion
made to reconsider by the prevailing side.
Councilperson Gillespie moved to reconsider. Councilman Hays
seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion CARRIED
5-0.
Councilperson Martin stated she is still concerned about the team
spirit that obviously does not exist here. Firefighting has to
be a team effort.
Mayor Wessler restated the probationary period at which time he
will not be able to sway; any deviation and he will be fired.
This process will not be necessary again at that point.
Councilman Hays explained the reason he made the motion the way
he did with the probationary period, is he feels although Mr.
Finch's actions were not proper, he was provoked and that the
other people involved were not dealt with as strictly as they
should have been dealt with. They were not acting
professionally.
Councilperson Gillespie stated she felt the City should have put
together a more professional presentation.
Councilman Hays restated the same motion he previously made.
Councilperson Gillespie seconded the motion. Upon roll call the
motion CARRIED 5-0. councilperson Martin stated she does not
want to put the Fire Department down, there has been a lot or
work done on this but she is in the minority, so she votes Yes.
-4-
Council/Merit Board Meeting
March 30, 1992
---
...."
ADJOURNMENT
Councilman Hays moved to adjourn. Councilman Jones seconded the
motion. Meeting adjourned, 4:55 p.m.
Minutes submitted by:
Lisa Kruckmeyer
-5-
Council/Merit Board Meeting
March 30, 1992