How Do You Steal 180 Pallets?

Leader article 7/3/14

Thomas Fired Again in Pevely

Pevely city administrator Terry Thomas was once again ousted by the board of aldermen, as he was in December before being reinstated. This time, though, the dismissal looks to be permanent.

This time, also, the legality of the dismissal (which was for cause, according to the board) is being called into question on three grounds:

• His contract says he can’t be dismissed without cause within 120 days after the municipal election, which was in April,
• His contract requires him an opportunity, if fired for cause, to appear before the board and present his case, and
• The causes given for his firing don’t meet the severity required in the contract.

The causes for his firing, in a document provided to Thomas by alderwoman Ilda Kennon, are here (a couple of employee names redacted). The document opens as follows:

Terry Thomas, city administrator, has failed to competently perform his duties for the past year and a half, His tenure as city administrator has been one of turmoil. It’s time to stop blaming previous administrators, city clerks, & auditors. Take ownership of the city’s problems & move forward.

The document claims dishonesty, incompetence, and insubordination, among other accusations. The Pevely 20/20 site responds to a couple of the items in this document (scroll down to the June 3 posts). The insubordination claim refers to his comments made at the May 5 board meeting (video here (he comes in at the end) and here), during which he questioned aldermen about comments they had made and mocked their priorities while stating what he thought were the city’s real issues.

I did think the meeting remarks were improper for a city administrator to direct to the board that employs him, and thought they might have served as Terry’s invitation to dismiss him. I also wonder about that 120-day provision in his contract. Is that normal, or was that put there by the old board, which was more friendly to Thomas, to protect him in case the subsequent election turned out as it did, with all the incumbents losing? (Update: I have learned that this standard language).

Contract Not in Effect?

However, the mayor, board, and interim city attorney (in place after the city’s attorney was fired, then the city was fired as a client by that attorney’s firm) say that Thomas didn’t sign the contract, thus making its provisions irrelevant. The city attorney, Tom Duggan, also said, according to the Leader, that “there needed to be an ordinance, not just a resolution, for Thomas to have an enforceable contract with the city.” This is what the relevant city ordinance says:

SECTION 115.190:     REMOVAL

The City Administrator shall serve at the pleasure of the Board of Aldermen of the City of Pevely, Missouri, and may be dismissed at will in the same manner as other appointed municipal officers pursuant to Section 79.240, RSMo.  (R.O. 2004 §115.060; CC 1990 §115.060; Ord. No. 417 §6, 3-31-81)

So, as I read this, Thomas’ contract was/would have been in conflict with this section, and so he was working as an at-will employee. Maybe that’s why an ordinance would be needed, to change the current fact that the city administrator can be removed “at the pleasure of the Board.”

But this may well end up in court.

Pevely Improves Teamsters Deal

Way back in the early days of this blog, I wrote about what I termed the “bailout” of the Teamsters Camp by the city of Pevely. The union wanted to open its camp, which is outside of Pevely and features a pool, golf course, walking trails, and some other recreational facilities, to Pevely residents. The details of the contract were very favorable to the Teamsters, though, and not the city.

But now the new board of aldermen has won adjustments to some of the contract language, according to the Dear Leader. First, there is no longer a minimum number of families that the city is required to recruit. This means the city will not be on the hook to pay if the number of participating families drops below the minimum, which was 150. The city hadn’t had to pay this penalty yet.

The new language also gets rid of installment payments for membership fees. These payments were added to water bills. According to alderman Dave Young, some people got their membership cards but then stopped paying their fees. The Teamsters were supposed to get a bar code reader to stop such scofflaws by scanning their cards, but did not do so. If these people closed their water accounts (by leaving town, presumably), the city would be stuck with the bill, said city clerk Stephanie Haas. Now, residents have to pay their yearly fee ($325) up front.

While these changes shouldn’t be necessary, because the provisions in question should not have been agreed to in the first place, it is good to see them being made.

Pevely Fires Attorney Again

Pevely has fired its city attorney for the second time in a year. One of the first moves of the new board of aldermen was to remove Melissa Vighi, whose firm, Lashly & Baer, was hired after longtime city attorney David Korum was fired in June. The board intended to keep Lashly & Baer, but have a different attorney represent the city, but the firm subsequently fired Pevely. Therefore, the city had to appoint an acting attorney, Tom Duggan.

When Korum was fired by the previous board, the deed was done in open session. While perhaps unusual, it was appropriate, because the job is an appointed one and so the normal employee privacy concerns need not apply. Or, even if the actual firing is done behind closed doors, the reasons should be given, because the public deserves to know them.

That, however, is not what happened in this case. No word has been given as to why Vighi did not meet the board’s standards. Therefore, we cannot judge whether or not this was a good move. We can only speculate and assume. The same thing happened when city administrator Terry Thomas was (briefly) relieved of duty. Only vague explanations as to why that was done were given.

Governments should always lean towards more transparency. Pevely does not do this in terms of expenditures, meeting minutes, or decisions like this one. Pevely’s disarray and discontent will start to decrease when it starts acting in a more open matter. Actions like the removal of the city attorney have the opposite effect.

More on Pevely Campaign Finance

I wrote previously about the money that Progress for Pevely contributed to the board of aldermen challenger candidates in the recent municipal election. I have since had the opportunity to review the relevant paperwork, which is only available in Hillsboro, and I wanted to report back in order to close the loop.

The three challengers (David Young, Dave Bewig, and Ed Walters) and incumbent Steve Markus filed reports. Don Menkhus and Russ Shackelford thus must not have had enough monetary activity to warrant a report. Minus one or two small contributions or loans, all of the challengers’ money came from Progress for Pevely.

While the three challengers raised a lot of money, it was in fact Markus who brought in the most money, a total of $4,333. His opponent, Dave Young, was a distant second with $2,129. Here is the main page from Markus’ final report of the election cycle:

All of this money (at least that raised in 2014) came from various St. Louis-area unions. As you can see, though, he only spent about as much as the challengers. He had a lot of arrows in the quiver on Election Day, so to speak. Could some of this money have helped Markus win the 19 votes he would have needed to win re-election? Hard to say.

As you can also see, Markus has a lot of money left over, more than $5,000. Could this be used for a run for mayor next year? Current mayor John Knobloch seemed to think Markus wanted the job, from which Knobloch claims he will be stepping down. We shall see.

Progress for Pevely Contributes Big to Challengers

Update: I called the county clerk’s office, and was informed that all Pevely candidates filed campaign finance reports. Whether or not they were “limited activity” reports, I don’t know. One has to travel down to Hillsboro to look at the filings. I apologize for the incorrect information I posted previously.

Correction: It turns out that local candidates file their campaign finance reports with the county clerk and not necessarily with MEC (although they can). And since the proper people at the county clerk’s office are not in today, I cannot verify what the commenter to this post says about which candidates did or did not file. But thanks for the comment.

The issue of political action committee Progress for Pevely and its role in the recent municipal election came up during the campaign. The “8 Day Before Municipal Election” report the group filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission (MEC) spells out what financial help the group gave Ed Walters, David Young, and Dave Bewig in their successful races against the incumbent Pevely aldermen.

In terms of direct expenditures, the group didn’t do a whole lot. They bought an ad in the Leader and paid to print some materials, for a total of $300. But the contributions the group made to the candidates were noteworthy. Young, who defeated Steve Markus, got $2,129 from the group on March 1. Walters, who bested Russ Shackelford, and Bewig, who beat Don Menkhus, both received $1,789 on the same date.

Bitterness in Pevely After Vote

In what I would characterize as a surprise, all three Pevely incumbent aldermen were defeated on Tuesday. Steve Markus lost to Dave Young by 18 votes, Russ Shackelford lost to Ed Walters by 51 votes, and Dave Bewig beat Don Menkhus by 45 votes.

Some harsh words were spoken in the aftermath. In the Leader, Menkhus said of the vote to reduce the mayoral term to 2 years that mayor John Knobloch is “a dictator.” He also said the change in aldermen “is going to take the city back at least 10 years” and that the electoral victors “don’t have a clue what’s going on in the city.”

On the other side of the slate, Walters told Pevely 20/20 proprietor Erin Kasten to “go to ____” on her page. Kasten’s husband did not take kindly to this.

If nothing else, things should continue to be interesting in Pevely.

Pevely “Industries” Respond

In my recap of the Pevely candidate forum, I mentioned allegations made by the incumbent aldermen about the role “the industries” are playing in this election. Steve Menendez of Progress for Pevely responded in the comments to that post. I’d like to post that response here as its own post, to ensure wider dissemination. Here it is:

====================================================================================================================

Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Steve Menendez, and I am the treasurer for a Political Action Committee (PAC) called Progress For Pevely (PFP). Progress For Pevely is a registered PAC with the Missouri Ethics Commission, and exists for the purpose of promoting economic growth in the City of Pevely.

We fully support the expansion of employment opportunities in Pevely, both in the form of attracting new businesses to Pevely and growth of existing businesses in Pevely.

As the Jefferson County Penknife, you are providing a valuable service to everyone who is interested in the political activities in Jefferson County. I would like to take this opportunity to say that I appreciate your efforts. I enjoy reading your blog and look forward to new posts.

Reading your blog post yesterday, March 27th, I was particularly troubled by some quoted statements towards the end of the “Pevely Incumbent Candidate Forum” article. In particular, the following passage was certainly explosive, as you described it.

“At the end of the night, the aldermen stated that this election has been nasty. Markus and Menkhus claimed that their opponents are backed by “the industries,” who want to roll back recent tax hikes, and who oppose the aforementioned highway projects and retail development. Menkhus said the challengers are “paid by industry to vote the way they want.” I thought these claims were quite explosive, and would like to have heard the challengers’ responses.”

If the 2 aldermen quoted above were referring to Progress For Pevely as “the industries”, the statements quoted above are completely false.

To clarify Progress For Pevely’s positions regarding the topics quoted above, and set the record straight, I offer the following:

1.) Progress For Pevely exists for the purpose of promoting economic growth in Pevely. We have never been opposed to any retail development or road improvement project.

2.) Progress For Pevely has never, will never, and would never even consider paying any candidate or official for a vote. Any such activity would be unethical and illegal. Doing so has never been an option.

3.) Progress For Pevely went out of our way to negotiate in good faith the terms of the current Merchants and Manufacturers License Tax structure. We agreed with the passage of this structure for the good of the entire City of Pevely. While we would certainly not object to a decrease in any tax rate, “roll backs” of tax rates are not among our goals.

Thank you for providing this opportunity to set the record straight with respect to Progress For Pevely, its views, and activities.

Sincerely,

Steve Menendez – Treasurer, Progress For Pevely

Pevely Incumbent Candidate Forum

On Tuesday night a candidate forum was held in Pevely for board of alderman candidates ahead of the April 8 election. However, the three challengers didn’t show up, so only the incumbents were there to take questions from the moderator in front of about 35 attendees, including a fair number of city employees. Two of the three challengers (David Young and Ed Walters) were planning to attend, but they apparently came to agree with candidate Dave Bewig that the event was going to be some sort of setup, or “snake pit,” so they all stayed away. I think they would have found themselves to be incorrect had they attended.

Aldermen Menkhus, Shackelford, and Markus.

The first question of the night was about the potential resumption of fluoride water treatment, and interestingly, all three aldermen said they opposed it, stating that it was “more of a poison” (Don Menkhus), that treatment by the dentist is better (Russ Shackelford), and that the fluoride is bad for the water plant equipment (Steve Markus).

Much of the evening’s discussion revolved around road improvements to Highway Z, Main Street, and the Herky-Horine road to attract more business to the city. It was claimed that developer Dan Drury is ready to build once Z is widened and some stop lights are put in. This retail will bring in more sales tax dollars and, it was claimed, take care of the city’s fiscal problems and could allow for the lowering of other taxes (which I will believe when I see). It was claimed that a big box store was once ready to go in behind Queen’s Market, but that mayor John Knobloch and the then-city administrator (I believe Happy Welch) didn’t want it and thus did not make the necessary road improvements happen. This, incidentally, was the only time the mayor’s name came up all night. There was some debate with the audience over whether the Herky-Horine fixes are necessary, given the small amount of development along the road. However, the I-55 Raceway, a big draw, is along that road.

Some discussion of the city’s lack of a pension took place. Moderator Matt West of KJFF radio (who did a good job) suggested that city police chief Ron Weeks would retire if he had a pension, thus allowing the city to bring in a less expensive chief and save money. I, however, doubt the city would pay much less for a new chief, and I think that years and years of pension payments would add up to more than any salary savings. Menkhus stated that seven other city employees were eligible to retire. Markus seemed to want to get a pension put in place, but said he would not support a tax hike to do so. My own personal idea is that the city should establish a 401-k type of plan rather than going for a traditional pension.

Former JeffCo Tea Party head and former candidate for county treasurer Ken Horton asked from the audience why the city didn’t consider disincorporating, an idea that has been floated by the Show-Me Institute. The number one reason not to do this, according to the aldermen, was that longer police response times would result. Menkhus cited the time his wife recently had a fall, and how a Pevely cop was there quickly. This is a bad example, though, because that is a situation where an ambulance is needed, not an officer. While I imagine response would be a bit slower, Pevely would presumably be located in the East Zone, which is based near the Windsor campus, not too far from Pevely. Quick snow removal and good city employees were also cited as reasons to keep a city government.

Some discussion of spending and taxes also occurred. Menkhus said the aldermen have “cut, cut, cut” but also needed to give raises to keep city employees. He said the city trains employees, who then leave for better pay elsewhere. Markus said the city had to hike water/sewer rates or the systems would have gone broke. Menkhus discussed how the city has gone from a $190,000 deficit to a balanced budget while he has been on the board.

At the end of the night, the aldermen stated that this election has been nasty. Markus and Menkhus claimed that their opponents are backed by “the industries,” who want to roll back recent tax hikes, and who oppose the aforementioned highway projects and retail development. Menkhus said the challengers are “paid by industry to vote the way they want.” I thought these claims were quite explosive, and would like to have heard the challengers’ responses.

In the end, the event was a good discussion of current issues in Pevely, and organizer Erin Kasten should be commended. However, the failure of the challenger candidates to attend caused the event to not be very useful to the undecided voter.

Sunshine Week Review of Local Government Web Sites

Sunshine Week is March 16-22 this year. This week is dedicated to promoting open government and the tools that we have to ensure access to information about government entities. In Missouri, it is the Sunshine Law that governs what records must be made available. Some cities, counties, and districts are more cooperative than others when it comes to sharing information.

In preparation for Sunshine Week, Watchdog Wire is asking people to review local government websites to see how useful they are to residents, using certain criteria. I’m going to talk a little about some of our local sites.

First we will start in Pevely. Pevely’s website is lacking. It contains no information on the city’s budgets or spending. It only offers alderman meeting agendas for two meetings at a time (usually the next meeting and the last meeting). As new agendas are added, old ones go away. These agendas are pretty bare-bones, too. Furthermore, no board minutes are posted. The addition of the board agendas is pretty recent, too.

The website does feature the names, photos, and e-mail addresses of aldermen. Last time I checked, the newest alderman was not listed, and there were no e-mail addresses, so some progress has been made here. However, we are not told when their terms are up or what their ward boundaries are.

Herculaneum’s site is better. It has board meeting minutes going back to late 2011. It also lists separate phone numbers for most departments, rather than having one central number to call (with an automated menu) to reach everybody. It lists more names of city employees, too. However, it also lacks budget and spending information.

Festus has an even better site. It has maps, including ward maps. It also has budgets going back to 2007, audited financial statements back to 2004, and lots of info on the various taxes you pay there. Online payment of water bills is also offered. But it also does not offer information on city expenditures.

Arnold’s website is better still. In addition to board minutes and agendas back to 2006, council packets are posted (as of now, they go back to January.) It would be nice if the packets were posted for a longer time period. Video of each meeting is also posted, back to 2010. This is the ultimate in openness, as it allows those who can’t make the meetings to watch the proceedings at their own convenience. I believe that it was Doris Borgelt who pushed for this to happen.

There is a lot of information on the city’s finance page. There are annual financial reports back to 2005, budgets to 2011, and general and payroll warrants back to 2012. The site also lists e-mail addresses of a number of department heads.

Of course, this is only a partial list of local governments. But it should give you an idea of what features you should expect to see on the websites of the entities that are relevant to you. You’re paying for all this government; you should be able to easily see what it is up to.