03/18/2008 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 3/18/2008 LETTERS AND COMMUNICATIONS The Clerk read a letter sent via e-mail: "This letter is written to express my disappointment to the mayor's response to Council regarding the absence of the Safety Director at the last 2 meetings of Council. I was hoping that with newly elected members of Council who were supposedly more acceptable to the Mayor, his attitude would have changed. It appears that nothing has changed. When I spoke at the March 5th meeting of Council and noted that the Safety Director was again absent, when she had also been absent from the February 19th meeting, Mayor O'Grady responded by saying, "When she's not here, she's excused - I'm sure she has a reason". Since when does this Mayor have dominion over Council? Where in the codified ordinances does a Director have the power to excuse him or herself from a required duty? This is not to say that this is the attitude of Ms. Thomas. I'm certain that she had a justifiable reason for not being at these meetings. This is to say that it appears to be just another case of the Mayor's response being inappropriate and not respectful of a relationship that should be a partnership between the administration and city council. Under Title 5, Chapter 139 of the Ordinances of the City of North Olmsted the following appears: "139.12 ADDITIONAL DUTIES OF SAFETY DIRECTOR. The Director of Public Safety shall be required to attend all regular meetings of the City Council. (Ord. 2003-25. Passed 3-18-03.)." If it is not an imposition, I am asking the Clerk of Council to please provide a copy of Ordinance 2003-25 to each member of Council for review because the "Whereas" clause explains its reasoning and enforcement. Thomas O'Grady was the Council President at the time when this ordinance was passed, so I know that this requirement should be no surprise to him. And yet, in his statement to Council, "When she's not here, she's excused - I'm sure she has a reason", Mayor O'Grady again, in my opinion, displays contempt for the powers of Council and the members who represents the citizens of this community. It is common place for Council to formally excuse one of its members when he or she is absent. The Mayor does not have that power. It is also common place for a general reason for the absence to be noted for the record. Certainly, there are no members of the administration who should be held to a lesser standard. In general, attendance is a serious concern in terms of cost control in any organization. The best leadership is leadership by example. How can a director expect his or her employees to be in regular attendance with no unscheduled absences when he or she does not maintain a regularly required work schedule? This is something that the mayor should be asking himself when he claims that he is attempting to control the city's operating expenses. Certainly if I were him, I would be focusing more on issues such as replacement overtime costs rather than trying to throw away our city's Fire Dispatchers and the City Engineer. In the past, I have questioned Mayor O'Grady's integrity and judgment. As a member of Council, it makes your job more difficult when you have a Mayor that cannot be trusted. This is just another example of why members of Council need to be vigilant and should be validating and verifying everything that this Mayor says. Each of you should understand the motives and verify the information coming from this Mayor before passing crucial legislation that impacts our taxes or seriously modifies how we are doing business in this community. Most assuredly, you should be enforcing with consistency the rules and codified ordinances governing this City Council. Sincerely, Dennis M. Lambert" 9