FORT PIERCE — After two weeks of anticipation, city leaders canceled a discussion intended to clarify the duties of the city manager and city attorney.
That discussion was deemed necessary after a public dispute between the two officials related to the city allegedly taking disciplinary action against an employee in a way that may have violated federal law.
The motion to remove the discussion from the May 4 agenda passed 4-1, with Commissioner Arnold Gaines claiming the discussion needed to wait because the city received a notice of intent to sue last week related to the same topic.
Gaines, who is also an attorney, said the City Commission should hold off on further public discussion of the topic until commissioners can meet with legal advisors to discuss the notice of intent, a letter which is a required by Florida state law to be sent before a lawsuit can be filed.
A majority of commissioners agreed with Gaines that the discussion needed to wait as a result of the notice of intent.
“I think that this discussion could be held at some future date, but not at this time,” Mayor Linda Hudson said.
Commissioners did not say who had sent the notice, only that it was received by the city on Wednesday or Thursday of the week prior. TCPalm has filed a public records request to obtain a copy of the notice, but has not yet received a copy at the time of publication.
Commissioner Chris Dzadovsky was the lone no-vote on removing the discussion from the agenda.
Dzadovsky said he had prepared a presentation after conducting research that included Florida Supreme Court decisions and Florida Attorney General opinions on the topic, as well as a review of the city’s charter. Dzadovsky said he could give his presentation, on the broad topic of which responsibilities fall under the city manager and which fall under the city attorney, without touching on the specifics of the potential lawsuit, but his colleagues decided not to give him that opportunity.
Later in the meeting, Gaines promised the topic will be discussed at a future City Commission meeting.
“Please understand that I am not trying to hide this conversation from the public,” Gaines said. “It’s going to be back on the agenda.”
The conversation that did not take place May 4 would seemingly have centered around a topic that was discussed at an April 20 City Commission meeting.
Johnna Morris, the city’s finance director, was allegedly suspended following the city becoming aware that she was having her wages garnished under a final judgement against Morris obtained by JP Morgan Chase Bank on Jan. 8 for a total of $14,343.61.
Morris racked up a personal credit card debt of that amount, according to court records. She was to have $1,321.19 garnished from her total earnings of $6,870.44 each pay period, according to court records related to the final judgement.
Morris is still listed as the finance director on the city website, but there are concerns that discipline against her may have violated federal law.
It is illegal to “discharge” an employee merely because their earnings have been subjected to garnishment for a single debt, according to the federal Consumer Credit Protection Act, which is a law that protects workers who are indebted.
The consequences of breaking that law could be a fine up to $1,000 and one year in prison.
“Did anybody know about this federal law before we made any decisions?” Gaines asked at the April 20 meeting. “How come a decision was made and no one knew about this federal law?”
The answer remains unclear.
At the April 20 meeting, commissioners gave different accounts of the events during the meeting and appeared to take sides — one taking the side of City Manager Richard Chess, another side backing City Attorney Sara Hedges.
Dzadovsky put blame on Hedges. Mayor Linda Hudson and City Commissioner Michael Broderick defended Hedges.
“My real concern is about the attorney’s office not providing the best possible legal reference to the city manager in a recent scenario,” Dzadovsky said, “regarding an employee’s wages being garnished.”
When Chess attempted to get a second opinion regarding an employment legal matter, Hedges stopped him from seeking the advice of another attorney, according to Dzadovsky’s version of events.
Hudson, however, disagreed.
“I don’t think you have the story straight,” Hudson said.
A wage garnishment request from a creditor was submitted to the city, which Hedges said was an offense that warranted termination, according to Dzadovsky’s version of events.
Chess defended himself, although he did not reveal details of the garnishment incident.
“At the end of the day, I’m a grown man,” Chess said. “No one tells me who to talk to. And no one tells me what to say.”
“If that’s the case,” Chess said, “I am not in the right seat.”
Neither Chess nor Hedges discussed the topic at the May 4 meeting. The city manager and city attorney are two of the three charter officers — the third being the city clerk — who report directly to the city commission. While the city manager is the boss of the vast majority of city employees, Chess does not oversee Hedges or her office.
Wicker Perlis is TCPalm’s Watchdog Reporter for St. Lucie County. You can reach him at Wicker.Perlis@TCPalm.com.
Jack Randall is TCPalm’s economy and real estate reporter. You can reach him at jack.randall@tcpalm.com.
This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: With lawsuit possibly coming soon, city cancels hotly awaited discussion
Reporting by Wicker Perlis and Jack Randall, Treasure Coast Newspapers / Treasure Coast Newspapers
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
