Rough Transcript:-listen to audio for exact wording.
Miller: We're here tonight for one item agenda and that is Discussion, consideration and possible action regarding City Attorney Pendleton's determination that no official grievance exists in connection with Oakdale Park Director Joslin because of the City's grievance procedures as set forth in the City's Personnel Policy were not followed. Is there any discussion? ... YOu all have been given information and what we are wanting to do when you can go through, this is all associated with Mr Joslin's evaluation and when it was signed, response to follow and he can always respond back as far as fliing it, he did not do the procedures as set forth in our policy, were not followed.
Martin: I've got a question I'm reading this here about Joslin, official grievance and I haven't been sent a copy of the grievance, I guess. When Michael returned from vacation and he filed it within five days .. is it still in the grievance the incident that he filed?
Miller: I believe it was received 10 days and even though Mr Leamons was on vacation, it oculd have been sent by email, regular mail, or hand delivered. He was out of the timeline what we have in our personnel policy that he has 5 days.
Martin: Does the grievance actually say what the incident was that, why he filed a grievance?
Miller: I know he listed a bunch of things on his letter I don't see actual,... when I read this I don't remember seeing grievances. I know that you had a meeting with Mr Leamons and there are some things that can't be fixed, there are some things are working and there are some things that you have discussed but as far as my grievances, I don't have it.
Bryant: So these emails that are supplied right here, who submitted those?
Leamons: I submitted those
Bryant: Was Mr Joslin notified to submit any type of emails to this particular discussion? I see what you submitted but I don't, are these the only ones, are there more?
Miller: Mr Joslin sent all of us an email and it was a copy of what he had previously sent Michael. I think it was 9 or 10 pages, i'm not sure.
Bryant: So, who approved this meeting?
Miller: I called it because... I asked Michael to forward the letter to our attorney. to make sure that we were correct that this .. the policy procedure in our personnel policy was not followed. And I just wanted to have an opinion... a legal opinion to make sure that the policy was not followed. And then there was a response from Mr Joslin that said he had no right to determine if this was the reason or not and I thought there might be some problems so I called this special meeting if we could determine if ... followed the personnel handbook.
Bryant: Was it approved by the City Attorney? City Administrator? Let me.. I'm probably going to shut this meeting down. Right now, because here's, I'm going to speak my mind. First of all, we're being supplied with some information from one side, this .. why is there even information about that in here, why are we discussing that? We're here to approve an ordinance or a policy
Miller: No.. I just want to tell you, we're already approved the policy.
Bryant: Wer'e here to approve that the policy is, in fact, intact. ON the other side, we've got information from the city administrator, this has turned into a ..conversation about what happened in the process. Nobody has spoken to Mr Joselin, I guess, about the supplied emails. I'm confused about that and I'm also confused about the structure of this meeting. What's the purpose of discussion? Is it to talk about Mr Joslin, because I can tell you right now .. You have, let me finish, Mayor. .. YOu opened a meeting and you're in violation of employee privacy. You're not discussing an ordinance, you're discussing an employee privacy.
Miller: I am not, because it was brought to our attention that this was a grievance and the response was, it was not, procedures were not followed.
Bryant: Then we should have discussed the personnel policy, then you brought in Mr Joslin's name. This grievance was submitted privately to the City Administrator. Right now you have opened it in public records and made that an open records subject which is violating employee rights.
Miller: A personnel record can be available.
Bryant: This particular subject was requested to be in executive session twice that I know of. Once by me and once by an employee, denied, why was that denied, first of all, and second of all, we aried out an employees personal information and not only embarrassed the City by airing dirty laundry but violated an employee's rights. I don't care what you say, I know I've been to TML enough, the phone calls, by even mentioning his name.You're not discussing a policy, you're discussing an employee personal and private conversatoin and rights that he has held by filing a grievance, so what I suggest.. we're here to protect the citizens so what happens is, not only is fhe full council responsible for any grievance or liability for any type of ... each and every one of you are responsible What I'm going to do, I'm going to recommend that this subject matter be closed, taken to executive session like was requested twice, and that'll be the end of it, because right now you're just digging yourself a hole. You cannot discuss a city employee's grievance or personal matter, you shouldn't even have mentioned his name. .. I'm going to excuse myself from this meeting and I would suggest you close the meeting and we revisit this in executive session in December
Miller: Thank you.
Vaughn: I may be mistaken but I don't read anything in here that pertains to Mr Joslin's performance review. The only thing I'm reading in here is the timing of the exchange of messages and rebuttals and so forth between
Miller: And that is what we are talking about, whether the timeline was met and if the timeline was met do we need to move forward with this and put it on a meeting, if the timeline was not met do we need to say I'm sorry the timeline was not met as per our personnell policy.
Oliver: I've read the .. that we received from Mr Josline and I do believe there are some things that need to be addressed. but the way this particiular item is on the agenda, we can't talk about any of them. I do agree those items probably need to be discussed and that does need to be handled in executive session but I know we can't do anything on that today. We should probably have an executive session in December to discuss these issues that have been brought to light
Martin: Followup on this also in executive session. We're talking about a 4 million dollar committment so I think it needs to be talked about
Ambrose: Oakdale work camper. My question is there's a 5 day time period, does it stipulate that the time frame if the person given the grievance is not present, then the time the person is not present is included?
Miller: It's a 5 day time frame..
Ambrose: Anyone ?
Miller: Need to go back to the city administrator
Ambrose: Does it state in the ordinance .. doesn't stipulate how to be presented?
Oliver: We're not here to talk about his grievance. If we do decide that this is grievance, can't talk about the contents of it.
Bryant: speaking as a citzen. This cannot be about an employee grievance. You speak about the policy but you still continue to speak about the personal grievance file by an employee. Thsi is executive session subject matter. Mr Pendleton, as the city attorney,you're paid to protect the City, you need to cancel this meeting immediately. .. you are making the city council liable for any litigation in the future
Pendleton. I disagree, there is no liability for the city in the conversation being had to this point. I'm not in charge of running the meeting so .. as you sit here today as you all want to conduct your meeting. I'm not here to set the policy and consider the agenda for you guys.
Miller: Anyone else? Let's consider and take possible action.
Oliver: I make a motion that we move this to executive session. The entire thing. ..Move this matter to executive session in December as a personnel matter.
Leamons I'm concerned that we have policites that it's our intention to follow, we were following the policies as written... City attorney determined there is no grievance under the city's policies. If city council is going to take this up as a grievance then city council not following the policies. and my question is are there other city council policies that city council is not going to follow? It causes a concern.
Bryant: The fact of a policy has nothing to do with someone filing a grievance. The policy's in place, the grievance is a different matter. Right now what council's trying to do... is silence the employee. There's an other side to this story that thyy're trying to prevent the council from hearing. That's why two executive sessions were denied, one by the employee, one by myself. So they're trying to establish this but do as you may but if this failes, all it takes is 3 city council meetings to get an executive session in December
Miller: I will say something. What we do in December has nothing, right now, is if our personnel policy was followed. IF there is something else we need to take to executive session, that is one thing. 5 day timeline. Only thing and if we need to have a meeting we can do that, but the only thing at this point is if we had a grievance procedure if follows personnel policy.
Stephenie: ONly thing you can make a motion on it, is let it lie. Cannot call for an exec session today, 3 council people can put it on as a special request.
Miller: is there a motion to vote on whether or not personnel policy was followed.
? (Leamons?) Grievance procedures, he or she may submit a grievance procedure within 5 working days. A little bit vague there, I'm reading it as if the employee delivers within 5 days, doesn't really matter if the supervisor is there.
Miller: Does not say you have to put in that supervisor's hands, and several ways to deliver it. Whether someone it here or not. As long as it wsa delivered to the office of the supervisor, emailed
Ambrose: Oakdale. I hear what you're saying but the reverse could also be 1, based on someone's understanding of the statute. Somebody that is more black and white rather than gray more literal can read that to say it has to be delivered to your supervisor. Some people are more prone to hand delivering interpersonal .. if I were reading that statute, I'm going to wait until my supervisor is back.. that policy is wide open to interpretation.
Bryant: Smart counsel, hate that I have to keep pointing out these facts, turning into a one sided courtroom, where is the other person's information? What is the grievance? We don't know what it is. Their idea of a grievance may be something else, if you're talking about an evaluation, might be something of a different matter, how do you know? Telling you, there is more to this, I'd play it safe and have executive session to discuss.
Miller: If you are through you may leave or you can be quiet.
Leamons: Make counsel aware that we did notify Mr Josline of this meeting on Friday and I understand the city council was provided a copy of what was identified as the grievance.