The Tallahassee Commission has approved a contract for new City Manager Karen Jumonville.
But one contract detail raised questions about whether the current commission majority is pushing a deal meant to dull the impact of November’s general elections.
The contract includes a clause specifying the manager can only be removed with a
2/3rds vote of the commission. That means four of the city’s five commission
members would be needed to fire her.
Tallahassee Mayor John Dailey negotiated the contract with Jumonville, and said
during the meeting he led the charge for that change.
“I think it depoliticizes the position of the of the city manager, I think it is needed. I have stood on this position for many, many, many years. When I served as the chairman of the county commission, when Vince Long was hired, I led the charge then to change the county charter to make sure that it was included. And to this day, the termination procedure for the county administrator of Leon County is a supermajority provision as well," he said.
But concerns about political gamesmanship dominated public comment and commission
discussion.
Tallahassee resident John Thomas questions why the details of the contract were released to the public less than 24 hours before commissioners discussed it.
“Residents deserve more than a last minute presentation of a contract with a five-year term severance, extra allowance, automatic renewals, and a provision requiring four or five, four out of five commissioners to remove the city manager. Mayor Dailey, if this proposal was truly in the best interest of Tallahassee, then it should have been able to withstand full public scrutiny, not be rushed through under the radar or presented as if the public should simply accept it," he said.
Resident Jordan Strickland called out the timing of this decision: right before an election where John Dailey isn’t running, but three of the commission seats will be on the ballot.
“Voters are about to have their say on who leads this city going forward, and instead of letting that election run its course, the majority of this commission is racing to lock in a decision that ties the hands of whoever comes next. That's not service before self; that's self before service," he said.
The hire comes after the board’s three-commissioner majority suffered a significant loss in the August primaries. The two candidates in the commission’s seat three race headed to a runoff, PJ Perez and Tom Derzypolski, beat a candidate endorsed by the current commission majority and both have been critical of the city manager selection process.
In Commissioner Dianne Williams-Cox’s comments on why she is supporting the
Contract language, she pointed specifically to Commissioner Jeremy Matlow’s social media post criticizing the process.
“That doesn't look like someone who is trying to bring this city together. We're trying to stabilize this city by making sure we have some folks in place who know how to run this city because they've worked their way up through the city and know the different parts of the city. That, to me, is worth more than any you know amount of money. Unfortunately, it is during a campaign season, but we govern our community by campaigns. We've got to govern them by the stability of what residents expect us to have. This is a well-run city. Whatever you think about it, it is a well-run city," she said.
Matlow voted against moving forward with the contract, saying it would create a situation where the city manager would be unaccountable to the majority of the commission.
“I want you to imagine a different scenario where decisions made by the city commission were not implemented. If three votes sold the hospital, but the city manager wouldn't move forward with that sale. If three votes sold the golf course, and the city manager would not move forward with that sale. If three votes decided to terminate the agreement with the county to provide fire services, but the city manager refused to move forward with that action, what then does the recourse of three votes on the city commission have? You would have a completely unaccountable city management that would require four votes to terminate for not following the direction of the majority of the body. That is wrong and cannot stand," he said.
There’s uncertainty about whether that part of the contract would completely tie
the hands of a future commission though. City Attorney Amy Toman said during the meeting that while terminating it with a 3-2 vote could put them in a breach
of contract if it is terminated early, there is no city charter rule preventing a
future commission from terminating the city manager with a simple majority
vote. So, whether that part of the contract would hold up in court is untested.
The contract takes effect on Oct. 1st.
