Wednesday, April 24, 2013
WHO'S LEFT HOLDING THE "BAG"?
It would appear the poison pen campaign against Council's choice for Clerk of Council has failed miserably. Council's choice has been installed. DD is suspiciously quiet and, judging from his history, that's never a good thing. His counter move remains to be seen. But rest assured, there will be a counter move.
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
PEOPLE IN GLASS HOUSES
As we are want to do, Grits Eggs and Politics would like to issue a community service announcement.
"The issuance of defamatory statements in written form constitutes LIBEL, not slander."
While it is more than understandable that any employee working at any job would strive to ingratiate themselves to their boss and re-enforce their job security, generally speaking, it would always be unwise, not to mention reckless, for anyone to perform a duty that would expose their soft underbelly to jeopardy, especially legal jeopardy.
By some strange coincidence, we have come into possession of a group of libelous letters written about County Council's choice for Clerk of Council. Contained in these letters are statements that Council's choice is "unqualified", "discriminatory", "unethical" and a general waste of taxpayers' money, among other defamatory statements.
Have no fear, BC Taxpayers, we have made sure these defamatory documents have been sent to the appropriate legal council. Those in BC who are so worried about libel, slander, and defamation can rest assured the perpetrators will be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law.
"The issuance of defamatory statements in written form constitutes LIBEL, not slander."
While it is more than understandable that any employee working at any job would strive to ingratiate themselves to their boss and re-enforce their job security, generally speaking, it would always be unwise, not to mention reckless, for anyone to perform a duty that would expose their soft underbelly to jeopardy, especially legal jeopardy.
By some strange coincidence, we have come into possession of a group of libelous letters written about County Council's choice for Clerk of Council. Contained in these letters are statements that Council's choice is "unqualified", "discriminatory", "unethical" and a general waste of taxpayers' money, among other defamatory statements.
Have no fear, BC Taxpayers, we have made sure these defamatory documents have been sent to the appropriate legal council. Those in BC who are so worried about libel, slander, and defamation can rest assured the perpetrators will be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law.
Sunday, April 7, 2013
TAXPAYER ALERT
Until January 2013, Supervisor Davis was as happy as a pig in slop. He enjoyed a 4/4 vote split on County Council with himself casting the tie breaking vote on every controversial issue. In other words, he unilaterally controlled Berkeley County. He could spend money as he pleased; borrow more money as he pleased; and successfully hide the details of his nefarious schemes from the 4 Conservatives on Council.
With the election of a 5th Conservative Councilman last November, the dynamic shifted. Now the Conservatives had control over the vote and the Supervisor realized this resulted in his perfect little sand box being filled with land mines. He HAD to do something to mitigate the damage. True to form, he and his trusty legal staff came up with a plan. They focused on the only remaining opportunity to exert any control, the Clerk of Council's office. If the Supervisor could only gain control over the meeting agendas, he might be able to pull this disaster out of the fire.
Prior to retirement in June 2011, the 14 year veteran Clerk of Council trained a replacement. In total, this replacement has 9 years experience in the Clerk's office, which includes a year and a half as interim Clerk. This replacement is the ONLY member of the Clerk's office who has the experience, training, and expertise to head the office. However, this replacement has a serious deficit which renders her unacceptable to the Supervisor; she is an honest professional who realizes she is legally working for and answerable to County Council and NOT the Supervisor.
Shortly after the 5th Conservative vote came on Council, this Clerk of Council replacement developed a medical problem that required attention. She took a short medical leave, FMLA. While she was absent, the Supervisor illegally replaced her. When she returned to work, she was informed that she had not only been replaced but her pay grade and position had been reduced. It boggles the mind to consider how many labor laws these actions violate.
When the 5 Conservatives learned of these actions, they responded. The Vice Chairmen of County Council notified the Clerk's office that he wanted certain items that would correct this blatant violation of the law added to his agenda and that of the regular Council meeting. The Supervisor, in turn, instructed the Clerk's office to REMOVE these items from the regular Council meeting agenda . How many laws did this action violate?
There has not been much publicity about the Supervisor's behavior at that Council meeting. At that meeting, when the Vice Chairman learned that his items had been removed from the agenda, the Supervisor initially said he didn't know how the items came to be removed. It was only after a member of the Clerk's office admitted the Supervisor instructed her to remove them that the Supervisor admitted his actions. From where we come from, that's called a lie.
State law, Home Rule, and County Ordinance clearly state the powers of County Council:
SECTION 4‑9‑110. Council shall select chairman and other officers; terms of office; appointment of clerk; frequency and conduct of meetings; minutes of proceedings.
With the election of a 5th Conservative Councilman last November, the dynamic shifted. Now the Conservatives had control over the vote and the Supervisor realized this resulted in his perfect little sand box being filled with land mines. He HAD to do something to mitigate the damage. True to form, he and his trusty legal staff came up with a plan. They focused on the only remaining opportunity to exert any control, the Clerk of Council's office. If the Supervisor could only gain control over the meeting agendas, he might be able to pull this disaster out of the fire.
Prior to retirement in June 2011, the 14 year veteran Clerk of Council trained a replacement. In total, this replacement has 9 years experience in the Clerk's office, which includes a year and a half as interim Clerk. This replacement is the ONLY member of the Clerk's office who has the experience, training, and expertise to head the office. However, this replacement has a serious deficit which renders her unacceptable to the Supervisor; she is an honest professional who realizes she is legally working for and answerable to County Council and NOT the Supervisor.
Shortly after the 5th Conservative vote came on Council, this Clerk of Council replacement developed a medical problem that required attention. She took a short medical leave, FMLA. While she was absent, the Supervisor illegally replaced her. When she returned to work, she was informed that she had not only been replaced but her pay grade and position had been reduced. It boggles the mind to consider how many labor laws these actions violate.
When the 5 Conservatives learned of these actions, they responded. The Vice Chairmen of County Council notified the Clerk's office that he wanted certain items that would correct this blatant violation of the law added to his agenda and that of the regular Council meeting. The Supervisor, in turn, instructed the Clerk's office to REMOVE these items from the regular Council meeting agenda . How many laws did this action violate?
There has not been much publicity about the Supervisor's behavior at that Council meeting. At that meeting, when the Vice Chairman learned that his items had been removed from the agenda, the Supervisor initially said he didn't know how the items came to be removed. It was only after a member of the Clerk's office admitted the Supervisor instructed her to remove them that the Supervisor admitted his actions. From where we come from, that's called a lie.
State law, Home Rule, and County Ordinance clearly state the powers of County Council:
SECTION 4‑9‑110. Council shall select chairman and other officers; terms of office; appointment of clerk; frequency and conduct of meetings; minutes of proceedings.
The council shall select one of its members as chairman, except where the chairman is elected as a separate office, one as vice‑chairman and such other officers as are deemed necessary for such terms as the council shall determine, unless otherwise provided for in the form of government adopted. The council shall appoint a clerk to record its proceedings and perform such additional duties as the council may prescribe. The council after public notice shall meet at least once each month but may meet more frequently in accordance with a schedule prescribed by the council and made public. All meetings shall be conducted in accordance with the general law of the State of South Carolina affecting meetings of public bodies. Special meetings may be called by the chairman or a majority of the members after twenty‑four hours' notice.
The council shall determine its own rules and order of business. It shall keep a journal in which shall be recorded the minutes of its proceedings which shall be open to public inspection.
If County Council has the authority to select, appoint, or hire a Clerk of Council, and they do, then they, also, have the authority to select, appoint, or hire the people who assistant the Clerk of Council. County Council should and do have complete control of the Clerk of Council's office. This office is for the support of 8 elected officials. The Supervisor has exceeded his authority by interfering in the Clerk's office. No one would think it proper if the Supervisor interfered in such a manner with the Sheriff's office and support staff or the Clerk of Court's office and support staff.
The Supervisor is using the following to support his actions:
SECTION 4‑9‑430. Powers of council and its members; authority of supervisor over certain elected officials.
The council shall not remove any county administrative officers or employees whom the county supervisor or any of his subordinates are empowered to appoint, unless by two‑thirds vote of the members present and voting.
Except for the purposes of inquiries and official investigations, neither the council nor its members shall give direct orders to any county officer or employee, either publicly or privately.
With the exception of organizational policies established by the governing body, the county supervisor shall exercise no authority over any elected officials of the county whose offices were created either by the Constitution or by general law of the State.
This section refers to those employees who fall under the control of the Supervisor's office and administration, NOT the folks under the control of other elected officials. In the Post & Courier today the Supervisor said he had no influence over the offices of "elected officials". How in the Sam Hill does the Supervisor think the Councilmen achieved their positions, by Royal decree? These 8 ARE elected officials and the Clerk's office is theirs not the Supervisor's.
Prior to this situation, few of the controversies created by the Supervisor attained widespread publicity. Generally speaking, very few taxpayers were aware of his activities, whether legal or questionable. Only a small group of diehard Conservative watchdogs knew about and cringed at his antics. But, as more and more taxpayers are negatively impacted by his policies, the media seems to have awakened from their long sleep and are taking notice.
We would strongly suggest that all concerned taxpayers attend the Monday night Council meeting and observe the Supervisor's actions. He is bound to come up with some equally ridiculous points to try to derail the efforts of the 5 Conservatives to rectify this outrageous/illegal situation. We are sitting on the edge of our chair in anticipation.
Prior to this situation, few of the controversies created by the Supervisor attained widespread publicity. Generally speaking, very few taxpayers were aware of his activities, whether legal or questionable. Only a small group of diehard Conservative watchdogs knew about and cringed at his antics. But, as more and more taxpayers are negatively impacted by his policies, the media seems to have awakened from their long sleep and are taking notice.
We would strongly suggest that all concerned taxpayers attend the Monday night Council meeting and observe the Supervisor's actions. He is bound to come up with some equally ridiculous points to try to derail the efforts of the 5 Conservatives to rectify this outrageous/illegal situation. We are sitting on the edge of our chair in anticipation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)