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.
4 comments:
Every day Davis reminds me of Ray Stevens song about the Illustrious Potentate Coy and his little redhead "friend" running through the convention with nothing on but Coy's FEZ. Just as classy as it gets in old Berkeley County. Now aint everyone proud!
At last check, I thought that citizens, and elected officials, who broke Federal, State, or local LAWS were subject to arrest and/or charges from law enforcement agencies such as, local police, Sheriff, SLED, FBI, etc.! Now that these agencies are aware of Mr. Davis' open and deliberate violations, should we hold our breathe for them to take action? I guest not! There are many legal options for this employee to use. I hope she will sue his backside!
DID KING DANO SHUT THE MEETING DOWN OR WAS IT HELD.THEY NEED TO IMPEACH KING DANO
For information, I talked with one of the senior attorneys in the SC Attorney Generals' Office this afternoon and requested that he look at Mr. Davis' actions in regard to the Clerk of Council position. I told him that I have evidence that Mr. Davis has intentionally and deliberately created a "hostile" work environment in the Clerk of Councils' Office. In addition, Mr. Davis has "harassed" the Clerk of Council. I asked for his review of Mr. Davis' actions under the new Public Integrity Unit established by the SC Attorney General last year to deal with both state AND "local government" to, deter corruption, better protect public trust, and enforce eithics laws to the fullest extent possible. Hopefully, Mr. Davis will be hearing from someone in the SC Attorneys' Office real soon!!
Post a Comment