After a hearing held March 15 by the Arkansas Ethics Commission, three of the five commissioners present dismissed a three-part complaint submitted in September 2023 against Alexander Mayor Crystal Herrmann. The complaint was submitted by JoAn Churchill, who was city treasurer at the time, and Council Member Juanita Wilson. Attending the hearing were Wilson, Herrmann and City Attorney Chris Madison. Churchill attended the meeting by phone.
The complaint covered three issues. They were; 1) Overpaying herself beyond the amount budgeted, 2) Hiring an elected official from another municipality to work at city hall allowing "confidential access" to city documents and 3) Paying some department heads beyond the amount budgeted.
Herrmann received a letter from the Ethics Commission shortly after the hearing. A copy of the letter was provided to council members at their March 18 meeting.
"Please be advised that the results of staff's investigation were presented to the Commission at the meeting held on today’s date (March 15)," the letter stated. "At that time, the Commission decided, by a vote of 3-0, with Commissioners Irby and Tolbert not present, to DISMISS the complaint."
In making their decisions on each allegation the commissioners relied on one narrow section of Arkansas Code Annotated § 21-8-304(a). That section states, "No public servant shall use or attempt to use his or her official position to secure special privileges or exemptions for himself or herself or his or her spouse, child, parents, or other persons standing in the first degree of relationship, or for those with whom he or she has a substantial financial relationship that are not available to others except as may be otherwise provided by law."
In the letter the first allegation states, "You have overpaid yourself by thousands of dollars ($7,030.00 so far)." According to the ruling the budget wasn't specific enough.
"With respect to allegation number 1, the Commission determined that your acceptance of the prior Alexander Mayor’s salary did not represent a special privilege," the letter to Herrmann stated. "While the complainant and Alexander City Council member Juanita Wilson gave evidence and sworn statements indicating that the City Council intended to reduce your salary to $21,320 at its December 19, 2022 meeting, there was no specific action mentioned in the minutes for that meeting. The City Council did pass a budget for 2023 that may have reduced the overall budget by the intended amount but there was nothing in the budget that directly tied the reduction to your salary."
The second allegation states, "You hired a Treasurer from Haskell who JoAn Allen-Churchill [the complainant herein] believes is compromised (confidential access)."
"With respect to allegation number 2, there was no evidence available indicating that you are related to Ms. Jennifer Hill," the letter said. Likewise, there was no evidence available reflecting that you have a substantial financial relationship with Ms. Hill. Accordingly, even if Ms. Hill’s hire was determined to be a special privilege, she does not fall within the class of people prohibited from receiving a special privilege or exemption by Ark. Code Ann. § 21-8-304(a)."
While the allegation makes no reference to Herrmann having a "financial relationship with Ms. Hill" nor does it mention any potential "special privilege," it does question whether Hill is "compromised" by having "(confidential access)" to records in two municipalities. The Commissioners did not opine as to whether subsection (b) falls under this allegation.
Subsection (b) states, "No public servant shall accept employment or engage in any public or professional activity while serving as a public official which he or she might reasonably expect would require or induce him or her to disclose any information acquired by him or her by reason of his or her official position that is declared by law or rule to be confidential."
Allegation three states, "You have paid many supervisory employees more than the budget allows." Again, when it comes to following a budget, apparently that's not a violation of ethics.
"Moving to allegation number 3, there was no evidence available indicating that you are related to any of the department heads," the letter says. "There was no evidence available reflecting that you had a substantial financial relationship with any of the department heads either. Accordingly, even if a department head was being paid more than the budgeted amount was determined to be a special privilege, none of the department heads fall within the class of people prohibited from receiving a special privilege or exemption by Ark. Code Ann. § 21-8-304(a)."
Receipt of this letter was not discussed during the March 18 council meeting.
No comments:
Post a Comment