2014-05-27 Reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3. Rod Jennings was sworn in as Councilmember, Ward Three, in the City Clerk’s office H. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (Total of 15 minutes allowed) Point of order; Mr. Crow asked Mayor Welsch if citizens who had signed up for agenda items that have now been removed still be allowed to speak? Mayor Welsch stated that they would be allowed to do so. Holston Black, Jr., 1336 Mendell Drive, University City, MO Mr. Holston stated that it is a little disconcerting that the resolutions have been taken off the agenda; his main concern is about the censure. He stated that at the last meeting Mayor Welsch announced that Mr. Kraft would not be censured, but based on his understanding, the full legislative body would have to make that decision by voting on the issue. He asked whether the Mayor alone can make such a decision. He stated that the minutes also made reference to Dr. Carr and Ms. Carr, which led him to question if this was the same person or two totally different individuals. Loren Grossman, 7350 Drexel Drive, University City, MO Mr. Grossman stated that he supports Resolution 2014-19 which requested a reprimand of Councilmember Kraft for his use of explicit profanity directed at a citizen who was addressing Council. He stated that while no one likes criticism, persons who hold a public office should know that in a free society the public has the right to speak publically to their elected officials, and there is much to be gained by this process. Mr. Grossman stated that once the profanity was uttered, Councilman Kraft lied to everyone by stating he had to cough. But when it went viral on “You Tube”, Mr. Kraft wrote an apology. Mr. Grossman stated that use of profanity by a public official in a public forum, is certainly wrong, however lying about it took Mr. Kraft’s behavior to a new low. Mr. Grossman stated that he is a Boy Scout Merit Badge Counselor and one of the virtues of the scouting program is to expose youth to civic leaders whom they can see as role models. Aside from a total lack of civility, Mr. Kraft, certainly violated one of the primary Scouting laws, which is trustworthiness. Jan Adams, 7150 Cambridge Avenue, University City, MO Ms. Adams stated that she wished to comment on the misinformation being disseminated about the legal issues involving the discipline of the City’s firefighters. In her legal opinion, everything that she has either heard or read was not based on reality. Ms. Adams stated that while the City’s Attorney is constrained by professional ethics to limit her comments, she believes that it is important that the City’s public record include a response to the claims made at the last Council meeting, as well as those made on social media. Ms. Adams stated that she is a lawyer with 49 years of experience and would present a summary of her background to support her legal opinion, although she does not and will not represent the City or any of its employees. Ms. Adams stated she served on University City’s Civil Service board and considered herself an expert on the sections of the City Charter that covered City employees, as well as City’s rules, regulations and constitutional rights of City’s employees. Ms. Adams stated her legal analysis on the firefighters’ case. Those who claim that the law is clear and that all you have to do is read the statute are wrong; statutes must be read in conjunction with other laws. She stated that the City’s Charter restricts the campaign activities of all of its employees based on the sound public policy of protecting employees from being compelled to participate in campaigns to protect their jobs, and being awarded jobs based on patronage. The new state statute now limits certain restrictions, but one cannot simply read that statute because there is a huge body of case law that relates to statutory construction. Moreover, there is contract law. Although everyone has a right to free speech, they also may voluntarily waive those rights. Ms. Adams stated that the City’s employees have agreed that in exchange for employment, they will not campaign and they are bound by that agreement. She stated that statutes cannot be applied retroactively as they are prospective only. The statute at issue did not become law until August 2013; it is fair and reasonable to take the position that the firefighters hired before August 2013 voluntarily waived their right to campaign. Ms. Adams stated that the new statute prohibits the City from making that waiver a condition of employment, but only for those hired after August 2013. It is also important to note that the statute at issue is civil and not criminal, so all of the hyperbolic rhetoric that the City Manager has violated the firefighters’ due process rights is wrong. It is the firefighters who must sue and prove that the statute prohibits the actions of the City Manager. Ms. Adams