Maryland Attorney General Defers to Salisbury City Attorney on Fire Chief’s Acting Status – Term Expired January 22 Emergency Session Set for Mon., Feb. 4, 11 a.m. SALISBURY
– Salisbury Mayor Jim Ireton’s December 17, 2012, request for an opinion from the Maryland Attorney General regarding the acting status of the fire chief has been answered with a letter, dated January 3, 2013. The letter states that the Office of the Attorney General defers to the “municipal counsel with respect to matters involving the construction of local law.”
Ireton did not inform the Council that the Attorney General’s office had responded. The Council learned of it after Council President Terry Cohen followed up and received her own letter from the Attorney General at the end of the day on January 28, 2013, including the response to Ireton.
City Attorney Mark Tilghman analyzed the language of the City’s official Employee Handbook, which limits acting status terms to a maximum of six months, unless approved for a longer period by the City Council. The Employee Handbook also notes that any increase in pay for serving in an acting status is considered “temporary.” Tilghman wrote that acting status cannot be “indefinite,” which is not “temporary.”
The legal opinion means approval for the status of the acting fire chief expired on January 22, 2013. The same is true of approval for the acting deputy fire chief.
On January 29, Ireton sent an email to the Council, stating, “We do not agree with the municipal attorney….”
“This isn’t the first time the Mayor has withheld information from the Council. It’s not the first time the Mayor has created a legal crisis for the City. It’s not the first time the Mayor has allowed an issue to go unaddressed past its expiration date,” said City Council President Terry Cohen. “The Mayor’s action, or lack of it, has left me not knowing whether I have the legal authority to sign off on the pay disbursements for these two positions, although by the Charter only one signature is required.”
“Due to the Mayor’s actions and refusal to honor the official legal opinion he himself requested and the legislative intent of the City Council, the Mayor has created a difficult and time-consuming crisis that must be addressed immediately. This crisis situation has been caused by the Administration failing to provide Council with the information needed, potentially creating legal jeopardy for the City. This is the detrimental environment in which the Council has been trying to get its work done for two years,” Cohen added.
The Council will be convening in an emergency legislative meeting on Monday, February 4, at 11 a.m. to discuss and consider taking legislative action to address the time-sensitive issue of legal interpretation and legislative intent regarding the application of Section 0308 of the Employee Handbook. The meeting will be held in Room 306 of the Government Office Building at 125 N. Division St.
The Agenda & Materials are posted on the website at the link below.
http://www.ci.salisbury.md.us/cityclerk/briefingbook/SplMtg2113.pdf
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
12 comments:
City voters need to hear Ireton's defense of his failure to disclose the January 3rd letter to the Council. This needs to be in the DT, whether or not they like to print negatives about him.
What a cluster. Ireton is a cluster.
What a sicko to do this to the town to "get" his political opponents.
Sicko, sicko, sicko.
What was that smart quip he used at the NAACP, "yeah the buck stops here. You have to know the laws".
Seems he put his foot in his mouth on this issue by not knowing the law.
Or, he knew the law and just chose to ignore it.
Either way, withholding pertinent information from the council is NOT working together Jim.
You made this mess and then dumped it into the council' lap. And in doing so, you exposed the City of Salisbury to possible legal action.
AND you did it in an election year. You put yourself in harms way too.
Not very smart. You talked about partnerships and yet you didn't work with your own closet team, the city council.
And to top it off, you disagreed with your own city's attorney.
No offense Mr. Ireton sir, but in the business world, I believe that would be grounds for dismissal.
And you did it to yourself.
Did you see that blog on the Daily Times? Does that writer Jeremy Cox supports fraud? Sure sounds like it. If that employee book says no more than 6 months unless the council says so, then that's all Hoppes gets.
FIRED in the real world...and he teaches our kids.sad..
Typical Progressive liberal democrat!
Ireton deliberately and knowingly withheld information that did not support his cause showing his willingness to deceive as well as his lack of genuine transparency and responsibility in government.
This is malfeasance in office.
The childish antics displayed by Jim Ireton and his "progressive" (aka old school failed socialist) political cohorts must come to an end. Salisbury deserves better.
Our children deserve better role models.
It is time to restore some dignity, respect and honor in city hall.
Surely he knew the AG's letter of January 3rd would become public knowledge sooner or later. Maybe he has an explanation.
His little silk panties are in a wad now , I think it is funny. What a joke for a mayor.
Can't legal action be taken against the mayor? Failure to perform his job duties and denying council information I would think would be grounds for impeachment.
I still find it totally unbelieveable that he is allowed to teach our children. His public displays of rather questionable morales, his temper fits, his deceitful behavior is not something that children need exposure to in school. Why in the world would the BOE superintendent want this kind of person around our children? But then look at the school board performance...says a great deal of everyone's values.
We dimish the seriousness of this legal and ethical issue when we make comments about someone's sexuality. It also causes some voters to defend the rights of the person when they wouldn't have been able to defend the legal decisions of an elected official. It's admirable to be relentless in the pursuit of accountability but please consider eliminating demeaning personal barbs.
12:28, agreed.
The issue here is the mayor's actions in his job. They are unacceptable.
He can't be impeached, only recalled, which won't happen with an election so near.
I believe what this chump wanted was to create a scandal so the fire department would hate Debbie Campbell and work against her re-election.
Maybe I don't understand why the council made the decision they did, although I can't say I'm all that impressed with the current chief. He's okay, but he also promoted a lot of unnecessary spending and that stupid fire boat. But they had every right to make that decision, so maybe they know something the firefighters don't know.
Just seems like dirty pool, so I'll just say if the firefighters go after Mrs. Campbell, I guess I just won't ever send them a check again. They should have enough sense and class to stay out of it.
Post a Comment