The circumstances surrounding the resignation of the chief of the City Environmental Quality Division has a "chilling effect" on other appointed employees and the information they share with City Council, according to several City Council members.
Earlier this month, Mayor Alvin Brown accepted the 2011 letter of resignation of Vince Seibold, chief of the environmental quality division since 2007, after a fact-finding investigation into alleged "unauthorized communication."
Seibold and other appointed officials tendered resignation letters at the beginning of Brown's term, which is standard practice for appointed officials for incoming mayors.
The Council Rules Committee sought information about Seibold's departure, which prompted the issue to be added to its Monday agenda.
General Counsel Cindy Laquidara said the mayor has the right to appoint or dismiss at will and it was determined Seibold and the administration "were not seeing eye to eye."
As part of proposed reorganization introduced in late March, the administration proposes to shift the environmental quality division from the Neighborhoods Department to the Public Works Department.
Karen Bowling, City chief administrative officer, said Seibold shared his concerns about the move with the administration, which the administration thought was then "resolved."
Seibold later shared his concerns with members of the Environmental Protection Board, at what a City official said was both at the board's request and his own inclination.
Laquidara said Seibold asked a member of the Office of General Counsel to "do something inappropriate and not tell her boss."
According to documents, Seibold allegedly requested Cherry Shaw of the general counsel's office to prepare a document for the board —without knowledge of consent of Shaw's supervisor — regarding a conflict of interest in the reorganization because of compliance and enforcement components.
Bowling later said the incident was the "real issue."
"I think this has a chilling effect on a lot of people," said Council Vice President Bill Gulliford. "I don't think open government is defined by suppression of information to anybody."
He said that Council cannot expect a division chief or department head to "share the whole story about their professional opinion from this point forward," without fear of punitive action.
Council member Lori Boyer agreed.
"I think the message you have sent is that no appointed employee can publicly disagree with anything the administration is offering, even if they are asked a point-blank question," she said.
She called it a "difficult" situation for the Council and the City because Council needs to be able to talk to professionals and not just the mayor's office.
"They need to be free to respond to us without talking" to members of the administration first, Boyer said
Members questioned the options Seibold was presented when his resignation letter was accepted and whether such letters should be allowable after a period of time.
Council member Robin Lumb sought clarification whether legislation could sunset or prohibit resignation letters, which Laquidara said she would research.
Rules Committee Chair Clay Yarborough said with the facts as presented, he didn't see the case as an issue of defamation against the administration or mayor, and requested further documentation about the resignation and events leading to it.
Yarborough called the matter a checks-and-balance practice given the shaky justification of Seibold's departure.
"I expect straight answers," Yarborough said.
Laquidara said the files will be provided to the committee, which intends to review the issue at its May 6 meeting.
Yarborough said that while it was not his intent to hold a formal hearing, Council rules allow for a hearing on the issue with subpoena power if necessary.
(904) 356-2466