posted October 27, 2009
At the last East Ridge Council Meeting, City Manager William Whitson made some very erroneous statements. These statements were in regard to what he called “fairness issues” over whether to pay the remainder of Mayor Mike Steele’s legal fees incurred in his defense of the ouster suit brought on behalf of some citizens of East Ridge.
He made these statements on behalf of East Ridge. I would like to take this opportunity to respond with the correct facts that can be verified by public record, which everyone can see.
Mr. Whitson framed this as a fairness issue. He also stated Mr. Steele “won an ouster case brought by a group of citizens.” Add to that the ridiculous statement “the mayor did nothing wrong.”
First and foremost, the ouster case was not a win or lose situation. By the rules of the East Ridge City Charter, ouster was the only method to remove a city official. The citizens did not have the option for a recall with a signature list which would have been much easier.
By order of the court it was determined there “is no ground for relief.” In other words, the judge did not feel there was enough strong evidence to remove Mayor Steele from office. Nowhere in the court order does it state that Mayor Steele “did nothing wrong.” The fact and truth of the matter, the mayor lied in his deposition and he lied under oath on the stand during the trial. The court further stated “from the opinion the Judge found on several allegations that the conduct, while wrong, was not willful; was it willful conduct ‘when violating the charter’ or is it 'ignorance' on the part of the mayor.” The court deemed the allegations brought forth were due to the "mayor’s ignorance."
The order also referred to allegations made in paragraph (8) in the conclusion of the order that “Mayor Steele’s violations of the city charter” gives the relators (citizens) grounds to pursue relief to make a few observations that may have future relevance therein. This gave the citizens appeal rights, as there were reservations regarding the violations of the city charter. I do not believe anywhere in this document does it state Mayor Steele “did nothing wrong.”
In regard to “fairness,” there was no choice per the city charter but to pursue an ouster. If changes need to be made so we can be fair to our city officials, we need to remove the Ouster method of removal and add a recall with the necessary amount of signatures. This would eliminate the need for court proceedings.
One would have to ask why his attorney didn’t advise him of the legal fees in pursuing this case or at least a supposed amount beforehand. There are many other fine attorneys out there that would have charged a much lesser fee; ours did. He did the majority of the work under unfair conditions and in a smaller amount of time, and he billed a smaller fee. Even the judge was surprised at the attorney’s amount for his legal fees; thus the order for the amount to be paid to him by the citizens.
Should the city of East Ridge pay for the remainder of the mayor’s legal fees? I would say absolutely not. The citizens had to pay for their legal fees, court fees, and a portion of the mayor’s fees. Most of these were elderly citizens on fixed incomes, and some have since passed away.
But in case you may think we are being biased, why not take that money and use it for the East Ridge citizens who will not receive monies due to the flood? There was even a member of the City Council whose home was completely destroyed; he was interviewed on Channel 9 news. Why not take that money and help Council Member Manning and others with their flood damages? That would be the most Christian way to spend this money, and I am sure Mayor Steele would agree with me on this issue.
The payment of the mayor’s legal fees was delayed until Thursday, when all council members are expected to be present. If you feel you should pay for his fees, so be it. If on the other hand you might feel that your money would be better spent on the damages caused by the flood to our many citizens and businesses, then please express your opinion. Either be there at the next meeting or call your council members and let them know how you feel regarding this matter.
For the ouster citizens, it is over and we have paid our dues. In the process we proved the caliber of those we have leading our city and unfortunately representing our city. Many of you have witnessed the same long after the trial. Most importantly, we all need to remember 2010 will be here in the blink of an eye.
PS In an earlier version of this opinion, I somehow must have forgotten that the mayor and his attorney do not have the same mother-in-law; she just happens to be very good friends with the mayor. It was her suggestion that her son-in-law represent the mayor with his previous legal problems and his present problems. My sincere apologies.
Jackie Fulks
| Dining Out | Business | Movies | Focus | About Us |
| Church | Living Well | Memories | Outdoors | Real Estate | Student Scene | Travel |
