The Pacific City Council met Monday to clear up the confusion that had enveloped the apparent confirmation of interim city clerk Sandy Paul on March 25.
And after council members reconsidered their earlier 3-3 vote, they voted 4-2 against the confirmation.
Paul – who had served as Pacific’s city clerk from 2004-2006 – said she was disappointed. She insisted that, despite her qualifications, she had lost her job because of her support for the mayor.
“(The council has) forgotten what their mission is, and they have forgotten what their oath of office is,” Paul said. “The only thing they’re trying to do is get rid of the mayor.”
Not so, said Council President Leanne Guier.
“It was based on the lack of professionalism she had shown in the short time she has been back with the City,” Guier said.
At the close of the March 25 meeting, the general belief was that Mayor Cy Sun, who had appointed Paul, had cast the tie-breaking vote to confirm.
According to City Attorney Kenyon Luce, however, after reviewing recordings of the meeting it was clear that Sun had not been allowed to cast his vote, which he should have been able to do, and that it had not been recorded.
Mayor Pro Tem James McMahon, to whom Sun had turned over responsibility for chairing the March 25 meeting, said he recognized that he had erred by failing to recognize Sun’s tie-breaking vote.
“As the person responsible for chairing the meeting last week for this portion of the meeting, I think that the transcript the city attorney provided shows the council, and me in particular, were in error when I prevented the mayor from casting the tie-breaking vote,” McMahon said.
To muddy the waters even more, councilmember Gary Hulsey notified the council and mayor on March 26 that he had cast his vote to confirm Paul in error. Hulsey, Joshua Putnam and Tren Walker originally voted to confirm, while John Jones, Leanne Guier and James McMahon voted against this past week.
“I was confused, I thought we were still on the amendment last week when I voted in the affirmative,” Hulsey said at the special meeting.
To straighten things out, Luce recommended that the council reconsider the motion to confirm, essentially starting the vote from scratch.
“Based on the record, it is my recommendation that the council takes steps to clarify the record on this issue and ensure the proper procedures are followed,” Luce said.
In the subsequent vote, Hulsey, Guier, McMahon and Jones voted no, while Putnam and Walker voted yes.
“Hopefully, (the mayor will) get the job posted and we’ll get someone put in that position,” Guier said.
ALSO: The council voted unanimously to disapprove a contract with Intravaia Investigations to investigate whistleblower allegations made against the City.
Putnam said his concern was the City’s potential liability.
“When the investigators were here, I had asked about their liability insurance and the City’s potential liability for any investigations they took for us,” Putnam said. “They said they had a bond, and that was sufficient. MSRC staff attorneys said there is not shelter available to us that would shelter us from the actions of a private investigator conducting an investigation on behalf of the City, and they advise against hiring an uninsured contractor for this service.”
McMahon agreed:
“When I looked at this company’s proposal to the City, I thought their contract was pretty unprepared,” McMahon said. “I was also troubled that this company has been in business all of, I think it’s four months, four-and-a-half now. So I think they’re pretty inexperienced with this type of investigation.”
Hulsey added that he was concerned about a possible conflict of interest arising from one of the principals involved with Intravaia, who had interviewed but was not chosen for an opening in the Pacific Police Department.
