Unusual ordinance struck down at Mt. Vernon BOA meeting

An ordinance allowing for the punishment of aldermen who tamper in city business outside of meeting was brought before Mt. Vernon’s governing body at their regular meeting on Tuesday, Aug. 25.
 
The ordinance, which was requested by Mayor Jason Haymes, includes “actions that may be taken when a member of the board of aldermen interferes with the conduct of any department or duties of employees subordinate to the city administrator. The ordinance failed with a split vote by aldermen.
 
Haymes said that in the past six months, aldermen had interfered with the jobs of city workers on multiple occasions. Haymes lumped himself in with the aldermen stating that he too was guilty of such infractions.
 
“More often in the last six months than before we’ve had these conversations with the board,” said Haymes. “And it continues to be something that’s coming across my plate.”
 
Haymes said that he brought the ordinance before the board, in part so he could discuss the matter with members in open session.
 
“You’re a board, and when you walk out of here, you have no authority to make any decisions on your own,” he said.
 
Some aldermen took issue with the fact that the ordinance was redundant, as was argued by Alderman Craig Nelson and others. City attorney Toni Hendricks agreed that the measures set out in this ordinance are already defined in state statute and in Mt. Vernon city code.
 
“If it’s a state ordinance, maybe we just need a little more training and not a [new] ordinance,” said Alderman Dallas Gramm.
 
Aldermen also voiced confusion about how strict such an ordinance would be.
 
“But what is interference?” said Nelson. “If I go out to the golf course and say, ‘Hey Shelby, we’re out of Cherry Pepsi; you need to order more,’ would that be interference? I think it’s really vague, and for that I’m voting no.”
 
“You kind of have to let common sense prevail whenever you’re having these conversations,” replied Haymes. “And if you’re talking about a direct interference with what that man’s supervisor has authorized, told or directed him to do, then that’s a situation that could cause a problem.”
 
The board, citing multiple concerns with the ordinance, namely vagueness and redundancy, struck down the ordinance. Craig Nelson, Logan Phillips, Jasmine Burks, Daryck Wheeler and Mike Tebow voted against. It failed with only three members (David Eden, Lowell Phillips and Dallas Gramm) voting yes.
 
 
Water and wastewater rate study
 
The board took the first step in what could be a massive improvement of their water and wastewater infrastructure by approving a rate study to be conducted by Great River Engineering. The engineering firm previously came before the board to present a multitude of options for improvement, but before anything can begin, a rate study will take place.
 
This study will evaluate citizens that use the city’s water and wastewater services, evaluate historical revenue and projected expenses.
 
The goal is to eventually bring rates up to the point that they cover the expenses accrued by offering sewer and water. This change would be incremental as previously reported by the Record, and process could steadily increase over the course of a decade.
 
The board gave the go-ahead to Great River to begin the study, and paid them $39,500 to do so.
 
 
Dog days
The board also heard from a host of citizens who were concerned about the welfare of a local animal. Citizens reported that a husky dog has been tethered outside a local home with little or no food and water as high temperatures continue.
 
The dog, the citizens argued, could be killed from the heat alone. They claimed that it remains outside at all times of the day and locals can do nothing about it for fear of the home’s inhabitant. The city discussed in detail possible avenues to remedy this issue, but police officers have already stopped by the home and reported that, since the animal had food and water, there was nothing they could do at the time.
 
Representatives of the city said they will continue to look into possible options to assist the dog.
 
 
Administrative vehicle
At the previous meeting, members approved the acquisition of a new Chevrolet truck to replace a damaged administrative-use SUV.
 
City Administrator Rob Harrington, who asked for the truck, walked back his previous stance. At a prior meeting, Harrington contended that if the city purchased a truck, it could be used for various duties around town, beyond just transportation.
 
At the Aug. 25 meeting, however, Harrington said that, after speaking with city personnel, he discovered that some did not feel comfortable with such a vehicle as a means of transportation. He asked that the board instead approve the purchase of an SUV. The board obliged, leasing a Chevrolet Traverse in the amount of $47,072.
 
“The staff is more comfortable driving something like this when they go to conferences,” said Harrington.