Loading...
1998-10-05 CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING MEETING MINUTES 7:00PM12G MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS, HELD ON OCTOBER 5, 1998 AT 7:00 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 3519 LIBERTY DRIVE, PEARLAND, TEXAS. The meeting was .called to order with the following present: Mayor Tom Reid Mayor Pro Tem Larry Wilkins Councilmember William Berger Councilmember Helen Beckman Councilmember Klaus Seeger Interim City Manager Glen Erwin City Attorney Darrin Coker City Secretary Young Lorfing Absent: Councilmember Tetens. Others in attendance: Project Coordinator Alan Mueller; Police Chief Mike Hogg; City Engineer John Hargrove; Planning and Development Director Dennis Smith and Utility Accounts Supervisor Missy Miller. PURSUANT TO THE CITY OF PEARLAND CHARTER SECTION 6.07. Public Hearing to be held: This hearing was held to permit him/her to present the facts pertinent to charges specified in the recall petition. CALL TO ORDER PURPOSE OF HEARING - PRESENTATION OF FACTS PERTINENT TO THE CHARGES SPECIFIED IN THE RECALL PETITION OF COUNCILMEMBER WILLIAM BERGER. Councilmember Berger addressed Council and stated that during regular City Council Meetings the Agenda permits any citizen to speak their mind without hearing responses from their elected officials. Sometimes this procedure can be very difficult for Councilmembers because what is being said may be inaccurate or untrue but a dialogue with the citizen is not allowed. Tonight, we are here for this Public Hearing because our City Charter dictates the procedures for a Recall Election and allows the "accused" to respond to the various charges. It is my turn to speak while the audience can only listen and 1 do have some things to say. Page 1 of 8 - 10/5 127 Let me start out by stating very clearly what I believe is the basis of the accusations listed in my Recall Petition (Exhibit 1): they are politically motivated charges orchestrated by Mr. Grohman with the intent to remove a perceived three vote majority on City Council and who have been critical of his past performance. I was the lucky one selected because according to our Charter, only 150 signers are required for a Councilmember who ran unopposed for their office. Recall Petitions for Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Seeger would necessitate signatures from 30% of those who voted in their particular election - a much more difficult task. Now let's review the four charges leveled against me which are based on malfeasance in office, incompetence and misconduct. First, I am accused of violating Section 10.07 of the City Charter which states that "no officer or employee of the city shall have a financial interest, direct or indirect, in any contract with the city, or shall be financially interested, directly or indirectly, in the sale to the city of any land, materials, supplies or service except on behalf of the city as an officer or employee". As a new PEDC Board member, I provided a "lead" to the Assistant Executive Director, John Bowman, regarding a company, i.e. Kemlon, where my wife is employed, and which indicated during her employment interview that they liked Pearland and would probably move their business here someday. Neither my wife nor I have any financial interest in Kemlon and the only benefit we received from the relocation to Pearland was the same available to any taxpayer who resides in this community - we gained a valuable addition to the assets of our city. Let me emphasize once again that I have never talked with the owners of Kemlon about relocating to Pearland; I was not a member of City Council at that time, only the PEDC Board; and no financial benefit whatsoever has been received. In closing this issue, I would also like to point out that every incentive provided to Kemlon received a unanimous vote from both the PEDC Board and City Council. I am also charged with "incompetence" because of a meeting I called on December 12, 1997 to relieve the growing tension between the then City Attorney and Mr. Grohman. His interpretation of the City Charterwas that the City Attorney reported directly to him not the City Council but the Council voted otherwise. Additionally, a compromise was accepted to install a door between the two offices and review the possible relocation of the City Attorney at a future time. The situation continued to deteriorate with the City Attorney resigning and the mishandling of this matter included in a Letter of Reprimand issued to Mr. Grohman signed by the entire Council. .Additionally, the petitioners provide as an example of "incompetence" my final vote against the issuance of $17 million in Certificates of Obligation. I did vote to authorize the staff to submit an application for these funds and likewise when the detailed documentation was received and placed on a Council meeting agenda. But after careful review and research Page 2 of 8 - 10/5 128 r^ regarding these CO's, I voted against issuing the largest single debt in our City's history without taxpayer approval. This is the purpose of the "Second and Final Reading" of an Ordinance - to allow additional time for questions to be answered, public input received and possible revisions made. 1 am finally charged with "misconduct" by contacting "numerous city employees and directing them to perform specific tasks, thus violating the City Charter". No details have been provided regarding this allegation such as who I supposedly contacted and exactly what I directed them to do. I can count on one hand the number of times I have had an official conversation as a Councilmember with any City employee other than the City Manager since I assumed this position and then only after contacting Mr. Grohman. There is one possible exception - I did confirm with the Police Chief directly that security would be available at the Special Session on September 4th for obvious reasons. As stated previously, my "recall" based on malfeasance, incompetence and misconduct are politically motivated charges trumped up by Paul Grohman and his supporters. It is one of a series of Tactics (Exhibit II) utilized by him not only twice here in Pearland but at other cities where he has worked previously. His strategy is to utilize the old Divide and Conquermeasures to polarize both the City Staff and the community itself. First, a Smear Campaign is initiated in the local newspapers through Letters to the Editor and Paid Political Ads. Simultaneously, targeted individuals (both Councilmembers and City Staff) are subjected to Intimidation via late night obscene phone calls; unsigned "notes" left on a Councilmembers chair prior to a meeting; and childish pranks such as turning a Councilmember's portrait upside down at City Hall. Next is the phase we are discussing this evening - the Recall Election, which was intended by our City Charter to be a mechanism for addressing legitimate violations. Instead, Mr. Grohman uses it as a weapon to attack any of his bosses who disagrees with him. We have already read in the papers about the probable next step - filing multimillion dollar Lawsuits against the citizens of the city where he was most recently employed. Rumors of my pending Indictment will follow and disseminated throughout the community. Again, Grohman will utilize select supporters to file documents with a DA's office or Attorney General which contain accusations having no credibility or merit. This action will be an attempt to tarnish my reputation and persuade voters to support my Recall. Yet to be seen but fully expected will be Lawsuits filed against selected individuals. Finally, a Settlement will be sought whereby Mr. Grohman receives a large sum of money; all lawsuits are dropped; and he moves on to the next city to start all over again. The political turmoil that we are heavily involved in today could have been avoided. On May 4th of this year, Mr. Grohman was presented with a memo entitled "Council Concerns with Areas of Performance" (Exhibit III) and signed by all six members at that time. Four Page 3 of 8 - 10/5 areas requiring "significant improvement" were identified as follows: Becoming defensive when someone disagrees with him instead of listening to the other person and discussing the issue in a constructive, mature and professional manner. He was advised to take constructive steps or seek professional help to address his strong sense of insecurity which was not contributing to mature, professional management of our city. He was given direct instructions to work out the problem with the City Attorney and Council did not feel that he gave it 100% of his effort. They were disappointed that he did not use his many years of experience as a City Manager to resolve the conflict between his staff and the City Attorney in a constructive manner. The Council was also concerned with his verbal responses to Councilmembers who did not share his view of issues by threatening to stack the Council chamber with his supporters in order to enforce upon the Council his position on an issue. He was told that this behavior must stop because even though the Council encouraged his views on various issues, he must remember that he was our employee and we do not respond well to threats. It was emphasized that if one of his employees threatened him, they would be fired immediately. The Council was concerned that he had been reported to have carried a gun in City Hall which was both inappropriate and contrary to Council action. Shortly after receiving this memo, Mr. Grohman was given his annual Performance Evaluation which was lower than previous ratings. In an attempt to emphasize the importance of addressing his stated deficiencies, a minor salary reduction was included but with the understanding that a raise in pay was possible if he worked on his problem areas. He was advised to carefully review three documents to understand exactly what the Council expected of him: the recent Reprimand Letter; his consolidated Performance Appraisal, and the International City Managers Association's "Code of Ethics" which he signed as a member of ICMA. The "ball" was placed squarely in his court: he could take the constructive criticism and become a better City Manager; he could opt to exercise the paragraph in his employment contract which would allow him to receive his severance benefits and relinquish his position as City Manager; or he could draw a line in the sand and attack. Regrettably, we know which option he chose. I would like to make it perfectly clear at this point that contrary to the belief of various Grohman supporters, no one on City Council was out to get him. Just the contrary was true - the Council bent over backwards to work with him and allow adequate time for Page 4 of 8 - 10/5 130 addressing his noted deficiencies. If indeed there was a "conspiracy" to terminate him, then the three vote majority would have been utilized back in May. In conjunction with my review of how events unfolded, I feel it is necessary for me to respond to a prepared statement read at a recent Council meeting by PEDC Assistant Executive Director, John Bowman. During the period of May 18th - 21st I attended a Shopping Mall Convention in Las Vegas with Bowman, Glen Erwin and Paul Grohman. Prior to departing on this trip, Stella Roberts suggested that I talk to Grohman while in Vegas about the issues that seem to get him into trouble with the hope that a "man-to-man" discussion may be beneficial to him. I advised her that a close friend of his would be better suited for this purpose but that I would try. One evening, Grohman and I had a lengthy conversation which included the "meaning" of the recent elections; the pros and cons of his weekly newspaper articles; handling various complaints from citizens; his perceived attacks on Rev. Scarborough; and his religious beliefs. He gave no indication that he agreed with any identified deficiencies or that an attempt would be made to resolve any of the issues discussed. I later spoke in confidence to Bowman concerning my conversation with Grohman believing he was "closer" to him than I. He asked many "hypothetical" questions such as what would happen if Grohman did not address his problems; how many Council votes would it take to terminate him; and who would be the most likely person to assume the Acting City Manager position should the worst happen. I provided my opinion and every question not knowing that Bowman would run directly to Grohman and provide his version of my responses. Bowman's recent address to Council concerning these events is not the first time he has given a prepared statement attacking a City official. He did it previously against the first PEDC Executive Director, Jim Berry, who was eventually fired in large part due to Bowman's accusations. It is also a well known fact around City Hall that he has been and is still undermining the current PEDC Director, Glen Erwin, in an attempt to obtain the "top" job in that organization. In a "Letter to the Editor" about five months ago, supposedly written by Mrs. Bowman, an attack was made on another Councilmember. And now, he is the only City employee out of almost 300 who decided to publicly "take sides" in the controversy regarding the termination of Grohman which demonstrates his lack of good judgement, maturity and common sense. If he wished to make a statement that would have been beneficial, he could have clarified my role in the relocation of Kemlon to Pearland. Such a statement by him would have been very instrumental in alleviating the concerns of Kemlon management over their unwilling involvement in Pearland politics as well as refuting the allegation of a "conflict of interest" on my part. If Paul Grohman is your "mentor" Mr. Bowman, you are learning quickly from him. For he utilizes whatever or whoever he needs to go for the "jugular" of any opponent. Citizens; Page 5 of 8 - 10/5 131 Churches; City Charter; Courts; Civic Organizations; City Staff; Businesses; etc. are examples of individuals or groups that have been dragged into the fracas and in many instances involuntarily. One such case is Pearland Memorial Post 7109 of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. Grohman has stated publicly and in his legal affidavit that he was dismissed in retaliation for his reporting of violation of law, i.e. the mowing of the VFW lawn by City employees. I find it a bit ironic and very disturbing that an organization comprised of War Veterans who fought to retain the many freedoms we enjoy today has been unwillingly used by Grohman to get his way regardless of the repercussions. On the other hand, he has the support of many individuals as evidenced by the names on my Recall Petition. A brief analysis shows that some of the "Circulators" and "Signers" (Exhibit IV) of these documents have what I call a "Special Tie" to the City (Exhibit IV). Donna Snowden who gathered signatures on the front steps of City Hall is a principal with Snowden Engineering. During the period of January 1, 1997 through September 30, 1998 the City paid this company in excess of $230,000 for services rendered. Likewise, Birdsong Printing received over$146,000 and Dr. Armbrusterwas compensated morethan $16,000. 1 am not insinuating that anything illegal was done to obtain these City accounts but I am concerned about the "motivation" behind these individuals. Did they circulate and sign my Recall Petition because they felt that I really did violate our Charter or are they concerned that without Grohman, the benefits from their "Special Ties" may be in jeopardy? Similarly, Lisa Diese is very close to Grohman and extremely active in the Recall effort. She was also connected with IDC (Interstate Diversified Companies) and was working hard to bring it to Pearland. The Chairman of IDC addressed City Council and spoke of his $25mm payroll; $200mm funding source; and millions he was looking to spend in our City for an office complex, golf course, and resort. It was common knowledge that if all these plans materialized, Mrs. Diese was promised a lucrative job with IDC. I researched this company utilizing my access to many financial resources and could not find any information. The PEDC staff requested its financial statement but it was never provided. IDC has not been heard from in quite some time and I am again questioning Ms. Diese's motivation in my Recall effort. Perhaps she believes that I was in some way responsible for running this company off and with it, her future employment. The relationship between Grohman and past Councilmembers Cole and Richardson is well known throughout Pearland and need no further discussion here. Two other groups of individuals active in my Recall have Real Estate related interests around Pearland or fall within a category which I learned about as a City Councilmember - Friend of the City or "F.O.0"'This latter designation identifies select citizens who receive special attention from Grohman not available to the ordinary taxpayer. In some cases the names you see on the list fall within both groups but the question in my mind remains the same- do they truly believe that the charges against me are valid or are they worried about Page 6 of 8 - 10/5 their future without Grohman. The real issue is whether the citizens expect Councilmembers to exercise their responsibilities as the "legislative and governing body" of the City of Pearland or has that authority been transferred to the City Manager. Until I assumed Position 4 on the Council, Mr. Grohman received majority support for virtually every matter he was behind. I came in to office and began asking questions and doing research prior to casting my vote on major issues or expenditures. It is no secret that I do not agree with every Ordinance or Resolution submitted by Mr. Grohman for Council approval. Our City Charter allows the voters to decide on my future as a Councilmember. Should they desire a representative who is a "rubber-stamp" for the City Manager and makes decisions based on the desires of special interest groups or "select" individuals, than I am not the man for this office nor would I want to remain on City Council. I sincerely believe that this is not the case in Pearland today and that my "recall election" would send a loud and clear message to those individuals still thinking they can manipulate the actions of our local government. Those days are over! However, during the last month or so, I have received numerous requests to cancel this Recall Election for very valid reasons: The "charges" have no credibility and are bogus. The Charter's purpose for a Recall Election is being misused in this case. This election would set a "precedent" by being the first ever in Pearland. It would encourage future "Recalls" requiring only 150 signatures. It is a waste of taxpayers money to hold such an election. If the voters want me replaced, they can do it at the regular City election. Calls of this nature are continuing and the concerns of our citizens are genuine. I will weigh the pros and cons regarding a Recall Election and make a final decision based on what I feel is best for Pearland - not just for me personally. Finally, to the many Citizens of Pearland who have contacted me offering encouragement and support, I would like to say thank you. It has been a difficult time for all of us and I think that I can speak for Mayor Reid, my fellow Councilmembers and the City staff when Page 7 of 8 - 10/5 11 .33 I say that we are anxious to put all this political turmoil behind us and move on with the business of making Pearland a better place to live. In closing Councilmember Berger said Thank you. Mayor Reid stated that concludes Mr. Berger's presentation. He asked Councilmember Berger if he had an ample opportunity to present his facts. Councilmember Berger stated that he did. Mayor Reid stated that the meeting would be adjourned. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:23p.m. Minutes approved as submitted and/or corrected this the 26`h d f October, A.D., 1998. �1 Tom Reid Mayor ATTEST: Page 8 of 8 - 10/5