Jackson Free Press

Jackson City Council President Frank Bluntson said yesterday that he would take legal action against Mayor Harvey Johnson Jr., if necessary, to obtain the names and salaries of all city employees. Bluntson cited several failed attempts to get the information from Johnson in preparation for passing the city's budget.

In July, Johnson revealed his proposed $266.7 million budget for fiscal year 2012 that would increase funding for public safety and infrastructure repairs. His budget would also provide a 2 percent raise to all city employees.

The council's budget committee members have conducted hearings over the last two weeks in which they have received reports on expenditures from all city departments and asked questions of department heads. On request, the mayor provided a list of all salaries and job titles to council members, but did not attach the names.

Council members announced at yesterday's work session that they are calling a special meeting at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday for a final review of the budget and to offer proposed amendments. The meeting is open to the public, but deviates from the planned budget process. The council will have a public hearing on the budget Sept. 1 and vote on the budget Sept. 15.

When the mayor questioned the council about the need for a special meeting, Bluntson brought up the issue of salaries and whom the city employs. He had asked the mayor for the list at a budget recap meeting Aug. 17, in which council members offered minor budget amendments. He asked for the information repeatedly at yesterday's meeting.

"It looks like you have something to hide," Blunston told the mayor.

Johnson said that determining employees' salaries is an administrative function and a not a legislative function, and therefore did not see a need to hand over the information.

"We are not trying to hide anything, but I don't understand why, after providing all the information that we have provided, and all the questions we have answered, that these names of these employees are so important that you have basically hijacked the process," Johnson told Bluntson.

Johnson accused Bluntson of playing politics.

"I hope you don't get so caught up in petty politics that you put the whole financial well-being of our city in jeopardy. That appears to be the road we are headed down."

Although Bluntson did not bring up the issue of the salaries last year, he said that former mayor Frank Melton gave council members names and salaries of employees when he was in office.

"They are getting public money, and it's a matter of public record," Bluntson said. "I'll go to the attorney general or go to court, or do whatever it takes (to get the documents)."

Ward 6 Councilman Tony Yarber walked out of the meeting yesterday after voicing his frustration about the two city leaders fighting in public.

"What we are going to do is behave the way citizens of Jackson would ask us to behave. ... We need to figure out a way to work through these things and do it in a way so that folks who are waiting on us don't look at us like we are crazy," Yarber said.

Ward 1 Councilman Quentin Whitwell, vice chair of the budget committee, said he planned to offer amendments to the budget on Wednesday but could not give specifics. He did say that he did not support all city employees receiving 2 percent raises. He also said that council members felt like they did not have input in crafting the city's budget and wants to change that for next year.

"(The mayor) and his staff have guided this process 100 percent without allowing us to provide input about how we feel about the budget," Whitwell said. "We came for a lecture and sat for hours on end being told what the budget will be for next year, and it's our turn to decide what we want to approve. I think there is a growing consensus that we need to have council members who are a part of the process from beginning to end and not just provided a recap and of where things stand with a gun held to our heads to pass the budget."

City spokesman Chris Mims said that council members have had several opportunities to take part in the budget process.

"We have had over two weeks of budget hearings and brought in all the department directors to answer questions and provided whatever information we needed to provide the council to make good decisions," Mims said. "We have asked the council to provide any questions or possible amendments in writing to the administration so we can go back and see how to balance the budget if any changes are required."

Previous Comments

ID

164688

Comment

I wish Mr. Bluntson had been such a fan of total transparency when his friend-mayor Melton was in office and fighting every attempt to provide any sort of public records, especially about the controversial folks Melton had on payroll (we fought like the dickens with the mayor's office and his sister-in-law PR woman over this stuff). Or when Melton's city attorney O'Reilly-Evans got Council (including Bluntson) to pass her cushy bond-money deal, which none of the Council folks later seemed to remember passing. I'm a huge fan of transparency, but I do wonder why specific names need to be attached to every city position if they know the position and the pay already. Is Bluntson trying to target specific people or something? This whole thing confuses me mightily and smells like petty politics. If there's something I'm missing, I'm all ears.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2011-08-23T12:29:41-06:00

ID

164690

Comment

Chris Mims called me back to let me know that the mayor has also provided a list of the names of city employees to the council (without showing how much they make).

Author

Lacey McLaughlin

Date

2011-08-23T12:36:01-06:00

ID

164693

Comment

Typical City of Jackson b.s. politics at work. The more things change …

Author

independent

Date

2011-08-23T12:50:06-06:00

ID

164695

Comment

As a matter of law any person has the right to obtain from the city the names of all city employees and the specific salary which each employee receives, without having to justify the reasons for which such information is sought. The Mayor has a duty to treat the request as an issue of principle guided by law. If the Mayor has a duty to disclose, then any person has the right to request and receive. Blunston's motives are irrelevant. Each person, not just city council members, have the right to this information as a basis for assessing the appropriateness or wisdom of the employee salary decisions made by the Mayor pursuant to his administrative authority. Matching individual employee background and experience with specific salaries is part of the information needed to make such assessments. The Mayor's power to decide salaries does not insulate the Mayor from the legal obligation and practical necessity to disclose.

Author

Mike Sayer

Date

2011-08-23T14:25:57-06:00

ID

164697

Comment

"I wish Mr. Bluntson had been such a fan of total transparency when his friend-mayor Melton was in office" Nuff said!

Author

Duan C.

Date

2011-08-23T15:44:53-06:00

ID

164698

Comment

independent, this kind of political posturing isn't only limited to Jackson. Hear tell it even happens in the 'burbs. At least they're not fighting over a mosque.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2011-08-23T15:51:12-06:00

ID

164699

Comment

"The Mayor's power to decide salaries does not insulate the Mayor from the legal obligation and practical necessity to disclose." I highly doubt the Johnson Administration would not have the ability to explain any hires and/or reasoning behind set salaries, as compared to the Melton Administration. With that said, if Mr. Blunston is concerned with the administrations hiring practices, he has the option of contacting the State Auditors Office and have them conduct an audit in regards to staffing and salaries of city employee's. But you may want to be careful with that, because there's no telling what they may discover.

Author

Duan C.

Date

2011-08-23T15:55:20-06:00

ID

164700

Comment

Quentin Whitwell's statement is curious. He helped set the budget calendar and then went out of town on vacation last week during the recap portion where other council members introduced at least one amendment to the budget. Amendments can be introduced at any time. All the budget hearings have been open to the public as well. They are every year. This meeting Wednesday is seemingly being called just for Whitwell. Looks like he's doing what he does best, setting the stage to get his name in the paper, truth be damned. Also, I've heard he's been telling folks he wants $100,000 dedicated to "study" Parham Bridges Park. I guess the city's water maintenance crews will have to suffer through without a pay increase if he gets his way.

Author

thabian

Date

2011-08-23T16:00:24-06:00

ID

164701

Comment

Ok. Isnt this the exact same thing that the Mayor asked DJP to do just a few weeks ago via letter? Im trying to grasp why he has such an issue with disclosing that info (which any citizen has a right to at least ASK for) when he asked the same thing of a private entity(which doesnt have to). Perhaps Im missing something.

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2011-08-23T16:12:04-06:00

ID

164702

Comment

Thabian, maybe Whitwell is trying Barbour's after-the-fact special-session approach on for size, cost be damned. And Kaz, I see your point about the mayor's request, but you left out one important thing. DJP, which is largely funded by taxes paid by business owners in the district, would not disclose specifics of their salaries. They certainly wouldn't tell Lacey. As for Johnson, it sounds like he's trying to protect privacy of low-level employees, which I can see to a point, although I can also see why they should be public. And to counter Mr. Bluntson's argument about Melton: They fought not to reveal many of the more controversial salaries and other information. I don't think we ever got it all. And I sure didn't hear Mr. Bluntson screaming then. Just when you thought the budget process was going so smoothly, here comes a blowup. I really hope it's for the right reasons, but the politics sure are starting to fly these days.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2011-08-23T16:25:10-06:00

ID

164703

Comment

I'm trying to grasp why the names of the individuals need to be attached to the salary. It should be the position that is considered: Not the person who holds the position. There are people who are resigning, fired and other movements that happen in City/State jobs. If Mr. Bluntson has a problem with certain employee(s), he should stop playing games and make his concern known. Jackson is among a very few Cities in the Country that is able to create a balanced budget. This talented Mayor has succeeded in bringing Jackson back from the brink of bankruptcy: A condition he inherited from the melton administration. When Johnson left office, there was a surplus of 6million dollars. This money was spent foolishly on salaries for people without the education, experience or knowledge base to adequately perform certain jobs. I don't mean to drop any trunks on the heads of those who were given these undeserved jobs or to continue to labor over the good men and women who were terminated; however, I would like to jog the memories of those who have seemingly forgotten. Don't forget the infamous lobbist job that was given to a young inexperienced African-American who did not know ANYTHING about Washington and was successful in bringing back -0- dollars and also without the development of any relationship that could have yieled anything positive for the City. My dear Mr. Bluntson sat on the Council during all of the above mentioned. He said nothing; he did nothing, but, rubber stamped/voted for everything crazy that melton came up with.Mr. Bluntson seemingly hadn't any problem with his mayor functioning as the cief-of-police, police officer, FBI Agent, CIA,secret service person, swat team member, Command Unit Operator,and the list goes on. Mr. Bluntson did not give the voters of the City of Jackson any of his prior history that, in my opinion, could have changed the course of voting in his Ward. So, put the anvil down, Mr. Bluntson: Don't let your mouth get...........

Author

justjess

Date

2011-08-23T17:00:45-06:00

ID

164704

Comment

Ps. ...and please don't forget about the mayor serving as canine trainer evidenced by the invertigative skills of Abby.

Author

justjess

Date

2011-08-23T17:40:31-06:00

ID

164705

Comment

Donna, where did I say it was limited to Jackson? I didn't. Just pointing out what seems to be obvious. The same 'ol same 'ol political games is all.

Author

independent

Date

2011-08-24T06:54:44-06:00

ID

164706

Comment

Well, you did say, "Typical City of Jackson b.s. politics at work," independent. So my assumption that you meant Jackson was rather natural, no? Otherwise, agreed.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2011-08-24T09:08:22-06:00

ID

164708

Comment

Well, Independent, it seems that Mayor Johnson is in the same boat as President Obama: It does not matter how many positive things they do, the assessment is always the same in the eyes and haearts of some, Negative, Negative, Negative. It is mind boggling to read comments such as yours and not arrive at the obvious: Black males are very negatively evaluated and there are people who do play political games to include finding other blacks who are willing to help them beat others to the canvass. Why are so many, so willing? These motives are often driven by jealousy, hate, fear, envy and entitlement issues which all culminate into racism. Anyone who can draw a "same old politics" evaluation to the Johnson Administration without any rememberance of the hell this community went through during the melton administration has got to be joking!

Author

justjess

Date

2011-08-24T11:28:18-06:00

ID

164713

Comment

Got no problemo with ol' Harvey. More with the city council. As for your second paragraph, I can't respond because I have no idea what it means. And lastly, I remember Frank. He was very dangerous in my opinion, yet highly entertaining to read about. I'd have loved to see the feds run he and his cronnies out of town.

Author

independent

Date

2011-08-24T13:38:27-06:00