By Kristine Thomas
Mt. Angel City Administrator Jim Hunt knows his job is on the line.
Less than a year ago he was the city council’s unanimous selection for city administrator. On Aug. 25 the Mt. Angel City Council called a special meeting centered on a motion to terminate his contract. It was defeated 4-3.
Councilors Mike Donohue, Ray Eder and Rick Schiedler voted to fire Hunt. Councilors Shari Reidman, Bill Schaecher and Joan Cuff disagreed. Mayor Tom Bauman broke the tie.
Hunt’s one-year contract expires Nov. 5.
At the Sept. 2 council meeting, a motion to approve a new, three-year contract, including a six-month severance package, was tabled. Councilors agreed to research the standard severance agreements for city administrators and review the findings at the Oct. 6 council meeting.
According to the International City Managers Association, it is standard practice to give a city administrator or city manager six months severance pay. Hunt’s original one-year contract included one month’s severance.
In addition to the uncertain nature of his contract, there’s another reason Hunt is unsure of his job status.
Councilors Bauman, Cuff, Schaecher and Riedman are not seeking reelection. The Nov. 4 election will change the council’s make-up. Schiedler is running unopposed for mayor. Darren Beyer, Kelly Grassman, James Kosel and Andrew Otte are running for the three open seats on the council.
In July, councilors gave Hunt a six-month performance evaluation rating him in the areas of public, employee and city council relations, leadership, communication, personal traits, goal setting and fiscal management.
For fiscal management, Reidman commented that Hunt had identified the “bleak picture for revenues and will work with council to address.” Donohue wrote, “Does not understand the word ‘efficiency.’ His only answer is raise and create fees.”
Under leadership, Bauman and Schaecher both said staff seems to have a more positive attitude since Hunt had been hired and Hunt assists staff in everyday problems, but Donohue wrote “yet to have seen any leadership qualities.”
In the general comments section, Bauman wrote, “Mr. Hunt has provided solid common sense leadership. He has a good grasp of staff and the heavy load they carry to meet the citizens. … Future looks better with improved morale and positive attitude.” Riedman wrote overall she was pleased with Hunt’s “positive energy and clear understanding of his role as city administrator.”
Donohue wrote, “Does not seem to understand who he works for. His allegiance appears to be with the city employees.” Schiedler wrote, “I feel that there are many areas that our city administrator needs improvement on to be able to stay on and effectively manage our city.”
At the council meeting Aug. 4 to discuss Hunt’s evaluation, Hunt said in the spirit and letter of his contract that Schiedler’s and Donohue’s evaluation should be nullified. He provided 276 pages to refute the allegations against him. He said many of the comments were hostile and could be perceived as threatening.
Schiedler said these are personal opinions. “This is a review of the city administrator, not of the city council,” he said.
No action was taken to address Hunt’ s request to nullify the two councilor’s evaluations.
According to a letter written by Donohue, Schiedler and Eder and given to the council Sept. 2, Hunt had called Eder into his office July 24 and discussed the evaluations.
“He (Hunt) told Eder that Donohue’s and Schiedler’s evaluations were very similar but he thought Ray’s was fair,” the letter reads.
It was during the meeting that Hunt brought up a January meeting where the three councilors met with him in his office at City Hall.
“He (Hunt) talked about Mike’s comments about some city employees,” the letter states. Then he told Eder he had taped the meeting and he hoped he wouldn’t have to divulge what the three councilors had said.
The letter states on July 25 Eder called Hunt to verify the previous day’s conversation. “Hunt told Eder, yes, I did record it and the police chief had said it was OK to tape the conversation.”
Schiedler, Eder and Donohue turned to attorney Jim Van Ness for an opinion on whether the taping was legal.
“According to legal opinion from Van Ness, Hunt has violated Oregon law, council rules and possibly federal law,” the letter states. “This was a private conversation, Hunt had no right legally or ethically to record our conversation without our consent.”
Approximately $5,200 in out-of-pocket attorney fees later, Donohue, Eder and Schiedler said they no longer trust Hunt and they do not plan to renew his contract.
“Personally, I am not in favor of renewing Jim’s contract because of what he did by illegally taping a private conversation with Ray, Mike and I without our consent and then threatening to use that tape for his benefit,” Schiedler said.
“In addition to that, there were multiple statements that he made at the Aug. 25 meeting that were completely untrue.”
Hunt, who has hired attorney Don Kelley, disagrees with the councilors’ account.
In a prepared statement to the council, Hunt said he recorded the conversation because he had been forewarned about the trio, adding that during the January meeting the three men discussed city employees and council members in “personal, demeaning, vulgar and obscene terms.”
“They clearly implied that either I would follow their directions and play ball with them or I would lose my job,” Hunt read at the Aug. 25 meeting.
Hunt said the tape recorder was visible on his desk and the recording light was on.
“It is my belief, and on the advice of my legal counsel, such recording was authorized and permitted and expected under law,” he said, citing state and city statues.
Hunt apologized for not bringing the matter before the entire council earlier. He said had hoped he could work with all members of the council to bring them closer together.
At the Aug. 25 meeting, Riedman said it is frightening that there is no trust between Hunt, Eder, Schiedler and Donohue.
She believes the matter between the three councilors and Hunt is a personal issue since the councilors say the January meeting with Hunt was held as a group of individuals, rather than as councilors.
During the Aug. meeting she said she worries that some council members aren’t giving Hunt credit as a professional trained to do his job and that the expectations of Hunt aren’t clear.
“If you look for mistakes, you are going to find mistakes and that’s OK to find mistakes because it gives the person a chance to improve,” she said. What’s not OK is to nitpick, bring up past issues and place undue pressure on city staff, she said.
Riedman said she doesn’t understand what the council’s expectations for a city administrator are.
“If we don’t understand what they are, then no city administrator will be able to walk in that door and do the job well.”
Donohue said he has several complaints about Hunt’s performance. The biggest, he said, was not being given information he requested regarding a grievance filed against him (Donohue) by a city employee.
“I made a request for information and had to go to the district attorney’s office to get the public records, which were given to the Silverton Appeal before they were given to me,” Donohue said.
Schiedler said he was disappointed in how Hunt handled board and commission appointments.
“There was a consensus at one meeting among the council on the direction that we wanted to go, then at the next meeting it was brought back to us differently than what the motion had said,” Schiedler said.
Riedman is worried what will happen next if the council fires Hunt or he resigns.
“Who is ever going to want to come and be city administrator for Mt. Angel given the current make-up of the council and the negativity?” she asked.
Hunt hopes not to leave. “The city of Mt. Angel is a great community which is undergoing serious growth pains and it is my hope to be able to continue to serve as city administrator.”
