Z TULEY COUNTY RECORDER SIGNS AFFIDAVIT TO SAVE EMPLOYEE JOBS
At an emotional County Council Finance committee meeting last Wednesday, County Recorder, Z Tuley signs an affidavit under pressure to save her employee jobs. The meeting started with discussion about squeaking through with just enough money to finish out the year.
County Councilman Tom Shelter Jr made a statement about conserving money for the next year budget.  He emphasized that money left over in a particular appropriation at the end of the year is not lost if not spent, but rather, it should be saved for supporting next year’s County  budgets.
Earlier in the week County Recorder Z Tuley had issued a statement that she would be speaking about the four front line staff jobs that were cut from the budget in September, 2015.  When Mrs. Tuley requested to speak, there seemed to be a question of whether it would be appropriate for her to speak. The County Council indicated that they had provided Mrs. Tuley with an affidavit, and if she did not sign in agreement,  she would not be allowed to speak and at least one of her staff would lose her job. There was much discussion about the lack of sound management practices at the County Recorder’s office, including bidding of contractual services and buying new furniture without competitive bids.
County Council Finance Chair James Raben assured Mrs. Tuley that the Council was not making threats, but that if she didn’t agree to the content of the affidavit, one of her staff personnel would be laid off beginning January 1, 2016.  He also stated that even if the staff was rehired a week later,  her employee would lose her employee benefits that she earned for her years of service.
Ms. Tuley offered a revision to the orginial affidavit that she had prepared and was willing to sign.  After a short recess between the County Council members and Mrs. Tuley where the two versions of the affidavits were compared word-for-word, the session continued with an acceptance of Ms. Tuley’s revised affidavit. It appeared that her employee jobs would be saved with the details to be worked out after the meeting.
A public access request for the two affidavits that were the excitement of the meeting indicated they were simply two budget variations for funding the Recorder’s office. The Council was asking for more of the necessary cost for the function of the Recorder’s office to be taken from a special purpose fund that the County Recorder felt uncomfortable depleting rather than general funds that the Council was uncomfortable depleting. The final signed affidavit was a compromise to fund the Recorder’s office with $178,503 of special funds from the Recorder’s Records Perpetuation Fund instead of the original $259,624.45 the Council requested to be funded from the special fund. After the meeting, the Recorder’s office personnel were visibly upset. They were satisfied with the outcome knowing their jobs remained intact but appeared displeased with the traumatic process.
When the room cleared George Lumley, a concerned citizen, addressed the County Council about the potential revenues from tax delinquent properties that could help fund the County budget shortfalls. Lumley remarks drew a comment from County Council member Ed Bassemeier when Lumley mentioned that the Councilman had purchased one of the tax delinquent properties direct from the County Commissioners before the County Delinquent Tax Sale auction. Bassemeier indicated he did purchase a vacant lot adjoining his property in order to help the neighborhood and paid for it appropriately. Mr. Lumley stated he also purchased vacant lots at the County’s Tax auction for the same reason. Members of the County Council thanked Lumley for his concern.
This just doesn’t seem right. I’m also wondering about the statement made by Mr. Raben. If the City employees are still a part of the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund (PERF) , what he said is simply not true. If the County has an HR rule that would strip the employee of accrued vacation and sick leave, I suppose that could be true, but it definitely doesn’t apply to PERF retirement. If it is true of City/County workers are subjected to that kind of rule, it is no wonder that there is a problem getting good employees. If she had been bullied into signing the Council’s version of the affidavit, it would have been null and void due to the fact that the document was clearly signed under duress.
What happened to the previous statements about Tuley making purchases of office furniture without going through the bidding process? Did it disappear into the ether, never to be heard again?
Comments are closed.