Holbrook City Council Upholds Kovach Firing

E-MAIL THIS

PRINT THIS

MOST POPULAR

PDF VERSION

XML VERSION

By Tammy Gray-Searles
    In a split decision, the Holbrook City Council upheld the findings of the city personnel commission that there was cause for the termination of former economic development director A’kos Kovach due to insubordination. The council’s decision is final and may not be appealed.
    Mayor Jeff Hill, Vice Mayor Cynthia Stuart and Councilmen Wade Carlisle and Kent Darris voted to accept the personnel commission’s findings. Councilmen Phil Cobb, Charles Haussman and Stuart Szink voted against accepting the findings.
    The decision followed a failed motion to table the issue by Cobb, who told the council that he wanted to read a tran scri pt of the hearing before the personnel commission prior to making a decision. Cobb noted that he was only able to attend part of the hearing and had been hearing different versions of what took place. He also told the council that he felt the written findings of the personnel board were too brief and did not offer enough information on which the council could base a decision.
    City Attorney Sterling Solomon pointed out that according to personnel policy, the council must make a decision on the findings within five days, and it would take at least a couple of weeks to obtain a tran scri pt.
    Darris remarked that he did not believe the council needed to read the entire tran scri pt to make a decision.
    “My understanding is that is why we picked five people to hear this and they have made their decision,” he said. “If we’re not going to go with what they say, why did we waste their time?”
    Carlisle noted that he agreed, and did not intend to read the tran scri pt unless outvoted by the rest of the council.
    “I’m ready to move on,” Carlisle said. “I’m happy with the group that was chosen, I believe they did their job and I respect their opinion.”
    Haussman asked why the council was part of the termination appeal process.
    Solomon explained that the council was involved because the personnel policy required it, but that wording will soon be changed.
    “There’s no reason this should be forwarded to the council after the commission makes a decision,” Solomon said.
    Following further discussion of the council’s role in the employee appeal process, council members adjourned into executive session to receive legal advice about the ramifications of tabling the item, though Cobb was opposed to the executive session.
    When the council members returned to regular session, they voted 4-3 against tabling the issue. Cobb, Haussman and Szink voted in favor of tabling it, while Hill, Stuart, Carlisle and Darris voted against tabling it.
    Carlisle then moved to accept the commission’s findings, which passed 4-3.