Sparks fly between Lincoln’s city attorney and the city administrator

 

[October 02, 2018] 

LINCOLN 

The Monday night meeting of the Lincoln City Council ended with a confrontation between the City Administrator Beth Kavelman and City Attorney Blinn Bates, as each speculated that the other is not performing in the best interest of the city.

The conversation began during the “Announcements” portion of the evening when Mayor Seth Goodman said that there have been conversations about the city administrator, as well as the mayor, others accusing that the two are not performing well in their respective positions.

Goodman asked for comments. For a few seconds there was silence, then it was Bates who first spoke up, speaking out against Kavelman more than the mayor.

Bates said he has a lot of concerns about the performance of the city administrator at this time. “I think the performance is lacking greatly. I think that the individual that has been put in this position is not qualified to hold this position. And I think at this time she is a liability to the city. She doesn’t return phone calls, she misses meetings, and doesn’t seem to understand the things that are explained, confuses issues. My office has received numerous complaints and they keep coming and keep coming. I’ve made my concerns known to the alderman, the mayor and to the public.”

Kavelman responded, “The one you haven’t made comments to is me, and I am your supervisor.”

Bates responded quickly that she is not his supervisor, and she argued that she is. She handed out documents to the aldermen as she spoke saying “The mayor and I are your immediate supervisors, and therefore you have shown insubordination.”

Kavelman said that she has been trying for weeks to get answers from him regarding a change in the structure of the city’s liquor license and that Bates had failed to respond to her questions. He countered that he had answered her questions at least seven or eight times.

Kavelman said that the council comes to their meetings, and Bates is not present. They ask questions that he should be answering, but he’s absent. Bates pointed out that his contract says he only has to attend two meetings a month. Kavelman countered that she didn’t know who saw fit to approve this contract, but the fact was the city attorney needs to be at the city council meetings.

Bates said he would be happy to renegotiate the contract. He then recited that the contract says he “serves at the leisure and the pleasure of the mayor and the advice and consent of the council.”

He went on to say that the contract could be terminated with 30-day notice. He concluded, “If this mayor and this council don’t believe that I am doing the job they hired me to do, make a motion, terminate it, you have that right.”

Kavelmen then said, “Mayor what is your pleasure.”

Tracy Welch said that Blinn had called him last week, and that Welch had been shocked by what he was told. However, he also said that so far what he has heard is allegations with no hard facts. He noted that he had heard of one meeting missed by Kavelman, but he also thought there had been a miscommunication about the time of the meeting. He noted that half the people who were to attend the meeting showed up at 10 a.m., while the alderman to attend, Ron Fleshman, had shown up at 9 a.m.

Welch noted that Kavelman has held her position for approximately 85 days. He said he felt that instead of making general allegations, they should be talking specifics. Welch noted that “Beth did walk into a mess, and Beth had no assistance, as had previous administrators.”

Keller wanted to know where in the document Kavelman had shared does it say specifically that the city attorney was under the supervision of the city administrator. Kavelman did so. Keller read the line where it said the attorney was to provide legal advice to the mayor and city administrator. Keller said in his mind that did not necessarily mean that Kavelman was Bates’ supervisor. Kavelman said that because Bates is the attorney who is designated to give legal advice, she felt that was a pertinent statement in determining he is under the supervision of the City Administrator.

Kavelman went on to say, “no one goes behind someone’s back and does this. You have an issue you talk to me. This is the same with the department heads. I have an open door policy and I think this is insubordination, the trust is gone. It is a breach of contract and an ethics violation to do something like this.”

City Treasurer Chuck Conzo said that he has worked with all the city administrators for Lincoln, and that he has been able to get more direct answers and cooperation from Kavelman than any other.

Goodman said that he wanted to speak up because Kavelman was his appointment. He noted that he communicates daily with Kavelman, and that she keeps him up to speed on everything she is doing. Something he couldn’t say about the other administrators.

Goodman said that since appointing Kavelman not one person has spoken to him personally about Kavelman or her performance. He said he was concerned that people were going to the city attorney rather than the mayor and urged the public to contact the mayor directly to voice concerns.

Goodman went on to say that he had been given to understand that one phone call to Bates had included comments about Goodman and his performance as mayor. He said he would like to hear that concern as well.

Ron Fleshman spoke saying that Goodman was in a difficult situation running a business and trying to serve as mayor. Fleshman said that he has been to city hall on Thursday’s when Goodman is supposed to be holding office hours and has not found him there.

Fleshman said that Lincoln is too small to have a full time mayor, but he said “I think that future citizens who want to run for mayor should take into consideration how much time it actually takes.”

Goodman said when he initially set those hours the city did not have a city administrator. He added that he has his phone number everywhere, he is on social media, and he is easily accessed at any time of the day or night. He said that people do reach out to him at all hours and he always responds to them. “I don’t quite understand. You’ve (Fleshman) texted me many times and I always respond to the text. So the office hours, I’m not sure, but I do take responsibility for that.”

Fleshman said there are times when he feels it would better to be able to talk with Goodman during office hours instead of when Goodman is out trying to run his business.

Goodman also commented about the alleged missed meeting. He said that he too had been scheduled to attend that meeting, and he showed up for the meeting at the same time Kavelman did and there were others who also arrived at that time, so there was a confusion on the time.

Welch said he wanted to know if that was the only meeting. “I’m still baffled about the allegation about her performance when there is nothing to back it up. It just sounds like opinion to me.”

Bates commented, “I can tell you I represent the city of Lincoln, and I have brought my concerns to the city. If you are not seeing the things I am seeing, then you are not paying attention.”

Kavelman said, “You know I’d like to see you. We don’t see you, we only see you at these two meetings that are always cut and dried and we’re rolling down the agenda. We need a city attorney who is going to come to our liquor commission meetings, and get in there and help us out, and give us the legal and technical advice we need.”

“I’ve done that,” Bates said.

“Not on our Tuesday night meetings,” Kavelman said.

Bates then said that he was not a mind reader and that no one has ever told him they wanted him to attend the Tuesday night meetings. He said that he felt that it was ridiculous that his firm has represented the city for decades, but problems with his performance are coming out now that he is trying to tell the city what he is seeing.

Bates concluded once again that if the city doesn’t like what he is doing they can terminate him.

Kavelman countered, “Do you want to continue to be city attorney?”

Bates countered, “Yes I do.”

Fleshman said that in his six months as an alderman he has seen Bates as being very helpful and always responds to his inquiries.

Kavelman said that even so, for the last three weeks, Bates has not answered questions regarding the liquor license. The ordinance is difficult to understand, she wasn’t there when the ordinance was drafted, and she has had a lot of difficulty answering their questions.

Bates said he had answered her questions countless times. He said that the city can pass any ordinance it wishes. What this pertains to is a question as to how to expand the gaming in the city without over-expanding the liquor license. There are Class B licenses and Class C licenses, one for restaurants and one for taverns. Both allow for gaming. One class is used up and the other still has slots available. Instead of increasing the total number of licenses the council is seeking to find out if they could legally combine the two so that the unused license in one class could be used.

The conversation then segued into talking about the liquor license and there was no further discussion pertaining to the job performance of either the city attorney or the city administrator.

[Nila Smith]