08/02/01 SP City Council Minutes1809
A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE KALISPELL CITY. COUNCIL WAS HELD AT 7:00
P.M. THURSDAY, AUGUST 2, 2001, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT CITY
HALL IN KALISPELL, MONTANA. MAYOR WILLIAM E. BOHARSKI PRESIDED.
COUNCIL MEMBERS JIM ATKINSON, DON COUNSELL, DALE HAARR, RANDY
KENYON, DUANE LARSON, FRED LEISTIKO, DOUG SCARFF, RON VAN NATTA
AND CITY MANAGER CHRIS KUKULSKI AND CITY ATTORNEY GLEN NEIER WERE
PRESENT.
(TAPE ONE - SIDE ONE)
Boharski: Good evening and welcome to the Special City Council
Meeting of August 2, 2001. The time is 7:00 p.m.
At this point in time I would like to call the meeting to order
and announce that this is a special meeting called by three
members of the City Council, and I just forgot who it was.
Councilman Counsell, Larson, and Leistiko, thank you. That being
the case, I would like to ask the Clerk to please take the roll.
Theresa.
Clerk: Councilor Larson.
Larson: Here.
Clerk: Leistiko.
Leistiko: Here.
Clerk: Scarff.
Scarff: Here.
Clerk: Van Natta.
Van Natta: Here.
Clerk: Atkinson.
Atkinson: Here.
Clerk: Counsell.
Counsell: Here.
Clerk: Haarr.
Haarr: Here.
Clerk: Kenyon.
Kenyon: Here.
Clerk: Mayor Boharski.
Mayor Boharski: Here.
Boharski,: Motion carries, Council is in order.
Since it's not on the agenda let's do it anyway. Please join me
for the Pledge of Allegiance.
(PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE)
Boharski: It's so nice, we should have a crowd this big every
week. At this point in time I would entertain a motion to
approve the agenda. Councilman Haarr.
Kalispell, City Council Minutes
special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page I of 42
Haarr: Your Honor I would move approval of the agenda as
presented.
Scarff: Second.
Boharski: Motion made and seconded by Councilman Scarff. Is there
any discussion? Seeing none, those in favor signify by saying
aye.
Council: Aye.
Boharski: Motion carries. I guess this ... not having a forum here
before us this evening, obviously the agenda that is presented
for those of you in the audience and on the television who have
not seen it, the sole agenda on the ... the sole item on the agenda
this evening, as stated by those Council members who called the
meeting is discussion of alleged misconduct of City Manager
brought forth by Mayor and City Attorney. And I suppose at the
risk of getting into a debate, I'm not sure that the Mayor at
least accused the City Manager of misconduct, however, I think
there are some issues that fairly... the purpose of this meeting
tonight has been called to address, and perhaps I could suggest
that one of the members who called this special meeting might
have an idea of what sort of a forum they planned on presenting
this this evening.
Larson: Your Honor.
Boharski: Councilman Larson.
Larson: I would suggest that since we have one item on the agenda
that we proceed in the normal fashion that we would in a regular
Council meeting. I guess the thought, my thought and my intent
on calling the special meeting, was to give the City Manager an
opportunity to explain the allegations that have been placed
against him and have been printed in the press, without him ever
seeing these allegations.
So I guess I would like to see the beginning of the meeting start
with him being able to explain ... give us an explanation of the
allegations. As far as public comment is concerned, I don't
think we should have a public comment session until after the
Council has had their discussion.
If I may. I posted some items on the blackboard, over there, and
I don't mean in any fashion to thwart conversation, or to attempt
to keep the conversation to a minimum. My sole purpose for
posting these guidelines is offered as an attempt to keep the
meeting civil and smooth running. I don't want to thwart anyone's
right to thoroughly discuss the issues. And I am going to read
those. Each Council member has a copy of them in front of them
and I would like to read those if I could your Honor.
Boharski: Certainly.
Larson: Please stay for ... with the purpose of the meeting. This
meeting was called for the purpose of discussion of alleged
misconduct of the City Manager brought forth by the Mayor and
City Attorney. We need to stay to that purpose. That's how it
was advertised and that's how it should stay. We will take no
action at this meeting. We are listening and discussing.
Please no character assassinations and please focus on problems
and not on people or personalities and I further stated... and I
would ask you all to honor the three minute rule. We could be
here for three weeks if we don't, so.
1
1
1
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - Auguet 2, 2001
Page 2 of 42
1811
These guidelines are offered in an attempt to keep the meeting
civil and smooth, not to thwart anyone's right to thoroughly
discuss the issues. I thank you for considering these guidelines
and I hope we can stick to them, all of us.
Boharski: And I presume Theresa has her bell for when that time
arrives. perhaps Chris, what I would maybe suggest is that you
briefly, as you did in your letter —which was kind of left on
our desks here. Rather than necessarily reading it, unless you so
choose. It appears that you will have both the allegations, or
the concerns, or whatever you might term them in your letter as
well as a response from yourself. And if you want to maybe take
a chance and go ahead to go through it, maybe that would be the
first thing to do, and then perhaps comments from the Council
would be the appropriate way to deal with that.
Kukulski: Yes. I'm comfortable with proceeding in that manner.
I'll start by maybe lightening things up a little bit, and
thanking you Bill, I have lost a good five or ten pounds in this
last week and I now recognize and was well reminded of why I
asked my wife to marry me, so thank you.
I'd ask, regarding to your comments Mayor, that the audience and
yourself and the members of the Council please be patient with
me. I do think that it is appropriate for me to read through the
issues that have been raised regarding my conduct and my
response. The reason for that is I am quite frankly, just to be
honest with you, a bit fearful that I might get sidetracked and
we might get into all kinds of discussion and things that are
outside of what the intent is tonight and outside of what I've
been presented with, which is specifically these five, six or
seven issues, or concerns. So, I will try to move through this
quickly, and yet in such a way that everyone here can have an
opportunity to listen.
Attached is a copy of a bullet document which Glen Neier
delivered to Maxine Lamb at the Flathead County Sheriff's Office
requesting criminal investigation assistance regarding
allegations levied against me. The six page document does not
include a date or signature, but was forwarded to the Department
of Justice on July 17th, 2001. The second document, which was
signed and sent to the Department of Commerce by Mayor Boharski,
mirrors the allegations outlined within the Department of Justice
document.
Except for the City Court and the City Attorney's Office, I
acknowledge and accept that I am accountable for every decision
made and dollar expended within this organization. This
responsibility is something I take very seriously and with great
pride. That being said, until this evening, I had not been given
an opportunity to respond to these allegations in a professional
manner or setting.
Basic principles of due process and fairness dictate that this
matter should have been handled differently. In any event the
facts are as follows. I was first made aware, aware, of the
allegations through someone who rumored that a letter had been
sent to the Criminal Investigation Bureau, or what I will refer
to in the future as the CIB, regarding my conduct as the
Kalispell City Manager. This was shocking to me and in fact was
verified by Arlyn Greydanus, the Chief of the CIB. Mr. Greydanus
would not share the letter or it's contents with me, however, he
did acknowledge that he had received the document from Maxine
Lamb and understood that it originated with Kalispell City
Attorney, Glen Neier. Mr. Greydanus acknowledged that he had
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 3 of 42
1812
spoken to Glen Neier on July 20th, and had concluded that this
appeared to be a local power issue and that nothing in the letter
warranted a criminal investigation by this office. That's a
paraphrase of the conversation.
Mr. Greydanus assured me that the letter, that a letter stating
this would be mailed within the next week, addressed to Maxine
Lamb and copied to the City Attorney. With that information in
mind my family and I were extremely relieved and expected that I
could share the details of this unfortunate situation with the
City Council upon receiving all of the documents pertaining to
this accusation. Most importantly, the Bureau's unbiased review.
I have learned that documents detailing the allegations were
leaked to several local regional media sources. On Friday, July
27th, I was notified by Skip Dusseau of the Daily Inter Lake that
Glen Neier had spent one and a half hours with him on Wednesday,
July 25th, walking Skip through each item in a criminal complaint
against me. Mr. Neier did not give Skip a copy of the letter,
but detailed the issues that he identified as improprieties.
This was five days after Glen was told by Arlyn Greydanus of the
CIB that the allegations did not warrant an investigation.
Later that afternoon, I was also notified by the Missoulian that
an anonymous fax of the complaints was sent to them from a
Kalispell Insty-Prints location. Again, basic fairness would
suggest that the accused should have an opportunity to address
concerns regarding his performance before hearing them from a
reporter.
In addition, I learned after notifying each of the eight Council
members that none of them were aware of the City Attorney or the
Mayor's investigation, thus eliminating their right to
investigate these allegations. Late Tuesday, that being July 30th
of this week in the afternoon, I was provided with a copy of the
allegations only after I made a formal written request to Glen
Neier's office. This was six days after Glen had detailed the
allegations to the media.
In responding to the specific allegations, I would like to
outline my approach to successfully managing the City of
Kalispell as entrusted by the City Council and its citizenry. In
working with Mayor Boharski and Glen Neier over the past two
years, I can readily acknowledge that although we share many of
the same goals, we don't always see eye -to -eye on how to
effectively and efficiently manage the City. This, I believe, is
at the root of many of the allegations.
My philosophy is based on the fact that if you treat employees
with dignity and respect, the level of productivity increases
immensely. This is accomplished by recognizing employees who
perform exceptionally well,, as well as holding them accountable
when they fail to perform in an acceptable manner. Though the
Mayor and City Attorney point out some examples of my praising
employees for work well done, they fail to mention the fact that
I also undertook the unpleasant task of terminating the
employment of three employees, who incidently, had not been
previously or appropriately disciplined, even though their
actions compromised the health and safety of the public and
themselves.
I mention this only because it proves that I provide praise when
it is appropriate and discipline when it is necessary. The past
approach of treating every employee exactly the same, no matter
how good or bad their performance is, is not the way to run a
1
1
1
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 4 of 42
1813
professional organization. The liability that is created by
treating employees as robots and never dealing with the
termination of employees that fail to perform, simply delays and
intensifies problems and the costs associated in dealing with
these problems.
I would also like to share my philosophy regarding meals, travel
and reimbursement of other legitimate business expenses. I
believe that the City should cover these costs, as needed, from
time to time when an employee is working is his or her official
capacity as a representative of the City. This City has a clear
policy on how to handle all of the various expenses when an
employee is in travel status. However, the policy fails to
outline any parameters on how to handle these expenses while in
town.
I believe that any expenses within this category are to be
utilized with the highest level of caution and should not become
extravagant. Meetings should be held outside of breakfast, lunch
and dinner hours whenever possible, but there are times when it
is necessary and productive to conduct business during these
hours. I also believe that expenses should be shared with
colleagues. As an example, when I travel I often share hotel
expenses, auto rentals and associated costs with other managers
whom I am traveling with. This not only cuts the cost of travel
in half for the City. It is difficult to respond to the bullet
document allegations because it is often unclear of what I am
being accused of, therefore, I will attempt to respond to the
spirit of what I perceive is being alleged.
The first point of which I would like to address regards a $50.00
bonus that is termed for a water department employee. The
allegation reads as follows: the City Manager gave a $50.00 bonus
in August of 2000 to a water department employee for coming in on
overtime to repair a water line break. The employee was already
receiving a $100.00 per week stipend to be on --call and carry a
pager. He further received, in accordance with the union
contract, time and one-half for coming into work. The City
Manager said the employee claimed he was out for an anniversary
dinner with his wife at the time of the call -out. The Manager
ran the $50.00 through the petty cash and purchased a gift
certificate. Except for the petty cash claim, the Council was
never informed of the bonus.
My response: A $50.00 gift certificate for dinner at the Painted
Horse Grill was given to an employee of the water division. Mayor
Boharski' s assertion that this gift was given after an employee
complained, is absolutely false. That's a statement that the
Mayor used in his letter to the Department of Commerce. This is a
perfect example of when, in my opinion, you need to recognize an
employee for their hard work beyond a simple pat on the back.
In brief, the facts surrounding the employee in this situation
appear to be accurately represented by the accusers. The employee
was in the middle of a wedding anniversary dinner at a local
restaurant with his wife when he was called. In addition, I would
note that the water main break was of extreme severity due to its
location within the downtown. The broken lines were flooding
local business basements, causing thousands of dollars in damage.
Within twenty-four hours of the incident, I received calls from
those local businessmen and women with nothing but praise for how
this employee handled the situation.
For these reasons, in situations that mirror this example, I
believe it is appropriate for me, as Kalispell City Manager, to
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 5 of 42
1814
acknowledge these employees. In my opinion, the City, as an
employer and community has received back this investment of
$50.00 at least ten -fold.
The second issue which was raised, again refers to, in this case,
a firefighter and it's entitled in the accusation as
"Firefighter's Bonus." In August of 2000, the City Manager
approached the City Attorney requesting that the City Attorney
sanction an increase in pay for the fire training officer to
equal that of the ambulance training officer.
The City Attorney offered a memo on September 22, 2000 setting
forth reasons why the increase in stipend should not be granted.
The CBA between the City and the Union contained a zipper clause
under which neither party was obligated to negotiate during the
term of the contract. Secondly, the Union had, during the
negotiations, declined to raise the fire training officer's pay.
Finally, the City Attorney said it would be bad policy to
entertain such a stipend increase without bargaining. During the
recently concluded fire negotiations the firefighters made a
proposal to have the fire training officer's stipend raised and
retroactively applied. However, documents supplied to the City
Attorney and, at the conclusion of the negotiations, indicated
that the training officer pay would be raised but not
retroactive. On "blank", I assume that was supposed to be the
date, the City Manager directed the Personnel Specialist to pay
the fire training officer $1,215.00 as a bonus. He told the
Personnel Specialist to keep the information confidential.
Again, he was dealing under the table. The City Attorney was
informed of the bonus granted to the fire training officer and
directed a memo dated May 15, 2001 to the Manager, criticizing
the actions of the Manager. The Manager responded to the memo
essentially stating that he was the Manager and the City Attorney
did not decide how such matters should be handled. The Manager
gave Council copies of both memos.
My response: The resolution to the firefighter/training officer
issue was handled after months of discussion with management, the
union, several Council members, three local government attorneys
and several colleagues. I am confident through these discussions,
that I, again, acted well within my authority. After responding
to Glen Neier's May 15th 2001 letter and the Mayor's June 19th
2001 complaints, neither of them were interested in having a
meaningful conversation with me regarding this issue, and yet
they now refuse to put this issue behind us.
When I approached Glen regarding my response to his letter he
treated me in an unprofessional manner. Glen's outrage was heard
by everyone near his office. The Assistant City Attorney's
Office, his secretary's office, and the City Court waiting area.
Glen made it crystal clear that he saw himself as the Judge of
the City's activities, and that he had absolutely no interest in
working with me, with myself, or any of the directors as a team.
On at least three separate occasions I approached Glen in an
effort to resolve this issue in a fair and equitable way. Just
because there is a zipper clause in a contract doesn't mean you
treat people unfairly and unequitably.
Never did he make an attempt to help me in this regard. Because
of this, I had to depend on outside legal counsel to guide me in
this matter. I approached the Mayor in regard to his letter
pertaining to this issue and he indicated that he was very busy
and would give me a call if he wanted to discuss the topic. I
never received a phone call from the Mayor.
11
1
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
18.15
After my discussions with municipal attorneys and the Personnel
Specialist it was evident that the City had a significant
liability if it did not resolve this situation. By resolving this
issue in a cooperative way with the employee and union we avoided
a potential future litigation. It should be also noted that I
reviewed this situation with the Department of Labor and Industry
and they also believe that the issue was handled well within the
law. I believe this solution saved the taxpayers of Kalispell
money in both the short and long term.
The next item which, quite frankly, is one of the most concerning
ones to be discussed in this manner. But it has already been
given to everybody so I don't think this makes any difference and
that is the Squire' s matter as it is described and this is the
allegation. In fall of 2000, the City had a problem with a City
police officer allegedly not performing on the job. Allegations
had been made that the officer had been sleeping in a patrol car
while on duty. The police department investigated the matter and
after consulting with the City Attorney's Office and the MMIA
attorneys the City Attorney's Office conducted a subsequent
investigation in preparation for a pre -disciplinary hearing under
the personnel policy.
During the City Attorney's investigation, it was determined that.
some KPD members had slept while on duty, with the knowledge and
sometimes at the direction, of supervisors. On December 7th,
2000, the City Attorney drafted a memo to the City Council and
Manager discussing the findings. Recommended that the officer be
disciplined for ten days for failure to patrol and failure to
follow orders. The memo was subject to the Attorney/Client
privilege. on December 11, 2000, members of the City Council met
with the City Manager prior to workshop in groups of two and
three. The City Attorney was not informed of these meetings or
invited to attend. The meetings were accomplished in a fashion
which intentionally avoided application of the Montana Open
Meetings Law. There was no notice of the meeting. By having the
meetings the Council waived the rights to the Attorney/Client
privilege. The next day the City Manager approached the City
Attorney and attempted to persuade the City Attorney to recommend
termination of the police officer because the City Council wanted
the officer fired. The City Attorney refused to change his memo.
The City Manager, in his final order on the matter, increased the
suspension to fifteen days.
My response: The determination to give Officer ,Squires a fifteen
day suspension rather than the ten days recommended by Glen Neier
is one of the most interesting topics discussed in the document.
This issue was discussed between myself, Glen Neier, Chief
Garner, Marti Hensley (our Personnel Specialist) and several
members of the City Council on numerous occasions. Never was a
specific meeting held for the purpose of discussing this matter.
I spoke with several Council members on the telephone and some of
the Council members while driving to a meeting in Columbia Falls.
Might also note that I recall that Mr. Neier spent a fair amount
of time discussing this issue with Council members as well, as I
would expect.
This was done for two primary reasons. First to make them aware
of the severity of the situation, and second to get their advice
and input before making a decision. This specific matter raises
the broader issue of when it's appropriate or inappropriate to
inform and seek input from the Council. The City Attorney has
never made me aware of any concerns regarding conversations or
meetings I have had with Council members. My concern is that the
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 20C
Page 7 of 42
1816
airing of this issue may compromise the City's effort to resolve
this pending litigation.
Next issue is titled Employee Falsifying Time Sheet. In early
December 2000 the City Attorney was informed that a City employee
had falsified a time sheet. Specifically, the employee related
that a City employee was absent for fifty-four hours during the
October 21st through November 20th, 2000 pay period. However, the
time sheet submitted by the employee did not reflect the absence.
When the Personnel Specialist confronted the employee about the
alleged discrepancy the employee stated that she was working at
home.
The City Attorney learned that the employee was in Hamilton,
Montana during the time. The City Attorney dispatched a memo to
the City Manager, pointed out the allegation of falsifying a time
sheet. The memo has been lost. When the City Attorney later
requested information on the outcome, the City Manager stated he
had talked to the department head who was on vacation during the
period, and the department head had indicated that the alleged
offending employee was on comp time during her absence. The
alleged offending employee was a member of AFSCME who are not
entitled to earn comp time and no comp time notation appeared on
any records of the City. Apparently the camp time was under the
table. The City Attorney advised the City Manager to get to the
bottom of the issue, because someone was lying. The City Manager
did not communicate to the City Attorney how the matter was
resolved, however, the Personnel Specialist never received any
corrected time sheet. The issue was swept under the table.
Attached is a copy of a written response of the Director of Parks
and Recreation, which provides a complete explanation of the
issue and demonstrates the frivolous nature of this allegation.
If the Council would like me to, I will read that document. I
believe it's about six pages and details, very specifically, the
numerous times in which the Parks and Rec Director met with the
City Attorney, the Personnel Specialist, the Union and myself to
make sure that what was being done with flex time was appropriate
under City ordinances. And so, at this point, I think because
it's written in his words, I guess I'd rather wait until the end
and then if you want me to read it I'm happy to. (Memo is
attached and by this reference is made a part of the official
record)
Banquet tickets are the next issue being alleged. The City
Manager attended the Doug Betters Winter Classic Banquet, the
Alert Banquet and the Kid Sports Banquet with tickets purchased
by an employee of the Kalispell Regional Medical Center. The
value of the tickets approximated $500.00. At the time the City
Manager accepted the tickets, the City was involved in a
controversial and confusing special improvement district
connected with the expansion of Kalispell Regional Hospital. The
SID costs totaled approximately $1,618,000. The City Manager is a
member of the International City Managers Association. The Code
of Ethics for the organization states at Tenet 12. "Seek no
favor; believe that personal aggrandizement of profit secured by
confidential information or by misuse of public time is
dishonest". The guidelines: "Gifts. Members should not directly
or indirectly solicit or receive any gifts whether it be money,
services, loan, travel, entertainment, hospitality, promise, or
any other form under the following circumstances: Number 1) it
could be reasonably inferred or expected that the gift was
intended to influence them in the performance of their official
duties or Number 2) the gift was intended to serve as a reward
for an official action on their part. The City Manager violated
the Code of Ethics of the ICMA by accepting tickets to the
functions from a hospital employee.
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Pgq@ A @t 0
1817
My response to that. From time to time as Kalispell City Manager,
I have been asked to attend lunches... -and dinners by business
owners and friends in the community. I have accepted these
invitations and enjoyed developing an even stronger working
relationship with numerous businesses and institutions within the
community. Positive community relations is something that nearly
all of the Council members praised me for during my recent
evaluation. I have attended four banquets. I attended the Capitol
Restoration, Doug Betters winter Classic and Kid Sports Banquets
with a representative of the Kalispell Regional Medical Center.
I also attended the Alert Banquet with a local banker. I did not
benefit from the donations made by the purchase of these tickets
to their perspective charities. on each of the four occasions I
received a dinner, which, with an estimated value of $25.00.
In joining ICMA (the professional association for city and county
managers), I agreed to abide by the ICMA Code of Ethics and to
have my conduct evaluated by my peers should there be any
question that my conduct does not meet the very high standards
established by ICMA. I share the values of the association and
profession, and can assure you that I have conducted myself at
the highest standards of professional and personal integrity.
ICMA has a formal and rigorous procedure in place for conducting
an ethics inquiry. A finding that a member has violated the Code
of Ethics can only be made by the ICMA Executive Board following
such review. Lacking such a formal review, it is improper for
anyone to make a statement that meant my conduct violated the
Code of Ethics. If any member of the Council or the public has a
concern that my conduct was unethical I would recommend that they
submit the information to ICMA and request that a formal ethics
inquiry be conducted.
It is important that the prohibition of unsolicited gifts be
limited to circumstances related to improper influence. In de
min.imus situations, such as meal checks, some modest maximum
dollar value should be determined by the member as a guideline.
The guideline is not intended to isolate members from normal
social practices or gifts among friends, associates and relatives
are appropriate for certain occasions.
My acceptance of tickets to a fund raising event for non-profit
associations does not violate the standard of the guideline. The
purpose of this guideline is to address those circumstances where
a single gift, or the overall value of a gift, is so large that
the ordinary individual would perceive that it was offered solely
to achieve some special benefit or consideration. That is simply
not the case in this situation. I call your attention to the
statement in the guideline: "It is important that the prohibition
of unsolicited gifts be limited to circumstances related to
improper influence". There was no improper influence in this
situation.
The invitations were not offered to me in an effort to influence
my performance or conduct as Kalispell City Manager. The
individuals who offered me the tickets have made no demands or
requests from me in exchange for the invitations, nor would I
expect them to. The invitations were not offered, nor were they
received, as a reward for special favors. The guideline in Tenent
12 clearly prohibits those gifts that are intended to influence a
manager's official actions or those that have the appearance of
doing so. In all other situations, the guideline presumes that
managers will exercise discretion in accepting gifts.
The insinuation that the hospital benefited financially by SID
343 because I attended any of these events is outrageous. All of
the components of the hospital project and SID 343 were developed
Kalispell. City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 9 of 42
through the Planning office, Finance Department and City
Attorney. The merits of the proposal were discussed and approved
by the Council, not by my office. The City spent several months
walking step by step through the SID process. Numerous public
meetings were held with several formal actions required by the
City Council and reviewed by the City Attorney and never once in
that time did Glen Neier present any of these concerns to me or
the Council.
We're getting there.
Meal policy is the next allegation. The City Finance Director
sent the City Attorney a memo after noticing several claims for
meals at Rotary and United Way being processed by the City
Account Clerk. She also was aware that some City employees were
using the City credit card and receiving petty cash for meals.
The City Attorney responded with a memo advising that a previous
City Manager had issued a directive that City employees were not
to be reimbursed for meal expenses while attending meals within
the City. The directive of the previous City manager had not been
reversed. The memo was dated June 7th, 2001 and copies were given
to the Manager, the Mayor and City Council on June 22nd. The City
Manager issued a directive authorizing department heads to join
local service clubs and use part of the department's school and
travel money for dues.
My response to this particular issue: the City of Kalispell does
not have a policy that regulates reimbursements of legitimate
expenses when dealing locally with official City business. I
believe it is within my authority to alter a directive given by
Interim City Manager, Al Thelen. If an employee is conducting
official City business which happens to be either at breakfast,
lunch or dinner, he or she should be reimbursed for the cost of
that meal by the City. This is a privilege that should be
exercised with great caution and has never been abused by myself
or anyone on my staff.
Additionally, I spoke with Glen about his memo and this issue
approximately three weeks ago. At that time Glen did not indicate
any urgency in resolving the issue and we both agreed that I
should contact cities throughout the state in order to see how
they handle the situation. I did exactly that and have notes and
faxes from most of the major cities within Montana. All of the
cities contacted handle local reimbursements in a similar or the
same way as I have directed the staff. It has been my intent to
discuss the merits of adding language dealing with this issue to
the personnel manual with the Personnel Specialist and Glen
Neier, which I intend to do in the immediate future.
As for myself, Section 8A of my employment agreement states: "the
City hereby agrees to budget and pay the travel and subsistence
expenses of employee for professional and official travel,
meetings and occasions adequate to continue the professional
development of the employee and to adequately pursue necessary
official and other functions for the City". This can be
reasonably interpreted as including the reimbursement for meals
while attending meetings in my capacity as the City Manager.
Examples would include attending monthly Kalispell Development
Corporation Meetings (they meet at breakfast), and lunches with
other public and private sector leaders involved in the
community. I would also like to note that in over two years of
working for the City, I have been reimbursed for approximately
$353.48. This averages $14.14 per month. When added to the review
conducted by each of the department directors, the City expends
on average less than $25.00 per month in meal expenses on all six
directors and myself combined. This is clear evidence that my
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 10 of 42
1819
staff and I have exercised appropriate discretion in judgment in
this area.
The next area has to deal with, it's entitled Millennium Madness.
Kalispell Rotary Club has a program called Millennium Madness.
The club sells $200.00 raffle tickets at $200.00 per ticket and
raffles off $20,000.00 in prizes. The City pays for the Manager's
membership and meals at Rotary, although the City has a policy
which does not allow for meals in the City. The October statement
from Rotary included a charge for Millennium Madness on the
Manager's account. Let me repeat that. The October's statement
from Rotary included a charge for Millennium Madness on the
Manager's account. The Manager did not authorize payment,
indicating that he was going to pay the charge. The January
statement contained an opening balance of $212.50, (this is three
months quarterly billing statement) indicating that the
Millennium Madness charge had not been paid by the Manager. The
Manager authorized payment by the City of the January statement
including the Millennium Madness charge.
My response: This issue is accurately described in the bullet
document. This was an honest mistake on my part and I never
intended to be reimbursed by the City for this raffle ticket. In
fact, I never intended to purchase one of these tickets in the
first place. This ticket was automatically billed to every member
of the club. Last week I was made aware of the fact that one of
the allegations included a payment to Rotary. Based on that
information, I immediately asked the Finance Department to
provide me with a copy of every invoice paid to Rotary. Based on
those invoices, the mistake was noticed and I reimbursed the City
within 24 hours. I take full responsibility for this honest
mistake.
In preparing... that concludes the issues that were listed in the
bullet document, but there has been some other comments made and
concerns. In preparing this response, I spent hours reviewing all
of the records associated with my employment as a City Manager.
In doing so, I have discovered the following two additional
issues that should be discussed at this time.
Fuel charges. Early in my employment with the City I asked the
Finance Director how I was to handle fuel or mileage expenses
when traveling outside of the area. The Personnel Manual does not
address a situation where an employee receives an automobile
allowance. Based on past practices, I was informed that I should
fill my vehicle when traveling to meetings or official business
outside of the area. With that information, I have been fueling
my vehicle whenever I have traveled to an official City function
or meeting outside of the valley. in other words, meetings in
Helena, Missoula, Great Falls, but not in Whitefish, Columbia
Falls or anywhere in what I guess I'd consider the valley. On
this subject my employment agreement states: "all expenses
involved in the operation of the employees personal vehicle shall
be employee's only". This is because I receive an automobile
allowance. However, the paragraph further states, "said employee
will be compensated for all City driving on City business,
outside the State of Montana, at the most current rate authorized
by the State of Montana". I have never turned in a mileage slip
for my official travels out of state. In 2000, I traveled to
Dickinson, North Dakota. The Whitefish City Manager, we car
pooled together, C Falls, Whitefish and myself and in that
occasion we used an automobile from Whitefish. Total mileage on
the trip was 1552 miles. It is not quite like going to a
conference in the Midwest. In 2001, I drove my personal vehicle
to Green River, Wyoming. Round trip 1,544 miles. May 1999 through
Kalispell City Council Minutes
special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 11 of 42
1820
July 2001, my fuel expenses,
reimbursed for, total $396.43.
(TAPE ONE - SIDE TWO)
that I have been inaccurately
Kukulski: In Green River, Wyoming, 1,544 miles at .34 per mile
equals $524.96. I have to acknowledge ... I did not get a chance to
verify the .34 per mile. I know it used to be .32 and heard now
it is .34. If that's inaccurate, I apologize. This actually
resulted in a net savings to the City of $128.53. This is an
issue that requires clarification at this time.
The next issue that I have listed is telephone expenses. In
reviewing every Visa bill since my employment in order to
evaluate meal and fuel charges, I also requested to see a copy of
every cellular phone and office phone bill. After a line -by-line
review of those invoices I have concluded that I owe the City
$158.49. Ninety five percent of these telephone charges were made
with a cellular phone when traveling and during the month of
December 2000 when my daughter was born. A check has been given
to the Finance Department reimbursing the City for these, for
this expense.
In closing, I'd like to say, in examining the manner in which
this matter has been addressed by the Mayor and the City
Attorney, it is critically important to note that neither the
Mayor or the City Attorney have ever provided me with the
courtesy of responding to the contents of the letter Glen Neier
forwarded to Maxine Lamb. Nor, have they, to my knowledge, ever
spoken to any of the members of the City Council regarding their
concerns. Rather, they have spoken to other City employees, state
and county officials and repeatedly to the media. I will let you
judge whether this approach is in the best interest of the City
of Kalispell.
As stated above, the Mayor and City Attorney have a right to
review decisions I have made in the way in which I manage City
finances. It is unfortunate that the issues raised in this letter
were not brought to the attention of the City Council and myself
in a more forthcoming and constructive manner. There are
procedures in place to address concerns of this kind. I believe
that I have acted within my authority as City Manager, and that I
have appropriately sought the advice and consent of the City
Council, Mayor and City Attorney. I am not perfect and I know I
make mistakes, but I work hard to learn from those mistakes and
move on. I have enjoyed a good working relationship with every
member of this City Council. In doing so, I have worked hard to
include each Councilman's perspective in the decisions I make.
The reality, however, is that from time to time some members of
the Council vigorously disagree with the majority, and when this
happens, it is impossible to make everyone happy. That is when we
must agree to disagree and move on.
As to the allegations filed with several state and local agencies
I am pleased to learn, according to the associated press, and I
maybe should give a plug for Skip, whoI guess wrote the article,
that investigators and I'm quoting, ",Investigators won't pursue
allegations against Kalispell City Manager". According to the
article, "state and county law enforcement will not investigate
allegations against the Kalispell City Manager that he misused
public money saying initial reviews give no indication he
violated the law". Arlyn Greydanus of the State Division of
Criminal Investigation is quoted as saying, "Based on the
material I was given I would not assign an agent to investigate
this because I don't see any evidence that it is a criminal
1
1
1
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 12 of 42
1821
matter". The local government services bureau has also stated
that an investigation is not in order. Finally, Maxine Lamb,
Commander of the Sheriff's Detective Division, is quoted as
saying, "I'm not sure after reviewing the material he gave me
that there is any validity to the claims". It is expected that
official letters to this effect will be sent to the City in the
next thirty days. Now that these independent agencies have
concluded their review, I can only hope that we can put this
entire matter behind us, and I can get back to managing the
business of the City of Kalispell. You have my assurance that
this is precisely what I intend to do. Thank you.
(STANDING OVATION)
Boharski: I have a feeling that the City Attorney probably feels
rather uncomfortable in responding to any of the things that you
mention in your memo Chris. I guess I want to start off by
stating a couple of things for clarification and hopefully those
individuals watching on television and in the public will get a
chance to hear it directly. You'll get a chance to hear it
directly from me and not necessarily from reading what
unfortunately has been distorted in the press about an issue,
which I think is serious in nature. Which I don't think should be
brushed over lightly. I want to start off by reading the first
paragraph of the memo that I sent, because I guess I take offense
at the suggestion that I made any sort of criminal allegations
against the City Manager or anyone in the City. I did not. I
spent a number of hours visiting with people over the telephone
after having visited with the members of the City Council, and in
fact, on June 19th sending a letter to the City Manager, all
members of the City Council, and did not receive what I felt was
a decent response from any of them. I received a response from
one of the issues contained in the letter by Councilman Leistiko
and none of the other members of this Council responded to my
letter. And that is none, not one of the eight.
Upon further looking into these issues, I ended up in the
Assistant Finance Director's Office one day and I asked her about
an allegation that I had heard. That the City Manager had charged
$200.00 in raffle tickets to the City of Kalispell and had not
paid them back. I asked her quietly in her office if she could
confirm or show this was not the case. She turned in her chair,
pulled it up on her computer screen, and in fact confirmed to me
that it had not been paid back. Subsequent to that, she stated,
and this is paraphrasing, what really bothers me is when the City
Manager goes out of town, and charges $148.00 or $150.00 a night
motels to the citizens of Kalispell with $16.00 valet charges,
and bills them to the City. This struck me as odd, because it
seems I would have come across something like this in the claims
that we see on every other Monday night. She informed me that the
reason I was not aware of these was that they were on the City
Manager's credit card receipts. I asked her for a copy of the
credit card receipts.
Pursuant to Montana law, it is perfectly appropriate, and I
believe that it is perfectly appropriate for myself or any member
of this City Council, to inquire or to investigate any issue
which concerns them regarding the taxpayer's money. Ladies and
gentlemen that is why we are elected to sit behind this table
every other Monday night. I did that, I reviewed the claims.
Having done so, I contacted several auditors in the State of
Montana, because frankly, and I will state it again for the
record, after receiving no response on my first letter to this
Council, I don't think it was unreasonable to expect that I
wasn't going to receive any other response from any member of
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 13 of 42
1822
this Council if I wrote them another letter. If that was an error
in my judgment, so be it, but I don't think it was. I think that
unfortunately, I would have received the same type of a response
that I just saw in this room.
The thing that concerns me is that we are all neighbors and that
somehow or another this has become an issue of let's stand up and
applaud the City Manager for a very nice response to some very
serious concerns. Ladies and gentlemen, this is not a playground
that we are playing on with all due respect. I take my oath of
office very seriously. I would never have addressed this letter
to the State Auditor: A; had they not suggested it, and B; had I
not felt that it was appropriate. I sent nothing to the Attorney
General's Office, and it's my understanding, although I have
never read his letter, that the City Attorney referred this issue
to the Attorney General's Office because he felt it was
inappropriate for him to be investigating the City Manager.
Now, I think it should be noted that in the ten years since we've
had the City Manager form of government in Kalispell, nothing
even akin to this, has ever come up with three previous City
managers. Absolutely nothing. We think these are serious issues.
As I stated in my opening paragraph, and Chris has paraphrased,
mainly because he addressed Glen's issues. But he's paraphrased
the issues that I brought up in my letter to the local government
assistance division, the audit section, and here's what it
states, it's only five lines long. It won't take us long. "Per
our recent telephone conversation a number of issues have been
brought to my attention by employees of the City of Kalispell
which I believe need to be examined by an independent auditor. I
would respectfully request that pursuant to the Statutes of the
State of Montana, your division investigate the following sets of
circumstances. I would also request that if you find any of these
matters to be a potential violation of state law that you refer
them to the appropriate investigative authority". Now, I guess I
take offense when members of this Council or other candidates
running for political office somehow can twist that to be
politicizing an issue.
I will provide a copy of this letter to anyone who requests it.
To me, requesting that an independent auditor investigate
possible, and I emphasize the word possible, misuse of public
funds is very serious business. It is not political in nature.
Now Chris, I guess, the first thing I would like to do is commend
you on a couple of things. You did pay back to the City of
Kalispell the $200.00 in tickets. I think that it is difficult
when you find yourself in a situation where you, in the first
place, could have found it, in any way, that you bill the
taxpayers for $200.00 worth of raffle tickets. You state that it
is an oversight, or whatever the word is in your letter, but it
really bothers me that somehow this ever ended up even on the
City's books. That greatly concerns me. And the fact that it was
there is one of the things that made me wonder whether or not
there were other things. Whether they were put there by mistake
or whether they were put there on purpose. I don't know and I
never made the allegation one way or another. I simply asked that
they be looked into.
The second is that, I guess in general as I read through your
response to these things, I was reminded of a conversation that I
had with someone and that was that they felt in many ways you
were running the City of Kalispell similar to the way an
individual would run a sole proprietorship. In a sole
proprietorship you own your business and many of the things that
you brought up, and I'd like to address some of them in specific
1-1
1
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 14 of 42
1823
detail, are very good and very nice things to do for people.
I
think that on as many occasions as you have, I have praised
City
employees for doing a good job. I've supported the contracts
that
we've signed with City employees and believe that they do
the
work, and that get paid for their job. The difficulty is, is
that
the City of Kalispell is not a sole proprietorship. The
nine
members of this Council, with the force of law, levy taxes on
the
citizens of Kalispell. We draw that money into the coffers, which
are the public's coffers, the money's not mine and the money's
not yours. With that money we have a responsibility to establish
policies, laws, rules, ordinances, personnel handbooks and
the
like to ensure that we know exactly how every dollar in the
City
of Kalispell is expended. Because we, the nine members of
this
Council and anyone who is running for office against us
that
might succeed in their bid for office, are responsible to
the
taxpayers.
Now let me mention a couple of specifics. You mention in here,
in your response, that you think it was appropriate to reward a
Public Works employee for a job well done. While I would concur
that a Public Works employee who is out on an anniversary dinner
with his wife, receives a call, it is a terribly unfortunate
situation. Let me back up for just a second. It seems to me
that if things were being managed in a different fashion, perhaps
in this case by the Public Works Director and not yourself, that
that employee could have the brought the fact to the Public Works
Director that it was his anniversary and he could have traded off
pagers with another employee. That would have resolved the
situation. It never would have come up. The difficulty with it
coming up, as the City Attorney pointed out to you, and as I
pointed out to you, is what you have done as a result of giving
that employee a $50.00 bonus is you have established a precedent
in the City of Kalispell, whereby,
(BOOING)
Boharski: is that you have established a precedent in the City of
Kalispell whereby union employees feel that they will be entitled
to a bonus when they do a job well done. Now that would all be
fine and good in a right to work state where they don't have
unions. And I guess, first of all, I wish that you would grant
as much respect to everyone on this Council as you have to the
City Manager. These are very complicated issues or we would not
be here. I didn't call this meeting this evening.
Now the difficulty is that what you are now, you are guilty of
unilateral bargaining. You have established a precedent for the
next union employee that comes to the City of Kalispell, who is
perhaps on a birthday party with his child, will come to the City
and complain, and maybe complain is not the right word, I don't
remember exactly the word I used. Now we have a difficult
situation. Do you grant it or do you deny it? If his wife is in
the hospital, do you grant it or you deny it? If his child is
feeling ill, do you grant it or you deny it? How are you going
to deal with the situation?
Kukulski: Mayor, when dealing with personnel issues, very
seldomly, as I'm sure that even the City Attorney can
acknowledge, are issues black and white. And, my decision to
reward this employee was only in, partially, to do with the fact
of the timing. Quite frankly, I would even strengthen that
statement a little more to say that it had little to do with the
timing. What it had to do with was a very unique situation, and
that is me receiving phone calls from businessmen and women, I
specifically remember that because I spoke with the gal. And,
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 15 of 42
1824
there were more than one of them, two, three, I didn' t document
who they were, who praised this employee for the job that they
had done, and how quickly, and how they handled the situation.
And, in fact, was even told that during the situation that one of
the business owners hired a private contractor to come in,
because they were so concerned about the damage. The private
contractor reversed what the City employee had done and caused
further damage. So I was convinced in this situation that this
employee, had by far, net savings to those taxpayers and to those
business owners that far exceeded $50.00. Now you're absolutely
correct, and you and I could sit here and we could argue all
night long about precisely how you handle different situations,
and you're absolutely correct, it is my responsibility and I've
put myself in a position, I'm comfortable with that, of needing
to be consistent in how I treat all employees, be it union or
non -union, and when I'm inconsistent I do place the City at risk.
Doing so, does place the City somewhat at risk. I fully believe,
though, in not doing those types of things, the City pays far
more, the taxpayers pay far more in the long run, through less
productivity and attitudes and approaches that employees have to
their jobs.
Now, I know that you probably disagree with that. But that's. I
readily acknowledge the situation that I have to face as a
manager in determining those issues.
Boharski: Chris, let me respond to that. I'm certainly not an
attorney and the gentleman to my left is the individual who is
hired by this Council to advise the City on personnel issues.
You made the statement at the beginning of your response that
troubles me very much. You stated that these are not black and
white issues. I beg to differ. They're absolutely black and
white issues, and here's what is going to happen. The next time
we have a disgruntled employee who thinks that he did a good job,
who got a letter of praise from someone, maybe he'll call his
friends up and get a letter of praise. Maybe he's angry with the
City. He will file an unfair labors practice charge with the
City. His attorneys during discovery, will ask the City Attorney
for documents that he has written in the past regarding these
issues. He will discover, in discovery, that the City Attorney
has advised against this policy. Yet the City is guilty of this
policy. Our own attorney will be called to the stand to testify
against us and we will be forced to give a bonus, or a reward, or
whatever it is.
I probably seem like the had guy, because I don't think we ought
to reward an employee for a job well done. I think it would be
nice if we could give cash rewards to every employee who did a
good job. We'd probably be giving them out all day long. The
difficulty is you've put the citizens of Kalispell in a situation
where they are facing unfair labor practice charges, and I can
assure you that the City Attorney advises me, and he's the
individual I depend on for advice, that we will probably lose
those claims. That is the difficulty, and the City Attorney
advised you against doing these things, and you have ignored his
advice, and you state in your letter with regards to the
firemen's issue, which I'll get to in a moment, that you sought
legal advice from other attorneys outside the City Attorney's
office, and with the Department of Labor. There's only one
difficulty. Ordinance 1166 specifically states that legal advice
is given by the City Attorney and none of the attorneys that you
talked to in town, and none of the attorneys that you talked to
at the Department of Labor, are going to come to the City of
Kalispell, unless we appropriate a whole bunch of money in
retainers, to bring them here to defend your actions. Frankly
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 16 of 42
1825
they will fail because they will use our own City Attorney as a
witness against us. That troubles me.,
Kukulski: I would like. I would like for us to discuss that
second issue. Because that one I would be very interested in
your feedback and I think you would be very interested in mine.
Boharski: Councilman Leistiko you have a question.
Leistiko: I have more than a question. I've got a statement
that I'd like to make. I want to thank City Manager, Chris, for
coming forward here and talking about these issues. I have always
thought that Chris was a man of integrity, honesty and sound
judgment and prior to this unfortunate incident and even because
of these allegations I haven't changed my mind. I still think he
is a man of integrity, honesty and sound judgment and I accept
his explanation for every one of these allegations. They're
management decisions, I believe, in most cases. Maybe a little
bit of bad judgment, but he took care of it. Everybody makes
mistakes. The most troubling aspect of this whole matter, to me,
is the way it was handled by the Mayor and the City Attorney,
I've had about a week to witness the scenario and read and hear
about it daily, and thought about what it means for us, and for
our City. When we decided to have this special meeting, I
prepared a statement that I would like to share, particularly
with the rest of the Council and with Chris so I can stay on the
subject. That's the reason I prepared it, because this thing gets
emotional at times about who's really in charge here, and
sometimes you tend to get off the subject, so I prepared this
written statement which I will be glad to provide to the Clerk so
that you can put in the records if you like.
We live in a country and a state that takes pride in the due
process protection we offer our citizens. Above all, we seem to
value the sense of fair play, the right to know the charges
against you and the right to answer them. The right not to have
your good name smeared by rumors, innuendos, and half-truths. I
guess we all know that the public arena can always be mean, but I
think you should take. It should still shock our conscience when
we see what has happened in this particular situation. The
question I have to ask is, did the good name and reputation of a
person have to be trampled in order to protect the interest of
the Kalispell citizens, and I don't think so. In looking at how
this all came about, I will begin with some quotes in the papers
by the City Attorney, Glen Neier, and Bill Boharski, that are
hard to explain and that intend to create confusion, considering
this City's form of government. The City Attorney is quoted as
saying that, "Chris is not the type of person to have an evil
intent, to have any evil intent. He would not intentionally
violate the law". Yet, criminal charges were leveled against
Chris anonymously and without notice to him. The charges were
given to the press for public review while the litigation of the
matter was still being reviewed by outside agencies. The City
Attorney gave extended interviews to the press, but never brought
the matter before this Council or even informed this Council of
his actions. And certainly, never sought the approval of this
Council. Yet, one of those charges made was that the City
Manager authorized the use of $50.00 out of petty cash funds
without approval of this Council. The Mayor is quoted as saying
that the majority of the Council doesn't give a dam, and he'd be
right in some cases there. That is, that he, therefore, has to
go over their heads, directly to the media and public opinion.
He is also quoted as saying that there is a perception that the
City Manager and a majority of this Council are working in
concert to quote, "Take control". Take control from whom, of
Kalispell, City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 17 of 42
1826
what? Therefore let me state unequivocally, Kalispell by the
will of its people has chosen a Manager City Council form of
government. The Manager is the chief executive officer of this
City. He is charged with running the day-to-day operations of
this City, and he has discretion to make decisions of a
managerial nature which do not require a formal vote or approval
of this City Council. However, he reports to this Council and is
charged with carrying out the policies set by this Council
through its resolutions, ordinances and other formal actions. He
serves at the pleasure of this Council, and can be disciplined or
removed by the majority vote of this Council. This Council is
the governing body for the City of Kalispell. Its function. It
functions as the legislative body in this particular form of
government. The Mayor is purportedly the leader of this Council
and presides over its meetings. He has one vote, the same as any
other Council member. Not a tying vote, he has one vote. His
duties are limited and specified in the administrative code of
the City under Ordinance 1.1.66, and they are limited. He may
appoint, with the consent of the Council, members of advisory
boards and commissions and the City Attorney. Number two. He
executes or signs all ordinances, resolutions and contracts on
behalf of the City after this Council's approval. He performs
ceremonial functions as Mayor of the City. Kisses the baby and
cuts the ribbons. And he performs any other duties specifically
designated by ordinance. And here's the kicker. Except for the
above, the Mayor shall have no other executive or administrative
duties, those being the responsibility of the City Manager. It is
spelled out. It is plain, simple, right out of the City
ordinance, and there's no wiggle room gentleman.
The duties of the City Attorney are also spelled out in the same
ordinance. He shall attend to matters before the City Court, the
District Court and the Supreme Court of Montana, and such other
courts as the Council may direct. Provided, however, the City
Attorney shall have sole prosecutorial discretion to criminal
matters in City Court, and upon appeal. He drafts, on behalf of
the City, all contracts, ordinances and resolutions. He advises
the manager and the Council on matters of duties, rights,
liabilities and powers of the City, and he performs such other
functions and duties as directed by this Council. Note that
contrary to what is sometimes reported in the media, the City
Attorney reports to this City Council, and not to the Mayor.
So how is the City of Kalispell governed? Through the official
and lawful actions of a majority of the elected representatives
of this Council. How is it managed day to day? By the City
Manager and his department heads. The law forbids interfering.
And we received a memo from the Mayor less that a week ago
stating that. If the City Attorney, the Mayor or an individual
Council member discovers or identifies something that he thinks
is improper or unlawful, what should be the proper way? What
should he do? He brings it to the governing body, this City
Council. What happens if the majority of the Council doesn't
agree with his allegations, what recourse does that individual
have? It seems simple to me. Any individual can act on their
own at their own risk, but not as an authorized representative of
the City of Kalispell. An individual should have an obligation
to make it clear to all, that he is acting outside the scope of
his official position. If he wants to put himself at risk of
litigation, etc., that's his choice. But does this individual
have the authority to unilaterally put the entire City at risk,
without approval of the majority of this governing body? I don't
think so. I have been on the losing side of issues, and one just
recently, the decision to forego $200,000 very arguably owed to
the City because of an arguable contract written by the City
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 18 of 42
1827
Attorney and approved by a prior Council. But the majority ruled.
I had to'accept the majority even though I did not agree with it.
I didn't run to the press and try to file criminal charges and
allegations. I did not pursue a personal agenda. These recent
actions of the City Attorney and the Mayor are not my idea of how
this City should be governed. I would therefore like to list
several questions which I believe we must get answers to in the
near future if we are to run this City effectively, smoothly and
without undo risk while meeting the trust that has been placed in
us by, as public officials. Therefore I want to suggest that
this Council discuss, at a future workshop, whether we need to
seek objective outside opinions in order to answer the following
questions.
Number one. Since the City Council is his client, did the City
Attorney have a responsibility to bring his concerns to this
Council for a decision as to how they should be handled prior to
filing them with an outside agency? And did the Mayor have the
same responsibility?
Number two. Did their unauthorized actions, by their unauthorized
actions, and when I say unauthorized I mean they
did not come to
this Council. Did the City Attorney and the Mayor place this
City at risk of costly litigation or jeopardize
its position in
still pending litigation? Is it appropriate, ethical and legal
for a City Attorney to discuss a pending criminal investigation
with the media even before the individual was
informed of the
charges against him? Was that appropriate for
the Mayor to do
likewise? Since the City of Kalispell is the
City Attorney's
client, did he violate any attorney/client
privileges of
confidentiality by the public disclosure he made
about personnel
actions or pending litigation? That's what
discussing. Exactly how is the City Attorney to
they were just
advise both the
Council and the City Manager of any problems he
perceives which
might be a violation of policies, ordinances or
laws? Does he
have an obligation to do so as soon as he is
aware of the
problems and ask for a resolution? Or can he sit back and just
wait, and just try to catch an offender. What is
the proper role
of the City Attorney in this situation?
Number six. Should the City Attorney have asked the City Council
to seek outside counsel to evaluate the charges against the City
Manager? Since he might have a conflict of interest as a chief
counsel for the City and its manager.
And seven. Does the Council need to put money back in the budget
to cover any potential liabilities the City might have because of
this matter and to answer the above questions? Or can these
questions be addressed by representatives of the Attorney
General's office at no cost to the City? At this same workshop
we could give Mr. Neier an opportunity to answer the questions
for us. Then we can discuss whether we also need to ask for
outside objective opinion. If we do have an outside objective
source evaluate this situation and we are told that everything
was handled properly and that we have nothing to worry about,
then so be it. I can accept it. But I want to get reliable
answers to these questions no matter what those answers might be.
That would conclude my remarks, and I will listen to the rest of
the arguments going on about this, but I will provide copies of
these comments to anybody who wants them. Thank you.
(CLAPPING)
Larson: Your Honor.
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 19 of 42
Boharski: With all due respect Councilman Leistiko, I don't
remember the agenda saying that the purpose of this meeting was
for you to politically grandstand.
(LAUGHTER AND YELLING)
Boharski: May we have order, may we have order please.
Larson: Your Honor.
Boharski: I have the floor Councilman Larson, thank you very
much. Councilman Leistiko, let me address some of the things
that you insinuate. Number one, I would suggest that you spend
more time...
Larson: Your Honor. Point of Order. I don't know that you have
the right to have the floor after every statement has been made.
(CLAPPING)
Boharski: I have taken the floor. Chief Garner, you will either
keep order in this room or we will remove the people from the
room.
Ann Robinson (Audience): You can't do it.
Boharski: Yes I can. Pursuant to ordinance 1166...
Ann Robinson (Audience): This is a public meeting.
Police Chief Frank Garner: Let me address that. I am a police
officer, I'm a sworn police officer and I will act on acts of
criminal conduct. I won't act on anything other than criminal
conduct because I can't remove myself from the position of being
a police officer. Now as your neighbor, I would ask you to
please show due respect for this meeting. It is the governing
body for the City of Kalispell. But I'll only act at such time
that I feel that it's appropriate. Based on the circumstances,
if somebody engages in criminal conduct.
Boharski: Now Frank, let me clarify...
(CLAPPING)
Boharski: let me clarify something. Obviously, as I mentioned
earlier, I am not going to be a very popular person when this
meeting is over with, but so be it. Under Ordinance 1166 Frank,
you are also the Sergeant at Arms, and I would request that you
read what your responsibilities under the Sergeant at Arms...
Garner: I already have.
Boharski: for this meeting are. And they are in conflict with
what you just stated. Now, to finish my point.
Garner: I'll act as I see appropriate based on the circumstances.
Boharski: To finish my point.
Leistiko: And you were saying something about my political
aspirations?
Boharski: We do not have a manager, Council form of government.
We have a Council/manager form of government, and that is
important to remember, that the Council oversees the manager and
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 20 of 42
1829
this City. Very simply put, that the City Attorney, and I'm glad
someone finally pointed it out, and.maybe skip you'll get it
right this time, that the Mayor does not have the City Attorney
working for him. I don't know how many people on this Council and
how many people in this room have stated that the City Attorney
works for the Mayor and the only reason he's bringing this up is
because somebody is going to remove that power that the Mayor
has. Even Councilman Leistiko now admits that it doesn't exist.
The City Attorney works for the Council and he works for the
Manager. Now, if I might...
Leistiko: Could I address that?
Boharski: the second issue that I would like to address, because
I believe that is the purpose of this meeting is to get to the
bottom of these problems, is with regard to the firefighter
increase of $1,215.00, It seems to me that you have done the same
thing as I previously mentioned with the $50.00 bonus. You
presented to this City Council on April 23rd, if the date serves
correctly, a contract for us to ratify, and we are the
individuals who ratify union contracts in this City. That
contract did not contain any provision for retroactive pay
increase for any member of the firefighter's union. Now I guess
I would like you to explain to this Council how you have not put
this City in a situation where we are going to face litigation
via an unfair labor practice for your unilaterally, without the
consent of this Council, granting a $1,215.00 reward, as your pay
slip states or retroactive pay increase, if in fact your quotes
are better than mine in the newspaper, because I am certainly
quoted incorrectly. I don't know if you are or not.
Kukulski: Not always correctly. In response to that. I have no
problem in responding to your concerns and your questions as I
have outlined in my memo. Let me start by saying that I spoke.
First of all let me give you a little bit of background on the
situation as I understand it, because some of it was prior to my
taking employment here. During the last contract negotiation,
that being not the one that was approved here in the last several
months but the three-year contract prior to that, the union and
the City came to an arrangement of which, at the time, for all
intents and purposes prior to that point there were at least two
individuals in the fire department that received, for lack of a
better term, a stipend for their duties that were above and
beyond the standard firefighter actions. The first one, and I'm
sure there were others, but which were parallel to each other,
were the EMT Coordinator and the Fire Training Officer. Both of
those individuals had typically, and I'm relying a little bit on
Glen and on Marti who shared with me what had happened in the
past, those individuals had always received an equal stipend to
one another, or to the position, for those responsibilities. And
I believe it might have been $50.00 a month at the previous
contract, two contracts ago. This past contract negotiation,
part of my arriving, the City based on I presume, sound
negotiation, increased the EMT Coordinator's stipend
considerably. I think it was about three times what it was
previously, I'm sure for good reason. But chose to leave the
Fire Training Officer at the same rate of pay. I think the spread
was something like $50.00 to $180_00, where as prior to this,
whenever there were adjustments they had been receiving the same
stipend. And the reason for that, I would presume in the past,
but what I can be assured of if I can trust my staff and I
believe that I can, is that when discussing this issue with the
Personnel Specialist, and I believe Glen Neier, but I will not, I
don't know if I asked him point blank, but I'm certain that I
asked the Personnel Specialist. Did these two individuals have
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 21 of 42
1530
the same amount of responsibility and the same amount of
background necessary to perform this function. And the answer
was...
(TAPE TWO - SIDE ONE)
Kuklski: The reason that I was given is that the Union never
asked for it and the reason the Union didn't fight for that
stipend, and unfortunately this brings up all kinds of issues
that I certainly don't think necessarily need to be discussed
publicly but in order to defend myself I will, that the previous
individual in that position was not performing at a capacity
where either the Union wanted to fight for an increase in this
stipend, nor the City was going to automatically grant it. I
believe the City created a liability for itself right then and
there. Because it's previous administration, be it the Manager,
what role the Attorney has, chose to allow those two individuals
though performing those functions that were determined to be
equal to be paid in a different way. Now what had happened is the
individual I believe retired, and a new individual was put into
that position. And that position and that individual performed
in a way in which his director expected and was satisfied with
met the capacity that they had always hoped for.
Immediately, I was asked to review this issue and decide and
discuss, would I be willing to discuss, bringing equity back into
the pay for these two positions. I went to Glen as I typically
do, he is the legal advisor to me and the Council, you're
absolutely correct. And I asked him. We discussed this several
times as I describe in my memo. And ultimately, after
frustration, I think both sides, the Union and myself, Glen said,
you know what -- get the Union to make a formal request to the
Fire Chief, run it through your office, bring it to me and we'll
take a look at it. That is exactly what we did, and although I
don't have attached documentation, I'm certain that there is
documentation to that effect that both the Union and the
Personnel Office has. At that time, Glen advised that it was not
smart, because of, it was not smart to open a contract mid-
stream. Ok, hindsight, that's what I should have done. I should
have accepted his advice, but then made the management decision
at that point.. you know what, I want to go to the Council and
fix this. I didn't. After continued wrestling with how to solve
it, it then became the idea of okay, let's do it the next time we
negotiate the contract. We'll fix it then, and Glen and I had
discussions to that effect. I'm not saying that he advised me
that that was the way to do it, but I'm saying we had discussions
to that effect.
Upon negotiating the contract, again in seeking Glen's advice, he
advised that it would set up a poor precedent for the City to
enter into a retroactive payment for a position when the contract
hadn't been expired. I agreed that that writing in the contract
would draw particular attention to itself. As would, of course,
amending the contract in mid -stream. However, now, it's obvious
that none of that stuff, it's all out there anyways. And not
that any of my actions are meant not to be played out in the
public, but I think everyone in this room, including yourself,
Mayor, agree that in day to day operations there are some things,
particularly personnel issues, negotiations, purchase of
property, other things that you don't just air out publicly. Not
in trying to keep them from the public, but in the best interest
of the public in making a decision. So, upon that advice I then
sought, and at that point I will fully acknowledge that I did not
get, and quite frankly don't know if very often I get the idea or
the feeling from my City Attorney, and in essence I guess that's
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 22 of 42
1831
what he is, he is my City Attorney and your City Attorney, that
he was working to solve my problem in a way that was legal. In
previous communities in which I worked in, it has been my
experience that often times, not always, but often times an
attorney will ask you what it is that you want to accomplish
here. And let me see what I can do under the law, or what you
can do under the law, to accomplish this. That's not the feeling
I get when we work together unfortunately.
So with that, I sought outside legal advice. Conversations with
other City attorneys, with other managers, and what I wanted to
know at that point wasn't if the City had a liability because I'm
completely convinced it did have a liability. In fact, I believe
the employee could have very easily filed a grievance against the
City and have the City Attorney step up to the podium and the
Personnel Specialist and said yeah, the duties and roster
responsibilities are equal. Where would the liability be there?
The question would be this wasn't handled in a proper way in
managing that employee and the City would have been liable.
To try to summarize it. This individual works for eighteen months
in this capacity, What I discussed with this individual and what
was discussed with other managers was, did I have the authority
to resolve this issue outside of the contract? The response that
I got was, definitely. It was well within my right to do so,
again, if I believed it was in the best interest of the
community. And the key two red flags that were brought to my
attention were number one, I cannot go over a bottom line budget
item, neither can you, without public hearings and amendings of
the budget. And number two, if that payment to that employee can
be perceived and proven that you're paying that employee because
he or she is a anti -union, pro -management type employee then
you're going to open yourself wide open to litigation in trying
to break apart the union. So in summary, in a nutshell, I had
agreed that the union shared responsibility because it did not
request the pay be increased, the City had liability because it
did not look at the situation and say, you know what, if they're
doing equal jobs and equal training and that guy's not doing a
good job then you get him out of there and you get someone else
in there who does, that's management's responsibility, that
didn't happen. Then we were opening ourselves up, and I said, ok,
we share it, and you were absolutely correct, I think, in your
letter. If we would have paid that employee from the time in
which they took over in those duties, the amount would have been
twice what it is that I paid.
In theory, share the responsibility for the action or the
inaction on both the union and the City' s part. Now I believe,
and you bring the point, if any other employee brings this
situation before us we've got a liability on our hands. And I
would tell you that if any other employee brings this situation
before us, we do have a liability situation on our hands, because
they can file a grievance against us and litigate against us
because we were not fairly and equitably compensating them. Now
I solved this in an agreeable way to the employee, the union,
myself and I believe firmly that that saved the taxpayer's money
in both the short, because I think he could have grieved twice
what he was given, and the long term because Glen will be the
first to tell you that as soon as you start getting into
litigation your cost escalates.
That's why I made that decision and if I had to do it again the
only thing I would have done different, I believe firmly in the
decision that was made, hindsight, I wish that I would have
insisted that, you know what Glen, I appreciate your advice, but
Kalispell City Council minutes
Special Meeting -- August 2, 2001
Page 23 of 42
I'm going to take this one and have the Council amend the
contract mid -stream. I know that opens up some liability, some
concerns, but I felt the circumstances should have warranted, and
I was quite frankly frustrated with myself, that it took months,
and I mean months, because it was several months I think
documents will prove that, to come to a resolution on this issue
because I was so concerned about making sure that it was handled
in an appropriate way.
Boharski: I think that you just mentioned what the appropriate
response would have been. The appropriate thing that you should
have done was during the union negotiations, you should have
included the language in the contract and presented that contract
for the Council to vote on. Then we would have no issues before
the City right now. None whatsoever. Now we are just going to
have to hope that nobody files an unfair labor practice against
US. But if you had followed the advice of the City Attorney, as
you're suggesting, if you would have included the retroactive pay
increase, I can't imagine that for another $1,215.00 or $2,000.00
that the City Council would not have ratified that contract.
What concerns me, as you stated, is that it was done outside the
contract. Four days prior you brought a.contract to us for
ratification. The language should have been included in the
contract. The issue would not be before us. And, you have stated
that in hindsight you would have done that. I think that's great.
I think that in the future, and we can all just hope, that this
issue does not come back to bite the City Council somehow in a
financial form. But you are right, that would have been the
appropriate way to deal with it, would have been to include it in
the contract and then the issue would not be facing us. Just one
further clarification, I don't know if you're aware of this, but
the difference in stipend between those two individuals was
negotiated in the prior fire contract.
Kukulski: I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear, I thought I
said a few times that it was negotiated, but my concern there,
Mayor, is that just because it was negotiated doesn't mean it
isn't subject to litigation. And I hate to bring this up because
we've got ... have an excellent relationship going, and I commend
both the guys and the management for doing that, but the police
contract..the previous police contract..that we are still
litigating, is proof. The previous police contracts are proof
that just because you negotiate it and agree to it, doesn't mean
you're not going to be subject to tens of thousands, if not
hundreds of thousands of dollars, in costs if those things
weren't negotiated in and I don't mean to say negotiated in a
fair way, because I'm sure that they were, both parties agree.
Just because they agree, doesn't mean legally it was correct.
And we've got that right now in some issues where the City,
unfortunately, is finding itself with a tremendous liability in
granting a request that the union brought forth and the employer
granted, and now it's coming back to haunt us and at the same
time in the reverse fashion.
So, I, and the only other clarifying thing I would say there, is
that Glen did advise me not to do, not to put retro-language in
the contract. Now I did not have to follow Glen's advice, and I
admit and acknowledge that hindsight, I still wouldn't have
followed his advice and I would have insisted that we open the
contract back eighteen months ago and make a right out of a bad
situation. That's what should have been done.
Boharski: And that would have been fine. I think you would agree
that something that is in a contract is much harder to litigate
than something that is not in a contract.
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 24 of 42
1833
Kukulski: Sure, absolutely.
Boharski: Councilman Atkinson do you have something?
Atkinson: Yes, how did you know that?
Boharski: You had your hand in the air.
Atkinson: Oh. I was reading your letter and you stated in the
last paragraph, "in a previous memo approximately one month ago I
informed the City Council members, as well as the City Manager,
that I had some concerns regarding the manner in which certain
issues were being dealt with in City Hall. Council members
Atkinson, Leistiko, Larson, Kenyon, and Van Natta failed to
respond in any fashion to the financial concerns raised in this
memo". The question I have, and I wouldn't expect you to have
that memo on hand at this point in time. At a later date I would
request, I'm sure I don't have the memos in my files whatsoever,
but what the verbiage was that requested a response from us. I
would respectfully ask for a copy of that memo or if you have a
recollection of what the verbiage was that asked for the
response. That would be very helpful to me to understand why I
did not respond.
Boharski: I can tell you that the memo had no verbiage in it
requesting a response, but then again neither did this memo, and
for some reason everyone wants to respond to this memo as well.
Atkinson: So.
Boharski: I never stated that it required a response.
Atkinson: You're stating then that we failed to respond in any
fashion to financial concerns raised in this memo, and yet you
did not ask for a response.
Boharski: That is correct.
Atkinson: Ok. I have a whole lot of concerns relative to the
approach in the same way that Mr. Leistiko has relative to the
approach that the City Attorney and yourself made in failing to
inform the Council, and in Mr. Neier's situation his bosses, as
to what he was doing. And I guess I would like to hear some
explanation from Mr. Neier as to why he felt that he had the
right as a City Attorney to request a criminal investigation
without discussing that with his bosses first.
Neier: I think that I had a..various City employees came to me
with various problems, Mr. Atkinson, that they had perceived with
regard to some of the activities that went on at City Hall.
("WE CAN'T HEAR YOU")
Various City employees came to me with various concerns about
certain activities at City Hall, and I did some preliminary and
maybe obviously too deep of an inquiry into some of those, and
then did not really have a comfortable feeling about what I was
doing. So I contacted the Attorney General's Office and asked
them for assistance. I think that was my legal and ethical
responsibility. They informed me that there was a group at the
Department of Justice, which would look at allegations that I
might have, if I referred them through, and they advised me to go
to the Flathead County Sheriff's Office.
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 25 of 42
1834
So I went to the Flathead County Sheriff's office and gave them
the documents, which I had, which were essentially notes and
asked if they wanted to, that those be transmitted to the
Department of Justice for review. I have not, except for one
conversation with the Department of Justice, have not had anymore
contact with the Department of Justice after those documents were
transmitted by the County Sheriff's office and I am waiting for
that response, and whatever response I get I will stand by. I
might add that I, or no one I know, had any connection with the
dissemination of that information.
Atkinson: That doesn't really answer my question. How did you
feel, why did you circumvent the Council?
Neier: I didn't circumvent anybody. I think that I had a legal
responsibility to ask for outside assistance when I did not
actually know a proper way to handle a situation which had come
to my attention. And I asked for outside help from an independent
organization to assist me in looking at a problem.
Atkinson: I guess I would certainly consider that, knowing that
the gravity of that situation, or maybe you didn't know what
would transpire from that, but if I were an employee I would
certainly confer with my boss before I decided to level
allegations against a...
Neier: I did not level any allegations. They were factual
statements, which I may, I did not, except for a few other areas,
did not level any criminal allegations at all.
Atkinson: Thank you.
Larson: Your Honor.
Boharski: Councilman Larson.
Larson: I guess in quick response to Glen's claims. It seems
rather odd to me that the allegations went to the Criminal
Justice Bureau of the State of Montana, if you were not, in fact,
leveling allegations of a criminal nature. And the other thing
that strikes me as strange is that you claim that you did not
leak this to the press. Well...
Neier: I didn't.
Larson: You're reported in the press as being the source and...
Neier: After they asked me, after they had known the
information, I talked to them.
Larson: Before anyone else knew the information, so you leaked
it, you didn't leak to the press, you poured it on their heads.
(LAUGHTER)
Larson: But beyond that, I would like to address the matter of.
We're not here to really discuss Glen's issues, that will come up
at a further meeting.
Boharski: I believe your notes are focused on problems, not
people.
Larson: Yes they are.
Boharski: Thank you.
1
1
1
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 26 of 42
1835
Larson: I guess the comments that I want to make first of all
are that I'm one hundred percent satisfied with Chris's
explanation of these allegations, and I don't know that you call
them anything other than allegations. That's exactly what they
are. And I'm one hundred percent convinced that Chris is an
ethical, honest, trustworthy individual. I have known him for two
years plus, and I would never think anything else. He is a
professional in the truest sense of the word, and I think that
has been borne out by at least four contacts with public agencies
concerning these allegations. The allegations that went first of
all to the County Attorney, then they went to the Chief of
Detectives of Flathead County, then they went to the Criminal
Justice Bureau, and then they went to the Legislative Audit
Division. And all of those people bear that out that there is no
criminal intent in any of the allegations, and the statement has
been made by the Mayor and the City Attorney that they didn't
offer any criminal allegations, they were strictly matters of
ethics. Well I beg to differ, because when you file complaints
of that nature you're looking for criminal intent and they didn't
find i t .
Just a couple of comments on Chris's explanation of the charges.
In regard to the firefighter bonus. Chris conferred with several
of the Council members, I being one of them, and as I remember
the conversation I was told that the firefighters were asking
for, I'm going to use the word retroactive pay, I don't care what
you call it, that's what it was and it was making a wrong right.
It was during the course of contract negotiations and you can
paint it anyway you want, but that's what it was, I told Chris
that I thought if he could negotiate that down to half of what
the Firefighters' Union was asking for, that it would be a small
price to pay to settle a contract amicably and in a timely
fashion so that we could get on with other business. $1, 215.00,
to me, was a small price to pay. I also told him that I felt
that it was an administrative matter. He was doing the
negotiations. It was for him to make that decision as long as he
stayed within the parameters set by the Council. So, I guess if
there is blame on that count I will accept part of it and I know
that several other Council people told me the same thing. I can't
speak for them.
The next thing I need to comment on is the banquet tickets. The
allegation that the hospital would benefit in any financial way
from Chris accepting those banquet tickets, because of a
controversial and confusing special improvement district being
formed, is beyond belief. Why would you even make an allegation
in that nature? The SID referred to, 343, is an SID which, in
some form did benefit the hospital, but it benefitted the City
also. We have been trying for years to get that road improved,
widened and made safer. And that happened because of this SID.
The other thing that I need to mention is that the SID was
written by Dorsey and Whitney, an independent specialist attorney
firm in Missoula that are specialists in writing special
improvement districts, and it was reviewed by Glen. It was voted
on by this City Council and the vote was nine to nothing
including Mayor Boharski's vote. I came into that meeting that
night with full intentions of wanting to amend that SID, and I
was told by Mayor Boharski at the beginning of the meeting if I
would not raise any objections to the SID, that he thought there
was a way to keep an individual that I thought was being unfairly
charged in the SID, that he knew of a way to keep them from
having to pay that assessment. I looked at the individual in the
audience and they shook their head yes, and I knew that the Mayor
had been talking to them, so I went along and voted with the
majority of the Council. The next morning I found out that the
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 27 of 42
1836
Larson: I guess the comments that I want to make first of all
are that I'm one hundred percent satisfied with Chris's
explanation of these allegations, and I don't know that you call
them anything other than allegations. That's exactly what they
are. And I'm one hundred percent convinced that Chris is an
ethical, honest, trustworthy individual. I have known him for two
years plus, and I would never think anything else. He is a
professional in the truest sense of the word, and I think that
has been borne out by at least four contacts with public agencies
concerning these allegations. The allegations that went first of
all to the County Attorney, then they went to the Chief of
Detectives of Flathead County, then they went to the Criminal
Justice Bureau, and then they went to the Legislative Audit
Division. And all of those people bear that out that there is no
criminal intent in any of the allegations, and the statement has
been made by the Mayor and the City Attorney that they didn't
offer any criminal allegations, they were strictly matters of
ethics. Well I beg to differ, because when you file complaints
of that nature you're looking for criminal intent and they didn't
find it.
Just a couple of comments on Chris's explanation of the charges.
In regard to the firefighter bonus. Chris conferred with several
of the Council members, I being one of them, and as I remember
the conversation I was told that the firefighters were asking
for, I'm going to use the word retroactive pay, I don't care what
you call it, that's what it was and it was making a wrong right.
It was during the course of contract negotiations and you can
paint it anyway you want, but that's what it was, I told Chris
that I thought if he could negotiate that down to half of what
the Firefighters' Union was asking for, that it would be a small
price to pay to settle a contract amicably and in a timely
fashion so that we could get on with other business. $1,21.5.00,
to me, was a small price to pay. I also told him that I felt
that it was an administrative matter. He was doing the
negotiations. It was for him to make that decision as long as he
stayed within the parameters set by the Council. So, I guess if
there is blame on that count I will accept part of it and I know
that several other Council people told me the same thing. I can't
speak for them.
The next thing I need to comment on is the banquet tickets. The
allegation that the hospital would benefit in any financial way
from Chris accepting those banquet tickets, because of a
controversial and confusing special improvement district being
formed, is beyond belief. Why would you even make an allegation
in that nature? The SID referred to, 343, is an SID which, in
some form did benefit the hospital, but it benefitted the City
also. We have been trying for years to get that road improved,
widened and made safer. And that happened because of this SID.
The other thing that I need to mention is that the SID was
written by Dorsey and Whitney, an independent specialist attorney
firm in Missoula that are specialists in writing special
improvement districts, and it was reviewed by Glen. It was voted
on by this City Council and the vote was nine to nothing
including Mayor Boharski's vote. I came into that meeting that
night with full intentions of wanting to amend that SID, and I
was told by Mayor Boharski at the beginning of the meeting if I
would not raise any objections to the SID, that he thought there
was a way to keep an individual that I thought was being unfairly
charged in the SID, that he knew of a way to keep them from
having to pay that assessment. I looked at the individual in the
audience and they shook their head yes, and I knew that the Mayor
had been talking to them, so I went along and voted with the
majority of the Council. The next morning I found out that the
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 27 of 58
1837
Mayor had inquired, I have to be fair, but found out that there
was not a solution. The individual that I thought was being
wronged did have to pay. But I voted for it, and I did nothing,
and I stand by that ,note. As Mr. Leistiko said, I don't go back
through the back door and try to change my vote or change what I
thought, or try to get a re -vote. That's not the way this system
works. So it's ludicrous to say that the hospital got a benefit
from that when the accusers voted for, reviewed it and thought it
was the finest thing in the world.
Just one other quick thing. I don't want to plow a lot of ground
that's been plowed already. Chris mentioned the telephone
expenses. Throughout this Nation, private organizations,
governmental agencies, public organizations, allow telephone
expenses while the employee is in a travel status. Personally, I
wish that Chris hadn't have repaid those, because I think that he
was entitled to them, however, with the policy being unclear, and
I worked for some big companies and I've dealt with some big
agencies and there's always a column on the expense sheet that
says telephone expenses. You are allowed to call home from
wherever you're at just to keep in contact with your home.
That's a common courtesy extended at many organizations.
I take a little offense at the Mayor saying that these —everyone
in the audience and all of us have taken these matters lightly.
I guess I would refer you to the County Attorney's Office, Chief
of Detectives for Flathead County, Criminal Justice Bureau, and
the Legislative Audit Committee. They didn't take them lightly.
They looked into them and they found no merit and basically said
move on. I think that's what we should do. I spoke with Mr. Arlyn
Greydanus yesterday, just to make sure what we read in the paper
was correct, and it was very accurate. They have no desire to
pursue these charges any further. In fact, they never assigned
an investigator to them because they felt they were without
merit. The Mayor says the Council didn't respond to his memo and
I freely admit I did not respond to his memo because I felt the
same way as these four public agencies did, there was no
substance to his concern. And I have many other things to do
other than responding to allegations that I see no merit
whatsoever to. And knowing Chris I especially didn't see any
merit to responding. The allegations haven't been brushed over
lightly, and the comment was made that Chris, in a critical
fashion, Chris sought independent counsel. I guess the position
that he is in right now is a result of these allegations, I don't
know why he wouldn't seek independent counsel. You don't know
whether Glen is making the decisions or the Mayor. And that
leaves this Council in a very bad position. The effectiveness of
the City Attorney's Office is compromised. And to say that they
acted independently in these allegations, is just simply not
true. All you have to do is read the news accounts, and there's
interchange of their names every other line.
We aren't here to speak about the waste of City dollars and
resources or compromise the labor relations on the Mayor's part,
but we certainly could, and we will. But that's not the subject
tonight. In conversation yesterday with the Director of the
Local Studies Center in Bozemen at the University of Montana, I
was informed in no uncertain terms, that what's going on here in
Kalispell is outrageous, and he told me I could use that
verbiage. He also told me that the Mayor has no function except
what is afforded to him by the administrative rules and that he
is allowed to preside over meetings and that is it, entirely.
End of conversation, period. He also said that he has no
executive authority to act on his own. And, so as a result of
these conversations, I think that I would further suggest, in the
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 28 of 58
immediate future, that this City Council diligently pursue a Code
of Ethics, not for the Manager, but for the Council. And so that
this travesty does not reoccur. I can't, or I would not tell the
Mayor, that he cannot pursue this further. I have heard
statements that he plans on pursuing this further. However, this
Council needs to inform the Mayor in no uncertain terms, if he
intends to pursue this further, he needs to use his own dollars
and not finance it on the back of the taxpayers, and...
(CLAPPING)
Larson:
We need to also get the message to him
that he does not
have the
authority to act on his own, and when
it comes to the
expenditure of taxpayer dollars and resources.
The Mayor does
not have
the authority to direct and control the
City Attorney
without
majority Council approval. Those are
items we need to
work on
outside the scope of this meeting, but
they need to be
done and
I am sure that they will be done. Thank
you.
(CLAPPING)
Aoharski: I have a couple of other issues. Chris, I think we were
gaining some ground there, in resolving some of these things. I,
the issue with regard to the tickets that you received from the
hospital. I think it's been stated by a number of Council members
that they find it outrageous to think that Kalispell Regional
Medical Center would have somehow benefited by the fact that they
gave you something in the neighborhood of, according to their
attorney it was originally $500.00, but it appears that now it
was $300.00 according to your memo and not $500.00. I think that
clearly, that is not the issue and I don't think, that either I,
or the City Attorney, ever suggested that you did. I think the
concern was, and I now know that in the City Attorney's memo that
he mentioned the ICMA Code of Ethics. My concern was more with
the Montana Statutes under Title 45 where a $50.00 limit is
specifically listed. And the concern is not that there was
impropriety, the concern is that there was an appearance of
impropriety and that's what the law states. And my concern is
that if that type of a situation arises and someone, such as the
lady that Councilman Larson mentioned, does find her way and for
some reason seek an allegation against the City, that is an issue
that she might bring up and say isn't this interesting. And you
would certainly defend yourself by saying, of course the $500.00
is not going to buy off my vote. That's not the level that she
has to meet. Under the law, the level says she has to meet under
the law, is that there's an appearance of impropriety. And to
follow then back to your concern is that the ICMA does provide a
method for dealing with this issue. I guess I would suggest, and
hope that you would concur, that what you would do in the future
when getting tickets of anything perhaps over a $50.00 value,
because that amount is specifically mentioned in the state law,
is that you simply write a memo to the Council clarifying that
you did that so it's on the table and everyone knows about it, so
that if someone from the public comes up and mentions it then we
can simply say look, it was signed off by the City Council, it's
not a problem, and no one has anything to worry about. And then
as well perhaps the City Manager... the City Attorney —would know
about it and could give advice on whether or not he thinks it
could create a situation where the City would end up in some sort
of litigation. I don't... that's not too much to ask.
Kukulski: No. I don't think it's too much to ask. I don't have
any problem with that method. You know, and I'm not,
unfortunately, an attorney either. So I don't know precisely all
the, you know, exactly —the details per se, but it's been
brought to my attention, not ... and I agree with approach that you
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special. Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 29 of 58
1839
just gave, I think that's a good
approach in the future. I guess
to clarify my... it is my understanding that what I received was a
dinner, that is what I received.
And whatever someone might place
the value of that dinner we
can all ... I suspect ... it was
certainly worth less than $50.00,
but the appearance is what is a
concern and I would say that on
some of these tickets, though I
don't ... four times in two years
isn't something that happens a
lot in Kalispell, I do believe
that on one, if not all of the
tickets, it specifically states,
which would be helpful in this
regard, what an individual can
write off on their tax return,
because $150.00 is the donation to
the organization and X dollars
is the meal of which you cannot deduct because you received a
meal for it.
Boharski: Sometimes I think $5.00 is over charge for the rubber
chicken you get.
Kukulski: Yah. And I would agree that's an issue of appearance
and it's always an issue that has to be handled very carefully,
just in the risk there ... some managers, and I'll certainly share
it with you, and some of us won't except anything, they won't
except a lunch from an engineer who they're working with. But on
other occasions, those types of business activities are
encouraged by folks, that you should be having lunch with the
President of Plum Creek and you should be out with those people.
So it is definitely something that whatever the guidance of this
Council is and what works for my own ethical standard, I
certainly don't have a problem sharing with that, with you folks.
Whatever this Council feels is what I should be doing in that
regard, I don't have a problem following that path.
Boharski: I guess I would suggest that you bring something to us.
I'm sure that you can dig up a standard that someone uses and run
it by the City Attorney to make sure.
Kukulski: Sure.
Boharski: And I guess lastly, the ... there are a number of issues
that seem to be, that you seem to indicate that are vague, the
meal policy. I know that the Council met before my time, perhaps
Councilman Atkinson and Haarr and Larson could fill us in a
little bit on this, but my understanding is that the Mayor at
that point in time specifically, and I presume some other members
of the City, both staff and elected officials, were charging a
number of things to the taxpayers at ... in violation of what the
Council felt was established policy. They then directed, although
it seems somewhat indirectly, they directed the Interim City
Manager to clarify to everyone in the City that that was in fact
the policy.
I think the fact that it is a policy... the proper way to resolve
that issue is, rather than writing a memo and in essence
reversing that, that you bring before the Council at your
earliest convenience a resolution with the recommendation to
change that, and we can debate whether or not we want to change
that and how we want to deal with it. In the meantime, yourself
and myself and the Council members, as well as the staff, abide
by the current policy. Because that is the policy as adopted by
this Council to the best of my understanding. The personnel
handbook is in fact, passed by resolution. It would be
appropriate for the Council to deal with that issue.
Kukulski: I would agree fully that this Council can deal with
that issue. My clarification, and the reason that this Council
would deal with this issue, is because the current ordinance...
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 30 of 58
•
or current policy in the personnel manual ... is extremely clear.
It's very clear and very well written, on any travel status
situations. it is... it doesn't ... I don't believe in recalling
any of it mentions an out -of -travel status situation and we
should clarify that. Simple to do as I indicate in my memo per
my conversation with Glen, I've gotten... well, what I've got is
notes and faxes from other cities and what is surprising to me,
to some degree, is that I couldn't find any that actually
solidified the policy and part of the reason that was given, and
I think it's a poor excuse, but that's what was given, was that
when you... sometimes when you create a policy, in effect you open
a door wide open for employees. As long as I fit underneath
these rules then I can go to lunch. What we've done, is made
it ... it's very clear, that they're to be very cautious about that
due to the sensitivity that this Council and previous Council's
have had. And I was very glad to see when the records were
pulled, what I would believe in an organization of this size and
magnitude with directors who are working in the community in the
ways they are, to be expending less than $25.00 a month shows
their sensitivity to that issue. That I'm pleased with. I was
pleased to get those numbers, and agree with you that this
Council should put in it's personnel manual how it wants to
handle those local issues so that finance staff, myself,
yourself, the issue deals with ... we have from time to time,
haven't had one in a while, a lunch. Council meeting, bring pizza
in or bring whatever. The Councils have had very differing
opinions about whether you're supposed to bring your own brown
sack, or whether it's reasonable to be covered, so I think that's
good and I think the City Attorney would certainly agree and the
Personnel Specialist that we should get that cleaned up in that
regard.
Boharski: Other than., perhaps, some closing comments if someone
has anything else to say just for clarification. The contract
that we have with you, as the City Manager, we do give you a
$400.00 per month automobile allowance and the language, I
believe, I don't have it in front of me, states that the City
Manager, something to the effect, the City Manager is expected to
use his own vehicle for all City business in state. All out of
state travel will be prior authorized by the City Council. As a
result of this, although this was neither in mine or the City
Attorney's letter, is that your clear understanding?
Rukulski: Yes. And I will tell you when I read the verbiage word
for word, word by word last week ... this week...I was surprised
because I didn't recognize it. It clearly says all expenses
involved in the operation of the employee's personal vehicle
shall be employee's only. So that does clearly state that I
should not have been fueling on the fuel card. The net result of
not turning in a...I also pursued in that same way the travel out
of state, doesn't happen much, but in that case to Green River,
also fueled up on the card which is far less at I believe at
$50.00, $55.00 in fuel, cause the other cities were helping to
vs. $525.00 that I could have turned in for a slip. So, the net
result was a benefit to the City, but until that contract is
renegotiated and changed that is precisely how we'll follow it in
the future. We will follow like this, and what the Council would
like me to do with the issue of the Green River trip, I will
follow that direction.
Boharski: Well I guess it's past history, so we're not too
concerned about it now. Does anyone on the Council have
any... Councilman Van Natta.
Van Natta: I appreciate what everybody said here tonight. I just
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 31 of 58
1841
want to say a couple of things. I'm not afflicted with henny
penny syndrome, I guess like. some others might be here, namely,
the Mayor and the Attorney. I don't think we're setting a
precedent or setting ourselves up for any problems that we don't
want to deal with in the future, by what we've done and how the
firefighter and I guess the spot award were handled. I happen to
believe that if somebody does something that needs to be
recognized, some small recognition is appropriate. I think it
fosters a productive work force, and so I have no problem with
what ... how those situations were handled. The problem I have is
the way I found out about what was going on. I think it's the
responsibility, in this particular case, if the Mayor's got some
problems, he ought to come, in a gentleman fashion and discuss
them with us. If the vote is 5 to 4 or S to 1 against moving
forward with it, then I...
(TAPE TWO - SIDE TWO)
Van Natta: I think it's a pretty cheap trick to go out and try
to start stirring up the public. We've got enough of that going
on in this community through other venues. So it just doesn't
foster a good working relationship as far as I'm concerned. I
feel I'm as easy a person to work with and discuss things with,
as probably anybody you'll find. I think I'm generally fair and
I'll certainly listen. And I guess what offends me here is I
wasn't given that opportunity until this whole thing got blown
out of the water. Most of these things are peanutsy things that a
policy outfit like us ought be able to sit down and discuss and
resolve. I don't think there's anything here that anyone's trying
to hide or screw with the system. I guess that's what bothers me
about this whole thing. I think we could have dealt with these
problems very easily in a workshop setting or even a phone call,
I guess. So with that, I'll turn the ... turn it back to the
Mayor.
Boharski: Councilman Kenyon.
Kenyon: I would also like to acknowledge that Chris's responses
meet with my one hundred percent satisfaction and that I hope
that this doesn't discourage him in any way from continuing the
management of our City and that I hope he sticks around for a
very long time. And I would like to concur with Councilmen Van
Natta, Larson and Leistiko, in agreeing with them that the
approach that was taken in this whole thing was very poorly
handled and I hope that, in the future, they can be handled in a
much better manner. So, thank you Chris.
(CLAPPING)
Boharski: Councilman Atkinson.
Atkinson: Your Honor. I would like to apologize to the City of
Kalispell for the actions that went forward here these last few
weeks. They were actions that should have been taken care of
within a working City Council. It was petty, it was blown out of
proportion and we all have to accept the responsibility for that.
For that, I will offer my apologies to the citizens of Kalispell
and hope that we can do better to look like a more responsible
Council in the future. I have to, in saying that, not include
Chris Kukulski or the staff in this. I think the staff is a
wonderful staff and those citizens who have seen the work being
done in the City of Kalispell and have called in to our Public
Works Director, or to our City Manager, or to the Parks and Rec
Director, or any of the Directors, and have said thanks for a job
well done, you just don't know how that warms the cockles of the
Kalispell City Ccuncil Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 32 of 58
hearts of the City workers
you with your tax money.
that you see going on in
afraid our responsibility
that I played in it I want
do better. Thank you.
that are out there doing your job for
The pettiness, ugliness, craziness,
the newspapers and at City Hall, I'm
of the City Council, and for any part
to apologize to you. Hope that we can
Boharski: Any further comments from the Council? Councilman
Counsell.
Counsell: Your Honor. I was one of the signers of the document
that asked for the special meeting tonight. The reason behind
that was that there were allegations in the newspaper,
information in the newspaper, information that we as a Council
did not know. We found it out through the media. It's not
always the best way to find out what's going on. And, I wanted
to sit with an open mind here and listen to an answer from our
City Manager to those allegations, and I'm satisfied that he's
answered those allegations to my satisfaction. I appreciate the
job that he is doing. I was on the committee ... I was a committee
chairman that pulled together the rating for the City Manager.
He was rated higher than he ever was rated last year by that
rating and by a majority of the Council. The majority of the
Council feels he's doing a good job, I'm included. I believe he
has integrity. I believe he has a spirit of cooperation and he
also wants to do the right thing and has a real heart. I think
it's pretty hard to find those kind of people now. I thank you
very much for the explanation that you have given us. I accept
it and I hope we can move on from here.
(CLAPPING)
Boharski: Further comments. Excuse me, any further comments from
the Council? I guess I just have one statement before, and I
think it would be appropriate to open the meeting for public
comment after that and that is that I think some things have been
accomplished tonight. I think it is terribly unfortunate that
the press has made this out to be some... pictures of you and I
facing each other on the front page of the newspaper is certainly
not what I expected when I wrote a letter requesting for
assistance in making sure that we were doing things appropriately
in the City of Kalispell. I don't believe, Chris, and I would
imagine that you would concur, that anywhere in my letter did I
accuse you of doing anything illegally or unethically. They were
questions of judgment, and perhaps and I guess in this point in
time, I still think in some cases errors of judgment. I think
you confirm that. You and I have reached, I think suggestions on
a number of things that you bring before the City Council for our
approval. I think that is a good thing.
I guess, just lastly, it bothers me that although I knew, because
the audit division told me, that when they received my letter, at
that point in time, became a public document. I do not believe
that Mr. Hayes, or anyone out of his office, disseminated that to
the public. I know for a fact that I did not have any part in
disseminating it to the public. If in fact it ever did get out
to the public, I don' t even know that my letter did get out to
the public. I know that Glen's did. But I do not know this
letter ever did get out to the public. But I can assure you that
if it did I had nothing to do with it. And I think that all of
this has been very unfortunate. We operate a twenty seven million
dollar corporation and I think that you and I have agreed that
when you operate a twenty seven million dollar corporation that
is paid for by the taxpayers, having rules and sticking to those
rules is very important. That's why we have a professional City
1
1
1
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 33 of 58
1843
Manager. That was what the people expected ten or eleven years
ago when they established it. There are some flaws in the system
and I think we've acknowledged that and come up with some
solutions to them. I think that's a good thing. Maybe there was
another way to approach it. But in some cases the end justifies
the means. And the rest of it is just water under the bridge.
I think we can move forward from here and hopefully operate the
City of Kalispell in an even better fashion than it's been
operating before. With that, I will open the floor to any public
comment. Remind any individuals that the standard policies for
speaking in front of the Council are that you do have a three
minute time limit and that the governing ordinance of the City of
Kalispell does not permit addressing of any individual Council
member on this Council, but rather comments intended for this
Council as a whole. With that Mr. Goodman the floor is yours.
Bill Goodman: I'm Bill Goodman in the KM Building. I'm going to
deviate a little bit from what I wrote. I follow a lot of City
issues. I come to a lot of City Council meetings. I was at a
City Council meeting and workshop a few weeks ago. At that
workshop meeting the Council recommended a little reorganization
of things. Taking the City Attorney, and instead of him being
underneath the City Mayor, putting him under the City Manager who
like all the other department heads are. I listened to you Mr.
Boharski come unglued. I listened to your words that said if you
do this I will take it to the people. You did that. The very
next day, you used our City Attorney to initiate your
investigation of Chris Kukulski whom you saw as your competitor.
This is not how democracy works. You're smiling over there. You
think it's funny.
Boharski: No Mr. Goodman. You're making allegations you have no
right...
Bill Goodman: The people of Kalispell don't pay their City
Attorney to carry out personal vendettas. He's our attorney.
Boharski: It is inappropriate for you to...
Bill Goodman: Now I see that the Council was right in trying to
make that change. Thank you. That was far seeing and shame on
your Honor ... what a ... your Honor. You're playing king of the
mountain again, and it's political season, and that's what you
do. You've done it before. It's at great cost. We can't really
let this happen again, and Chris Kukulski is a very good manager.
I support him, I stand by him, he's good for downtown, he's good
for Kalispell. Your job description does not include playing king
of the mountain. If you want to get Kukulski, do it with your
own attorney, not with ours. I hereby ask you Mayor, to resign.
I want you to withdraw from the corning election also. To stay in
would be without honor, your Honor. You've lost my support and
you've lost the support of many downtown. These are the people
who are working to better the City. You seem more interested in
your personal power. I'm very close to this issue. I've been at
these meetings. I ask my fellow citizens not to be fooled by
what he says. He is a politician. I am here ready to accept your
resignation and your apology.
(CLAPPING)
Bill Goodman: How much time do I have Theresa?
Clerk: The bell just went off Bill.
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 34 of 58
� I 1
Bill Goodman: Thank you.
Ann Robinson: My name is Arai Robinson and I know I'm not supposed
to say names, but I can't help it. This man has been so badly
hurt and Mr. Boharski is at it again. He wanted Mr. Krepps out,
now he wants to get rid of the best manager this City's seen.
Don't let it happen. Boharski has his own agenda. He's the one
that fought for sewer and water to Four Corners. Now that the
constituents don't want that, he stated in the paper that he's
against it. That's because he's running for Mayor again. He
fooled the people last election. We didn't hear much from him
for most of the duration of his tenure until now, when he's
running again or something was to his advantage. These
accusations against Mr. Kukulski should have been handled in the
building. In this building without all the publicity. It's sad
the Council wasn't even informed. I have a couple of questions
I'd like to ask and see if they can answer them. Who paid for
Boharski's trip to Helena when he went and spoke for a bill
through Paul Sliter that the citizens didn't want? He did it
behind everyone's back, even the City Council. No one would have
known, but it so happens we have a friend in the Capitol that
called us and told us what Boharski said. And he quoted, and
this is a quote, "It was essential that we have this legislation
to allow utilities to outlying areas". Also, I don't know if you
people know, but who paid the $879.00 that was paid so Boharski's
name would be in the book of Who's Who? We also need a new City
Attorney. He's made a lot of mistakes, which he has admitted at
many Council meetings. Especially the real estate south of the
town when it was sold. We're stuck with that sale. Let's not
have anymore like that. Between the two of them they're damaging
our City's reputation. The Inter Lake is on the net and my
daughter called from Hawaii and wanted to know why Boharski is
doing this. She said it looks like we're a western hick town,
and we're not. We've lost much more than what Mr. Kukulski is
being accused of, especially south of town. This is a terrible
underhanded maneuver to make Boharski look good, it's political.
We've gone round and round before, but now we're going to fight
for Mr. Kukulski and his image in this City. Even you, as the
Council, many of you said this was not correct. Why wasn't this
brought up in private before the evaluation of our City Manager?
Why? Because Boharski wants the publicity from now to election
time, and that's not even fair to the other candidates. He
doesn't deserve to be Mayor of our fine City. He doesn't
represent us when he's asked to. one of the largest events in
this valley was held, he was asked to come, and he was a no-show.
And I was there and saw this. It's a shame and our people should
be embarrassed by our Mayor for the bad publicity he's put Mr.
Kukulski through, and his wonderful wife and baby. Keep in mind
all the trouble a couple of years ago when our police worked for
a year without a contract. That hasn't been settled yet. This
year Mr. Kukulski handled the negotiations and it was settled,
this one was settled in three days. Mr. Kukulski, you have our
utmost respect and appreciation. For what you've done for our
City and the way you represent our residents. It's a shame that
you've had to work under these terrible conditions. We're not
through. If Boharski wants to sling accusations, we can meet them
with many he doesn't even know we know.
(CLAPPING)
Boharski: Councilman Haarr.
Haarx: Your Honor. I think that the agenda item has been
sufficiently addressed for my purposes and if any of you that are
speaking wish to relate what you have to say to me, I would like
to be excused. Excuse me.
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 35 of 58
1845
Boharski: You're excused.
(HAARR LEFT)
I imagine when Chris Kukulski took the job as the City Manager...
Clerk: Excuse me sir, could I get your name and address please?
Ben Long: Oh I'm sorry, ch sure, my r
920 6th Ave. East in Kalispell, and I
took this job as City Manager he
Kalispell, Montana in the twenty -firs
he might be thinking that he moved to
seventeenth century. The allegations
completely lacking in common sense.
give them too much credence. Ther,
review a staff member's work and that
report, their annual evaluation. Tha-
brought up. To bring this up under t:
political. Chris Kukulski is clearl-
ime is Ben Long. I live at
imagine when, Chris Kukulski
thought he was moving to
century. Today, I imagine
Salem, Massachusetts in the
that we heard tonight were
To call them petty is to
's a time and a place to
`s during the work progress
's when it should have been
ese circumstances is purely
the victim of a smear and
clearly that smear is politically motivated to get one man
publicity. I hope that the City Council keeps all this in mind
when the City Attorney's job performance is reviewed next year.
As for some statements that the Mayor made earlier, that we can
consider this all "water under the bridge", I would like to
remind everybody that the water doesn't flow under the bridge
until election day. Thank you.
(CLAPPING)
Mary Jane Fox: My
name
is Mary Jane Fox, 433 Main, and I wanted
to thank all of
tonight, an extra
you
night
Councilmen for being here and working
and putting in all these hours. And I
want to commend,
almost
everyone here, for the respect I heard
from most of you
with each
other in listening to opinions. I am
particularly naming... I'm
going to butcher your name ... Les teek..
Atkinson: Leistiko.
Mary Jane Fox: I appreciate the time you took to prepare your
statement, and I really found your questions provocative, and I
want to encourage the Council to please, please look into all of
those questions that he raised and I would love a copy of that
prepared statement that you did. I think those questions really
need to be further addressed here. I'm sorry that we had to be
here and I would like to say that the only rude comment that I
actually heard was after Councilman Leistiko made his comments.
I don't think that's very professional, and I also don't think
that people clapping when they hear things that they like is a
crime.
(CLAPPING)
Harry Amend: My name is Harry Amend, my address is 634 South Foys
Lake Drive. I'm here to say that I have confidence in the
majority opinion of the City Council here in Kalispell. I have
had the pleasure of working with Chris Kukulski for going on
three years now. It is my opinion that he's a people builder and
that he's a bridge builder. I think he's a very, very
constructive and progressive community leader. He's intelligent,
and in my opinion, has very good instincts as a personnel manager
and as a leader in our community. He's courageous, above all he
has integrity and he's looking forward for the best interest of
our community and I have complete confidence in Chris Kukulski's
leadership as our City Manager. Thank you.
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 36 of Be
(CLAPPING)
Ruth Ackroyd: Mayor, City Councilmen. I served as President of
Kalispell Day Break Rotary last year. I'm Ruth Ackroyd.
Clerk: Your name and address please.
Ruth Ackroyd: I'm Ruth Ackroyd. I reside at 273 North Many Lakes
Drive, however, I work in Kalispell at Flathead Valley Community
College (777 Grandview Drive). As past president of Kalispell
Day Break Rotary, I feel very much a part of this matter. It's
very difficult to be here and have heard the things that I heard
tonight. But, I want to say the utmost respect I have for my
fellow Rotarian, Chris Kukulski, I know there are a number of
Rotarians, I'm sorry that Mr. Haarr left. But basically, how
would you describe the organization called Rotary? There are so
many characteristics of a rotary club as well as the activities
of multi -million Rotarians worldwide. They are the features of
service, international, fellowship. We have classifications of
vocations, development of goodwill and world understanding and
emphasis, and I underline the emphasis, on high ethical
standards. I represent the fifty --five members of Kalispell Day
Break Rotary. We are proud to support our fellow member who we
feel demonstrates ethical standards and concern for people in our
community_ Rotary is an organization of business and professional
persons united worldwide who provide humanitarian service, and
indeed, high ethical standards in all vocations. I want to
applaud our City Manager for demonstrating those qualities. I'm
proud he's a fellow Rotarian. Thank you.
(CLAPPING)
Diane Conradi: My name is Diane Conradi. I'm with Citizens for a
Better Flathead at 35 4th Street West in Kalispell. I want to
emphasize that the reason that we have ethics, and that really
seems to be the issue here, not criminal charges, not civil
charges, criminal allegations, but ethical complaints. The reason
that we have ethics is because they're fair, because they embody
integrity and honesty. That's why we have ethics codes.
Attorneys have ethics codes as well. And attorney's ethics codes
prevent an attorney from divulging confidential information of a
client and, according to the administrative code, the City
Manager is in fact, a client of the Attorney... of the ... the City
Manager is a client of the City Attorney. And you also can't
take a position that is adverse to your client. I'm troubled by
what I heard here tonight and I'm troubled by what I read in the
papers about the way that this issue with Mr. Kukulski was
handled. I'm troubled most of all because it's not fair. It's
not just and it lacks integrity. I would applaud and encourage
the City to move forward and take this opportunity to look over
your administrative code, as you started to do, and look at it
with a close eye toward ethics and ethical conduct of Council
members, all Council members, to delegate the rules more clearly
of the City Attorney, the Mayor, the Council and the City
Manager, and have a document that you can fall back on when
something like this happens. If there's not a problem, it's
okay, but when there is a problem you see where the holes are,
and I encourage you to take the time to find out where those
holes are and to get the help that you need to patch those holes.
When you're looking at the code you should adopt very specific
...a very specific code of ethics and there are plenty of local
governments here in this valley that do have samples to draw
from. You should... the way that you handle these kinds of
personnel issues is you adopt policies. That's what the Council
does. They're policy makers. The City Manager implements the
policies. If you have a problem with the way things are done,
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting August 2, 2001
Page 37 of A91
1847
the way to do it is to adopt a policy and I encourage you all to
do that. Not to micro -manage, but to adopt a policy. And
finally, I know at the fifth Monday meeting, Councilman Leistiko
and Council members from Columbia Falls and Whitefish suggested
that you bring trainers down here to train Council members and
the community about ethics, and what it means to have a conflict
of interest and what it means to act honorably and fairly in
representing your... the people that voted for you. I would
suggest that if the "Who's Who" subscription comes up, that the
money might be better spent on training rather than renewing the
subscription.
(CLAPPING)
Art Bitton: My name is Art Bitton, I'm a retired farmer. And I
don't know, but there's a Mayor who's picture should be up there,
Mayor McDowell. Does anybody else here remember him? He was in
trouble like this City Manager, and I think the City Council and
everybody here working on behalf of the public should harmonize
themselves and get things a going. And not just your $50.00
bickering, that when Mayor McDowell was Mayor it was $5.00,
equals $50.00 now. So, that's about how much inflation we have,
so I think we should harmonize ourselves and don't be like three
or four ten year old kids, playing marbles and deciding who's
going to shoot the wrong marble out the v. That's all I have to
say.
(CLAPPING)
M.E.K Johnson: I'm M.E.K. Johnson, 539 Third Street East. I told
Fred this evening that I wasn't going to say anything. However, I
think there are a couple of things that are worth mentioning.
First of all, I'm gratified at the response here of all the
supporters of Mr. Kukulski. When he was appointed City Manager,
I took an opportunity to call him and warn him about what he was
getting into. I called him in Michigan. He was home having lunch.
I don't know how it happened, but the connections were made. Mr.
Kukulski told me he thought he could get along with anybody. He
was a uniter instead of a divider. And, I think that's what we
have here for our City Manager. And, although I had to warn him,
and it has come to pass, I think he will survive this and remain
our effective City Manager. Thank you.
(CLAPPING)
Tracy Walsh: My name is Tracy Walsh and I live at 30 5th Avenue
East and I live in a neighborhood that has tremendous trees,
beautiful streets, rough sidewalks and tremendous neighbors. our
neighbors take pride in one another and we look out for one
another and one of our neighbors is Chris Kukulski. It's sad and
it bothers me to see Chris sitting up here when he shouldn't be
here. He has tremendous values, he has tremendous morals, and I
think it's not only an attack against Chris, but I think that we
hurt his family and you hurt the neighbors on Fifth Avenue East.
And I think that the wrong people, or the wrong person, is
sitting at that desk being ripped. And I guess what goes around
comes around. I hope you remember that. I hope that my. ..Dale
Haarr, who's also a representative in Ward Two —and I'm glad at
least one stuck here...
Leistiko: I'm not —I'm not...
Tracy Walsh: You're the man. I hope that you feel that Chris is
doing a good job and I hope that you back him a hundred percent
because we in the neighborhood feel that he's a good one and we
don't want to get rid of Chris. Thank you.
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 58 of 4.
(CLAPPING)
Mark Holston: I think we all probably want to go home, but since
it's not 10:00 yet I'll give you forty-five seconds or so. My
name is Mark Holston, 104 Northern Lights Boulevard. The thing
that really has concerned me the most, as I spend a lot of time
monitoring and considering some of what I think are horrible
things happening in this valley, this vicious, slanderous,
malicious radio station, that is trying to stir up this community
and turn people against each other. They had told their followers
to be here tonight. I'm so gratified to see that the good people
of Kalispell, the people that do care about the future of this
community are here tonight, and not those yahoos who would have
been here disrupting this meeting. If they were here, they have
stayed in their seats. This City Council, with the majority that
we have and with this progressive leadership, has been one
positive factor in this valley. When we look at this other crazy
divisive stuff that is going on, and this business in the last
week, this kind of dark keystone cops incident has put a big
cloud over the community. It is embarrassing. It's embarrassing
to this gentleman, it's embarrassing to all of us who are
citizens here, that we have to explain this. And Kalispell and
the Flathead Valley unfortunately is cultivating this type of
reputation, and I'm encouraged tonight,by the comments that I've
heard, the very eloquent statements by Councilman Larson, and
Leistiko, Atkinson, and Kenyon, and Van Natta, and Counsell, that
I see hope. And what I've heard from the audience tonight, you
know we can fight this, we can beat this. This is a good
positive community with people that will work hard. We have
positive, progressive people in this community and we need to
step up to the plate more. We need to hear these kinds of
comments and not this negative stuff that is out there so much.
Thank you very much.
(CLAPPING)
Mayre Flowers: My name is Mayre Flowers, Citizens for a Better
Flathead, 35 4th Street West. I would just like to encourage the
Council, as Diane did for you earlier, to really take this
opportunity as the nudge that you need to go ahead and to look at
ethics policies and guidelines in the City, but even more
particular than that I want to share with you, and as you know
I've brought this issue to you before, in researching ethics
policies in this community I had the opportunity to visit with
those in Whitefish who worked very hard to adopt, over the past
few years, a new ethics policy. And I think one of the things
that was most strongly related to me is that it was not just the
policy, but it was the process of going through the workshops and
the opportunity to dialogue, as a Council, on types of situations
that come up before you that you least expect, and to really
understand different responses that are appropriate for those.
So, I extremely encourage you to not only look at your policies,
but to host workshops that give you the opportunity to discuss
these matters. And I would also encourage you to look at,
strongly, including in the ethics policies, the planning boards
and other boards that represent the City. Thank you.
(CLAPPING)
Marshall Noice: I'm Marshall Noice. I live at 647 Sixth Street
East and I didn' t want ... I warn' t going to say anything ... but I
just wanted to say thanks to each and every Councilman who spoke
tonight. I appreciate your comments and I feel heartened by those
comments, and it gives me hope for our community. Thank you very
much.
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 39 of 42
1849 41
(CLAPPING)
Boharski:
Would anyone else care to comment this evening?
Anyone else
from the audience care to comment this evening?
Seeing none.
Is there any further business to come before the
Council?
Larson: Your
Honor.
Boharski: Councilman Larson.
Larson: One
matter of business that I would like to take care of
before we adjourn. It is my full understanding that there would
be no action
taken at this meeting, and the motion I am about to
make is not
an action, it's a vote of confidence for the City
Manager. I
conferred with the Local Government ... I forget
the ... Center
in Bozeman last night and I was told that it would
be proper to
make a motion, to extend a motion of support for
City Manager
Chris Kukulski.
And with that advice I would move that the Council extend to
Chris Kukulski a strong vote of support and a sincere apology for
what he and his family have been put through.
Van Natta: I believe I'll second that.
Leistiko: I'll second too.
Boharski: Motion made and seconded by Councilman Van Natta. Is
there any discussion?
Boharski: I have, I guess a little bit of discussion because I
feel this was a little bit of a political gotcha for the Mayor,
but so be it. Chris, I don't believe I have done anything that I
need to apologize to you for. I think we've discussed a number of
issues tonight in a very...I guess what I would consider a
hostile environment which I think is unfortunate. I think if the
issues that are resolved, as we have discussed this evening are
properly resolved, Certainly you have my vote of confidence and
support of that along with the rest of the Council. As I
mentioned earlier I think errors were made. I think we've come
to an agreement of that. I think the individual agencies that
looked into it looked into it appropriately. I think the
references were made appropriately and if the vote is to ... vote
certainly to keep you here. I never made a suggestion that I
didn't want to do anything less than that, just to straighten out
the folks in the City of Kalispell, that would be fine with me.
And for anything that your family has gone through, I apologize,
but I think the individuals that need to be discussed with about
that is probably the press. Councilman Atkinson.
Atkinson: If I thought that this motion was a political gotcha
for the Mayor I would vote against it. I think the nature of the
motion is strictly a vote of confidence for our City Manager and
should be meant as a vote of confidence for our City Manager.
I'm sorry if you feel that that is politically oriented. I do not
think that it is and I think that we need to keep our vision on
why this motion really was made, and I know Duane Larson and I
sincerely feel that it is a... strictly a motion for support of
our City Manager. So I wanted to —correct you I guess you'd say
in regards to that.
Bill, I appreciate what you're going through. I don't appreciate
the way you did it. I would like to stand up for your right to
question, investigate on your own, any concerns that you may have
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 40 of 42
M: 1
with anyone in this government, and that's why this government is
so great because one man can do that. I don't appreciate the way
you went forward with it. I would have appreciated it if you
would have included us. You and the City Attorney would have
included us. I probably agree with what your assumption would
have been if you had included us. But that's all water under the
bridge now. Let's go forward. Let's support this man the way
he's supported us in our decisions. And I would appreciate an
unanimous vote on this, although we all have the right to vote
our own conscience.
Larson: Your Honor.
Boharski: Councilman Larson.
1
Larson: In view of the fact I made the motion and I don't want to
prolong this meeting any longer than we have to, I appreciate
everyone showing up and showing support for Chris. I know that
they all had busy evenings planned and I really, really
appreciate it. I have a lot of faith in the citizens of Kalispell
and I know they stood up for what they thought was right and I do
appreciate that. In light of the special meeting discussion
tonight and Chris's complete vindication of any and all
allegations of criminal misconduct by all agencies contacted, I
would urge the Council to unanimously support my motion.
Boharski: Is there any further discussion? Those in favor
signify by saying aye.
Atkinson; Counsell; Kenyon; Larson; Leistiko; Scarff; Van Natta;
Mayor Boharski: Aye.
Boharski: Opposed. None. Motion carries. Any further item to
come before the Council? Chris.
Kukulski: Obviously I thank you for that vote and I don't want
to jump into the discussion of what's been said. I appreciate,
not the support for me, but that you entrusted me and I know that
you've taken the time to listen as I explained the information
and as you read over it, I'm confident that I addressed the
issues. What I plan on saying, and is really fitting I think for
this meeting, though believe me I had no idea and was, at least
to say, a little nervous about what tonight might bring. In
everything that was going on, I made an attempt and did attend
some meetings this week with groups and it was so pleasant to do
so with Rotary this morning and yesterday. The one that I want to
bring up was an attendance that I had at the Jobs Now Board
Meeting. Again, it wasn't anything to do about folk's comments to
me, or about me, or anything else, it was the fact that, and I
think this is interesting and something we can learn from. Jobs
Now, for those of you who don't know, is the only privately
funded economic development organization in the state, and as a
result of that the board is made up of predominantly private
sector directors and things, and there's a couple of us
government types that are on there, Dale Williams and myself.
And it was so pleasant to go to a board meeting where everyone
was so positive. The chairman of that board, Jeannie Parsons,
and those board members and I won't name them all, but it was
such a positive environment of which they wanted to proceed and
move forward with that group. Paul Wachholtz, which I know
everyone in this room is probably... knows Paul real well, must
have spent fifteen to twenty minutes on some work that he had
done over the past month and wanted to really pump up the board
and Liz Harris and the employees that do such a fine job over
there. And I thought how nice that was and how that brings forth
Kalispell, City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 41 of 42
1851
energy in the right direction. My wife would be a little
surprised by this because she knows how much I read books, but
David Landus, Wealth and Poverty -of Nations said, "In this world
the optimists have it, not because they are always right, but
because they are positive and that is the way of achievement,
correction, improvement and success. Educated... eyes open
optimism pays. Pessimism can only offer the empty consolation of
being right". Thank you very much.
(CLAPPING)
Boharski: Seeing no further business to come before the Council,
we are adjourned.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
ATTEST:
Theresa White
City Clerk
1
Approved September 4, 2001
1
w
Wm. E. Boharski
Mayor
Kalispell City Council Minutes
Special Meeting - August 2, 2001
Page 42 of 42