Ethics panel to hear Nicholson complaint

CommerceNewsTODAY

RSS Feed

Email Alerts

Facebook

Ethics panel to hear Nicholson complaint

Posted by

Staff Writer

in Area Headline News

Wednesday, April 6. 2011

Comments (9)

An ethics complaint filed against a Nicholson City Council member will be heard by the town’s ethics board.

In a public hearing on Monday night, the city council voted to send the ethics complaint filed recently against council member Lamar Watkins to the ethics board for review.

City attorney Tricia Hise presided over Monday’s hearing. Mayor Ronnie Maxwell recused himself and Hise asked Watkins to recuse himself. Council members Bobby Watkins and Howard Wilbanks, along with Hise, held a discussion on the complaint. Council member Chuck Wheeler, who had been asked to attend the hearing, was absent.

Former Nicholson council member, Faye Seagraves, filed the ethics complaint against Watkins in a letter to the ethics board dated January 8, 2011.

Seagraves alleges that during her time in office, 2006-2009, the mayor and council received travel expenses for taking their personal vehicles to the Georgia Municipal Association (GMA) Convention in Savannah.

Seagraves said Watkins signed that he was driving and he took travel expenses even though he actually rode with council member Howard Wilbanks to the convention.
Seagraves lists the amount of money that she believes Watkins owes the city as $210.

Seagraves asked the ethics board to do what is right and fair for the city and people of Nicholson.

On Monday, Wilbanks said, “The complaint has no merit and I think we need to vote it down tonight and it can’t be brought up again. The complaint doesn’t have a leg to stand on.”
Hise said, “Acting on the abundance of caution, I think it should be passed on to the ethics board.”

Hise also said she has recommended that the city change the way mileage is paid. Hise advised the city to pay mileage after the council member returns from the meeting and have each council member sign an affidavit swearing under oath that the information (mileage) is correct.

Crawford made a motion to send the complaint to the ethics board and Hise agreed. Wilbanks said he was against the complaint going to the ethics board.

The ethics board will be made up of five residents chosen from a pool of names already approved by the council to serve on the ethics board.

Hise advised Maxwell to draw the five names, soon, and get the individuals notified. A hearing will be advertised and both parties will be allowed to speak on the complaint, Hise said.

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 Anonymous on 04/07/11 at 06:26 AM [Reply]

So how did the city council vote to pass this along to the (non-existant) ethics board? If the mayor recused himself, and Watkins recused himself, and Wheeler was not present, then only Wilbanks and and Crawford have a vote. The city attorney does NOT HAVE A VOTE AS A COUNCIL PERSON as she was not ELECTED to the council!!!!!

If Wilbanks was against it, and Crawford was for it, then it was an unbreakable tie and hense was NOT VOTED ON TO PROCEED!!!!

How is it that an APPOINTED lawyer has ANY vote under ANY circumstance in an ELECTED COUNCIL???

And I'd love for the city attorney to explain how the ethics board that was a part of the City Charter which was voted into law by the STATE legislature can be replaced by an ethics board which does NOT adhere to the city charter????

The latest version of the city charter that I saw defined the city ethics board as a 3 person board, two citizens and an attorney, but all three MUST reside inside of the city limits of Nicholson. (How many lawyers actually live inside the city limits of Nicholson???)

Now, out of the blue, the mayor gets to draw 5 names to form the ethics board? How did this come about?

This entire episode SMACKS of vendetta and the city should be ashamed of itself for making a public spectacle of this.

#1.1 4therecord on 04/11/11 at 10:37 PM [Reply]

The mayor was not recused he was never a part of the panel it was made up of Three council members and the city attorney since the complaint was against lamar he couldn't sit on it either the confusion is coming over combining the ethics ordanance with the city charter two seperate documents the ethics says that the panel will be made up of a panel consisting of the three council members and the attorney she is a part of the panel with voting rights this new ordanance of which you are not famaliar with came about in sept 10 because the expired one that you know so well couldn't be effective because at this time no attorney lives inside our city limits if chuck had attended this meeting that he forgot the vote would have been different but that's water under the bridge now

ya

#1.1.1 Anonymous on 04/13/11 at 08:27 AM [Reply]

The article clearly says that the mayor DID recuse himself. Take it up with the newspaper if they are incorrectly reporting actions taken during the city council meetings.

The "confusion" is coming over the constantly changing city "ordinaces" and the tail grows longer the more the tale is told. I wonder why it is so difficult to get a straight answer from anyone in the city government, and I find it amazing that you'll get different answers depending on who is asking.

The original "ordinance" was not effective at the time it was originally issued, and anyone on the council who didn't know that at the time obviously didn't bother to engage their brain before voting on it, because it was common knowledge that no attorney lived inside the city limit at that time. I also find it interesting that an ethics ordinace "expired". I didn't know that ethics had a "shelf life", but apprently they do.

It sure does seem kind of sketchy that these "ethics ordinances" seem to be so easily changed on the whim of the current council and mayor. What is the point of having an ethic's ordinance or an ethics committee when things aren't being handling in a clear and transparent manner? Is the matter of ethics only applicable when it is convenient for the people in power?

ya ya

#1.1.1.1 Anonymous on 04/14/11 at 08:25 AM [Reply]

Sounds like Madison County... Who ur friends r and who you kiss up to is when the rules change.

#1.1.1.1.1 Anonymous on 04/14/11 at 12:02 PM [Reply]

All too true. lol

#1.2 4therecord on 04/14/11 at 08:51 PM [Reply]

Nothing transparent at all everything was reported in the paper as it was taking place at the time the ethics ordanance started there was an attorney living in the city limits a former city attorney. By expired I meant that the original ordanance was if you want another word try deceased upon the adoption of one that would work I don't know who you have asked questions certainly you have the right but if you want the truth try the city clerk give her a call

#1.2.1 Anonymous on 04/19/11 at 09:32 AM [Reply]

Really? Then name names, if you have this information so readly available. Just who was this supposed attorney that was living inside of the city limits, and exactly when was this "deceased" ordiance enacted and superceded? Your comments negate the information that came directly from the mouth of Mayor Ronnie Maxwell, so you are disputing what the mayor himself said, not what I've said. Funny how the story changes over time, when it becomes "inconvenient". You might want to have the mayor think back REAL hard about just what he's said, who he's said it to, and when he said it.

#1.3 Githa on 07/09/11 at 02:47 AM [Reply]

Its really great that people are sharing this ifnormtiaon.

#2 DPat on 04/07/11 at 08:25 AM [Reply]

Chuck Wheeler should have attended this meeting. It looks like he was ducking-out and that is not what he us paid for. For the rest of this crew...well let's just say the 'Good ole' Boy' system is firmly in place in Nicholson. Lamar, pay the money back, you didn't earn it, you didn't drive, you stole the money! Pretty simple...yet and still, there are those who would support shenanigans such as these, those with a criminal mind perhaps!

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment: E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.

Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
Phone*

What is two plus six?
: Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry
: Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

Community

Commerce Community

Ethics panel to hear Nicholson complaint

CommerceNewsTODAY

Ethics panel to hear Nicholson complaint

Recent Stories

Recent Comments

Sister Sites

Archives

Community

Keyword Tags