Brentwood Mayor Chris Thornton, at the board of aldermen meeting Monday, began the meeting with an explanation of why he follows Robert’s Rules of Order so closely at meetings — it protects the interests of the minority and the majority, he said.
He also said he sent an email to all aldermen before the meeting regarding their conduct as aldermen.
Following that, three residents stood to support Alderwoman Maureen Saunders, who was the subject of a motion of censure in the previous meeting.
See also: Saunders defended against censure — it’s not reintroduced
No alderman followed with a comment, and the motion of censure — which Alderman Patrick Toohey made two weeks ago — was not brought up again. Toohey said after the meeting that Thornton’s email to the alderman may have taken care of the issue.
Thornton’s email was requested by 40 South News. In total, it’s a 20-page PDF file.
It begins with Thornton’s introduction, saying it’s important for members of the board to refrain from “conduct injurious to the organization or its purposes, and the board must decide what types of conduct are acceptable from its members in the execution of their office…”
Thornton says he is concerned that the BOA may be permitting one of its members to “dominate consideration of certain topics and, by doing so, may be preventing the Board from reaching consensus and acting in the best interests of the City.
“I have no doubt that, to the extent this has taken place, it has been for noble reasons, preferring to allow a member to go farther than is proper rather than quashing debate; erring on the side of indulgence rather than rigidity. I applaud these sentiments, but I believe the Board’s indulgence is being abused and it is preventing the Board from meaningful deliberation and possibly reaching consensus on issues of considerable importance to the City.
“In the past five months, I have personally witnessed numerous occasions on which Alderwoman Saunders has exceeded her authority in the conduct of her office, potentially violated Missouri Statutes and putatively violated the confidentiality of the Board’s closed sessions.”
The email continues, with attachments of emails between Saunders and a city attorney, Saunders and other aldermen, and Saunders and administrators of other cities.
“As you can see in the emails below, Alderwoman Saunders made direct requests to other municipalities seeking specific compensation data. These requests were largely made to the same municipalities who responded to the compensation survey conducted by the City’s compensation consultant Higbee & Associates in the fall of 2014.”
Thornton states: “Alderwoman Saunders’ attempt to gather this data, no matter how well intentioned, was improper, duplicative and wasteful.”
See Thornton’s email to the aldermen.
if I follow the time line of the e-mails she did stop according to the dates, given the most recent was at the top where she was asked to stop. assume the Mayor would of posted any e-mails in defiance of the September e-mails from attorney.
Did all of you read the same emails I read in that letter? It is obvious that Mrs Saunders was asked on multiple occasions to stop! She instead kept going basically ignoring the city attorney’s advice! It is plain as day AND she at one point was using her personal email! What does she need?! A neon sign saying “STOP!”? Maybe the censure vote needs to be brought back up to save our city from another embarrassment by our city leaders! The proof is all in those emails she acted on her own accord and kept going when asked to stop! Mrs. Saunders, please STOP!
The embarrassment is that the person asking questions is being stomped on by the powers that be in the club. Again, I would ask, who works for who in Brentwood? Who is looking out for the public funds? Who was our attorney during the lead up to the last “embarrassment”? Same guy? I don’t know the answer, but I know which way I’d bet. One other thing, you put an exclamation point behind 8 out of 9 sentences in your comment. That’s about an inch from ALL CAPS. Might want to dial it down just a hair. This conversation needs to be calm and dispassionate.
It’s a different attorney, however the same old crowd crying that Saunders is being mistreated. It’s odd that you say public servants stole from the city and that bothers you, however when Alderman Saunders continually goes against the advice given by the attorney, she disregards it. She also disregards the laws governing conduct of a city official, but these things all seem to be acceptable to you, only because it fits your agenda of wanting to run the government from behind a keyboard. Here’s a thought, file for a seat on the board and see how the cards fall in April. Maureen will appreciate you on the board, since she won’t have her own.
“however when Alderman Saunders continually goes against the advice given by the attorney, she disregards it”
Sorry, I don’t know what this sentence means. Could you explain? As to running the govt, keyboard, etc. – What exactly makes wanting the elected and appointed officials to be honest, and spending kept above board and modest, qualifies me as a wannabe shadow mayor? Sorry, but that’s a silly schoolyard taunt. Why the Saunders hate? I can hear that ax grinding all the way downtown. I’ve never met her, but I think she is asking the right questions. I’m getting the feeling that your views are more personal. City employee maybe?
Oh you know, probably just another law abiding, caring, knowledable citizen. Nah rickstl, not like that is your real name, you only side with the ones who have their own personal agenda.
Gosh, I hope they are all going to act like grown-ups and just do their best for this community.
The Missouri Sunshine law allows for any individual to ask for records pertaining to the salary of government employees, so I don’t see how Mrs. Sanders was acting in any way beyond what her rights are as a citizen, and more so as a representative with influence on the salaries of government employees.
If the Mayor seeks to build consensus, bullying the minority opinion in staying quiet is certainly not the way to go about it.
Sunshine requests do allow for citizens to request information through proper channels and procedures. But that is not what Ms. Saunders was doing. She said she was working on behalf of the City when she was not given the authority to do so. The only one that can give the authority is the board of alderman, and the board never granted her that authority. The rules might not make sense to some people, but they are there for a reason, even if you have the best intentions in mind you are still required to follow the rules that you swore an oath to uphold.
Read all the e-mails, and the obvious question is, if Saunders was out of line, why did other Alderpersons continue to e-mail back? Also, noticed she shared compensation plans she requested from other cities yet never noticed an e-mail from anyone telling her to stop at that time. Now all of the sudden it is a problem. Typically when someone steps out of line you tell them right then and there not weeks later.
Justin,
Did you read the emails? She was admonished every time within a day of her email, in one case as soon as an hour later from Brentwoods own attorney, and in language that left no room for ambiguity! According to the dates on the emails, this has been going on for months and the warnings have had no effect whatsoever on her actions. I’m not sure what else you expect to happen here.
And who hires the attorney?
Looks to me like city government, mayor, board of aldermen, public employee unions, and city hall staff is trying to shut Saunders up.
That way, they can all go about their real business, which is making money off the taxpayer. They have had their way for many years, (how the hell did we wind up with the highest paid fire dept? Are our guys better at putting out fires than everyone else?), now maybe it’s time to get a grip on things before another Seemayer comes along and cleans us out completely. Look at it this way – Who was the major (only?) donor to Toohey’s campaign? That’s right, local building magnate Musick. So, who does this guy represent on the Board? I think that question should be asked of every member. Third world politics belongs in the third world. Not in Brentwood.
I read through the Mayor’s email and the emails from Saunders. All I can say is that there is something wrong with the Mayor and with the rest of the Alderman if they take issue with Saunders and her actions. As far as I can tell, she is acting well within her rights and more so to ensure that the city is being held accountable. I think more Alderman in the way of Saunders are needed.
Also, it wasn’t clear who interrupted Mr. Sanders during the Public Forum as he made his comment to the Mayor and Alderman, but shame on you. How dare you ask someone to wrap it up during a public session. Whatever man did that deserves to be censored, not Maureen Saunders.
After attending the prior meeting and many meeting before, Saunders does dominate the conversation because she is the only one who seems willing to want to understand all the facts. At the last meeting there was a very confusing topic brought up about the pension. The only person that asked for clarification was her. This is typical at most BOA meetings. If you want to know what is going on in detail, Saunders is who you need to ask. I cannot speak for current board members, the past ones simply asked no questions and voted exactly as the Mayor asked them to vote, no questions asked.
Comments are closed.