Linda Miles out as fill-in city attorney?
I'm working on a story for Friday's newspaper about a movement afoot among some City Council members not to bring back retired City Attorney Linda Miles for her previously-agreed-upon contract work.
On Nov. 16, Miles signed a contract with the city that would allow her to work up to 1,000 hours for the city in 2008. She would earn $91.50 an hour, or up to $91,500 for approximately 24 weeks of work.
Councilman Zack Matheny said earlier today he will probably make a motion at Tuesday night's meeting that the council vote not to bring back Miles. Instead of paying Miles, he said, the city manager needs to get busy finding her replacement.
I got a copy of the contract today. It says "either party upon 60 days written notice may cancel the contract." So I called back Matheny and asked whether that would be part of his motion, or if he would move that the contract become null and void. Matheny said he would get back to me.
That raises an interesting question: What can the council do about this contract? City Manager Mitchell Johnson is responsible for hiring/firing the city attorney (although some council members want to change that, too). He entered into the contract with Miles. Can the council order him to nullify the contract?
I'm still reporting this story, waiting on calls back from the city attorney's office, etc.
Comments (12)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Well I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV but it appears Zach What-his-name is able to read the writing on the wall.
Posted on January 9, 2008 8:16 PM
If I understand the former city attorney Linda Miles contract correctly, she should be served 60 day's notice that her services will not be needed, and steps should be taken to ensure that she is not called on for any work during that time frame.
Who approved this contract in the first place? Linda Miles did enough harm to the city's reputation in its handling of the David Wray matter. Some of the reported legal shortcomings by her department during this episode can only make one wonder what would motivate the City Manager to enter into a lucrative post employment contract with her.
This is one more indication of the poor judgement exercised by the City Manager, and just one more reason he that he too should be replaced.
Posted on January 9, 2008 8:36 PM
Maybe I should apply. Do you think Mitch would hire me?
Of course, that might result in me suing myself.
Posted on January 9, 2008 10:34 PM
Mitchell Johnson costs every resident of Greensboro $0.76 per year to supply his salary.
Less than two postage stamps.
I'm not happy with my purchase.
Check the expiration date.
Posted on January 10, 2008 1:29 AM
good lord, that is quit ehell of a money
Posted on January 10, 2008 8:16 AM
Bill: That's how I read it, too - that the council could order City Manager Mitchell Johnson to give her 60 days notice, then not give her any work for that period. I'm waiting to hear from the acting city attorney about that interpretation. And I also need to call Linda Miles, too, and see what she thinks about all of this.
Sam: Having you as city attorney would make my job VERY interesting!!
Posted on January 10, 2008 9:44 AM
I've heard very little information about Linda Miles performance except from the occasional blogger. Specifically what did she do wrong, if anything? Will your story cover that aspect?
Posted on January 10, 2008 1:32 PM
Allen,
You asked specifically what did she do wrong, if anything? Will your story cover that aspect?
Linda's most recent illegal action involved the unauthorized release of a former employees personnel file.
Read 5 and 6
http://bp2.blogger.com/_C9bum5bC7Co/R3Vz28uE4BI/AAAAAAAABAM/hUO9DQ_QucY/s1600-h/pers+release1.jpg
As for banks covering that, I seriously doubt it. The N&R probably sees nothing wrong with legal illegally releasing a personnel file.
Posted on January 10, 2008 1:45 PM
Allen,
You asked specifically what did she do wrong, if anything? Will your story cover that aspect?
Linda's most recent illegal action involved the unauthorized release of a former employees personnel file.
Read 5 and 6
http://bp2.blogger.com/_C9bum5bC7Co/R3Vz28uE4BI/AAAAAAAABAM/hUO9DQ_QucY/s1600-h/pers+release1.jpg
As for banks covering that, I seriously doubt it. The N&R probably sees nothing wrong with illegally releasing a personnel file.
Posted on January 10, 2008 1:46 PM
Margaret, I have the qualifications and the ability- I just don't think Mitch would approve. I wonder why. If he took my advice legal or otherwise, he would be better off already. That's why I'm here. That's why people love me.
Posted on January 10, 2008 5:41 PM
Has no one else seen the job done by the current interim city attorney? She can barely answer a question without having a book in front of her. I say bring back Linda Miles until they can find a suitable replacement.
Posted on January 11, 2008 12:33 AM
http://thetroublemaker.blogspot.com/2008/01/disturbing-allegation.html
Posted on January 14, 2008 10:52 AM