Much like pulling teeth, The Grenada Star has once again run into issues obtaining public records from the City of Grenada.
Following regular session and citizens requests during the July 8 City Council meeting held at City Hall, which lasted one hour and 21 minutes, Councilmembers cleared the room of guests after unanimously voting to consider and enter into Executive Session.
However, prior to the votes, Mayor Charles Latham listed the four items up for discussion during Executive Session — two each pertaining to litigation and personnel. The items included:
• Potential Litigation — Stan Amos
• Litigation — COG vs. Purdue Pharma “Opioid”
• Personnel — Police Department
• Personnel — City Manager
“We appreciate Mayor Latham for voicing the items aloud even though they are listed on the monthly agenda under Executive Session,” The Star’s Publisher Adam Prestridge said. “This practice informs our live stream viewers of what will potentially be discussed during the closed session prior to our broadcast shutting down.”
The motion to enter Executive Session was made by Ward 5 Councilman Eric Harris and was seconded by Ward 1 Councilman Warren B. Cox.
The Executive Session concluded shortly thereafter and Prestridge and guests were allowed to reenter City Hall. The Council quickly voted to adjourn and Mayor Latham asked City Attorney Mary Brown to provide Prestridge with the outcomes from Executive Session.
“Once again, we appreciate Mayor Latham for providing Executive Session outcomes following each meeting,” Prestridge added. “Not only has he asked the city attorney to begin providing this information at the conclusion of each Executive Session, but he has also provided it himself. This is another step in transparency for our citizens.”
According to Brown, potential litigation involving former City Manager Stanford Amos, who resigned in June, was tabled. She also reported that the Council “opted out of adding additional defendants” in the COG vs. Purdue Pharma class action lawsuit.
GPD promotions prompt questions
In what proved to be the most controversial item approved in Executive Session was Police Chief George Douglas’ request to promote former Grenada County Sheriff Rolando Fair, who was defeated by former GPD Police Chief Garrett Hartley in the November 2023 General Election and took over the office in January, as well as longtime officer Reggie Woodall to the rank of captain. Brown said the Council approved an “exception to allow” Chief Douglas to override department policy.
“The Star’s concern is not the officers’ promotions, but the method used to promote them,” Prestridge said. “Most police departments — and businesses for that matter — require testing and interviews for advancement, along with the requirement of job openings being advertised.”
The Star has received several phone calls and one email from current and former City of Grenada police officers voicing outrage once learning of the promotions. The callers and the sender of the email all expressed concerns of “guaranteed retaliation from the department, city and blacklisting in law enforcement” if they revealed their identities.
Among the many concerns voiced include lack of structure in the police department, ranking officers not being allowed to make decisions in order to perform their duties effectively, upper management vetoing ideas or actions, lack of respect, inadequate equipment, ranking officers getting paid without working all hours, lack of officers and unfair promotion practices.
Several of these concerns had been voiced to The Star prior to the July Council meeting, but are being vetted. However, having previously been contacted about unfair promotions, The Star began to dig deeper after the Council’s executive decision.
“Unfortunately, our efforts were met with roadblocks,” Prestridge said. “Even more unfortunate, it was not a surprise.”
As stated, Brown provided The Star with the outcome of all four Executive Session items, the last being the approval to pay interim City Manager JoJo Weathers, who was previously approved for 90 days of employment, based on an annual salary of $90,000. However, no individual Councilmember votes were provided.
At 2:08 p.m. on Friday, July 12, 2024, four days after the Council meeting, Prestridge emailed Brown requesting the votes — motions, seconds and individual votes — for each item discussed in Executive Session. She responded back to the email at 10:30 a.m. on Monday, July 15, stating that she was out of the office and would be back later that day.
“I am almost sure the vote was 7-0 on all matters,” she responded. “I don’t know who made the motions without my notes.”
Without definitive results, The Star waited for answers.
“Good morning, Mary,” Prestridge replied back at 11:37 a.m. on Thursday, July 18. “Please provide the votes associated with the email request below. I never heard back from you Monday afternoon.”
The wait continued for another seven days.
Brown then sent two emails to Prestridge — one at 2:02 p.m. and another at 2:05 p.m. — on Thursday, July 25, with the subject line “Executive Session.” The second email was sent with no subject line after she stated, “Sorry, hit the send button by mistake.”
In the email, Brown included the motions and seconds for each of the four Executive Session items, but once again, included no individual votes. She reported that Councilman Cox made the motion to table the Amos litigation, which was seconded by Councilman Harris; Ward 2 Councilman Fredreick “Pete” Wilson made the COG vs. Purdue Pharma motion, seconded by Councilman Harris; Ward 3 Councilman Lewis Johnson made the GPD personnel motion, seconded by Councilman Wilson, who also made the motion for Weathers’ pay rate, seconded by Councilman Harris.
Prestridge then promptly replied at 2:24 p.m.
“Great! Thank you,” he said. “I also need to know the votes in favor, against or recusal by each Councilmember for each item in Executive Session.”
As of 5 p.m. on Monday, July 29, Brown had not responded to Prestridge’s email response.
Tuesday morning, The Star filed three “Requests for Information” to the City Clerk’s office under the Freedom of Information Act. They included individual votes for all four Executive Session items discussed during the July 8 Council meeting, a copy of the Grenada Police Department’s handbook, policies and/or procedures and a current list of Grenada Police Department officers including years of service, rank and pay.
“The votes in these matters may have been 7-0, but considering the issues surrounding the GPD’s promotions, not providing or dodging the question to provide individual votes, makes it appear that there is more to the story,” Prestridge concluded. “Nevertheless, was all of the pertinent information provided to the Council before approval? Were there other police officers on the force looked over for these promotions? Was GPD policy disregarded? We want the answers, the citizens want the answers, but most of all, the officers protecting our streets day and night, risking their lives, deserve the answers.”
