Indianola residents could soon be paying their city property taxes at the county courthouse.
Although still not finalized, the Indianola Board of Aldermen voted unanimously on Monday night to approve a proposed interlocal agreement with the county to begin collecting city taxes. According to a statement made by County Board Attorney Johnny McWilliams during the county's April 20 session, the measure still has to be approved by the state's attorney general.
McWilliams said the agreement is dated to start May 1 and once it meets final approval from all parties, the county could conceivably begin collecting taxes for the 2020 tax year, which would be due at the beginning of 2021.
In other business,
Mayor Steve Rosenthal presented the city leaders with a letter from Kiser Brown, the firm hired to conduct the city's audit, which basically stated that they were closed due to the COVID-19 Coronavirus and they will make it a priority to complete the 2017 audit as soon as possible.
At the request of Alderman Gary Fratesi, the city leaders also briefly discussed city-owned vehicles that are being taken home by employees for emergency call out. Fratesi asked Rosenthal to provide the aldermen with a list, excluding the police and fire departments, of persons who are authorized to take vehicles home and why.
He said, "To see who's got it and I would like an explanation of who's taking them home." Fratesi then emphasized that the take-home policy was for emergency call-out purposes only.
Based on that request, Alderman Sam Brock questioned why the aldermen had to make multiple requests to get the information. "About three months ago Alderman Fratesi requested the same information. I would like to know why that information wasn't supplied then. Now, we've got to turn around and request the same information; why we didn't get it the first time?” said Brock.
Rosenthal said he was unable to answer that question, so Brock then suggested that Fratesi compel a deadline on receiving the information. Rosenthal responded, "You'll get it probably tomorrow or Wednesday via email, because if I remember correctly I already have that list."
Rosenthal then stated that he too had a concern about a couple of employees who had stated that they did not want to take vehicles home because they were not willing to be on call out.
“To me if you are a supervisor you need to be on call out if that's what the duty requires,” Rosenthal said.
Alderman Darrell Simpson then reminded the others of a prior statement made by Public Works Director Robert Spurlock regarding the matter and Simpson stated that if a person was supposed to be on-call and did not respond there should be some type of repercussions.
Simpson stressed, "Because we are depending on these people to come out when we call them and if he (Spurlock)calls them and they don't come we've got to keep moving down the line. We may get to a guy who don't have the city vehicle and he's there in his own truck trying to help us out.”
Fratesi added that if being called out is a part of a worker’s job description and they don't respond then the person should be demoted and have their salary cut.
Although not by name, Fratesi mentioned a city employee who did not respond to a recent call-out and stressed that that particular employee had the city’s safety cones and barricades behind his personal residence. “They are no longer there now,” said Rosenthal.
Fratesi asserted, “Anybody in a supervisory position that refuses to come out, won't take the truck home because they don't want to come out, they don't need to be a supervisor. They're not supervision.
They are just regular day-to-day workers. They need to be filling in potholes as far as I am concerned."
Additionally, the city lawmakers voted unanimously to continue with the current emergency declaration, which includes continuing the 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. curfew.
Although the group spent more than 20 minutes discussing redesigning the job duties for the city clerk’s position, no action was taken. Rosenthal indicated that he had submitted a draft of the changes to the board members. "I will look for y’all's guidance to add or take away from what may be needed," he said.
During the discussion, Fratesi made several attempts to make a motion, but the discourse continued and no one uttered a second.
However, Rosenthal asked him at the end if he wanted to continue with his motion, but he declined. "Let's do it all together when you send it all out and everybody can see everything," Fratesi said.
Rosenthal's proposed changes would seemingly move most of the financial/accounting responsibilities to an outside agency making the city clerk’s duties mostly clerical, which would render a $10,000 to $12,000 reduction in the current salary range for the position.
After emerging from the first of two executive sessions, the city lawmakers acknowledged two motions that were made during that closed proceeding pertaining to two unnamed public works employees who had been suspended without pay at a prior session.
Reportedly, Fratesi made a motion, seconded by Simpson, to allow the employees to make an appeal in a disciplinary hearing, but Brock and aldermen Marvin Elder and Ruben Woods voted no.
In a subsequent motion by Elder, Brock and Woods voted yes to reinstating the employees, without a hearing and with back pay, Fratesi and Simpson voted no, the motion passed; however, Rosenthal announced his intention to veto the decision.
They also voted to hire two new public works employees and to transfer Willie McGuire to the street department as street maintenance supervisor over the patch crew repairing potholes and other duties.
