Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Ramey, council appear close on truce
By Blake Spurney Editor
Lawyers for Mayor Tom Ramey Sr. and Clayton City Council have exchanged correspondence in which they seemed tantalizing close to reaching a settlement in the nearly year-old lawsuit between factions.
One big hang-up remains, however: the employment of City Attorney Davis Bauman.
"It appears to me that most, if not all of the issues raised in the lawsuit are not moot," wrote John Dickerson, who is representing council, to Ramey's lawyer, Andrew Lampros, on April 22. He also indicated he would submit a settlement proposal to council.
Ramey filed suit against council seeking a declaratory judgment on a mayor's powers, especially those regarding veto and appointment powers.
A third cause of action challenged council's attempt to impeach Ramey, but that matter was rendered moot.
Lampros also wrote to Dickerson on April 22 about their earlier conversation in which they discussed a mayor's powers under the City Charter. According to Lampros, the mayor has the power to veto any measure passed by council and exclusive appointment powers. Any matter in which the charter's provisions were not followed would nullify measures adopted by council, including positions filled by council.
Dickerson noted in his letter the relative calm between mayor and council in recent months. He suggested as an alternative that Ramey could "file a motion to dismiss without prejudice since it appears to me that the mayor and council are now working in a spirit of cooperation ...," he wrote.
The next day, Lampros wrote that Dickerson "indicated that Council would likely resist any resolution that did not insure that Davis Bauman retained his position as City Attorney." He continued by saying Ramey "is probably willing to consider any qualified individual for the position so long as reasonable billing practices are followed and there is accounting for how time is spent and what the City is getting for its money."
Bauman's billing practices have been a source of his feud with Ramey since the latter took office in 2006. Bauman was getting paid a $3,600 monthly retainer, which has since been negotiated down to $3,000.
However, Ramey has challenged Bauman's unwillingness to itemize his bill. Ramey even fired Bauman, along with City Manager Cissy Henry, last August, but council rehired them. In January, Ramey tried appointing another lawyer, but council appointed Bauman, a move that Ramey vetoed.
Further complicating matters, Bauman was forced to withdraw from representing council in the current lawsuit because of a conflict of interest.
In a response dated April 29, Dickerson indicated the lack of response he had gotten from Lampros over two months. Dickerson wrote that a six-day deadline suggested by Lampros for a response was unreasonable.
Dickerson noted difficulty in scheduling a meeting with his clients.
"I am certain the Defendants will want to have Davis Bauman at the meeting although I recognize and clearly understand that he cannot represent the Defendants. Just because there is a conflict in him representing the Defendants doesn't mean that he can't be available at the meeting of the city council," he wrote.
When asked Tuesday if he was giving council legal advice in the lawsuit, Bauman said, "I don't have anything to do with it." He also said he wasn't billing the city for time related to the case.
Ramey also is at odds with the city over water bills for Stave Mill and Laurel Falls apartments, which are owned by his family. Council passed a resolution seeking an investigation into allegations of theft of services.
David Fowler, deputy director with legal services for the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council of Georgia, was appointed by the state Attorney General's office to look into the allegations. Tuesday, he said he hadn't made any decision on whether he would call for additional investigation into the claims forwarded by Bauman to prosecutors. He expected to make a decision soon.
Asked if it was unusual for a city attorney to seek a change against his own mayor, Fowler said: "I'll say this, it's the first time I've ever had it happen, but it doesn't make it unusual."
Staff Writer Chris McCaa contributed to this story.
One big hang-up remains, however: the employment of City Attorney Davis Bauman.
"It appears to me that most, if not all of the issues raised in the lawsuit are not moot," wrote John Dickerson, who is representing council, to Ramey's lawyer, Andrew Lampros, on April 22. He also indicated he would submit a settlement proposal to council.
Ramey filed suit against council seeking a declaratory judgment on a mayor's powers, especially those regarding veto and appointment powers.
A third cause of action challenged council's attempt to impeach Ramey, but that matter was rendered moot.
Lampros also wrote to Dickerson on April 22 about their earlier conversation in which they discussed a mayor's powers under the City Charter. According to Lampros, the mayor has the power to veto any measure passed by council and exclusive appointment powers. Any matter in which the charter's provisions were not followed would nullify measures adopted by council, including positions filled by council.
Dickerson noted in his letter the relative calm between mayor and council in recent months. He suggested as an alternative that Ramey could "file a motion to dismiss without prejudice since it appears to me that the mayor and council are now working in a spirit of cooperation ...," he wrote.
The next day, Lampros wrote that Dickerson "indicated that Council would likely resist any resolution that did not insure that Davis Bauman retained his position as City Attorney." He continued by saying Ramey "is probably willing to consider any qualified individual for the position so long as reasonable billing practices are followed and there is accounting for how time is spent and what the City is getting for its money."
Bauman's billing practices have been a source of his feud with Ramey since the latter took office in 2006. Bauman was getting paid a $3,600 monthly retainer, which has since been negotiated down to $3,000.
However, Ramey has challenged Bauman's unwillingness to itemize his bill. Ramey even fired Bauman, along with City Manager Cissy Henry, last August, but council rehired them. In January, Ramey tried appointing another lawyer, but council appointed Bauman, a move that Ramey vetoed.
Further complicating matters, Bauman was forced to withdraw from representing council in the current lawsuit because of a conflict of interest.
In a response dated April 29, Dickerson indicated the lack of response he had gotten from Lampros over two months. Dickerson wrote that a six-day deadline suggested by Lampros for a response was unreasonable.
Dickerson noted difficulty in scheduling a meeting with his clients.
"I am certain the Defendants will want to have Davis Bauman at the meeting although I recognize and clearly understand that he cannot represent the Defendants. Just because there is a conflict in him representing the Defendants doesn't mean that he can't be available at the meeting of the city council," he wrote.
When asked Tuesday if he was giving council legal advice in the lawsuit, Bauman said, "I don't have anything to do with it." He also said he wasn't billing the city for time related to the case.
Ramey also is at odds with the city over water bills for Stave Mill and Laurel Falls apartments, which are owned by his family. Council passed a resolution seeking an investigation into allegations of theft of services.
David Fowler, deputy director with legal services for the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council of Georgia, was appointed by the state Attorney General's office to look into the allegations. Tuesday, he said he hadn't made any decision on whether he would call for additional investigation into the claims forwarded by Bauman to prosecutors. He expected to make a decision soon.
Asked if it was unusual for a city attorney to seek a change against his own mayor, Fowler said: "I'll say this, it's the first time I've ever had it happen, but it doesn't make it unusual."
Staff Writer Chris McCaa contributed to this story.
 |
||
| Governor vetoes welcome center |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of theclaytontribune.com.
KB wrote on May 17, 2008 3:51 AM: