Mayor Vaughn: $3,000 a month stipend is legal
by Lindsay Field
lfield@mdjonline.com
November 03, 2011 12:01 AM | 2779 views | 14 14 comments | 7 7 recommendations | email to a friend | print
POWDER SPRINGS — Powder Springs Mayor Pat Vaughn denies recent allegations that the additional $3,000 a month she was paid while serving as interim city manager nearly five years ago was illegally given to her.

Vaughn, who has been serving as Powder Springs’ mayor since 2004, is running for her third term on Nov. 8, against former police chief L. Rick Richardson and Paul Moore.

“I am now in my second term as mayor and find it curious that years later my opponents have chosen to criticize me for working harder for the city than would be required of my position as mayor,” Vaughn said. “To dredge up something that’s long since been a moot point is nothing but a last-minute attempt to stir up controversy at election time where none has ever existed before.”

Vaughn says the $3,000 pay was legal and that she did not violate city ordinance 2.14(e) because she received just a stipend, not the full $115,000 a year city manager’s salary. She also denies an additional allegation that accuses her of driving a 2002 city-owned Chevrolet Suburban for private use.

“I was given the stipend to try and help cover some of the expenses that I was having to do while working 12-hour days as interim city manager … and I haven’t (driven the Suburban) in a couple of years, except when we go on a retreat and we travel together or on city business,” she said.

Shortly after former City Manager Dane Perry resigned in 2005, City Council members Nancy Arnold, Bob Farmer, Al Thurman, Tom Bevirt and Ra Barr asked Vaughn to be interim city manager. A resolution was signed on Dec. 5, 2005, to validate the appointment.

On April 3, 2006, the council met in an executive session and talked about paying Vaughn for her extra work.

According to Powder Springs City Clerk Dawn Davis, minutes of the executive session were not taken so there is no record of what was talked about during the executive session. Davis said Vaughn did not participate in the meeting.

Davis confirmed that the council unanimously decided to increase Vaughn’s salary. However, the only documentation to support the stipend was an email from former finance director Gina Auld to the payroll clerk relaying information that she had verbally received from then-Mayor Pro-tem Bob Farmer. Farmer passed away in February.

“Mr. Farmer called and the council voted unanimously to pay the mayor retroactive back to December additional pay of $3,000 per month for her city manager duties,” the email reads.

Auld asked the payroll clerk to issue Vaughn a check on April 13, 2006, for $12,000 and then on April 28, 2006, to begin issuing Vaughn a check for her regular mayoral pay of $1,500 and $3,000 for her “approved” stipend by the council.

“She will receive the additional $3,000 each month until a new city manager is hired,” the e-mail from Auld said.

Vaughn received the monthly stipend for 18 months until Charles Nickerson stepped in as city manager in May 2007.

Ra Barr, who served on the council between 2003 and 2010, said he remembers the meeting but recalls the stipend amount being less.

“We talked about what I thought was $1,000 … an agreement reached that was a unanimous agreement amongst the council members,” Barr said.

A vote was not taken at the time of the discussion in the executive session because the Open Meetings Act deems that any vote taken during an executive session as null and void, Barr added.

“Whatever you agree to must be brought into a public meeting and voted on publicly,” Barr said. “This seems to be a budget amendment, and our city charter says a budget amendment has to be done through a resolution or ordinance, and you pass those in an open, public meeting.”

Barr said he has looked at his city council meeting notes and minutes and hasn’t been able to locate when the resolution or ordinance could have been approved for Vaughn’s stipend.

“I can’t find where the public vote was ever taken,” Barr said. “That’s my particular issue. It appears that an action was taken to pay this lady a lot of money without any basis of council action.”

Tom Bevirt, who has served on the city council since 1999, said he was the one who recommended the stipend.

“We just thought it was the right thing to do,” he said. “I’m not sure how the figure was arrived at but it was considerably less than what we were paying city managers at the time, so we just thought it was a fair deal.”

Bevirt remembered all council members being present that day, including council attorney Richard Calhoun of Brock, Clay, Calhoun and Rogers.

“We had to check about the legality of it … that was covered because it was a temporary arrangement. We had no idea that it would go on as long as it did,” he said.

Bevirt said he believes the allegations are coming to light at this time because of the Nov. 8 election.

“There are a lot of people with grudges. It’s sad. Nobody brought anything up back then. Nobody questioned this,” he said. “It’s not going to help matters any when folks make these wild statements.”

Vaughn stepped in as interim city manager again in January 2009 after Nickerson was fired through May 2010 when Rick Eckert was hired, but she was not compensated.

Phone calls to former city council members Nancy Arnold and Al Thurman and attorney Calhoun were not returned by press time on Wednesday.

The mayoral election for Powder Springs will take place on Tuesday.

At a public forum last week, Vaughn produced a copy of a polygraph test that she took to prove that she was honest about L. Rick Richardson’s firing. He was fired in February for allegedly selling city property, including three police vehicles without authorization, although L. Rick Richardson said previously that Vaughn authorized the sale. Richardson said on his campaign website that a lawsuit filed a few years ago by his brother, Ray Richardson, against the city for firing Ray Richardson as deputy police chief, led to L. Rick Richardson’s termination and that Vaughn was out to get him for his testimony during a 2008 deposition in the case.

Candidate contributions have been publicly reported on the Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Commission website.

To date, Vaughn has raised approximately $5,700 in contributions for the race, including a $500 donation from city attorney Calhoun, Croy Engineering, Farmer’s widow Nancy Farmer and Vaughn’s husband the Rev. Ray Vaughn. Of these contributions, Vaughn received $2,600 in loans.

Richardson has raised $3,150 in contributions including a $250 donation from New Town Developers and D&D Fleet Cleaning Services.

Moore has not reported any contributions and in a previous interview with him, he said he does not plan to accept contributions for the mayoral race.
Comments
(14)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
CountryWalk
|
November 04, 2011
To Areyousure

Yes I am sure that she has used her suburban to drive around the neighborhood to search for code violators as I have witnessed it first hand as have my neighbors. As for the police presence I know that the neighborhood pays for the service but it is because the Mayor has stated that our neighborhood is "crime infested" and needs the protection. That is so ridiculous and laughable and it is obvious as to the real reason for their presence. I guess your daughter is one of the few with a Mayor Vaughn sign in her yard. Our city needs a new direction and our current mayor is traveling down the wrong road. Again I say it is time for her to go!
Phaedra from Cali
|
November 04, 2011
To All:

This childishness here depresses me. I am considering moving to Powder Springs, but over the last few weeks, I have been discouraged. This discouragement is in great part to how petty people are being in response to articles. I'm not going to name names or even name articles, but this is so disappointing. Here I was thinking that in moving to Georgia I'd be making a better choice for myself and hopefully for my family down the road. I'd heard great things about Powder Springs from residents around the area, especially my Realtor. But these comments are really starting to make me reconsider. Why can't we all just wait and see what happens come the election? I think truth will win out.
downtheroad
|
November 04, 2011
To areyousure - which is it? Here ya go... Yes, the suburban has been parked in the parking lot in the same spot for months because it is no longer being driven to Belk's and Target. I don't know what you are talking about "a couple of weeks ago". And, I do agree with you..it is sad that we have to live with these few vicious people that represent the city...you must know Pat Vaughn
Areyousure
|
November 04, 2011
To down the road - Huh? first you said the Suburban has been sitting in the parking lot in the same spot for months, then you said Mayor Vaughn stopped driving it to Belk's and Target a couple weeks ago when someone said something about it. Which is it? I am sure if he is elected Rick will put it on his list to find a friend that is interested and give away City property again.

To Marywp - I agree with you, how sad that these few vicious people represent the City.

To Country Walk - Really? My daughter lives in Country Walk and says that the Mayor does not do property inspections. My daughter also stated that the $21,000 is paid by Country Walk for the security of all the homes in Country Walk. If they are sitting the parking lot, how are they protecting the Mayor's home? Seems like you have your facts mixed up or is it a deliberate lie?
downtheroad
|
November 04, 2011
Why does the City of Powder Springs own a suburban so that the Mayor and Council members can drive together to retreats or city meetings? That suburban has been sitting in the parking lot at City Hall for months in the same spot. Why don't they sell the car? Pat Vaughn stopped driving it to Belk's and to Target when someone said something about it. Rick, put that on your list as first thing to do when you get elected!
I Get It.
|
November 04, 2011
"Wild accusations"; "Grudges", Mr. Bevirt. Really? I wouldn't use that phrase to describe what's going on here. A more accurate description would be "a bringing to light" a matter of malfeasance, based on solely on documented facts. Sadly, you are not able to back up your actions with documented material.

Vaughn: "and find it curious that years later my opponents have chosen to criticize me...for something that’s long since been a moot point" Well, Madam Mayor, some say that they "find it curious" with the timing of the firing of a fellow employee, Chief Richardson, for his oversight of something that's been "a moot point" or whatever you wish to call it, when he was just a few months from retirement with full benefits.

If you were an employee, and technically you are, you would have been fired for your serving simultaneously as Mayor and CM, along with those who voted for your stipend.

As has been mentioned before, every time you comment, the more questions you raise.
MaryWP
|
November 03, 2011
Wow, I'm glad I don't live in Powder Springs and have to listen to vicious talk like this all the time.

CountryWalk
|
November 03, 2011
I wonder if the Mayor considers riding around Country Walk subdivision looking for violators of the HOA covenants "city business"? I have personally witnessed her and private citizens riding around in that black suburban writing up people who were not following code for the subdivision. It is also funny that the police department officers are paid $21,000 per year to sit in the Country Walk subdivision store parking lot because our "Mayor" lives there. This Mayor is a joke and needs to go!
Mike D
|
November 03, 2011
A stipend is a form of salary, such as for an internship or apprenticeship. It is often distinct from a wage or a salary because it does not necessarily represent payment for work performed, instead it represents a payment that enables somebody to be exempt partly or wholly from waged or salaried employment in order to undertake a role that is normally unpaid or voluntary, or which cannot be measured in terms of a task.

PS watcher
|
November 03, 2011
So a sizeable stipend is awarded in what all recollect as a verbal agreement. No record in the minutes. Seems this incident gives a great deal of validity to Rick Richardson's claim that much of the city's business was done with verbal instructions. Could Richardson be right when he claims the mayor verbally approved selling the old police cars?

Wonder why City Attorney is so generous to the Pat Vaughn campaign? Think a new mayor may want to look at getting a new city attorney?
idon'tbelieveher
|
November 03, 2011
Here we go again. Why were minutes not kept of the meeting. What else is she being paid that's the public is not aware of? So she recieved upfront $12.000 then $3,000. for 18 months...that totals $66,000.00. Are you kidding me. With the budget being strapped, employess not receiving raises!!!! Re the polygraph - who paid for the polygraph - who provided the materials and the questions for it? I suppose if this were checked into the Mayor did. I would want to run again too mayor for the mayor's salary plus a $66,000.00 bonus. Wake up people... things like this are taking up the government budgets thus causing increases for us in other areas. It is time for a change.
PS Girl
|
November 03, 2011
"Nobody had a problem with it back then" - that's funny. Nobody had a problem with the sale of that car back in 2007 either.
no way
|
November 03, 2011
You working harder for the city? not. What that is, is you being a control FREAK and trying to have your nose in the pot where it doesnt belong, and just so happened you saw an opportunity to be compensated for your "hard work" and your "long hours" while having a free ride to work on city gas in a city vehicle. get her out of there. now.
Sara J.
|
November 03, 2011
What's the big deal? The lady worked two jobs for a year and a half, and got paid a third of what she should have, and now several years later somebody's got a problem with it?

Sounds like election year nonsense to me.

*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, spam, and links to outside websites will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides