Columbus’ employee nepotism policy now more directly defines inter-department kinship.
Columbus Mayor Robert Smith on Tuesday broke a tie council vote to essentially tighten the city’s employee nepotism policy during a specially called meeting to address what constitutes a violation of the policy.
The policy now states no two employees in the third degree of kinship or in a dating relationship can work in the same city department. The council can transfer or terminate the employment of anyone it considers to run afoul of the code.
According to city ordinance, the third degree of kinship includes: mother, father, sister, brother, grandparent, great-grandparent, grandchild, great-grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, half-brother, half-sister, step-mother, step-father, step-sister and step-brother.
Prior to Tuesday’s meeting, councilman Kabir Karriem asked that city administration and councilmen review the policy after councilmen earlier this month voted to transfer a Columbus Fire & Rescue employee to the police department after he married a co-worker’s niece. Afterward, Goodman, the former firefighter, told The Dispatch he would not go to work for CPD.
The new policy added language stating that nepotism occurs when any city employee “shall occupy a position in which he (or she) will be working in the same department with a relative or person with whom he is in a dating relationship, even if there is no line of authority or reporting involved.” The only prior definition of nepotism in the policy stated that the act occurred when a city employee would be working directly for, or supervising, a relative or person he or she was dating.
Language is also changed to state that employees who are related within the third degree of kinship by blood or marriage will be separated by reassignment to another city department or terminated from employment to avoid personal conflicts being carried over into regular duties. The previous language said they may be separated or fired.
Councilmen Marty Turner and Charlie Box joined colleague Gene Taylor to accept the new language, which was drafted and recommended by council attorney Jeff Turnage. Karriem, Joseph Mickens and Bill Gavin were opposed. The mayor stepped in and broke the tie.
The city nepotism policy went into effect in 2008. Employees who were related to the third degree of kinship were grandfathered in.
‘Too strenuous’
Smith said he had met with police chief Tony Carleton, fire chief Martin Andrews and city administration to gather input on any needed changes to the policy. He said they wanted to stay with what was in place.
Karriem said the policy should be set by elected leaders and not department heads or supervisors. He cited the attorney general’s opinion and suggested the city should revise its nepotism policy to be more in line with state statutes.
“With all due respect to the department heads, which do a tremendous job for the city, I think policy falls on the mayor and council to decide the direction that should be carried out whether they like it or not,” Karriem said. “My reason for bringing this policy up is after researching and looking at attorney general opinions when it comes to nepotism policies, I feel our policy is a little bit too strenuous.”
Smith said department heads should have some input in decisions that involve them. He then referenced the council’s previous firing of three public works employees in 2012. Those employees had not disclosed that they were related until after they were hired and were removed from the city workforce as a result, Turnage told The Dispatch after Tuesday’s meeting.
“I just don’t understand why when we had three people from the public works department that was terminated, nothing was brought up until the issue came up with the fireman,” Smith said.
“I think if we go back and revise this policy and tweak it more than we’ve done,” Smith said, “we’re just opening up a can of worms.”
Exemption if there’s ‘a compelling need’
Turnage said a previous council had asked him to draft a policy that closed any potential loopholes in the two statutes.
“My thinking was if you were related in the third degree of kinship, even if you were not a supervisor or subordinate, there could be the potential for personal conflicts and personal favoritism to carry over, especially if one of the two got promoted and you’re in the same department,” Turnage said. “(The city’s policy) is much stricter than the state ethics law and the state nepotism law because there’s nothing in the nepotism law or the ethics law that would preclude brothers, sisters and cousins from being hired unless they were related to (councilmen) because they don’t make the decision on who is hired. I think for avoiding personal conflicts, lots of employers — public and private — have rules that prohibit hiring of relatives in the same department.”
Mickens then said he reconsidered the council’s unanimous vote to transfer Goodman and, like Karriem, believed the policy should be revisited. Gavin asked for clarification on the exemption clause in the policy, which states that the city can hire someone in a supervisory role of a relative “in the case of a compelling need.” Gavin suggested that phrase be further defined.
“There may be some certain circumstances when you’ve already got a good employee and here comes a superstar and you can’t pass them up,” Turnage said.
“I don’t see how you can justify that,” Mickens said.
Turnage then said it would be up to the council to justify that decision in the event that such a situation occurs. Smith interjected, again referencing the public works employees.
“How did we justify letting the three employees from the public works department go home?” Smith said. “Answer that question for me … Just because they worked at the public works department? Let’s be for real.”
“I’m just commenting on what Mr. Gavin brought up,” Mickens replied. “That we’ve got the choice to pick and choose. Am I reading it wrong?”
“What I’m saying is what it was intended to address is if you found some exceptional leader,” Turnage said. “Last (meeting), Mr. Goodman was a basic fireman and his uncle was a basic fireman, so I wouldn’t think that it would apply to this circumstance.”
Box mentioned that on top of firing the public works employees, the city turned away potential firemen due to the policy.
“We have not hired two or three really good people for the fire department because they had uncles or brothers,” Box said. “We know at that meeting the other night, several of those people were here waiting to see what we did. If we make an exception moving forward, is that not going to impact us?”
After more discussion on the ramifications of changing the policy to be less strict, Karriem asked Smith to refresh his memory on the termination of the three public works employees.
“You don’t remember when we terminated the three employees from the public works department?” Smith asked Karriem.
“Mayor, we’ve terminated a lot of folks from the public works department,” Karriem replied.
“A lot of them come in and out, but they’re not terminated because of nepotism,” Smith said.
Karriem then asked if anyone who has been fired or not hired because of the policy could re-apply for city jobs should it be corrected to be less strict.
“Some of them probably would unless they had other jobs,” Smith said, “Why weren’t you that concerned when it affected the three public works employees?”
“It’s always the right time to do the right thing,” Karriem said. “It has been brought to my attention now that this policy needs to be evaluated.”
“So it wasn’t the right time then?” Smith asked before Taylor made the motion to adopt Turnage’s revisions.
Nathan Gregory covers city and county government for The Dispatch.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 34 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.