By MaryHelen Swanson

Accompanied by her attorney Teresa Ayling, former Harris clerk Kim Hugger sat before the city council last Friday afternoon to appeal the councilís decision to let her go from her job.

Hugger was recently fired following a lengthy special council meeting at which 49 allegations, mostly of incompetence in her work, were revealed.

Last Friday night, Ayling said they were back for name clearing, due process and an opportunity to present witnesses and cross examine witnesses.

Itís a matter of workplace justice, Ayling told the councilors and mayor.

Ayling spoke of what she believed was the cityís mandate for a process of disciplinary actions and opportunity her client should have to correct issues that were brought up.

According to Aylingís interpretation of city policy, she believed Hugger should have had seven to eight formal reviews during her employment and she said, Hugger had only one, and that was right before she was fired.

She never got to go back to work, Ayling said of Hugger (because she was suspended) and she never was allowed to correct any of the issues.

Ayling said itís obvious when a highway department cuts back and potholes donít get fixed, but not so obvious when city services donít get addressed due to cutbacks.

When these ìholesî in city services donít get ìfilledî Ayling said, it becomes harder to get things done.

Ayling told the council that with the hiring of someone to do the treasurerís job, Hugger should be able to come back as clerk and handle the job.

ìKim Hugger really loved her job,î Ayling said, ìSheís asking you to reconsider her employment.î

Mayor Rick Smisson spoke to the ìreviewî aspect saying the verbal communications on Huggerís performance constituted ìwarnings.î Thatís correction, he said.

He felt letting Hugger know verbally what had to be done was considered that part of a review process.

He also noted that both recently hired positions (financial and clerical) were temporary positions. Their compensation, which is higher than Hugger was getting, is due to the contract nature of their positions. Theyíre not being treated as an employee, he said.

Councilor Wayne Buisman asked about an apparent conflict in responses he got on his question at the last hearing on the steps needed for disciplinary measures.

He said the city attorney said it was OK let an employee go in the manner that the council had taken.

Attorney Pete Grundhoefer, disagreeing with Huggerís attorney about the intent of the cityís personnel policy, pointed out that on page 3 of the policy it states an employee may be terminated at any time for non-discriminatory reasons.

He supported the mayorís concept that his (mayorís) verbal communications with Hugger constituted disciplinary actions.

But Ayling responded saying that oral reprimanding is a very formal process wherein the employee is called in to the office and usually this action is documented in writing.

She insisted that the Harris personnel manual required just cause and for the council to go through procedures.

Mayor Smisson said the ìjust causeî would be the 49 allegations. He said an oral reprimand could be subjective, but the 49 allegations were more than that, they were issues that constitute the just cause.

When Ayling pointed out the pages in the cityís policy that talk about ìtypes of disciplinary actions,î the mayor said they were ìoptionsî for the council.

Ayling and Grundhoefer did not agree on the interpretation of the policy.

A question came up about Councilor Kathy Olsonís voting on the council being a conflict of interest as she has been appointed acting clerk.

Mayor Smisson said she is not doing the clerkís duties, sheís just there in case a signature is required, he said.

Ayling disagreed about the conflict.

Itís not a conflict, Grundhoefer said, sheís not being paid.

Ayling said there is the appearance that Olson may be hired (for the clerk position) at some point in the future.

Olson thanked Ayling for thinking she could do the clerkís job, but said ìno thank you, that will not happen.î

There were no other comments from the council about Huggerís appeal.

Then the mayor said the council should either affirm its previous action, overturn it or take other actions.

Councilwoman Olson moved and Councilor Doug Chaffee seconded a motion to affirm the previous action to terminate Hugger. It was a unanimous vote.