Title
Ethics Complaint - Event Five involving Interim City Manager Steve Hill
Body
SUMMARY:
That Mr. Hill did upon assuming duties recover from the Parks Department a utility vehicle for his own personal use in violation of article 1-707 “an employee may not use municipal equipment for private gain or advantage to himself”. Mr. Hill as Parks Department Head solicited the utility vehicle for use stating he needed a vehicle capable of hauling light items. Upon becoming City Manager, he exchanged his manager’s sedan for the utility vehicle requiring the Parks Department to haul concession supplies in the exchanged sedan. When Mr. Hill was hired, he was given a salary, insurance, but no motion involved the private use of a vehicle as compensation. Mr. Hill has logged 4,078 miles on the vehicle where his predecessor logged 1,687 miles. Mr. Hill has the distinction of having two admonishments for misuse and excessive use of municipal vehicles in his file.
Mr. Hill in five months drove 4,000 miles, his predecessor in the same period drove 1,687 miles and he allowed the staff to go on trips with the City vehicle. Mr. Hill was not authorized to use this vehicle for personal reasons and no explanation can be provided to explain this mileage any reasonable person can accept. Moreover, for any use of this vehicle to be used personally authorization would have to come from the Council in a public forum, advertised and recorded.
City Council shall either determine that the complaint has merit, determine that the complaint does not have merit or determine that the complaint has sufficient merit to warrant further investigation. If the Council determines that a complaint warrants further investigation, it shall authorize an investigation by the City Attorney or another individual or entity chosen by the City Council. (§ 1-710(3))
BUDGET ACCOUNT:
Recommended Action
NECESSARY COUNCIL ACTION: Determine merits of complaint