A motion was rescinded to award former City Administrator Judy Brigham $56,000 in additional restitutions from a lawsuit that was settled in 2012.
The motion, made by Don Becker, and passed by an 8-0 decision by the council, will negate the remaining 50 percent of Brigham’s sick leave and her legal costs. In addition, the severance pay for Brigham will not be paid.
City Administrator Carl Slaugh said the purpose of the restitutions were under question, mainly because a legal settlement had already been reached with Brigham.
“It was inappropriate in terms of legalities, you have to have a bonafide purpose,” Slaugh said.
A letter from former City Attorney Chuck Apt to the council raised questions about the motivation behind the awarded money, as well as the legality of the issue. An opinion was sought from the attorney general’s office, but was eventually declined.
Slaugh said there was no purpose behind the payment, because the council was not obligated to make further payments past the settlement. He said the legal costs were included in the settlement. As for the severence, he said due to the fact that Brigham was reinstated into her position until her retirement, severence was not required. The other 50 percent of the sick leave is not required to be paid, as listed under the city’s personnel manual.
Slaugh said the original motion to pay the $56,000 was made without legal counsel, and he believes the decision was swayed by the circumstances at hand.
“Sometimes you are swayed by the situation taking place at the time,” Slaugh said, “In this case, the pendulum swung too far in one direction.”
Multiple executive sessions were held over the course of two city council meetings, and council members were given the chance to discuss their opinions on the matter.
“It’s not an easy matter, the council recognizes that the whole community is going through this,” Slaugh said. “There was a rehashing of some old issues, some of them were not pleasant.”
When asked for comment, Brigham said she “did not have enough information” about the decision to comment and had not yet been formally contacted by the city.
“My attorney at the time felt that everything was legal,” Brigham said. “I need more information to respond with whatever I need to do.”
Brigham denied additional restitution
