The Waycross Ethics Board has recommended prosecution by a city court as the penalty for Commissioner Katrena Felder after its investigation of a citizen ethics complaint filed against her.
The board reached its decision by a 3-2 vote Friday, December 13 during a meeting in City Hall. The penalty follows a unanimous 5-0 vote December 5 stating there is validity to allegations in the complaint of citizen Clayton Nelson.
Nelson’s action, filed September 2, alleged Felder misused her city- issued credit card and also attended a partisan event while on a city business trip.
The recommendation now moves to the Waycross City Commission for review and possible action. Board Chairperson Shawn Taylor delivered a copy of the recommendation signed by the five members to the commission at its planning and information session Monday, December 16.
Interim City Attorney Huey Spearman said according to the City Code, Felder has 10 days from issuance of the order to file an appeal with City Manager Ulysses “Duke” Rayford. If an appeal is filed, the commission will be notified at the next regular session and a date will be set for a hearing within 45 days of the notification.
The commission will review any decision by the board in a public meeting set for that purpose, Spearman said.
According to City Code, the commission “shall render its opinion by a public vote at the conclusion of the proceedings to:
• affirm the decision of the board of ethics;
• reverse the decision and enter a decision of a less severe nature;
• remand the case to the board for further consideration.
Attempts to reach Felder for comment Monday, December 16 were unsuccessful.
Felder and her attorney, Adam Craft, were present as were Nelson and his attorney, Kemberly Copeland. About two dozen community members were in attendance.
The 3-2 vote followed a motion by Albert Bussey and second from Lorene Regulus for the stiffest of the six actions the board can recommend.
In order, they are:
• no admonishment, no action;
• public reprimand, and not to violate city code in the future;
• formal reprimand;
• public censure;
• recommendation for termination, resignation or recall; Taylor joined Bussey and Regulus in the affirmative after Tim Peacock and Dr. Earl Martin started the voting, each with “no.”
Taylor then read the nine-page recommendation order that contained nearly two dozen sections leading to the conclusion that:
• complainant did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent violated the City of Waycross Code of Ethics regarding use of City property (i.e. city automobile). No clear evidence was presented to support this alleged violation.
• complainant did prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent violated the City of Waycross Code of Ethics regarding use of government purchasing card by purchasing expensive meals for more than one person, exceeding the daily per diem and allotted annual budget, and purchasing numerous meals and snacks in Waycross when not conducting official city business without prior approval by the city manager or city commission.
• respondent’s unauthorized use of the government purchasing card to purchase personal items for herself and others was a form of theft of city resources.
Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law, the board assessed a penalty against the respondent which it believes is appropriate based upon the seriousness of her continuing misuse and abuse of her city credit card charging privileges.
The recommendation came after a 40-minute executive session shortly after Taylor called the meeting to order. Following the roll call to establish the quorum of the five members, Craft asked to make two objections to the proceeding.
The first objection was regarding the City Code requirement the board release its findings within 14 days of the end of deliberations with a decision on violation and penalty.
The second objection was related to a video posted on social media by Taylor following the the commission’s called meeting Monday, December 9. One of the two resolutions approved at the meeting was for the commission’s acceptance of the Ware County Board of Elections and Registration’s certification of the election of new District 1 Commissioner Shawn Roberts on December 3.
The resolution passed 3-2 vote with Commissioner Diane Hopkins and Felder casting “no” votes.
In her video, Taylor admonished both commissioners for their votes and called for the voters of District 1 to assemble at the next commission meeting to let the two know their displeasure.
Craft charged the video showed “extreme concern of conflict of interest.” He said allowing Taylor to vote on the penalty would hinder this process toward a fair and impartial outcome.
Taylor then called for an executive sesssion. Dr. Martin moved for such and Regulus seconded ahead of a 5-0 vote. The board retired to a room on the second floor for deliberations which lasted about 40 minutes.
Once the meeting resumed, Spearman responded to Craft’s objections.
Spearman said the vote regarding violations was within the 14-day window, to the day. He pointed to the extenuating circumstances due to the need to seat two alternates (Dr. Martin and Peacock) at successive meetings during which a penalty could have been determined.
In response to the second objection, Spearman felt it was not clear Taylor had demonstrated bias against Felder. He cited the 1964 landmark Supreme Court case “New York Times v. Sullivan”, which established boundaries for fair comment and criticism of a public figure under the First Amendment’s free speech section.
