By Kim McDarison

The Whitewater Common Council has emerged, following its last two meetings, from closed session discussions, each time issuing written statements regarding its position on complaints, which have been lodged against the body through the city’s Human Resources Department.

During the council’s Tuesday, Nov. 7, meeting, following its open session meeting, the body entered into a closed session for the purpose, as stated on the agenda, of holding a discussion regarding “complaints received by the Human Resources Department.” 

Along with council members, the closed session was attended by a representative of the city’s HR department and the city’s “employment attorney.”

Following the closed session, the council reconvened in open session and council president pro tem Lisa Dawsey Smith, on behalf of the council, read the following statement:

“The council is respectful that each individual council member has distinct, competing and divergent viewpoints designed to promote the best interests of the city and representation of the community.

“The council intends to work on a plan to enhance the effectiveness of the council as a body and as that body works with the employees of the city. The council is committed to Robert’s Rules as a guideline and the city’s transparency ordinance.

“The council will explore and conduct training as to governance, conduct of meetings, and open meetings compliance, and encourage appointed officeholders to participate in such opportunities.

“The council will explore standards of decorum and civility for its meetings.

“The council will work with the city manager for the development of an onboarding process for new elected and appointed officeholders. The council will set expectations for self-accountability, individual commitment to one another.

“The council will consider whether use of outside resources is of benefit to this process, including resources from CVMIC, and the executive branch of the city, facilitators or other resources.

“The council’s commitment to this plan is ongoing, which the council will address at subsequent meetings.”

During a recent followup interview, Dawsey Smith said she has, since April, tended, when returning to open session from closed, to be the individual chosen by the body to make official statements because, she said, “I kept track of the motion.”

Likewise, following the council’s most recent meeting, held Tuesday, the body moved into closed session to once again, according to the agenda, hold a “discussion regarding complaints received by the Human Resources Department.” The session was, again, attended by a representative from the Human Resources Department and an “employment attorney.”

Following Tuesday’s closed session, City Manager John Weidl, responding to questions from WhitewaterWise by email, said he was presented with a letter from the council in response to a complaint he had lodged on Sept. 26 through the city’s Human Resources Department, regarding “the conduct of Alderperson and Council President Jim Allen,” which was, according to Weidl, exhibited during his scheduled leave of absence to spend time with his newborn daughter.

Within the letter to Weidl, which was signed by each of the seven council members, the body said it met to discuss “the concerns that you expressed in your Sept. 26 complaint focused on the conduct of Alderperson and Council President James Allen. Human Resources Manager Sara Marquardt brought your complaint to us as she properly recognized that she lacked authority to address your concerns.

“The council recognizes that your leave was very important to you, your newborn daughter, and your family. The council likewise recognizes that leave of absence situations may recur in the future as you continue your service to the city. The council also recognizes that there may be circumstances where other employees have the need for leaves of absence, including the use of protected leave under state and federal law. The council’s commitment to you going forward is to respect the boundaries that you establish regarding your authorized leaves of absence. Those boundaries were important to you during your leave to support your family and newborn daughter, and those boundaries should be respected.”

Within its letter, the council noted that it believed the “existence of the chief of staff position will help avoid similar situations in the future as the chief of staff can be contacted by individual alderpersons in your absence.”

Additionally the council wrote: “We also want you to know that this situation has given all of us good reason to deliberate with one another and to focus on our efforts individually and as a body. As a body, we are undertaking significant efforts to address how we operate. We will involve you in those efforts where your time and support can best be applied. Efforts you will see from us as a body include commitment to professional decorum and civility in our meetings, relying on Roberts Rules of Order as proper guidelines, compliance with the transparency ordinance, exploring trainings involving governance, conduct of meetings, and compliance with open meetings laws, and use of outside resources as needed to help the Council. We hope that the actions that you see from us will enhance the relationships that we have with you while also helping us set forth the council’s collective expectations of you.”

Within his email, Weidl said he conveyed his concerns to council and the city’s human resources department regarding his planned leave, and interactions he found concerning between members of the council and city staff, in two letters.

In a memorandum to council sent by Weidl on Sept. 9, referenced as “addressing persistent challenges and actions for better governance in Whitewater,” Weidl wrote that he was hoping to address “pressing matters that are affecting my ability to serve effectively as the city manager of Whitewater.”

Weidl began his memo by listing what he described as responses made under his leadership by city staff to meet “significant community need,” citing “bringing an ALDI store to Whitewater,” along with efforts underway made in collaboration with the Whitewater Grocery Co-op,” which, he wrote, would be “integrated within a new downtown development.”

Additionally, he pointed to his leadership, while serving as the city’s interim manager, regarding an “educational and informational tour for a pivotal referendum,” which, he noted, gained 65% approval from voters, allowing for the establishment of a full-time 17-member Fire and EMS department.

Further, he said, he oversaw the “optimization of staff workflows, technological upgrades and the clearance of a backlog of pending projects.”

Weidl wrote: “While we’ve made significant progress, ongoing challenges threaten our focus on Whitewater’s advancement. It’s not just me; several staff members have expressed unease regarding the conduct of particular council members. Case in point, Human Resources has received complaints about one member’s unprofessional behavior, which hinders our united effort to serve the community. This same individual has, on one occasion, threatened my position through a text message. Additionally, the sporadic addition and removal of agenda items without prior discussion shrouds our process in secrecy and unaccountability. Such behaviors, which could be construed as intimidating tactics, erode trust and destabilize our working environment.”

In addition, Weidl wrote: “there has been noticeable micromanagement by some council members towards staff operating under the city manager’s directive. This not only diverts essential resources from approved tasks but also allocates resources on pursuits often based on misrecollections or personal preferences, not actions approved by the body. Additionally, many staff members, seeing the interactions some council members have with me, are hesitant to take on greater leadership or engage in activities requiring attendance at public meetings for fear of similar treatment. This dampens morale, harms recruitment and retention, and hinders our future productivity and prospects. It’s crucial for the effectiveness of our operations that the council trusts the staff to execute the vision and strategy, refraining from minute-by-minute directives. We should work collaboratively, with mutual trust, to ensure Whitewater’s progress.” 

In a second memo, which was sent to the city’s Human Resources Department in September, referenced as “formal complaint regarding unprofessional conduct and violations of maternity leave rights,” Weidl wrote: “I am writing to formally express my deep concerns and dissatisfaction with the actions and behaviors of certain council members, which have not only disrupted the professional environment but have also impinged my family leave rights.”

Within the memo, Weidl wrote: “During a recent CDA meeting, the council president deviated from our city’s codes related to public meetings by selectively distributing materials that were not part of the pre-published agenda packet. This selective distribution not only breaches our commitment to transparency but also places undue pressure on our staff, forcing them to choose between following procedural guidelines and catering to on-the-spot demands. One staff member has already lodged a written complaint with your department, emphasizing the uncomfortable position she was placed in due to the sudden provision of these materials. Such actions erode trust within our organization and compromise our pledge to make all discussions and materials publicly accessible.”

Additionally, and within his memo, Weidl stated that he received an early morning email, at 7:07 a.m., from the council president “requesting me to attend a same-morning, 9 a.m. to 1 p.m., meeting.”

“Despite the potential infringement of my family leave,” Weidl continued, “I felt obligated to oblige.”

He cited a concern that the “same council member is leveraging a future agenda item request that has been placed for discussion on a public agenda previously, only to be pulled from the agenda moments before consideration. The council president added and continues to maintain an agenda item for the hiring of part-time assistance in my office during my family leave and after, citing perceived productivity issues. He has given staff no indication when this item will come before the governing body. This tactic not only undermines my professional capabilities but also forces me to sacrifice precious moments with my newborn daughter.”

Returning to the subject of the early morning meeting, he wrote: “Note that this meeting was several days after the agenda was posted for publication and almost a week after the elected offices saw a draft. Upon my arrival, the council member casually mentioned they assumed it was our regular monthly meeting. This statement contradicts evidence from my chief of staff, who has documented numerous emails to this member trying to formally schedule these meetings, all of which were either ignored or declined.” 

Weidl wrote in September that the “severity” of the incidents had “compelled” him to reconsider “my professional future,” noting that he had taken steps to “initiate my job search.”

Weidl, offering a statement to the media in October, said that while he had become a finalist for a managerial position in another community, he had removed himself from consideration, opting instead, he said, to remain in his position as city manager in Whitewater.

He concluded his memo to the Human Resources Department, by stating: “I urge the Human Resources Department to conduct a thorough investigation into these matters and implement necessary reforms.” 

During Tuesday’s open session meeting, members of the common council received a handout from the city’s human resources director which included a list of Roberts Rules of Order. The council discussed options for engaging in learning opportunities for council members to increase their understanding of the operations of government. Council members expressed interest in continuing discussion and finding ways to pursue educational opportunities during their next meeting.

In a followup email sent to WhitewaterWise, Weidl wrote: “Following the recent session by the Whitewater Common Council, I recognize their steps to address concerns raised by myself and other staff members. This response, though necessary, brings to light the complexities of our current leadership dynamics. The necessity of repeated efforts to bring these issues to the fore suggests areas for improvement in our governance approach.

“While changes in leadership positions are not always the immediate answer, it is essential for any council to continuously evaluate its effectiveness considering staff and community feedback. The preservation of certain leadership roles, despite recurring concerns of the conduct of an individual member, may warrant thoughtful reflection on how best to serve the needs and expectations of our city.

“In my role as city manager, I remain dedicated to fostering a collaborative and respectful working environment. My focus is on ensuring that Whitewater’s governance effectively represents and serves the interests of both our staff and taxpayers. I am hopeful that ongoing dialogue with the council will lead to constructive developments in how we address and preempt such challenges in the future.”