Halbrooks reinstated, suspended with pay pending second appeal
Tommy Halbrooks, director of Public Works for the City of Hartselle, was briefly reinstated to his position Wednesday and then suspended with back pay pending a possible second appeal, according city attorney Larry Madison.
At a Sept. 6 hearing before the Hartselle Personnel Board, Halbrooks and his attorney appealed the termination decision made by Mayor Randy Garrison July 24. The three-member board outlined its official recommendation in a letter to Garrison dated Sept. 11.
Garrison deferred all comments in the matter to Madison who said the board found cause for termination, but because of deficiencies in the procedures that were followed, the board recommended Halbrooks be immediately reinstated.
“The mayor went ahead and gave (Halbrooks) a notice of his intention to terminate him based on having cured these procedural deficiencies,” Madison said. “(Halbrooks is) currently under suspension pending whether or not he appeals this decision.”
If Halbrooks does not appeal for a second time by Sept. 27 at the close of business, Madison said the mayor intends his termination to be effective at that time.
“If he does appeal, the matter will proceed like it did before to a second personnel board hearing,” Madison said.
Madison said new allegations against Halbrooks led to the suspension. These alleged actions were not known before the termination or public hearing.
“There were some matters before the board that were put before the board for consideration that the mayor was not aware of before he actually terminated Halbrooks,” Madison said. “What he’s being terminated on now is based on what has come to light since the previous hearing.”
Madison said he cannot disclose the new allegations against Halbrooks until the possible second hearing before the board. Madison added there is a chance that a solution can still be negotiated in the interim.
According to the two-page letter to Garrison, the board determined proper procedures had not been followed before Halbrooks was terminated.
“Despite Mr. Halbrooks’ employment-at-will status, it is the board’s opinion that the lack of written documented performance issues does not support a termination decision based upon the final incident which involved employee Kevin Beasley. Mr. Halbrooks should have had the opportunity to be questioned by you to defend his alleged actions prior to decision being made to terminate his employment,” the letter reads.
“As it relates to Mr. Halbrooks’ performance during his tenure as director of public works, there should have been notations in his performance evaluations depicting less than acceptable performance, or issues pertaining to his deficient management style, but there were not. On the contrary, Mr. Halbrooks’ evaluations were considered to be average to above average overall for the periods he was formally evaluated and no evidence of an evaluation for the current year,” the recommendation continued. “Therefore, it is troublesome to categorize the final incident involving Mr. Beasley as being very serious, justifying the need to immediately terminate his employment.”
According to the board’s recommendation, immediate termination would be the result of certain circumstances that include theft, fraud, violence or extreme cases of harassment. “This event with Mr. Beasley, along with the lack of performance documentation, increases the chances of litigation liability,” the recommendation read. It also noted that it was “problematic” that signed statements from Public Works employees were obtained after Halbrooks’ termination rather than before, agreeing with Halbrooks’ attorney John D. Saxon, who said those statements would be “classified (as) ex post facto evidence.”
Saxon said he was pleased with the personnel board’s decision, and he and his client intend to appeal the decision and refute the new claims as they come to light.
“I was impressed with the personal board … They listened very carefully, and obviously I was pleased with their opinion. It was well done, well reasoned, and they made valid points,” Saxon said. “The mayor was totally inconsistent with his reasons. He didn’t follow proper procedure. We will have to wait to find out what the claims are, and we will deal with them and try to refute them.”
Halbrooks said he was reinstated Wednesday afternoon shortly after 3 p.m., “written up by 3:15 p.m. and suspended by 3:25 p.m.,” Halbrooks said. “I had no opportunity to correct any deficiencies … if I could (have). Part of the review is to highlight deficiencies and provide an opportunity to correct them. A sensible person would know that you can’t be fully reinstated by a three-member board, written up and (suspended) within 30 minutes. There’s bound to be some labor laws that cover people for that.”
Because the appeal has yet to be filed, a hearing has not been set. Saxon said it is Halbrooks’ decision whether to make the second appeal hearing open to the public.