Support the Timberjay by making a donation.
GREENWOOD TWP— After a few residents raised questions about a big increase in pay to a newly-appointed town clerk, supervisors here found an apparent solution: they’ve instructed the town …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account and connect your subscription to it by clicking here.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active, online-only subscription then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you've not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
GREENWOOD TWP— After a few residents raised questions about a big increase in pay to a newly-appointed town clerk, supervisors here found an apparent solution: they’ve instructed the town clerk to redact payroll information that’s part of the monthly meeting packet.
Governmental employee payroll data is considered public information under state law, but township officials here have decided they don’t have to make it easy for their residents to obtain.
At Tuesday’s town board meeting, the town board affirmed their convoluted public data policy passed last year, which put in place a seven-step process when a member of the public requests township information. The process includes filling out a request form, which is standard practice in most cities or townships. But while most governmental units give the clerk, or appointed person, the authority to then release the information, requests in Greenwood then go to the chairman within three days. The chair may then choose to send the request to the township attorney. The chair will then either reject the request in its entirety or approve it in whole or part. If approved, the clerk will collect payment based on estimated hours at $20 per hour, plus 25 cents per page requested. The clerk would then make the approved documents available to the requester. The town board is expected to pass the policy once again at the February meeting.
The concern about payroll stems from information included in public packets late last year, after the town board all but forced the resignation of township clerk Sue Drobac through actions that Drobac found abusive and disrespectful. Among those steps, the board voted to slash Drobac’s pay, from her established salary of $2,316.61 per month to an hourly pay rate of $27 per hour with a maximum of 12 hours a week, equaling a monthly equivalent of $1,404. The clerk had been keeping the town hall office open for 20 hours a week, did other work from home as needed, and attended township meetings. Board members claimed the pay cut was enacted for budgetary reasons, but board members left their own salaries intact.
The board appointed a replacement for Drobac, Debby Spicer, in early September, and payroll reports since then had indicated that Spicer was being paid far more than the board had allowed for Drobac. In fact, the October report indicated that Spicer received gross pay for the month of $2,792.66. That prompted both Drobac and resident John Bassing to request payroll data for September, October and November last month. As of this writing, neither of those requests had been fulfilled, according to Drobac and Bassing, despite their willingness to follow the township’s unusual access policy.
When questioned in an email by this reporter, Town Board Chair Mike Ralston said “the actual month-to-month time spent providing the necessary clerk duties has been in alignment with our goals set previously.” He noted the clerk needed to be trained in, and also needed extra time to prepare for the Nov. 3 election.
Whether the higher pay continued post-election is not clear. In the packet for the town board’s January meeting, the names associated with all the township employee payroll were redacted. When asked about this, Spicer said she was acting “as instructed by the township attorney.”
That’s inconsistent with previous statements by Spicer. In an email on Dec. 1, 2020, Spicer noted that the “part of the treasury report that was omitted contained the net pay information for all township employees. The township attorney has advised that net pay information should not be released to the public, but the gross pay information can be.”