One of Iredell County’s top administrators was demoted yesterday, apparently after confirming that she has become involved with a county commissioner.
Effective Dec. 4, Deputy County Manager/Finance Director Susan Blumenstein, who has worked for the county for more than 23 years, is no longer the county’s deputy manager – but she will retain her position as finance director – because of her relationship with Commissioner Ken Robertson.
Blumenstein’s salary was cut by more than $11,000 a year, according to the county’s human resources department. Her new salary is $117, 543.
County Manager Joel Mashburn did not confirm the relationship between Robertson and Blumenstein yesterday, saying only: “Mr. Robertson has not talked to me about it.”
Mashburn said that the county has a policy that prohibits a person in a supervisory role from dating someone within his or her own department. But the policy, Mashburn said, does not specifically address relationships between elected officials and staff. “In the circumstances you’re talking about, it would not be clear,” he said.
In a phone conversation with the Report on Thursday, Robertson said that while the couple did not “make a public spectacle of” their relationship, they also didn’t make a conscientious effort to be secretive about it.
In fact, he said, the two of them – both of whom are unmarried – “individually and independently” approached County Attorney Bill Pope before they went out.
“At some point in time, Susan and I decided that instead of just talking, it might be nice to go out,” Robertson said. “We asked the county attorney, he reviewed the county policy, and he said that he saw no reason why we can’t see each other socially.”
Before that, Robertson said, he and Blumenstein had not so much as “sat down and eaten a sandwich together.”
Even after receiving assurances from Pope that they wouldn’t be violating county policy, Robertson said, at least three weeks passed before he and Blumenstein went out. He said he could count on one hand the number of times they’ve been out since. This past Sunday, he said, they together attended a church program about “a person’s spiritual journey after a devastating life experience.”
Robertson said after talking to Pope that he approached Marvin Norman, who at the time was chairman of the county commission. “I told him before we went out,” Robertson said, “and he said if it was okay with Mr. Pope, it was okay with him, and that’s it.
“We were not in violation of county policy,” Robertson said.
When asked how, if at all, the relationship has influenced any of his decisions, Robertson said: “Susan is not a policy-maker. The county manager enforces the policies. Susan, as deputy county manager, reports to the county manager, and everything goes through the county manager.
“We (as commissioners) are not allowed to give staff direction,” Robertson said, adding that the board of commissioners has authority only over the county manager and not the deputy county manager.
But while the deputy county manager may not enforce policies, the question remains: Does the position have the potential of influencing policy? And if so, would that therefore render it inappropriate to have a relationship with an elected official? Tell me your thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
35 comments:
Sounds like another bad piece of legal advice from Bill Pope. First he rubberstamps the county's ridiculous purchase price of the golf course, and the laughable lease back to the seller. Now he's rubberstamping a county commissioner dating a top county official. Nice going Bill. What are we paying you for anyway?
The last time I saw anything about Ken Robertson was (if I'm not mistaken) an article depicting him and his happy family raising goats. I didn't know he was unmarried. Not that it matters, just an observation. Personally I have no use for Ken as in my dealings with him I found him to be a smart ass. I was really hoping he wouldn't get re-elected.
As for Pope's advice, it is stated that he said they could see each other socially. Dating and seeing someone socially are two entirely different definitions. Another way of putting it would be friends or romantically involved. Sounds like terminology has been used to blur the facts.
Even though I don't care for Ken, I do have to say that being a public official and having your personal life scrutinized really sucks. There is no division between work and home.
This is a test of our county's ethic responsibility to the taxpayers.
Here's a link to the Statesville Record & Landmark's article:
http://www2.statesville.com/content/2008/dec/05/deputy-manager-steps-down/news-local/#comments
Damn for $11,000.00 a year this lady could have hired a YOUNG stud.
Any lawyer worth their salt would have advised strongly against this, most likely doing a CYA letter on top of that. Why? Because of all the nightmarish scenarios that can occur down the road, putting Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer on the line to foot the bill, say, if a sexual harrassment lawsuit was ever filed by this woman if their relationship goes south and she starts feeling picked on or not promoted fast enough, or whatever. Sorry.
Was she next in line for manager position when Mr. Mashburn retired?
Were they dating when the commissioners voted on her salary?
Just another cover up. Mashburn, Pope, and some of the commissioners have a lot to cover up these days. Unfortunatly for them, their paper trail is littered with gross errors and costly mistakes. The day of reckoning is approaching. Thanks Jaime
Two different reports on the same subject matter. So was she demoted, or did she step down. There is a big difference in the two.
Need accurate info. Either the Report is wrong, or the Record Landmark is wrong. Would not suprise me if they were both wrong as they both have been in the past.
Its a personell matter so nobody probably knows for sure. Both are probably just reporting what they've been told. I'd bet its somewhere in the middle.
It's no wonder people don't want to run for elected office. You got the news an know-it-alls like on here that pry into there personal lives.What these two are doing is neither a violation of the law,policy,or morally wrong. I know Robertson somewhat an your right he is somewhat of a smart-ass,but he is a nice guy with high morals. I know Blumenstein also an she is a fine lady,an does a great job for Iredell Co. There going out together will not cost the taxpayer's one dime. SO LEAVE THEM ALONE!!!!
It seems to me that they both dealt with it in an appropriate manner and the County Manager did what needed to be done. Good for all three!!! At least the parties were proactive in their thinking and not having to respond after some bad press like the Town of Mooresville.
Yankee Bob
this looks like it is a BAD situation to me; power, love, deceit. In a business this would be grounds for immediate termination of both employees.
"But while the deputy county manager may not enforce policies, the question remains: Does the position have the potential of influencing policy? And if so, would that therefore render it inappropriate to have a relationship with an elected official?"
Pry into personal lives? Sorry but once you run and make it in public office your life is no longer as private as it once was. They know this and run anyway. If you can't stand the heat, there's a way out of the kitchen.
If Mr. Robertson would get his personal life together, he might be one of the most effective commissioners Iredell has ever had. He has some rough edges, but, no one can argue that he doesn't do his homework (unlike many before him).
As for Ms Blumenstein, she is a top-notch finance officer that the county could not replace at her current salary. We are lucky to have her.
They sound like they tried to do everything on the up-and-up. I don't see a problem.
I'm all for love, but not when the pillow talk may come at taxpayer expense.
we all make choices in our lives.
poor choices do lead us to difficult consequences.
elected officials must be held to basic ethical standards. the taxpayers demand it without question.
I have no doubt that both are good at their jobs. however, that is not the concern. the true concern is when you begin to blur the lines between setting policy and influencing the setting of policy; as well, making recommendations to the board and influencing the making of those recommendations to the board. do you understand the ethical violation being presented?
i am afraid the consequences here will be quite severe.
for those who don't see the problem, i assume you took no issue with bill clinton disrespecting the oval office or terminology technicality in the 1990's.
I have lost respect for mr. robertson.
At least they were out in the open about it. I know of another public official who is notorious for sleeping around while being married. He has been re-elected several times.
"sleeping around" is not the issue... the issue is the relationship with the deputy county manager / finance director and a commissioner.
Who "leaked" this? And what was their motivation? I don't believe in coincidence. Is there somebody who's sore with Robertson for a stance he's recently taken on an issue? Anybody got any thoughts?
11:21... I understand the basis of the complaint. The fact is that ALL government decisions are made by the uppers who eat together, party together and look out for each other. Realistically, most major decisions are influenced by the needs of a few.
As 11:30 pointed out, the only thing that happened here was that somebody was pissed off about them being together. My first guess would be the ex. Don't know, don't care. Point is that this shit goes on all the time and is only a "moral" issue when somebody gets pissed off and blows the whistle.
That is why I mentioned the individual who is morally off the charts with his sleeping around while married. Ever consider who is on the inside on that and what influence his behavior has on what he wants and what he gets politically? There all kinds of favors owed in that situation.
Read in the Charlotte Observer today that Mecklenburg's going to be taping all closed minutes. That's at least one way to stop any hanky panky going on in the board room. If these officials know they're being taped and the tapes will one will become public, they'll think twice about throwing their weight around behind closed doors. Then, it won't matter as much who they're friends with or dating or anything, because the tapes will tell all.
I suspect that both these individuals are intelligent and above reproach and more than able to keep their jobs separate; however, it's important, for their own sakes, to avoid the look of wrongdoing. I hope nothing comes back to bite either one in the ankle later.
I'm all for recording all of the closed meetings of the county and the city. Is that not being done already?
I doubt if either is biting one another in the ankle??????
The Town of Mooresville records all Board of Commissioner meetings as well as any closed meetings. All recordings are done by the Town Clerk, and are in her charge. Regular board meeting recordings are available anytime from the Town Clerk. You will need to call her for directions on how to access. Any closed session recordings and minutes are also kept by the Town Clerk, but are restricted.
The Planning Board regular meetings are also recorded. They have no closed meetings. Those recordings are housed at the Planning Department in the Town Hall.
All other TOM advisory boards and committees take minutes and submit written minutes monthly and would be filed by the Town Clerk,also.
Call TOM at 704-663-3800 and ask for the Town Clerk for any assistance.
Should have previewed the last comment. Sorry for any miscommunication. There are no closed meetings, closed sessions are only possible during open meetings that have have been properly advertised
Can anybody coroborate weather its true that Town of Mooresville taperecords all meetings of the board of commissioners (closed & open)? And if so when did they start doing this? Anybody know? Also what kind of technology are they using to do this? This sure is news to me!
How about the county? Are they taperecording meetings? I know their meetings used to be televised but I haven't heard anything lately.
Who gives a F_ CK?
Looks like somebody's feathers got all ruffled up at the idea that people may want to actually know what is being said in secret "closed session" meetings. BTW, 4:01, if ToM is taping their "closed sessions", they sure have been quiet about it.
Jaime Gatton can verify that the recordings do exist. Do your thing Jaime.
If it's true and there are tapes, then several people's goose is as good as cooked (the RATS to be more specific). And rightfully so.
Well if tapes were enough to sink a president, I'm sure they'll be enough to sink a few local politicians who've been greasing their own palms in one way or another in closed session!
People, why do we care who is doing who, the problem here is a failure to commit to honesty. If there is a problem face it, handle it, and take care of it. Sorry we are dealing with government (defined as lairs and crooks). Lets stop BSing about it and do something about it.
Post a Comment