Residents press council over service‑department staffing, firing of longtime employee

A sustained public-comment period at the Cortland City Council meeting focused on personnel and operations in the city’s service department, including the recent separation of a long-serving employee, Michael Smith, and the council’s use of an interim, part‑time contract service director, identified in the meeting as Sean.

Michael Matheny, a resident who identified himself from 352 Old Oak Drive, criticized the decision to eliminate an assistant service‑director position and asked why Michael Smith had not been reassigned when another employee was returned to the service department. Matheny questioned the city’s hiring process and urged the council to review applicants and conduct interviews: "We have a ton of resumes," he said, adding that the council should not allow staffing decisions to be made without council review.

Why it matters: residents said the staffing changes are affecting basic city services such as permits and point to broader questions about oversight and cost. One commenter cited a reported contract cost for the interim service‑director arrangement and questioned its value: as stated by a public speaker, the interim contract was described as costing about $11,660 a month for intermittent work (the commenter framed that as "10 days a month" at roughly $1,166 a day); council and staff did not present a detailed contract breakdown in the public record during the meeting.

Operational concerns and permits: several small-business owners and residents said they were unable to reach the interim service director, reported full voicemail boxes or delayed responses, and linked delays to difficulties getting permit approvals. Commenters said previous staff (including the now‑separated employee) had been a clearer local contact for permit issues. The interim arrangement’s part‑time and remote nature drew criticism; one resident said, "It would be nice to talk to somebody who's here," and asked why the city was not using an in‑office, full‑time director while applicants are reviewed.

Roles and process: the mayor said hiring authority for the service‑director position rests with her office, with council approval required for any employment contract; commenters urged council members to exercise their hiring oversight under the city charter. The interim contract was described as expiring in August; several speakers asked the mayor whether the city planned to continue reviewing applicants and hold interviews before approving any long‑term hire. Council members and the mayor acknowledged they had received resumes but at least one council member said she had not yet interviewed candidates.

What remains unresolved: the meeting transcript captures pointed public criticism but does not record a formal council vote on a permanent hire. The mayor said the matter remains open and that the interim contract will expire in August; she also told commenters that if the city purchases other properties and pursues projects, staff and council would return with specific plans. Residents demanded greater transparency, faster customer service on permits and a clear plan for a full‑time service director who meets job qualifications and is available locally.

A number of speakers urged the council to take a more active role in vetting candidates and to prioritize operational continuity and responsiveness while the city searches for permanent staff.