Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel And Civil Service topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and council members voice concern about staff turnover after communications director’s dismissal
Summary
Public commenters and council members criticized the mayor’s personnel actions and raised concerns about employee morale after the city’s communications director, Jessica Shantz, was fired earlier the same day, citing repeated staff turnover and calls for accountability.
Several residents used the public comment period at the June 30 council meeting to criticize the mayor’s personnel decisions and to express concern about the effect of frequent staff turnover on city operations.
Richard Goodwin said he was “brought here tonight by the mayor's decision to fire Jessica Shantz today this afternoon. The city's now former communications director.” He added the firing was “a disgrace brought on by the mayor's actions.”
Multiple speakers described staff morale and turnover as central concerns. James Bates told council the recall was driven by “a pattern of failed leadership, repeated blind spots, and the clear erosion of trust between Cleveland, city Cleveland Heights City Hall and the very people it serves,” and pointed to high staff turnover and budget process problems. Councilman Cobb said in council comments that “the mayor destroyed the livelihood of our communications director when he fired her and then replaced her with another employee who had circulated a petition earlier in the month in support of the mayor,” and characterized circulation of a petition inside city hall as inappropriate.
Public commentators also raised issues including alleged workplace misconduct, claims about the mayor’s spouse creating an uncomfortable environment for staff, and requests for apologies for comments and behavior the speakers described as problematic. Eileen Rammerman told the mayor, “Mayor Sarin, resign.” Susan Wood and others described the recall and staff dismissals as divisive.
Council members noted earlier formal actions related to staff concerns: the council president referenced previously adopted resolutions including a loss‑of‑confidence resolution (recorded earlier as a 6–1 vote) and a resolution calling for an investigation into an incident involving access to the law department and asking that no personnel moves be made that could be considered retaliatory. No new personnel actions or disciplinary measures were taken during the June 30 meeting; council members called for continued attention to employee morale and for staff protections while any investigations proceed.
