Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Litigation Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Athens council votes to pursue binding arbitration in long-running dispute with Glenn Whiting
Summary
After an executive-session review of settlement offers from Glenn Whiting, the council voted 4–1 to pursue binding arbitration with a mutually selected arbitrator and a cap on damages. Whiting had submitted multiple written offers; the council also noted a federal order awarding the city attorney fees in a fireworks case.
The Athens City Council directed staff to pursue binding arbitration as a path to resolve long-running litigation with Glenn Whiting, after discussing multiple settlement documents that Whiting submitted to the city.
Following an executive-session briefing from the city attorney, the council voted 4–1 to authorize binding arbitration with a mutually selected arbitrator and a cap on damages, if Whiting agrees to the arbitration terms. The vote followed presentation of several written offers Whiting had circulated to the city; the materials discussed in the meeting cited figures including $350,000, a separate $75,000 proposal tied to property known as the Pope Avenue building, and a $435,000 “global” offer to resolve multiple matters. The council did not accept or ratify any single offer in open session but approved arbitration as a dispute-resolution path.
City officials said the documents Whiting provided will be retained as public records and that the council had been given prior settlement materials submitted in 2024 as well as more recent documents. The city attorney advised councilmembers on the difference between reviewing offers in executive session and taking action in open session; after the briefing the council returned to open session and voted on the arbitration motion.
Council members also noted a recent federal ruling that awarded some attorney fees to the city in a separate Fourth of July case; the council cited an approximate combined award of roughly $60,000 in attorney fees in that matter, which staff said was set out in court documents.
Council members who supported arbitration said a binding process could end repeated litigation and limit future costs and staff time. A council member in opposition said arbitration carries a risk that an arbitrator could award damages that the city does not control. The vote authorizes the city attorney and manager to negotiate arbitration details and report back to the council in a public meeting prior to any final agreement.
