Lynn Haven commission debates, then ratifies overtime payment to city manager after public challenge over possible Sunshine Law issue

The Lynn Haven City Commission on Jan. 14 discussed a public complaint alleging a possible Sunshine Law violation tied to a retroactive overtime payment to the city manager for work at a 2024 Martin Luther King event and then ratified the payment.

A resident, Ryan Scray, told the commission he had filed a public-records request after he was told the HR director had received four approvals for that payment but the records returned only three. “If there was a Sunshine Law violation, that full and open discussion paired with an independent final action all in the sunshine is a proper remedy here,” Scray said, urging commissioners to pull the item from the consent agenda for public discussion.

The city attorney told the commission that while a Sunshine Law violation was not certain, the perception of one could be addressed “by having a full and open conversation.” The attorney also explained that items that ratify earlier decisions are commonly placed on consent agendas but that pulling the item to allow discussion is “procedurally appropriate” when the commission believes it did not get to say its piece.

Commissioner Parnell moved to pull the overtime ratification from the consent agenda so it could be discussed publicly; the motion passed on a roll call vote with all five commissioners voting yes. After several commissioners and members of the public spoke, the commission debated whether the city manager’s contract and the personnel policy permitted overtime or only compensatory time for exempt, salaried employees.

Commissioner Vandegrift read language from the city manager’s contract aloud: “employee would be allowed to take compensatory time off … so long as such time off does not affect the performance of the employee.” He said that, in his review of comparable contracts, most city managers do not receive overtime and that the contract language appeared intended to provide compensatory time rather than overtime pay.

HR Director Hodges told the commission she had relied on a personnel policy that allows the city manager to be compensated for “extraordinary service” and had requested confirmations by email; she said she received three written confirmations and a verbal confirmation and believed that provided enough authority to issue the pay.

Commission discussion ranged from a view that the payment was an appropriate “attaboy bonus” for organizing and staffing the event to concerns that staff procedures and training should prevent any appearance of operating outside open-meeting requirements. Several commissioners said they would treat this as a learning moment and consider contract or policy changes during upcoming negotiations.

On a final roll call the commission approved ratification of the overtime payment to the city manager with these votes: Commissioner Vandergriff — yes; Commissioner Peebles — yes; Commissioner Ward — no; Commissioner Parnell — yes; Mayor Nelson — yes. The motion carried 4–1.

City staff said the episode will prompt clarifications to policy and contract language and that future requests for extraordinary compensation will be handled in the open. The commission asked the city attorney and staff to return proposed language on compensatory time versus overtime for exempt employees during future meetings.