City manager proposes administrative safeguards after conflicting accounts about building-department meeting; commissioner denies allegations

City Manager Jerome Fletcher told the Northport City Commission on Feb. 24 that staff will add procedural safeguards for any future in-person development-services interactions involving anyone representing a commissioner’s private business.

“This is not, in fact, a fact-finding request,” Fletcher said, introducing the item. “It’s not a determination of credibility nor is it an accusation of misconduct. … This item is for discussion and transparency purposes only.”

Fletcher outlined three proposed measures: require two city employees (one preferably a supervisor) to be present for such in-person interactions; require interactions to be documented in writing as they occur; and notify the commission when a permanent application bears a commissioner’s name so the process is transparent.

The discussion followed conflicting accounts about a Jan. 23 interaction at the building department. The staff email that circulated to commissioners alleged that an engineer representing an applicant had invoked a commissioner’s name and “forcefully and publicly insisted” that building-division staff were wrong. The email’s assertions prompted a sharp response from the commissioner named in the message.

Commissioner Demetrius Petro said the accusations were false and read from sworn affidavits. “I did not instruct them, and they did not invoke my name,” Petro said. He called the published email “half truth or lies” and said staff should have corroborated facts before circulating the message publicly.

Engineer Tim Drumm, who was named in the email and who addressed the commission during public comment, said he was present at the building-department counter on Jan. 23 but denied the more serious allegations. “Based on their own city staff present at this meeting, Kyle Hoffman refused their accusations they made about me,” Drumm said, referring to a staff follow-up email that disputed the original account. Drumm urged the commission to “search out the truth and take appropriate actions against the party or parties involved making these false and slanderous statements.”

Other commissioners and members of the public described the episode as damaging whether or not a law was broken. Commissioner Stokes warned that resolving competing accounts through a full investigation would require time and taxpayer resources; Commissioner Duvall urged procedures that protect staff and preserve public trust. “If one of us breaks the law, it should be addressed the same way any citizen is addressed,” Duvall said.

Several staff members’ email exchanges and a timeline of events were cited repeatedly during the discussion. City officials framed the proposed safeguards as structural protections for employees and for the integrity of permit processing rather than punitive measures.

The commission did not authorize an outside investigation or disciplinary action at the meeting. Commissioners discussed the possibility of a formal investigation, and Petro said he would not oppose an inquiry if the body chose that course.

The discussion closed with a mix of calls for greater transparency, reminders of legal limits on commissioner-staff interactions, and public commenters urging the commission to avoid ad-hoc responses. City Manager Fletcher said the proposed administrative steps are preventive and apply equally to any commissioner; he asked staff to implement them going forward.