Council discusses layoff, temporary HR coverage and external investigation after former deputy director raises concerns

Council members and several residents pressed for more detail and fairness around a recent personnel change and an external investigation during the March 3 meeting.

Former deputy personnel director Vicky Brooks told council she was laid off after a council budget amendment reduced the funded amount of her position. “I would further like this council to be aware that based on civil service requirements, my name should be placed on the layoff reemployment list and my name should be placed on the eligibility list for my classifications,” Brooks said during public comment, and she asked the council to review an ethics‑board meeting recording she referenced.

Council members asked administration and legal staff to clarify the timeline and process. City manager Mr. Mattis said HR duties are currently handled by administration with help from department staff while an administrative assistant (Briana Parsons) is on leave; Paige Alderman was temporarily filling posting and filing duties. Mr. Mattis said temporary part‑time placements can be used for up to 120 days under civil service rules and that a fuller determination of HR structure is pending.

City attorney Mr. Albbright and council members described steps to commission an outside investigation recommended by labor counsel. According to the discussion, labor attorney Brandon Fornier declined to conduct the probe himself because of a conflict and identified two independent firms; the first firm agreed but later withdrew due to a scheduling conflict, so the second firm was retained to conduct the review. Council members asked administration to report back and, where possible, present the matter at a future open meeting with any non‑privileged findings.

Council also debated whether all relevant witnesses were interviewed; some speakers and council members said names had been raised that were not interviewed, and Mr. Albbright said he would consult labor counsel about interview coverage and legal privilege. Several council members asked that the next full meeting include a dedicated agenda item so the full council can review any factual and procedural clarifications that are not protected by attorney–client privilege.

Why it matters: allegations about retaliation, civil service placement and interview coverage directly affect employee rights and can expose the city to legal and reputational risk. Council directed staff and labor counsel to pursue an independent investigation and return with available factual updates.

What’s next: administration said it will consult labor counsel, seek answers about witness interviews, and present available non‑privileged information at a future meeting; council members encouraged submitting questions in advance so staff can research responses.