At the behest of associate county commissioner Wayne Willingham, the Cullman County Commission will hold what he is describing as a “special public meeting” to revisit a number of items approved under controversial circumstances last week at a regular meeting that broke down after disagreement among the three commissioners over whether those items — none of which were placed on that meeting’s agenda — could legally see action.

Willingham brought the topic of a special meeting before his two fellow commissioners Tuesday, delivering a letter that portrays the meeting’s purpose, essentially, as a reaffirmation of five measures he and associate commissioner Doug Williams took at the commission’s Oct. 7 meeting, after chairman James Graves had declared proceedings for the day complete and left the room.

The intent of next week’s gathering, according to a notice Willingham had drafted Tuesday, is to “…[F]oreclose any uncertainty or disagreement as to the legality of the authorization of these items at the Commission meeting on Oct. 7, 2010…to consider, memorialize, confirm, ratify and acknowledge its authorization of these items and to consider the other items on the agenda proposed herewith.”

“These items” refers to five items — now disputed in a lawsuit — passed by the two associates at the end of the Oct. 7 meeting, including measures that obligate Cullman County to:

• Adhere to the version of the FY 2011 budget approved Thursday. That budget takes $600,000 out of the county’s reserve funds to cover a projected revenue gap for the coming year.
• Pay the Birmingham law firm of Johnston Barton Proctor & Rose an unspecified amount, but one believed currently to stand at $172,000, for legal work in setting up the SCCD and the GUSC — and to commit the county to cover future expenses incurred by the firm’s retention on the two boards’ appeals to the state Supreme Court in the ongoing lawsuit against them.
• Retain the services of Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. for the posting of a Supreme Court-ordered supersedeas bond of $500,000 as surety against a potentially unsuccessful appeal of the suit, by the SCCD and its co-defendants, before the high court.
• Authorize the SCCD, under contract, to purchase water from Cullman County. The county acquires its resold water from the City of Cullman.
• Retain water department manager David Bussman for five additional contract years.

The “other items…proposed herewith” chiefly refers to a new item involving the commission’s revisitation of a new water purchase agreement with the City of Cullman — never signed — drafted in 2009 as part of ongoing negotiations between the two governments to cooperate on the sale of water to be drawn from the proposed Duck River Dam reservoir project.

The meeting notice provided by Willingham describes “…certain concerns and inadequacies regarding the proposed agreement” and proposes that the county commission should “recommend certain revisions to the agreement to ensure a guaranteed source of clean and safe water for the water customers of the County at the most efficient and economical means possible…”

Also in the notice, Willingham asserted Graves was out of order in the manner in which he dismissed the Oct. 7 commission meeting.

“It is…the customary practice and procedure of the Commission to adjourn its meetings upon a majority vote,” the notice states. “In breach of this customary practice…Chairman Graves attempted to adjourn the Commission meeting on October 7…without the consent of the other commissioners and over their express objection. Chairman Graves’ alleged adjournment was unlawful and ineffective.”

Graves declined to comment Wednesday, stating that he would have more to say about the public meeting at a later time.

Willingham also accused Graves of intentionally excluding himself from participation in the informal preparatory agenda-setting session that was to precede the Oct. 7 meeting,  effectively killing any hope the two associate commissioners had of legally placing the five disputed items on the day’s agenda.

“The inclusion of each agenda item is to be determined by a majority vote of the commissioners,” explains the notice. “In breach of this customary practice, prior to the commencement of the Commission meeting on October 7…Chairman Graves intentionally locked himself in his office to unilaterally prepare his version of the agenda without the input or consent Associate Commissioners Doug Williams and Wayne Willingham. Chairman Graves’ version of the agenda did not include the above-mentioned items, and he later refused to include them on his version of the agenda despite a specific request from…Williams and Willingham…”

The meeting is scheduled for Oct. 19, five days after a hearing set for 9 a.m. today before Circuit Judge Don Hardeman. The hearing is intended to assess the legality of the commission’s actions at the end of the Oct. 7 meeting.

Today’s court proceeding was precipitated by a lawsuit all four candidates for the two open associate commissioners’ seats filed the day after the items in question were added to the agenda and passed. Judge Hardeman granted the plaintiffs’ request last Friday for a temporary restraining order nullifying all five of the items passed by Williams and Willingham in Graves’ absence. That order is effective for ten days, and can be extended if the court is persuaded by evidence and testimony delivered before its expiration.

* Benjamin Bullard can be reached by e-mail at bbullard@cullmantimes.com or by telephone at 734-2131 ext. 270.