Councilman contends no confidence in Florence mayor
FLORENCE — Florence City Councilman Buddy Brand said first reading of a bill at Monday’s regular council meeting is a vote of no confidence in Mayor Stephen J. Wukela, but the first-term mayor begs to differ.
Two readings are required for a measure to be adopted by council.
Brand alluded to an ordinance to amend the city code to update the rules and order of business to be used by Council under the council-manager form of government. The update is designed to bring the rules more in line with the model rules suggested by the S.C. Municipal Association and to address and clarify inconsistencies that have developed over the years.
The amendment would:
- Give Council the ability to choose its own presiding officer.
- Identify the specific version of Robert’s Rules used by Council.
- Clarify the procedure for voting on motions and “putting the question” to resolve issues previously experienced by Council.
- State a clear purpose for the rules and regulations.
- Clarify the process for setting the agenda.
- Update the ordinance to clearly set the schedule for regular meeting in compliance with the actual practice that has been used for many years.
- Bring Council’s rules into line more closely with the model rules suggested by the Municipal Association.
“I think these seven targets hit home on every issue that we discussed,” Brand said. “This bill will allow council to choose its own presiding officer. And I think the key to this action, without a doubt, is a vote of no confidence in the mayor.
“Five council members voted for it. What we’re saying in essence is we don’t feel like we’re being led in the right direction,” he said. “This ordinance would have never come to be if we felt like council was being run in accordance with normal rules and regulations. Council is being run as a courtroom, not as a council chamber. This is a peoples’ venue, not the Supreme Court, Congress or anything else.”
Brand said Council is supposed to operate as a council-manager form of government. In this form, all members have one vote each and make their suggestions to city ,anager David Williams, who runs the city with Council’s direction.
“The mayor has made it a strong-arm mayor form of government,” Brand said, “and that’s not what we are.”
Brand also alluded to Monday’s marathon meeting.
“I think it’s pretty clear that a seven-hour meeting is uncalled for,” he said. “I think the shortest meeting we’ve had since the new council took over is four hours. There’s no call for these meetings to last that long. And to top that off, we’re not getting the peoples’ business done.”
“The people elected me to be their mayor and their chairman of city council,” Wukela said. “At Monday’s meeting, an ordinance was offered by some members of council that included a discussion of the council’s ability to pick another member as chair. It was also coupled with limits on the members’ ability to debate under Roberts Rules of order.
“I regarded that, frankly, as a somewhat veiled attempt to intimidate me in response to my position and my opposition to non-partisan elections in the city,” he said. “In response to that contention of mine, Council assured me that they had no intent of making any effort to replace my chairmanship and also agreed to pass a repeal of the original non-partisan ordinance.”
The original ordinance was passed by the prior city council and didn’t stipulate a date. Another ordinance proposed by the current city council was to set a date.
“That last non-partisan ordinance is the subject of controversy and has never even had a vote on the first reading,” Wukela said. “It was the vote of Council at Monday’s meeting to repeal the original ordinance that started all of this, which would in effect moot the second ordinance. So it would put us back to where we were before the non-partisan issue was ever brought up.”
Wukela also took note of Monday’s long, drawn-out meeting.
“That meeting had on the agenda every controversial issue known to man,” Wukela said. “We muddled through all that.
“I really do think this council is going to be able to move forward now on a much more congenial basis and get the work of the city done even more efficiently. I just know that’s the desire of the constituency, my desire and I believe the desire of Council. I think now that we’ve got all that under our belt, we can move forward.”
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
educated in SC, I am always amazed when people who don’t know what they are talking about, start calling people they don’t even know names. If you read my post you will notice that I do watch City Council meetings, and look at my last post and you will know that I read the minutes also. As for Joining these organizations. I will not give money to United Way because not enough of my dollar went to charities. So I give direct, I do not need a middleman and I want my donation to go local and where I see fit. I have belonged to The Boys Club, 4-H, FFA, I have donated time to the YMCA I have also belonged to the American Legion. And all these organizations have great goals and mission statements, But each chapter is only as good as the people running them. And I to applaud people who get involved in them, as long as it isn’t for personal gain or a photo op, Which so many times with politicians it is.
Justa Reader, you are absolutely right the Mayor failed the motion, but what you forgot to mention was that it needed a 2/3 majority to pass, so the Mayor was correct in his actions. I would suggest that instead of relying on a newspaper account, that maybe you go and read the actual minutes of the meeting. You will also notice in the Minutes of the meetings it mentions who is present at the meetings and one of the people present is the City Attorney, whos job it is to correct any miscues or illegal activity. You will also note that it was the four council members that lost their motion who dragged this issue on for a long time and then called for a special meeting to drag it on for another day. Now as for the last meeting and why it took so long. I have mentioned before that there are a few council members that like to ramble on. I can almost guarantee that the Mayor and several other members of the council would love to tell these people to keep on the subject or to shut up. But if they did, these persons who ramble would start crying about how they are not being allowed their freedom of speech. And as for the 5-2 vote, the mayor is still the head of the council because the citizens of Florence voted him into that position, Not the City Council…. PS if I didn’t watch the meeting, how did I know about Ed’s “Holding the Black Man Down” speech. I didn’t watch all of it but I did watch a lot
Rodlucci: Seriously! Pee in the cup! Show me that your clean!
Judging someone’s character instead of addressing their behavior is a sign of weakness. If you don’t have the words to communicate without using terms that slander ones character, then learn to. Obviously I don’t need to answer your question “What are you talking about?“, because your behavior exhibits your disapproval. Your behavior is less than professional! Just because one does not think the same as you is a sign of freedom. If you must resort to calling names and judging character, perhaps you should read up on leadership. If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
I am representing myself and I am not in politics, nor am I Mr. Brand as you referred!
“If you refuse to be coerced, you won’t be. If you stand your ground calmly without loosing your temper or succumbing to undue pressure, you can win. In the end, it’s the hammer not the anvil that breaks!”
.... I would have to agree with the comment from one of the other bloggers that “Red Dog” and “Big Blue” are from the same kennel… I would like to encourage you both (and several others) to actually WATCH a city council meeting on tv, READ a city council article in the news paper, and then GET INVOLVED in city organizations such as The United Way, Boys and Girls Club, CHOICES, etc. If you did… you would see that Buddy Brand and several other members of the city council have done tremendous things for these organizations and the city of Florence. I applaud their efforts! For the city’s sake I hope Wukela will change his ways.
Rodlucci : I hope that you are regularly drug tested for your job! What are you talking about?
Buddy Brand is trying to make a name for himself .. and idiots like you are chiming in like fools! (Are you Buddy Brand?)
Don’t worry about the leadership with Florence! It’s never been stronger.
When some of the old school “let’s do it the way we’ve always done it” councilman realize that things have changed, then Stephen can get back to doing his civic job .. leading this town in a direction that it needs to be lead!
Leadership needs support to be successful and leadership must earn success just as it earns respect! Respect is not given; even in an election….it is Earned! Leadership is only as strong as its weakest link…..the lack of leadership causes dissention in the ranks. True leadership challenges, but does not manipulate. Leadership turns individual contributors into group contributors.
If the manifestation of no confidence arises…..it is due to the lack of leadership!
I mean that you should take a look at where all the public money sunk into the downtown development corporation actually goes. Weren’t they supposed to be finding private funds? Where are they? Why do we need another master plan? Where is all this money going and what are we getting for it?
And as far as the cops and firefighters go, you’re right. My question is why didn’t Brand and Powers bother to read the budget until they were asked to vote on it? How much more time do they need to “study the issue” until our public safety needs can be met?
It’s easy to “say” you support cops and firefighters. Everybody “says” they support public safety. But actions speak louder.
And One Vote, my recollection is that Brand and Powers are for the police, the fire station, and removal of abandoned buildings. They just wanted to look for outside sources for funding before simply voting in a tax increase. It makes sense to me. The Feds are giving money away hand over fist right now. The only one against hiring more police was Ed Robinson.
You have insinuated before that someone is lining his own pockets. Just what do you mean?
OK Reddog, I’ll play along with you. Here are the dates.
The meeting where Wukela was going on and on and ultimately ruled that 3 beat 4 was in February of 2009.
By Dwight Dana Morning News reporter
Published: February 9, 2009
“...A motion by Councilman Bill Bradham to set a date failed… Voting for it in addition to Bradham were councilmen Buddy Brand and Steve Powers and councilwoman Ocatvia Williams-Blake. Voting against were councilmen Ed Robinson and Billy D. Williams and Mayor Steven J. Wukela.
The meeting in which Ms. Williams-Blake stated that the Council does not have leadership is the one held last Monday (August 10, 2009) and is currently being replayed on TV. Watch it and see.
No one can blame you for not watching it because it is about 6 hours long. One of the reasons the meeting is 6 hours long is because Wukela, the current Chair, does not know how to run a meeting. An example of what I am talking about is exactly what you are complaining about with Robinson going on and on. If Mr. Wukela knew how to run a meeting, he would stop the off-subject diatribes and focus the council’s attention to the business at hand. Maybe Wukela prefers 6 hour meetings in order to limit witnesses so he can rule that 3 beats 4.
As I said in my earlier post, “If Wukela was not wasting so much time and determining that 3 beats 4, he would not find himself in a position where 5 are voting against 2 (Wukela and Billy D. Williams) to remove him as Chairman of the Council.“
Advertisement