McFadden cites Town Code to question legal authority of mayor regarding Town personnel matters – But does it really matter?

Royal Examiner has communicated extensively with Joe McFadden in recent weeks on the legal dynamics of his verbal resignation of August 8, and subsequent questions surrounding processes or a lack thereof to make that resignation “formally accepted” and binding. During those communications the former councilman, it appears by recent majority council consensus, raised a peripheral issue that could impact his situation. That issue is Town Code boundaries on mayoral authority regarding personnel matters.

McFadden cited a Town Code Section to question where the line is drawn regarding mayoral authority to accept a council resignation, among other personnel matters the mayor has been involved in, such as his tie-breaking vote on Town Manager Steven Hicks termination.

Council and mayor during open portion of Aug. 8 meeting adjourned to closed session discussion of terminations, leading to a mayoral tie-breaking vote to terminate the town manager (back to camera), leading to Councilman McFadden’s (blue T-shirt at right) verbal resignation in protest of the action without what he felt was supporting evidence of allegations against Mr. Hicks.

“Chapter II, Section 8 of the Town Code of Front Royal clearly states that ‘The Mayor shall have no power to suspend, remove or discharge any officer, agent or employee of the Town, nor shall he have any power or authority to appoint or employ any officer, agent or employee of the town nor to fix the term of office or employment, or the compensation, or to increase or decrease the power and authority of any officer, agent or employee of the town, but the mayor shall have such powers with respect to the Chief of Police, the Policemen and employees of the police force.’

“Did he accept my resignation? It doesn’t seem like he should be able to,” McFadden reasoned of the limiting code language, adding, “The Council would have to vote for it. And they never have. But regardless if they did, the circular argument continues that if they accepted it on the 29th, I had already withdrawn it on the 12th. To not acknowledge my withdrawal and then releasing to the public a statement that they accepted it is logically mind-bending.

“Also, the Town Code Chapter II, Section 8 raises another question – If Mayor Holloway cast the final vote to fire Town Manager Hicks – Was that legal?” McFadden asks of the cited code section limiting mayoral authority on personnel matters inside town hall.

Council on Aug. 8 during a break prior to the fireworks to come. Councilwoman Morris is present virtually on the video screen and Vice-Mayor Cockrell is on her feet off camera.

After several readings of the referenced Town Code Section, we asked McFadden if the language cited might not reference unilateral action by the mayor, as opposed to actions in his role as council chairperson, as in breaking tie votes or accepting an offered resignation to facilitate council action on that resignation.

“I could definitely see that as how it could be interpreted that way. I like limited powers of any particular government branch – the mayor seemingly to be like the Executive Branch, and the council as the Legislative, and Circuit Court as Judicial – with clear checks and balances,” McFadden replied.

We further wondered whether in light of the sequence of events he has cited regarding his verbal resignation on August 8 without mayoral acknowledgement or formal council action, his written withdrawal of that resignation August 12, and council’s formal acceptance of the resignation August 29, would the Chapter II Section 8 wording be of primary relevance anyway.

A bottom legal line may be whether council can pick-and-choose which actions by a member it will acknowledge and recognize, particularly after the fact. Can they, as they appear to have, ignore that member’s written withdrawal of their verbal resignation before they have formally accepted that resignation?

“Processes work, when you follow them,” McFadden observed, adding, “We have Robert’s Rules of Order, which we don’t seem to follow. We have a Town Code, which we also seem to not follow. What is really going on in our Town? We must follow the codes and rules that keep us from once again reverting back to lawlessness. How long until we have another huge scandal like the EDA Embezzlement?” the former and seeking to again be Front Royal Town Councilman wondered at a seemingly cavalier attitude toward procedures and rules emerging in the conduct of Town governmental business.

McFadden reacts to council move to fill his vacant seat – and considers paths forward