MONROE - The City of Monroe is denying all allegations that members of its Salary and Personnel Committee violated state open meeting laws during a closed session of its meeting on Sept. 10, 2013.
On Wednesday, Gregg Gunta, the city's attorney in the case now pending in Green County Circuit Court, filed the defendants' answer and defenses in response to the complaint filed by District Attorney Gary Luhman earlier this year.
Luhman's complaint, filed for the State of Wisconsin, centers on allegations that the city did not give proper notice of the meeting, particularly by the wording - or lack of words - on the publicly posted agenda regarding the intent of the closed session portion of that meeting.
The case began with a complaint to the D.A. office from a former city employee, Alan Eckstein, after he was fired, effective midnight Sept. 12, 2013, from his job as the city's water utilities director.
The defendants are also requesting a substitution for the Lafayette County judge, William Johnston, assigned to the case.
In denying the allegations, the committee members are asking the court to deny any entitlement to relief for the plaintiffs and any forfeitures of between $25 and $300 each against the defendants, Aldermen Brooke Bauman, Reid Stangel, Charles Schuringa and Louis Armstrong.
As part of its demand for relief, the State of Wisconsin is asking the court to declare the committee's dismissal action as void, and the Monroe Common Council's vote as insufficient to uphold the action.
Gunta submitted the defendants' contention that the committee met "for the sole purpose of exercising its power, duties and authority" outlined in the city code, "none of which include power and authority to terminate an employee, officer or department head, such as was (Eckstein)."
Eckstein "was terminated properly by a majority vote of the City of Monroe Council on Sept. 17, 2013, under city code," Gunta continues.
He also stated in the list of defenses that the Monroe Common Council was vested with the authority, by city codes, to terminate Eckstein's employment "by ratifying the termination action of the Salary and Personnel Committee," taken on Sept. 10.
Gunta listed other points of defense for the committee members, such as: No violation was committed knowingly or intentionally; that the named dependents acted pursuant to advice of counsel; and that the committee did not comprise a quorum of council members.
The list included that the committee members are entitled to discretionary and legislative action immunity and that the acts of the individual defendants are protected by the First Amendment.
Eckstein had submitted his motion to intervene as a party to the plaintiff in February, and is seeking to be reimbursed for his attorney fees in the matter. Gunta denies Eckstein is entitled to any compensation, reimbursement or relief.
Furthermore, Gunta alleges the "State of Wisconsin appears to be acting as a surrogate for Mr. Eckstein and his counsel, presumably because Mr. Eckstein through his counsel has waived any right of action against the City of Monroe, and thereby its officers, agents and employees pursuant to an email from Attorney (Aaron) Halstead to the City Attorney (Rex) Ewald dated Wednesday, 4/24/2013."
In turn, Gunta is asking for dismissing of the case and "awarding them (the defendants) costs and reasonable attorney's fees."
The court has set its second status conference in the case for 1 p.m. June 5.
On Wednesday, Gregg Gunta, the city's attorney in the case now pending in Green County Circuit Court, filed the defendants' answer and defenses in response to the complaint filed by District Attorney Gary Luhman earlier this year.
Luhman's complaint, filed for the State of Wisconsin, centers on allegations that the city did not give proper notice of the meeting, particularly by the wording - or lack of words - on the publicly posted agenda regarding the intent of the closed session portion of that meeting.
The case began with a complaint to the D.A. office from a former city employee, Alan Eckstein, after he was fired, effective midnight Sept. 12, 2013, from his job as the city's water utilities director.
The defendants are also requesting a substitution for the Lafayette County judge, William Johnston, assigned to the case.
In denying the allegations, the committee members are asking the court to deny any entitlement to relief for the plaintiffs and any forfeitures of between $25 and $300 each against the defendants, Aldermen Brooke Bauman, Reid Stangel, Charles Schuringa and Louis Armstrong.
As part of its demand for relief, the State of Wisconsin is asking the court to declare the committee's dismissal action as void, and the Monroe Common Council's vote as insufficient to uphold the action.
Gunta submitted the defendants' contention that the committee met "for the sole purpose of exercising its power, duties and authority" outlined in the city code, "none of which include power and authority to terminate an employee, officer or department head, such as was (Eckstein)."
Eckstein "was terminated properly by a majority vote of the City of Monroe Council on Sept. 17, 2013, under city code," Gunta continues.
He also stated in the list of defenses that the Monroe Common Council was vested with the authority, by city codes, to terminate Eckstein's employment "by ratifying the termination action of the Salary and Personnel Committee," taken on Sept. 10.
Gunta listed other points of defense for the committee members, such as: No violation was committed knowingly or intentionally; that the named dependents acted pursuant to advice of counsel; and that the committee did not comprise a quorum of council members.
The list included that the committee members are entitled to discretionary and legislative action immunity and that the acts of the individual defendants are protected by the First Amendment.
Eckstein had submitted his motion to intervene as a party to the plaintiff in February, and is seeking to be reimbursed for his attorney fees in the matter. Gunta denies Eckstein is entitled to any compensation, reimbursement or relief.
Furthermore, Gunta alleges the "State of Wisconsin appears to be acting as a surrogate for Mr. Eckstein and his counsel, presumably because Mr. Eckstein through his counsel has waived any right of action against the City of Monroe, and thereby its officers, agents and employees pursuant to an email from Attorney (Aaron) Halstead to the City Attorney (Rex) Ewald dated Wednesday, 4/24/2013."
In turn, Gunta is asking for dismissing of the case and "awarding them (the defendants) costs and reasonable attorney's fees."
The court has set its second status conference in the case for 1 p.m. June 5.