Misapplication of Public Policy Involving Public Officials - Demolition by City Government on Private Property Which Increases Property Value of a Public Official's Relative

House demolished by the City of Scottsboro due to being an unsafe structure located at approximately 602 E. Willow St., Scottsboro, Al. (Google Earth photo 2014, Fair-Use rights for non-profit news reporting)

UPDATE - March 22, 2016 - Cost List of Demolition of Homes in Alabama and across the nation are listed. For this area the cost are listed for a similar structure's cost runs from $5500 -  $7500.00. That does not include leveling the property, reseeding and mowing for half a year. Cost estimates do not consider disposal of asbestos containing shingles or other hazardous materials such as lead pipe. Utilizing the demolition list estimates, this property's demolition and reconditioning would be near $12,000 for this area. 

http://www.hometowndemolitioncontractors.com/demolition-cost/building-demolition/house-demolition

Misapplication of Public Policy and Law by Scottsboro City Officials - Abatement of Public Nuisances on Private Property by Demolition or Repair, not in accordance with the laws of the State of Alabama Regarding 11-53B MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY TO REPAIR OR DEMOLISH UNSAFE STRUCTURES. Which may be found at  http://alisondb.legislature.state.al.us/alison/codeofalabama/1975/coatoc.htm

Results of the Public Nuisance, Unsafe Structure file inspection regarding the Gross property located at approximately 602 E. Willow St., Scottsboro, Al..

1) When viewing the file the appropriate Alabama Code citation was misstated, 11-53A was utilized in part, that is improper according to the City Attorney as the City of Scottsboro is not a Class 5, 6 or 8 municipality. It is a class 7 in accordance with the 1970 census which the law is based on.

2) There was no itemized list of the property demolition cost, i.e. man hours spent, fuel used, hauling cost to land fill, equipment usage, etc.

3) There was no fixation of cost per resolution of the City Council/governing body as required by law - COA 11-53B-5.

4) There was a city cash register receipt of $3,150.00 but no indication of a check copy.

5) As stated in the City Council meeting the Mayor sent Councilman Smith to Mrs. Margaret Gross in secret, mother of the property owner, and a public official as appointed by Mr. Smith to the Electric Power Board, at Hardees, where they eat breakfast together, outside of the legal process, and offered city equipment, manpower, and resources to her for the demolition of an unsafe house on her property, the demolition increased the property's value.

6) The house which was demolished was an old structure with what appeared to be asbestos containing shingles, there was no test to determine if asbestos was present in the structure.

It is my opinion that some public officials within the City of Scottsboro are attempting to cover up this possible ethics violation and misapplication of public policy and law.

MY THOUGHTS - What a deal, if you're a city official's friend plus public official, you get your unsafe house demolished, hazardous materials disposed, lot cleared, leveled, reseeded and maintained for $3150.00, thus increasing the private citizens property value many times over. Such honest political leaders we have, NOT. Does the city apply this special treatment fairly to everyone as the mayor claims? My inquiries reveal the answer to be NO. This abuse of taxpayer resources may be an ethics violation, reference - "Section 36-25-5 "d) No person shall solicit a public official or public employee to use or cause to be used equipment, facilities, time, materials, human labor, or other public property for such person's private benefit or business benefit, which would materially affect his or her financial interest, except as otherwise provided by law."

All of this came to light when I received a call about a Scottsboro Mowing Crew at the property of Mrs. Gross's daughter on East Willow Street. This resulted in me asking questions about the property and why was city equipment being utilized for the benefit of private citizens. The City council President stated this was all unintentional, as Mrs. Gross said, "I guess this was an accident." referring to the mowing crew taking care of the private property.

BOTTOM LINE - The City of Scottsboro should not be involved in the demolition, repair, or mowing of private property. Repair or demolition of private property is the responsibility of the property owner. If repair or demolition becomes necessary to protect the public from a public nuisance then the work should be contracted out and the city utilize the law to recover costs.

The excuse according to the Mayor, "We do this all of the time is an example of non-accountable political official's excuses. It is my observations the Mayor is not being truthful. Council Member Keith Smith's personal attack on me for bringing this issue forward is a further example of non-accountable political officials, it is Smith who met in secret with Mrs Gross to broker the deal in conjunction with the mayor to purposefully increase the property value of the Gross property. The statement of Smith, "She (meaning Margaret Gross, public official and mother of property owner) didn't come to us we went to her," is remarkable. It demonstrates the extent some political officials in Scottsboro will go to deceive the public and benefit friends and the wealthy while having a lack luster attitude toward the poor and average citizens in Scottsboro, Alabama.

My reporting to the City Council of inappropriate application of law and possible ethics violations has resulted in harassment and false accusations from Council Member Keith Smith when bringing these issues forward. Harassment appears to be an unprofessional, unethical policy practice of city officials. This misconduct trend has carried forth into the application of management policy as it has been applied to the employees of the City of Scottsboro, Alabama. This is indicative of a wider problem involving non-professional conduct and misbehavior of elected and appointed city officials which includes sexual discrimination, retaliatory conduct and harassment.

Is the City of Scottsboro Meeting Legal Requirements of Property Abatement? Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Harassment and Retaliation - Creation of a Hostile Work Environment

Edited & Updated March 16, 2016, Corrections Below

Creation of a hostile work environment. Presentation to the Scottsboro City Council, video below and this personal document memo of my presentation.

March 14, 2015

From: Garry Morgan

To: Scottsboro City Council and Mayor

Everything I am about to relay to you has been provided to me by employees within the City of Scottsboro, Alabama.

1)      It has been my observation due to sufficient evidence presented to me that elected officials of the City of Scottsboro have created a hostile work environment by actively discriminating, retaliating and harassing city employees of the City of Scottsboro. The discrimination has been based on overt attacks relating to gender. There have been numerous instances brought to my attention by Scottsboro City Employees about these acts.

2)      An unlicensed private investigator/personnel board member was hired by the City of Scottsboro to stalk city employees in the attempt to catch them in some nefarious deed. There was no nefarious deed but that did not stop rumors from circulating originating from Scottsboro City Officials about untruthful relationships between employees after duty hours. The private investigator was paid money from the accounts of the City of Scottsboro, tax payer money, I had requested copies documents titled report of investigation and /or investigative summaries. These reports were not a restricted law enforcement file. The officials of the city of Scottsboro refused production of those unrestricted documents. A violation of the Alabama public records disclosure law. A State Attorney General complaint has been filed.

3)      It is my opinion the photographing of city employees and the subsequent harassment by elected and appointed officials violates the laws of this state. Namely aggravated stalking because a sexual advance was denied; that multiple official personnel participated in this unethical and inappropriate behavior. Photographs and untruthful statements were then circulated based on the unethical/improper report of investigation to those in city hall who had no business nor reason to be involved in the mayors ordered improper investigation.

4)      Informants within the City of Scottsboro have provided me with the photographs and now I realize why you did not want the photographs released nor the documents related to the very unprofessional, questionable probable untruthful report. It demonstrates nothing except the unprofessional conduct of those who schemed to harass, slander and retaliate against a female employee who rebuked the sexual advances of a city official.

5)      But this is not all, the same employee was subject to further harassment by city officials by having pictures of her breast area shown around city hall.

6)      The employee was suspended in a retaliatory action, pay was lost. To avoid legal action the female employees pay was reinstated and her attorney fees paid without the approval of the city council. It is my belief that this act was unethical, that the city council should have met in an executive session to discuss the matter and returned for a vote, This did not happen

7)      Another employees has been subjected to harassment and discriminatory action, this employee has not been made whole again and is involved in a legal action with the Mayor of Scottsboro as a defendant. This employee should have been made whole. Apparently pride and poor judgement has stood in the way of good sense and better judgement.

8)   It has come to my attention that some citizens are having their lawns manicured, their dilapidated property demolished at the citizens of Scottsboro expense. The area of concern is located just west of Byrds Pawn Shop and in between the Century House. What is the authorization for this lawn care of the “taxpayers dime?” Apparently this has been occurring for at least 1 and ½ years. Others in the city have reported they cannot get their limbs or trees damaged by wind picked up but apparently there are special people who receive full service treatment. Can someone explain?

Video of lawn care by city employees. Photos by Google Earth of Abated Property

Issue of Property Demolition Fixation of costs as described by the  Code of Alabama, one of two choices, regarding fixation of costs both are similar in structure.

1st choice - Pertaining to Class 6 Municipalities, Scottsboro is a Class 7 Municipality because in 1970 Scottsboro was not at the same population of today. Welcome to the crazy State of Confusion we call Alabama. The city classification requirement is based on the census population of 1970, not the current population. "Section 11-40-12 Classification of municipalities. (a) There are hereby established eight classes of municipalities based on the population as certified by the 1970 federal decennial census..." If todays census data was utilized Scottsboro would be a class 6 municipality. 46 year old, outdated law having detrimental effects on government today.

Section 11-53A-4 (Reference, does not apply to Scottsboro - unfortunately upon review of the city's demolition and abatement file of this property, reference was made regarding authorizations regarding this property's abatement and demolition actions.)

Adoption of resolution fixing costs of removal of unsafe building or structure; fixing of costs to constitute special assessment and lien against property; notice and filing of resolution.

Upon demolition and removal of a building or structure, the board shall make a report to the governing body of the cost. The governing body shall adopt a resolution fixing the costs which it finds were reasonably incurred in the demolition and removal and assess the costs against the property. The proceeds of any monies received from the sale of salvaged materials from the building or structure shall be used or applied against the cost of the demolition and removal. Any person, firm, or corporation having an interest in the property may be heard at the meeting concerning any objection he or she may have to the fixing of the costs. The city clerk shall give not less than 15 days' notice of the meeting at which the fixing of the costs are to be considered by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city. The fixing of costs by the governing body shall constitute a special assessment against the lot or lots, parcel, or parcels of land upon which the building or structure was located, and shall constitute a lien on the property for the amount of the assessment. The lien shall be superior to all other liens on the property except prior recorded mortgages and other prior recorded security interests and liens for taxes, and shall continue in force until paid. The city clerk shall mail a certified copy of the resolution by registered or certified mail to the person last assessed for ad valorem taxes, and a certified copy of the resolution shall be published in the manner and as prescribed for the publication of municipal ordinances. A certified copy of the resolution shall also be filed in the office of the judge of probate of the county in which the city is situated.

(Acts 1992, No. 92-572, p. 1182, §4.)

Applicable law Section 11-53B-5 (also 11-40-30 thru 36 which is similar in requirements.)

Fixing of costs.

Upon demolition or repair of the building or structure, the appropriate city official shall make a report to the governing body of the cost thereof, and the governing body shall adopt a resolution fixing the costs which it finds were reasonably incurred in the demolition or repair and assessing the same against the property; provided, however, the proceeds of any moneys received from the sale of salvaged materials from the building or structure shall be used or applied against the cost of the demolition; and provided further, that any person, firm, or corporation having an interest in the property may be heard at the meeting as to any objection he or she may have to the fixing of such costs or the amounts thereof. The clerk of the municipality shall give notice of the meeting at which the fixing of the costs is to be considered by first-class mail to all entities having an interest in the property whose address and interest is determined from the tax assessor's records on the property or as otherwise known to the clerk. The fixing of the costs by the governing body shall constitute an assessment against the lot or lots, parcel or parcels of land upon which the building or structure was located, and as made and confirmed shall constitute a lien on the property for the amount of the assessment ("the final assessment"). The lien shall be superior to all other liens on the property except liens for taxes, and except for mortgages recorded prior to the creation of the lien for the assessment, and shall continue in force until paid. A certified copy of the resolution fixing the final assessment shall also be recorded in the office of the judge of probate of the county in which the municipality is situated.

(Act 2002-522, p. 1355, §5.)

Section 11-53B-5 Fixing the costs apparently applies to Scottsboro since the City's classification was decided in 1970, 46 years out of date.

There appears to be 4 steps in the demolition process. - 1) Property is declared unsafe, needs to be demolished. 2) Demolition or repair takes place. 3) Governing Body, which is city council, who has control over budget and financial resources, fixes the price of the demolition or repair. 4) City Clerk shall post notice.   Those are the steps which fit the City of Scottsboro. I have never heard the governing body of our city fixing the price of demolition.

 Mr. Smith admits in the video he and the Mayor made decisions on the demolition of the Gross property by offering choices which were not up to them to make in accordance with the laws of the state. Eating breakfast with his friend, Ms. Gross, is not an excuse to circumvent law. A question must be asked, how many other instances of preferential treatment have been given which are undisclosed due to improper and unfair application of law and policy. How much is this preferential treatment to friends or family costing the taxpayers. Mr. Smith and the Mayor may attempt to create as much subterfuge and call me a liar as many times as he wants. It will not stop me,  since I ran against him for public office I have been threatened, harassed and intimidated, for 8 years.

Smith's petty accusations will not stop me from supporting Sunshine/Open Government and Accountable Government. Go ahead Ms. Gross, Smith and Potter, intimidate away, all appointed or elected officials I might add.

The good people of Scottsboro deserve accountable government, not secret backroom deals benefiting individuals not the taxpayers. 

Citizens 8 Characteristics of Good Governance (Fair Use Rights for non-profit news reporting from Global Development Research Center)