E- mail broke no law, ethics attorney says. McMenamin wants to discuss matter at retreat. Tennant labels flap 'political retribution'

By MONROE ROARK
mroark@TheCitizenNews.com

The ethics complaint filed against Peachtree City Councilman Dan Tennant has been withdrawn. Meanwhile, the attorney advising the city's ethics board said Tennant had not violated the state's open meetings laws.

Councilwoman Annie McMenamin, who filed the complaint, said she withdrew it so the controversy could be discussed in a more “open and hopefully productive forum.”

As a result of her withdrawal request, the committee investigating the complaint against Tennant will no longer function. Tennant Monday afternoon forwarded to The Citizen a message from City Manager Jim Basinger which said that the process would stop due to McMenamin's withdrawal, on a recommendation from attorney Andrew Whalen III of Griffin, the ethics committee's city-appointed advisor.

The group met for the first time last week and set April 12 as the date for a public hearing, but that has been cancelled.

An unrelated ethics complaint against City Attorney James Webb is still active.

Whalen sent a letter to McMenamin Monday saying that he could not find in the ordinance any reason that her withdrawal might be prohibited.

He added that, while he considered McMenamin's original complaint to be in good faith, he planned to advise the committee that he did not feel Tennant's e-mail transmissions constituted a meeting according to Georgia law.

“The term `meeting' means the gathering of a quorum of the members of the governing body, pursuant to call, at a designated time and place at which public matters will be presented or considered,” Whalen wrote. “By definition, this excludes chance discussions which may result whenever two or more members discuss public matters.”

“Why in the world did Mrs. McMenamin not ask this fundamental question before she put me, my family, and our community through this turmoil?” Tennant wrote in a letter to be published Friday.

“Amazingly, even though the ethics complaint had been pending for two weeks, with one ethics board meeting convened, it took just five hours after being notified of [my] intention to compel testimony at my hearing that Ms. McMenamin coincidentally decided to dismiss her complaint,” Tennant wrote. “Is it possible the mayor and McMenamin were reluctant to answer questions under oath that might arise on the subject of open meetings? As my good friend Steve Brown would say, draw your own conclusions.”

The Citizen Monday afternoon received a faxed copy of a letter by McMenamin. Her letter, along with a letter from Tennant, will appear in its entirety in Friday's Peachtree Citizen Review.

In her Monday statement, McMenamin said she wished to make certain that “the public has full knowledge that the complaint was neither frivolous nor political in nature.” Tennant said in a statement last week that he was “defending myself against a frivolous, politically motivated ethics complaint.”

McMenamin said in her letter that Tennant told her after he was sworn in that he wanted to get along with everyone and be included in the “inner circle,” where council members discuss in advance what happens at the next meeting. She said she told him that does not take place, because it would violate the open meetings law.

Tennant scoffed at McMenamin's charge. “I got elected because I wasn't a part of the `inner circle,'” Tennant said.

She also charged that Tennant attempted to solicit the vote of another council member, whom she did not name, to “orchestrate the decision concerning the selection of the city attorney in February.” Councilman Robert Brooks missed both February meetings and, with McMenamin on the record as abstaining from any vote concerning present city attorneys Webb, Stuckey and Lindsey because of her daughter's employment there, McMenamin said only two votes would have constituted a majority on that issue.

“This prompted Councilman [Carol] Fritz to recommend an ordinance where it would require three votes (a majority of council) to pass any motion,” McMenamin wrote.

This episode, combined with the ensuing e-mail that led to the ethics complaint, led McMenamin to wonder about Tennant's motives compared with his campaign promises, she added.

“While I may have philosophically disagreed with the mayor and fellow councilmen from time to time, prior to Jan. 1, I never doubted their personal integrity or desire to serve in the best interest of Peachtree City,” she wrote. “Unfortunately, this is no longer the case.”

McMenamin said that she has always intended to discuss the city's ethics ordinance at the City Council's retreat this weekend, regardless of how the committee ruled on this issue.

Tennant had his own view of McMenamin's motives. “One can reasonably conclude her reaction is attributed to political retribution for criticizing the city attorney and/or mayor's actions on the Steve Brown libel case,” Tennant said. “Or for not going along to get along with regard to appointing the highest bidder for city judge. Or for not going along to lift the annexation moratorium. Or for having the audacity to write a free speech ordinance. Again, draw your own conclusions.”

McMenamin and Tennant have both expressed interest in running for mayor next year when Lenox steps down.