VARNELL, Ga. — Varnell Mayor Anthony Hulsey reinstated Police Chief Lyle Grant Tuesday morning, but 15 minutes later Grant didn’t have a police department to work for.

The City Council voted 3-1 to dissolve the police department “effective immediately,” leaving 10 officers in limbo and Hulsey and City Manager Mike Brown left to figure out what to do next. Mayor Pro Tem David Owens voted with council members Andrea Gordy and Jan Pourquoi to dissolve the police department. Council member Ashlee Godfrey voted against the measure.

“I’ve already spoken with the (Whitfield County) sheriff’s office to help us out with law enforcement coverage until we get this thing resolved,” Hulsey, who questioned the legality of the vote, said following the meeting. “We are trying to get this straightened out.”

Both Hulsey and City Attorney Terry Miller had questions about the legality of the motion to dissolve the police department and the vote, as only an executive session was listed on the meeting’s agenda. When asked what he meant by “straightened out,” Hulsey said he hopes the city will continue to have a police force.

“That means that we are trying to see what we can do to keep the police department,” he said. “We are looking to see what we can do to maintain our police department. This thing wasn’t thought through, in my opinion. We are having to look and see what we are needing to do — providing coverage and securing the city of Varnell.”

Hulsey said the mayor has veto power over the City Council, which he didn’t exercise Tuesday. He indicated that might be an option to use at the next council meeting, which he said is tentatively scheduled for July 25.

“There are actions … I have veto power, and I am working with Terry Miller right now,” he said. “We are going to look at all of our options. Everything has been brought up at this point.”

Owens said the council members could re-vote to override a veto.

“If he does, then I think the council has the opportunity to have another vote and I would assume we would vote the same way,” Owens said. “I think change is hard on some people and not welcome by a lot, but as time goes on they will see this is a good move for the city of Varnell.”

Whitfield County Sheriff Scott Chitwood said the people of Varnell will still have law enforcement protection.

“It isn’t going to affect us in any way,” Chitwood said after Tuesday morning’s developments. “We have always had a presence in the Varnell area, and that will not change. I don’t think that the people of the city of Varnell will see any change. We will adjust accordingly, but we are already patrolling that area and the city of Varnell and I don’t anticipate a major change in our protection for the citizens of the county.”

Grant, who attended the meeting in street clothes with his attorney Marcus Morris, had been put on paid administrative leave by Owens on June 28 for his handling of a domestic call at the home of former councilman Sheldon Fowler, who resigned following the incident.

After coming out of a 37-minute executive session, Hulsey, who typically only votes in the event of a tie, made a statement reinstating Grant immediately. After Hulsey read his statement, Pourquoi proposed a motion to dissolve the police department, enter into a contract with the county commissioner to provide dedicated patrols in Varnell and hire a “community organizer” with the savings from the police department. The motion was seconded by Owens, who joined the meeting by phone.

“As a citizen of this city and as a taxpayer of this city, I am absolutely appalled at the decision of this council that I helped elect, made this decision to do something of this magnitude to its citizens,” said Bill Morgan, who attended the meeting and spoke. “This is absolutely the worst thing I have seen a city do. I don’t understand it. I don’t understand where you are coming from. We have a good police department. We have good officers. We have a great chief. We have a lot of good things going on in this city and you are dissolving it. I can’t believe it. The citizens of this city need to be at the next council meeting and they need to be asking questions of our council members. This is absolutely insane.”

Business, not personal

Pourquoi said his move to dissolve the police department wasn’t a vendetta against Grant, whom he verbally rebuked when Grant was put on paid administrative leave. Instead, both Pourquoi and Owens said ending the police force has been something consolidation advocates and many taxpayers have told them they have wanted.

“A lot of people in Varnell do not believe we need a police force in Varnell,” Pourquoi said. “We have a police force we already pay taxes for called the Whitfield County Sheriff’s Office. There is no reason, other than creating employment, which is not the government’s business. We can take that money and get bigger bang for the buck for the citizens of Varnell. Are we breaking an old mold? Yes, but sometimes that needs to happen. This idea has been here a long time, and current events really have just set the spark to make it happen.”

Owens agreed.

“I sat on the consolidation commission and I saw a lot of benefits. I saw a lot of great benefits,” said Owens. “We are not going to have four or five people, but we will have the benefit of a dedicated officer in the city of Varnell. We will free up some programs for quality of life and other programs.”

Sgt. Pat Hayes — who along with the three other full-time employees of the department is on paid leave as a result of Tuesday’s vote, Hulsey said — said the citizens will lose and the decision to dissolve the police force is political grandstanding.

“This was out of the blue and totally unexpected and it will have very negative consequences,” said Hayes, who has worked for the police department since 2006 and has 23 years of experience. “This is something that should have been left up to the people and not three mad, vindictive council members. As good as the county (sheriff’s office) is, they simply can’t provide that same level of protection or respond as quickly to the north end of the county like we can. This is a political action that shouldn’t be taken. It is vindictiveness and I don’t see their motivation.”

Owens pointed to savings as his motivation. According to numbers provided by Brown, the police department was budgeted for more than $307,000 in salaries and expenses for 2017. He said the liability insurance for the city has increased by more than $25,000 in recent years because of officer-involved lawsuits.

Pourquoi said he hopes other area governments will follow suit.

“I hope it serves as an example for the other municipalities. … We are already paying tax dollars for the sheriff’s office and we should use that rather than duplicating services all over the place.”

Just because the police department has been dissolved by the council doesn’t mean the ticket you got last week doesn’t have to be paid. Hulsey said a person who got a ticket Monday night would still have to come to court if they wanted to contest it.

And as of now, he isn’t giving up on having a police department, saying he would make sure that everything would be in storage until the situation plays out as he tries to figure out a way to save the police department.

“At this point, I have not made a decision without meeting with Terry,” Hulsey said. “My biggest concern is getting police protection for the citizens of Varnell. I don’t know how long this thing is going to drag out.”

In the meantime, Miller said he and Hulsey will open a conversation with Chitwood to see what options are available. At that point, Miller said he would hope to pursue an agreement with the county. County Commission Chairman Lynn Laughter said it is too early to know what an agreement would look like.

“I don’t know a lot at this point,” Laughter said. “The sheriff has agreed to take over patrolling that area. I don’t know what Varnell will have to do. We may be talking about an intergovernmental agreement to reimburse the county for sheriff’s protection. This is so sudden, I didn’t see this coming, and there are a lot of issues we will have to look into. It surprised me.”

County Administrator Mark Gibson said he will let the Varnell administrators and Chitwood handle the negotiations.

“We will look at what Varnell wants as far as services and see what we can do,” Gibson said. “As far as what something like this would cost, I can only guess at this point.”

Proper legal notice?

Prior to the meeting, no agenda was posted at City Hall, and the agenda provided after the meeting by Brown — which he said was the one given to the council members — did not list any business other than an executive session, the subject of which was not listed. Under Georgia’s open meetings law, an agenda should be publicly posted and can be changed to include new business if a government body votes in open session to do so.

There was no motion to discuss new business before Pourquoi made his motion to dissolve the department.

After the vote, Hulsey raised the subject with Miller, and Miller said he didn’t have enough information at the time to say if the open meetings law had been violated.

David Hudson, legal counsel for the Georgia Press Association, said the law allows for items not on the agenda to be addressed when it “becomes necessary to address” the matter during a meeting. Miller was contacted after the meeting and after the Daily Citizen-News received the agenda and was asked if the motion was legal since the agenda wasn’t amended to include new business.

“That is a good question. You recall where there was a portion where the mayor asked me that question,” Miller said. “Of course, I didn’t have the notice. I was at a loss to really give them and I told them I didn’t know the answer. I am concerned about it, and the mayor has specifically asked me to look into that.

“I have looked at the agenda and I have reached out to a colleague with the Georgia Municipal Association as well,” Miller said. “I will have an opinion about that in fairly short order. We are working on that, and that is a good question.”

During the meeting, the debate between council members was loud with some talking over others. Three times during the meeting, Hulsey told Pourquoi to let others finish. Miller and Pourquoi jousted when Miller said he was giving Gordy some clarification on a legal point after the vote and Pourquoi said he was trying to get Gordy to reconsider her vote.

“You just can’t ignore a vote all of a sudden,” Pourquoi said.

“Listen, Mr. Pourquoi. You can’t sit here and run the meeting,” Miller said. “It is the mayor’s responsibility. I am sorry, I have some duties here. Miss Gordy has a right. I am not trying to (inaudible) and your suggestion, you are not going to do that to me. We have a ton of things that impacts, that have legal aspects to it, and three of you have just voted to do something that impacts the charter, contracts, personnel …”

“If anybody wants to challenge it, they can do so,” Pourquoi said. “It is a legal vote.”

Miller said afterwards he wasn’t trying to take sides.

“I don’t mean to disparage any side on this,” Miller said. “That is not my role, but it is to keep the legal affairs of the city straight. Having a properly called meeting to discuss things is part of that role. I didn’t know ahead of time that there would be a motion to do this. We just don’t want to do things wrong. Former city officials have already called very, very disturbed. I think you will see some political reaction to this and there may be people who may challenge it.”

One of those former officials is former council member Brent Newsome, who served on the council from 2010-13.

“I question whether Mr. Pourquoi can make a motion when it wasn’t on the agenda, and I think a lot of people will be digging into this,” Newsome said. “I think that is very much a discussion we need to have in our community. I very much think we need a police department. This hasty decision with no public comment and no public input is unacceptable. I am glad I am not in the middle of this one. It makes me angry to see what we worked for for four years, Mr. Pourquoi seems to want to destroy that.”