Ethics Board advances probe into complaint against Henry County chair

Harrell, reached by phone Wednesday, said the claims are baseless and she will refuse to attend any hearing before the board.

“They can investigate all they want to, but I will not be answering anything that they put out,” Harrell said. “I haven’t done anything wrong and there’s no reason to investigate, because they’ve overstepped their bounds.”

Laurin “Brie” Smith, a former member of Henry’s Ethics Board, filed the complaint this month, alleging Harrell directed the county attorney and county manager to advise employees in the transportation department to disregard lawful subpoenas during the November hearing, putting the staff at risk of “adverse actions.”

Harrell’s directive led to a dramatic interruption of the Nov. 12 hearing, when administrator Gloria Banister told the Ethics Board Harrell was asking that the witnesses leave and return to work. The hearing, which involved a complaint against the county’s transportation director, was postponed when the witnesses followed the directive and left.

Bullard said Tuesday night that state law empowers the Ethics Board to subpoena witnesses to testify and that anyone who refuses to appear can face penalties.

Bullard also noted that state law prohibits Henry County commissioners from issuing directives to employees who report to the county manager.

As evidence of inappropriate conduct, Bullard cited Harrell’s acknowledgment in an interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that she had directed the county manager and human resources director to send employees back to work.

Because Harrell admitted in the AJC interview that she issued a directive to the HR director, who reports to the county manager, Bullard concluded there is probable cause for the allegation of inappropriate conduct by Harrell.

“She did readily admit that she gave that directive,” Bullard said.

Bullard said she did not consider in her preliminary investigation an allegation that Harrell’s directive to remove the witnesses was an act of retaliation against the Ethics Board for removing a friend of Harrell’s from the board in April. Bullard said the board had already heard that allegation at a previous hearing and did not find inappropriate behavior by Harrell.

Harrell told the AJC in the interview that she issued the directive because the entire transportation department had been called to testify. She added the Ethics Board has been overreaching into human resources matters.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Bullard denied Harrell’s claim that the entire DOT had been called to testify in the Nov. 12 hearing.

“Based on the last census that I have of the DOT department, there’s approximately 45 total employees,” Bullard said. “And so between the both of us, we subpoenaed probably nine of the 45, so it wasn’t necessarily the whole department,” or even close to it.

Since early October, at least two HR officials have written memorandums to County Manager Cheri Hobson-Matthews to complain about the Ethics Board exceeding its intended purpose. In an Oct. 30 letter, county attorney Rachel N. Mack wrote that the county has serious concerns about its “perceived lack of impartiality.”

Mack added that subpoenas issued by the Ethics Board are “unenforceable” because the board has not paid “witness and mileage fees at the time a subpoena is served,” placing an “unlawful burden on individuals compelled to appear.”

The Nov. 12 ethics hearing involved a complaint against Scott Morris, the county’s transportation director, and two other DOT employees. Based on the complaint, the Ethics Board found probable cause that Morris may have misused his position, disclosed confidential information and failed to show impartiality in the performance of his official duties.

Attempts to reach Morris for comment Wednesday were unsuccessful.