Newspaper Page Text
The Champion, Thursday, June 25 - July 1, 2015
LOCAL
Page 17A
Mayor
Continued From Page 10A
not be spent for local events—
not eligible—which he wanted
to be, to berating me in an
executive session over the res
ignation of [name retracted],”
Garrett continued.
Garrett also mentioned
other incidents in which Da
vis allegedly berated her in
meetings, and “pressured”
her to do the “wrong thing”
when he allegedly asked her
to bid out batting cages at a
local park, “Of which the con
sensus of the council was not
to pay for batting cages until
after the master plan for Mur
phy Candler Park.”
“When I refuse [Davis]
steps up his anger towards
me,” Garrett stated.
Garrett also said a staff
member and council member
told her that Davis stated that
she “would be gone soon.”
“I received a very positive
performance evaluation and
this was presented to me by
the mayor and council on Feb.
10,” Garret stated. “The mayor
said I was doing an excellent
job and that ‘we want to keep
you.’ Since the evaluation, I
have experienced negative be
havior towards me.”
In a response to the email,
Davis wrote to former city
attorney Tom Kurrie that
he was “saddened to find it
necessary” to respond to the
email.
“But, I simply cant let
these incendiary statements
go without the facts being
presented,” Davis wrote. “Ma
rie’s email to Rick discloses
several executive session
items to which Rick was not
a party. I believe this may be
in violation of the charter and
ethics policy but I leave that
matter to you.”
Davis said when he was
shown the email, more than a
month after it was written, he
approached Garrett and asked
her why she wrote it. Davis
claims she said to him—in
front of Kurrie, he added—
that Councilman John Park
told her that Davis was trying
to “set me up over franchise
fees.”
“She had gone to lunch
with John [Park] a week or
so prior to her writing the
memo,” Davis stated. “She
went on to say that she had
heard of second- and third-
hand conversations that I was
‘going to fire her.’ I do not
have the sole authority to fire
her and do not engage in ru
mor mongering.
“For Marie to give these
as her first reasons for the
things she says in her email is
evidence as to her motivation
and points to the lack of ve
racity shown in its contents,”
Davis continued.
Davis detailed the inci
dent where Garrett alleged
that he hired an employee.
Davis said his hiring an em
ployee was not true.
“I do not know how to
conduct a hire for the city, did
not direct anyone [on] staff to
hire [said employee] and did
not sign her checks,” he wrote.
Davis also said in his let
ter to Kurrie that he did not
berate Garrett, and said Gar
rett’s statements regarding the
batting cages were not true.
Garrett’s email also in
cluded the sexual harassment
complaint that two city em
ployees made against Davis.
The employees told Garrett
that Davis sprayed a can of
Lysol at one of the employee’s
buttocks.
“I have since reported it to
[Park] on March 6 and again
to [Kurrie] on March 17,” she
said. “This is unacceptable be
havior and I believe that [Da
vis] took liberty and crossed
the line doing something that
I consider to be sexual harass
ment. This has become and
continues to be a hostile work
environment.”
Davis denied spraying the
can at the employee’s buttocks
and said the incident was a
“silly joke that elicited laugh
ter” from the two employees.
“But, obviously I now
realize the laughter was more
of an uncomfortable nature
for which I have obviously
apologized,” Davis wrote. “Af
ter they spoke to Marie, Marie
did not bring it up to me to
let me know that this incident
made them uncomfortable.
When I asked Marie why she
gave an opinion in her email
that she considered this ‘sex
ual harassment’ she said she
thought it could be.”
Davis added that he
asked Garrett if the employee
claimed to have been sexu
ally harassed, and Garrett told
him no.
Davis said Garrett’s uses
phrases such as “demeaning
behavior towards me” and
“hostile work environment”
is how she reacts to different
opinions or criticism.
“In the past while refer
ring to other individuals, Ma
rie has used terminology such
as, [This person is] “beating
on me,” “harassing me,” “be
rating me,” “demeaning me,”
etc.,” Davis wrote. “It has been
pointed out to Marie that she
risks clouding real issues by
using terms and phrases that
are inappropriate to the facts
at hand.”
NOTICE OF PROPERTY TAX INCREASE
The Mayor and City Council of the City of Lithonia has tentatively
adopted a millage rate which will require an increase in property taxes
by 2.98%.
All concerned citizens are invited to the public hearing on this tax
increase to be held at City Hall, 6920 Main Street on Tuesday, June
23,2015 at 10:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. A third public hearing will be
held at City Hall, 6920 Main Street on Monday, July 6,2015 at 6:30
p.m.
This tentative increase will result in a millage rate of 17.000, an
increase of 0.492 mills. Without this tentative tax increase, the millage
rate will be no more than 16.508 mills.
This proposed tax increase for a home with a fair market value of
$36,000 is approximately $24.00. The proposed increase on non
homestead property with a fair market value of $70,000 is
approximately $48.00.
NOTICE
The Mayor and Lithonia City Council do hereby announce that the millage rate will be set at a meeting to be
held at the Lithonia City Hall, 6920 Main Street, Lithonia 30058 on Monday, July 6, 2015 at 7:00 PM and pursuant to the requirements of O.C.G.A. Section
48-5-32 do hereby publish the following presentation of the current year's tax digest and levy, along with the history of the tax
digest and levy for the past five years.
CURRENT 2014 TAX DIGEST AND 5 YEAR HISTORY OF LEVY
COUNTY WIDE
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Real & Personal
$ 26,674,180
$ 20,765,829
$ 19,375,805
$ 17,690,700
$ 20,095,784
$ 22,214,312
Motor Vehicles
$ 1,582,040
$ 1,615,590
$ 1,690,000
$ 1,853,380
$ 1,554,440
$ 981,640
Mobile Homes
$ 176,149
$ 176,149
$ 117,094
$ 117,094
$ 93,990
$ 93,990
Timber -100%
Heavy Duty Equipment
Gross Digest
$ 28,432,369
$ 22,557,568
$ 21,182,899
$ 19,661,174
$ 21,744,214
$ 23,289,942
Less M& O Exemptions
$ 565,746
$ 545,059
$ 562,008
$ 552,462
$ 526,915
$ 536,850
Net M & O Digest
$ 27,866,623
$ 22,012,509
$ 20,620,891
$ 19,108,712
$ 21,217,299
$ 22,753,092
State l-orest Land Assistance
Grant Value
Adjusted Net M&O Digest
$ 27,866,623
$ 22,012,509
$ 20,620,891
$ 19,108,712
$ 21,217,299
$ 22,753,092
Gross M&O Millage
13.178
15.205
16.552
17.869
17.869
17.000
Less Rollbacks
Net M&O Millage
13.178
15.205
16.552
17.869
17.869
17.000
Total County Taxes Levied
$367,226
$334,700
$341,317
$341,454
$ 379,132
$386,803
Net Taxes $ Increase
-$7,920
-$32,526
$6,617
$137
$ 37,678
$ 7,671
Net Taxes % Increase
-2.11%
-8.86%
1.98%
0.04%
9.94%
1.98%