Mic Smith Photography LLC
The response from Mayor Phillip Pounds regarding the Island Eye op-ed is a classic example of deflection—appealing to personal integrity rather than addressing the substantive concerns raised by the community and council members. It does not erase the core issue: Pounds acted outside his authority in a hiring process that should have been transparent and governed by defined procedures. A few facts & observations:
1. Shifting the Narrative
Pounds claims he “does not have the authority or power to make job offers or discuss any part of an offer or salary.” Yet, the concerns raised were never about a formal job offer—but rather about inappropriate involvement long after hiring a search firm, the application slate closed, and selecting/scheduling three highly qualified candidate finalists from 79 applicants that all followed the process. He improperly initiated discussions with Mr. Kerr without council authorization, circumventing the process, and added a candidate at the end that should have followed the same unbiased process. A level playing field ensures all candidates are considered fairly, within the established timeline, and with proper council approval.
2. Contradicting His Own Claims
Pounds acknowledges he initiated discussions regarding Mr. Kerr’s candidacy with many council members after final interviews had been scheduled with the three finalists. Some of the discussions likely violated Administration Committee quorum rules. This contradicts his assertion that he played no role beyond what was appropriate. If he played no role, why was only one candidate fast-tracked into the process now? He states there was council agreement to add the candidate – that is false. He acted unilaterally and without authority, despite his attempts to claim otherwise. Pounds, as Chair of the Administration Committee, added Mr. Kerr to the process without a vote of council and scheduled the interview.
3. Executive Session Confidentiality
All information in the IEN Op-Ed was communicated by Pounds outside of executive session during his initiated calls or is public information. He does not dispute accuracy but criticizes the leakage of information from the executive session. Transparency is precisely what prevents backroom dealings from eroding public trust. The problem is an unfair and irreparably corrupted process that’s being questioned. Why is there so much concern about the public knowing as much as possible about hiring the most critical position in our administration? Instead, the minimum amount of information is being disclosed to the public, which has been met with multiple FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests that may not be fulfilled until after hiring is complete.
4. Attacking the Messenger
Instead of addressing the substance of raised concerns, Pounds dismisses criticism as “noise” and labels it defamatory. However, legitimate scrutiny, facts, and opinions are not defamation; it is democracy at work. To demean or minimize any resident’s concerns as “noise,” no matter how much you disagree, is a disservice to the community. If the reporting is truly baseless, Pounds could refute it with clear documentation rather than broad accusations.
5. Integrity
Integrity is not about how loudly one defends it—it’s about actions. Pounds should be asking why his handling of this critical matter has prompted so much pushback. The community deserves leadership that values transparency and fair play to all. Integrity is a standard that must be upheld through actions, always and with everyone.
Following the candidate interviews on February 13th in executive session, the Council veered way off the stated agenda. It should not have happened. Pounds made representations regarding his actions, and council member Miars confronted him with his own words from a Pounds-initiated phone call to Ms. Miars. When exposed, his response? Profanity. He hurled the F-word at her. Then, council member Hahn, who sits next to Miars, launched into a verbal tirade of such volume and physical gestures that I’ve not witnessed in over 40 years of professional meetings. Ms. Miars felt threatened. Pounds, as chair of the meeting, did nothing to control the outburst. The meeting ended in chaos. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated instance of behavior; it’s escalating at each outburst and has created possible workplace safety concerns. What’s also startling is that Pounds wrote his rebuttal after the actions he took (or didn’t) at this meeting. (You can watch a clip from the meeting below or at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkxgXWpzABc).
Regarding “open doors,” we should have no doors with the public, where we act differently on one side or the other.
