Stayton awarded $57,000+ annually by water board

During a continued Daleville Water Works and Sewer Board, Inc. meeting Monday Nov. 21, a full board consisting of City Council members Scott Moore and Marvin Wise, plus former council member and now Water Board Chairman Bob Slagle, Board Member Joshua Robertson and Board Member Patrick Sullen awarded newly appointed Water Superintendent Jayme Stayton a $38,000 annual salary, plus yearly benefits of $5,312.64 and an annual retirement of $14,060—all totaling $57,372.64. However, Moore voted against the measure and Wise abstained.

Stayton was appointed the Water Superintendent during the Nov.15 Water and Sewer Board meeting that was recessed and completed this week.

Moore questioned the large increase in salary and benefits to be paid to Stayton, considering the previous superintendent, former mayor Claudia Wigglesworth, only made $24,000 annually. Moore told the Sun-Courier that she was paid the lower amount because while she had much managerial experience, she did not have water system experience. Wigglesworth also received no additional benefits.

In a September board meeting it was suggested by board attorney that the mayor be appointed water superintendent and then the board conduct an application process to make sure a qualified person held the position, which manages a multi-million dollar water and sewer system and budget.

However, it appears that Stayton never submitted an application or resume for the position and was appointed and his salary determined without such documentation ever being presented to the corporate board. The Water and Sewer Board is a completely separate entity from the city.

A certified letter dated Sept. 20, 2016 was sent to Stayton by then Water Board Chairman Moore on behalf of the board. The letter states, “There is a Daleville city ordinance that requires the mayor to serve as the superintendent of the Water and Wastewater Board. The ordinance is not without conditions as the board is governed with bylaws, which have requirements that must be met.

“Based on the opinion of the board attorney (Henry Steagall III) and in light of the governing documents, I request that you complete the attached job application and submit it with your resume to me before October 18, 2016. Also attached is a copy of the superintendent job description. At a later date, you will be required to be interviewed at a public meeting of the board.”

None of those requirements were met. The letter was received by Stayton and signed for by him per the postal verification form. A copy of the letter and the certified receipt form was provided to the Sun-Courier by Board member Wise.

When the Sun-Courier asked Chairman Slagle if it’s okay with him to hire a superintendent and pay a $38,000 salary plus benefits without receiving an application or resume’, he said, “Correct.”

When the Sun-Courier asked Wise why he abstained from voting for the superintendent’s salary, he said he should have now that he realizes no resume or application was provided after a formal request had been made, referring to the aforementioned certified letter.

Moore also contacted the attorney and each board member via email prior to this week’s meeting and in that letter stated, “Here are my thoughts. We have already budgeted the superintendent's salary at $24,000 for this coming year (as well as the past four years). As the budget is already set, I don't see how we as a board, charged with the CORRECT management of the board's money, can justify changing that current salary. I have been informed that the mayor is asking for an increase to $38,000 plus benefits…That is an exorbitant amount over what has been budgeted.

“Without a resume or application, we have no idea right now about the mayor's qualifications. So what we do know is the past history—he worked as an unskilled laborer for the city/water board twice before and quit both times.

“Considering all this I suggest that we approve the budgeted $2,000 per month compensation only for the remainder of this fiscal year as that was the budget. This would allow the mayor a chance to prove himself in the next few months and then negotiate compensation for the next fiscal year. The superintendent can propose an increase during next year’s budget process.”

The majority of the board, however, per their votes did not follow Moore’s suggestion.

“At the end of the day, I do not believe the members of the Water Board did their fiduciary duty to correctly handle the board’s money, as is their charge,” Moore said to the Sun-Courier following Monday night’s meeting.