On an evening that was set to honor a decade of service from City Manager Peter Grant, the Cypress City Council meeting on Monday ended in mystery as a long-time and respected department head showed up to suggest the city manager should be fired.
Earlier in the meeting, Council member Bonnie Peat said she had just wanted to mark Grant’s ten years of service and gave a glowing account of Grant’s tenure with the city.
Peat provided a series of supportive letters and testimonials from local officials praising Grant’s work. Also, a handful of residents and others turned up to speak for and against Grant’s performance.
Later in the meeting, during the second oral communications period, however, when former Public Works Director Douglas
Dancs showed up to speak, the legal fireworks began. There was no glowing account of Grant’s tenure from Dancs.
Dancs, has been prominent at every meeting in recent years when called on the explain public works projects, etc.
Without explanation, Dancs had mysteriously disappeared from the staff area in recent months with no mention from the city manager or the Council as to why.
He showed up Monday, however, and suggested there was a darker side of the city administration and began spilling the beans as he sees them before the city attorney shut things down.
“After my departure, I waited patiently and never expected to return here,” said Dancs, “but some recent councilmember comments caused me concern,” he said.
“As for the recognition of the city manager (Grant), in my opinion, the City Council should fire the city manager for cause,” said Dancs.
Dancs said he spoke with the authority of 32 years of experience, 23 of which he served as a public works department head, serving under seven different city managers and 28 Council members.
“I speak from deep experience,” said Dancs, as he began.
He said his opinion to fire Grant for cause “stems from alleged unlawful acts of misconduct during my….”
“Excuse me,” interjected Cypress city attorney Fred Galante, loudly and firmly interrupting Dancs in mid-word before he could finish the sentence.
“This is completely inappropriate,” said Galante, shutting Dancs down, saying that “these comments should not be made in a public setting.”
“To the extent you’ve gained some information, Mr. Dancs, that you are now sharing or to the extent that there is anything contained in an agreement, I would caution you not to make those comments OK,” the city attorney said.
Dancs agreed, then appeared to confirm for sure there was some sort of underlying agreement, but did not specify.
“My agreement,” said Dancs, “per recent state law, says nothing that prevents employees from discussing or disclosing information about unlawful acts in the workplace, such as harassment, discrimination or conduct an employee believes violated the law,” he added.
“I respectfully disagree,” said Galante, adding that “I think your agreement encompasses everything you were just mentioning and to the extent there are any future actions, I can understand your comment,” said Galante.
“That is my advice to this Council, to not allow that comment or any further comments to the extent they were gained during Mr. Dancs employment,” said Galante to the Council.
Mayor David Burke paused a moment to think following Galante’s comments, then continued, giving Dancs the option to continue speaking…or not.
“You’ve heard the city attorney,” said Burke to Dancs, “but you’re free to comment. You have your three minutes to use as you see fit.”
“I am not going to continue based on the city attorney’s comment,” said Dancs.
Nevertheless, said Dancs, “I have a First Amendment right. I’m allowed to have opinions. I’m allowed to bring forward what I consider to be misconduct,” he said.
“If he (Galante) is saying that everything I ever learned (during his long employment at the city) is confidential, then I will stop, based on what he’s just said to me,” Dancs said to Burke.
“I provided my suggestion,” said Dancs, “and I’m happy to describe it further,” he said before deciding to give in to the pressure not to say anything further.
Dancs had enjoyed a spectacular career in Public Works leadership for decades in Cypress, as he had done before that in the City of Seal Beach.
“Are you saying he’s not allowed to make a comment,” the mayor asked Galante.
Galante now seemed to acknowledge the existence of an agreement, at least some form of confidentiality agreement.
“There is a confidentiality agreement,” said Galante. “To the extent that he violates it, it’s up to him to proceed and to the extent that any damages result, it is up to the city to consider what actions they may take,” the city attorney told Burke.
Galante’s comments may suggest that whatever is in the agreement is confidential and that it should not be discussed “in a public setting.”
Asked by Burke if they should then retire to an emergency closed session, the city attorney said “you could certainly add a closed session based on information that just arose tonight to discuss this. Whether the council finds it urgent, that is another matter,” said Galante.
‘I’m not going to continue with what I was going to say,” Dancs, said, even though “First Amendment-wise and within my agreement,” Dancs said he thought he had a protected right to speak.
However, “based on what the city attorney said,” Dancs concluded, “I’m not going to continue with what I came to say.”