So a complaint filed by seven well respected area city managers with no political connections to University City was politically motivated? If it is of no consequence why has Mayor Welsch been attempting to hide the issue since it was filed last spring? The ICMA is the only agency with a City Management accreditation program and Walker agreed to the Code of Ethics when he joined the organization. In addition, he agreed to be governed by them when he signed his employment contract with the City of University City, which references the ICMA Code of Ethics and goes so far as to deny severance if a violation should be issued by the ICMA. How can this be politically motivated if the people who reviewed the facts of the case never met him? The Mayor’s blindness to this issue is a disgrace to herself and the City. The Mayor’s statement is as diabolical as Walker’s actions.

Shelley - please stop the insanity! You and Joyce Pumm (also violating Cty Clerk ethical code) are as guilty regarding this situation as Lehman by communicating in such an unethical manner. Lehman has just continued being the worst City Manager I have ever worked for and only by the efforts of others the City is moving forward (aka the development at Westgate and Delmar which a few years ago Lehman pooh-poohed as not important to support). The neighboring CIty Managers are professional and they voluntary felt the obligation to file a complaint. Lehman's decision to end the membership was so pathetic no one could possibly be fooled.

Let me see if I have this earth shattering news correct. 1) Mr. Walker didn't like his previous boss, Ms. Feier, and gave his opinion of her performance to several people but failed to cc Ms. Feier. 2) Mr. Walker networked and passed along his resume as he desired to increase his station in life. 3) Mr. Walker left his position in Illinois after 9 months to take a higher profile position. WOW! And for these transgressions an industry group wants their jacket back. Good riddance I say. Glad to save the $1100. And Mr. Walker did not violate his contract. All of these alleged misdeeds happened before he was our City Manager. U City has a choice. They can stand behind Mr. Walker and efficient government or we can go back to bloated, inefficient government and higher taxes. The choice seems simple to me.

If this is how Mayor Welsch is going to respond to a blatant ethics violation on behalf of City Manager Walker than U. City has a serious issue. His contract clearly states that "...a breach of the ICMA, Code of Ethics" is cause for termination. Mayor Welsch has a duty to take action now that Mr. Walker is in violation of his contract.

I wonder how frequently the group takes a step of this magnitude? To ban someone for life suggests a penalty of great severity. Is this like a lawyer being disbarred? If membership in this organization is a requirement of the job, what will happen to the next contract? Do we simply take out language we find inconvenient?

ICMA could have done the following:

1. Nothing
2. Issued Mr. Walker a Private Censure
3 Public Censure
4 Public Censure Expulsion\Bar

BTW:

This is not some "Trade Organization" yanking a membership. The complaint against Mr. Walker was made by his Peers, the evidence was reviewed by another set of his Peers and finally a third set of his Peers voted for Public Censure and to bar him from THEIR organization.

http://icma.org/en/icma/ethics/enforcement

This question begs to be asked: who else at city hall knew about this?

There are so many things to comment on here, I don't know where to begin... (1) Walker lied about the reason he was resigning, give your citizens more credit than that, we aren't that stupid (2) Welch has used his membership in the ICMA to support his abilities (I have seen her reference it several times). (3) Membership in this organization was apparently important enough to reference it in his employment contract (4) I have always thought the emails between him, Welsch, and Plumm prior to his employment were very unprofessional...they all could have at least been smart enough to not use goverment email addresses..in fact if these emails were sent via a private email account, there probably wouldn't even be a story here. Shows the level of intelligence by all 3 (5) Lastly, Welch's comment "I have already spent more words on it than deserves" is condescending to her constituents. This city is becoming quite an embarrassment. I have lived in 3rd world countries that are managed better than this place has been over the last year.

The Mayor clearly thought highly enough of this organization to include adherence to it's ethical standards in her city manager's contract. This makes her statement all the more abhorrent. I suppose it stands to reason that she would defend him, since the violations he was cited for involved her as well. I wonder to what ethical standards, if any, she believes he should be accountable to? Perhaps it is to her credit that she chooses to stand by him rather than throw him to the wolves. Nonetheless, in my humble opinion both Lehman Walker and Shelley Welsch (and probably a couple of others) should issue a profound apology to the citizens of University City and tender their resignations. Let us move on. It would be the honorable thing to do.

And to the hand picked candidates of Ms. Welsch for the 1st and 2nd wards you need not want to join the Walker/Welsch/Pumm problem
and the voters will confirm this.

Mr. Walker, “The ICMA decision is a conclusive example of why I recently resigned from this voluntary organization.”
Meaning: I quit because they were going to kick me out.
Mr. Walker: “This type of political activity is contrary to my personal rights.”
Meaning: It is my personal right to be unethical. How dare someone question ME!

Mayor Welsch “This action of the ICMA is of no concern to me.”
Meaning: Ethics Schmethics I’m the Mayor. I make the rules.
Mayor Welsch: The decision, “has no impact on Mr. Walker’s ability to continue” in his job.
Meaning: Mr. Walker need not worry as long as he has friends in City Hall. Wink Wink Nudge Nudge
Mayor Welsch: “The ICMA is ...with no ... knowledge to penalize our City Manager.” Except the e-mails that the City of Evanston was able to use data recovery to find and my e-mails, and Ms. Pumm’s e-mails, and Mr. Kraft’s contacts and Ms. Ricci’s e-mails and the eyewitnesses.
Mayor Welsch: “This is one more politically-motivated attempt to smear Mr. Walker, using material that has been public for a year and a half.”
Meaning: Why couldn’t we delay this until after April 3rd?
Mayor Welsch “I hope the people of University City realize this for what it is.”
Meaning: I hope the people of University City DO NOT realize this for what it is.
Mayor Welsch: “I have already spent more words on it than it deserves.”
Meaning: Why did I hire Mr. Walker? He has been a nightmare since he started complaining about Julie. He can’t balance the budget. The way he handled the driving range lights costs us close to $100,000. He either fired or drove out everyone with experience. Now I have to defend his unethical behavior that got him the job in the first place. I wish this would just go away.

Seriously? This guy just needs to go away. We now know that with his false press release about why he "quit" (ahem) ICMA he has no qualms about directly lying to U City residents. Forgot about the ethics issue ICMA reviewed, we now have a new and, in my mind, larger one.

The level of incompetence, in my opinion, that I have observed with Shelley Welsch and Lehman Walker has been astounding. No accountability to any accusations of wrongdoings, no ability to self-reflect. Just the ability to de-value those who would accuse, or those who might fight actual fault. Acountability and self-reflection, are needed traits in City leaders for even gradual course corrections...

Yes , I agree. What ability they have to consistently say one thing and yet do another. Why hasn't anyone caught on to this yet? Iif one were to go back and peruse the record, one could see that Shelley, lehman, Lynn Ricci and Jan Adams have been in cahoots for some time, not to mention steve kraft

as a former ucity employee, i'm not at all surprised by this soap opera that is the second floor of University City City Hall. What i am surprised about is that no one is taking this to the tv stations or crying from the tops of the hills! This needs to get out by mass media to the residents before they go to vote on unsuspected cronies! and more than that, to show the current administration that is in there now are coming off as complete amateurs!! they act as they wish, not as required by the needs of the city, or even just that of professionalism (or ethics, as clearly pointed out by a group of his professional peers!).Very sad. To lay off whole departments because they ethically and professionally stand in the way of your warped vision or because they were viewed as friendly to the former city manager, and to do it citing "budgetary concerns" and while never have performed a financial study to verify your "astute fiscal" opinion, is considered reckless and imprudent management by most intelligent people. The full story of Walker's underhanded hiring, poor management decisions, and consistent lying to immediately cover bad decisions should land on the doorstep of every ucity resident. and now!

Michael W. Drake
If the mayor desires a second term, her only hope is to request the resignation of her insufferabely incompompetant aide-de-camp.

That such violation is listed as grounds for termination for cause does not mean termination is mandatory but that consequences of termination for such reason are different than if there is no cause (i.e., it is a "may terminate," not a "must terminate.") However, since it is mentioned in the contract and is a very serious matter, someone on Council should raise this censure as grounds for a vote on Walker. If it's up, then let's move on. If it's down, then let's have an excellent, open search with broad community input, hire a good manager, and move on. Obviously, the previous "search" was not handled as well as it could have been. Either way, let's move on. Paralysis over events of two years ago is the worst thing--far worse than the events themselves, in my opinion. Another option that may or may not be available to Council would be a warning or censure to Walker, without termination. That could include a strong message about unilateral action in areas on which public would likely demand input (such as consulting contracts). Finally, if anyone has studied a professional ethics code, they tend to go way beyond common sense right and wrong--which is not to say that they shouldn't be followed, but that well-meaning people can easily fall afoul of them while acting in good faith and doing what they think best for their client/company/community. (That is why this censure is not a slam-dunk for firing Walker.) In this regard, Greg Pace's remarks are well taken.

Enforcing the contract by vote makes sense, but the people involved in the hiring fiasco that are the basis of the vote, the Mayor, Ms. Ricci, Mr. Kraft, are the same people voting on this. The citizens are then left with the very people who caused this ethical problem to vote on it. With the amount of backroom deals discovered thus far the City deserves better. The level to which Mr. Walker has embedded himself with a few select people who are supposed to represent us and not him makes any vote by those individuals highly suspect. That is why the refrain has been vote and move on. Which is nothing more than out right support for an unethical City Manager and those who tried to dupe the City into believing he was the best we could find. Remember they rigged they rigged the selection process so no other candidate was reviewed. Stop blaming the Citizens who want ethical, honest government for the problems caused by those who skirt the rules.

As a previous employee at the City of Evanston, I feel for University City. In 9 months, Lehman created a disaster in the Community Development Department that they are still recovering from (which is how it came to my attention). As mentioned above he either fired or drove out everyone with experience. These were professional, dedicated employees that were very committed to the City. At least in Evanston we had support from the City Council who had worked with some of these employees for 19+ years. I think someone else mentioned this is a satisfying moment for so many excellent and experienced employees that Lehman Walker personally handpicked to have removed from City employment because they affected his ego in some way. It appears his actions in U. City are so consistent with the City of Evanston's experience that it is difficult to deny this his actions paint a true picture of who Lehman Walker truly is! All I can say is karma's a bitch. Good luck U. City.

University City once had the most revered city management in the State of Missouri. If this is how the Mayor of University City is going to respond to a blatant ethics violation on behalf of "City Manager" Walker than the entire region is in serious trouble. They need to step outside their bubble. The narcissism of winner take all by Welsch and her crew is reaching beyond the boundaries of U City. Their ineptitude impacts the entire region.

Fiscal responsibility means nothing Walker/Welsch. They sent out a press release claiming to save $1,100 by disassociating with ICMA. Walker agreed to the tenants of ICMA when he joined the organization and then reinforced them in his employment contract with University City. His contract even states he could be/SHOULD BE terminated without severance if he were censured by ICMA.
Since he has been here for such a short time that would mean they are trying to “save” $1,100 while putting double is salary to reward his incompetence. The Mayor’s comments are a disgrace to herself and University City. She should step down. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

I have said it before and I will say it again – this constant drumbeat of negativity against Mr. Walker and Mayor Welsch has got to stop. It’s dismaying that so much energy is being expended to try to tear down this community – while little of the opposite is noted.

A few things on the latest brouhaha:

1.) I agree with Mr. Pace about the details. We are talking about a few e-mails – the ICMA doesn’t have the right or authority to demand that its members stop all contact with friends and colleagues. And why should they? To protect another ICMA member? I thought the ICMA was for good government. If so, the organization should be pleased when members are willing to share their expertise.
2.) If I remember correctly, the Charter of the City of University City allows members of Council to talk with department directors. Once someone leaves, then, does the ICMA say that relationship has to end? Again, why?
3.) How can anyone think that the City Council of University City should allow a third party – ANY third party – to set ethical guidelines. I’m sorry, but as a resident of this community I am not willing to say this organization represents the best in local government and is the appropriate arbiter of ethics of our City officials. No way.
To be continued

4.) I am wondering who is behind all of this. I read the ICMA release. There is no mention of who filed a complaint. Hmmmm…..how does anyone know that this complaint was filed by “respected “ local leaders? Smells fishy. This whole thing smells fishy.

What I see as a taxpaying resident of this community is a city manager who has been under attack since the day he arrived – by a small group of residents. I see a City Manager who, after YEARS of mismanagement, has brought order to the finances of this City – remember the previous city manager said that if we didn’t pass her tax hike we would be almost two million dollars in debt right now? Mr. Walker, just unveiled a draft budget for next year with an almost half-million dollar surplus!!! And he is doing needed reorganization. And he is finally uncovering what was NOT done under the past two city managers – why do you think we are $24 million dollars behind in repairing and improving our aging infrastructure? Hmmmm again…mismanagement during the previous two administrations.

To be continued

Given all the positive things coming out of City Hall, I'm starting to wonder what else might be behind the continual harassment of our City Manager Lehman Walker. Might the cause of the disgruntlement reach back to the to Terry Crow's unsuccessful 2004 run for the MO House of Representatives and his need to progress up the electoral ladder to run again – and the only path is can see is to support efforts to destroy Welsch and Walker? Might it be a response to a disgruntled Frank Ollendorff's continued involvement in U.City's government - he retired with a more than generous severance package six years ago – why is he still involved? Might there be a touch of unacknowledged racism? Might it be the old guard of this community and its small group of supporters are unwilling to acknowledge that the past was not perfect?

And that's it

I'm new in the community so my feeling are based on my direct observations over the past year alone..Mismanagement, incompetence, and the inability to self-reflect. Somebody mentioned narcissism earlier and that has been my thoughts for the past six months. Those that offer the narcissistic supply are valued, those that do not are devalued. Truth is secondary to image.

Ms. Fried:

Mr. Walker was free to share his "Expertise" with anyone but the elected officials in any City with an incumbent City Manager. Mr. Walker VOLUNTARLY chose to join ICMA and abide by the Code of Ethics. He violated them and was sanctioned by a wide representation of his Peers. Apparently, it was the Mayor and Council who thought it was important to include a reference to the ICMA Code of Ethics in Mr. Walker's contract…. before he violated them. What they choose to do about it is up to them and untimely up to the residents of University City.

I think it is interesting that we - or I - don't know who Consultant, Cindy, Can't Take Anymore, City Manager, Concerned Citizen, Kim, Steve, UCity Fan, Jill, Jack, Charles F, nor Sam are. I assume these folks live in U. City - right? Why are they not using their last names - or real names? I support our City Manager, our Mayor and ALL our City Council members whether I agree with them on certain issues or not. I think finally our City is on the right track. And - my name is Jen Jensen. I'm not afraid to sign it on my comments.

City Hall -- I am a past employee too that left for a promotion. Now you will know who I am. I am ecstatic to learn that the people who didn't come to work before 10:00 am or "worked from home" or played games on their computer while at work or misrepresented the city to make their pet projects move forward or caused several lawsuits are gone. We WERE the laughing stock of the region for the past several years. Especially with state and regional agencies. The silly unqualified juvenile high school group is gone. Finally. It took over twenty years to make that happen because administration and council turned a blind eye. The years of wrong are being made right.

Can't we all just get along? At the end of the day don't we all really want pretty much the same things for the future of University City? Signed, my full name is Earl Higgins, search all you want.

From the Riverfront Times:
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2012/03/lehman_walker_university_city_city_manager_censured_violates_contract.php

I went ahead an updated my name from consultant...so now I can beat on my chest and say I am not afraid to post to my real name! I feel like a tough guy now! For those that want to use just a first name or remain anonymous, I still totally support you.

Thank you all for expressing your opinion. It has come to my attention that some comments are being flagged by other readers and thus temporarily disappearing from the site. I have allowed appropriate comments back on the story. Please remember to keep your discussions on U City Patch civil and to the point without name calling. We are all neighbors here!

Will signing in with my real name make Lehman Walkers actions more ethical. The organization which he chose to join of hown free will, kicked him out for screwing up their proud brand which he said he would live by when he joined.

I know how vindictive city hall is and would never use my real name to post here, it doesn't invalidate my opinion. I don't support the mayor or her administration and the terrible job they are doing. This is from what I have experienced over the past year, I have no idea of how they operated prior to that time, nor do I have ties to any of the previous administration or prior employees. What I see now scares me, that is why I post.

The Council must respond meaningfully to the censure. It's a serious matter that should not be swept under the rug. But is it serious enough to require terminating Mr. Walker's employment?

It may be helpful to consider it this way:

Two of the three violations would not have occurred had there been no pre-election contact with Walker, but promptly after the election the Council had properly voted to terminate the former Manager, and then immediately contacted Mr. Walker and properly voted to hire him. The outcome would have been identical, except a few days delay in contracting with Mr. Walker.

So how "bad" and "unethical" was it that the timing of pre-employment events was different than permitted but the outcome the same? People can respond that the end doesn't justify the means; the rules were broken and that's it. But viewing the issue as a matter of timing, not one of inherently "bad," "unethical," or "immoral" conduct, sheds light on the seriousness of violation--which bears on the proper action to take.

The third violation was not staying in Evanston for two years. Apparently he didn't breach his contract there. But it's a clear violation of the "ethics" rule. How "bad" is this? How many of us live by such a rule in our own employment relations? How many other City Managers have breached it, without consequences from the organization? These questions should be carefully considered, with no rush to judgment. Let the punishment fit the crime.

I agree the Council should determine whether, under the terms of the contract, whether Mr. Walker should continue on. Why would the contact make reference to the ICMA and specifically the Code of Ethics if, as the Mayor now says, it has not bearing on Mr. Walker?

I also would like to share with each of you this wiki link, which is informed mostly by the ICMA. Please read the section about a 1/4 or so down the page about the History of the Council - Manager form of government in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council%E2%80%93manager_government
(Actually the whole page is good info)

Good information. This is particularly interesting:

"While the popularity of council–manager government has endured into the twenty-first century, the system as practiced has changed over time, particularly in once medium-sized communities that have grown into more heterogeneous and politically contentious large cities. In such communities, their elected officials increasingly see themselves as political activists responding to a constituency rather than trustees performing a public service, and they take a greater interest in administration on a day-to-day basis, participating more closely in resolving civic issues, rather than simply identifying them as in the traditional model."

I don't know about anyone else, but the role of elected officials as described in the last sentence quoted, rather than the classic one, is what I prefer. Second to that, if most power is to reside in an unelected City Manager, I'd like to see that person be one who is committed to working closely with the Mayor and Council. Hence, I am not troubled that one of the top concerns for a candidate running for Mayor was anticipating who might be hired as City Manager. That is not to say that the rules shouldn't have been followed, but that the violation is understandable.

To be clear mr walker first contacted the city officials not the other way around. He specifically called for the then current city manager to be fired. He was working In another city actively working to create the job opening in University City he was then placed into. Absent his efforts to have the city manager removed, there may not have been an opening.

Yes Steve, more serious that way. The point "there may not have been an opening" is something that should be investigated. My understanding was that was pretty much a given if certain people would be elected.