Winfield may double manager’s severance package

The Winfield village board will seek to amend Village Manager Curt Barrett’s contract tonight to double his potential severance package in the event he’s fired.

The action is included on tonight’s consent agenda, which usually lists routine items officials believe don’t warrant further discussion.

Barrett confirmed the proposed change would increase his severance package if he were terminated from the equivalent of three months pay to six months pay.

Village President Deb Birutis said Barrett raised concerns that newly elected trustees may seek retaliation over Barrett’s enforcement of the village’s sign ordinance during the recent election campaign. Candidate Tim Allen had accused village staff of unfairly targeting his signs, a claim village officials denied.

Birutis said the board opened the discussion as a result of Barrett’s concerns.

“We have a village manager that has high integrity and is expected to follow the ordinance approved by the village board,” Birutis said. “It would be a detriment to the community if he left WInfield.”

Birutis said the measure has been discussed several times during recent closed sessions but that the timing, which coincides with the final meeting of the current board, “is part of it” and that she wanted to protect Barrett from retaliation “for political reasons.”

“He has done a tremendous job as village manager,” Birutis said. “The village board is trying to do what we can to keep him. He’s an asset to the village and has high integrity.”

One incoming Winfield trustee says the single-line item is an effort to “sneak something in” before the new board gets seated next month.

Tony Reyes, who was the second-highest vote-getter in the April 5 election and will take his seat May 5, said he doesn’t know why the board “rushed” the resolution onto the agenda.

“It’s the kind of politicking that should not go on in our village,” said Reyes, who said he knew nothing of the move until contacted by the Daily Herald. “The new board should be a part of that decision. It does not need to be rushed into the agenda before we get seated with no opportunity for discussion. It’s inappropriate.”

Trustees can remove items from a consent agenda at any time during a meeting. That would then subject the move to a public vote by the board. If no trustee removes it, however, the item most likely will be approved as part of the consent agenda.

Tonight’s consent agenda contains some routine items, such as payment of monthly bills, approval of past meeting minutes and change orders for construction projects in town. But the fifth item is the approval of the change to Barrett’s contract.

According to agendas posted on the village’s website, personnel matters have been discussed in closed session during four of the board’s past five meetings.

As of this morning, a Freedom of Information Act request filed Wednesday for Barrett’s contract had not been returned but Barrett said he would provide the document this afternoon.

His contract paid him $111,000 during his first year as village manager. If that salary has remained the same, it would mean the village would owe Barrett $55,500 if he were terminated, an increase from the previous total of $27,750.

Trustee Jay Olson would not comment on the change.

But fellow incoming trustee Tim Allen had plenty to say. Allen said he did not see the item in an earlier version of the agenda posted at the start of the week and was just as surprised as Reyes when contacted. The agenda posted on Winfield’s website is labeled “revised” and lists a posting of 11 p.m. Tuesday.

“It’s disappointing they are going to take such a serious question under consideration when they see the trustees coming in whose job it would be to work with him in the future,” Allen said. “It’s fiscally irresponsible for a village with as little money as we do.”

Allen also questioned the decision to renegotiate a contract with an employee who is already locked in for two more years. Reyes said the move surely will cause some concern among Winfield residents.

“It’s unprecedented for the village president and the board to make this type of move as a lame-duck board on the final day,” he said. “It’s inappropriate and will raise some eyebrows.”

Barrett said he did not ask for the new terms but is happy with the proposed change.

“It really reflects a little bit more security for me and my family,” he said. “It’s been a productive two years. I’m pleased. I have enjoyed the opportunities we have had here and we do feel we have had two very productive years since I joined the village and I look forward to more of that in the future.”