Just days before leaving office, Mayor Dwight C. Jones quietly awarded nearly $2 million in bonuses to most of the city’s 4,000 employees in seeking to brighten their holidays and thank them for their “dedication and commitment” during his tenure.

However, he apparently had no authority to play Santa Claus, according to a state law that reserves the authority to award bonuses to City Council and requires any bonuses to be approved by an ordinance.

Mayor Jones’ action apparently has used the lion’s share of a potential, but still uncertain, surplus for the current fiscal year to the dismay of the incoming mayor, Levar Stoney, and members of Richmond City Council who see struggles ahead in financing a host of city and schools needs in the next budget that is being prepared.

Mr. Stoney, who will take office Jan. 1, said he did not receive a courtesy call that the bonuses were going to be paid and only learned about them after the fact.

“I believe we should recognize and appreciate the hard work of our public servants,” he commented. “But I do not think this was a fiscally prudent decision given the challenges we face.”

Others, including 5th District Councilman Parker C. Agelasto, are concerned that the money for the bonuses is based on a projected surplus that might not materialize.

“Last year in the first quarter, the city was projecting a $12 million deficit,” he noted. “Only later did that turn into a small surplus. We’ve been told repeatedly by the administration that first quarter numbers are too imprecise, and that it is important to wait until later in the year to have a better idea of the financial situation.”

Whether any action will be taken to recapture the bonus money remains to be seen after Mr. Stoney and the new council take office in a few days.

One thing appears to be certain: No one on City Council has any interest in trying to take back the money from city employees. The bonuses awarded in the Dec. 16 paychecks provided $500 to each full-time employee with at least one year of service; qualifying part-time employees received $250.

Except for police, firefighters and emergency medical technicians, most have not received a pay raise in several years.

Outgoing Councilwoman Kathy C. Graziano, 4th District, has mixed feelings about the bonuses.

“I was at the store, and a street sweeper came up to me and thanked me for the bonus. He said it would allow him to take care of his family for Christmas,” she said. However, she also knows how much the city could use $2 million for other needs.

Despite the uproar, Selena Cuffee-Glenn, the city’s chief administrative officer, is stoutly defending the bonuses.

In an interview Tuesday, she insisted that the award of bonuses complies with the City Council-approved compensation plan that dates back to 1993, although that ordinance, at best, only provides authority to award bonuses to the CAO, not the mayor.

More importantly, she said that City Attorney Allen L. Jackson, who has since issued an official opinion stating that the mayor flouted the authority of City Council, did “not raise any red flags” or suggest the award of bonuses was improper when she and the mayor’s chief of staff held their weekly meeting with him on Wednesday, Dec. 14.

“The issue of the bonuses was raised at the meeting,” she said, adding that Mr. Jackson only asked a general question about what departments were do to if they did not have the money in their budget.

Ms. Cuffee-Glenn said she told Mr. Jackson that any department heads with concerns should consult with Budget Director Jay Brown. She also said departments are authorized to shift money from operations to personnel accounts to cover the bonuses.

Tammy Hawley, Mayor Jones’ press secretary, said not a single department head raised any objection to the award of the bonuses, including appointees of City Council like Mr. Jackson.

In response to a Free Press query Mr. Jackson confirmed that he did not question the legality of the bonuses during that meeting.

“I learned about the bonuses on Dec. 13 along with everyone else, when I received the announcement issued by the Press Office,” Mr. Jackson stated.

“Since the announcement had already been made and the money was already in paychecks, my first concern following the announcement, like everyone, related to the fiscal impact of the decision, which I discussed with the CAO and (the mayor’s) chief of staff on Dec. 14,” he continued.

He stated he did not begin to receive inquiries about the legality of the bonuses “until Friday, Dec. 16, when I was out of town, and I did not begin to research their legality until Monday, Dec. 19.” 

“While I was generally aware that state law authorizes localities to pay bonuses,” he stated, “it was only when I began responding to the specific questions being asked that the limitations of the statute that grants the authority (solely to City Council) came into play.”

In the opinion he issued, he noted that the language in the compensation plan that Ms. Cuffee-Glenn relied on would not have provided her with the authority to award bonuses to all employees, but only to specific employees who were recommended by their supervisors for a monetary commendation for “extraordinary performance.”

He indicated that one remedy would be to seek “to recover the payments from those who authorized them … on a theory that the payments were authorized, directed or implemented by one or more persons who had no legal authority to do so.”

While Mr. Jackson did not address the issue, it appears that Mayor Jones, who leaves office effective Dec. 31, also overstepped his authority under the City Charter in “granting authority” to department heads to award the bonuses, a City Hall memo noted.

The charter requires the mayor to act through the CAO and bars him from giving orders either publicly or privately to any subordinate of the CAO.

Mayor Jones has spoken repeatedly about the city’s financial challenges, particularly during budget time. Last March in presenting his budget plan for the current fiscal year, he proposed — and City Council ultimately approved — a 12 percent cut in departmental discretionary spending. The Council also agreed with his plan to slash funding by 25 percent for grants to nonprofits that provide services in areas ranging from arts and culture to aiding the homeless in an effort to balance the budget.

The money that went into the bonuses apparently was drawn from funds earmarked for personnel costs in each department. Some of that money has accumulated because of vacancies that have not been filled. The bonus payments could limit the ability of departments to hire new people to fill those vacancies.