Two Minot residents with questions surrounding the firing of the city’s former manager are asking for more government transparency.

Chad Chalmers told the Minot City Council Monday that his open records request failed to unearth notes from 10 of 23 interviews conducted by the attorney who investigated former city manager Tom Barry. Among material held back was eight hours of Barry’s testimony.

“All I ask for is transparency,” Chalmers said.

Leif Snyder and Chalmers previously had raised concerns to the council about the investigation process and the lack of public access to city employee handbook information.

Snyder said city employees who used a political blogger rather than the human resources’ grievance process to register complaints about their boss were out of line. Just as the city manager was investigated, so should department heads be investigated, he said.

“They should have used the reporting policies and procedures that already exist. This way, they were able to do it without even being named. There’s no formal complaint filed,” Snyder said.

Snyder said he questions whether department heads have too much power and aren’t being held accountable.

He said the investigator’s report lacked details regarding whether a hostile work environment existed, and no council member at the meeting at which Barry was fired listed a reason for the firing other than what was in the report. He said there was a suggestion that there may be other reasons for the firing outside the investigation findings, but those actions weren’t identified.

“It could be that he did something that was justified to be removed. But citizens have a right to know what that is, just as he does,” Snyder said.

Because legal negotiations are continuing related to Barry’s firing, the council has kept its discussion on the topic limited. City Attorney Kelly Hendershot said the city has the complete investigation file but some documents are exempt records or attorney work product, not subject to open records.

Chalmers said another records request will be made, and any decision by the city not to release information will be taken up with the Attorney General’s office.

Snyder presented recommendations to make the employee manual available on the city website, address the lack of policy regarding city-paid cell phones beings set to auto delete, hold city employees accountable to policy and laws, hire a professional outside expert to evaluate human resources policies and include council members in any human resources investigation or training advised by an outside expert.

Attorney Patricia Monson, who had conducted the investigation, released a report in April based on 40 hours of interviews. She wrote that the city manager became preoccupied with the “culture of leadership” related to a group of several long-tenured employees who socialized outside of work. These employees received lower scores on their performance evaluations that she described as retributive and retaliatory.

Other actions the report deemed “intimidating” included emphasizing his authority to fire, threatening to fire, telling the HR director that the council and her co-workers don’t trust her and repeatedly telling some employees that certain council members want them terminated,

Monson wrote that the grievance procedure, along with being difficult to follow, doesn’t apply to the situation in which the city manager placed employees because none had an adverse employment decision for which they could seek review. The city also has a hostile work environment reporting policy.

Monson wrote the mayor learned from community members last October of employee concerns but no action was taken. The council president at the time had received a complaint from the finance director last November but did not forward it to the HR director.