Bluffdale mayor files lawsuit against council

Bluffdale's mayor has sued the City Council over its efforts to undo her hiring of a political ally.

Mayor Claudia Anderson filed a lawsuit Thursday in 3rd District Court in Salt Lake City in the latest round of infighting among the first-term mayor and her council. The lawsuit seeks to overturn an ordinance that calls Anderson's hiring of former state Rep. Dave Hogue as city administrator illegal. The council has refused to recognize the hiring.

The ordinance was passed in a rare Saturday council meeting Feb. 24. All five council members were present, but Anderson was out of town and was not at the meeting. The council unanimously approved the measure, which directs city employees not to follow Hogue's instructions or recognize him as a staff member.

The City Council reaffirmed the ordinance by another unanimous vote Tuesday. Members of the council opted to put the issue on the agenda again after the mayor, who was out of town Saturday, questioned whether the special meeting was properly noticed.

Hogue was back at the staff table Tuesday but was not addressed by the council and didn't make any comments during the meeting.

Anderson hired Hogue shortly after forcing former administrative services director Brent Bluth to resign, despite efforts by the council to prevent her from doing so.

Anderson contends that, as CEO of the city, she was within her rights to fire Bluth and appoint Hogue. The council disagrees, and in the ordinance cites sections of the Utah and Bluffdale codes that state such action requires the "advice and consent" of the City Council.

The City Council has filed a complaint with the Utah Attorney General's Office over the appointment of Hogue. The office's Civil Review Committee is evaluating the issue.

If the Attorney General's Office doesn't intervene, council members have said they will consider taking Anderson to court.

Anderson's lawsuit accuses the council of throwing together the last-minute meeting deliberately to prevent her from being able to attend. It says the meeting was not properly noticed to the public, as the agenda referred to the proposed ordinance only as an item "pertaining to administrative services director."

The substance of the ordinance, the lawsuit says, "addressed several other subjects," violating the state Open and Public Meetings Act and invalidating the ordinance."