City denies liability, but still paid $25,000 to settle with department head who alleged discrimination

The city of Goldsboro denied liability in a discrimination lawsuit filed by one of its department heads against both the city and District 1 Councilman Antonio Williams, but still paid her $25,000 to settle the matter.

According to the settlement agreement, which was obtained by the New Old North, the city paid Community Affairs Director Shycole Simpson-Carter $16,666.66 for her “alleged compensatory damages, including alleged pain, suffering and emotional distress” and wrote an $8,333.34 check to her attorney.

The city also restored six weeks of paid leave Simpson-Carter exhausted in 2019 during her battle with the councilman.

By accepting the settlement, Simpson-Carter, among other things, dismissed charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, but the agreement might not mark the end of the dispute between the parties involved.

“Paragraph 7” of the settlement details the expectation of confidentiality — specifically that the city “agrees to direct its employees with personal knowledge of the EEOC mediation and settlement negotiations between the parties to abide by the EEOC’s Confidentiality Agreement.”

“The agreement on confidentiality is an essential part of this Agreement,” it reads.

But at the end of the City Council’s July 13 meeting, Williams publicly acknowledged that a settlement had been reached.

“We just made a settlement about Shycole Simpson Carter and our city attorney states that we can’t tell the public,” he said. “It’s public dollars. It’s public dollars. I guess I’ll be censured because I’m explaining this.”

The councilman’s statement came a month after the city declined to even acknowledge that such an agreement existed in response to a New Old North records request for a copy of the agreement.

“Per the city attorney, if such a document were to exist, it would be considered a part of Ms. Simpson-Carter’s personnel file and would not be considered a public record,” City Clerk Melissa Capps said June 18.

But the potential breach of confidentiality is only one possible problem for the city in the wake of the deal.

In the “Mediation Settlement Agreement” finalized this summer, the city agreed that “there shall be no discrimination or retaliation of any kind” against Simpson-Carter as a result of filing the charges with the EEOC.

And some officials recently shared their concern that Williams’ outing of the settlement, and the fact that he consistently walks out of council meetings before Simpson-Carter addresses the board, might give her grounds for an additional claim.

Additionally, Williams filed a hefty public records request in March that included, among other things, 18 months of Simpson-Carter’s emails — a request that resulted in a contentious discussion among council members and city staff about what constituted a “reasonable” records request.

In the EEOC complaint, which was filed Aug. 8, 2019, Simpson-Carter said Williams was guilty of “severe and pervasive” behavior that “amounted to harassment and hostile work environment based on sex” that “adversely impacted (her) job and health.”

The complaint also alleged that the city “knew” and “took no action.”

The Simpson-Carter/Williams saga dates back to at least 2017 when, according to an independent investigation undertaken after Simpson-Carter filed a formal complaint against the councilman, tensions between the two began to surface when Simpson-Carter, as part of her duties, was helping to develop the Summer Youth Employment Initiative.

Williams, investigators concluded, wanted more control of the program — and to have summer youth workers placed at his business, a request that Simpson-Carter perceived as a conflict of interest and spoke out against.

But the conflict reached its climax at a Sept. 27, 2018, GATEWAY meeting when, investigators said, Williams behaved in an “unacceptable” manner — berating the city employee after Simpson-Carter told the GATEWAY board that she did everything within her power to ensure 10 individuals who had been displaced by Hurricane Florence had a roof over their heads after the flooding associated with the storm left them without shelter.

According to records released in June, Williams said during the meeting that the city only footed the bill for one night at local hotels — that he, not the government, paid for lodging for the individuals on Friday, Sept. 21, 2018.

“We got them in a hotel for one night with WAGES’ help, but I had to pay for these individuals’ room and board after they were put back on the street Friday,” a quote attributed to Williams from that meeting reads. “(Simpson-Carter) is lying. I don’t know what receipts she has, but she is lying. The city did not pay for these individuals’ hotel stay on Friday.”

Receipts obtained via a records request, however, seemingly substantiate Simpson-Carter’s assertion that she did, in fact, pay for several of the residents to spend an additional night at Knights Inn using her “city procurement card.” She also bought food and duffle bags. The released documents include narratives prepared by Simpson-Carter for all 10 individuals — and are seemingly indicative that she followed their cases through.

To justify his claims that he, not the city, paid for room and board for the residents, Williams produced one receipt for a single room and two receipts from McDonald’s.

Investigators also concluded that the councilman’s request more than a week later for Simpson-Carter to be fired, “could very well be found to be retaliatory.”

“What the City Council should remember is that the facts in this case are clearly sufficient to put the City (at) risk for liability for allowing further allegedly discriminatory or retaliatory behavior to occur,” the report reads.

The council attempted to take steps to address the issue, voting to release a redacted version of the investigation report to the public after Simpson-Carter waived her right to confidentiality. Council then held a censure hearing.

But the contentious July 15 hearing only resulted in a 4-3 vote to censure Williams — an outcome shy of the threshold required to take the action.

During the proceedings, Williams’ attorney likened the way his client had been treated by the council to a “lynching” and was particularly upset that he did not have the opportunity to cross-examine those who gave statements to the team that investigated Simpson-Carter’s complaint.

“I’ve been doing this for 25 years and due process, to me, means being able to confront and cross-examine my accusers. … Somebody should be upset other than me. Somebody should see the injustice in this other than me,” the attorney said.

Sources at City Hall said the action was taken to ensure that the city had performed due diligence in response to Simpson-Carter’s complaint — in hopes of avoiding a lawsuit.

In her EEOC complaint, Simpson-Carter said she could not believe the result of the hearing.

“As the city yet again did nothing or said nothing as I tried to be professional and swallow the fact that I was not being treated fair or protected as an African-American female based on the city’s … action not to censure Councilman Williams … I still showed up … to do my job under enormous pressure and stress,” she said in her complaint.

But the day after the hearing, when she showed up for work, Simpson-Carter said she, “couldn’t stop crying, my chest was pounding, and I could not focus out of fear and humiliation.”

That afternoon, she left work “under the care of a psychiatrist” and was placed on medical leave.

“It seems like I … have been living in the pit of hell each day that I am being tortured to the brink of death by Lucifer himself,” Simpson-Carter said.

The New Old North has reached out to both Williams and Simpson-Carter. Simpson-Carter declined to comment.