Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 03-11-08 Special agenda ‎(finance director)‎ — reading text

CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH City Council Special Meeting Agenda March 11, 2008 - 4: 00 P.M. City Council Chambers 107 Miracle Strip Parkway, SE Fort Walton Beach, FL 32548 CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE —Mayor Mike Anderson 3 ...; ..: .;... ..:. ... . ..:..'. 1. Consideration of receiving the Summary of Findings from the labor attorney on the Mayor's investigations into the working relationships and workplace interaction among the Charter Officers and among the Charter Officers and the Officials and employees of the City. ( Mayor Anderson) ( See Backup). 2. Other Business. ADJOURN  CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING March 11, 2008 Special Meeting Agenda Consideration of receiving a Summary of Findings from the labor attorney on the Mayor's investigations into the working relationships and workplace interaction among the Charter Officers and the Officials and employees of the City Mayor Anderson) Agenda Item Number: SP.- 1  City of Fort Walton Beach Internal Investigation Report March 6, 2008 Factual Findings Summary There are two areas of concern involving employment relationships within the City of Fort Walton Beach' s workforce. Specifically, there is evidence of a strained working relationship between the Finance Director with the City Manager, City Attorney, and most Department Directors. There are also concerns raised by numerous City employees indicating unprofessional conduct by the Finance Director which is resulting in an intolerable working atmosphere. Initially, the Finance Director has a dysfunctional working relationship with the City Manager, City Attorney, and most of the Department Directors. Their relationships reflect, a mutual lack of trust and disregard for the relative professional abilities of each other and an inability to effectively communicate. Their discord can be traced back to the earliest days of the Finance Director' s tenure. Secondly, there is a perception by several employees of the Finance Department that they are subjected to a pattern of behavior by their Department Director that is demeaning, retaliatory, and unbearable. These employees report that the adversarial relationship they have with the Finance Director has interfered with their ability to perform their duties. They express little or Several no regard for the supervisory skills or professional abilities of the Finance Director. employees of the Finance Department advise that the manner in which they have been supervised by the Finance Director has moved them to seek other employment. They describe the conditions of the working relationship with the Finance Director as intolerable. Lq  The Finance Director is aware of the strained relationship with the City Manager, City Attorney, and most Department Directors. She attributes the difficulties to the following factors: City Manager is too involved in the operations of the Finance Department City Attorney has disagreed with the Finance Director on interpretations of law Department Heads have been influenced to distrust the Finance Director and that the Finance Director is aggressive in policing fiscal procedures The City Manager and Finance Director positions have many interrelated responsibilities. As such, for these positions to perform their functions effectively, they must work cooperatively and avoid adversarial confrontations. Exacerbating the current situation is the ongoing debate over the relative 'Charter authority of the City Manager and Finance Director. There does not appear to be a consensus among City officials about how the authorities of these Charter Officers intersect. Whether the City Manager is delving too deeply into the Finance Director' s scope of authority or the Finance Director is interfering with the obligations of the City Manager, they must find an accord and to date have not. The City Manager initiated a regular meeting of all Charter Officers in an effort to facilitate a better working relationship. This effort has not proved effective. In at least three meetings, their interaction degenerated into verbal disagreements 1 which led to the Finance Director prematurely exiting the meeting. The City Attorney professes a sincere desire to work cooperatively with all City officials and employees. She believes that any failing working relationship is the result of the actions of Employees interviewed that attended the meetings attribute the disruption to the Finance Director' s conduct. all involved and regrets that there is not some means to improve her relationship with the Finance Director. Still, she has lost trust in the Finance Director and believes that she mischaracterizes events and falsely accuses people of wrongdoing. For example, she vehemently denies that she ever sought the Finance Director' s resignation, yet the Finance Director asserts that she did.' The lack of trust eroded to the point where the City Attorney restricted her communication with the Finance Director to those means where a written record was 2 established. The working relationship between the department heads and the Finance Director, with rare exception, reflect a mutual disregard that goes beyond professional differences over fiscal policy. Most department heads do not enjoy a positive working relationship with the Finance Director. There is no evidence that these individuals are raising these concerns because they have been ordered to, been influenced to, or because they resist fiscal oversight. Rather, there appears a consistent theme of department heads having there trust or regard for the Finance Department eroded by the manner in which the Finance Director has communicated to them and about them. The individuals involved are experienced professionals who take considerable pride in their work and reputations. These professionals have labored throughout their careers to bring service to the City in an efficient and ethical manner. Most of the department heads interviewed relayed a sincere concern over being publicly offended by remarks made by the Finance Director. In a setting where professionals must work together, it is imperative that they exhibit mutual respect. The Department Directors and City employees have testified that the Finance 2 The City Attorney has not experienced a similar lack of trust or need to communicate in writing with any other employee.  Director has referred to them in the following terms, which has resulted in a widened gap between these individuals' working relationships: biased" liar( s)" frauds" covering up wrongdoing" unprofessional" unethical" caustic" dishonest" The Finance Director has verbalized disregard for the City, the Mayor, Members of the These Council, the City Manager, the City Attorney, department heads, and employees. comments were made at public meetings, staff meetings, conferences, bid meetings and in private conversations with subordinates. These derogatory comments have been made to City officials, employees, vendors and members of the public. Comments impugning the reputation of professionals associated with the City have also been made by the Finance Director referring to outside legal counsel as " covering up wrongdoing" and the City Auditor as likewise failing to act in a competent manner while undertaking their fiduciary duty to the City. Both the counsel and the auditor are highly regarded professionals who have high ethical standards. Again, the counsel referred above has ceased all communication with the Finance Director except in written form reflecting a lack of trust. Of serious concern is the working atmosphere within the Finance Department. At least four key employees have identified a hostile work environment. They report that the Finance Cam] Director has acted unprofessionally, retaliatory, accusatory, needlessly blames employees of wrongdoing and creates a highly charged and negative interaction that interferes with their ability to conduct their duties. Specific examples of conduct reported include, but are not limited to: Intimidated subordinates by advising them that certain Council Members wanted to terminate their employment, but she was running interference; Told staff that an elected official was a lying sack of shit and not to trust him; Believed that council member( s) are having her administrative assistant track her meetings and actions Directed a subordinate to keep her husband from attending council meetings; Interrogated employees and questions their loyalty to her when they interact with other City officials; Instructed staff that they were not allowed to use the City' s complaint or grievance policies and the Office of Human Resources without prior permission; After an employee submitted a complaint, her duties and right of access were revoked; Employees are berated and treated adversely because they refused to report on co- workers;  Employees were blamed for engaging in wrongdoing or for mistakes that all parties knew was at the express direction of the Finance Director; by their Insulting subordinate employees referencing personal lives and private business in conversations regarding workplace performance; Directing staff to refuse to assist or interact with targeted fellow employees As