Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 03-25-08 regular agenda — reading text

Manager; Lisa Absher, Finance Director; Helen Spencer, City Clerk; Toni Craig, City Attorney; Department Directors; Mike Mattimore, Labor Attorney; and Media PURPOSE 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. CALL TO ORDER The Mayor called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone. He requested anyone who wished to address Council to approach the podium after being recognized, and then state his or her name and address for the record. PLEDGE The Mayor led in the Pledge of Allegiance. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS OF MAYOR' S INVESTIGATION The Mayor introduced Mike Mattimore with Allen, Norton and Blue. He requested Council hold questions until Mr. Mattimore is done with his presentation, then after Council has asked their questions he will open it to the general public. Mike Mattimore went over his background and credentials as a labor attorney. He described the process used to interview employees, Charter Officers and people who had an interest in speaking to him. He said as a result of the interviews he brought to Council what was told him; he did not draw conclusions and did not make recommendations. He stated he spoke to everyone who wanted to be heard and gave his contact information out to everyone who wanted it. He said the investigation was delayed by a number of days because the Finance Director asked for additional time allotted to the other Charter Officers and he complied with her request. He mentioned one initial observation he had is that Council has City employees they should be very proud of, who love their city and love the people they work with and they showed courage and candor in coming to him and speaking honestly. He said no one was compelled to speak with him and no one had to, everyone knew they were being taped and knew some day their words would be public, but they still spoke openly and candidly and they really felt a need to do so. He pointed out that Carole Jones was left off the witness list because she contacted them at the last minute and said she wanted to be interviewed, so they did interview her by telephone as they were bringing a close to the report. He said they had met with her during the process and understood she did not want to speak to them but she did after all. Mr. Mattimore relayed of primary concern as a labor and employment attorney is that five key employees of the Finance Department who are subordinate to the Finance Director described in very emotional terms a hostile work environment. He went over what was relayed to him, said he thought they are good employees, they are loyal employees and they are in a dysfunctional situation. He said what is disturbing to him is that those employees were told they could not go to the Human Resource Department to complain about the conditions. He said it is essential to have the ability to the employees to go complain when they feel there is a problem in their work place, that is what policies are for, and that is one of the essential functions for Human Resource and for a manager to say they have to first go to her, and first tell her they are going to Human Resources and why they are going to Human Resources and they cannot go to Human Resources at all, is not a good practice, and not a practice he can recommend. 32Special Council 3 -11 - 08 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Cont. Mr. Mattimore said they talked to the Department Heads and with one exception they brought a litany of situations where they thought the Finance Director engaged in a mistake, retracted or changed the policy, reversed the policy, or somehow did something in a fiscal area they disagreed with. He got as a sense that they had legitimate concerns about the means and ability of communication between them; they each brought situations where they thought they were blamed for something they had not done, that they were insulted or offended by something that they should not be insulted or offended by, or that there was some misrepresentation made about them by the Finance Director. He said these are all individuals who have reputations and are concerned about their reputations. He said he walked away with a sense that they felt there was some risk in their interaction with the Finance Director because she would say things, use language in communicating with them, in writing or verbally, that could place their reputation at risk. He thought they all had a lack of trust and a concern about communicating with the Finance Director. He stated the City Attorney and the Pension Attorney have placed restrictions upon the communications with the Finance Director so that it would only be in writing because they do not trust that what they say or communicate will be accurately recounted. He thought the City needs a Finance Director that has autonomy, one who will enforce and require a strong fiscal responsibility, one that has the respect and trust of co- workers, one that works well with Council, and one that works well with the City Manager. He thought all of the concerns and intentions are well intended and right. He said a person needs to be able to effectively communicate with the people they work with; you have to have those peoples trust and he thought that is lacking right now, and that is where he thinks there is a dysfunction. He said he considered the suggestion going into the investigation and asked expressly about it, and looked for the possibility that employees or Department Heads were compelled or influenced in bringing their information to him and sitting down and telling him what they thought. He did not think there was anything to that, and many of the Department Heads had been tamping down this situation for a year, had been trying to make less of it than more of it, had been asking subordinates to refrain from bringing information forward to the Council or Human Resources because they were trying to give this situation time so that the situation could heal. He would hope in bringing this information forward that neither the messengers nor the report is attacked for bringing it forward. He thought the spirit should be that this information be accepted with the seriousness that it deserves and that some sort of legitimate response or concern about how to address these problems be first and foremost rather than to quibble about one aspect or another aspect of what happens on one page of the report. Mr. Mattimore took a moment to respond to a criticism of the report. He said the Finance Director was offered to give him any person' s name to interview, and he would interview them, and he did. He said he did not select or compel a set of people to talk to him because he thought he knew what they were going to say because he had no idea what any of them would say. He said it was not anything he had set out a menu to preordain what was going to be said to him or brought to his attention. He has had the opportunity to work and communicate with the City Manager over the years, the City Attorney a few times, and the Finance Director a few times, and he hoped over the last couple of months since he saw this developing that everyone would find a way. He said the situation they are in now is to some extent because Dr. Pullen took him aside and said do your risk management function; you are the labor attorney for the City and you have an obligation, and that is what he tried to do. He thought if they do not address this situation, they do expose themselves to liability, and beyond that, beyond liability for people thinking they will be retaliated against or being forced to work in an offensive environment, he thinks he sees a continuing decline in morale and a loss of employees because he had employees come to him and genuinely tell him if something is not done to change the situation, they will leave. He said this is a difficult situation but he commended Council and the Mayor; through this process they have given a voice to the employees, and hopefully when the day is done this situation will have improved rather than continue on a path where there is a potential for further litigation, a work place that is not an environment that we can be proud of to provide to our employees and a City that runs more efficiently and effectively. He thanked Council for the opportunity and hoped the report is of some benefit to each of them. The Mayor opened the floor for questions from Council. Mr. Holmes asked Mr. Mattimore in his review with the employees, as far as their reference to a hostile work environment, if he thought the employees had sufficient claim and legitimate concern about that. Special Council 3 -11 - 08 33 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS cont. Mr. Mattimore responded he thought there are employees who believe they are subject to retaliation and have been adversely affected by it and as a result he thought there is exposure to liability. Mr. Holmes asked why Mr. Mattimore said emotions ran high during the interview process. Mr. Mattimore replied he had employees that became emotional to the point where they were crying and could not continue to speak. He said he asked closed ended and open ended questions and they were also offered an opportunity to respond to open ended questions. Mr. Miller asked when Mr. Mattimore started to do business in Fort Walton Beach. Mr. Mattimore replied he thought he started when Billy Mikel was the Human Resource Director. Mr. Miller noted several witness summaries were not included in the report. Mr. Mattimore replied witnesses that had no information about the charge of the investigation and came to them with completely extraneous concerns were not included in the summary. Mr. Miller asked Mr. Mattimore to tell them the nature of the inquiry. Mr. Mattimore responded that the Mayor initiated an investigation to look into the working relationships and workplace interaction among the Charter Officers and among the Charter Officers and the Officials and employees of the City. Mr. Miller asked about the last paragraph that it is not the intent of the inquiry to draw conclusions. Mr. Mattimore replied he did not approach it to make recommendation or action. He said it is a report of facts. Mr. Miller commented Mr. Mattimore used adjectives instead of exact numbers which he thought biased the conclusions or summary of findings. He asked if the issues brought out in the report were brought to the attention of the City Manager or to the attention of Council. Mr. Mattimore replied he asked certain people that question and they were concerned with retaliation and reminded Council he had witnesses that were told they could not to go to Human Resources to report those things. Mr. Miller asked Mr. Mattimore if he was aware there have been Council meetings previously with the intent to fire the Finance Director and at those times the floor is open to everyone to bring testimony before the Council. Mr. Mattimore replied whether that is the case or not, those people came to him and relayed their impressions and observations, and he did not know why or whether they came here before he had no knowledge. Mr. Miller asked Mr. Mattimore where the information came from about legal counsel, the actuary, and the auditor, if that was provided in testimony. Mr. Mattimore replied that was told him by the Finance Director herself that was the interaction between her and the pension