ABSTRACT: As a follow-up to PART I, PART II presents a Carmelite’s questions on the City’s Harassment Prevention Policy emailed to the City and the City’s response. If and when responses are forthcoming from City Attorney Don Freeman and attorneys representing the City at Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, their responses will be posted.
A Carmelite’s Email:
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Subject: RE: Policy
RE: CITY POLICY NO. C93-02
1. Who conducts an investigation when the complainant is the Personnel Officer and the alleged harasser is the City Administrator? To whom does the Personnel Officer file his/her written complaint when the alleged harasser is the City Administrator?
2. In May and June 2008, who were the members of the City Council’s Personnel Committee?
3. Regarding the complainant being the Personnel Officer and the alleged harasser being the City Administrator, does the City make the assumption that a credible investigation can be conducted without the city administrator being placed on a leave of absence for the duration of the investigation?
4. Regarding inquiries for records pertaining to Jane Miller, does the City make the assumption that it is appropriate and ethical for the city clerk (‘Female B’) to be in charge of city records over the course of Jane Miller’s active lawsuit?
City’s Response:
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009
To: Heidi Burch
Subject: RE: Policy
I have forwarded your email to City Attorney Don Freeman as well as Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, as they are handling the current litigation about which you are inquiring.
Thank you,
Heidi
No comments:
Post a Comment