Banning City Councilman repeatedly denied that the grand jury investigation report released in June is about him.
He claims that he has hardly ever been around city hall to “bully” employees.
The allegations that his colleagues on the council believe point to him, he claims are false.
“There is no evidence in the grand jury report that points” specifically to him, he noted.
Peterson points out that his name does not appear anywhere in the grand jury’s report — at least not the version that was released to the public.
Peterson instead suspects that the bullying councilmember being alluded to in the report could be former mayor George Moyer, who Peterson claims to have witnessed yelling and screaming at current and former employees, including Economic Development Director Ted Shove.
It is Moyer that Peterson blamed for creating a toxic environment at city hall.
Peterson suggested that, perhaps, the person who allegedly circumvents the city manager could be Mayor Art Welch himself, since there already has been a grand jury investigation into an event that was associated with Welch’s actions.
As for potential unethical behavior, Peterson accused former mayor Debbie Franklin of visiting a constituent in their home to try and convince them to press sexual assault charges against Peterson.
He stated that stories in the Record Gazette naming him as the individual alluded to by the grand jury are part of a retaliatory smear campaign.
Peterson reiterated a litany of glowing support from former employees like Community Services Director Heidi Meraz and former personnel director Rita Chapparosa, as well as former interim police chiefs Alex Diaz and Robert Fisher, as evidence that he is nothing more than a friendly, helpful councilman who stands up for what is right — even if others find his mannerisms gruff.
Peterson called out developer Diversified Pacific, who has contributed to local political campaigns, as being behind an effort to oust him from his seat.
He claimed that City Manager Doug Schulze was not forthcoming about his history when he was hired, and chastised him for what Peterson believes was an unethical pursuit of the current police chief, who Schulze previously worked with back in Washington state.
He berated former city manager Michael Rock and former administrative services director Rochelle Clayton for what he declared had been either unethical or inept behavior.
For the newer councilmembers Dave Happe and Colleen Wallace, Peterson credits them for making statements that “incite the public.”
For all the allegations in the grand jury report, not one of the people outlined in any of them had their day in court, according to Peterson.
“No judge or jury reviewed the information in these lawsuits,” Peterson said. “I emphatically disagree with all the findings.”
The council, which has 90 days to respond to the grand jury’s findings, were tasked with drafting a response, which passed 4-1 with Peterson being the lone dissenter.
Part of the letter’s responses follow.
As to the grand jury’s finding of “City Council Member circumvents city manager relationship” (in which the grand jury cites incidents in which an unnamed city councilmember directly dealt with department heads and city employees) the city responded that “The council believes that councilmembers should abide” by the municipal code “and deal with the administrative services of the city through the city manager, and not give orders to any subordinate of the city manager.”
As to “Council member’s independent actions” (of which the grand jury claims that an unnamed councilmember’s actions created a destructive culture within city government), the city agreed that there needs to be improvement in the culture between city council and city employees, and that “no councilmember should engage in improper, unprofessional or inappropriate contact with the city employees.”
Regarding the grand jury’s assertion of “Low employee retention” (which the grand jury found that an unnamed councilmember’s “inappropriate actions have contributed to low employee retention and difficulty in filling open positions with qualified personnel”), the city council “generally agrees” that high turnover “is not in the interests of the city,” with the proviso that it “would be inappropriate for the city council, from a risk management perspective, to specifically comment” about the work environment within the city other than to “affirm the City’s goal of maintaining a professional, safe and legally compliant workplace.”
August 30, 2019
Banning Record Gazette
By David James Heiss
No comments:
Post a Comment