Loading...
CC - Item 5A - Release of Personnel Investigation Report• • ~ ~g 0 `6 ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT 47 ~A, TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL C~i FROM: OLIVER CHI, CITY MANAGER DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 SUBJECT: RELEASE OF PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION REPORT- REQUESTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GARY TAYLOR SUMMARY At the August 28, 2007 City Council meeting, Council Member Gary Taylor requested that an item be placed on a future agenda to vote on the distribution of a report prepared by an outside investigative firm dealing with a pending personnel issue. Council Member Taylor has submitted this request in writing and is attached to this report (Attachment A). Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction to the City Attorney and staff with regard to releasing the information being requested by Council Member Taylor to the entire City Council. LEGAL REVIEW This staff report has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. Submitted by: O i r Chi City Manager ~ w- Attachment A - September 4, 2007 Letter from Council Member Gary Taylor APPROVED FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: • Gary A. Taylor September 4, 2007 Rosemead City Council Members 8838 E. Valley Blvd. Rosemead, CA 91770 • Page 1 of-" SEP 0 5 2007 Dear Council Members, I have listed my responses to the letter dated August 14, 2007 from Mr. Bonifacio Garcia, City Attorney, as follows: 1) Page one, paragraph two The letter is not a public record. The letter is a document that the elected five member City Council has a responsibility and obligation to review very carefully to decide what actions need to be taken. I am one of the five elected City Council members for the City of Rosemead. Each of us has a duty to understand what needs to be done to protect the rights of employees and residents of the City of Rosemead. It is my understanding that NO ONE in Rosemead city government has a copy of the reports. The request is simple. I. as a member of the Rosemead City Council, the client, am requesting to review documents to understand what is happening in our city and what needs to be done to correct the problems. 2) Page one, paragraph three This is NOT a general Public Records Act request. This is a request that the elected City Council of Rosemead, the client, receive the reports done by the special investigator. Why must the Rosemead City Council, the client, wave the exemption and authorize disclosure TO THEMSELVES? No one in Rosemead City government has a copy of the two reports. 3) Page two, paragraph two The City Attorney is making personal conclusions and personal opinions for ALL elected officials and employees of Rosemead, ESPECIALLY since NO ONE has received a copy of ' -At e,two reports. 4) -Page two, paragraph three Attorney work product is exempt from disclosure to the client, the Rosemead City Council. The City council must take express action to wave privilege before attorneys for the City may disclose the documents to the City Council in order for the City Council to verify the claims made by employees. 5) Page two, paragraph four There is to be no disclosure to the client, the elected City Council, of the special investigation that has disclosed several problems and concerns as revealed by twenty-two employees of the City of Rosemead. Now the City Council may choose to wave the exemption and make the requested disclosure for the City Council in order that the Council may find out the facts and concerns of the Rosemead city employees. 0 Page -2 of 2 6) Page two, paragraph five There is an entirely different meaning for public disclosure to the public and disclosing to the responsible elected City Council members that are required by law to receive and review reports, complaints and issues that create a hostile work environment against city employees. 7) Page three, paragraph two The City Council is required by law to protect the rights of employees from abuse due to allowing a hostile work environment. There are several other items of concern to employees other than the accusations against Mr. Nunez. This information that the special investigator stated, is now being withheld at the expense and possible loss of employees' jobs 8) Page three, paragraph three Waiver of Public Records Act exemptions of one person means waiver for all. Does Government code 6254.5 provide that disclosure of the 2 reports to the City Council under the attorney-client privilege mean the City Council is not allowed to be informed and make proper decisions as required by law to protect all city employees? 9) Page three, paragraph four I believe there is an abuse under the color of official right that the City Council is being denied the right, responsibility, and mandatory legal requirement to defend the city employees against a hostile work environment. Everyone claims there are no written reports in the possession of any city official. Two reports were referred to in the closed session meeting on April 3, 2007. The special investigator stated that the employee did not report work incidents to management because they thought nothing would be done about it. I believe the City Council is negligence in law and is guilty of misfeasance in the improper performance of lawfully protecting the right of city employees. "fhere is much information that is being withheld from the City Council and for the reasons stated above is why I am requesting copies of the two reports. Respectfully, Gary A. Taylor Rosemead Councilmember CC: Rosemead City Clerk, Nina Castruita Rosemead City Manager, Oliver Chi Rosemead City Attorney, Bonifacio Garcia Attachment Included: Letter dated August 14, 2007 from City Attorney