Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/3/1993Wednesday, February 3, 1993 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Special Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, February 3, 1993, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Richard N. Bird, Chairman; Fran B. Adams; Carolyn K. Eggert; and Kenneth R. Macht. Vice Chairman John Tippin was in Stuart, Florida on County business. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order. APPEAL OF TERMINATION - JON HALLOUIST The Board reviewed the following memo dated 1/29/93: The County Administrator has prepared substantial background material on the employee's appeal; however, because the Board is sitting as a quasi-judicial body, I have advised the Administrator not to show the material to the Board until the hearing unless the opposing side stipulates to its earlier admission (Mr. Hallquist's attorney has not yet agreed to this) . At the hearing objections may be made by the opposing side and the 'County staff will make the argument for introduction of whatever evidence they wish. CPV/lk cc: James E. Chandler, County Administrator 1 L -FEB BOOK 88 NAGE 733 Other TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE: January 29, 1993 RE: HALLQUIST APPEAL The County Administrator has prepared substantial background material on the employee's appeal; however, because the Board is sitting as a quasi-judicial body, I have advised the Administrator not to show the material to the Board until the hearing unless the opposing side stipulates to its earlier admission (Mr. Hallquist's attorney has not yet agreed to this) . At the hearing objections may be made by the opposing side and the 'County staff will make the argument for introduction of whatever evidence they wish. CPV/lk cc: James E. Chandler, County Administrator 1 L -FEB BOOK 88 NAGE 733 rFEB 3 1993 BOOK 88 PAGE 7.34 -1 County Attorney Vitunac advised that this is an appeal of employment termination, but we don't know at this time exactly what his appeal is. Deputy County Attorney Will Collins will give a history, Recreation Director Pat Callahan will read into the record the termination letter she gave to Mr. Hallquist back in November, and then Administrator Chandler's letter upholding the termination will be read into the record. At that time we will turn the appeal over to Mr. Hallquist, who will have time to make an appeal including calling County witnesses and asking questions or making legal arguments or whatever else he would like to say. Attorney Vitunac noted that he has divorced himself from this situation and that Attorney Collins will be the lead attorney for staff. Attorney Collins will respond to whatever Mr. Hallquist says, and at that time Attorney Collins may introduce evidence backing up the County Administrator's letter. Attorney Vitunac noted that there wasn't any backup material to the Agenda for this meeting. This is an appeal which means that the burden of proof is on Mr. Hallquist, who is representing himself today without legal counsel. Therefore, we will bend over backwards to make sure the record is full and he has every chance, and we will do whatever we can so that the hearing is fair to both sides. County Attorney Will Collins wished to begin by giving a brief history of Mr. Hallquist's termination process: Mr. Hallquist was employed by the County as a supervisor of lifeguards. He met with Recreation Director Pat Callahan in mid-September, 1992, and after a couple of meetings, which may or may not be gone into in more detail here, he was terminated by Mrs. Callahan on September 18, 1992. Three days later on September 21, 1992, the written termination notice was forwarded to Mr. Hallquist under the signature of Pegi Wilkes, Acting Director,of Recreation. Mr. Hallquist subsequently hired Attorney James Wilson, who filed a timely, formal appeal on September 28, 1992, setting out some procedural objections to the discharge as well as some substantive challenges to the discharge. Hearings were held by the County Administrator on October 21 and continued to October 27 at which time Mr. Hallquist's appeal was heard by Administrator Chandler. Questions were asked by Administrator Chandler of Mr. Hallquist and questions were asked of County staff by Attorney Wilson on Mr. Hallquist's behalf. After those appeal hearings, Administrator Chandler issued a determination upholding the discharge by letter dated November 3, 1992. Attorney Wilson filed an immediate appeal on behalf of Mr. Hallquist for an appeal to the County Commission. However, that appeal was delayed. The time lapse between the 2 M M November 3, 1992 determination and the January 19, 1993 appeal request is related to Mr. Hallquist's change in legal counsel from James Wilson to Wayne McDonough, who requested today's appeal. However, we were notified by phone yesterday that Attorney McDonough would not be here and that Mr. Hallquist would be representing himself. That is a thumbnail sketch of the events that took place. The actual basis for the discharge was under County Personnel Rules and Regulations, Section 12.21, Group III Offense #11, which reads: "Immoral, unlawful or improper conduct, or indecency, either on or off the job, which would tend to affect the employee's relationship to the job, fellow workers, reputation _.or goodwill in the community." Attorney Vitunac then swore in the following witnesses: Pegi Wilkes, Acting County Recreation Director; Pat Callahan, County Recreation Director; Jack Price, County Personnel Director; Jim Chandler, County Administrator; and appellant Jon Hallquist. With that, Attorney Collins asked Ms. Wilkes to read into the record the following termination letter of September 21, 1992: September 21, 1992 Mr. Jon M. Hallquist 306 Anchor Way Fort Pierce, Florida 34946 Dear Mr. Hallquist, The purpose of this letter is to confirm the decision by Indian River County to terminate your employment effective September 18. This documents that event, of which you were advised verbally on that date by your supervisor, Recreation Director Callahan. During the week of September 14, 1992, Mrs. Callahan was made aware of serious concerns by a number of your subordinate lifeguards about the integrity of the lifeguard operation. Those concerns focused on the erosion of patrol quality and a threat to the reputation of the lifeguard service resulting from alleged drug use by you and one of the lifeguards. Several meetings with the lifeguards and with you privately resulted in one conclusion. You have a lengthy history of off -the - job drug use, as you stated in meetings with Mrs. Callahan and later with Mrs. Callahan and Jack Price from Personnel. Of great significance is that you communicated no interest in stopping your use of drugs, but rather justified that practice to Mrs. Callahan. Your job is a public safety position. I am convinced that public safety and the overall effectiveness of the lifeguard service are threatened by your actions. Under the policy of Indian River County, the category of "offenses" established as Group III, are those which may result in discharge for the first occurrence. I believe this situation warrants that action because two of those offenses are directly applicable. 3 BOOK 8$ PAGE 735 r- FEB X01 BOOK Hallquist - Page 2 Those two offenses are: "11. Immoral, unlawful or improper conduct, or indecency, either on or off the job, which would tend to affect the employee's relationship to the job, fellow workers, reputation or goodwill in the community." "16. Drinking intoxicating liquor while on duty or habitual use or abuse of controlled dangerous substances; or reporting for work while obviously under the influence of alcohol or drugs." As a career service employee, you have the right to appeal this decision in writing within five working days from the date you reveive this letter, as described in section AM 904.1 of the Administrative Policy Manual. An extracted copy of the Grievance procedure is attached. Payment of unused vacation is authorized only upon termination of employment. Therefore, if a written appeal to this termination decision is received within the above specified time, payment of unused vacation will be withheld pending a final determination of your appeal. If no written appeal is received within the above specified time, your final pay check, which will include payment for unused vacation, will be available for pickup by you from Personnel on Friday, October 9, 1992, provided all equipment you are responsible for has been turned in to your supervisor. sincerely, Pegi Wilkes Acting Recreation Director ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY MANUAL SECTION PERSONNEL SUBJECT GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE NUMBER AM -904.1 DATE EFFECT 06-01-8! PAGE 1 OF 3 POLM: It is the policy of the County to encourage employees to bring to the — attention of management their complaints about work relate situations. Employees will be provided with an opportunity to presen their complaints and appeal decisions by management through a forma complaint and grievance procedure. All complaints or grievances wil. be resolved fairly and promptly. COMMENT: • �JA grievance may be defined as an employee's expressed feeling of dideatisfaction concerning conditions of employment or treatment bt management, supervisors, or other employees. Examples of actions whic2 may be causes of grievances include: 4 ads Application of* County policies, practices, rules, regulations, and procedures believed to be to the detriment of an employee; . Treatment considered unfair by an employee, such as coercion, b. reprisal, harassment or intimidation; S.. Allaged discrimination because of race, religion, color, sex, age, marital status, national origin, physical handicap or any other non -merit factor; and d. Improper or unfair administration of employee benefits or rmn"4tions of employment such as vacations, fringe benefits, promotions,- retirement, holidays, performance review, salary, or seniority. 2. Supervisors are responsible for ensuring that the grievance is fully processed. until the employee is satisfied with the decision or until the employee's right of appeal is exhausted. No employee shall be penalized for using the County's grievance procedure, unless repetitive unmeritorious grievances are viewed as abuse of the procedure. 3. Any grievance filed shall systematically follow the grievance procedure as outlined herein, and shall refer to the provision or provisions of County policy, practice, procedure, rule, or regulation alleged to have been violated, and shall adequately set forth the facts pertaining to the alleged violation, and the remedy or correction sought. to • The aggrieved employee shall present the grievance to his/her division head. Discussions will be informal for the purpose of settling differences in the simplest and most direct manner. The division head shall reach a decision and communicate it in writing to the aggrieved employee within 3 working days from the date the grievance was presented. If there is no division head, proceed directly to Step 2. Steffi 2: If the grievance is not settled in Step 1, the aggrieved employee, within 3 working days of receipt of the written decision, shall forward the written grievance to the department head. The department head shall meet with the aggrieved employee to determine the facts of the case. Any decision rendered shall be written to the aggrieved employee and shall be dated and signed by the County's representative at that step. Within 5 working days after the receipt of the grievance, unless such time is mutually extended in writing and the grievance is not solved, the grievance is then forwarded to the Personnel Director. Step 3: If the grievance is not settled at Step 2, the aggrieved employee shall, within 5 working days, forward the written grievance to the Personnel Director. The Personnel Director shall meet with the aggrieved employee within 10 working days after receipt of the grievance, unless such time is mutually extended in writing. The Personnel Director shall obtain the facts and forward his recommendations to the County Administrator within 5 working days after the meeting, unless this period is extended by mutual agreement. The County Administrator shall have 7 working days to consult with any of the parties involved and render a decision in writing to the employee, unless this period is extended by mutual agreement in writing. 5 FEB -31992 BOOK - 88 PACE 137 31992 BOOK 88 PAGE 738 4. The decision of the County Administrator at Step 3 shall be final and binding on the parties, without further right to appeal. 5. A grievance must be brought forward as soon as it might reasonably have become known to exist. In 'the event a grievance arises, the employee must submit a grievance to his/her division head ( Step 1) within 5 working days after he/she had knowledge of the grievance, unless good and reasonable cause is shown for the delay. 6,.__A grievance presented at Step 2 and above shall be dated and signed by the aggrieved employee presenting it. 7. When a written grievance is presented, the County's representative shall provide a dated and signed receipt for it at that particular step. 8. A grievance not advanced to the higher step within the time limit provided shall be deemed permanently withdrawn, and as having been settled on the basis of the decision most recently given. Failure on the part of the County's representative to answer within the time limit set forth in any step will entitle the employee to proceed to the next step. Attorney Collins read into the record the following letter signed by Attorney James Wilson dated September 28, 1992: SULLIVAN, STONE, SULLIVAN, LAJOIE & THACKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW CHARLES A. SULLIVAN PLEASE REPLY TO: 1601 20TH STREET ROBERT E. STONE POST OFFICE BOX 2620 POST OFFICE BOX 2620 VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32961-2620 CHARLES A. SULLIVAN, JR. VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32961-2620 (407) 567-4371 ROGER W. LAJOIE FAX (407) 778-4947 J. RUSSELL THACKER 133 SOUTH SECOND STREET JAMES P. WILSON FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34980 (407) 464-4566 September 28, 1992 Patricia Callahan, Recreation Director 52b Z1<' Jack Price, Personnel Director Jim Chandler, County Administrator Indian River County 4D* S�Algg? 1840 25th Street �; /Nlsl Vero Beach, Florida .� 011PAta� f IN RE: Jon M. Hallquist Dear Mrs. Callahan, Mr. Price and Mr. Chandler: Please be advised that this office has been retained to represent Jon Hallquist, in connection with the County's apparent attempt -to discharge Mr. Hallquist from his employment with the County by letter dated September 21, 1992. That letter gave Mr. Hallquist the right to appeal the decision in accordance with Section AM 904.1 of the Administrative Policy Manual of the County. However, upon review of that section, it appears that this matter is not properly brought as a grievance under the Administrative Policy Manual but instead should be considered as an appeal under the Rules and Regulations for the Personnel Management System of Indian River 6 � s � County. Therefore, for the Personnel "Regulations" are letter as an appeal a grievance under Hallquist's rights I have forwarded a Attorney, and I suc letter with their to the appeal. Sections 9 and 12 of the Rules and Regulations Management System, hereinafter referred to as relevant to this action. Please consider this of the dismissal under said Regulations and as the Administrative Policy Manual so that Mr. to appeal this action shall not be jeopardized. copy of this letter to Charles Vitunac, County ;gest that the County Administrator review this tttorney prior to setting any hearings relating The grounds for this appeal are as follows: 1. Mr. Hallquist was terminated by Pegi Wilkes, an employee of the City of Vero Beach Recreation Department. Mr. Hallquist is a County employee and does not work under the supervision of City employees, unless such employees are appointed to serve in both positions. It is my understanding that Mrs. Wilkes does not have any authority to enforce disciplinary action against any County employee, therefore the dismissal should be found null and void and Mr. Hallquist should be reinstated to his previous position. 2. Mr. Hallquist was suspended from his position prior to dismissal. Under Section 12.05 of such Regulations, suspended employees shall be notified by the supervisor at the time of the suspension of the specific reasons for the action. Such notification shall be in writing dated and hand delivered or delivered by certified mail to the employees last known address. By verbally suspending Mr. Hallquist, the County violated Section 12.05 of the Regulations. Therefore, Mr. Hallquist's suspension should be considered a nullity and Mr. Hallquist's position and pay should remain in effect until properly notified of the suspension in writing. 3. The County, or the applicable City officer, as the case may be, has attempted to discharge Mr. Hallquist from his position based upon alleged acts which were "immoral, unlawful, improper or indecent" and for . habitual use or abuse of controlled dangerous substances or reporting for work while obviously under the influence of alcohol or drugs. However, the County has completely failed to present any substantive evidence or testimony to establish a basis for such charges. Therefore, Mr. Hallquist is entitled to a hearing and the County should be required to produce evidence and witnesses to substantiate such charges. In the absence of such evidence, witnesses or testimony, such charges should be dismissed and Mr. Hallquist reinstated. 4. The County has failed to follow its own procedure for dismissal as contained within Section 9.07 of the Regulations. Section 9.07(D)(2) states that career service employees who are to be dismissed because of unsatisfactory performance "shall be notified in writing of the specific causes for dismissal at least five (5) working days prior to dismissal.. Such notice will include the employee's right of appeal.." In taking action against Mr. Hallquist, Mr. Hallquist was notified letter dated September 21, 1992 that he was 7 L_ FEB 31993 BOOK 88 PAGE 739 r FEB 31993 BOOK 88 F GE 7401 terminated effective September 18, 1992. Therefore, the County has effectively terminated Mr. Hallquist in violation of Section 9.07(D)(2). Further, Section 9.07(D)(3) provides that career service employees who are dismissed because of conduct prejudicial to the public interest,shall be given notice of dismissal on or immediately before the dismissal date and shall receive a written statement of the charges within seventy two (72) hours following dismissal. The County has failed to comply with this Section. Therefore, due to the County's failure to comply with its Rules and Regulations relating to suspensions and/or dismissals, any attempts to dismiss Mr. Hallquist by the County's present action should be considered a nullity and Mr. Hallquist should be immediately reinstated to his position with the County. Mrs. Wilkes' letter of September 21, 1992 sets forth, as a reason for the dismissal, the alleged fact that Mr. Hallquist has a 1 engthy history of off -the- job drug use and that, he had no interest in stopping the use of drugs. Mr. Hallquist adamantly denies making such statements. In fact, when Mr. Hallquist contacted my office on September 21st because of his belief that the County intended to take action against him, I immediately instructed him to submit to drug screening to determine whether Mr. Hallquist has any present history of drug use. If drug use had pre-existed, Mr. Hallquist would have tested positive even if he had ceased the use of drugs on or around the time of his meeting with Mr_ . Price and Mrs. Callahan. I have enclosed a copy of the results of such drug screening for your information. They indicate that Mr. Hallquist is absolutely free of any illegal narcotic or controlled substances as of September 21, 1992. If these results are not satisfactory to the County, Mr. Hallquist has indicated that he will submit to any drug test requested by the County. In fact, if Mr. Hallquist is reinstated to his position, he has requested that he be held to the same standards as required by the County of its firefighters who, like lifeguards, work under extreme stress and are responsible for the health, safety and welfare of the public on a very direct basis. The County's drug and alcohol policy which has been approved by the firefighter's also provides assistance for persons suspected of using alcohol or illegal drugs. Mr. Hallquist and other County employees should -be entitled to the same protections, if they are suspected of such substance use. Mr. Hallquist has been employed by Indian River County almost ten (10) years and has compiled an exemplary work record. The County's improper and unjustified dismissal of Mr. Hallquist should be set aside and Mr. Hallquist should be immediately reinstated to his Pi tion with back pay. Therefore, we request a hearing in accorda4" with applicable County policies. Thank you for your cotisidera o3,. S ncerel y urs, i i� James P. Wilson JPW/ ag 8 J r � ., . Allied Clinical Laboratories 3070 DOCTORS' CLINIC (PHYCOR OF VERO BEACH) 2300 FIFTH AVE VERO BEACH, FL 32960 DRUG :iCREE1.] :f.V, URINE AMPHETAMINES BARBITURATES BENZODIAZEPINES CANNABINOIDS COCAINE/METABOLITE METHAQUALONE OPIATES PHENCYCLIDINE 9424--44 5i:. 1-1eteY sbU'I'I4, r' 1. .331L)2 (8:13) 576-1444 (800) G85..-738:3 PATIENT NAME: HALLQUIST,JON M ROOM#: AGE: 3E SEX: P; ACCESSION N: P187982Z COLLECTED: 09/21/92 02:15 RECEIVED: 09/23/92 REPORTED: 09/23/92 9: 5GAM REO.MIMED. REC.N: REQUESTINGPHYS: HILL, J PT. ID 9: 5738158 NEGATIVE NEGATIVE CUTOFF: 1000 NG/ML NEGATIVE NEGATIVE CUTOFF: 200 NG/ML NEGATIVE NEGATIVE CUTOFF: 300 NG/ML NEGATIVE NEGATIVE CUTOFF: 100 NG/ML NEGATIVE NEGATIVE CUTOFF: 300 NG/ML NEGATIVE NEGATIVE CUTOFF: 750 NG/ML NEGATIVE NEGATIVE CUTOFF: 300 NG/ML NEGATIVE NEGATIVE CUTOFF: 25 NG/ML 0 *REFERENCE RANGES ARE ADJUSTED FOR AGE OR SEX OR BOTH IF GIVEN. IF AGE NOT GIVEN, ADULT NORMAL RANGES ARE PRINTED. ** FINAL REPORT *** P1879822 5738156 HALLQUIST,JON M 9 FE3 1993 BOOK 88 PAGE 741t �F E B 1993 Booz 88 vnE 742 Attorney Collins advised that based on that appeal, subsequent appeal hearings were held, and on November 3, 1992, appeal determination was made. the the At the request of Attorney Collins, County Administrator Jim Chandler stated his name and position for the record. Attorney Collins asked, and Administrator Chandler confirmed that he held appeal hearings on the matter of the discharge of Jon Hallquist on October 21 and 27, 1992. Attorney Collins asked Administrator Chandler if, as a result of holding those hearings, he had come to any determination with regard to the propriety of the discharge, and Administrator Chandler stated that he had. Attorney Collins asked Administrator Chandler to read into the record his findings as a result of that appeal hearing, the letter dated November 3, 1992. Telephone: (407) 5674MM November 3, 1992 BOARD OF COUNTY C0A4Mjaaj vjv r jm Y 1840 25th Strut, Vero Brach, Florida -32960 James P. Wilson, Esq. Sullivan, Stone, Sullivan, LaJoie & Thacker 1601 20th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Dear Mr. Wilson: 5uncom Telephone: 224-1011 The following is my decision regarding your appeal, dated September 28, 1992 of the termination of Jon M. Hallquist., The decision is based on my conclusions resulting from my review of the Rules and Regulations for the Personnel Management System of Indian River County and the information presented at the appeal meetings on October 21, 1992 and October 27, 1992. By my letter dated October 1, 1992 to you and as I stated at the October 21, 1992 meeting, the appeal is being processed pursuant to Sections 9 and 12 of the Rules and Regulations. As agreed at the October 21, 1992 meeting, I indicated I would make determinations with respect to two basic areas of the appeal. The first determination would be whether the County followed proper procedures per the Rules and Regulations. The second determination would be whether Mr. Hallquist's appeal for reinstatement should be approved or denied. 10 As you indicated and elaborated on at the October 21, 1992 meeting, the procedural questions are contained in your September 28, 1992 letter. Therefore, the following is in response to each as they appear in that letter. 1. Pat Callahan has been appropriately recognized and designated by the County as the County Recreation Director. As such she has full department head responsibility and authority for administration of County Recreation, including departmental personnel matters. In her absence, the person designated by Pat Callahan is recognized by the County as the Acting Recreation Director. Mr. Haliquist was verbally terminated by Pat Callahan on September 18, 1992. Pegi Wilkes, having been properly designated as Acting Director, notified Mr. Haliquist of his termination by certified letter dated September 21, 1992. Pegi Wilkes had been fully apprised of the circumstances and issued the letter at the direction of Pat Callahan. The procedural actions by Pegi Wilkes, in my opinion, were clearly consistent with County policy and procedures. 2. - Mr. Haliquist was not formally suspended by Pat Callahan per Section 9.07F or 12.05. After the meeting with him on September 16, 1992 they agreed to meet again on September 17, 1992, but he was not to report for work. The meetings on September 17, 1992 resulted in an agreement to meet again on September 18, 1992, but he was not to report to work. Mr. Hallquist was terminated on the afternoon of September 18, 1992. Mr. Haliquist was compensated for September 17, 1992, but not for September 18, 1992. At this time It is not clear whether he was regularly scheduled to work on September 18, 1992. Considering the nature of the allegations, in my opinion, until a final determination was made, the actions by Pat Callahan were appropriate and in the best interest of Mr. Haliquist and the County. In as much as it is not clear whether he was scheduled to work the 18th, I am of the opinion he should be compensated for that day. In my opinion, ✓ the preceding is consistent with County policy and procedures. 3. Pat Callahan testified at the October 21, 1992 meeting that she met with Mr. Haliquist to discuss the drug allegations and give him the opportunity to respond. Mr. Haliquist acknowledged, at the October 21, 1992 meeting that he met with Pat Callahan and that he provided his response. The result, in Pat Callahan's opinion, was that Mr. Haliquist should be terminated and she did so verbally in a meeting with him on September 18, 1992. The meetings of October 21, 1992 and October 27, 1992 were to hear your appeal of that decision. In my opinion, the preceding is consistent with County policy and procedures. 4. Based on the seriousness of the allegations and Mr. Hallquist's public safety responsibilities, in my opinion, Section 9.07(D)(3) is applicable. According to Pat Callahan, she verbally terminated Mr. Haliquist on Friday, September 18, 1992. That same day, Personnel advised Mr. Haliquist he would receive a written statement by certified mail. The written dismissal statement was transmitted by certified mail to Mr. Haliquist on Monday, September 21, 1992. Since he had not received the statement Tuesday, September 22, 1992, Mr. Haliquist picked up a copy from Personnel that day. The statement was received by certified mail Wednesday, September 23, 1992. In my opinion, the preceding is consistent with County policy and procedures. In summary, I believe proper procedures were adhered to in this matter. The September 21, 1992 dismissal statement reflects that Mr. Haliquist was terminated pursuant to the following Group III Offenses: "11. Immoral, unlawful or improper conduct, or indecency, either on or off the job, which tend to affect the employee's relationship to the job, fellow workers, reputation or goodwill in the community." 11 F 3 1993 800K 88 P,au 743 �F E B 3 1993 ®om 88 PnE 744 "16. Drinking intoxicating liquor while on duty or habitual use or abuse of controlled dangerous substances; or reporting for work while obviously under the influence of alcohol or drugs." In considering the information presented at the October 21, 1992 and October 27, 1992 appeal meetings, in my opinion the primary determination revolves around the allegation of the use of an illegal drug, marijuana, by a public safety supervisor. At the. appeal meetings, Pat Callahan indicated she initiated her review as a result of a letter dated September 12, 1992 signed by a number: of lifeguards. The primary thrust of the letter, meetings with the lifeguards on September 16, 1992, and individual letters from lifeguards received on September 16, 1992, were allegations relating to another lifeguard, Chad Summerlin. The letter from Lifeguard John D. Frazier, Jr. alleges use of marijuana by Chad Summerlin and Jon Hallquist while on duty September 12, 1992. On September 16, 1992, Chad Summerlin resigned. At that time, Pat Callahan indicated that Summerlin stated that "Captain Jon" smoked his pot in the tower on September 12, 1992. Pat Callahan stated that she met with Jon Hallquist on September 16, 1992. Pat Callahan stated that at that meeting, Jon Hallquist told her that he used natural drugs, had a long past of drug use and his drug use impaired his supervisory capacity. Personnel Director Jack Price stated that at a meeting on September 17, 1992 with Pat Callahan and Jon Hallquist, that Hallquist admitted to Price's satisfaction that he had a drug problem. At the October 21, 1992 appeal meeting, in response to the preceding, Jon Hallquist stated that Pat Callahan did not understand what he had said. He stated that he did not use drugs and that he did not use drugs on the job. He indicated that he had used drugs a long time ago and that he was recently depressed because of personal problems, not because of the -use of drugs. He indicated that he felt the allegations from the lifeguards were in response to his strict supervisory practices. A copy of a September 21, 1992 Doctors Clinic drug screen was- submitted as evidence that Mr. Hallquist was free of any illegal narcotic or controlled substances as of September 21, 1992. Following the preceding, I asked Jon Haliquist if he had used drugs since he has been employed by the County. He stated that he used marijuana several months ago, but did not use marijuana while on duty. I asked him if he was aware that marijuana was an illegal drug and he replied "Yes". At a later point in the appeal meeting, Jon Hallquist stated that he had only used marijuana once in the last year. When asked when that was, he stated New Years. I asked why he had earlier in the meeting stated to me that he had used marijuana several months ago. He replied that he had used marijuana this summer and on New Years. At the end of the October 27, 1992 appeal meeting, I advised that I would make my decision and provide it in writing by no later than October 30, 1992. After the conclusion of the October 27, 1992 appeal meeting, you gave Deputy County Attorney Will Collins and me a copy of a document that you received from your client, Jon Hallquist, after the appeal meeting. The document is purportedly a statement dated October 22, 1992 from Chad Summerlin indicating — that he never made any accusations or comments to Pat Callahan regarding Captain Hallquist smoking pot. Will Collins and I advised you that if you and your client wanted to bring Summerlin in as a witness, another appeal meeting would be scheduled. To date, no response has been received. In my opinion, the Information presented by Pat Callahan at the appeal meetings regarding statements made to her by Chad Summerlin and Jon Hallquist regarding drug use are credible. I am of the same opinion with respect to the statements by Jack Price concerning his meeting with Jon Hallquist. In my almost four years' working relationship with both, I have had no reason to doubt nor -do I question their sincerity and honesty. By the same token, I seriously doubt that they misunderstood Mr. Hallquist's comments to them. In the setting of an administrative -appeal hearing, I am of the opinion that their statements alone, taken within the context of the total information presented, is sufficient 12 to deny the appeal. Although obviously not an attorney, I am of the opinion this would also hold true in a formal court setting involving additional witnesses and sworn testimony. However, in my opinion, more importantly, Mr. Hallquist admitted to me at the appeal meeting, his use of the illegal substance, marijuana, as recent as this summer. His differing responses to the question of his drug use during the appeal meeting are also of concern to me as to the credibility of his testimony. In view of his admissions to the use of marijuana, at the appeal meeting, I do not believe it was necessary to pursue the question as to whether the drug screen was valid or not. Based on the information presented and considering the context of the administrative hearing, I believe it is difficult to totally substantiate "....habitual use or abuse of controlled dangerous substances; or reporting for work while obviously under the influence of alcohol or drugs." However, based on the information presented and Mr. Hallquist's admissions, at the appeal meeting to the use of marijuana, in my opinion he clearly violated Group I I I Offenses: -1111. Immoral, unlawful or improper conduct, or indecency, either on or off the job, which tend to affect the employee's relationship to the job, fellow workers, reputation or goodwill in the community." The position of a public safety supervisor is one in which the individual filling that position is vested with a extreme amount of responsibility and trust from the other employees, employer, and public, whom he is there to protect. In my opinion, Mr. Hallquist's violation warranted termination, As a result, I deny the appeal for reinstatement. As provided for in Section 12.07 E, you have the right to appeal this decision to the Board of County Commissioners. Yours truly, James E. Chandler County Administrator cc: Jon M. Hallquist Pat Callahan, VB/IRC Recreation Director William G. Collins II, Deputy County Attorney Jack Price, Personnel Director Attorney Vitunac advised that at this time it would be appropriate to turn this over to Mr. Hallquist, the employee appellant, to present his case. Before Mr. Hallquist began, Chairman Bird wished to comment that as chairman of the Parks & Recreation Committee he has spent a lot of time in the County's parks and recreational facilities and over the years has gotten to know some of the employees fairly well, one of which is Jon Hallquist who was our head lifeguard for some time. He felt that he and Jon considered each other friends, and Jon showed up at his real estate office one day and asked for his advice in this matter. He gave Jon the advice that he should search his conscience and the truth in the matter, and if he felt that he was right, then to follow the appeal process and fight for his job. He further told him that if he did that research and found that he was honestly wrong in what he did, he may not want to go through the appeal process and the embarrassment that may bring, 13 F 7 BOOK 88 NGE 745 BOOK 8 8 PAVE 1 6 -7 but go about his life and put this behind him and try to learn -from whatever mistakes that were made. With that said, Chairman Bird asked if Mr. Hallquist had any problem with him sitting on this Board making a determination on his appeal, and Mr. Hallquist indicated that he did not. Mr. Hallquist proceeded to present his case. He stated that he has been a faithful and loyal employee of the County for over 9 years. He has been affiliated with the Red Cross (lifesaving) for over 20 years. He noted that the initial letter and all the meetings that were held were based on a great deal of hearsay. While employed by the County, he has worked under different supervisors and each of those supervisors dealt with him in different ways. A few years back he was placed under the supervision of Pat Callahan. The first argument he had with Pat Callahan was over the use of yellow caution flags on the beach. He mentioned the rivalry between the City and the County lifeguards. When he requested yellow caution flags and gave her several good reasons for using yellow flags, one being that they are used by the American Red Cross, Mrs. Callahan said that the County doesn't go by the American Red Cross. He told her that he had been certified under the American Red Cross all along. Mr. Hallquist felt there was some animosity towards the American Red Cross. Ever since then, he felt there was some discrimination going on perhaps because he told her this program wasn't exactly right. After that, unfortunately, there was a drowning and Mrs. Callahan recruited a very professional man to replace the City lifeguard captain, and right away he got everything he requested. Mr. Hallquist stated that he would go to Mrs. Callahan and request the same type of things and she would say that she was sorry, but it was a different budget from that of the County. He felt that the City lifeguards getting everything they requested when the County lifeguards did not has caused a great deal of animosity. There seemed to be a constant battle between the City and the County programs. The County lifeguards got a new beach to cover, but no new lifeguard to cover it, which is why he cut back on breaks, etc. He had his lifeguards tighten their belts and cover for one another and work alone instead of in teams. After that, his lifeguards started doing pranks on him on a constant basis. These were stupid things and it started to really upset and depress him. He told Pat Callahan about this, but he got the same answer about the budgets being different. Meanwhile the City lifeguards started having meetings for which they were paid overtime, and he heard that the City seemed to have an agenda to make the City's program more professional than the County's. When he asked Mrs. Callahan about `LE's � � r that, she told him to accept that and be patient, that over a certain amount of time the programs would be equal. His lifeguards felt he was ingratiating himself with her, so he just did the best job he could. It all came down to the point where it was very difficult for him to deal with all the things that were happening. When he again approached Pat Callahan, she became very angry, and ... (tape inaudible) Mr. Hallquist stated that he has never done anything to hamper his ability to do his job. He was doing the best he could. He noted that once when he was taking photographs to show how the lifeguards appear to the public, a man made an obscene gesture toward him. Mr. Hallquist circulated the photographs among the Commissioners. Commissioner Eggert asked Mr. Hallquist to identify the man, and Mr. Hallquist said that ... (tape inaudible) At this point, Mr. Hallquist read into the record the following letter signed by 6 of the 9 lifeguards under his supervision. September iZ, 1992 Dear Pat Callahan, (and -whomever else this may concern) We, the lifeguards of Indian River County, regret to inform you that we have reason to believe that a certain lifeguard, employed by Indian River County, is involved with the illegal possesion and smoking of marijuana while on duty. The lifeguard's name is Chad Summerlin, and has been working at the beach under the influence of "pot" and has left the tower reaking Of it's smell after he had been the only one working at that station. This has all been reported to our supervisor, but to this day, no satisfactory results have been administered. This type of behavior' is damaging to -the credibility of the lifeguard profession. We urgently employe your help and investigation in this matter. Thank -you," Signed... fin- 1 ]•:r:7r • C�-lJ ,� r', -���tl 15 FEB3 1993 a®oK 88 rnE 747 FEB 3 1993 BOOK O® F,A,E 748 Mr. Hallquist stated that after this letter was received, he wrote the following memo to Pat Callahan dated September 14, 1992: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY / VERO BEACH RECREATION DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Pat Callahan . Recreation Director FROMs J -:n Hallquist . Lifeauard Captain Dates Sept.14 1992 Subject: In reference to letter dated 9-12-92 I was first informed of this matter on saturday 09-12-92 Three Lifeguards in an angry manner told me that they knew that I was high and had been allowing all that was going on with chad to go on. I denied this and told them that I would take care of this at once. I informed Chad of the allegations concerning marijuana use and sleeping on the job. He denied the marijuana use and apologized for dozing off one time while working with Ron. I informed him that the police may be looking into this and that a urine analysis maybe done. Part of the hostility toward myself I feel has to do with the fact that I had caught 2 of these LifeGuards having left work a half hour early and warned them with a written memo Attorney Collins noted that the following memo dated September 16, 1992 was attached to Mr. Hallquist's memo to Mrs. Callahan of September 14: 16 L:—1 0 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY / VERO PEACH RECREATION DEPARTMEP MEMORANDUM , a� - ZI cCz3�q�s TO: Pat Callahan .,Recreation Director r AD Oct- v`=; 9?. ��� ries o FROM: Jon Hallquist , LifeGuard Captain �%., w' Date$ Sept,16 1992 Subject: Meeting Sept 16 1992 Dawn Adams started the meeting with a prepared statement concerning an incident on Saturday in which John Frazer came into the tower while Chad Summerlin and myself and started yelling that he knew we were high and that he could smell pot, he then gathered his things saying he couldn't take it anymore etc... and left for his car. I asked Chad what that was all about he said he didn't know. I then went after John and met with him by his car and told him that he was scheduled to work at this beach and he was to stay. He said drugs had no business being around the job He accused me of being high. I denied being high and agreed that drugs had no business being anywhere once back on the tower I told them both that I know that I had strong body odder and apologized. I know this sounds funny but I have found that when I stink like this it causes some people to become aggressive. I took my pager off and went swimming to wash off. I came back to the tower John was on the telephone Chad was out surfing I dried off and put my pager back on I noticed a free surfboard had almost hit another surfer, when the surfer came in to retrieve his board I blew my whistle he looked at me, I waved him in he proceeded out and ignored for two more whistles. This made me mad so I went in after him forgetting to take off my pager. I then went to Wabasso and found the water f i l l ed with surfers from one side of the park to the other and Ron Adams was arguing with an older woman about space for swimming I interceded and ordered Ron to make a swim area he grudgingly made a small area. Three groups of people moved to the area . This area seemed unsafe because surfers were surfing at the swimmers from both sides. I went down and changed the flags so that the surfers had half the beach and the swimmers had the other half with a buffer zone in between. This made Ron angry. He then told me he knew I was high because Dawn Adam told him so and that nether she nor himself want to work with me. I waited for Dawn to arrive to pull her shift she then told me all of her suspicions. I denied any involvement and told her that I had not 17 Boor 88 PAuL 749 m� 31993 FEB �9� BOOK 88 PA ,F 750 witnessed any of these things she heard people tell her. She admits that this is the first time any of this had been brought to my attention. I assured her that I would talk to Chad and bring this to Pat Callahans attentizn. I then proceeded to Goldensands to give Jeff Loudermilk a break everything was in order there. I then paddled to Treasure Shores and Dan Elward told me he knew what was going on and that he had his suspicions but didn't know anything. I then told Dan that when Chad came to pull his shift I would talk to him and that he would be my witness. I then informed Chad of the allegations concerning marijuana use. He denied this but apologized for dozing off one time while working with Ron. I informed him that the police may be looking into this and that a urine analysis may be done. I said this in a stern manner never once winking as Dan said during the meeting. I also told Chad not to allow himself to get into a situation where he looked like he was using it. Jeff Loudermilk witnessing to Chads use of marijuana at the meeting was a surprise, this information had been withheld from me It is apparent that some lifeGuards are upset about my Insistence that they enforce park rules. They have held closed meetings and have -prepared an attack on my character. Part of the description of my demeanor as described by Dawn during the meeting has been due to a part time job working for a local rock band .The late night bar scene after four years was starting to affect my home life and my real job . So I gave up the late nights in smoke filled rooms and the 0600 a month Income. My marriage of 14yrs ended . So I'm having to deal with a decreased income and an increase in outgo. Still the rumors follow me. In spite of this I have remained conscientious at my job as LifeGuard Captain and insist that our LifeGuards enforce the rules and follow the policies as demanded by their jobs. I believe part of the problem comes from local surfers and our Life6uards fraternizing with them and my allowance of the lifeGuards to surf on their breaks. Mr. Hallquist stated that after that meeting, the lifeguards were afraid that maybe it was public opinion that the lifeguards were considered drug users. They felt this would hurt their public image, and he did not contest that at all. They requested that they be put under the same policies as the EMS and Fire Department 18 ® M M on this, and he had agreed with them, saying that it would be a good thing. After that, Pat Callahan --had a meeting with him and wanted to know the truth about him and drugs, and he told her that when he was young his father was ill and had shared marijuana with him while telling him about some very traumatic times in the war. All of that occurred before his employment with the County. That is the only thing he could think of where Mrs. Callahan got his lengthy history. She asked him a question, which he felt was right out of left field, about what marijuana had to do with God. His answer to that question was that it is a plant that grows out of the earth just like all the plants that God created. That is the only thing that he could think of that caused Mrs. Callahan to figure he was immoral because he considered that plant to be like all the other plants. He just didn't understand why he is considered a drug addict and immoral. This letter will affect the rest of his life and he was deeply concerned about his ability to get employment. Mr. Hallquist pointed out that he probably is the first lifeguard in the history of the City and County who has submitted himself to a drug test, which he passed. Commissioner Eggert asked Mr. Hallquist to describe the process of taking the drug test in the presence of another person. Mr. Hallquist explained that he went to the lab in the Doctors Clinic and a woman followed him into the bathroom and was present while he went into a stall and filled a cup with his urine. After he gave the filled cup to her, she signed a paper and he signed a paper. She was present during the whole time. Mr. Hallquist stressed that he would be willing to do that again. Commissioner Eggert asked him about not using the opportunity they had given him to bring in Chad Summerlin as a witness. Mr. Hallquist stated that he asked Chad to come in, but Chad told him he had resigned in good standing and was told that if he did that, none of this would show up on his record. Chad was afraid that if he came in and gave witness to the fact that he didn't make those statements, or any of that, it would jeopardize his resignation. Commissioner Eggert asked if he had informed Administrator Chandler or Director Price and asked them if, indeed, that was true. Mr. Hallquist stated that he did not because at that time he was being represented by Attorney James Wilson. At the first meeting they had with Administrator Chandler he came to the realization that Attorney Wilson had a conflict of interest and had totally misrepresented him in that meeting. Prior to that meeting, Attorney Wilson was supposed to make all the communications, and he 19 BOOK 88 FLEE L�L � �9�3 51 BOOK, 88 PAGE 752 dismissed him on that basis. He then went over to Attorney Wayne McDonough and asked him to do all the communications. Commissioner Eggert asked if Mr. Hallquist felt he was properly represented by Attorney McDonough, and Attorney Collins interjected that the only contacts we had with Attorney McDonough were the notification that he would be representing Mr. Hallquist and a meeting with Administrator Chandler and himself to discuss the possibility of a new appeal meeting if Chad Summerlin could be produced. Attorney McDonough went back and discussed it with Mr. Hallquist, and the next letter we received was a request for a hearing before the Board rather than going back before the County Administrator. Commissioner Eggert asked Mr. Hallquist if he would like to tell the Board in what way Attorney Wilson had inaccurately or inappropriately defended him, and Mr. Hallquist explained that Attorney Wilson started out by saying something which was totally unbeknownst to him, that he felt it was alright to smoke a joint every now and then rather than drink a 6 -pack of_beer a day. Attorney Wilson also stated that he knew that half the administration here at the County used drugs. Mr. Hallquist stressed that this was not his position at all. Commissioner Adams asked Mr. Hallquist what his job was exactly, and Mr. Hallquist said that he was a supervisor of lifeguards. He saw that they had proper certification and proper training. He made out their schedules and saw that they had the proper equipment to do their jobs. He instructed them on how to deal with public emergency situations and how to prevent accidents and drownings. With regard to the public, his job was to notify them of hazardous situations in order to prevent accidents from occurring. He instructed children on water safety. In a nutshell, his job was to ensure the public a safe recreational area. At that time he supervised 9 lifeguards and was responsible for 4 lifeguard stations. In that supervision, he moved from one station to another using his own vehicle. Chairman Bird felt that we should focus on the primary offenses that are alluded to in the dismissal, the involvement in the use of some type of illegal substance either on duty or off duty. He asked if Mr. Hallquist was denying today that he admitted to a certain amount of drug use. - Mr. Hallquist stated that was in response to a question they asked on why he felt a portion of the lifeguards were grouping together concerning this drug use. He told them that not only did they have this animosity towards him, there were these. rumors. Unfortunately, he had been invited to a party where a joint had 24 been passed around, and not being used to that sort of thing, he puffed once on the cigarette and passed it along, being very fearful that he possibly might have to go for a urine analysis. After that, he was very uncomfortable and left the party. That was New Years Eve, 1991. He went to a party again in the following summer with a portion of the same crowd and the same sort of thing happened. He deeply regretted having been in those situations. He offered them this to help them understand more about why the allegations came about. Mr. Hallquist deeply apologized for being in this situation, but he felt that it did not hinder his ability to do his job properly. Chairman Bird asked Mr. Hallquist if he is saying under oath that other than those two times at New Year's Eve and the summer of 1992, he never used marijuana either on or off duty, and Mr. Hallquist answered, "Yes, sir." Chairman Bird asked Mr. Hallquist if he felt that was consistent with what he told his supervisors when they interviewed him, and Mr. Hallquist answered, "Yes, sir." Chairman Bird wished to hear from the supervisors, because obviously there are two opinions as to what Mr. Hallquist said at those two interviews. Deputy Attorney Will Collins asked Pat Callahan, Director of Recreation for the City of Vero Beach and Indian River County, to describe the circumstances around the time leading up to the discharge letter and some of the reasoning she had for terminating Mr. Hallquist. Mrs. Callahan stated she had received the letter from the lifeguards suggesting that there was a problem on the beach. The six lifeguards who signed the letter are full-time lifeguards. There are some part-time lifeguards, but only one full-time lifeguard did not sign the letter. Prior to that time, Jon had told her that some of the lifeguards were plotting against him, and believing in Jon she felt that perhaps these lifeguards had mustered together and signed this letter against him. She sent the letter over to Risk Management for advice on how to proceed. Beth Jordan, Manager of Risk Management, advised that the best thing to do was to get everyone together and have each person tell their stories. As the meeting progressed, Chad Summerlin admitted to the group that he had smoked marijuana not in the tower but on break. After that was said, she asked those lifeguards to go back to the beach and write down what they could remember and submit to her their record of incidents of how it came to this. She sent Chad back -to the beach, but she told Jon Hallquist not to put him on the beach alone. Following this, she called Personnel and it was 21 BOOK 88 D'UE 753 hh�E B 3 1993 Bou 88 pn754 suggested that she ask Chad to come in to see if he would resign so that it wasn't on his record that he was fired because of the use of drugs. Chad came in, they talked for a long time, and she asked him to resign and he did. She hadn't asked him any questions about anything else going on at the beach. He was very gentlemanly and polite. He left the room but came back in crying, saying "Captain Jon is impaired in his job everyday because he smokes pot everyday." Attorney Vitunac broke into the discussion to advise that this is hearsay and that we really need Chad to come in and say that. He advised the Board not to consider that as proof that Capt. Jon smokes marijuana everyday. Mrs. Callahan stated that she brought that up so that the Board can see where she was coming from and what her emotions were. By this time she was distressed and not real sure of what to do. She called Jon on September. 16 and he came in that afternoon. She felt that she could sit down and talk with him and that he would be truthful with her. They have had disagreements, but she has always tried to help Jon and felt that he had always tried to help himself. When she met with him, she kept asking him to tell her the truth. For a long time he was hedging, asking her what she meant and wondering if he was being set up, etc. At this point she requested to read into the record some of the thoughts that she had jotted down after that meeting, knowing that she was planning to leave town shortly. Attorney Vitunac asked Mr. Hallquist if he had a problem with that, and Mr. Hallquist stated that he did not. Administrator Chandler advised that Mrs. Callahan's notes were submitted at the appeal hearings. Mrs. Callahan read her notes into the record and made additional comments on some items: OCT RD&%11STR4TOR'S OFFICE r, ock kK J C mrn r t h Q { Lt.S�C �YGc 5 c LLKI-rq hcurs or) area - 22 M M M 1.1 VoE661 3 55� 88 £Z • of u �.�. aIve Vi prno v?7 4!z g F t)l -Ac�— • vAQ N 1 -5&U -o � V v( -0 u o I� ') I °l Lsbd v � !hVH Fu! UGr 1 u l I- .yaw w ! MZ� �y sp w 0 u u,-( Uq-� l�" ni �1 � TT �,� -� s �v © �-a-� }-amu �JUO 4-nq- v - ,. �S.f77"OlIqq UQ� `f' - m f� ,rabbs�► ;P)p kCr a ,��at��tir spm -�y s� hips d► .c ;C)q s(3) L)� 'vv U 5� BOOK 88 PACE 756 -7 r�Qci q,-haf 0�D' i� �Q� a rcl�. su,rr�ix�c�nc�ecLpo lucsoR kj--rn=0- 4�� q �arkcr M's C�arr,p-s . ,bn wanfe� 4o imphatde all (he oyhQr n� Qr\6 ujo-5 men �� -�,� Is yob , -TTS; 5 Mn ed W., tor,A oo 1^ �lm�u u s� at ,,,T .m q - I q t t1'1 0grcvfnent 4-ij ask �i--m 4r� ���: � - e t he hid do�� n a4►ing 4-v rns� 5n 1 -o br, g '8-0- clime. 4,rUY I OU -1 acleA Aralvuw in 6 aae v`,�Pry c�7404- C7 fn frAQ-4 UJ, -VA �,.bn &W�.5 d1]:voqjrq 24 $�lowtot 931, SZ Gs,(sa.1 c'� �✓c.�soo� 531Y IV 3- ctr--� Ul" • u5,s�� c� yds - u�, c�+r� tau - wjrvT' 4�;9wot 9cFk' P!279 ?Pv 7 papirpo - "-� 9 0 1 11 ct u 67 prk�+ ur Wgic -S-Rerrb OV -WvQE'lb' as. I �p Vol • )�')Rpoev L'6 qc/,/, qu rjo Lt/j 9 �4 � 4zq BOOK 88 NACE ! 58 FEB 3 19974) 64,amte-cJ '4D s4�-// d[1L,5 �) s i r %P- Y,0-5:5 re a n d Q t p -V 5 !_ / �l t 0-`-rck,rr-5�'r� ee 5 6 � h s -4v yr od eml1�• QST m a-ro- )a -S+ � n,C 4D YD'S` h — CL n0 4D 4X -b- AF:; far-,s�-raJ Mr. Hallquist stated that he was totally taken aback by some of Mrs. Callahan's statements. He never remembered telling Ms. Callahan that he could quit it at any time. He didn't remember telling her that he was using drugs at that time. He did remember telling her about his father, the Peace Corps, and the Golden Book which was given to him by friends in the Peace Corps, because she was asking him to tell her the truth as a friend. He realizes now that he should never have offered her that at all because that probably is where he scared her. It seemed to him that at no time did anyone mention that he said to her that he was dealing with deep depression and that he had broken down several times throughout the year due to his divorce. It seemed to him that Mrs. Callahan has interchanged his problem from depression to drug use. When he met with Personnel Director Jack Price, he just assumed that he was referring to a drug use. He felt he didn't have a problem with drug use, but had a problem with depression due to his divorce last year. Mr. Hallquist stated that he felt Ms. Callahan had a way of popping into his brain which brought all of this out about his father, etc. He didn't remember admitting to using drugs other than with his father, so he would like to see most of this dismissed as hearsay. Chairman Bird noted that it isn't really hearsay, it is sworn testimony. He wished to hear from Administrator Chandler. 26 W ® � r First, Attorney Collins wished to ask Mrs. Callahan a few questions before she left the podium. He asked if she came away from her meetings with Jon Hallquist and the other lifeguards with the totality of an impression that Mr. Hallquist was a current user of marijuana, and Mrs. Callahan answered, "Yes." Attorney Collins asked Mrs. Callahan if it was her determination from meeting with Mr. Hallquist and the other lifeguards that the use tended to affect his relationship with his job and fellow workers and, potentially, the reputation of the lifeguard corps in the community, and Mrs. Callahan answered, "Yes." Mrs. Callahan stated that she has worked with lifeguards for many years now and has found that very rarely does a group band against their supervisor. Mr. Hallquist rebutted that during the last few evaluations, Mrs. Callahan told him that he was too nice of a guy and needed to be more of a disciplinarian. In addition, on several occasions throughout the year Mrs. Callahan warned him that he had to be careful because the lifeguards would test him. Mr. Hallquist asked Mrs. Callahan if that was true, and Mrs. Callahan said, "Yes." Mr. Hallquist understood then that she had expected his lifeguards to band against him, but Mrs. Callahan said that she told him she expected the lifeguards to test him, not band against him. Commissioner Eggert inquired whether Mr. Hallquist had responded to Chad Summerlin's smoking marijuana, and Mr. Hallquist stated that within two days he talked with Chad and told him that it was brought to his attention that he had been smoking marijuana in the parking lot with surfers, and Chad denied that. He suggested to Chad that he not hang out with the surfers and not look like he did. He wrote him up that day on the fact that he was in the water when he should not have been, rather than bringing out the allegations because he had no proof, just hearsay. Throughout the years a lot of people have accused him of using drugs, and he wondered you respond to an accusation except by denial. The firefighters and the EMS have a policy that assures that justice is served because apparently a lot of allegations are made about firefighters. He noted that he had a copy of their policy which is quite extensive, and under their regulations and procedures he would be protected from this sort of injustice. Mr. Hallquist requested that he be held to the same standards and policies used by the firefighters since their jobs are similar in that they concern public safety. Attorney Collins asked Mr. Hallquist if he had used marijuana 27 C� 31993 BOOK FAGE 75 pp®® Bou 88 Pmjr 760 on or off the job around the time Mrs. Callahan had discharged him, and Mr. Hallquist answered, "No, sir." Director of Personnel Jack Price recalled that when Mrs. Callahan brought Jon to his office to follow up on some discussion she had been having with him because she was considering his termination, Jon was extremely apprehensive. When Jon entered the office and shook hands, he noticed that Jon's hand was wringing wet and he was trembling. In an attempt to be gentle with Jon, he simply asked him if it was true he had a long-term relationship with drugs. Director Price stated that if he had that to do over again, he probably would have asked the question in a much more direct fashion. However, he remembers those words exactly, and Jon acknowledged that it was true. From that point they went on to discuss alternatives and assistance that might be available to him, but Jon's interest at that time was in talking about other prospects of work with the County and the regulations related to unemployment compensation. Commissioner Eggert asked Director Price what. alternatives were brought forward in this case, and Director Price stated that the discussion only got as far as indicated due to Jon's unwillingness to discuss alternatives and what might be done. Mrs. Callahan had related to him that she extended the same service to Jon, but he communicated to her that he had no interest in that sort of thing because he did not have a drug problem. He told her he could stop it at any time and didn't need any assistance with the drug problem. So, there was minimal discussion of drug and alcohol abuse treatment in the office that day. Chairman Bird asked Jon what he is asking this appeal board to do on his behalf if he had his choice and if the Board found in his favor, and Mr. Hallquist stated that he would be requesting that he be reinstated in his position as lifeguard supervisor with back pay from the time of termination up to this point. Commissioner Adams asked if Jon had sought treatment for depression, and Mr. Hallquist explained that he had not because he already was having problems with making child support payments, mortgage payments, and various other things. He felt that it was just a passing thing and was hoping that it would just pass. Part of the problem was that some of the things he was watching on TV were depressing. So, he got rid of his TV and went to the library, but the books he selected only added to his depression. Then he joined a class on writing children's books, feeling that if he just could steer his life away from certain things, he could find some joy in his life. Some people felt he should see someone about it, and maybe he should have, but it was a matter of being able to 2- - M M M afford it. Mr. Hallquist questioned what Director Price has said because he seems to be saying something different than at the second meeting. It seemed to him that all they were offering to him was to resign. The lifeguards had said that he had a swing in his moods, which is why they felt he was on drugs. He kept saying that he was not on drugs, that his problem was depression. He kept trying to instill that all through the meeting with Mrs. Callahan. Commissioner Eggert asked if he had made this point with Director Price also, and Mr. Hallquist answered that he had. They said that there was something available for him, but all they kept saying was that the best thing was to resign and just walk away. He kept telling them that it was not. He has been working part- time delivering pizza. Director Price informed him that if he resigned, he would not be able to collect unemployment since he was being fired for a Group III offense. However, when he went to the unemployment office a couple of weeks later, they told him there wasn't any evidence and he was entitled to unemployment. He has received 3 unemployment checks, but there is another meeting on Friday because the County is appealing his being paid unemployment compensation. The unemployment office has a copy of his drug test. Commissioner Eggert asked Director Price if he had gotten the idea that Jon's problem was depression and had offered any alternatives to that or just was instructed to resign-.- Director esign:Director Price explained that at that time we were just fact finding and Jon did talk about personal problems. We heard those problems, but we already had heard those from Mrs. Callahan. The focus of the meeting was really to discuss what alternatives were available. It was clear very early on that Mr. Hallquist wanted to talk about what the County was going to do for him with regard to placement in another job and continuation of wages. For that reason we did not pursue mental health care or drug treatment. Director Price asked the Board to please bear in mind that Mr. Hallquist had acknowledged a long-term relationship with drugs but at the same time said that he did not have a drug problem. Until we had some acknowledgement from him that he would be receptive to some formal assistance for the drug problem, there wasn't a whole lot that could be done. Chairman Bird asked Jon if being a lifeguard is what he wanted to do or whether he had any other goals, and Mr. Hallquist stated that he is 36 years old and figures he is good for another 5-10 years as a lifeguard. He has respect for older lifeguards, but he felt that it is important for lifeguards to have something else to go to in the future. He was fearful of that, but had not been doing it. He definitely knows now that he has to do it. 29 L FEB - 3 1992 BOOK 88 FADE 761 r FEB _ 3 1992 GOOK O8 P.+�F 76� Attorney Collins advised that he wished to make a concluding statement and then Mr. Hallquist could make his final statement before the Board deliberates on this appeal. Attorney Collins stated that the position of the County is that the termination of the employee was proper in that Mrs. Callahan, after meeting with Mr. Hallquist and all the other lifeguards, concluded that there was unlawful conduct -- the smoking of marijuana on or off the job -- which was tending to affect Mr. Hallquist's relationship to the job, his fellow employees and the community. Based on Mrs. Callahan's concluding that, which is a dischargeable offense under our personnel rules, he was terminated. He made an appeal to Administrator Chandler and during those appeal hearings, Administrator Chandler heard the same admissions the Board heard today, that Mr. Hallquist had smoked marijuana on New Year's Eve and last summer. Based on those admissions and finding there had been unlawful conduct off the job as recently as last summer and that such conduct was tending to affect his relationship with his job which involves public safety, it was Administrator Chandler's determination that the discharge was correct and he upheld the termination. Mr. Hallquist's appeal is now before the Board. In conclusion, Mr. Hallquist stated that he deeply regrets that he found himself in the presence of illegal activity and still holds that he did nothing that would hinder him from doing his job properly. He again requested that he be considered under the firefighters policy and have drug tests. Mr. Hallquist pointed out that although he offered, at no time did the County request a drug test. After he got the letter that said he was a drug addict and immoral, he went and took the drug test. Chairman Bird understood that Mr. Hallquist receives an annual salary of $26,200, and Mr. Hallquist said that he has 9-3/4 years in and has only 3 months to go to be vested for retirement. He couldn't understand why all this could come down on him at this time, and it seemed unfair to him. Chairman Bird announced that while the Board deliberates this appeal, there will be a 10 -minute break during which the Board members are not to talk about this. After the break, Chairman Bird asked Attorney Vitunac to explain what latitude the Board has in this matter. Attorney Vitunac advised that to uphold the County Administrator's determination on the termination of the employee, the Board has to make a finding of fact that there was enough evidence for Administrator Chandler's decision to have been correct under our local ordinance: In that regard, the Board would go along the lines of the questions that Attorney Collins asked of MKI M M Mrs. Callahan which set out the elements of the determination hearing. On the other hand, if the Board decides to rehire the employee or to find for his appeal, there is a wide range of options including hiring him back to his former job, a lesser job, or a different job with the County under conditions that the Board feels appropriate. Chairman Bird felt that in light of all the testimony and background that was given, it would be a very difficult situation to reinstate Mr. Hallquist to his former position as supervisor of lifeguards. He believed that staff probably was correct in the procedures that were followed in the termination. However, he felt that Mr. Hallquist is, and certainly has been in the past, a fine employee of the County and basically a good person and deserves an opportunity to get his life back in order and to reinstate himself in some way. Chairman Bird stated that he would not be opposed to rehiring him as a lifeguard under some probationary status with the thought that if his performance in the future is indicative of management and a supervisory position, that he could have the opportunity to work back to that position. Chairman Bird stated that he would have a problem with reinstating Mr. Hallquist in full at this time with all back pay and so forth. Commissioner Eggert asked what other alternative might there be other than Mr. Hallquist being a lifeguard. Commissioner Adams suggested that the Board give the direction to staff that this release not prejudice any future applications of employment Mr. Hallquist submits to the County. She doesn't see what she would term as a long history of drug abuse. There are the statements where Mr. Hallquist admitted he used marijuana with his father and freaked out on some other plant in Santa Domingo. Of course, he has admitted to smoking marijuana last summer and on New Year's Eve before that. She sees some periodic usage, which is not to be condoned at all. Commissioner Adams felt the position he holds of trust mandates that he must uphold credibility in the eyes of his fellow employees and the people he is entrusted to take care of on the beach. She would have a problem with simply sweeping this under the rug. She didn't think that he could go back to his former position as a supervisor without this hanging over his head all the time. Commissioner Adams felt we have to uphold staff's recommendation, but she would love to see Mr. Hallquist get treatment for depression which is not as much a mental thing as a physical thing. Depression affects you physically. Speaking directly to Mr. Hallquist, Commissioner Adams said that he owes that to himself, the community and the children he looks after 31 FEB 31993 Boa 76-3 BOOK 88 F��,F 764-7 everyday on the beach. She would like to see the dismissal not prejudice his future employment with the County. Attorney Vitunac advised that under normal conditions our personnel forms ask if you have ever been terminated for drug use, and that will become a fact if this termination is upheld. Attorney Collins advised that they do not ask for that information on personnel forms any more because the Americans with Disabilities Act doesn't allow that type of question. Former drug use is considered a disability. Administrator Chandler asked what position the Board would consider giving Mr. Hallquist if he was reinstated. Commissioner Adams felt that would depend on the position he applied for -- perhaps he might want to be Utilities Director. If he seeks treatment for his problem, (and he has admitted that he has a problem but he is not saying it is drug related, he is saying it is something else) she doesn't feel he should be prejudiced down the road for getting that problem solved. Administrator Chandler stressed that is the position that staff had taken all along, that if he had a problem and was willing to seek help, then we would proceed with assisting him in that matter. However, every step along the way he did not admit that he had a problem nor that he would he seek help. Commissioner Eggert asked if at any time Mr. Hallquist was offered mental health treatment rather than drug treatment, and Mrs. Callahan stated that over the three days she had talked to Jon, the feeling she had was that he didn't need help in that he understood his problem whether it was drugs or whatever. He said that if he went to a psychiatrist, he only would upset the psychiatrist. Administrator Chandler stated that in the hearing he held, part of the statements from Mr. Hallquist and his attorneys were that Pat Callahan and Jack Price misunderstood what had been related. So they went through that, and Mr. Hallquist indicated among other things that he felt they misunderstood because he was depressed recently about incidents with his family and children down in Miami. Beyond that, there wasn't any extensive discussion on depression, not to the extent we have had today. More importantly, Mr. Hallquist's main point and that of his attorneys was that he didn't use drugs and had not used drugs for a long period of time. Later on he stated that he used drugs in the summer, but even later he said that he had used drugs only at New Year's Eve and in the summer. There was no strong emphasis on depression other than he felt that Mrs. Callahan and Mr. Price had misunderstood and that he was depressed about a family incident in 32 Miami. Administrator Chandler stated that he kept getting contradicting statements from Mr. Hallquist on whether he did or did not -use drugs. Chairman Bird asked if the policies that were applied in this termination were applied any differently or more strictly because of the fact that Jon was a supervisor and because of the fact that his job entails public safety rather than, for example, someone who worked for the Utilities Department as an equipment operator. Administrator Chandler felt that from his perspective, it wasn't, because we do have a strict policy on the use of drugs. He felt it carries it one step further when you are in a public safety position. If Mr. Hallquist had indicated that he had a problem and was willing to seek help, then we would have attempted to assist him in that manner, but he did not do so. Mr. Hallquist interjected that just prior to those meetings, he had family trouble. His children were missing for 3 days due to the storm and he was trying constantly to reach them. That also added to his depression. He was very distraught over the whole thing. He did mention to Mrs. Callahan that he didn't need help for drugs but had considered help for depression but was prevented by the cost factor. He mentioned the same thing to Director Price and then at the meeting he kept telling them that his problem wasn't drug related, it was depression related. Attorney Collins advised that procedurally the only difference in the way Mr. Hallquist was treated is that normally before dismissal you get 5 days written notice of the specific causes. However, when it is an employee who is dismissed for conduct which may be prejudicial to the public interest, that employee can be dismissed immediately with a follow-up within 72 hours, which is what was done in this case. Commissioner Macht asked if Mr. Hallquist was ever offered drug rehabilitation as a condition of continued employment. He also asked if we have a policy where you get one chance. Administrator Chandler advised that our policy is that if an employee admits that he has a substance abuse or alcohol problem and is willing to seek treatment, we work with them where they can take the time off to seek that treatment and retain employment. Mr. Hallquist was made aware that was the policy. Mr. Hallquist stated that he is willing to seek help for his depression and was willing back then, but the only thing that kept him from doing it was the ability to pay for it. He felt that if he had to go into debt again to do that, then so.be it. Commissioner Macht asked who pays for treatment under those conditions, and Administrator Chandler explained that part of the 33 L._ FEB 31993 BOOK 88 P,�GE 765 r FEB 3 1991 8cor 88 PAGE 766 —7 cost is picked up by the County Is health insurance plan and the balance is paid by the employee. Commissioner Macht felt that perhaps if Mr. Hallquist would accept a drug rehabilitation program, he could be returned to a position for which he is qualified. Commissioner Macht felt it would be a mistake to return him to a lifeguard position. If Mr. Hallquist is retained by the County, he ought to be retained in an unrelated position for which he is qualified. That would have the effect of preserving his claim to tenure and also give him a chance for whatever personal rehabilitation is appropriate. It certainly would be the humanitarian thing to do. He felt the dismissal and appeal were conducted very properly and based on very solid evidence, but he agreed with Commissioner Adams that we are dealing with a human being who has a personal stake in employment with the County, regardless of the fact that he himself has jeopardized his employment by involvement with drugs. Chairman Bird suggested that proper wording for a Motion would be to uphold the determination of staff with some feeling there for allowing him the opportunity to apply and be considered for reemployment by the County in the immediate future for a job for which he is qualified. He wondered if any strings should be attached to that. Commissioner Macht felt that the burden should be placed on Mr. Hallquist for recognizing the problem and dealing with our Personnel Department and the County Administrator regarding rehabilitation through whatever process the County has in place. He wished to know more about that at a later date. Commissioner Eggert pointed out that once he is fired, he would have to be rehired before there would be any responsibility for the rehabilitation; otherwise, he would have to get himself into some kind of program before coming back. Attorney Collins advised that when an employee is terminated, he has rights under the COBRA, a federal law, which allows him to continue his health care coverage up to 18 months by paying his own premiums. He would be entitled to whatever hospitalization benefits the County policy provides, whether it be drug treatment, depression treatment, etc. Commissioner Macht asked if, rather than Mr. Hallquist being released, it would be possible for him to be transferred administratively to a position for which he qualifies. Administrator Chandler sensed that the Commission is trying to find a gap here, but the problem is how do you get from here to there. He suggested that perhaps the Board uphold the termination, but modify it to an extent that he is suspended without pay for 34 some period of time and then if he comes back to the County, and if he has received help, the County would employee him in a vacant position for which he is qualified. Administrator Chandler felt that keeps the gap in terms of terminating and then rehiring. Attorney Vitunac understood then that the Board would find that he did commit the infraction for which termination normally would be proper, but would find that too severe and would impose some other penalties such as suspension from September until a certain time, and at that time he would have to show that he is rehabilitated from whatever his problem was. Commissioner Adams felt that would set a real bad precedent because he was given the option to resign or seek treatment to begin with, and he never took that option. He has proceeded with the appeal. We are saying to him to take care of his problem, whatever it is. If we give this gap treatment, we would have to let everybody else do the same thing whether it is severe drug abuse or whatever. She stressed that we are giving him the benefit of the doubt by saying that we are not going to prejudice him in future applications with the County. She felt that we do need to say that we do not condone what has been going on. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Tippin being absent) upheld the termination of employment of Jon Hallquist based on the finding of fact that he did engage in conduct on or off the job which tended to affect his relationship to the job, fellow employees and the reputation and goodwill in the community; and declared that if he determines what his problem is and seeks treatment for it, the County would withhold any prejudice on any future applications with the County (which is not to say that he will be rehired, but just that we won't prejudice his application if he comes back in with something he would like to apply for). Mr. Hallquist asked if that meant he could apply for any other job other than a lifeguard, and Chairman Bird explained that he could apply for a lifeguard position as well. Mr. Hallquist asked if that would wipe out his tenure, and it was explained that if he was rehired by the County, he would not lose his 9-3/4 years tenure. 35 FES 31993 BOOK : 88 PAGE 767 � FEB 3993 Booz 88 PacF 763 There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 12:00 o'clock noon. ATTEST: . Barton, Clerk Richard N. Bird, Chairman 36 _ M