A Stallion Becomes a Titan Thursday!

An artist's rendering of what project Titan will look like, on the ground at the Pensacola Airport, in 2024.

A few years back we celebrated the completion of project Stallion and we looked forward with eager anticipation to the funding and commencement of project Titan.

These names, Stallion and Titan,  are the economic development code words for the quarter of a Billion Dollar build out of hangars and administrative facilities for the Pensacola Airport by ST Engineering Aerospace that bagan with the $46 Million project Stallion, completed in 2017-2018.

That event was amazing, and I was honored to speak at the grand opening of hangar 1 (4:10 of this video) along with Mayor Ashton Hayward, Governor Rick Scott, and dignitaries from ST Engineering--the world's leader in aircraft maintenance, repair, and overhaul.

Between then and now, a lot of hard work has been put in, lots of money has been raised, and this week--the $210 Million Dollar project Titan officially begins with a groundbreaking on Thursday.

a staggering $66Million for this local project came from Triumph Gulf Coast (BP) funds---the largest such award in the panhandle of Florida to date!

Once again I have been invited to speak at this ceremony on behalf of the county-which I am very happy to do.  I know the value of economic development in general--and to our community specifically.  

While some feel we should not expend ANY taxpayer funds to pursue ANY opportunities like this and other large employers such as Navy Federal Credit Union, Ascend Performance Materials and/or ST Engineering--I completely disagree.  In fact, I believe to go after such opportunities is an essential function of good governance! 

Fortunately for the majority of rational, intelligent citizens that understand basic tenets of economic theory and economic development-- the very small and insignificant  voices of dissent on such opportunities by naysayer policymakers locally get quashed by the majority that are rational and understand such things.  Narrow minds never win the prize--and to listen to them on this project would result in this, what will be one of the largest MRO campuses in the world, going somewhere else like Austin, Seattle, San Diego, or Pittsburgh.  But because those voices of dissent were not, are not, and will never be given any creedence on important topics like this--Such an opportunity and the concomitant $210,000,000 is being spent here, in Pensacola.  With this project, once completed, Escambia County, Pensacola, and our region will achieve the following: (projected from a HAAS center study conducted in 2017)

--1,325 new, high paying jobs (in addition to the 400 new jobs from Project Stallion)

--a regional Center of Excellence for the MRO industry

--a new Aerospace industry sector, adding resiliency to the economic base, in addition to tourism and military

--a regional magnet to attract talent and supply chain businesses

--Enhanced and expanded regional educational programming- George Stone, Pensacola State College, B.T. Washington and others.

--a pathway to the middle class for many

--1,725 new jobs in the targeted Aviation/Aerospace industry sector for a fully developed MRO aviation campus (Project Stallion and Project Titan combined). New jobs will be added as each hangar element is completed.

--Average guaranteed wages >$45,000 per employee (actual amount is greater)

--3,400 new indirect jobs*

--$400 Million annual personal income increase

--$600 Million Florida GDP annual increase

--Annual rental income of > $1.0 million per year  to Pensacola International Airport from ST Engineering

--Annual ad valorem income of > $3.5 million to City and County from ST Engineering

The groundbreaking ceremony will take place this Thursday morning at 10:30AM.  See the "run of the show" below.

It's Like Doing a Rain Dance, Then Complaining About a Lack of Umbrellas When it Starts Pouring.....

When you pray for rain it is good to have a solid umbrella....

County and IAFF bargaining continues tomorrow.

Meanwhile, there are significant issues that still need to be addressed in the fire union contract.  I am hopeful our bargaining team can carry the board's proposals tomorrow and an agreement can be reached.

At least that is the hope.

But in listening to the last 10 minutes of the most recent session with the IAFF--it appears their  positions are very intransigent.  I hope this changes.

Continuing shots at commissioners have not stopped or changed, though.  Through selective releases of certain information on social media, via proxies sympathetic to the union,  and the union itself---- information and data that are misleading, inaccurate, or flat out fiction pour out.

For Example:  the false social media posts related to a tragic fire resulting in the death of a citizen were weaponized and launched onto the internet by the union.  This rightfully led to disciplinary action against those union leaders that did this but would not admit their culpability.  Good.  That tragic death was absolutely NOT about a lack of resources as the union falsely claimed.  That was a straight-up, bald-faced lie.  Sickeningly, it had the appearance of an attempt at utilization of a tragedy to further union negotiations for higher wages.  Disgustingly unprofessional.

I was contacted by that victim's family in that instance and they were not happy about that post.  Believe that.

At a breakfast I enjoyed this past Saturday with a current county employee and former volunteer firefighter in West Pensacola, he recounted that his own experience as a multi-year volunteer was bittersweet.  "I enjoyed doing it for many years, but we were never treated fairly, we were not allowed to ride along to fire calls, and we were given only menial tasks to do in the firehouse.  Most of us left because we were treated horribly, like second-class citizens."  

A current volunteer (one of the few remaining) summed it up succinctly "This can be fixed with minimal cost. Just need to put people with vision in these positions and let them build it up and get us all to working together. Volunteers and career can Co exist but we need to begin with solid volunteer leadership to start with. And it can grow if given the chance. Cuts down their overtime and increases services to the citizens at minimal cost. But you gotta start with solid volunteer leaders.

Right now they [IAFF Union] control ECFR every aspect of it and that is not working. District Chiefs with a little backbone for the volunteers is what we need right now. If you noticed recently that station one now has no volunteers and they are trying to achieve that at all stations. I myself have almost thrown in the

County Medical Director: County Going in New Direction

Public Safety Director Eric Gilmore discussed this briefly at Commissioner Barry's Town Hall meeting last night, a new direction and approach for EMS and the Medical Director position.  According to Gilmore, the County will have access to three (3) Doctors under the new plan--and the contract for us to begin utilizing this university-based training hospital medical staff on a contract basis apparently will be on the BCC agenda for Thursday, July 8th.

Meanwhile, this email, below, has gone out yesterday to staff in EMS.

Looks as though the county is going in a new direction with respect to how we handle the Medical Director position.

This is a good thing.  And a long time coming.

Support for a First-Rate Regional Tennis Center/Facility at Roger Scott

The Roger Scott Tennis Center hosts national tournaments multiple times yearly, like the Pensacola Open wheelchair tennis tournament, pictured above, from 2013.

One of the greatest assets our area has is the Roger Scott Tennis facility in the city of Pensacola.  

I play there myself on a very regular basis.  Many of my friends and family members do as well.  

The facility has a mix of hard court and clay court facilities--and is a great location for tennis for all levels of players.  

What I like most about the facility is that it's not just about tennis.  It is about the community.

This facility hosts world class tornaments and events that bring folks to our area from around the world- generating hotel stays, restaurant purchases, and other spending that funds sales and use taxes that benefit the area.

Additionally-this facility hosts recreational tennis leagues for men, women, and students from all around the Pensacola Bay area.  The ladies tennis leagues at Roger Scott boast more than 1000 participants per season!  High School tournaments are held here, tennis pros are on the roster to give lessons in tennis to citizens from beginners all the way up to open-flight level, and themed (and fun) casual mixers happen throughout the year and are a blast to play in!

And the facility hosts annual charity tournaments that raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for worthwhile causes.  

So with this all as the backdrop, and seeing the tremendous value this facility brings our area---the center needs an infusion of capital to propel it into the future and to enable this facility to continue to operate safely.

The facility took some significant damage during Hurricane Sally in September of last year, and that damage is being addressed as this post is written.

But in addition to damages from the storm--the facility's hard courts are in desperate need of repair for safety and playability purposes.  If the county and city can work a proportional cost-sharing agreement-the deal could bring a win-win for all citizens-county and city alike.  

You see, currently there is a tiered pricing and membership fee structure which gives a reduced rate to city residents as compared to county residents.  In my discussions with the Mayor on this topic--my vote for the funding support is contingent upon county citizens receiving the same rate for play and membership as the city residents enjoy.   I believe this is a fair and reasonable request.  This email I recently received from the mayor, below, seems to indicate he agrees.

"Subject: Roger Scott Tennis Courts

Gentlemen,

We now have both a design and estimate for the work that needs to be done to Roger Scott Tennis Center for improvements. We have funding or have spent $1.3 million but are still about $1.3 million short. We would like to talk to the County about support of a regional city/county tennis center.

The city would still run and manage but the prices for membership and play on both hard and clay courts would be the same for city and County` residents. Additional[sic] those courts would be at the best level and design for play.

Please let us know a time that would be good for us to get together with you. Thanks.

Grover"

So yes-there are lots of areas that need funding at the moment throughout the county, we know this.  But utilizing a variety of allowable funding sources to improve Roger Scott makes sense to me, will be a huge quality of life improvement (not to mention a tourist/visitor magnet) and I strongly support this.  Hopefully at least two of my counterparts will see the value and lend support to this initiative as well when I bring it for consideration.

PNJ Editorial Board: Truth is their Enemy, Lies are their Stock-in-Trade, Propaganda is What They Are...

This piece of trash op-ed that will appear in tomorrow's edition of the PNJ is probably one of their worst yet.  Of all time. Tomorrow's garbage editorial is nothing but a haphazard, fact-barren ad hominem personal attack on four of the five elected Escambia County Commissioners.  And disgustingly, the most important, factual information is ignored in favor of a salacious attack on four of us.  The piece, most disturbingly, is built entirely on lies, rumors, insinuations and assumptions.

But it's foundations are lies.

PNJ Lie # 1.)  Janice Gilley was fired over the discussions of the 401(a) plan.  Not true, not even close.  (Hint for PNJ propaganda squad:  What did the ECAT union vote the week before the firing request?  Think.  You even covered it!  Nope, no mention of that... What about the almost $200,000.00 settlement that happened the same week--the second one based on harrassment in public safety?  nope, no mention of that even though your paper covered it.  What about the fact that the only other area printed newspaper publisher has openly called for Janice's termination for months now?)

PNJ Lie #2.)   An insinuation that the board and members of the board violated the Florida Sunshine law and "orchestrated" the firing for months.  This is a straight-up, bald faced lie and a fabrication.  If they think we did it,  have the guts to take your proof to the SAO and push for us to be prosecuted!  You are liars, PNJ editorial team,  straight up.  And this insinuation is a lie.  Shame on you both, Andy Marlette and Lisa Nellesen Savage.  You have no integrity.

PNJ Lie #3.)   That I purposely gave a "milquetoast" explanation of my rationale for firing Janice.  NOT TRUE!  roll back the tape and re-watch.  I said I didn't want to publicly discuss it.  "I like to praise in public, punish in private!"  That's what I said.  And when you try to sell the fiction that the other board members "couldn't muster specific reasons or a public explanation for their vote." That, too,  is a straight up lie and you know it.  Each of us with the exception of Doug intimated that we did not and would not make a public spectacle of a tough circumstance and would not "air dirty laundry"---out of consideration for Janice.  For you to accuse us of purposely being deceptive is a LIE.  Watch the actual meetings and what we said--instead of peddling lies and mischaracterizations.

To the PNJ "Editorial Board" that wrote this garbage:  The bottom line is this board has the authority to do what we did.  She works for us under a contract, we hired her.  Sometimes entities and leaders part ways--you know that.  CEO's and companies, Baseball teams and star pitchers, AND yes--counties and their administrators.  It's not personal for any of us so far as I can tell; certainly isn't for me.  It's business.  But it is disgustingly bizarre for you to use Janice Gilley as your straw man man here to attack us with lies and mischaracterizations.  You don't care about the truth, and you sure as hell don't care about Janice Gilley--obviously.  You are simply using her and this uncomfortable situation to aid in yet another attack on those of us who lead, regardless of what this is doing to her and her family.  I harbor no ill-will toward Janice, I think she is and was a great person.  Don't use her termination as fodder to attack, that's reprehensible.  Here is a novel concept PNJ:  Go back and do some basic reading on honor, truth, and journalistic integrity.  You have HUGE deficits in each of these areas and we all see it.

I Certainly Don't--and NOBODY Should--Condone Body Shaming Attacks....

But sadly it is happening with some posters on social media---to include right here on this blog.

Look, we get it and we all know it:  Free speech is ugly, messy, and can be downright deplorable.  That's why it is protected.  And that's why there's this famous assessment: "because it is ugly and messy--this is precisely why free speech must be protected--as nobody has a problem with speech that offends nobody..."

Yes, I get that.  And although I detest the idea of it--I understand why the courts and the ACLU defend speech that is despicable (flag burning, bible burning, the "piss" Christ, etc....)

But free speech is not without its limitation.  You cannot yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater. 

Here on my own blog which has steadily drawn more and more visitors and commenters--I noticed this trend of just downright despicable comments being made.  The main ones I really detest are the comments that body shame folks.  I also don't condone the attacks on family members of public figures.

So other sites, chat sites, can do what they want.  They can condone and allow vicious, body shaming ad hominem personal attacks.  They can cultivate that.  I'm not, though.  Because I certainly don't, and NOBODY should--condone body shaming.

For my part--I'm going to start keeping posts in moderation, and I will not approve any going forward, that body-shame anyone or drag anybody's (public figure) family members into the gutter with ad hominem's.  

So yes, I'm sure anonymous commenters will still submit these to the blog, I just won't post them.

Yes, I believe in free speech.  Yes, anonymous speech is free speech. But there has to be some civility--much more than what I am seeing.  And so family members are off limits from this point forward on this blog.  And body shaming or any sexual references or inuendos will also not be approved.  

Let's have free speech.  Let's have vigorous disagreements.  But let's not devolve into body shaming people and dragging family members of public figures through the mud.  Family members did not sign up for this. 

PNJ Shenanigans with the Truth Paint me in a False Light Deliberately

PNJ is always engaging in their machinations against those with whom they disagree, or with whom they dislike.  Or with whom their advertisers and patrons dislike.

As they have done in the past to me, they are once again painting me in a false light with actual malice.

How so?

After a recent meeting, there was hearsay that the PNJ ran with intimating some commissioners had said things that were offensive about our clerk of the court Pam Childers.  It was not true, and I categorically denied it at the time.  It blew over when the clerk herself brushed it aside and deflected when asked who said what and who heard what.  It was over.

But in their rush to publish that salacious, inaccurate article built on hearsay--they (PNJ) put my picture on the caption in the headline online---even though I was not one of the commissioners even accused of saying anything in the first place.  When called about the accusations---I was the only commissioner who even took the time to take the PNJ's call and give an on the record comment.

And then they did this to me.....  See screenshots of my conversation with Lisa Nellesen Savage below.

She tried to explain and to fix the issue--but this is at least the second time they've done this to me.

Coincidence?  

I don't think so, I don't believe in them.  Not with the PNJ.

Was the Interception of a Private Electronic Text Message a Violation of Florida Law?

This screen shot is taken from a social media post made over the weekend, purportedly showing the private text messages between Melissa Pino and Eric Sharplin during last Thursday's BCC meeting.  The question now turns to whether or not the taking of this photo by a third party surreptitiously, and the subsequent dissemination of this screenshot, was/is legal.  One lawyer with whom I have spoken believes it was not illegal.....

This weekend a lot of accusations and allegations are flying.  There is a HUGE back and forth in the comments on an unrelated blog post about what apparently transpired in the chambers during last Thursday's Board of County Commissioner's meeting.

Was the act of leaning over a person in the row ahead inside our chamber Thursday and the deliberate taking of pictures to intercept text messages an act that was illegal?

This is what has been alleged to have happened during our meeting, and apparently the picture that was taken was posted on social media on several sites.  I have received screen shots that purport to show this.

One lawyer with whom I have spoken has said clearly no, it is not a violation of law.  "In a public place folks can take pictures and there is not necessarily an expectation of privacy--it is up to the individual to know their surroundings and not allow something that is potentially classified, personal, or embarrasing to be viewable."  And I suppose that makes sense, and that's how photographers with telescopic lenses get unflattering pictures of celebrities in public in order to sell such materials to tabloids.

But that opinion appears to be in contradiction to this statute which clearly states that the act of using an electronic device to intercept an electronic communication is unlawful.  

Now, perhaps that statute only refers to electonic devices that jam transmissions or intercept electronic transmissions remotely--not necessarily in such a rudimentary way as leaning over someone's shoulder and taking pictures of someone's laptop screen or smartphone to share what is captured?  Who knows, the lawyers will have to sort this one out--which I'm sure will happen this week.  

But one thing to ponder:  Would it be illegal under that same state statute for someone to leer over a person using an ATM in public in an attempt to video the act of a user punching in his/her PIN code at the ATM?  Would that be illegal (I'd like to think so), and if so, why would it NOT be illegal to purposely film and publish someone's private text messages by snapping pictures over the shoulders of the unsuspecting attendees at a county commission meeting?

Either which way--it's unnerving to think someone would do this--particularly at a commission meeting.  Why?

Believe me, there are much more interesting things to pursue than people's text messages back and forth about opinions of a government meeting.  And this opinion of mine comes from a vantage point of a person who was actually in the meeting participating.  

Weird, creepy, and unnerving.  But hey, just when I thought I'd seen it all in 15 years in public office locally, along comes this, LOL.  😛

Happy Father's Day!

Is Legality of 401(a) Plan a "Grizzly Bear Trap?"

 

Yesterday's board discussion about the county's 401(a) retirement plan was inartful.  And I said so multiple times.  It was a discussion that did not need to happen.  It should have been worked out between the lawyers in the background and the facts brought to us for a decision.  But nope, we had to make sausage even though we didn't need to have this discussion in public.

But it happened, nonetheless.  (Starting at 1:08:25 of this video)

Full disclosure, I do not take the 401(a) plan, I never knew it existed until two months ago, and obviously the rate of return for elected officials (over 51% for next year) is obscenely high.  These are the facts upon which we can ALL agree.  Do I believe these rates are too high?  Yes, of course I do, and I said so at the meeting.

Furthermore, the additional facts of the matter are very clear:  The county has had this plan in place for nearly 25 years (since 1997) and many current and former employees and current elected members of the board have made irrevocable elections out of the standard FRS plan to join this local plan.  This plan and the administration and rates for reimbursement to the accounts of employees and elected officials are memorialized in a contract the board approved in 2016 before I was on this board.  At the meeting yesterday, I again asked our attorney if this plan was legal, to which she replied "Yes."

Now comes the strange, artless, choppy, sloppy, and unusual stuff.  The Clerk's office put an "information item" on their portion of the agenda, stating they would unilaterally be reinterpreting portions of the board's 2016 executed contract with ICMA because they felt the "rate of payment into these accounts was too high."  They did not say, in their agenda backup, however, that they felt it was "illegal" to make these contributions.  So I asked the clerk and the clerk's attorney both point blank:  Is this illegal?  After pressing them---after wading through a lot of gibberish and gobldegook--they both finally stated at the meeting in answer to my query that yesthey believe it is "illegal."  But our attorney, again, believes otherwise.

So here's where it gets interesting and the questions come in rapid fire fashion:  

If it is indeed illegal--why has the clerk's office signed off and sent in the checks to pay these astonishingly high rates of return for the last 8 years?  If it is illegal today, was it illegal then?  Does paying from the treasury an illegal charge carry any penalty under state statutes?  Is ignorance of the law a defense?  Robert Bender made a very subdued, modest statement that resonated with me when he disclosed to us all via a statement to the clerk that he indeed sought a clerk's opinion about the plan shortly after he took office, specifically about the high rate of return and if this was legal, to which he apparently received reassurance from the clerks office that it was legal.  I mean, this must have been their opinion--otherwise the payments to Bender's account should have stopped right then and there, in early 2019.  

But no, the clerk's office continued to approve these huge payments ever since.   Apparently these queries from Bender to the clerk's office were made in writing.  (Someone should look at these).

So here's the bear trap.  If it is/was legal to pay these plans--then the clerk has NO legal authority to take action to prevent or pause payment--this is up to the BOCC to fix or adjust, our issue.  A clerk unilaterally not paying or attempting to void or reinterpret an executed contract is imporper at least-and could be that office acting ultra vires at worst-- according to our attorney.  (Yes, I asked that question yesterday, too)

On the other hand--if the clerk is right and this is in fact illegal--then why the heck have these payments been made for all these years?  How the heck could the clerk's office say yes--it is legal to Robert Bender in 2018 and continue to pay if it was illegal?  And why in the heck would it take them 3 years to finally figure out it is illegal and not simply problematic?  And if they figured out this past week, that it is/was illegal---why not just indicate that within the backup?  Why make me pry it out of the clerk's attorney like a pearl diver opening a clam?  Why not say "YES WE THINK IT'S ILLEGAL!"  Why the doublespeak about it being "problematic."  What the hell does that even mean, anyway?

Too many questions--but meanwhile we, the BOCC, have requested formal legal opinions on all these questions from an outside counsel.  The answers will be interesting to read.  Either way though, this spectacle of a discussion yesterday turned into a grizzly bear trap about to be sprung........ 

And whatever happens there with that---the BOCC will fix this issue--because It's our issue to fix.

  

County Response to Doug Underhill's Request for Payment of Legal Fees Filed This Morning....And it is Devastating

 

Asst. County Attorney Charles Peppler wrote this response that was filed in court this morning.  It was filed in response to a request through the court that the County be mandated and forced to pay for commissioner Underhill's legal fees in one of his numerous lawsuits.

This response eviserates the request from Doug's legal team that essentially sought to have the court force us to pay the fees and that this payment of fees was a foregone conclusion and essentially a ministerial function.

But repayment is not a ministerial function and not a foregone conclusion.

from the response by the county:

"FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The AWM does not meet the legal requirements necessary to compel the execution of a ministerial duty, as the Board has the discretionary authority to deny Petitioner’s request for legal fees and costs according to the terms of the LR Policy.

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Petitioner has violated the LR Policy by not complying within ten days of having been served with a suit or having retained counsel and submitting the information required by Section D., Procedures, contained in the LR Policy, which is a mandatory obligation imposed on Petitioner.

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Petitioner is not entitled to seek reimbursement for legal fees and costs, as his conduct in using social media networking sites to interact with Scott Miller violated the County Commissioners’ Technology Policy, adopted on August 20, 2009, which was in force on the date that Petitioner made his online comments concerning Scott Miller. A copy of the Technology Policy is attached to this response as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by reference.

29

CONCLUSION

The Alternative Writ in Mandamus must be denied as the Legal Representation Policy involves more than just a ministerial duty to grant attorney’s fees on a rubber stamp basis, but empowers the Board to apply its discretionary authority in reviewing a commissioner’s written request for attorney’s fees and costs. The LR Policy mandates that a commissioner comply with its procedures to obtain publicly-funded legal representation. Moreover, Petitioner has violated the County’s Technology Policy by discussing County business on a Facebook page with a constituent. Based upon the foregoing reasoning and cited authorities, the Alternative Writ in Mandamus must be denied.

Respectfully submitted,

Escambia County Attorney's Office

221 Palafox Place, Suite 430

Pensacola, Florida 32502

(850) 595-4970

/s/ Charles V. Peppler

By: Charles V. Peppler, Deputy County Attorney"

Read the document here.

Clear and Convincing Evidence: A High Standard to Meet

As several of us watch the progression of a case involving alleged misconduct by a former EMS employee as it hurtles toward a DOAH administrative hearing---some interesting facts must be noted.

First of all, this hearing before a hearing officer is an administrative, civil procedure.  Some folks on some chat sites don't know this, they want this former employee's head on a plate.  They think he is up on criminal charges!  

But no, this is a civil, administrative matter.  It is serious, it is important, but it is a civil matter.  

And the question for the hearing officer will be fairly basic.  Is there clear and convincing evidence that this individual did what has been alleged?

And because this individual holds a state certification, he will have to answer to these allegations in one of the following four ways:

  

--Formal hearing before the Division of Administrative Hearings (contest the charges)

--Informal hearing before the board (no dispute)

--hearing waived before board (no dispute)

--settlement by licensee to board for approval

(See the process flow chart, below.)

In perusing the settled case files and reading a couple of interesting recommended orders like this one----one thing becomes exceptionally clear very quickly to even the most casual observer: proving something to the standard of clear and convincing isn't a slam dunk.   Especially if there are facts in dispute, if it is a "he said, she said" issue....And when you are talking about someone's livlihood---their state license---it has to be a high bar to meet to prove even the most sensational allegations.

In speaking with a lawyer I know and trust about the difficulty in proving something to this standard--when issues are contested and with dualing expert testimony submitted, the reply was short and simple  "Jeff, it will be difficult if not impossible to get to clear and convincing with dualing medical experts on complex subjects of contention."  Another attorney I asked put it a bit more bluntly  "It would be an expert vs. expert smack down.  That [clear and convincing] is a very high standard to meet."

So while anyone can throw a bunch of charges against the wall to see what sticks----and while some of these allegations can be framed in such a way to make someone look terrible----at the end of the day and at the end of the process, even these tremendously scary sounding allegations have to be proved.  And the burden of proof in this instance must be clear and convincing.

So it will be a Doctor vs. Doctor game of rock em' sock em' robots.  The hearing officer will read one doctor's "charge sheet" and see another doctor refute every single allegation in his written counter.  Each and every one.  So with two well qualified doctors completely disagreeing--how the heck will the hearing officer ever meet the "clear and convincing" standard to find this employee violated the state licensing regulations he is alleged to have violated? 

But then the really interesting timelines will come in that make getting to clear and convincing even more difficult.  The timing of the harrassment complaint is devastating to the doctor making allegations about the employee.  This is because these "allegations" from the doctor against an employee were made AFTER the harrassment complaint was made by the employee against the doctor.  And that timeline will be easily illustrated and backed with proof. 

But then the most obvious of obvious, million dollar questions will most assuredly be asked by the DOAH hearing officer once he gets through with the dualing doctor testimony:  

"If you allege this particular employee was so inept, dangerous, and reckless in his conduct, why did you not counsel him, discipline him, or restrict his privileges to address these alleged shortcomings until AFTER you found out he filed a harrassment complaint against you?"  "Furthermore, why did you save up and document all of these purported incidents where this medic, according to you, acted with recklessness jeopardizing patient safety--but during this same timeframe where you gathered these allegations you never once recommended he be disciplined nor conseled--and you NEVER restricted his privileges or reported this to DOH?"

Throw in the emails and initial HR documents that point to retaliation, or at a minimum the appearance of retaliation, on the part of the doctor making these allegations against the employee-----and there appears to be no pathway to getting the allegations against this medic sustained to the level of "clear and convincing."   

And by the time this thing even goes to DOAH, there will likely be a huge, 6-figure settlement paid to this employee by the county that will be out there in the domain of public records that can and will be included in the hearing--complete with transcripts.  And these will only help this employee.  

I predict he clears his name and defeats these allegations and charges, because clear and convincing is a high standard to meet. 

62nd Coffee with the Commissioner This Wednesday Morning 6:30-7:30 AM

 

Join us for our 62nd Coffee with The Commissioner event this Wednesday, June 16th, 2021 from 6:30-7:30AM.

We will have County Administrator Janice Gilley, Escambia County Emergency Manager Eric Gilmore, and Escambia County Information Technology Director Bart Siders on the call. Janice will give an update on county happenings, Eric will give an update from Public Safety, and Bart will discuss the County's proactive approach to network security.

Our special guest on the webinar will be Dr. Eman El-Sheikh, who is Associate Vice President at the University of West Florida. She leads the Center for Cybersecurity and is also a Professor of Computer Science at UWF. With Colonial Pipeline, JBS, the City of Pensacola, and more recently the city of Mobile all being targeted by cyber-criminals--this will be a discussion about what we can do to protect our networks and how the field of cybersecurity is growing in our area. Dr. El-Sheikh will highlight what the UWF Center for Cybersecurity is doing to support cybersecurity awareness, education and workforce development across public and private sectors, and current challenges and opportunities in this field. Please join us for this great and very timely and relevant discussion!

To join the meeting, go to the following Facebook page at 6:30 a.m. on Wednesday, March 10 and watch the live stream:

www.facebook.com/CommissionerBergosh/.

Residents and citizens are encouraged to send virtual questions and comments they would like to discuss with District 1 Commissioner during the event through Facebook or email to district1@myescambia.com

Another BIG Settlement Coming in Public Safety. This One DID NOT Have to Happen Though.............

 This settlement, below, will be on next Thursday's agenda for consideration by the Escambia Board of County Commissioners.

The conduct that led to this issue was a series of blunders by management--to include an abject failure by administration to honor an employee's basic due process rights.

There was also an allegation of harrassment against this employee that the county did NOT properly investigate and settle as stipulated in board policy.

While this settlement, if approved by the board on Thursday, will be paid 100% by an insurance policy we carry--nevertheless this will impact our rates going forward in a major way.   And this employee did deal with the stress of the whole ordeal.  He told me, in October/November of 2019 before it went to court "I don't want to sue the county--I just want to get back to work and work for Escambia County Public Safety!"  But unfortunately that did not work out that way.

And this all came on the heels of the other harrassment case we settled in Public Safety just a year earlier!

Saddest and most disappointing of all---this never even had to go to the courts.  It could have (should have) been addressed properly in November of 2019.  But some HR and admin folks didn't listen and couldn't see what was coming.  Even when they were told, even when they were shown.  Nope. They, instead, got BAD advice from a guy that did not and does not even work for Escambia County, a " healthcare consultant" of sorts.  His advice on this was about as good as the Titanic's navigator in the North Atlantic......

And now, we are going to have to swallow ANOTHER big settlement in Public Safety.......due to botched managament and oversight.  I can't wait to have this and other related discussions this coming Thursday.

What Could This Mean Though?

 

A fairly short and to the point email was put out by our attorney yesterday afternoon--see it above.  But it stood out to me as the subject of the email is/was a former EMS employee who resigned years ago.

And after this employee left, a series of follow on administrators have characterized what this individual was "alleged" to have done in very, very sinister terms.  I never got into the weeds of what he was accused of doing, as he quit and moved on, and the subsequent charges that were leveled against him continued on in the courts.

So this email notice, here above, came as somewhat of a surprise to me.  Again, when the narrative I got (along the lines of) "Oh man, it's bad.  It's really, really bad.  Oh boy, this is some bad, bad stuff"  is juxtaposed with how the thing actually got resolved----it makes one think that the seriousness of the initial narrative may have been exaggerated?  Or did the prosecution run into a snag?  I mean, how does "the sky is falling--commissioner" turn into two misdemeanor charges (to which "no contest" is pled) and adjudication is subsequently withheld??

Wow.  Wonder if this is the shape of things to come with some other, upcoming high profile cases which I was told were "extremely serious!!"...........guess we will all find out soon enough.

Are We in Junior High School Again?

Using hearsay to create a strawman:  Are we back in Junior High School Again?

Last evening (after I went to bed) an email was sent to commissioners apparently leveling some accusations at three of us.  It was hearsay that appears to have been put into an email in order to create a record which, in turn, will no doubt make its way on to various chat sites later this morning...

But hearsay is just that.  Unreliable, unverified, unsubstantiated statements that rightfully elicit doubt.  That's why when judges instruct juries, they give them a primer on hearsay--how it is not to be considered except in very rare, exceptionally unusual circumstances.  (This hearsay at issue doesn't rise to this level)

Often, as I suspect will be the case here in this instance, this sort of hearsay is used to create a strawman, which is then subsequently used to attack the purported subject of the hearsay.  See how that works?

Certain media outlets have perfected and vaulted the informal fallacy of the "straw man" into an artform.  Local facebook chat sites and a dozen or so commenters also revel in this misinformation.

So this latest one, this email from 9:00 last night, suggests I said something disparaging about the Clerk of the Courts.  This is not true, I deny this fully, categorically.   it's a lie.  It's hearsay.  

The genesis for this hearsay email (sent out 4 full days after the meeting, no less) was a discussion on the 401(a) plan at last Thursday's meeting.  FULL DISCLOSURE:  I do not take this 401(a) plan, I have not signed on to this plan, it does not impact my FRS account at all.  I was vested in the FRS pension plan at the end of 2011 due to my service on the school board, before the FRS changed vesting timelines to 8 years after 2011, and before anyone else currently on the BCC Dais held any elected office.  So it's not about me, that's number one.

Number two is this:  The team on that dais, the five of us, the deciders, the BCC--we had already--- as a team ----talked through the issue and decided obtaining a written legal memorandum before proceeding was the way we were going to go.  Our debate on this topic was over, it ended when commissioner Barry pulled the motion and we moved forward in the agenda.

ONLY THEN did the clerk speak up.  After the debate had ended.  After the angst, the debate, and all discussion.  After the smoke cleared.  It was over.

And by the time she did speak, anything she added was superfluous to the discussion, anything she felt like saying was already a MOOT POINT, as again, the leadership team, the BCC had already as a group decided on a course of action.

Chairman Bender was being congenial in allowing her to be recognized after the issue had passed, in a very gracious gesture.  But she is the clerk, she is not and was not a decider on this issue.  If she disagrees with the attorney's opinion, she as clerk could seek her own opinion.  If the board votes for something for which she has a disagreement--she has certain methods at her disposal with which she can respond.

But chiming in after an agenda item was dropped and after no vote was taken and AFTER a leadership team decision was made....that WAS completely unnecessary.

First Half of Escambia's American Rescue Plan Allotment is in the Bank!

 What amounts to half of our full allotment of American Rescue Plan funds has arrived and is in the County's Bank Account.  Commissioners were informed of this yesterday.

A discussion of uses and allocations of this nearly $31 Million dollar cash infusion will occur at an upcoming Board of County Commissioners meeting.