 |
| This item should have been paid three months ago....Why wasn't it? |
I
wrote extensively last week about what I felt was an unnecessary, unprofessional withholding of payment by the clerk's office of a duly approved and voted-upon item by the BCC. The County Attorney has now sent the below response to the Clerk and her attorney to address this failure to make the payment. Hopefully, payment will be made without ANY further delay, as it should have all along....From the email:
"First,
let me express how extremely disappointed I am that you did not extend the
courtesy at the earliest opportunity to advise of your concerns with this expenditure
relating to Mr. Selover’s attorney’s fees and administrative fine. As you
know, the Board voted to authorize this expenditure at its October 6, 2022
meeting. Since then, more than three months have passed, and until now, you
have not contacted me regarding this matter.
Pursuant
to Fla. Stat. §125.17, the Clerk shall make payments as directed by the Board
of County Commissioners. The Board is the elected legislative body that
determines what expenses serve a public purpose and, unless illegal, those
payments shall be timely made. Under home rule authority, it is not
necessary to demonstrate specific statutory authorization to make payment;
instead, upon legislative authorization, payment shall be made unless
illegal. While you have provided statutory authority for payment of
public officer and employee attorney’s fees, that authority is clearly not
preemptive or exhaustive as illustrated by the common law theories regarding
those expenses.
There
is no authority of which I am aware finding the payment of attorney’s fees or a
fine illegal or inappropriate. To the contrary, there is a strong public
policy in favor of financially supporting public sector employees who become
engaged in legal jeopardy arising out of their public sector employment.
To not defend such employees would discourage public employment as such
employees are often asked to perform duties that are subject to legal
challenges for various reasons.
Mr.
Selover’s attorney’s fees and the fine at issue were associated with an administrative
action, rather than a criminal proceeding, that was directly related to his
employment with the County. The settlement agreement made no finding of
grossly negligent conduct, bad faith, malicious purpose, or willful and wanton
disregard of human safety. Moreover, the settlement was entered into for
the purpose of effecting an expeditious resolution rather than incurring the
costs of a lengthy proceeding.
To
require a public employee or former employee to undergo an evidentiary hearing
to avoid a fine instead of entering into a settlement agreement as a condition
for authorizing payment is contrary to the public policy and would,
undoubtedly, result in unnecessary expense. It is also relevant to note,
on occasion, the County must pay fines or penalties assessed against the
County, whether arising out of the actions of its employees or otherwise.
Thus, assuming proper legislative action, it stands to reason that public funds
may be used to pay fines assessed against a public employee when those fines
arose out of his public employment.
Additionally,
although you have not communicated any concerns, it is my understanding the
Clerk has not yet processed payment of Kate Kenney’s attorney’s fees, which the
Board voted to authorize on October 20, 2022. I assume the issue of
expenditures for fees or other expenses incurred by Public Safety employees was
the subject of Ms. Childers discussion with the JLAC auditors after our meeting
on Friday afternoon. If so, I point out that only the elected legislative
body can make a legislative determination as to what serves a public
purpose. That said, if the auditors provided specific advice on this
issue then it should be shared between our agencies in the unified effort to
perform and accomplish the public’s business.
Thus,
I respectfully request the payment authorized by the Board on October 6 be
processed as expeditiously as possible."
3 comments:
Why is it such a relief to read actual common sense coming from anywhere these days. I mean, reading this letter, shouldn't it be obvious how absolutely ridiculous the Clerk's actions are?
People are so tired of self-aggrandizing public officials throwing their weight around just to see how far they can throw it. Brinksmanship just for the sake of "owning" other public officials, or worse yet, constituents and citizens. It's a deplorable, and deeply sad, state of affairs.
Thank you to the County Attorney for laying down the truth, which also makes obvious that in addition to being legally absurd, the Clerk's actions are also immoral to the core. Our taxpayer dollars should not continue to be wasted day in and day out by a good percentage of elected officials--local, state, federal--simply pushing the envelope to see how obnoxious and unethical they can get away with being. Among other terrible consequences, it's creating an awful world for children to grow up in. I don't know how young kids can grow to have any idea of right and wrong with so many "adults" in office valorizing their flagrant disdain for rules and law.
And of course it goes without saying: as if these former, and stellar, employees haven't had enough of the back of the hand from bad actors manipulating their positions of power.
It's times like this that I catch myself wishing that I believed in an afterlife based on a rewards system based on good and bad behavior. And it never ceases to amaze me that so many people who claim to believe in such a system conduct themselves in the ways that they do.
JLAC Auditors????
Melissa Pino 8:30-As it relates to the Selover payment--so far as I have been told by staff--the clerks office did NOT notify the county that they were experiencing a delay in the payment of Selover's fees that the BCC approved on 10-6-22. Only after the Selover's attorneys called asking about status did our attorney call over to the clerk's office to inquire about the status. Then and only then did Codey Leigh reach out to our attorney via email and express doubt about the legality of the payment. He didn't mention workload, holiday delays, or anything else. He just intimated the payment couldn't be made because in his opinion it wasn't "authorized." How long would they have waited to tell us the payment wasn't forthcoming if we hadn't inquired? That's the question. Why make these folks wait for what is going on 4 months for their payment. I GUARANTEE you they are not waiting that long to pay their attorneys in the 401a case. Guarantee it. So it's petty and ridiculous. It is unprofessional and it was uncalled for them to not immediately notify us the minute they had an issue with it. That's why I spotlighted this issue in hopes of getting it resolved because as I said in the PNJ--if this is the new normal of how these things are going to be handled, welcome to dysfunction junction. And NOT on the fault of the BCC or our staff......
Post a Comment