Saving Tens of Thousands of Taxpayer Dollars (And Doing the Right Thing) Is the Public Purpose Served!

Defending employees wrongly accused of misconduct in the course of their employement while simultaneously saving tens of thousands of dollars in legal bills is always a vote and an expenditure of funds that serves a valid public purpose and that also is a lawful expenditure by the BCC

Not surprisingly, a blazing front page piece in today's pre-holiday PNJ completely misses the mark.

And it misses the point.

The purpose of the piece this morning is to vilify the BCC, former paramedic employee Matt Selover, and our attorney, and to lionize clerk of the court Pam Childers and our former medical director.  

This is accomplished via snippets of emails thrown into an article, adorned with subjective assessments of issues that were swirling around the EMS division at the time of this settlement vote-- where these snippets used by PNJ are not properly contextualized.

On its face and as presented, it doesn't look good.  That's the point for the PNJ.

But once the onion is peeled and all the facts are known, the rationale for the BCC's vote to pay Matt Selover's $6,900.00 fine is readily apparent to even the most casual observer/reader.  That is why the rationale, the basis for the payment vote by the BCC appears nowhere in today's hatchet piece by Jim Little.  But there is, was, and always has been a searing, unflinching and completely rational reason "why" the board voted to pay the fine-----it DID serve a very valid public purpose.

Saving tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars (and doing the right thing) is the public purpose served!

Here is the story behind the story you will not get in this garbage pile article this morning in PNJ.

Former Escambia County Paramedic Matt Selover was railroaded on trumped up charges, deprived of due process, deprived of pay, unfairly demoted, and vilified and bullied by a former employee that made it a habit of doing this to folks with whom she disagreed. Along the way, this meniachal former employee that attempted to ruin Selover's career threw a host of allegations at a raft of now former employees with whom she had various beefs with during her short tenure.

At the end of it, all but one of the 6 now former EMS personnel this former reckless employee fingered and attempted to ruin---all but one were never prosecuted.  5 of 6 have clean records and have not been convicted of doing anything illegal---even thoughtheir collective lives were turned upside down and careers were damaged. (we're still cleaning up the mess caused by this whole episode, paying another $90K settlement to another wronged former EMS employee at our last meeting)

In Selover's case specifically--the evidence was OVERWHELMING against the county and the way the county treated him.  It was so overwhelming and blatant---- the horrible way he was treated--- that the county's own outside counsel and insurance adjuster BEGGED the county to settle for $200,000 because they estimated a jury award to Selover could have exceeded $800,000.  They also acknowledged the county would likely lose a suit if it went to a jury due to the overwhelming evidence pointing to the horric way Selover was treated by EMS staff, HR, Public Safety Supervisors, and the former County Administrator.  It was a disaster for the county.

So we settled with Selover over his due process lawsuit and we did so with insurance money, not tax dollars.

But even after the settlement, there was a DOAH administrative complaint that Selover was fighting based upon the charges levied against him by the county's former medical director.

IMPORTANT:  The county owed an obligation to defend him (Selover) in this matter and to pay his legal bills if he prevailed at DOAH, and therefore we would have been on the hook to do so had the matter at DOAH proceeded all the way through the hearing process.  We settle things all the time, all day every day, to avoid geometrically increasing legal bills.  No difference in this case.

The medical director levied multiple charges and accusations against Selover.

An expert witness, a more experienced and well-respected Medical Director, wrote an expert opinion disputing every single allegation made against Selover, one by one. Expert witness against expert witness.  

And to sustain a sanction at DOAH, the evidentiary standard that must be met is "Clear and Convincing."  

So had the hearing at DOAH continued forward, it is highly unlikely that Selover would have faced a sanction because the evidence against him by a doctor was disputed factually by another doctor.  Add to this that testimony would have been entered on behalf of Selover about other employees targeted by the former medical director and how those allegations never materialized,---and most believe there is no way he would have faced a sanction.  It would have dragged out though.

And the one sure thing is that the legal fees would have kept on going, up and up like a hot air balloon.  It could have cost taxpayers $30, $40, or $50K more.

Instead, Selover graciously accepted the deal for $6,900--- in which he did not plead guilty to anything and which also allowed him to keep his license and move forward with his career in a neighboring jurisdiction.

Selover's  acceptance of the deal and the concomitant savings in legal fees to the taxpayer that accepted deal enabled IS THE PUBLIC PURPOSE which formed the basis for the payment by the BCC.

He'd been wronged by the county, a $200,000 settlement had been made, the atrocious way his due process was withheld and the damage to him personally would have also influenced this decision at DOAH--it all would have factored in so it was most appropriate for the BCC to pay the settlement to completely make this former employee whole.  I am proud I voted to do it, I would do it again in a heartbeat, because it is and was the right thing to do.

We have to stand by our employees when they are bullied, targeted, vilified, and wrongly accused by rouge employees.  Always.  Sure, lawyers are human and make mistakes, and sometimes they reverse their opinions as our attorney did when she advised us that to make the payment "lawful" we (the BCC) had to vote it served a public purpose.  Which we did, and which payment DID serve a public purpose.

Staying in our Lanes

If we all stay in our lanes and do our jobs things will function effectively and efficiently.  If not, we are no better than a third-world dictatorship.....

Yesterday evening at the end of our regular BCC meeting (beginning at about 1:16:45 of this video) the board once again wrestled with an issue that should have never, ever been brought forward on another agenda.  It is a settled matter, all but the final payment of $6,900.00.  Or so it should have been.

Sadly, however, the issue had to be brought back for another go-round last night.

Way back on October 6th--- nearly four months ago---the board voted to pay the last of the costs associated with righting a wrong that was put upon a former employee.  Whether or not anyone agreed with the board's course of action on that matter, the bottom line is the county had to settle with that former employee because of numerous mistakes made by now former staff members that didn't do their jobs correctly, period.  His rights were violated, unfounded accusations were leveled against him, and his due process rights were tossed in a garbage can and lit on fire.   The insurance company and their attorneys wisely advised that the issue be settled for $200,000.00 as the case, if brought to a trial, could have cost the county as much as $800,000.00 in settlement fees + legal costs.

Feckless, glib individuals (to include a claims adjuster for the insurance company and even several former county staffers) who do not understand the way things actually work (apparently including several of the lawyers who purportedly worked on our behalf for the insurance company in defending the eventual lawsuit that was brought by this former employee) attempted to foist blame on me for the outcome.  Of course what they did and how they spread that message via their adjuster and even through former county staff was unethical and contrary to the professional, appropriate way a client is to be treated by their attorney (they are lucky no bar complaint was filed).  

But we were not their real client; never were.  Nope.  We figured that out once we received their emails and assessment of the case documents---after the fact.  You know, the texts and emails they never thought we would see.  No, their real client was always their insurance company that paid their salaries.  They didn't think too much of the commissioners nor did they care for me.  So what.  Do a job.  That's what I say.  Because the seminal, most important axiom of reality these "lawyers" never admitted to nor conceded was the fact that had this matter gone to trial-- I would have NEVER been called to testify at such a trial as I was not a fact witness to the events upon which I have opined and testified truthfully under oath during my deposition.  

They should have known that, and probably did.  

Yet they still assigned blame to a commissioner when the fact of the matter was I told the truth and they were dealt a bum case with fact patterns they didn't have the chops nor the will to overcome.  Period.

Setting that ALL aside, they brazenly claimed that my truthful testimony once I was deposed somehow "tanked the case"  Garbage, rubbish lie.

So after all that smoke cleared, the final settlement costs this former employee incurred in order to get on with his life and career totalled $6,900.00 dollars.  The board of county commissioners voted 3-1 that the payment of this sum be made to settle the costs with the state on behalf of this former employee. Further, the board also voted that in it's view this payment was appropriate and served a public purpose/interest.  

October 6th we voted that.   (See the discussion and vote beginning at 3:17:41 of this video)

But the clerk never paid it.  

Only when she was asked about the delay, 90 days later,  did her office gave a weak set of excuses about why it wasn't paid.

The clerk didn't bother to tell our attorney or any of us she had a problem with the payment for 90 days until she was prodded on it.

Why not?

Well, many of us suspect it is all related to other pending issues she has with the BCC.  Nobody knows for sure except her, but it doesn't matter now, because last night the board once again had to reopen this messy affair and discuss it.  And again, the board made a 3-1 vote.

This time, though, the 3-1 was made to allow our attorney to utilize the court to compel payment of this item.  I predict a writ of mandamus will be filed, and hopefully it will be considered swiftly in the circuit court so the previously BCC approved, lawful and appropriate payment------at long last----- can be made.

As I said in the meeting last night---I believe to not make that payment is an attempt at usurping the board's power.  It isn't right.  We all have to stay in our lanes and if we don't--things devolve and fall apart and we become dysfunctional like a third-world banana republic or worse.

More to come on this.  Much more.

Why Has This Not Yet Been Paid by the Clerk?

 

Why are our payments being "handcuffed" by the Clerk?  Lawful payments voted upon by the BCC must be made, in timely fashion, by the clerk.  The ridiculous, vindictive, and petty scrutiny combined with the failure by the clerk to honor and make lawful payments approved by the BCC--or at a minimum immediately notify us that the payment would NOT be made-- is not only unprecedented--it is unscrupulous and unprofessional in my opinion.

On October 6th of 2022---more than three months ago---the Escambia Board of County Commissioners voted-by a 3-1 margin-to pay admisistrative costs and fees resulting from the former Escambia County Medical Director's witch hunt directed toward one former employee.  This wronged former employee was forced out of county employment and his reputation was maligned by multiple staff members-- including the former medical director-- and he was left with very few options. So in order to continue his career and maintain his paramedic's license (and to save what could have been years and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees that the county would have had to pay on his behalf) he took a settlemet deal with the state.  

We (BCC) previously had to pay this same wronged  former employee, Matt Selover,  a six-figure settlement due to the deplorable way he was treated by his supervisor at that time, the now former medical director.  And the mistreatment of this former employee was not just at the hands of the former medical director;  all levels of admin from HR all the way up to former Administrator Janice Gilley left Matt Selover hanging out to dry and sold him down the river like yesterday's garbage.  And his 13 year career was ruined.

It was the metaphorical equivalent of a ship's crew celebrating on the deck of the ship, sipping champagne, while a deck-hand crew member was drowning just off the ship.  And instead of throwing their shipmate a life vest---this crew threw him an Anvil.  That's how Matt (and several other former EMS employees, I might add) were treated.

And the taxpayers paid the price and the BCC picked up the pieces and a huge settlement was paid.

So putting a button on it--I brought forward the agenda item on October 6th to pay the final penalties levied against former employee Selover---to completely make him "whole" and cover the remaining associated fees and costs to the state ------considering the deplorable way he was treated by the former medical director, the former county administrator, the former HR director, and numerous others. This payment would  allow him to continue on with his career elsewhere----which thankfully he has now been able to do.

The item passed the board 3-1.  (See the discussion and vote beginning at 3:17:41 of this video)

Moreover, the board also ---at the same meeting ---affirmatively voted that along with funding the payment--- we were also making a legislative finding that the payment served a legitimate public purpose.  

So, I thought that chapter was finally behind us. Everyone else did as well.  It should have been.  Case closed.

Or so I thought.

Late last week, however, I was told that even though the board voted to pay the $6960.02 in state fees more than three months ago-----the clerk of the court, Pam Childers, had not yet made payment.  Worse yet, I received word on Saturday that the clerk's lawyer, Cody Leigh (who was actually at the meeting on 10-6-22 when the vote was made to  make this payment and who said nothing that night or in the weeks and months following the vote) has now stated he feels the payment is "not authorized."  

From clerk lawyer Cody Leigh's email on 1-6-2023.....

"Upon review, I am unable to find any authority supporting payment of county funds to satisfy fines and costs (i.e. costs for prosecution and investigation) arising from an administrative enforcement case.  By extension, the fees in pursuit thereof would similarly be unauthorized.  I am aware of provisions in chapter 111 authorizing expenditure of funds in certain actions: § 111.07, Fla. Stat. (2022) (county authorized to provide an attorney to defend any civil action); § 111.071, Fla. Stat. (2022) (county authorized to pay final judgment, compromise, or settlement arising from complaint for damages or injury); § 111.072, Fla. Stat. (2022) (county authorized to self-insure or expend for liability insurance in order to pay expenses pursuant to § 111.07).  Similarly, I see there is a common law right to representation for public officials in defense of litigation arising from the performance of official duties."

What?!?  

It is completely appropriate---- and authorized under law---particularly after the vote that the BCC made.

But if he had issues with it--why did Leigh wait three months and sit on the payment?  Why did he not say one word at the meeting as the board pondered and thoughtfully considered this issue for several minutes prior to voting on it?  Why did he sit there like a wax statue?  Why didn't he and his boss Pam Childers not say right away that they wouldn't make the payment?  Why did they throw this on the back burner and not tell us?  Why wait until folks start asking "where is the check" to say they feel it is "not authorized?"

Why the gamesmanship?

Why hold out--this is now going on four months unpaid?  Why withhold payment--unless the object is to inflict more pain and agony on the former employee now vindicated of all the garbage accusations made against him---just wanting to move forward with his life?

If on 10-10-2022---only 3 days after the BCC voted to approve the above payment---the clerk had an issue paying it---why did her office wait three months to let us know they WOULD NOT PAY while everyone else thought the payment was processed?

I'm not happy about this turn of events.  And that is the polite way I'll put that.

Our attorney believes the payment is appropriate.  She signed the voucher, above.  The BCC voted to make the payment. There is NO reason this payment should not have happened in October or November------months ago.

I certainly hope this is not some weird spillover from the current litigation between the BCC and the clerk over retirment plan contributions.  I hope one thing isn't related to another.  Is this related to the hearsay that someone called her the B-word?  What, are we back in Middle School?!?  I hope not, and I certainly don't want to do business this way.  We approve the payments, she is supposed to pay the check, period.

Do a job.

Now, apparently, we are in some weird twilight zone where some things we vote to approve are going to have to go through some ridiculous, unnecessary, additional layer of scrutiny in order to be paid in timely fashion--if at all.  And if there is a perceived "problem" with the payment--we aren't going to be told either--it will simply twist in the wind and we'll be blissfully unaware.......

Immature, ridiculous, unnecessary, and uncalled for.

I'll post our attorney's response to this ridiculous hold up, here, once I receive it.  If this payment is not made in timely fashion, I will bring an item to our next meeting to discuss this and every option we have at our disposal (including and not limited to another mandamus filing in the circuit court) to compel the clerk to set aside her hard feelings and do her job and make this payment.

We approve the payments, she writes the check and pays.  It's very basic.

Much more to come on this.

The Deposition(s) of Jana Still

I received authorization to release the three volumes of Jana Still's (former HR Director for Escambia County) depositions in the now concluded Matt Selover lawsuit.

Her deposition, conducted by Pensacola attorney J.J. Talbot, was not helpful, whatsoever, to the county's case.  In fact, upon re-reading it juxtaposed with all of the other pertinent information in the case, it now appears more than likely that she was brought in and thrown to the wolves and instructed to "handle" the mess that was already well underway by the time she was brought in to work on it in November of 2019.  She was brought in to fix it, and her efforts were a belly-flop-job, a disaster.  It went south on her very badly...and cost us time, money, and several employees.

From county legal, as to my ability to release these particular records:

"Commissioner Bergosh:

Attached please find Jana Still’s deposition transcript.  There does not appear to be any applicable exemptions.  However, this transcript also contains testimony regarding the xxxxxxxxxxxxx and the resulting xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

 You may want to exercise your discretion to omit the following portions of the transcript:

• Volume II, page 129, lines 9-11; and
• Volume II, page 133, lines 15-18

Thank you,

 Kia M. Johnson

Assistant County Attorney"

Read the transcripts here, here, and here...

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.

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.

39th Coffee With the Commissioner Event Covers Multiple Topics of Interest

We had an excellent discussion about how COVID-19 is disrupting many aspects of our lives and businesses locally--and how we are recovering/coping-- at this morning's  virtual Coffee With the Commissioner event.

We had a really great conversation covering multiple topics of interest at this morning's Coffee with the Commissioner event.

Our guests this week were County Administrator Janice Gilley, Escambia Emergency Management Director Eric Gilmore, Escambia County Destination Marketing Organization Director Rusty Branch, and local Businessman Michael Silver.  Mr. Silver is the head of the group that brought the "Pop-Up" Drive-In movie theater to District 1 starting last week.  He gave updates on his operation, some challenges he has had, and also some improvements he has made for his customers.  He gave a rundown on how this concept came to be and what movies will be coming to the Drive in over this next weekend.

Eric Gilmore gave us an update on our EOC, the status of the work we are doing in conjunction with the National Guard to help our local Long Term Care facilities recover from the COVID-19 outbreak.

Janice Gilley gave an overview of the weekend's beach opening, including some issues out at Avenida 18 with some crowds that gathered there.  She also discussed the Governor's phased re-opening plan and reiterated the fact that Escambia County DID NOT close anyone's business--we are simply following the Governor's Executive orders that have limited certain businesses from opening.

Rusty Branch from the DMO discussed the first weekend of the season out at Pensacola Beach now that it has been re-opened beginning last weekend.  He also discussed the impacts the COVID-19 pandemic is having on the hotels and businesses out at Pensacola Beach.

You can watch the entire video on Facebook here,

it is also available on the County's YouTube site Here.

We will see you all next Wednesday morning for our 40th Coffee With the Commissioner Event!

The Re-Opening of Escambia County Begins Today

In alignment with the Governor's phased approach to opening the state--- Escambia County Facilities will begin a partial re-opening later this morning, Monday, May 4, 2020.

From County Administrator Janice Gilley:

"Dear Team Escambia:

Thank you again for your commitment to our citizens and your continued work during this very difficult time. I hope you and your families are safe and healthy.  As we look forward to getting back to a new normal in Phase I, please take time to read the information below related to your safety and reopening buildings at 25% (included at the bottom of the message).  Escambia County wants to protect our citizens and our employees that come to our facilities.  In anticipation of welcoming the public back to government facilities in a safe yet comfortable manner, the County will implement safety measures and guidelines. 

First and foremost, to protect themselves and those they come in contact with throughout the day, employees should remember to:

Be calm.  Be clean.  Be healthy.

·         Stay home if you’re sick

·         Move away from people before coughing or sneezing

o   cough or sneeze into your elbow or if available, a tissue and then discard the tissue in trash

·         Avoid close contact such as hugging or shaking hands

·         Avoid large gatherings (more than 10 people) and stay at least six (6) feet away from others

·         Avoid being around anyone who is sick or who may have a weak immune system

·         Avoid touching your eyes, nose, and mouth

·         Wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, especially after coughing, sneezing, or blowing your nose

·         Use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer that contains at least 60% alcohol if soap and water are not available

·         Continuously clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces and objects

·         Following the CDC’s recommendation that masks or face coverings be worn in areas where social distancing is difficult, we will provide masks/face coverings for staff use. The provided face coverings are not personal protective equipment. They do not protect the wearer, but rather protect others from the wearer.

·         Staff should make every effort to maintain social distancing throughout the office. Wearing a face covering is optional but strongly suggested for staff that need to go to stores or other public places while working.

Please feel free to contact either me or your Department Director should you have any questions or concerns regarding the information provided. We will get through this pandemic situation and will be stronger as a community."