October 4, 2009 Page 12 of 16 Re: J. Mittelstadt
Enright for his after-the-fact honesty, it is important to note that the City Manager attained his goal, the matter was taken off the agenda. v. On August 17, 2009 (And Again On September 1, 2009) The City Manager Made Ms. Mittelstadt A Quid Pro Quo Offer To Have Her Change Her Legal Analysis In Exchange For His Arranging To Have The Complaints Against Her Dropped After the City Manager reported that the Finance Department had made written complaint against Ms. Mittelstadt on August 10, and after Ms. Mittelstadt alerted the City Council that the 2-24 and the Finance Department’s reporting requirements had to taken off the August 18 agenda, the City Manager sent Ms. Mittelstadt an email on August 17, 2009, a day before the scheduled August 18, 2009 Council meeting. In that email, the City Manager offered Ms. Mittelstadt a quid pro quo arrangement to get her to change her legal analysis and recommendations. The City Manager’s email stated he would arrange to have the complaints against Ms. Mittelstadt dropped, if she changed her legal analysis. The City Manager wrote: “[if you agree that] [a]ny matter or consideration to make the Finance Director an at-will employee reporting to the City Council will be stopped…. I will discuss them with the parties that have filed complaints and seek their agreement to drop their complaints [against you].” The City Manager reiterated that quid pro quo offer on September 1, 2009. On that date, the City Manager stated he would make the complaints against Ms. Mittelstadt "go away" if Ms. Mittelstadt provided written notification of her agreement to cease discussion of the CFO issue and agree to his version of 2-24. vi. City Manager’s Refusal To Place PARSAC Representative Issue On Agenda In An Effort To Maintain His Own Authority Over The Matter Another illegal action by the City Manager was his unilateral cancellation of a City Council directed agenda item to have a PARSAC presentation, and review appointment of City’s PARSAC representative. The City Manager argued that Ms. Mittelstadt should not be the PARSAC designated representative, as he wanted to maintain control over the matter. Therefore, he refused to place the matter on the agenda, despite the City Council’s direction. The City Manager’s conduct was in violation of City Code sections 2-24 and 1-7. v. Mittelstadt’s Reporting Of Other Illegal Conduct For Which She Is Being Retaliated Against Other examples of misconduct, violations of the law or information generating retaliation include: