Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-042A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE RATIFYING ACTION CONCERNING 'i'HE SEPARATION OF COUNTY DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TOM PARILO BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte as follows: Recitals. This resolution is made with reference to the following background recitals: a. On March l 3, 2001, the Board of Supervisors held a closed session meeting to conduct a performance evaluation of County Director of Development Services Tom Pariio. b. During his performance evaluation, a majority of the Board expressed a desire to have Mr. Pardo separated from his position as Director-Development Services. c. In this closed session meeting, the board directed County Counsel Bruce Alpert and Chief Administrative Officer John Blacklock to contact Mr. Pardo and attempt to reach a mutual agreement with him regarding both parties' rights under the employment agreement and voluntary separation from County employment. d. Government Code Section 54957.1 requires the Board to publicly report any action taken inclosed session and the vote, with the timing ofthe report governed by the rules in section 54957.1, subsection (a). Section 54957.1, subsection (a)(5}applies to any action taken to dismiss or otherwise affect the employment status of a public employee. ]t provides that the report of dismissal "shall be deferred until the first public meeting following the exhaustion of administrative remedies, if any." e, Mr. Alpert determined that the nature of the Board's closed session action and direction to the County Counsel provided Mr. Pardo with a type ofadministrative remedy to pursue with the County Counsel's office, and that the Board's action was not final or effective until completion of discussions and negotiations, if any, between Mr. Pardo and the County Counsel. Consequently, Mr. Alpert concluded and the Board of Supervisors concurs that the Board was required by section 54957.1, subsection (a)(5) to defer the announcement until the first public meeting following the completion of discussions and negotiations, if any, between the County Counsel, Mr. Blacklock, and Mr. Pardo. This conclusion is further supported by the primary reason for the personnel exception to the Brown Act, which is to avoid undue publicity and embarrassment to the affected employee. f. Following the March ] 3, 2001 closed session meeting, the County Counsel and Mr. Blacklock contacted Mr. Pardo to discuss with him both parties' rights under the employment agreement and voluntary separation. Following these discussions, it became apparent that mutual agreement regarding separation would not be reached. The County Counsel on March 16, 2001 notified Mr. Pardo that he was being terminated from employment with the County. g. After the decision to terminate became final and effective and all administrative remedies with the County Counsel's office exhausted, the Board at its March 27, 2001 meeting publicly reported the action taken in the March 13, 2001 closed session meeting concerning Mr. Pardo. h. In a letterto the County dated March 22, 2001, attorneys forthe Chico Enterprise Record allege two violations of the Brown Act relating to the March 13, 2001 closed session meeting: (I} they allege that the County failed to timely report back the closed session action; and (ii} they allege that the Board improperly took action on an item not appearing on the posted agenda for the March 13, 2001 meeting, because the agenda referred to a closed session for "public employee performance evaluation" instead of referring to dismissal or termination. In the March 22, 2001 letter, the newspaper's attorneys request that the County Board of Supervisors cure or correct the March 13, 2001 action in accordance with Government Code section 54960.1. I. Based an the advice of County Counsel, and retained outside counsel with Brown Act expertise, the Board does not believe that its actions on March 13, 2001 violated the Brown Act. Concerning the timing of the public report an the closed session action, the Brown Act expressly required the Board to defer the report until the first public meeting following the exhaustion of administrative remedies, which would include the discussions and negotiations which occurred. With respect to the description of the agenda item as "public employee performance evaluation," at the time that County staff prepared the agenda, they did not know that the outcome of the performance evaluation would be a decision to seek Mr. Parilo's separation from employment. A decision to seek the separation of an at-wi11 management employee is a possible outcome of any performance evaluation and the County believes that the agenda entry satisfied the Brown Act requirement of a "brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed." j. Nevertheless, in a good faith effort to avoid any misunderstanding about the Board's decision in this matter, and avoid any unnecessary and expensive litigation, the Board has determined that it is appropriate to ratify its March 13, 2001 action in response to the cure and correct request. By this resolution, the Board cures the alleged Brown Act violations by (I) rescinding the March 13, 2001 action and publicly ratifying the earlier decision to separate Mr. Pardo from employment with the County, and {ii} taking this action in open session at a regular meeting under an agenda item description that clearly describes the contemplated action. 2. Ratitication. The Board hereby (a) rescinds its closed session action on March 13, 2001 concerning the dismissal of County Director of Development Services Tom Parilo, and {b) ratifies the County's decision to dismiss Mr. Pardo from employment in accordance with the applicable provisions of his employment contract and notice of such action taken by County Counsel on March 16, 2001. 2 i'ASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Butte on the 10`~ day of April 2001 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Beeler, Yamaguchi. and Chair Josiassen NOES: Supervisors Dolan and Houx ABSENT: None NOT VOTING: None l ` t~ ~.. --~~~"BUR , JOSIASSEN, Chair Boaxd~of Supervisors ATTEST: JOHN S. BLACKLOCK, Chief Ad~~~inistrative Officer and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ~. r ~ r ,, ,~