The gloves are coming off in City Hall...
Quote
Council aide files complaint against Mayor Curry's chief of staff
By Nate Monroe
Posted Feb 13, 2018 at 3:35 PM
Updated Feb 13, 2018 at 11:22 PM
City Council President Anna Brosche's assistant filed a complaint against Brian Hughes, Mayor Lenny Curry's chief of staff, claiming he "accosted" her.
An aide to City Council President Anna Brosche filed a complaint Tuesday against Mayor Lenny Curry's chief of staff claiming an angry confrontation left her no longer feeling safe in City Hall.
The complaint against Brian Hughes — which was forwarded to the city's employee services department, the Jacksonville Human Rights Commission and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission — caps off weeks of escalating tension between the mayor and Brosche, stemming in part from recent talks over possibly selling the city-owned electric and water utility JEA. It also comes on the eve of a special City Council meeting Wednesday — called at Curry's request after Brosche refused to call one herself — where a report that will put a dollar value on JEA is set to be discussed.
Hughes called the complaint baseless.
The complaint alleges that Hughes confronted Jeneen Sanders, Brosche's executive council assistant, in a hallway Monday afternoon and angrily complained that Brosche had not copied a letter she had written rejecting the Wednesday JEA meeting to the mayor's office (a grievance he had also mentioned to a Times-Union reporter earlier in the day).
Sanders said Hughes' angry tone left her feeling unsafe.
"I feel extremely uncomfortable based on his aggressive tone, facial expressions, and his physical movements," Sanders wrote in the complaint. "Mr. Hughes spoke with fierce anger, creating a hostile work environment. I do not feel safe and would like to file a complaint."
...
http://www.jacksonville.com/news/20180213/council-aide-files-complaint-against-mayor-currys-chief-of-staff
QuoteSanders said Hughes' angry tone left her feeling unsafe.
"I feel extremely uncomfortable based on his aggressive tone, facial expressions, and his physical movements," Sanders wrote in the complaint. "Mr. Hughes spoke with fierce anger, creating a hostile work environment. I do not feel safe and would like to file a complaint."
The woman need to retire to her sewing basket at home.
Quote from: DTJAXEYE on February 15, 2018, 02:18:11 PM
QuoteSanders said Hughes' angry tone left her feeling unsafe.
"I feel extremely uncomfortable based on his aggressive tone, facial expressions, and his physical movements," Sanders wrote in the complaint. "Mr. Hughes spoke with fierce anger, creating a hostile work environment. I do not feel safe and would like to file a complaint."
The woman need to retire to her sewing basket at home.
Thanks for the input, Brian ;)
Quote from: DTJAXEYE on February 15, 2018, 02:18:11 PM
QuoteSanders said Hughes' angry tone left her feeling unsafe.
"I feel extremely uncomfortable based on his aggressive tone, facial expressions, and his physical movements," Sanders wrote in the complaint. "Mr. Hughes spoke with fierce anger, creating a hostile work environment. I do not feel safe and would like to file a complaint."
The woman need to retire to her sewing basket at home.
Assuming her version of events is true, it is he that needs to retire. Behavior like his would get many people fired in the private sector.
This sounds more like it's part of the feud between the Council President and the Mayor's office.
If it is true that she did not do her job and sent the letter to the Mayor's office as alleged, then perhaps she deserved the butt chewing she got.
The claim was investigated and found to be baseless...
Quote from: BridgeTroll on February 18, 2018, 07:18:21 AM
The claim was investigated and found to be baseless...
Well, it was found that he didn't break any laws in what he did. Hughes is the one who went on about it being "baseless" and "false", which doesn't exactly make him sound like a teddy bear.
http://floridapolitics.com/archives/256462-jacksonville-general-counsel-clears-brian-hughes
Quote from: carpnter on February 17, 2018, 11:07:54 AM
This sounds more like it's part of the feud between the Council President and the Mayor's office.
If it is true that she did not do her job and sent the letter to the Mayor's office as alleged, then perhaps she deserved the butt chewing she got.
The problem is that if Hughes did lash out at one of Brosche's employees over something Brosche's office did, that's out of line. He should have brought it to Brosche directly. He is by no means Sanders' superior and had no authority to give her a "butt chewing".
^ further, there were only cameras in one section - apparently some of the discussion between the two was not captured on video
This doesn't end:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/city-council-president-says-her-computer-is-monitored-administration-says-charge-unfounded
Quote
Mayor Lenny Curry's Chief of Staff Brian Hughes on Friday dismissed claims made Wednesday by City Council President Anna Lopez-Brosche that her and her executive council assistant's computers are being "monitored."
Brosche made the statement during an interview on WJCT 89.9-FM on First Coast Connect with Melissa Ross saying she learned that her and assistant Jeneen Sanders's "computers are being monitored."
"Who's monitoring your computer?" asked Ross.
"I really don't know, she was trying to log off and it said you can't log off because someone else is on the machine," Brosche said.
"So, is it your contention that you and your staff are being spied on?" Ross said.
"I find it difficult not to reach that conclusion, but I'm just putting together my experiences and observations of things that happen on a regular basis," Brosche said.
I'll tell you what....IF (and it's a big IF) someone was monitoring the computer in the manner described in the article, it would be about the most unsophisticated manner of "monitoring" on earth because you can look at any time to see who else is logged into the computer. Plus, Windows keeps the sessions largely separate unless you have software to break through to another session. I'd be willing to bet that anyone that would use that software and know how to use it wouldn't be so careless as to leave a session logged on.
This seems like a really odd thing to say on a radio show without some concrete evidence to back it up. Her statement "she was trying to log off and it said you can't log off because someone else is on the machine" by itself doesn't really mean anything.
Maybe I've missed something, but I don't really understand why someone would want to spy on her staff.
Quote from: remc86007 on May 04, 2018, 03:12:59 PM
This seems like a really odd thing to say on a radio show without some concrete evidence to back it up. Her statement "she was trying to log off and it said you can't log off because someone else is on the machine" by itself doesn't really mean anything.
Maybe I've missed something, but I don't really understand why someone would want to spy on her staff.
On one hand, I have no idea why Nixon wanted to spy on the Democrats in 1972 either.....
On the other, I completely agree that it was a really dumb thing to say based on the "evidence" she has. With the resources that Curry has, if he REALLY wanted to spy it would be a lot more subtle than an additional user on the computer.
Side note: if in Windows open Task Manager and click the "Users" tab. It will tell you if anyone else is logged in. Not exactly secretive.
First the harassment story proven baseless and now claims of amateur espionage? This is becoming pretty comical.
Next thing you know they'll see somebody using command prompt and accuse them of hacking...
I think this falls under the category of "knows just enough to be dangerous"
They clearly know that somebody else is on the computer, but obviously have no idea what that actually means. Admins get into individual computers all the time to do software updates and perform maintenance, and you probably ought to assume ANYTHING you place on a corporate or government workstation is available to the IT department or others. To assume SPYING is simultaneously an egregious overstatement implying sinister motives and a "no duh" in the sense that anybody within the office with admin privileges could monitor your activity on a workstation within their administered network.
Quote from: Steve on May 04, 2018, 03:19:01 PM
On one hand, I have no idea why Nixon wanted to spy on the Democrats in 1972 either.....
Oh...I had somehow missed (or forgotten) that Curry had filed to run for reelection. Still...spying seems like an awful risky thing to do, especially, as you say, in such an unsophisticated manner.
I think this is a case of someone being ignorant of how things work and should probably just shut up before they look like a complete fool.
I suspect that like any other government agency and most decent sized corporate entities there is a disclaimer when you log on that you have no expectation of privacy unless it falls under certain very specific categories. (i.e. medicalrecords or communication, privileged communications between a lawyer are a couple of the big ones). Everything on that computer that does not fall into those protected categories belongs to the owner of the computer which in this case would be the city. If that disclaimer exists the city's IT department has every right to monitor anything (except the information in the protected categories) on that computer and the person using that computer has no say in the matter.