Jax EPA Cheif Seibold forced out by Brown Administration

[Cheshire Cat]

This incident evidences a much deeper problem that is currently going on in this city hall.  We the citizens expect that those we elect and the folks employed by them do everything they can to offer us a competent and smoothly run city.  Through all the hype this administration offers via parking apps and the like,  much attention is drawn from the many serious missteps of the Brown administration.  This should be considered one of them and make no mistake that it is a serious one.  When our EPA Chief for Jax was asked specific questions about the impact of Brown's ideas to consolidate two departments, he was told that it could present a conflict of interest in the departments as well as other operational considerations.  The head of Jax EPA then found his "loyalty" to the mayor under question and was firmly handed back the resignation letter he and other Department heads were asked to sign when Alvin took office. 

What expectations can we have of competence in our City operations when those who do what they are asked, which was to vet a serious issues, are fired when the mayor doesn't like the answer?  This type of "shoot the messenger" mentality on the part of this administration and mayor is frankly untenable.  For this mayor "truth and reality" often seem to apply only if they match his agenda

By Steve Patterson   TU

The head of Jacksonville’s environmental agency has been dismissed after talking to a city advisory board about potential problems with Mayor Alvin Brown’s plan to reorganize his agency.

Vince Seibold said before losing his job that members of the Environmental Protection Board asked him about effects of moving the Environmental Quality Division into the Public Works Department.

He restated his loyalty when city personnel managers held a “fact-finding meeting” last week to ask him about “unauthorized communication.”

Read: Plan to shift Jacksonville City Hall offices drawing criticisms from environmentalists
J

“My track record clearly shows that I support [the] mayor’s priorities and have excelled at my job,” Seibold wrote on a nine-question form that asked his stance on Brown’s plan.

Seibold wrote that he supported the plan but there were “operational issues to be addressed.”

To see documents from city's investigation of Seibold, click here

His boss, Neighborhoods Director Terrance Ashanta-Barker, issued a memo in January that said moving the division to Public Works would “create an operational conflict of interest” and “subject the city to a backlash from the environmental community.”

Ashanta-Barker was also questioned by personnel managers, but the city’s labor relations chief, Tracey Watkins, recommended against disciplining him. Ashanta-Barker “was generally unaware of the level of efforts by his staff to secure support against the realignment,” Watkins wrote in a memo to Chief Administrative Officer Karen Bowling.

The city dismissed Seibold by using a resignation letter he wrote in 2011, when all city appointees were required to formally resign before Brown was sworn in.

During the meeting with personnel managers, Seibold was asked if he had approached Protection Board members about the reorganization. He answered no but wrote on the form â€" which was completed during the meeting â€" that board members asked him about it during public meetings.

During its meeting this week, board members were upset that they had difficulty in getting more information about the change. Having Siebold gone, board members said, would make their job even harder.

“I’m very frustrated,” said board member Michelle Tappouni. “I’ve worked very hard to get answers on this and I’ve gotten none. And now our chief is gone.

For full article:  http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2013-04-11/story/jacksonville-environmental-chief-pushed-out

[Cheshire Cat]

Looks like some others find all of this a bit odd as well.

By Kevin Meerschaert   

The Jacksonville City Council Rules Committee wants to know if Environmental Quality Chief Vince Seibold was let go because he publicly expressed concerns about reorganization plans involving his department.

Seibold told the Environmental Protection Board, or EPB about potential problems with move environmntal control under Public Works.


Jacksonville's Director of Environmental Control Vince Seibold was let go by the city last week.

The administration says Seibold was let go because he had requested a member of the General Counsel's office to prepare a document for the EPB without the consent or acknowledgment of her superior Cindy Laquidara.

Council members like Vice-President Bill Gulliford say they need more information to be assured Seibold wasn't  shown the door just for questioning the administration's proposal.

Gulliford says it would be chilling to believe that would happen. He says the council needs to be able to hear any concerns the city's department heads have regarding current and proposed policy.

The Rules Committee asked the administration to come back with more information about Seibold's departure at its next meeting in two weeks.

http://news.wjct.org/post/jax-council-committee-wants-more-answers-ousting-environmental-chief#.UWxuOz_Leu4.facebook

         

[Charles Hunter]

Hope the Council and news media can get to the bottom of this.
The Environmental Quality Board, at times, has to cite the City for violations.  Typically, they cite Public Works, because of the type of work Public Works does.
Having the enforcers subordinate to the Director of Public Works would certainly put a chill on issuing citations to Public Works.
An obvious conflict of interest.  One wonders what about the Mayor's agenda here.

[Cheshire Cat]

Hope the Council and news media can get to the bottom of this.
The Environmental Quality Board, at times, has to cite the City for violations.  Typically, they cite Public Works, because of the type of work Public Works does.
Having the enforcers subordinate to the Director of Public Works would certainly put a chill on issuing citations to Public Works.
An obvious conflict of interest.  One wonders what about the Mayor's agenda here.

Indeed Charles.  There is an agenda and what they claim is the reasoning for his release is absurd.  One guy can't ask for information and gets let go, while another in a different office loses three quarter of a million dollars, breaks procurement policy and the mayor publicly states he completely supports the later.  Brown has someone in mind for a new position he is creating for the combined agencies.  Seibold was not the guy he wanted in that position.  Stay tuned for who he would like to appoint in this new spot.  I certainly hope the council digs deeper on this.  Someone who gives honest input about an issue should never have their loyalty questioned or be pushed out of office because someone didn't like the answer. Not good.

[Cheshire Cat]

Here we go now.  This is not going away so easy.  It looks like Brown has overstepped in this situation.  From TU Steve Patterson

The dismissal of Jacksonville’s environmental division chief has raised troubling questions while Mayor Alvin Brown’s office is seeking support for a complicated reorganization of city government, City Council members said Monday.

“This one really, really concerns me greatly. … I think we need to look at the whole structure of this,” Council Vice President Bill Gulliford said as several Brown aides, headed by Chief Administrative Officer Karen Bowling, talked to the council Rules Committee about the dismissal.

Councilman John Cresicimbeni was more pointed.

“I don’t think you realize what kind of mess you’ve stepped in here,” he said.

Seibold was removed from his job as chief of the Environmental Quality Division after being investigated this month for “unauthorized communication” related to Brown’s reorganization plan, which would move the division into the Public Works Department.

Seibold had expressed concerns about the plan, Bowling said, but said that wasn’t the reason for his dismissal. If simply speaking his mind were a problem, Seibold would have been fired in January, she said, noting he contributed to a memo that Neighborhoods director Terrance Ashanta-Barker signed then arguing against the division move.

Committee members said they didn’t hear a clear explanation as to why Seibold was removed.

Several said they were worried the dismissal â€" Brown’s office technically accepted a resignation Seibold was required to sign in 2011 â€" would dissuade other appointees from speaking honestly about their work, making it harder for council members to stay informed about issues in many corners of City Hall.

“We need to be able to work with staff and not simply discuss things with three people in the Mayor’s Office,” said Councilwoman Lori Boyer.

Said Gulliford: “I want to hear both sides of every story.”

Rules members asked for extensive documentation about Seibold’s removal and his concerns about the division move, and said they would revisit the subject at a meeting May 6.

To see documents from city's investigation of Seibold, click here

The committee deferred action on a reorganization bill (2013-209) Brown proposed last month.

That bill continued to trouble members of the city’s unpaid Environmental Protection Board, who had talked to Seibold about whether moving environmental inspection into an agency that needs environmental permits for projects like roadwork and drainage would create an excessive conflict of interest.

The appointed board agreed Monday evening to write to Brown and the council, outlining concerns and posing questions about the reorganization plan

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/403455/steve-patterson/2013-04-15/jacksonville-council-panel-fumes-over-seibold

[Noone]

Vince will be receiving millions.
Wrongful termination.

Ben- JCCI we need to kayak Downtown before 2025

[Ben Warner]

Yes, John, we do need to kayak. I appreciate the invitations--still trying to clear a moment on my calendar.

[mbwright]

I wonder if there is statute of limitations on a resignation letter.  I would think that if you were rehired, or retained, that it would then become null and void.

[fieldafm]

The 'firing' of Vince Seibold has been particularly disturbing to me and follows a very unsettling pattern. 

Vince was very passionate about his job, was well qualified, worked well with community leaders and was simply giving his (expert) opinion based on a direct question from the very public commission (during a noticed, public meeting of that body no less) that oversees the regulation of the very department being combined into environmental services (public works).  In essence, the concern is that Environmental Services (and the public commission) provides a checks and balance system to Public Works and the combined organization could in effect water down the capability of this board in relation to protecting our environmental assets.  The members of that governing body were concerned about how this effects that system of checks and balances.  On the surface, this seems to be a very valid question and one that required clarification from the very director whose department (of which that board oversees) is being affected.

I'm sorry, but firing someone for not keeping their mouth shut during a public meeting when asked a direct question flies in the face of what an open, participatory government is about.  I'm all for eliminating inefficiencies and unecessary steps/processes/etc... but if you are going to have a governing board such as this, they should be allowed to ask questions of public officials and expect answers, and those government officials should be required to answer honestly without fear of reprisal. 

[Cheshire Cat]

From today's Daily Record.

The Council Rules Committee sought information about Seibold's departure, which prompted the issue to be added to its Monday agenda.

General Counsel Cindy Laquidara said the mayor has the right to appoint or dismiss at will and it was determined Seibold and the administration "were not seeing eye to eye."

As part of proposed reorganization introduced in late March, the administration proposes to shift the environmental quality division from the Neighborhoods Department to the Public Works Department.

Karen Bowling, City chief administrative officer, said Seibold shared his concerns about the move with the administration, which the administration thought was then "resolved."

Seibold later shared his concerns with members of the Environmental Protection Board, at what a City official said was both at the board's request and his own inclination.

Laquidara said Seibold asked a member of the Office of General Counsel to "do something inappropriate and not tell her boss."

According to documents, Seibold allegedly requested Cherry Shaw of the general counsel's office to prepare a document for the board â€"without knowledge of consent of Shaw's supervisor â€" regarding a conflict of interest in the reorganization because of compliance and enforcement components

For more of this article.  http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=539244

[fieldafm]

According to documents, Seibold allegedly requested Cherry Shaw of the general counsel's office to prepare a document for the board â€"without knowledge of consent of Shaw's supervisor â€" regarding a conflict of interest in the reorganization because of compliance and enforcement components

So, a brave public employee stands up for what he passionately believes in when the administration does something that in his heart believes is not in the best interests of the community in which he is charged to serve... and gets fired for it.

And you wonder why more people don't take a stand when they see something that's not right?

[Tacachale]

The 'firing' of Vince Seibold has been particularly disturbing to me and follows a very unsettling pattern. 

Vince was very passionate about his job, was well qualified, worked well with community leaders and was simply giving his (expert) opinion based on a direct question from the very public commission (during a noticed, public meeting of that body no less) that oversees the regulation of the very department being combined into environmental services (public works).  In essence, the concern is that Environmental Services (and the public commission) provides a checks and balance system to Public Works and the combined organization could in effect water down the capability of this board in relation to protecting our environmental assets.  The members of that governing body were concerned about how this effects that system of checks and balances.  On the surface, this seems to be a very valid question and one that required clarification from the very director whose department (of which that board oversees) is being affected.

I'm sorry, but firing someone for not keeping their mouth shut during a public meeting when asked a direct question flies in the face of what an open, participatory government is about.  I'm all for eliminating inefficiencies and unecessary steps/processes/etc... but if you are going to have a governing board such as this, they should be allowed to ask questions of public officials and expect answers, and those government officials should be required to answer honestly without fear of reprisal.

+1

[Cheshire Cat]

Mike there have been others fired or demoted by this administration for speaking to real concerns on behalf of the citizens.  This situation has been exposed at a time when the "shine" is wearing off Mayor Alvin Brown.  The mindset that denies public records, claims "we didn't know" when found taking wrong action to be followed by you are fired or resign now is just one aspect of what is going wrong in city hall under this administration.  There is deep damage being done right now due to incompetence in finance and the using of the office of GC to explain away questionable choices in some cases and to outright support them in others. 

[fieldafm]

Mike there have been others fired or demoted by this administration for speaking to real concerns on behalf of the citizens.

I agree, which is why I said:

and follows a very unsettling pattern. 

[Cheshire Cat]

Mike there have been others fired or demoted by this administration for speaking to real concerns on behalf of the citizens.

I agree, which is why I said:

and follows a very unsettling pattern. 

Agreed!