The DVD from the IBO luncheon recall debate arrived here today and I transcribed a couple of parts here and will update throughout the weekend. Please know that these are literal translations and I am not responsible for grammatical errors.

Stufflebean: People keep talking about the process was flawed. Coos County Commissioners and our managers followed the process by law in order to do what was right for you as a taxpayer. There was no hidden agendas, there was no secret meeting, everything was done on the up and up and we have all the public proof, all the meetings were documented, all the agendas were listed as a matter of fact, if we were trying to be secretive there is no way at any time that I would have had a conversation with a member of the South Coast Labor Council that handles the media information on December 3rd saying we needed to look at a budget reduction and layoffs in the road department. At no time if I felt I was being secretive would I ever had that discussion with somebody, with South Coast Labor Council. So that right there discredits any information they talk about when they say we were trying to be secretive.

There are so many language mechanic flaws in this first claim that I almost don’t know where to begin but I must note the phrase ‘if I felt I was being secretive’ only because no one cares how he felt but rather what he did. Also, a South Coast Labor Council representative believed to be the person Kevin is referring to has no idea what he is talking about. Regardless, it is a moot point because why, why, why would Kevin rely upon a labor council or members of the public at the meetings or the media to inform the road workers they were being laid off? Why not do it himself? He was acting road master at the time.

Next snippet

Stufflebean: 15:45 This is the appalling part ladies and gentlemen that I find absolutely appalling is that my conversation with Coquille Sentinel media absolutely identified that the business manager for the Teamsters Union in Portland hem hawed around that he knew about it the 23rd of December, there is no way that we were being secretive about these layoffs, we insured that individuals were notified. Even on the 26th, I was off that day I called in to work that day to make sure that the individuals were notified. They were notified, we received a final information on December 31st it was written right on our minutes that we would be having an executive session on that day because we needed to clarify some legal issues. We clarified those.

So what is the appalling part? That he claims to have described to The Sentinel a hemming and hawing Teamsters’ business manager? Is that appalling? No one at The Sentinel has any recollection of this ‘absolute identification’ and did not start covering the layoffs until, ta da, after they had occurred because there were no press releases regarding pending layoffs. Presumably, unless there was a collective brain washing amongst all the local media, no one received any press releases. So, is Kevin appalled because The Sentinel did not report to its readers that according to Kevin Stufflebean, Teamsters 223 business manager hems and haws?

We are not clear what Kevin was appalled about, though it clearly isn’t that he did not notify the public about the layoffs, but as Jean says, “whatever it was, it was appalling and he was appalled.”

Lets challenge Kevin to produce the people that were notified, December 3, December 16, December 23 and whomever he is talking about on December 26 and demand to know of these well informed people why no one else in the County knew about the layoffs, including the workers, until they heard about it on the radio and in the paper after it had happened?

Also, Kevin used the organization chart which he just held up and no one could see, to claim he clearly showed that 22 people were losing their jobs. Later I will scan that chart and add it here and you can decide for yourself.

Next, I had an exchange with County Counsel yesterday which I will include here

Me: Hello Jackie,

Kevin has advised the reason he requested the December 16, 2008 executive session held at the end of a budget work session not be recorded was at your behest. Given Coos County has the ability to and regularly records executive sessions, why would you advise him in advance to request handwritten notes for this session?

You have been served a subpoena to supply notes or tapes of the executive sessions relating to the layoff of twenty-two road workers and the ULP with ERB. Will you comply with the subpoena?

Also, have you prepared a written opinion to the Board for applying the Nollan and Dolan precedents to the ORC, West Beaver Hill road improvement issue surrounding Condition 13? If so will you please provide a copy?

Thank you,

Mary Geddry
Haggerty:
All legal advice to the Board is protected by the attorney-client privilege.

Me: Will you comply with the subpoena?

Thank you,

Mary Geddry

The Employment Relations Board has advised me the County has the right to file a motion to quash the subpoena. If they do and the ALJ denies their motion they will have to comply based upon the rules used at ERB. There may be civil options to deny the subpoena but the ALJ I spoke with was not aware of any.

Later I will post the part where Kevin accuses Bob Main of being in collusion with the road workers and Bob’s quote to me when I told him.

UPDATE:Did Kevin and Nikki meet in a quorum and agree to this? Kevin uses the term “We”.

Stufflebean: 26:10 We actually did consider that but the problem we ran into was that it was obvious that Commissioner Main had already met with uh, members of the road department and made promises to them he couldn’t meet. Our job was to move forward with the process that was best for the taxpayers and not looking at hidden agendas like so many individuals have.

UPDATE #2Road Dept Organizational Chart used during December 16, 2008 budget work session that Kevin claims clearly shows people will be laid off.