SLT council to consider censuring Conner
By Kathryn Reed
The South Lake Tahoe City Council will consider censuring Councilmember JoAnn Conner at a special meeting on Oct. 19.
Mayor Hal Cole called for the meeting to address the behavior and language of Conner toward multiple city employees as well as her interactions with colleagues. He said she is creating a hostile work environment.
Cole told Lake Tahoe News the exact wording of the agenda is being worked out, but that two items will likely be on it:
1. A vote to support City Manager Nancy Kerry’s decision to ban Conner from having one-on-one access with any staff member.
“We don’t have to do this. I’m concerned with what I’m hearing and reading that JoAnn is making this personal between her and Nancy. It is not personal. It is about protecting the city. It sends a message that it is not just Nancy doing this, that we concur,” Cole said.
2. There will be a resolution brought forward to censure Conner.
If the majority of the council votes to censure Conner, she will still be able to do her job. It is essentially a vote to say they object to her behavior. At the local level impeachment is not an option by the council.
“When I feel my employees have been threatened, I need to protect them and the city coffers,” Cole told LTN.
Last month Kerry told the council she would no longer allow Conner to interact with staff and vice versa.
Conner’s abusive behavior has been the norm for the nearly three years she has been on the council, according to city staff. Non-city staff has told Lake Tahoe News many stories about Conner’s vulgarity and hostility. Those interactions, though, point to a pattern of behavior, but are not anything the council can address.
In February the council had an open meeting during the weekend strategic planning session in which the five aired concerns about Conner’s behavior. Tears were shed and an honest dialog was had. Later that weekend Conner called it healing. The other four believed Conner when she said change would be forthcoming.
Cole said Conner took some responsibility in February for her behavior, but since then she has reverted to her old tactics of bullying.
Those tactics reportedly include abusive, threatening, repulsive and belittling comments. This, by definition, is harassment.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission says harassment is when “the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive.”
The EEOC goes on to say, “The victim does not have to be the person harassed, but can be anyone affected by the offensive conduct.”
Conner – as are all the council members – is the boss of the city manager and city attorney. They in turn have an obligation to protect their respective employees or they could be held individually liable. Stopping the interaction between Conner and staff is a form of protection.
Conner was not available for comment late Wednesday. However, she has been active on social media in pleading her case. On Facebook she posted, “I still have no information on the specific charges, just lots of innuendo and hearsay, therefore I cannot explain it, defend it, or change it.” She claims her challenge of the sign permit fee has something to do with what is going on. Cole said the sign permit is irrelevant to what is going on.
She sent a letter to a number of people on Oct. 7, which was forwarded to LTN. In it she begs for support.
The email said, “I believe this is a power play to silence the voice of the people. I have always been different from the other Council Members, and am the most active advocate for the ‘little people,’ veterans, seniors, and small business owners.
“I believe they do not like that I do not automatically defer to Nancy Kerry or go along with their agenda. They cannot attack me on my work, as I have accomplished too many good things for the people, so I believe they are attempting to attack me on innuendo and hearsay, to tarnish my reputation, so I will either quit or not run again in 2016.”
At no point does she address the allegations made against her about her conduct. She will have an opportunity in 11 days to do so at the special meeting.
—-
Notes:
· The meeting is Oct. 19 at 3pm at Lake Tahoe Airport.
It’s about time. The EEOC law is what the city has to focus on. Laws around workplace harassment are very strict and costly when not adhered to. Joann’s use of the rallying cry, “hey it’s for the little guy,” suggests she is unable and unwilling to understand her role as an employer. And “the little people” comments are bizarre. These laws were put in place to protect employees (the little guys) from their big bad employers.
Outside her work for the City, Conner can treat people any way she wants, it’s her free speech right to do say and do what she wants, we can consider that at the ballot box. But when representing the city, she’s an employer and like all employers, she does not enjoy free speech protections. If a single employee, or multiple employees, perceive her behavior as threatening, the city is toast. Her perception of her conduct while evident of her state of mind, is irrelevant; the employee sets the course in these cases.
The city is long beyond needing to take some kind of action. Former members of council have felt abused, their perception. A February workshop with new members of council who must have witnessed behavior, the multitude of stories of perceived hostile behavior, there’s no debate about whether or not the city has a liability issue, the liability is Conner herself. If she actually cared about the city, she would turn her perception around and take a very different approach, but that’s also been said for years.
I had to deal with her verbal abuse for years.She would walk into the bank and yell at us about customer service. She clearly has her own definition.
I congratulate the City Council for backing up the City Manager. The CM put herself out on a limb when she went into action to protect the City employees. As for the possibility of change, a leopard cannot change its spots. I think Conner sees nothing wrong with yelling and screaming at the employees – – as she says in her email, she thinks this must be some kind of power play to get her off the council. Conner just doesn’t get it and she never will. The Council is doing the right thing in a very difficult situation.
When the mayor elections happened, she went into a fit when she wasn’t selected for mayor pro tem. It was a disgusting display, and not one befitting of one who should hold public office. I witnessed it in person.
I commend the city for taking action to protect its self. If I were one of her constituents, ditch her and find a new person to run in 2016.
Country bumpkins running amok.
Brian,
The reason you don’t run for office and straighten these ‘country’ bumpkins out is what?
Amok is a pretty big word…congrats.
Hal. Ok, a censure of JoAnn is a start. However. If she goes off on another City Employee or Resident (at a city meeting) again, then what?
One must believe that Ms Conner just might need a good physical and psychological checkup.
Could the City make this a requirement?
She might have some mental or physical condition causing lack of restraint, and ignoring the conventional social norms and inhibitions regarding abuse of others.
I had a relative that, after one glass of wine, showed no inhibitions whatsoever in saying the most insulting and demeaning things.
You know JoAnn is claiming on social media that Nancy Kerry ‘intercepted’ an email that JoAnn sent to another Council Member. I guess cause it was on the City’s server, Nancy would have access to it?
If true, this is getting real interesting. If not true, JoAnn is desperately trying to grasp at something to save herself.
Wish though JoAnn would first either admit or deny she regulatly used vulgarity when dealing with City Staff. Simple question that deserves a simple answer.
Unfortunately, Ms Conners m o is to first deny. When that tactic doesn’t work, she does shed tears and tries to turn the situation around and appear as the victim.
She can no longer deny these allegations and perhaps she knows it. Her written words have been documented. Her verbal attacks and disrespectful and unprofessional treatment of the public and her colleagues have been witnessed by many and is documented on video.
This has nothing to do with her political views and/or positions.
Parker: JoAnn should have had a private server and everything in Hooterville would have been fine.
One has to ask them selfs, how in the world did this whacko get elected? South Tahoe Chamber I’m looking at you. It’s time to back a new not crazy horse.
Posting again as my first post seems to have been deleted:
The only news here is that this poor excuse for a reporter obviously has no clue how to do her job. And the not so surprising fact that there are people who would read this or the previous article on the same subject and think it had any merit whatsoever.
So far all I have seen from these articles are unsubstantiated rumors, gossip, he said/she said. These opinion pieces wouldn’t have made it past a middle school newspaper editor. Where are the facts? Where is the documentation? Where are the quotes from anyone other than the city manager or the mayor. People, who by all appearances, seem to have an ax to grind with Conner. There has been no investigation, no charges, nobody stepping forward to substantiate these “claims” and no chance for Conner to face her accusers or even know what specifically she is accused of. No chance to defend herself. So I guess in America you are innocent until proven guilty unless you live in South Lake Tahoe. You should not have to lose your civil rights just because you get elected to public office.
This has every appearance of being an orchestrated campaign to bully, harass and intimidate Conner and Reed has gleefully and unprofessionally joined into the conspiracy.
And what is truly laughable is that this so-called reporter has entirely missed the really juicy story. The story that any professional reporter would give his right arm for. I wonder if Reed has ever heard of, or read, the Brown Act. Most California reporters cut their teeth on this document and know it inside out. If Reed had taken even a passing glance at this glorious document then these leaks and information coming out of closed session should have set off every alarm bell in her head. It seems that she didn’t even notice that the information that was leaked to her would have been a completely illegal subject for the council to be addressing in closed session since there was no agenda item to announce it.
Furthermore, council members are sworn to absolute secrecy about anything discussed in closed session. A pesky requirement that SLT City Council seems to have no respect for. The Brown Act exists to make sure that politicians don’t get up to shenanigans behind closed doors and out of the public eye. But Ms. Reed does not seem to be concerned with legality or even the facts, ma’am. It will be interesting to see how the minutes of that meeting record any announcement that came out of that session. When I called the city clerk’s office this morning I was told the minutes would not be available until the Thursday before the next meeting.
One also has to wonder if the City Attorney is acquainted with the Brown Act. Why isn’t he cautioning the council about leaking information that is supposed to be kept confidential? A fact that every single council member is educated to the minute they step into office.
And then there is the matter of the City Manager and the City Council conspiring to rob citizens and voters of their First Amendment rights. Telling employees they may not speak to Conner is robbing them of their access to their elected representative and curtailing their free speech rights. You should not have to lose your civil rights just to keep your job. As far as telling Conner she may not speak to employees that is just laughable. Neither the City Manager nor any other elected representative has the authority to do that. Conner is an elected representative. Meaning she answers to the voters, to the people that she was elected to represent. A fact that the City Manager and the rest of this city council appear to have nothing but disdain for. And of course, city employees would be in fear for their jobs if they tried to publicly deny or contradict the careful web of lies, gossip and deceit that has been woven around Conner by her peers on the council. When Conner says she stands for the little people you can begin to understand the arrogance of her detractorsAs far as I am concerned the only statement with any integrity in this horrid piece of writing is Conner’s statement. She seems to be the only one capable of making a truthful statement.. Let me just say the little people are very happy that there is at least one person on the city governing board that gives a damn about them.
And then there is this recent development. It appears the city manager has allegedly (see, Ms Reed, the word “allegedly”. You need to learn that) been intercepting email intended for other council members and city staff. If this is true, it is a federal offense punishable with jail time and a hefty fine, and we might be hearing from the FCC about that.
See what I mean about Reed missing the real story here. I might add a further caution to Reed. Becoming the lapdog mouth-piece of any politician is a very short run. Especially in city politics.
As for the inevitable Greek chorus that always pops up when Reed writes these hit pieces, they are just as predictable as Reed’s abysmal writing skills. More unsubstantiated accusations and uninformed opinions. Y’all need to learn how to read a news story and discern if there is any actual news in it.
As far as I am concerned the only statement with any integrity in this juvenile and oh-so-biased piece of writing is Conner’s statement. She seems to be the only one capable of making a truthful statement.
Mary,
None of the reporting in this article or the previous one contained any information from closed session that would violate the Brown Act. Please stop lying.
If you know of a Brown Act violation, please let us know about it and we’ll look into it, or you could call the district attorney.
You are acting like a good soldier for JoAnn, so you are to be commended for that — all the anger, name calling and nastiness seem so uncalled for. I hope it made you fee better.
Kathryn Reed, LTN publisher
Buck,
JoAnn claims to have sent it from her private server to a Councilperson’s City email. Either way, if true, don’t think the City Mgr. has the right to look at private correspondence?
And now JoAnn claims on social media to have never used profanity towards City Staff.
I absolutely do not know what the facts are in this matter! Just know what the accusations and denials are.
And just know the right thing now is for a public hearing. So the taxpayers, those paying the bills for all involved, can hopefully discover what the true story ‘behind the curtain’ really is.
This is getting so ridiculous. Thank goodness the city is taking the actions it is, long overdue. Ms Conner definitely seems to be grasping at straws at this point. She has been very active in claiming persecution in public facebook groups, and is now claiming that she has less rights than a mass murder suspect???? Ridiculous. Shameful. Unacceptable. Also – in regards to the email claim – if they are from her city email, they are subject to public record, so I’m not sure if she just forgot that part of being an elected official or just doesn’t get it. If she really wanted to serve “the little guy”, she’d quit crying victim and just do her job.
Nice work Kae!
Mary, how in the world do you justify backing this abusive woman? Everyone in town has seen her act a fool. As a public official you just can’t act like that.
JoAnn if your out there please get off the internet. Your cronies and the tactics that they are using are not working. Your just showing how you only understand how to bully people. Get off the Facebook groups, get off the internet. From a legal and PR perspective you should go quiet and let this blow over.
Check this out: http://tahoebusinessnetwork.com/programs/weblog.cgi?showpage=1443637249_Lake-Tahoe-Business-News A shining example of just how desperate JoAnn and her henchmen are.
to admin: as I stated on your facebook page, it is not up to me to do your job. However, concerning the Brown Act; First of all the fact that you reported anything at all that went on in closed session seems to speak to the fact that someone who was there must have given you the information. That was a Brown Act violation. How was this “action” announced on the agenda under Closed Session? And what was announced to the public after closed session? These are all important Brown Act requirements…
As far as me being angry, as a former reporter it pains the life out of me to see unsubstantiated statements being reported as facts. For instance, your statement in the last article “…because she has a concealed weapons permit and often has a gun in her purse at meetings.” Really? How do you know that? Did you research public records? Have you personally seen the gun? Where did you get this information? Because if that is true it opens up a whole other can of legal worms. And if it is not true you might have put Conner’s life in jeopardy for a lie. What is your source for this damaging tidbit? Or did you just make it up?
And I agree that all the anger, name-calling and nastiness is uncalled for. The City manager and city council should stop it, already.
Mary,
The agenda for closed session was city manager’s review, there was no report.
Any city manager can prevent councilmembers and staff from talking to one another. The fact this occurred is public, non-closed session information. This action was taken before the closed session.
The action taken was to protect staff from abuse and being in a hostile work environment.
There are roughly 200 employees. Do you really think they wouldn’t talk?
There is NO Brown Act violation.
Also, there is no statewide database for concealed weapons permits. I have personally heard Ms. Conner state she has CWP. She said so in front of others and has said so to the entire council and to staff. She was either lying then or she is lying now.
Kathryn Reed, LTN publisher
Mary, JoAnne and her cronies are attacking the city manager on facebook. So… Be careful who you defend. JoAnn will bend the truth.
Like the sign ordinance post on local Knunckledraggers post where JoAnn Claimed to fight for the little guys and was the only one to stand up against the sign ordinance. Nancy stepped in with the real information. JoAnn with the rest of city council voted the change in.
Well, somebody is lying. That’s a fact.
The Jim Biller who writes in support of JC on the Trib’s site doesn’t even live in Tahoe. He lives in Southern California, but the Trib allows him to keep changing his residence. His wife is really good friends with JC.
There are a whole bunch of weird posts going on about JoAnn all over the internet in South Lake Tahoe.
The Oct. 19 censure resolution meeting was a classic railroading because the four council members who voted on the censure only had gossip and no proof. It was chilling. One can only wonder why they did this in this manner when a private meeting would have been far better. Again it is about personal power and money, not the city or protecting employees which was only a ploy. Democracy failed today in SLT and was replaced by censure and even censorship because these council members confuse disagreement with harassment. Hopefully, the four will lose the next election.