While an employee may not be subject to a tenable action for damages in cases of mere negligence, employers may seek damages against a former employee or a contract employee such as Stacy Tebo in cases where the employee’s conduct has amounted to more than negligence or carelessness and the employer’s losses are significant.
In Pam Tomlinson’s case, the Town may also pursue dismissal with cause , but must be careful to ensure first that it had provided appropriate training, supervision and materials to the employee. Yet, Pam Tomlinson is an At-Will Employee so it does not matter. But Again, Tebo lacks in Supervision and will not provide training but locks herself in her office and then people like Bullard and Lofton as well as Brown give her a great annual review when they have no idea that Ms. Tebo doesn’t know how to supervise and even her HR position was taken away in DeBary.
So I say to you, Councilors of White Springs, you need to do something immediately before we are totally bankrupt. You need expert advise relative to the state of our finances and that means someone must audit and go through Pam Tomlinson’s books and Pam needs to retire. WHY SHOULD THE CITIZENS OF WHITE SPRINGS BE PENALIZED BY INCREASED TAXATION AND LIMITED RESOURCES BECAUSE OUR PRIOR COUNCILORS DID NOTHING TO HANDLE THEIR FIDUCIARY DUTIES. THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO SUE MS. TEBO FOR HER GROSS NEGLIGENCE AND INABILITY TO DO HER JOB AND THE ONIS IS ON YOU NOT ANYONE ELSE.
As for Tebo since she has grossly managed her position and breached her contract, a civil suit must commence at the earliest available moment. We cannot afford someone like her who is running our finances into the ground and has never really told the council the dire situation regarding our liquidity. Our CPA finally did but Tebo’s been running our Town into the ground for four years and now the Town Council must act and as far as I am concerned, if the Council does not sue Ms. Tebo in Civil Court for the damages, then the Town Councilors are not adhering to their fiduciary duty to the Citizens of White Springs.
Let me remind you Councilors of
your duty to the public:
Certainly when the public chooses an elected official, the public is putting its trust and confidence in him or her to act in the public’s best interests. The same can be said when one becomes an employee of a public agency. … In a representative democracy, the public elects officials to act in their interests.
Government Ethics refer to the unique set of duties that public officials owe to the public that they serve. These duties arise upon entering the public work force either as an elected representative, an appointed official, or a member of government staff. (For simplicity’s sake, please know that when we refer to public officials, we are referring to all public actors, be they elected, appointed or hired.) Public ethical obligations exist in addition to general ethical obligations and sometimes government ethics may conflict with personal ethical duties.
The public delegates governing authority to public officials to exercise discretion over the public treasury and to create laws that will impact their lives. The public official, once elected, appointed, or hired, is in a superior position to that of the individual citizen due to specialized governmental knowledge and the ability to advise, deliberate, and participate in the representative process. And finally, the public trusts that the public official will act in the public’s best interest.
As Fiduciaries, Councilors, these are your duties which for some of you other than Miller and Moore, you have not upheld:
The Duty of Care
The duty care requires that the public official competently and faithfully execute the duties of the office. Under duty of care fall such obligations as the duty to manage assets competently and be good stewards of the public treasury, to use due diligence in the selection and supervision of staff, to follow the rules and to uphold the constitution and laws of the jurisdiction. Examples of breach of this duty include failure to attend meetings, failure to investigate, failure to engage in the deliberative process, and failure to vote.
The Duty of Loyalty
Public fiduciaries have an absolute obligation to put the public’s interest before their own direct or indirect personal interests. The public fiduciary breaches this obligation when he or she benefits at the public expense. Prohibited benefits can be financial (such as engaging in pay to play politics- or participating in decisions that favorably impact an official’s business, property, or investments), career related (such as using public office and/or public resources to obtain future employment or political position), or personal such as benefits to family members or close associates. Note that when general ethical duties to family or friends conflict with duty to the public, the public duty must prevail.
Duty of Impartiality
Public officials have a duty to represent all of their constituents fairly. This means that the public fiduciary cannot favor those of his or her own party over other constituents, or let the fact that someone voted against him or her impact the ability to act fairly. They must overcome any inherent bias that they possess. Public fiduciaries should avoid targeting particular constituencies for favor or for punishment. (YES LOFTON, THIS IS SPECIFICALLY FOR YOU) The Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution is in essence a codification of the duty of impartiality. (Natelson, 2004)
Duty of Accountability
Without a duty of accountability, the public’s ability to monitor the behavior of public fiduciaries would be severely limited. From the duty of accountability flow the duty of transparency and the concepts of disclosure, open meetings, and accessibility of public records.“Implicit in the democratic process is the notion that government should be accountable for its actions. In order to verify accountability, individuals must have access to government files. Such access permits checks against the arbitrary exercise of official power and secrecy in the political process.” (Id. at 328)
Karin for the blog