Informal 01/24/12 Session – CSB / Mid-year budget update – Norfolk City Council, VA

Just another WordPress site

Informal 01/24/12 Session – CSB / Mid-year budget update – Norfolk City Council, VA

>>> OKAY, I THINK WE CAN GET STARTED I KNOW ANTHONY IS GOING TO JOIN US IN JUST — ISSUES AND INTERESTS UNTIL THE VERY END, MAKE SURE WE GET THROUGH THE PRESENTATIONS THAT THE MANAGER HAS IT’S A VERY BUSY DOCKET TONIGHT FIRST TIME WE GET A CHANCE, WE’RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE WAY (INAUDIBLE) DO BUSINESS BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO YOU, MARCUS, THERE IS ONE THING PENDING LEGISLATION IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ABOUT PARTY OF A PHYSICALATIONS — AFFILIATIONS IN LOCAL RACES ON THE BALLOT I WAS — YOU KNOW, I OFFERED MY OPINION THAT I WASN’T PERSONALLY OPPOSED TO IT, BUT BEFORE THE COUNCIL CAN ACTUALLY — I MEAN, BEFORE THE CITY CAN TAKE A POSITION, THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO ACTUALLY WEIGH IN SO WE CAN INSTRUCT THE MANAGER WHO WILL INSTRUCT OUR GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, BRIAN PENNINGTON UP THERE, TO EITHER OPPOSE IT OR SUPPORT IT IS THERE ANYBODY GOT ANYTHING THAT THEY — >> IT’S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LAW IS ONLY CHANGING THAT CURRENTLY LOCALITIES THAT RUN UNDER PARTY AFFILIATION, IT DOES NOT PUT THE PARTY AFFILIATION ON THE BALLOT AND THAT THIS LAW WILL ONLY IMPACT THOSE LOCALILITIES THOSE THAT HAVE CHOSEN TO RUN AS INS WITHOUT PARTY AL FILL YANETION, WHICH IS OURS, IT WOULD NOT PUT THE FARTHER AFFILIATION ONES THERE PIT’S ONLY WHERE THEY DO RUN, THEY GET PARTY ENDORSEMENT, BUT NOW ANYBODY WHO RUNS AT THAT LEVEL, THEY DON’T EVER PUT THE PARTY ON THEIR, SO I DON’T KNOW IF IT — ON THERE, SO I DON’T KNOW IF IT NECESSARILY IMPACTS US BECAUSE WE HAVE CHOSEN TO NOT HAVE PARTY ENDORSEMENTS >> THAT’S THE WAY I’VE BEEN TOLD I DIDN’T READ THE BILL YOU MAY KNOW MORE THAN ME THE CITY ATTORNEY ACTUALLY DEFERRED TO THE COUNCIL WHEN IT CAME — I SAW THAT NOTE THAT YOU SENT, THE COUNCIL SHOULD TRY — >> THE GUIDANCE THAT WE’RE LOOKING FOR THE COUNCIL IS WHETHER WE WANT TO OPPOSE HAVING PARTY AFFILIATION IN OUR COUNCIL — AS YOU SAY, MR SMIGIEL GER, THAT I’S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, WE HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT, BUT IF IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN, WE WANT TO KNOW WHETHER WE SHOULD OPPOSE IT OR SUPPORT IT OR BE NEUTRAL >> I AGREE >> MUCH BETTER NOT HAVING A PARTY LABEL >> I THINK THE PARTY LABELS JUST MAKE EVERYTHING SO DIVISIVE >> IT COULD LEAD TO PRIMARIES, PARTY PRIMARIES THERE’S JUST NO END TO IT >> OKAY I DON’T HEAR ANYBODY — I HEAR TOMMY SAYING THAT — IT DOESN’T APPLY TO US THAT’S GREAT SOMETIMES THOSE THINGS GET AMENDED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, SO THEN WE’LL OPPOSE IT OKAY? >> JUST LET BRIAN KNOW (INAUDIBLE) >> THE VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE OKAY >> NE’ER AND COUNCIL — NE’ER AND COUNCIL, WE’LL NOW MOVE TO ITEM 4, WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD DISCUSSION IT’S REALLY TWO PIECES BER NARND WILL LEAD WF — BERNARD WILL LEAD OFF WITH A FOLLOW-UP TO THE DISCUSSION WE HAD WHEN WE LAST KNIGHT MEET ABOUT BIOGRAPHICALLY AN OVER — BASICALLY AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROCEEDINGS THAT RELATED TO THE JIM McCLUNG CASE AND AFTER THAT I’LL PROVIDE INFORMATION FOR YOU ABOUT THE CSB AND INDICATIONS FROM THEED — RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION ABOUT HOW THE STRUCTURE WILL BE MOVING FORWARD >> THANK YOU THE NEXT HEARING IN THE LITIGATION PROCESS OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD IN ORDER TO TRY TO COLLECT THE MONEY THAT WAS WRONGFULLY PAY TO McCLUNG IS ON FEBRUARY THE 13th AND ADAM SAID TO YOU THAT PLEADINGS IN THAT CASE INCLUDE OUR CAUSES OF ACTIONS AND FACTS UNDERLYING THEM AND HE’S GOING TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT CASE WHEN I FINISH I’M GOING TO RUN THROUGH TOMORROW OF THE MILESTONE EVENT THAT OCCURRED STARTING WITH THE RELATIVELY NEW EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMING TO MEET WITH ME IN MAY OF 2010 SHE HAD THREE ISSUES THAT DAY, ONE OF WHICH WAS, I’VE LEARNED THAT THERE’S AN EMPLOYEE WHO’S BEEN SUSPENDED FOR OVER 12 YEARS AND BEEN PAID, WHAT DO I DO? MY ADVICE TO HER THEN WAS TO START WITH NEVER SENDING ANOTHER PAYCHECK, AND THEY FOLLOWED THAT — SHE FOLLOWED THAT ADVICE AND THEN ASKED IF WE COULD HELP HER DETERMINE WHAT THE PERSONNELS OR WHAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE TO DO GIVEN SUCH A DEBACLE JACK KLAUSEY WHO IS HERE WORKS WITH HER AND THEY INTERVIEWED EMPLOYEES AND IT RESULTS IN HER TERMINATING FOUR EMPLOYEES AT THE TIME THAT JACK AND MARIE ALSO DETERMINED TO ASK THE POLICE TO INVESTIGATE IT AND THEY DID INVESTIGATE IT

AFTER THE DECISIONS WERE MADE ABOUT WHAT ACTIONS WERE APPROPRIATE FOR THE PERSONNEL ACTION, SHE HELD A PRESS CONFERENCE IN AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION AND TO ASSURE THE PUBLIC THAT SHE WOULD BE MAKING CERTAIN THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT NEVER HAPPENED AGAIN AND THAT SOME ACTIONS HAD BEEN TAKEN IN ADDITION TO — WE REFERRED IT TO THE POLICE, MAUREEN AND JACK DID, AND THEN THE FBI AND PEOPLE FROM THE FEDERAL INSPECTOR GENERAL’S OFFICE, THE STATE INSPECTOR GENERAL’S OFFICE, CONTACTED THE COMMUNITY SERVICE BOARD THE COMMUNITY SERVICE BOARD FULLY COOPERATED IN PROVIDING ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT THEY COULD TO THE EMPLOYEES THAT WERE TERMINATED OR AT LEAST THREE OF THEM, SOUGHT UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION WHEN I SAY THREE DID, I MEAN JILL McCLUNG DID ALSO THE COMMISSION DENIED EMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BENEFITS TO JILL McCLUNG AND SHE DID NOT APPEAL THAT TWO OFFICERS, THE HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER AND THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT McCLUNG WORKS IN, CHRIS, ALSO SOUGHT UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION AND THE LEVEL OF HEARING OFFICE ER THAT DENIED THE BENEFIT TO JILL McCLUNG, ALSO DENIED THEM TO THEM THEY APPEALED AND THE FIRST APPELLATE LEVEL AGAIN DENIED UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS TO THEM AND THEN THE THIRD LEVEL, THE FINAL HEARING OFFICER DETERMINED THAT THE DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE TO CORPORATE POLICY WASN’T SUFFICIENT AND ALLOWS THE UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS NOT LONG AFTER THAT, A LAWSUIT WAS BROUGHT SAYING THAT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HAD DEFAMED THEM BY SOCIETYING THEM, AS SHE — ASSOCIATING THEM, AS SHE DID, WITH THE JILL McCLUNG SCANDAL SOON AFTER THAT, THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY FINISHED HIS REVIEW OF THE POLICE INVESTIGATION AND INFORMED THE POLICE CHIEF THAT AT THAT POINT IN TIME, HE WAS NOT PROCEEDING WITH A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION THE FBI AND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL DO NOT, IN THE ORDINARY COURSE, DIVULGE THEY ARE POSITION ON VEST — THEIR POSITION ON INVESTIGATIONS JACK CLOUD WAS ABLE TO ASK THE U.S. ATTORNEY AND HE WAS UNABLE TO SAY WHETHER THE FBI WOULD EVER — WHETHER THE U.S ATTORNEY WOULD EVER PROSECUTE THIS ON THE FBI’S INVESTIGATION THE U.S. ATTORNEY HAS NOT COMMENCED A PROSECUTION TO DATE AND WE DON’T EXPECT ONE AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE CONFERRED WITH THE COMMUNITY SERVICE BOARD AND DISCUSSED WHETHER THE COMMUNITY SERVICE BOARD SHOULD BRING A LAWSUIT IN ORDER TO TRY TO COLLECT THESE MONIES, AND THE BOARD DID DETERMINE TO DO SO AND SO WE PREPARED THOSE PLEADINGS AND WE FILED THEM, THAT THE DEFENDANT INITIALLY FILED WHAT’S KNOWN AS A DEMURRER AND SAID WE HADN’T STATED A CAUSE OF ACTION, THAT WE MIGHT HAVE DESCRIBED MISMANAGEMENT, BUT THAT WE HADN’TED STATED THE — HADN’T STATED THE BASIS UPON WHICH TO RECOVER JUDGE MARTIN INITIALLY SUSTAIN THE DEMURRERS, BUT GAVE US LEAVE ON AMEND, AND SO THE COMPLAINT THAT WAS DELIVERED TO YOU, THE AMENDED COMPLAINT, THE HEARING ON THAT IS ON FEBRUARY THE 13th JACK CLOUD IS WITH ME TODAY AND ADAM PREPARED THE LAWSUIT AND IS PREPARED TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF THAT SO THAT YOU DON’T JUST HAVE TO RELY UPON HAVING READ IT >> THANKS, BERNARD >> WE WANT TO RELY PRIMARILY — I AM HANDLING THIS LITIGATION ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD AS PART OF THEIR EFFORT TO, IN COMMON PAR LANCE, KIND OF GET TO THE BOTTOM OF WHAT WEPT ON HERE SO WE HAVE DONE THE SAME SORT OF INVESTIGATION, AND JACK CLOUD STARTED THAT I’VE DONE SOME MORE OF THAT INVESTIGATION, THE SAME TYPE OF WORK THAT WE BELIEVE THAT THE POLICE DID AND THAT WE BELIEVE THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY DID WE HAD ENOUGH INFORMATION TO PROVIDE A LEVEL OF DETAIL THAT WE BELIEVE SHOULD SATISFY THE COURT WITH REGARD TO EVERYTHING THAT WE KNOW ABOUT THIS CASE, AND AT THIS POINT, WE DO HAVE, WE BELIEVE, ANSWERS TO THE BASIC WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WHY, AND

HOW QUESTIONS I MIGHT CHARACTERIZE THE “HOW” QUESTION AS THE HARDEST QUESTION OF ALL TO ANSWER BECAUSE WE’VE ONLY REALLY BEEN GIVEN ONE RESPONSE FROM THE VARIOUS FOLKS WHO WERE AT THE CSB MANAGEMENT LEVEL WHO MADE THE DECISION TO MAINTAIN THIS PERSON ON THE PAYROLL FOR 12 YEARS THE ANSWER THEY HAVE GIVEN IS THAT THEY FORGOT TO DEAL WITH THIS OR WHEN THEY WERE REMINDED TO DEAL WITH IT, OTHER THINGS CAME UP AND IT DIDN’T GET HANDLED AT ALL IN A TIMELY FASHION, BUT THAT SORT OF GOES WITHOUT SAYING IT SLIPPED UNDER THE RADAR EVENTUALLY OTHER PEOPLE WOULD ASK ABOUT IT AGAIN AND UNTIL FINALLY UNDER THE DIRECTORSHIP OF MS. WOMACK, THERE WAS A RESOLUTION TO THE ISSUE SO THAT’S THE ANSWER WE’VE BEEN GIVEN TO — BY THE FOLKS WHO WERE INVOLVED WITH MAINTAINING THIS PERSON ON THE PAYROLL FOR SO LONG FINALLY, I’LL JUST SUMMERIZE FOR YOU — SUMMARIZE FOR YOU THE BASIC GIST OF THE LAWSUIT IT IS AN UNUSUAL CASE I’VE LOOKED FOR PRECEDENCE FOR THIS TYPE OF CASE AND IT DOESN’T HAPPEN INITIALLY WHEN THE CSB WAS ASKING ABOUT IT, THEY DIDN’T UNDERSTAND WHY THERE WASN’T A CRIME HERE, AND AGAIN, FOR THE LIFE OF US, IT’S HARD TO FIGURE OUT WRR SOMEBODY — WHERE SOMEBODY DID SOMETHING CRIMINALLY WRONG IT DID FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES APPEAR SORT OF THE GROSSEST OF MISMANAGEMENT, SO BASED ON THAT THEORY AND THAT BEING THE ANSWER WE’VE BEEN GIVEN CONSISTENTLY, SUPPORTED BY THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE THAT THE CSB HAS, WE PREPARED THIS ATTEMPTING TO RECOVERY MONEY BASED ON COMPENSATING SOMEBODY ON THE PREMISE THAT THEY WOULD BE DOING WORK FOR THE CSB, WHEN IN FACT THEY WEREN’T DOING ANY WORK AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WAS A MISREPRESENTATION TO THE ORGANIZATION AND THE BOARD WHO BUDGETED THE FUNDS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS PERSON WAS HELPING WITH THE PROCESS OF PROVIDING SERVICES THAT NORFOLK SUB STANT ADDICTED AND — SUBSTANCE ADDICTED AND DISABLED CITIZENS, NONE OF THOSE SERVICES WERE BEING DELIVERED BY JILL McCLUNG, EVEN THOUGH SHE WAS BAIG PAID FOR IT SO THE NATURE OF THE CASE IS OUTLINED IN MY MEMO TO YOU IS NOT BASED ON ANY SORT OF FAULT OR WRONG DOING BY MS. McCLUNG IT’S BASED ON UNJUST ENRICHMENT THEORY, THE THEORY BEING SHE WAS THE RECIPIENT, UNIT WITHING OR NOT, OF MONEY THAT THEY WAS NOT ENTITLED TO GET AND THE REASON SHE WASN’T ENTITLED IS BECAUSE SHE WASN’T ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK THAT THE MONEY WAS INTENDED TO COMPENSATE HER FOR SO LIKE I SAID, I THINK WE HAVE — WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED AND WE KNOW THE PEOPLE THAT WERE INVOLVED WITH MISMANAGING THE SITUATION WE’VE BEEN GIVEN AN ANSWER BY THE FOLKS WHO MISMANAGED IT OR BY THEIR ATTORNEY REPRESENTATIVES, AND THAT’S THE THEORY THAT WE’RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH UNTIL SOME OTHER EXPLANATION IS PROVIDED [ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ] >> AT ALL QUESTIONS TO — MOSS MAUREEN WOMACK FOUND THE PROBLEM AND SHE WAS THE NEW DIRECTOR >> IT’S A PIERCE THAT — >> SO IT WAS GOING ON FRYER TO HER GETTING THERE — PRIOR TO HER GETTING THERE >> AND MAUREEN WAS NOT THE FIRST PERSON TO FIND IT SHE DOES APPEAR TO BE THE FIRST PERSON TO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DEAL WITH IT DR. PRATT, WHO PRECEDED MAUREEN WOMACK IN THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S POSITION, HE WAS INTERVIEWED BY THE POLICE I DON’T BELIEVE — AT THE POINT WHERE OUR OFFICE STARTED TO INVESTIGATE THE MATTER, HE HAD ALREADY RETIRED FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR POSITION, SO WE DID NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO INTERVIEW HIM AS AN EMPLOYEE HE WAS NOT, OBVIOUSLY, ONE OF THE FOUR PEOPLE WHO WERE TERMINATED SO HE DID SPEAK WITH THE POLICE AND HE DID EXPLAIN CONSISTENT WITH WHAT I DESCRIBED FROM THE OTHER EMPLOYEES, WHICH IS WE WEREN’T AWARE THAT THIS HADN’T BEEN DEALT WITH, I THOUGHT IT WAS, EVERY TIME SOMEBODY BROUGHT IT TO MY ATTENTION I INSTRUCTED SOMEBODY TO TAKE CARE OF IT AND I WASN’T AWARE THAT IT DIDN’T GET FIXED >> YOU KNOW, WE’RE DOING EVERYTHING IN OUR — REMINDING MYSELF OF WHAT WAS GOING DOWN AND WHAT WE KNEW ABOUT, THE DAPET AND THE SEQUENCING OF EVENTS AND — BUT YOU LABEL IT

THE GROSSEST OF MISMANAGEMENT I MEAN, THERE’S SOME TRUTH TO THAT THIS IS THE (INAUDIBLE) HAVING LOOKED AT IT ALL OVER AGAIN, OVER 12 YEARS OF SOMEHOW SOMEONE IN A SUPERVISORY POSITION JUST NOT — JUST LETTING IT SLIDE WEEK AFTER WEEK, AND ALMOST — I MEAN, AT LEAST TWICE A MONTH, THEY HAD TO ASK THEMSELVES, SHOULD WE SEND THIS CHECK OUT, WHAT IS THIS PERSON DOING I MEAN, IT IS JUST BEYOND THE PALE OF ANYTHING I’VE EVER SEEN AND THE ANSWER SO FAR ABOUT IT JUST BEING SOMEHOW, WE DIDN’T GET TO IT, IT WAS SORT OF UNCOMFORTABLE, JUST DOESN’T WASH I MEAN, I KNOW THERE’S — I MEAN, THE POLICE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIND ANYTHING THAT THEY WOULD PROSECUTE SOMEONE FOR THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY HASN’T I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE GRAND JURY WOULD DO, BUT I JUST — THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS, BEYOND THAT IF THE COMMUNITY WANTS AN ANSWER, I’M SURE THEY DO, BUT UNTIL SOMEBODY ACTUALLY COMES FORWARD, WE ARE WHERE WE ARE >> WELL, I CAN — BERNARD, IF WE COULD BACK UP BECAUSE IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO WHAT YOUR OFFICE KNEW AND WHEN THEY KNEW IT AND I WANT YOU TO GO BACK AND TELL ME YOUR OFFICE — I MEAN, THE McGLONE ISSUE, AND I WILL SAY THIS IS AN EXCELLENTLY BRIEF AND IN FACT, IT ENCOMPASSES ALL OF THE INVESTIGATION THAT I WOULD WANT EXCEPT THE CONCLUSION OF RECKLESS AND WANTON DISREGARD, SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE, CRIMINAL INTENT IT REALLY IS A TRUE INVESTIGATION AS LAID OUT IN THE COMPLAINT AS WRITTEN YOU JUST CAN’T WRAP THAT CONCLUSION IN IT’S WHAT WE NEED BUT BERNARD, GOING BACK, YOUR OFFICE WAS INVOLVED IN THE INITIAL McGLONE — I MEAN, THE CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE I DON’T KNOW IF YOU WERE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE TIME WERE YOU? >> I’M NOT SURE ’97, ’98 >> WHEN HER INITIAL EMPLOYMENT PROBLEMS RESULTED, YOU NAD A CITY ATTORNEY IN THOSE MEETINGS WITH THE CSB OR THERE WAS A CITY ATTORNEY I TAKE IT WAS THERE? >> YES THE CITY ATTORNEY ATTENDS VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE BOARD MEETINGS, BUT I DON’T KNOW THAT IT WAS EVER A MATTER THAT WENT TO THE BOARD LEVEL, AND SO THAT IT WOULD NOT USUALLY AT THAT POINT IN TIME AT THIS TIME, BECAUSE IT’S SO EXTRAORDINARY, THE BOARD HAS HAD TO DISCUSS IT, BUT YES, WE HAD A CITY ATTORNEY THAT WAS ATTENDING BOARD MEETINGS REGULARLY >> NOW, SO WE KNOW THAT YOUR OFFICE IS FAMILIAR WITH THIS FROM ABOUT ’97 ON, ’98, WHEN IT FIRST RUTTED AS LAID — RESULTED AS LAID OUT WITHIN THE COMPLAINT, THE AMENDED COMPLAINT >> RIGHT, RIGHT >> NOW, AS WE MOVE ALONG, AT SOME POINT, THERE ARE DISCUSSIONS, IT APPEARS, AMONGST CHRIS PRATT, THAT THEY’RE TALKING ABOUT IT HAS YOUR OFFICE PULLED EVERY MEMORANDUM AND E-MAIL THAT RESULTED IN THAT TIME PERIOD OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE AT THE CSB? I ASSUME YOU HAVE FOR DISCOVERY PURPOSES >> WE HAVE REVIEWED EVERYTHING WE COULD GET OUR HANDS ON >> RIGHT >> AS THE MAYOR SAYS, THAT IT’S MOST EXTRAORDINARY THAT WE AGREE THAT IT’S SOMETHING BEYOND THE GROSSEST OF MISMANAGEMENT AND THE CAUSES OF ACTION THAT WE PLED INCLUDE THAT AND SO THAT WE CANNOT SAY — WE’RE SURPRISED THAT WE DON’T FIND A RATIONAL EXPLANATION, AND SO THAT WE — EVERYTHING WE HAVE REVIEWED SUPPORTS THE DEFENDANT’S DEFENSE THAT THEY JUST REALLY MESSED IT UP >> WELL, READING YOUR — AND I DISAGREE READING YOUR AMENDED COMPLAINT, MORE THAN JUST REALLY MESSING IT UP I MEAN, I FIND CRIMINAL INTENT IF I WAS SITTING IN A ROBE, I FIND CRIMINAL INTENT, AND I FIND WIRE FRAUD AND I FIND THAT — AND I FIND A WILLFUL DISREGARD, AND I HAVE SAT IN A ROBE, SO — I’LL GET TO THAT IN A MINUTE WHAT I’M LOOKING FOR IS YOUR OFFICE WAS FAMILIAR WITH THIS, THE McGLONE ISSUE, IN THE LATE ’90s AT SOME POINT, YOUR OFFICE BECAME UNFAMILIAR WITH IT WHEN AND WHY? >> LAWYERS GENERALLY DON’T MAKE PERSONNEL DECISIONS >> I KNOW, BUT I’M SURE THAT THEY’RE CONSULTED YOU MAY NOT NECESSARILY KNOW ABOUT IT, BUT YOU HAD SOMEBODY THERE >> THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS FAMILIAR WITH IT

>> WHERE IS HE NOW? >> HE’S RETIRED THAT COMPLOES TO THIS TIME — CLOSE TO THIS TIME, HE RECOMMENDED TO THE MANAGEMENT THAT THEY DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, AND SO THAT HE BECAME FAMILIAR WITH IT IN PART BECAUSE ONE OF JILL McGLONE’S DEFENSES WAS TO DIVULGE HEALTH INFORMATION PERTAINING TO A CLIENT, SO THAT THE COMMUNITY SERVICE BOARD WAS SUED BECAUSE OF THAT, SO HE HAD THAT DEFENSE AND HE SUCCESSFULLY DEFENDED, FILED SUMMARY DISPOSITION AND THE PLAINTIFF’S LAWYER SAW THE HANDWRITING ON THE WALL AND NONSUITED IT, SO HE SUCCEEDED, AND HE SAID — >> VERY GOOD LEGAL WORK >> VERY GOOD LEGAL WORK, AND IN ADDITION TO THE LEGAL WORK, LET ME TELL YOU, YOU NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THAT THAT’S A PERSONNEL MATTER THAT IS YOURS AND YOU NEED TO HANDLE, AND THAT IS BEYOND THE LAWYER’S ROLE TO TELL A MANAGEMENT ABOUT WHO THEY SHOULD HIRE AND FIRE HE WENT BEYOND THE ROLE AND SAID DO THAT, AND THEN LEFT IT THERE FOR THE MANAGEMENT TO ATTEND TO >> HAS HE BEEN DEBRIEFED? HAS YOUR OFFICE CONTACTED HIM? >> YES, YES >> SINCE THIS HAS COME ABOUT >> YES >> DID HE KEEP NOTES AND WERE THOSE NOTES REVIEWED? >> YOU KNOW, HE KEPT FILES AS ALL PEOPLE DO >> RIGHT >> THOSE HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND ALL THAT HE REMEMBERS IS JUST WHAT I TOLD YOU ABOUT >> WHO PICKED UP WHEN HE LEFT? >> JOHN RICHARDSON >> AND JOHN IS STILL THERE — JUST RETIRED >> JUST RETIRED >> AND DID YOU DEBRIEF WITH JOHN? >> I DID AND HE NEVER WAS AWARE, NEVER HEARD THE NAME JILL McGLONE, WAS NEVER ASKED ABOUT IT, AND ONLY HEARD ABOUT IT SINCE MS. WOMACK DISCOVERED THE SITUATION >> LET ME ASK YOU, WITH REGARD TO YOUR DISCUSSION OR AT LEAST TELL ME THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, POLICE, FBI, COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEYS OFFICE AND I READ THE LETTER THE COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY’S OFFICE WROTE, THE AUSA WAS CONSULTED, AT LEAST WHAT’S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE REQUEST AND I WILL AGREE THAT THEY WILL NEVER TELL YOU IF OR WHEN THEY’RE GOING TO GO THROUGH WITH AN INVESTIGATION OR A CRIMINAL INDICTMENT IF WARRANTED BUT I DO HAVE, WHAT DISCUSSION DID YOUR OFFICE HAVE TO SEEK A CRIMINAL INDICTMENT AGAINST ANYONE, ESPECIALLY MS. McGLONE IN THE CASE, ON — AND I ASSUME WIRE FRAUD PERTAINS TO THE DIRECT DEPOSIT? WAS IT A DIRECT DEPOSIT? >> I DON’T KNOW THAT >> WELL, SHE DIDN’T COME PICK IT UP REFER — EVERY TIME SO DIRECT DEPOSIT, YOU HAVE A WIRE FRAUD AT LEAST I THINK IT’S THERE BECAUSE YOU’VE ALREADY PLED CONSTRUCTIVE AND ACTUAL FRAUD >> RIGHT >> SO WHAT DISCUSSIONS DID YOUR OFFICE HAVE WITH EACH OF THE PROSECUTING AGENCIES TO PROMOTE — BECAUSE YOU HAD TO PROMOTE YOUR CASE, TO PROMOTE A CRIMINAL INDICTMENT? >> THAT WE DID NOT LOBBY FOR AN INDICTMENT, THAT COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY HAS THAT WITHIN HIS PROVINCE THAT WE PROSECUTE ORDINANCES JUST BY HIS PERMISSION I HAD ONE CONVERSATION WITH HIM THAT HE CALLED TO GIVE ME A HEADS-UP THAT HE WAS CONCLUDING THAT HE DIDN’T HAVE A BASIS TO PROCEED >> HE NEVER TOLD YOU WHAT HE DID I READ THE LETTER IT DOESN’T SAY MUCH OF ANYTHING >> OTHER THAN — I ASSUME HE READ THE — DON’T YOU THINK HE WAS COMPLETELY RELYING UPON THE POLICE REPORT? >> WELL, WE DON’T KNOW HE DIDN’T TELL US >> RIGHT, HE DID NOT AND I DID NOT LOBBY HIM I JUST EXPRESSED REGRET THAT WE HAD BEEN HOPING AND RELYING THAT THERE WOULD BE A PROSECUTION THAT WOULD HELP US GET SOME ANSWERS, AND IT WASN’T UNTIL AFTER THAT, TA WE HAD TO — THAT WE HAD TO BEGIN TO EVALUATE THE ABILITY TO BRING A CIVIL ACTION >> WELL, I CAN TELL YOU THAT AUSA OFTEN LOBBY BACK IF THEY’RE LOOKING FOR ONE, AND IN PARTICULAR, LET’S SAY A SUPERVISOR, AND I’VE BEEN THERE WHEN THEY DISCUSSED IT AND I REALLY BELIEVE THAT IF YOU’RE JUST GOING TO TURN A FILE OVER, IF SOMEBODY BRINGS ME A FILE AND TURNS IT OVER TO ME AND SAYS, HERE, READ IT, THAT’S A BIG DIFFERENCE TO SOMEBODY SITTING DOWN WITH ME AND EXPLAINING TO ME WHAT THEY’RE LOOKING FOR WHAT DO YOU WANT OUT OF THIS, IS AN ISSUE THAT I SUSPECT MAY HAVE ASSISTED, IF WE HAD WALKED IN AND SAID WE’RE LOOKING FOR A WIRE FRAUD CASE HERE, CONSPIRACY, WIRE FRAUD CASE AGAINST MS. McGLONE AND THAT DIDN’T HAPPEN AND THEY’RE GOING TO — WE’RE ASSUMING THAT THEY PERFORMED THEIR INVESTIGATIONS OF READING A POLICE REPORT MOST OF THESE PEOPLE, I’M SURE, TOOK THE STEPS ANY HOW AND I FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE A CIVIL COMPLAINT THAT

ALLEGATION IT, THAT AT LEAST IN HER CASE IT DIDN’T RISE TO CRIMINAL LET ME ASK, SO WE HAVE NO MEETINGS WITH ANY OF THE SUPERVISORS, NO MEETINGS WITH ME PROSECUTORIAL AGENCY TO REQUEST AND TELL THEM WHAT WE’RE LOOKING FOR >> NO, WE DID NOT ENDEAVOR TO PRACTICE CRIMINAL LAW >> I’M NOT — ALL RIGHT YOU DON’T HAVE TO PRACTICE CRIMINAL LAW YOU KNOW THAT >> I DON’T EVEN — >> WE GOT MARCUS TO GO IN THERE AND TELL THEM >> I DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT WIRE FRAUD IS THE ONLY CRIMINAL LAW I’VE EVER PRACTICED IS PROSECUTING THE CITY’S MISDEMEANORS, WHICH I DID THROUGH THE PERMISSION OF THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY THAT I DON’T — I DON’T HAVE ANY OPINION ABOUT WHETHER THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY KNOWS WHAT HE’S DOING IN HIS JOB, SO IT IS HIS OBLIGATION AND RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE IF A CRIME IS — IF HE’S GOT THE BASIS FROE, AND I DON’T HAVE ANY OPINION I’M NOT SECOND-GUESSING HIM HE KNOWS MUCH MORE ABOUT CRIMINAL LAW THAN I DO >> WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS ADAM, DO YOU HAVE YOUR COMPLAINT? LOOK AT YOUR PARAGRAPH 75 AND 76 AT NO TIME AFTER APRIL 14th, 1980, DID CRISP OR ANYONE ELSE EVER CHANGE RESOLVE OR ULTIMATELY END THE SPPTION WITHOUT PAY AT THE TIME, I TAKE IT IAN CRISP THOUGHT SHE WAS SUSPENDED WITHOUT PAY WHEN IN REALITY SHE WAS RECEIVING PAY >> I DON’T KNOW THAT >> YOU PLED IT ON PARAGRAPH 75 >> WE PLED THAT SHE NEVER — >> CHANGED HER STATUS >> TO SAY IT WAS WITHOUT PAY >> CORRECT IT MAY BE THAT THERE — ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS HAPPENED IN THIS CASE IS THAT, AND THIS IS PLED IN THE COMPLAINT — ALLEGED IN THE COMPLAINT, IS THAT THE INVESTIGATIVE FILE THAT THE CSB SHOULD HAVE HAD FOR THE, FOR THE HEALTH INFORMATION DISCLOSURE IS MISSING THERE IS NOT — THERE’S AN EMPTY FOLDER, BUT THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE ANY INVESTIGATORY FILES FOR THE DISCIPLINARY ACTION WHETHER THERE IS A DOCUMENT IN THERE THAT TERMINATES THE SUSPENSION WITHOUT PAY AND PUTS HER BACK ON TO PAY, I DON’T KNOW >> HE NEVER SUGGESTED THAT FOR WHATEVER REASON >> I KNOW IT’S NOT SUGGESTED FROM THE FINANCIAL INFORMATION BUT IT ANYWAY BE THAT THE DEFENDANTS MAY APPEAR AT TRIAL WITH A PIECE OF PAPER OR A LETTER THAT SAYS SHE WAS PUT ON TO — GLIE HOPE THEY’RE GOING TO PRODUCE IT IN DISCOVERY BEFORE IT SHOWS UP AT TRIAL, RIGHT? THAT’S WHAT YOU MEAN, RIGHT? >> RIGHT >> OKAY WITH REGARD TO HER — CRISP SIGNS OFF ON ALL THESE DATES IN PARAGRAPH 76 THAT SHE HAD USED 40 HOURS OF LEAVE TIME, EVEN THOUGH SHE NEVER WORKED HE KNEW SHE WASN’T WORKING, RIGHT? >> RIGHT >> WHETHER SHE WAS FADE OR UNPAID, HE STILL ENDORSED 40 HOURS OF LEAVE TIME FOR HER >> CORRECT >> NOW, TELL ME WHY THAT IS NOT CRIMINAL >> WELL, I’M NOT XATIVEL TELLING YOU WHY IS — CAPABLE OF TELLING YOU WHY IT’S NOT CAPABLE BECAUSE I’M NOT CAPABLE OF TELLING YOU WHY IT IS CAPABLE >> ARE WE JUST SAYING THAT IT JUST SO GROSSLY WANTON AND DISREGARD >> I’LL TELL YOU WHEN INTERVIEWED, THAT HE SAID HE WAS INSTRUCTED BY HIS SUPERIOR TO GO AHEAD AND MARK THE LEAVE RECORD — THE PAY RECORD IN EXACTLY THAT MANNER >> SO HIS ANSWER WOULD BE I’M JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS THAT DOESN’T WORK IN WAR, WE KNOW THAT SO AS FAR AS WE KNOW RIGHT NOW, HE WOULD SIGN — SO HE WOULD SAY THAT SHE RECEIVED 40 HOURS OF LEAVE TIME, FORGET HER PAY, HE KNEW SHE DIDN’T WORK AND SHE EARNED IT AND WAS PAID FOR 40 HOURS OF LEAVE TIME? >> RIGHT >> AND NOT ONLY DID HE, THROUGHOUT YOUR COMPLAINT, HE WASN’T THE ONLY ONE YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME THAT OTHERS SIGNED OFF ON IT, HIS SUPERIORS SIGNED OFF ON HER LEAVE TIME AND SHE NEVER WORKED >> NOBODY ELSE SIGNED THE FORMS >> RIGHT >> THE FORMS WERE — >> THAT WE’RE FAMILIAR WITH >> THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT PROCESSED SO THAT THE PAYCHECKS COULD GO OUT IT’S THE HOURLY INFORMATION IS INPUT INTO THE SYSTEM — IF THE HOURLY INFORMATION ISN’T INPUT INTO THE SYSTEM, IT WOULD THE GENERATE COMPENSATION >> ON NOVEMBER 30th, 2008, CRISP SIGNED A LABOR REPORT FORM WHICH INDICATED THAT McGLONE HAD NOT DONE ANY WORK, HAD USED 20 HOURS OF LEAVE TIME, AND CLAIMED THAT SHE WAS ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE WITH PAY >> I’M NOT SURE IF THERE’S AN EXPLANATION FOR THAT BECAUSE WE HAVEN’T GOTTEN INTO DISCOVERY, HAVEN’T EVEN GOTTEN PAST THE DEMURRER YET >> BUT WE KNOW SIGNED A FORM — >> SOME OF THE FORMS SAY ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE SOME OF THE FORMS DON’T HAVE ANY INDICATION OF WHAT FORM OF LEAVE, SO WE PLED EXACTLY WHAT THE DOCUMENTATION WE HAVE >> I THINK THE DOCUMENTS SPEAK VOLUMES FOR THEMSELVES DON’T YOU AGREE? YOU MUST TO PUT IT IN YOUR COMPLAINT, RIGHT? >> I THINK THEY DO >> WHAT I’M GETTING AT, AND I’VE

CIRCLED, HOW MANY TIMES CAN SOMEBODY USE 24 HOURS OF LEAVE AND NOT DONE ANY WORK AND YET THEY’RE STILL SIGNING OFF ON HER FORMS? AND YOU CANNOT TELL ME THAT THERE ISN’T INTENT THAT’S NOT GROSS, WANTON, WILLFUL DISREGARD WHEN YOU DO THAT FOR YEARS, AN INTENT, EVEN A MALICE WAS FOUND SO I’M CURIOUS AS TO NOW WHY THIS SYNOPSIS OF A COMPLAINT IS NOT TAKEN TO — AND SAT DOWN WITH A PRODUCE COURT AND LOB — PROSECUTOR AND LOBBIED >> WE’D BE HAPPY TO SEND THIS TO THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY >> INY WE NEED TO SIT DOWN IF YOU WANT, I’LL GO WITH YOU >> I’D BE HAPPY TO GET — >> PAUL, HE SAID HE DOESN’T, HE DOESN’T DO FELONIES >> I DON’T CARE, BUT YOU DON’T NEED — NOT FOR THIS COUNCIL, FOR THE CITY, I THINK YOU’RE DOING — [ ALL SPEAKING AT ONCE ] >> I WILL SIT DOWN WITH HIM SO THAT — >> WELL, I’LL TALK TO YOU AND YOU WILL THEN COMMUNICATE TO HIM WHAT — >> THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL >> AND MAYBE WE’LL SIT DOWN — I’LL COMMUNICATE WITH YOU WHAT WE NEED TO SIT DOWN ABOUT PARAGRAPH 88, IS THAT A TYPO, 24,000 HOURS OF LEAVE OR IS IT — >> NO, THAT’S 24,000 IF YOU ADD UP THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT SHE WORKED THERE, THAT SHE WAS PAID FOR WORKING OVER 12 YEARS, YOU KNOW, APPROXIMATELY 250 DAYS A YEAR, EIGHT HOURS A DAY >> ALL RIGHT, PARAGRAPH 95 AND I MEAN, THERE ARE MORE, BUT I’M PICKING AND CHOOSING WHAT I COULD OR WHAT AT LEAST TAKES ME TO MY POINT PARAGRAPH 95, EACH OF CRISP’S SUBMISSIONS FOR ANNUAL BUDGET FINDINGS — FUNDING, EXCUSE ME, FOR THE CSB’S CLINICAL SERVICES PROGRAM MADE BETWEEN JULY 1, 1999, AND JULY 1, 2009, WAS IT A MISREPRESENTATION AT THE TIME HE SUBMITTED EACH, CRISP KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT McGLONE WOULD NOT BE DOING ANY WORK FOR THE CSB, EVEN THOUGH HE WAS FUNDING FOR HER TO BE PAID AS HER POSITION >> IT’S EITHER A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE OR A FULL-TIME EQUIVALENCY ONE OF THE PIECES OF INFORMATION THAT THE CSB TRACKS AND PROVIDES TO THE STATE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AS PART OF THEIR — AS PART OF THEIR DISCLOSURE OF THEIR FUNDING, PART OF THEIR AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE, INCLUDES MEASUREMENT OF WHAT SERVICES ARE GOING TO BE PROVIDED, BROKEN DOWN BY A RATIO OF HOW MANY FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT POSITIONS ARE WORKING TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES SO THE MORE PEOPLE YOU HAVE, OR STAFF PROVIDING SERVICES FOR THE SAME NUMBER OF CLIENTS, THE LOWER YOUR RATIO GOES AS FAR AS EFFECTIVENESS OF YOUR DELIVERY SO CARRYING ON YOUR BUDGET AND ON YOUR DISCLOSURE TO THE STATE A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE WHO YOU’RE PAYING WHO ACTUALLY ISN’T PROVIDING ANY BENEFITS FOR YOUR CLIENTS DOES DRIVE YOUR RATIO DOWN AND MAKES YOU SEEM LESS EFFICIENT SO IT IS OF SIGNIFICANCE THAT THEY CONTINUED TO SHOW THAT THEY HAVE SOMEBODY WORKING WHEN, IN FACT, THAT PERSON WAS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO HELP THEM PROVIDE ANY SERVICES >> YET THE ENTIRE TIME THEY WOULD HAVE KNOWN RIGHT? >> CORRECT AS A FUNCTION OF PREPARING THOSE BUDGET DOCUMENTS, WE BELIEVE, SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT AT LEAST ONE PERSON IN THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE DIVISION WOULDN’T BE HELPING WITH THOSE SERVICES >> AND IN FACT, YOU EVEN ALLEGE THE SAME WITH REGARD TO WHY, IN PARAGRAPH 113, 114 >> CORRECT >> THAT THEY’RE REQUESTING FUNDS TO FILL A SLOT THAT THEY KNOW THE PERSON IS NOT WORKING AND AGAIN, ON 131, PARAGRAPH 131, WISE AGAIN KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN, RIGHT? >> CORRECT >> SHE’S APPROVING A BUDGET REQUEST KNOWING THE PERSON IS NOT WORKING >> CORRECT, AND WE DO HAVE MINUTES FROM THOSE MEETINGS AND WE KNOW — >> WHAT MEETINGS? >> BOARD MEETINGS, WHEREBY IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD AND UPON THE BOARD VOTED TO APPROVE BUDGETS >> DID ANYONE TRY TO EXAMINE 18.2.498.3 MISREPRESENTATIONS? ANY PERSON THAT DOES COMMERCIAL DEALINGS WITHIN THIS JURISDICTION WITH THE COMMONWEALTH, DID YOU ALREADY LOOK AT THAT, IT IS IN LEAD OR COVER UP BY TRICK, SCHEME OR DEVICE? >> I CAN’T TELL YOU IF ANYBODY ELSE DID >> DID YOUR OFFICE? >> I DID NOT >> THE CLASSIC FELONY ANYBODY LOOK AT THIS, TRY TO SEE IF IT FITS?

CAN WE? >> WE CAN’T BUT THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY >> CAN YOU TELL YOUR OFFICE — WHY DON’T WE GET A MEMO TO OURSELF FIRST AND PUT IT ON A SILVER PLATTER TO THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY OR THE U.S. ATTORNEY TO BE ABLE TO PROSECUTE THIS CASE AT LEAST UNSTATE STATUTES IT MAY DEAL WITH CONTRACTORS OUTSIDE, BIT IT DOESES A — BUT IT DID APPEAR TO BE A CASE THAT HAS SOMEBODY WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT THAT HAS COMMITTED A MISREPRESENTATION BY TRICK, SCHEME, DEVICE OF MATERIAL FACT, MAKING FALSE, FICTITIOUS, AND FRAUDULENT STATEMENTS OF MISREPRESENTATION AND THAT’S WHAT APPEARS WE HAVE HERE WHAT OTHER SUITS ARE PENDING? [ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ] >> TELL ME ABOUT THAT >> THAT CRISP SUED MRS. WOMACK OVER THE COMMENTS SHE MADE AT THE PRESS TO EXPLAIN THE STATUS OF THE CASE AND THAT THE COMMUNITY SERVICE BOARD’S INSURANCE COVERS THAT >> WE’RE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT >> WE’RE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT >> AND THEN LASTLY, TELL ME HOW THE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE THAT IS CURRENTLY SET UP, THAT WE HAVE — BECAUSE I ASSUME THAT SHE COULD GRIEVE IS THAT WHAT YOU TOLD ME BEFORE? >> WELL, TECHNICALLY, SHE MIGHT HAVE ABLE TO, BUT JUST BY THE PASSAGE OF TIME NOW, SHE’S NOT ABLE TO, SO THAT WHEN I INSTRUCT — ADVISED MRS. WOMACK TO NEVER FAY HER AGAIN, UNDER THE — PAY HER AGAIN, UNDER THE GRIEVANCE PARLANCE, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A GRIEVABLE ACTION >> LETS STOP RIGHT THERE SO IF THEY HAD DONE THAT IN 1997, 1998, WHEN ALL OF HER CONDUCT WHICH ANYBODY WOULD HAVE FIRED HER ON IMMEDIATELY, SHE COULD HAVE GRIEVED AT THAT POINT >> IF THEY HAD FIRED HER, YES >> ALL RIGHT WHAT IS THERE ANYTHING IN OUR PROCEDURE OF GRIEVANCE THAT IS — MAKES IT SUCH A BURDEN TO BE ABLE TO DISMISS SOMEBODY WITH SUCH GROSS CONDUCT AS HERS, AND DO WE HAVE TO CHANGE OUR GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE OR HAVE THEM REEXAMINED, THAT WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO DON’T WANT TO GRIEVE, WHO DON’T WANT TO FIRE SOMEBODY BECAUSE IT’S SUCH A DIFFICULT AND ONEROUS TASK? AND I’M NOT SAYING — AND I KNOW I’M GOING TO GET CRITICIZED AND I APOLOGIZE, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS OUR PROCEDURE SO ONEROUS THAT WE HAVE PEOPLE IN MANAGEMENT WHO DON’T WANT TO FIRE PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY END UP IN A GRIEVANCE PROCESS >> YOU GET ME UP ON MY SOAPBOX ON GRIEVANCE AND GRIEVE VAN RIGHTS THAT — GRIEVANCE RIGHTS, AND I DON’T KNOW IF YOU KNOW IT, BUT THE AVERAGE LENGTH OF TIME TO TERMINATE A NEW YORK CITY PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER IS THREE YEARS THAT’S NOT OUR EXPERIENCE, BUT IT IS REQUIRED BY THE STATE, OUR SYSTEM OF CLASSIFICATION AND PROVISION OF GRIEVANCE, BUT THIS COUNCIL HAS HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH US ABOUT MAKING IMPROVEMENTS TO IT WHEN CHIEF HYDE LEFT, I THINK IN HIS DEBRIEFING, THAT HE SAID THAT THE TWO THINGS THAT HE THOUGHT WOULD BE MOST HELPFUL TO MANAGEMENT, PARTICULARLY POLICE MANAGEMENT, WOULD BE THE ABILITY TO HAVE AT-WILL SENIOR POLICE OFFICERS AND THE ABILITY TO END THE RISK THAT, IF A PERSON WAS FOUND TO HAVE MADE — DONE THE MISDEEDS THAT CAUSED THEIR DISCIPLINE AND TERMINATION, THAT A PANEL WOULDN’T HAVE THE ABILITY TO SUBSTITUTE THEIR JUDGMENT FOR THE JUDGMENT OF THE MANAGEMENT ON WHAT THE APPROPRIATE DISCIPLINE IS AND SO THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE’VE TALKED ABOUT IN THE PAST AND WE MAY BE BRINGING BACK TO THIS COUNCIL >> OKAY >> SO THAT WE DON’T HAVE THE ABILITY TO RADICALLY CHANGE IT, BUT THERE MAY BE SOME CHANGES THAT COULD IMPROVE IT >> AND I’M GOING TO CONCLUDE WITH THIS YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME THAT THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY, YOU OR A MEMBER OF YOUR OFFICE, ABOUT GOING TO THE GRAND JURY AND TESTIFYING YOURSELF BEFORE THE GRAND JURY AM I CORRECT, TO SEEK AN INDICTMENT? >> NO, WE DID NOT DISCUSS GRAND JURY >> AND HE DID NOT TELL YOU THAT THAT EXISTED >> RIGHT, RIGHT >> AND YOU WOULD ALSO AGREE WITH ME THAT THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION OF HIM CALLING A SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE GRAND JURY IN THIS CASE IF IT WAS — IF IT FIT WITHIN THE STATUTE, HE DID NOT DO THAT AND THAT WAS NOT DISCUSSED >> RIGHT AND THE ONE CONVERSATION I HAD WITH HIM AT HIS CONCLUSION, WE DID NOT DISCUSS THAT I DON’T KNOW WHAT HE MIGHT HAVE SAID TO HIS COLLEAGUES OR ANYBODY ELSE, BUT WITH ME IN THE ONE DISCUSSION, NO, WE DID NOT >> AND THAT’S — IN THAT CASE, IF HE BELIEVED THERE WAS NO PROBABLE CAUSE, AT LEAST HE WOULD HAVE GIVEN IT TO THE CITIZENS TO MAKE THE DECISION PROPER CAUSE XIRSED AT A GRAND JURY AND THEY COULD HAVE INDICTED OR NOT INDICTED, RIGHT? AND HE DIDN’T DO THAT >> RIGHT THERE WAS NO GRAND JURY ON THAT >> HAVE YOU EXAMINED IF THERE’S

ANY STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON THE FEDERAL SIDE OF ANY CRIMINAL CHARGES? >> NO, NOT — >> BECAUSE THE FEDS HAVE A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS >> WE’VE NOT UNDERTAKEN ANY ANALYSIS OF FEDERAL CRIMINAL — >> AND WE KNOW THERE’S NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON — >> THAT >> YOU REST YOUR CASE? YOU WOULD YOU LIKE TO SUM UP? >> WHEN I GOOD OAT COURT TV — >> CAN WE GET YOU ON THE JURY? >> NO, BUT I’LL PUT A ROBE ON AGAIN YOU DID WELL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I KNOW THAT WE’VE TALKED — I DID HAVE SOME PREP FOR HIM I DID NOT GET OFFMARKS, PER SE — SOME OF THE QUESTIONS YOU WERE IN THE PREPARED FOR AND YOU ANSWERED THEM TO MY SATISFACTION I THINK THAT, AS I SAID LAST TIME, IT WAS PROBABLY — IT JUST — I WOULD TOO NEW I FAULT MYSELF, I JUST COME ON COUNCIL THAT MONTH AND PERHAPS IT JUST — AND THEN IT JUST GREW AND I DON’T THINK WE EVER GOT IT, BUT THE INVESTIGATION IS THERE I APPRECIATE IT THAT IS A — YOU HAVE A BIG STAFF THAT I DO BELIEVE IN AND I THINK SOME OF THE ISSUES I’VE RAISED TODAY, I DO STAND ON, AND THAT’S COMMUNICATION WITH THE PROSECUTOR AND WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE DONE AND I TOLD YOU THAT, AND EVEN PERHAPS TRYING TO GET THE INDICTMENTS OURSELVES, GOING DOWN THERE NEXT WEDNESDAY AND TESTIFYING BEFORE A GRAND JURY IF WE DIDN’T HAVE SUPPORT OF THE COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY ON IT BUT I DO APPRECIATE YOUR HONESTY, YOUR FORTHRIGHTNESS IN YOUR ANSWER AND YOUR STAFF’S >> YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE (INAUDIBLE) COUNCIL MEMBERS AROUND THE TABLE, I THINK MOST EARLY ON, AT LEAST I DID, BELIEVE THAT A COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY, CITY ATTORNEY INVESTIGATION WOULD LEAD TO A RESOLUTION THAT WE ALL, YOU KNOW, THAT WE COULD TAKE SOLACE IN WHO KNEW THAT IT WOULD EXTEND THIS WAY SO WE DO HAVE SOME — WE HAVE SOME LEGAL ACTIONS GOING ON RIGHT NOW, AND IF THAT DOESN’T HELP, WE CAN COME BACK AND REVISIT THE REQUEST >> WE CAN TALK SOME MORE I CAN TALK SOME MORE >> I WANTED TO ASK AGAIN, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD GET A SECOND OPINION FROM ANOTHER COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY FROM OUTSIDE OF NORFOLK TO LOOK AT THIS? WHERE IT’S NOT IN THE CITY? >> I THINK THAT, BERNARD, I THINK THE KEY IS RIGHT NOW, PART OF THE PROBLEM IS WE’RE IN IFL LITIGATION AND CIVIL LITIGATION, WHEN YOU HAVE A DOUBLE ROLE OF CRIMINAL LITIGATION AND CIVIL LITIGATION RUNNING HAND-IN-HAND, IT BECOMES AN EXTREMELY COMPLEX MATTER I DO THINK IT’S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT AMONGST OURSELVES I’D LIKE TO TALK TO BERNARD ABOUT IT, AND EVEN, YOU KNOW, SEE WHERE THE DISCUSSIONS DO GO WITH THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE ON SOME OF THIS ESPECIALLY — AND THE REASON I SAY THIS IS, ESPECIALLY READING THE AMENDED COMPLAINT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN DISAGREE AND AGREE TO DISAGREE WITH JUDGES WHO HAVE ISSUES ON DEMURRER THIS PLEADING IS VERY WELL WRITTEN ONE OF THE BETTER ONES I’VE — AND PAUL, I THINK YOU WOULD AGREE, ONE OF THE BETTER ONES I’VE EVER READ BUT IT DOES, IN MY MIND, LAY OUT CRIMINAL CONDUCT AND IT TAKES IT AND SUMMARIZES, AND IT MAY NOT BE CRIMINAL CONDUCT ON ALL THE INDIVIDUALS I’M NOT SAYING THAT I DO THINK IT LAYS IT OUT ON ONE INDIVIDUAL FOR SURE IN PARTICULAR, AND I THINK THAT’S WHERE WE NEED TO FOCUS OF ANY PROSECUTION IF IN THE FUTURE IT OCCURS, BUT I THINK THAT’S SOMETHING WE NEED TO DO AND DISCUSS IN PRIVATE AND SEE WHERE WE GO I DON’T THINK IT’S — THAT REALLY IS SOMETHING, WHEN IT COMES TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, WE DISCUSS IN OPEN AREAS YOU CAN’T BECAUSE I THINK PART OF IT, IT INVOLVES, OF COURSE, OTHER ISSUES, BUT I THINK THAT THE PLEADING IS WELL DONE >> THANK YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND [ LAUGHTER ] MARCUS, YOU WERE GOING TO NOW TALK ABOUT (INAUDIBLE) >> YES, OKAY WITH THAT SEGUE, IT IS THIS NEXT PRESENTATION ABOUT THE NEXT STEP AS RELATED TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD WHAT I’D LIKE TO DO IS REALLY FOCUS ON, YOU KNOW, TWO ISSUES AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION ONE IS THAT — ONE OF OUR MAIN CONCERNS IS JUST THE CONCEPT OF BEING WELL-MANAGED GOVERNMENT AND THAT’S NOT JUST THE ADMINISTRATION, BUT ANYBODY WHO IS RECEIVING PUBLIC FUNDS THAT COME FROM THE CITY, AND AS WE GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, YOU WILL SEE WHY I START OFF WITH THAT PREMISE IT’S VERY IMPORTANT, BECAUSE MANY TIMES THE LINE BLURS ABOUT WHAT IS A CITY DEPARTMENT VERSUS WHAT IS NOT A CITY DEPARTMENT THE OTHER ASPECT THAT’S VERY

IMPORTANT IS WHEN IT’S ALL SAID AND DONE, WHAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO YOU TONIGHT IS TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A SYSTEM WHERE SERVICES ARE BASED ON THE BEST SERVICE DELIVERY MODEL WE CAN’T LOSE SIGHT OF THE CLIENT IN OTHER WORDS, THOSE INDIVIDUALS WITH MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES, SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUES SO EVERYTHING IS GEARED TOWARD A WELL-MANAGED ORGANIZATION NOT LOSING SIGHT OF THE CLIENT IN TERMS OF THE OVERVIEW, BASICALLY WHAT WE’RE GOING TO DO IS PROVIDE YOU WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FROM WHAT WE HAD AS A WORK GROUP AND I’LL EXPLAIN THE INDIVIDUALS ON THE WORK GROUP, BUT THE WORK GROUP HAD A MANDATE, IT HAD SOME RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT ALSO THE WORK GROUP STOPPED AT A CERTAIN POINT AND THAT’S WHERE THE ADMINISTRATION PICKS UP THE ADMINISTRATION HAS RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO THE STRUCTURE AND ISSUES THAT WE MAY HAVE TO ADDRESS MOVING FORWARD BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A STRUCTURE THE WORK GROUP COMPOSITION, I’M VERY PROUD OF THE GROUP THAT WE PULLED TOGETHER BASICALLY WE HAD EIGHT INDIVIDUALS AND THEN MAUREEN WAS PART OF THE WORK GROUP AS WELL AS MYSELF BUT, YOU WANT, THE REASON I TALKED ABOUT THESE — YOU KNOW, THE REASON I TALKED ABOUT THESE EIGHT INDIVIDUALS IT WASN’T JUST CITY STAFF WE WENT BASICALLY ACROSS THE STATE WE HAD THE DP OF MEDICAL STAFFS, THE NEXT THREE INDIVIDUALS ARE, WHAT I RECALL CSB DIRECTORS FROM VARIOUS TYPES OF CSBs FROM ACROSS THE STATE BOTH THE DIRECTOR OF THE HAMPTON NEWPORT NEWS CSB THAT’S AN OPERATIONAL CSB, WE’LL TALK ABOUT THAT LATER, BUT IT GOES ACROSS JURISDICTIONS THE DIRECTOR OF THE RICHMOND BEHAVORIAL HEALTH AUTHORITY, AS WELL AS THE DIRECTOR FROM THE HENRICO AREA, WHAT I CALL CSB AGAIN, WE HAD CLIENTS, PEOPLE WHO RECEIVED SERVICES WE HAD THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE, WE HAD THE PLANNING COUNCIL, AND ALSO WE HAD STAFF FROM THE CITY AUDITOR’S OFFICE ACTUALLY THE CITY AUDITOR SAT IN ON A NUMBER OF MEETINGS AS WELL AS THE PAST CHAIR FOR CSB, SO AGAIN, THE WORK GROUP WAS I THINK A BLUE-RIBBON GROUP THAT CAME TOGETHER AND GAVE US GREAT INFORMATION I REQUESTED THE WORK GROUP DO FOUR THINGS ONE, BASICALLY LOOK AT THE BEST ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR THE CSB ALSO WHAT WOULD BE A GOOD STRUCTURE FOR THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES WHAT’S VERY IMPORTANT AS WE’RE LOOKING FORWARD, HOW CAN THE CSB ADAPT TO CHANGING ROLES IN OTHER WORDS, THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT ARE CHANGING AND HOW CAN WE POSITION THEMSELVES AND MOST IMPORTANTLY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HOW WE POSITION THEMSELVES FOR THE FUTURE WE HAD A SERIES OF PRESENTATIONS FROM CSB DIRECTORS AT THE TIME ABOUT BEST PRACTICES FROM ACROSS THE STATE FROM THE OTHER CSB DIRECTORS AS WELL AS WE HAD PAULA GUILDING WHO CAME DOWN FROM STATE WHO BASICALLY TALKED WITH US ABOUT HISTORY OF CSBs AND SOME THINGS THAT WE SHOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT MOVING FORWARD IT WAS EXCELLENT FEEDBACK WE MET MONTHLY AND IN THE AUGUST TO OCTOBER TIME FRAME WE HAVEN’T DISBANDED THE GROUP AND I’LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT THAT LATER WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT THE WORK GROUP HAS DECISION-MAKING MODEL AND RIGHT OUT FRONT, THEY BASICALLY SAID THAT, LOOK, MARCUS, WE DON’T BELIEVE THAT THE BEST USE OF OUR TIME TO TELL YOU OR RECOMMEND TO YOU WHAT IS THE BEST STRUCTURE FOR A CSB THAT’S REALLY WHAT WORKS BEST FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT, AND THAT’S REALLY GOING TO BE YOUR COUNCIL’S DECISION WITH YOUR INPUT, BUT THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY WE CAN HELP YOU WITH SOME OTHER AREAS SO THAT WE CAN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT BEST PRACTICES AND MAKE SURE THAT YOU’RE LOOKING AT WHAT’S BEST FOR YOUR LOCALITY SO IT WAS VERY GOOD — IN OTHER WORDS, WE HAD MEMBERS FROM THREE DIFFERENT CSBs, THREE DIFFERENT STRUCTURES, AND I DON’T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THEY DIDN’T WANT TO TAKE SHOTS AT EACH OTHER AT THE TABLE, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THEY BASICALLY SAID THAT ISSUE NUMBER ONE IS SOMETHING THAT IS BEST FOR THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO DECIDE SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY HAD WAS BASICALLY ESTABLISH A GENERAL AGREEMENT AS I TALK WITH YOU TONIGHT, YOU’RE GOING TO SEE THAT THE LINES HAVE BEEN BLURRED IN SOME AREAS WHEN IT COMES TO FINANCE AND I.T. AND HUMAN RESOURCES IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT’S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY, WHAT’S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CSB, AND THEN SOMETHING THAT THE WORK GROUP CAUGHT ON TO VERY QUICKLY AND THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS THAT YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT YOU COME TO SOME AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNCIL AND THE BOARD ABOUT THE MUTUAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ONE OF THE, I THINK ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAME FROM THE WORK GROUP WAS TO BASICALLY ENHANCE THE PERFORMANCE CONTRACT PROCESS ADAM MENTIONED IT A COUPLE TIMES TONIGHT, BUT TO MAKE A LONG STORY SHORT, EACH YEAR THE COUNCIL APPROVES THE PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT I CAN RECALL WHEN WE APPROVED

IT, WHEN YOU APPROVED IT LAST, PAUL, THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, REALLY WHAT DOES THE AGREEMENT DO AS WE TALK TO THE DIFFERENT CSB DIRECTORS, THEY SAID, WELL, APPENDIX A IS REALLY THE ROADMAP YOU CAN REALLY, IN THAT PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT, OUTLINE WHAT’S IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY, WHAT’S IMPORTANT FOR THE COUNCIL, WHAT ARE THE OUTCOMES THAT YOU WANT, AND IT BECOMES, AGAIN, THE ROADMAP BETWEEN — OR GREEPT BETWEEN THE CITY — AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE CSB AND NOT NEGATIVE SOMETHING THAT IS PERFUNCTORY SO AGAIN, THAT IS IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF RECOMMENDATION THEY SAID THAT ALSO, BEFORE THE APPROVAL OF THE PERFORMANCE, CONSIDER THE AGREEMENT, THERE SHOULD BE A DISCUSSION ABOUT IT IN OTHER WORDS, YOU COULD HAVE A SESSION, COUNCIL HAVE A SESSION WITH THE BOARD TO REAL OUTLINE WHAT THE AGREEMENT IS AS OPPOSED TO JUST A VOTE SO AGAIN, VERY GOOD RECOMMENDATIONS ONE OF THE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE WORK GROUP SAID WE SHOULD FOCUS ON, THE COUNCIL SHOULD FOCUS ON, IS TO EXAMINE THE CITY CODE AND THE BOARD COMPOSITION BASICALLY, IF YOU GO BACK TO WHEN THE STATE HAD ALL OF THE CITIES DECLARE WHAT TYPE OF BOARD THEY WOULD HAVE, JULY 1998, BASICALLY ALL OF THE JURISDICTIONS, 130-PLUS JURISDICTIONS ACROSS THE STATE HAD TO MAKE A DECISION WHETHER THEY WOULD BE AN OPERATING CSB OR ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY CSB, WHICH I’LL TALK ABOUT IN DETAIL LATER, AND IT SEEMS THAT THAT PROCESS OCCURRED HERE IN NORFOLK, THAT IT WAS MORE OR LESS STATUS QUO IT REALLY WASN’T A DISCUSSION ABOUT, WELL, WHAT DO WE WANT FROM THE CSB, WHAT DO WE WANT FROM THE CITY IN TERMS OF MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITIES THEY ALSO SAID TAKE A LOOK, MAKE SURE YOUR CODE IS UP TO DATE WE LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, SOME AREAS OF THE CODE THAT WE THINK THAT WE CAN IMPROVE UPON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT OCCURRED IN DIFFERENT CITIES WERE THAT THERE WAS A MEMBER FROM THE CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE ACTUALLY ON THE CSB BOARD THERE WAS SOME CITIES WHERE YOU HAVE A MEMBER FROM COUNCIL THAT’S ACTUALLY ON THE CSB BOARD, BUT THOSE WERE SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAME FROM THE WORK GROUP ONE OF THE BIG ONES WAS, FOR THE BOARD AND COUNCIL TO HAVE A GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT ARE THE NEEDS OF THE BOARD IN TERMS OF PERSONNEL WHAT KIND OF SKILL HE SAIDS SHOULD COME TO THE — SKILL SETS SHOULD COME TO THE BOARD, AND BASICALLY THE BOARD IS GREAT IN TERMS OF COLLABORATION AND COMMUNICATION WITH THE ADMINISTRATION AND THE BOARD, THE CODE SETS UP THAT YOU HAVE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN SIX AND 18 MEMBERS OUR CITY CODE, THE CODE OF VIRGINIA, WENT FROM 6 TO 18 AND OUR CITY CODE ELEMENT OF LIMITS IT TO 15 I THINK THERE ARE TWO VACANCIES RIGHT NOW, BUT FOR THE MOST PART, THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES ONCE AGAIN TO HAVE DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD ABOUT THE SKILL SETS NEEDED AS WELL AS POIMENT APPOINTMENT — POTENTIAL APPOINTMENT POSSIBILITIES ON THE NEXT SLIDE ABOUT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE, I MENTIONED PAULA GILDING FROM THE STATE AGAIN, HE CAME AND HAD A VERY GOOD CONVERSATION WITH US AND HE LEFT US WITH THREE KEY POINTS, AND THAT IS THAT THERE SHOULD BE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE INTEGRATION OF BEHAVORIAL HEALTH AND PRIMARY CARE THAT’S GOING TO BE CRITICAL TO ANY CSB HE ALSO SAYS THAT THERE’S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US IN THE CITY TO BETTER COORDINATE BETWEEN AGENCIES AND ULTIMATELY WHAT WE’RE DISCUSSING IS SERVICE DELIVERY, THAT MAYBE IT’S NOT JUST FOCUSING ON THE CSB WHAT ARE SOME SIMILAR SERVICES THAT ARE HAPPENING ACROSS THE BOARD AND THEN LASTLY, HE LEFT WITH US A NOTE SAYING THAT WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH MANAGED CARE, BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE CHANGES THAT ARE COMING DOWN THAT WILL IMPACT US, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT LATER THE ADMINISTRATION, SO THAT’S WHERE THE WORK GROUP ENDED IT BASICALLY SAID, WE WON’T I HAVE YOU A RECOMMENDATION ABOUT YOUR BOARD STRUCTURE, BUT WE WILL GIVE YOU SOME BEST PRACTICES AND WE’LL KEEP THE LINES OF COMMUNICATION OPEN I DO AGREE THAT IT’S NOT A UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED STRUCTURE NOT GOING TO COME IN TONIGHT AND SAY THIS IS THE BEST THING WE CAN DO, BUT WHAT I WILL DO, TALK TO YOU ABOUT SOME OF THE DIFFERENT LOCALITIES AND WHY THOSE STRUCTURES WORK IN THOSE LOCALITIES AND WHY I’M GOING TO SUBMIT A RECOMMENDATION TO YOU TONIGHT I WANT TO START BY TALKING ABOUT BOARD STRUCTURE THERE ARE TWO REAL KEYBOARD STRUCTURES WE HAVE AN OPERATING BOARD HERE IN NORFOLK BASICALLY, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS PROVIDES THE SERVICE AND THE STAFF REPORTS TO THE BOARD THE STAFF — THE BOARD HIRES ITS OWN STAFF THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES THROUGH IT’S OWN STAFF AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY BOARD, IN THIS ARRANGEMENT, THE BOARD SETS THE POLICY BUT THE STAFF WORK FOR THE LOCAL JURISDICTION THERE ARE TWO OTHER OUTLIERS, BASICALLY A POLICY ADVISORY

BOARD WHICH THERE ARE NO OPERATIONAL POWERS, AND THEN THERE’S ALSO THE BEHAVIOR AND HEALTH AUTHORITY, AND THAT NEEDS TO BE PROVIDED BY THE STATE THERE ARE THREE JURISDICTIONS THAT HAVE THAT CAPACITY THEY’RE CHESTERFIELD, RICHMOND AND VIRGINIA BEACH, BUT ONLY RICHMOND CHOOSES TO BE A BEHAVORIAL HEALTH AUTHORITY IT’S VERY CLOSE TO A FREIGHTING CSB AND I’LL TALK ABOUT THESE IN MORE DENAIL IN THE NEXT SLIDE SOME OF THE DIFFERENCES IS THEY CAN MAKE LOANS SO AGAIN, BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AUTHORITY IS DIFFERENT THAN THE VAST MAJORITY OF CSB STRUCTURES ACROSS THE STATE WHAT I’LL DO IS THROW OUT THREE NUMBERS AND WE CAN LOOK AT THE CSB STRUCTURES 40, 28, AND 10 SO WE HAVE 40 CSBs ACROSS THE COMMONWEALTH 130-PLUS LOCALITIES, SO THAT SUGGESTION THERE ARE A NUMBER — SUGGESTS THERE ARE A NUMBER OF MULTIPLE JURISDICTION CSBs SO ON THE FAR LEFT, YOU WILL SEE OPERATING BOARDS BASICALLY YOU HAVE OF THOSE 40, 18 CSBs ARE OPERATING BOARDS YOU GET THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF THE BOARD SETTING POLICY AND THE STACH WORKING — STAFF WORKING FOR THE BOARD I’M GOING TO PICK OUT TWO ANO, MA’AM MALIS AND REDUCE IT TO ONE IN A SECOND WHEN YOU START TO LOOK AT THE 28 OPERATING BOARDS, ALL ARE MULTI-JURISDICTION WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TWO, DICKINSON COUNTY AND NORFOLK CITY SO IF YOU WANT TO SAY THE ANO, MA’AM MALI, 26 OF THE 28 ARE MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL AND IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE YOU DON’T HAVE ONE COUNCIL THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EFFORTS OF THE CSB IT’S LIKE THE NEWPORT NEWS/HAMPTON DICKINSON COUNTY, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE FAMILIAR WITH DICK SIN CONIS THE, IT’S ABOUT 15,000 PEOPLE AND I DON’T THINK THAT’S THE RIGHT COMPARISON TO NORFOLK WITH ALMOST 243,000 PEOPLE AS WE TALKED WITH DICKINSON COUNTY, BASICALLY THEY WERE A PART OF A MULTI-JURISDICTION CSB AT ONE POINT AND THEY WENT TO THE SINGLE JURISDICTION AND THEY BASIC HAD SAID, OKAY, WE’RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE OPERATING BOARD STRUCTURE SO I CAN COME DIRECTLY TO NORFOLK WE ARE AN OUTLIER AGAIN, WE HAVE A SINGLE JURISDICTION, BUT WE’RE OPERATING THE CSB AS IF THEY ARE THE MULTI-JURISDICTION CSBs, WHICH IS THE VAST MAJORITY OF OPERATING BOARD THE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY BOARD, IF YOU START TO LOOK HERE, YOU WILL SEE THAT BASICALLY FOR THE MOST PART, IT’S ONE JURISDICTION, AND BECAUSE IT’S ONE JURISDICTION, THE BOARD SETS THE POLICY AND ALL THE STAFF WORK FOR THE ADMINISTRATION WE HAVE THREE OUTLIERS HERE, FAIRFAX, FALLS CHURCH, AND HENRICO AREA AND PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY SEVEN OF THE TEN, SINGLE JURISDICTION THE OTHER THREE, WHILE THEY’RE MULTIPLE JURISDICTION, IT’S LIKE ONE BIG LOCALITY AND TWO SMALL ONES SO IN OTHER WORDS, FAIRFAX, FALLS CHURCH, FAIRFAX COUNTY, 1.1 MILLION CITY OF FAIRFAX, 23,000 AND FALLS CHURCH 12,000, SO BASICALLY ALL OF THE ACTIVITY IS HAPPENING IN THE BIG LOCALITY, FAIRFAX COUNTY, SO AGAIN, WE CAN SAY IT’S A LITTLE DIFFERENT, MULTI JURISDICTIONAL, BUT IT IS ONE BIG LOCALITY PROVIDING THE SERVICE AND I CAN GO THROUGH THE OTHER TWO, BUT FOR THE MOST PART IT’S THE SAME THING HENRICO, AND CHARLES CITY ARE THE TWO SMALLER ONES AND BETWEEN THEM, THEY BARELY HAVE 25,000 SO AS YOU START TO LOOK AT THE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY, THE CSB STRUCTURE, IT’S FOR THE MOST PART IN ONE LOCALITY AND IN THAT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY STRUCTURE, THAT ONE LOCALITY HAS A BOARD THAT SETS POLICY, BUT ALL OF THE STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY MANAGER OR TO THE CAO OF THE COUNTY OR THE COUNTY — CITY OR THE COUNTY THE OPTIONS I PUT OUT TO YOU TONIGHT ARE BASICALLY THREE WEEK KEEP THE — WE CAN KEEP THE OPERATING BOARD STRUCTURE INTACT, UTILIZING RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE WORK GROUP IN OTHER WORDS, LOOK AT THE OPERATING AGREEMENT, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE I DON’T RECOMMEND THAT WE COULD DO OPTION TWO, WHICH IS INITIATE DIALOGUE WITH OTHER LOCALITIES TO BRING IT TO A MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL CSB I THINK THAT MAY ULTIMATELY BE A VERY GOOD OPTION FOR THE CITY WE JUST GOT SHARED SERVICES WITH VIRGINIA BEACH AND CHESAPEAKE I PUT THIS ON THE TABLE I’M NOT SURE THAT THIS WILL BE ONE THAT WE ULTIMATELY DO, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT’S GOING TO TAKE MULTIPLE STEPS AND WOULD TAKE MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS TO CREATE, AND THAT’S WHY MY RECOMMENDATION TO YOU TONIGHT IS OPTION THREE WHICH IS TO CHANGE THE CSB DESIGNATION TO ADMIN STRASIVES POLICY — ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY CSB AND CONVERT THE STAFF TO CITY EMPLOYEES AND THEN WE WOULD BE MUCH LIKE THE TEN I

IDENTIFIED PREVIOUSLY I WOULD SAY THERE’S A COUPLE THINGS WE NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE START TO LOOK AT THAT RECOMMENDATION ONE, THERE ARE REALLY THREE OPTIONS THAT YOU COULD LITERALLY BRING THE CSB IN AS A STAND-ALONE DEPARTMENT I’LL TELL YOU OF TEN CSBs THAT ARE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY, IT’S SPECIFICALLY ABOUT FIVE OF THEM HAVE THE CSB AS A STAND-ALONE DEPARTMENT AND THE OTHER FIVE HAVE A CSB HAS SOME TYPE OF DIVISION WITHIN HUMAN SERVICES SO AGAIN, THE OPTION ONE, STAND-ALONE DEPARTMENT, OPTION TWO IT WOULD BE SET UP WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES BUT AGAIN, I LIKE OPTION THREE, WHICH WOULD BE, AGAIN, WHAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE STATE IN TERMS OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND FOCUS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE DELIVERY MODEL I DON’T FOCUS ON JUST WHETHER THE CSB IS WITHIN HUMAN SERVICES OR A STAND-ALONE DEPARTMENT, BUT TO WHAT EXTENT WE CAN GO ACROSS DEPARTMENTS AND MAKE SURE THERE’S OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE’RE NOT REDUN DANCE IN THE DELIVERY — REDUNDANT IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES, BUT ULTIMATELY, THE TWO POINTS IN THE BEGINNING A WELL-MANAGED GOVERNMENT, AND TWO, THE FOCUS ON THE CLIENTS, THE PEOPLE WHO RECEIVE THE SERVICES ISSUES TO CONSIDER MOVING FORWARD, BASICALLY I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT THE CUSTOMERS AND CLIENTS, MAKE SURE THAT THE DELIVERY OF SERVICE — >> MARCUS? >> YES >> DID YOU WANT SOME FEEDBACK? >> SURE, SURE >> DOES ANYBODY — SEEMS TO ME LIKE HE SET OUT A VERY LOGICAL, YOU KNOW, MOVEMENT FORWARD OF HOW WE BRING THE CSB IN, AND I — YOU’RE THE PROFESSIONALS HERE I’M PREPARED TO EXCEPT YOUR RECOMMENDATION UNLESS SOMEBODY (INAUDIBLE) MOVE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION ANY OTHER — >> ON THE SHARED SERVICES, ONE OF THE OPTIONS YOU HAD, DOES ANY OF THE POTENTIAL — OF THE DIFFERENT WAYS WE DO IT, MAKE THAT UNDOABLE, HARDER, RATHER THAN EASIER SHOULD WE GO THAT WAY IF WE TRY TO MAKE SAVINGS BY SHARING — >> RIGHT AGAIN, ULTIMATELY, I THINK THAT’S THE RIGHT WAY TO GO IT’S JUST TIMING WHAT MAKES IT DIFFICULT IS THAT YOU HAVE TWO OF THOSE JURISDICTIONS THAT ARE ALREADY ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY CSBs, SO WE HAVE SINGLE-JURISDICTION THE CSB SETS THE POLICY, BUT THEY HAVE STAFF THAT WORK FOR THE CITY AT SOME POINT, THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE GO FROM, REALLY, AN ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY CSB BACK TO THEM BEING AN OPERATING CSB SO THAT WOULD BE SOMEWHAT OF A — >> I GUESS WHAT I’M SAYING, THE THREE OPTIONS, THEY HAVE GOT LESS — IF WE DECIDED TO DO THAT DOWN THE ROAD, MAKE THAT EASIER OR HARDER? >> I THINK IN THE SHARED SERVICES MODEL, I’M JUST SAYING — IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY, IT’S BEST IN TERMS OF THE OVERALL >> RIGHT, BUT THE THREE OPTIONS WITHIN HOW THE CITY TAKE IT, IS ANY OF THOSE UNWINDABLE, HARDER TO UNWIND IF WE WERE TO WORK WITH ANOTHER CSB? >> NOT IN MY (INAUDIBLE) >> LET ME ASK YOU, THEY COME IN, DOES THAT AFFECT OUR LIABILITY FUND THAT WE NORMALLY KEEP? DO WE HAVE TO INCREASE IT CONSIDERING THE SUITS THAT RESULT IN PATIENT DELIVERY? >> IT WOULD BE A DECISION THAT WE COULD MAKE WE MIGHT CONCLUDE THAT THAT WAS THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY CURRENTLY, THEY MAINTAIN INSURANCE >> RIGHT >> SO IT MAY BE THAT WE DO THIS FOR SCOPE WE HAVE A DISCRETE POLICY THAT COVERS SLIPS AND FALLS THERE BECAUSE — >> (INAUDIBLE) >> YEAH, SO THAT — BUT THAT WOULD BE ANALYSIS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO IF THEY CAME IN-HOUSE, WOULD IT BE COVERED BY OURSELF INSURANCE OR WHETHER WE WOULD — OUR SELF INSURANCE, OR WHETHER WE WOULD SEEK OUTSIDE INSURANCE IF IT WERE AVAILABLE JUST TO COVER THEIR ACTIVITIES GIVEN THE NATURE OF THEIR WORK, COMPARED TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, IT DOESN’T PRESENT AS MUCH LIABILITY >> WELL, I GUESS IN THE PHYSICIANS WHO DELIVER SERVICES, PRESCRIBE THE WRONG MEDICATION, THAT COMES UNDER HIS PERSONAL INSURANCE CARRIER FOR HIS MALPRACTICE? >> IF HE IS AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR, WHICH I THINK VIRTUALLY ALL — I DON’T KNOW IF WE HAVE ANY EMPLOYEES WHO PRESCRIBE I WOULD BE SURPRISED

AND THAT IS, OBVIOUSLY — I’LL JUST GO THROUGH IT QUICKLY, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES, AGAIN THE RISK LIABILITY, REAL ESTATE, YOU KNOW, LEGAL AND FINANCIAL ISSUES, YOU KNOW, AGREEMENTS, CONTRACT ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION IS JUST ADMINISTRATIVE AND PERSONNEL ISSUES, SO AT SOME POINT, IF I HAVEN’T SAID IT, I’LL SAY IT NOW, WHAT’S VERY IMPORTANT IS BRINGING THE CSB IN, IT’S VERY IMPORTANT THAT THERE IS — THAT WE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE EMPLOYEES, THE CSB EMPLOYEES ONE THING THAT STANDS OUT FOR ME IS THAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY IN THIS ASSIGNED CONTRIBUTION PLAN AND WE’RE IN A DEFINED BENEFIT PRAN WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE ANALYZE THIS, THAT WE ARE, AGAIN, KEEPING IN — TAKING BO ACCOUNT THOSE — INTO ACCOUNT THOSE EMPLOYEES BECAUSE WE CAN DEBATE A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN VERSUS A DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN ALL DAY LONG, BUT THE ISSUE IS ULTIMATELY THERE COULD BE SOMEBODY WHO’S DOING A JOB TODAY AND DOING THE SAME JOB TOMORROW, THAT IF WE DON’T GO ABOUT THIS IN A THOROUGH WAY, THEY COULD HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT TO THEM BECAUSE OF GOING FROM ONE PLAN TO ANOTHER I THINK THAT IF THERE ARE NO QUESTION, I’D LIKE TO DO THE NEXT STEP, WHICH IS SLIDE 18 IT SAYS, I’D LIKE TO CONTINUE TO UTILIZE THE EXPERTISE FROM THE WORK GROUP THAT WE PULLED TOGETHER I THINK IT’S VERY IMPORTANT THAT, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATELY THAT WE BEGIN TO ENGAGE WITH THE CITY STAFF, CSB STAFF, TO BEGIN THE EVALUATION PROCESS I OUTLINED, YOU KNOW, HALF A DOZEN ISSUES THAT MAY BE OUT THERE, THERE COULD BE ANOTHER HALF A DOZEN ISSUES I’D LIKE TO FULLY VET THOSE ISSUES WITHIN THE NEXT 30 DAYS AND BE ABLE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL, NOT NECESSARILY WITH A RECOMMENDATION, BUT IF WE CAN SET THEM OUT, MAYBE AS PROPOSED ORDINANCE, WE CAN GIVE YOU AN UPDATE AT THE FEBRUARY 7th, WE’RE HAVING A WORKSHOP, WORK SESSION THERE, AND WITH THE AIM TO HAVE A FINAL PRESENTATION — OR EXCUSE ME, A FINAL RESOLUTION TO YOU BY THE END OF THE MONTH SO WHAT I’D LIKE TO DO IS, WITH YOUR AGREEMENT TODAY, START TO MOVE FAST-FORWARD BECAUSE IT SEEMS THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT THING FOR US TO DO IT’S JUST GETTING ALL THE PLAYERS AROUND THE TABLE TO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND ANY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, AND I’M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL JULY 1 THIS MAY BE A SITUATION THAT IF WE CAN IRON THE ISSUE OUT, THERE COULD BE THE IMMEDIATE BRINGING IN OF THE CSB [ INAUDIBLE COMMENTS ] >> (INAUDIBLE) PRESENTATION, I APPRECIATE IT IT MAY BE A LITTLE LONG, BUT IT LAYS IT ALL OUT IN AN UNDERSTANDABLE WAY THANK YOU AND THE STAFF AND THE WORK GROUP >> OKAY TAKE A DEEP BREATH BEFORE WE GO ON? >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT >> OKAY, WHY DON’T WE GET — >> IS HE OUT THERE IN THE HALLWAY? >> HE’S HANDING OUT CARDS >> I’M GOING TO HAVE HIM REPRESENT ME IN SOMETHING SO HE WON’T GET — >> IS HE ON — IF HE’S ON THE DEFENSE SIDE >> COME ON, GUYS LET’S COME ON >> OKAY LET’S GET STARTED >> YES, SIR [ INDISCERNIBLE CROSSTALK ] >> NE’ER AND COUNCIL — MAYOR AND COUNCIL, NOW I’LL GO OVER THE MID YEAR UPDATE IN TERMS OF THE CITY’S FINANCES I WILL SAY THAT THIS YEAR IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT TYPICALLY WE GIVE YOU A LOT OF ECONOMIC DATA I’D LIKE TO JUST SAVE THAT FOR THE FINANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE ONE, BECAUSE THERE’S GOING TO BE A BUNCH OF FOLKS SMARTER THAN ME GIVING THAT FORECAST TOMORROW AND WE’D LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE INFORMATION FROM THEM I WILL SAY THAT WE ARE PUTTING INTO PLACE A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS TO HELP US MORE SO

IN THE ECONOMIC FORECASTING SIDE, A GROUP THAT ACTUALLY ARE GOING TO HAVE THE CHIEF ECONOMIST FOR THE GOVERNOR COME DOWN THIS NO AND TALK WITH US — THIS MONTH AND TALK WITH US, BOTH PULLING SOME BUSINESS LEADERS FROM THE AREA AND AN ECONOMIST FROM ODU AND ALSO NORFOLK STATE, SO THAT’S GOING TO BE KEY TYPICALLY YOU SEE A LOT OF ECONOMIC DATA I WON’T DO IT AT THIS MEETING WE’LL DO IT AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING THERE ARE REALLY FOUR KEY AREAS HERE WE’LL TELL YOU WHERE WE ENDED UP IN 2011, TALK ABOUT WHERE WE ARE IN 2012 TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT 2013, AND WE’LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SOCIETY OF — BASICALLY, 2011, AGAIN, THE PERIOD ENDING JUNE 30th, AND WE START OFF WITH THE BUDGET YOU WILL RECALL THAT THE APPROVED BUDGET WAS ABOUT 5% LESS THAN THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND IT WAS THE SECOND CONSECUTIVE DECLINE IN THE APPROVED BUDGET SINCE THE EARLY ’90s ONE OF THE KEY ISSUES AT THAT POINT WAS THAT REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENTS FELL A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN 3% THE FIRST DECLINE SINCE THE MID ’90s, BUT IF YOU START TO JUST FOCUS ON THIS CHART, WHAT YOU REALLY IS THAT — AND WE’LL DO THIS AND I’LL MAKE COMPARISONS BETWEEN 2007 AND 2013, BUT ALSO MAKE SOME COMPARISONS BETWEEN 2007 AND 2011 YOU START TO LOOK AT THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET, AGAIN, THE BUDGET IN 2007 WAS ABOUT 266 MILLION THEN YOU HAVE THREE YEARS OF GROWTH BY THE TIME — YES, $766 MILLION BY THE TIME YOU GET TO 2011, YOU’RE AT 785, AROUND THE 786 MILLION MARK, GROWTH, BUT THAT DOESN’T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE BER VEENG YEARS — INTERVENING YEARS WHERE BASIC IN 2009 YOU WERE UP TO ABOUT $827 MILLION THAT’S ABOUT A $40 MILLION DROPOFF IN TERMS OF THE BUDGET OVER THAT TWO-YEAR PEERED YOD AND THAT’S SIGNIFICANT WHEN YOU START TO LOOK AT JUST THE ACTUAL, THAT’S YOUR BUDGET AND YOU START TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL REVENUE THAT WE GOT, THAT REFLECTED IN 2011, IT WAS ABOUT 5 MILLION BELOW THE ESTIMATE I DON’T KNOW IF — DR. HARRISON IS HERE, THE FORECASTER FOR THE CITY, AND I SAY THIS IN A VERY NICE WAY, A 2% FORECAST WAS A GOOD FORECAST BUT WHEN YOU START TO LOOK AT, WITHIN 2%, IT’S GOOD, BUT WHEN YOU START TO LOOK AT $800 MILLION, BEING OFF 2% IS NOT THAT GOOD OKAY? SO IN TERMS OF THE FORECAST, IT’S A GOOD FORECAST, YOU KNOW, REVENUE WAS DOWN ABOUT A HALF A PERCENT LESS THAN WE EXPECTED, REFLECTED, ABOUT A HALF PERCENT LESS, WHICH IS ABOUT $5 MILLION CLEARLY THE IMPACT ON FUNDS COMING FROM THE STATE AND A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE REVENUE THE GOOD NEWS, IF THERE IS GOOD NEWS, FOR THE MOST PART, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT HUMAN SERVICES OR EVEN SCHOOLS, IT’S TYPICALLY A CORRESPONDING DECLINE, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE, 2011, REVENUE WAS ABOUT $5 MILLION LESS THAN EXPECTED I WILL SAY THAT IT’S IMPORTANT, WITH 2011, WE SAW — BEGIN TO SEE LOCAL TAXES RECOVER SO AND I HOPE THAT’S NOT TOO TINY BEHIND YOU, BUT IF YOU GO INTO YOUR TOP LEFT-HAND CORNER, SALES TAX, THE FIRST TIME SINCE 2007, YOU SAW GROWTH SO GROWTH IN SALES TAX MEALS TAX, FIRST TIME SINCE 2008 YOU SAW GROWTH HOTEL TAX, ALSO INCREASED FIRST TIME SINCE 2007 YOU SEE GROWTH THERE AND THEN EVEN ADMISSIONS TAX, YOU SEE GROWTH THE REASON I TALKED ABOUT 2007 TO BEGIN WITH, EVEN THOUGH WE GREW OVER 2010, WE STILL IN MANY AREAS ARE NOT AT THE 2007 LEVEL SO IN OTHER WORDS, SALES TAX IN 2007 REFLECTED $32 MILLION, AND IN 2011, ONLY 28 MILLION SO IN OTHER WORDS, YES, WE GREW OVER 2010, BUT WHEN YOU GO BACK TO, IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT THE PEAK IN THE LAST, YOU KNOW, FIVE, SIX YEARS, WE STILL AREN’T AT THAT 2007 LEVEL I CAN SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT FOOD AND BEVERAGE TAX, APPROXIMATELY FLAT, BUT STILL NOT AT THAT LEVEL HOTEL, MOTEL TAX, ABOUT 14% DOWN FROM 2007, SAME THING WITH ADMISSIONS AGAIN, THE GOOD NEWS IS WE GREW IN THESE KEY AREAS IN 2011, BUT THAT IS AFTER SEVERAL YEARS OF DECLINE I KNOW YOU SAY TAKE GOOD NEWS HOWEVER YOU CAN TAKE IT >> ADMISSIONS TAX, WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT WHEN WE’RE TALKING ABOUT — GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE >> YOU BUY A TICKET TO A CONCERT AND YOU HAVE — WE COLLECT, I BELIEVE IT’S 10% ADMISSIONS TAX ON THAT TICKET >> THAT’S WITH THE (INAUDIBLE) >> NO, THAT’S ANOTHER WHOLE CAN

OF WORMS ISSUE >> I THINK THE EMPHASIS THERE IS YOU HAVE (INAUDIBLE) SO THAT IF IT’S — [ ALL SPEAKING AT ONCE ] >> I THINK IT’S A — ELTON JOHN, I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES >> WE USED TO COLLECT IT AND WHEN TIMES GOT TOUGH FOR THEM, WE STOPPED COLLECTING, IT’S BEEN SORT OF A — SOME OF THEM DO, SOME OF THEM DON’T ALL THE YOOMPT I THINK AROUND THE — UNIVERSITIES I THINK AROUND THE COMMONWEALTH STILL COLLECT IT >> BUT WE HAVE ONE THAT WANTS A POLICE SAGES, IT WOULD BE — STATION, IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE WORK TOGETHER MAYBE THEY CAN START COLLECTING IT I’M SERIOUS, TALK TO THEM ABOUT IT >> I’LL SAY THAT — I’M JUMPING AHEAD A LITTLE BIT, BUT I WILL SAY THAT THIS STORY CONTINUES IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, SO IN OTHER WORDS, WE’RE SEEING GROWTH IN THESE FOUR REVENUE AREAS AGAIN THROUGH THE FIRST FIVE MONTHS OF 2012, WHICH IS HUGE THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT >> BEFORE YOU GO, WHAT HAPPENED IN 2007 THAT THE ADMISSION TAX IS DOWN AT THAT POINT? >> I WILL HAVE TO GO AND LOOK >> THAT’S (INAUDIBLE) >> SO AGAIN, REMEMBER WITH THIS ADMISSION TAX, I’M NOT GOING TO SAY THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED, BUT YOU GET THE GREAT SHOWS, LIKE “THE LION KING” OR SOMETHING LIKE “WICKED,” IT’S REDIFFICULT TO GROW OVER THAT THE NEXT YEAR I HOPE THE SALES TAX IN 2012 IS SO GREAT AT THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR THAT WE’RE WORRIED ABOUT GROWING OVER IT IN 2013, BUT THAT’S AN EXPECTATION OF GREAT ECONOMIC ACTIVITY 2011, YOU LOOK ON THE BUDGET SIDE, ABOUT $20 MILLION ANDS A POSITIVE BEARING, SO IN OTHER WORDS, WHILE THERE WAS $786 MILLION IN THE EXPENDITURE SHORT, WE DIDN’T SPEND IT ALL NOW, I’LL TELL YOU THAT A PIECE OF THAT, ABOUT A THIRD OF IT, WHAT I MENTIONED EARLIER, WHEN YOU DON’T GET SOME REIMBURSEMENTS FROM THE STATE, WHETHER IT’S HUMAN SERVICES OR IF THE DOLLARS DON’T COME IN FOR SCHOOLS, AGAIN, THERE’S NOT A CORRESPONDING EXPENDITURE, SO I’LL SAY ROUGHLY A THIRD OF THAT IS REALLY PASS-THROUGH MONEY NOT COMING FROM THE STATE, BUT TWO-THIRDS OF IT IS LITERALLY THE STAFF I REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT THE STAFF DID THE STAFF BASICALLY SAID WE’RE TREATING THIS CITY AS IF IT WERE OUR OWN HOME AND WE’RE CUTTING OUT LIGHTS WHEN WE LEAVE THE ROOM, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, AND THEIR HARD WORK AND EFFORTS IS WHERE YOU GET TWO-THIRDS OF THE SAVINGS, SO THAT’S HUGE I WILL TELL YOU AN UPDATE FROM WHERE WE ARE IN SEPTEMBER BOTTOM LINE, AND I KNOW COUNCIL, WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT, I’M GOING TO TRY TO DO A BETTER JOB OF EXPLANATION THE BOTTOM LINE THAT IS WE ARE $9 MILLION — WE WERE $9 MILLION UP FROM 2011 IN OTHER WORDS, AFTER WE TAD TAKEN CARE OF ALL OUR OBLIGATIONS, WE HAD A POSITIVE SURPLUS, WHAT HAVE YOU, ABOUT $9 MILLION BASICALLY WHAT CHANGED BETWEEN SEPTEMBER AND TODAY OR WHEN WE FINALLY GOT THE BOOKS DONE IN DECEMBER WAS BASICALLY ABOUT T $2 MILLION IF YOU REMEMBER, WE WERE AT ABOUT THE $8 MILLION RANGE AND I SAID VERY IMPORTANT IF WE KEEP THE 5% RESERVE AT THE SAME LEVEL IT WAS LAST YEAR, THAT I’D LIKE TO KEEP $2 MILLION SET ASIDE FOR THAT, SO EVEN AFTER YOU DO THAT, THERE’S $9 MILLION THAT WE HAVE A POSITIVE BEARING FOR THE PERIOD ENDING JUNE 30, 2011, THAT AT THE RETREAT YOU SAID DON’T TOUCH IT JUST LEAVE IT THERE, MAKE SURE WE ARE PREPARED FOR 2013 NOW, I’LL SAY THAT’S AN EXCELLENT DECISION BECAUSE AT SOME POINT IN THIS PRESENTATION, WE’LL TALK ABOUT 20130 — 2013 AND THE CHALLENGES >> (INAUDIBLE) >> THAT’S THE 11 MILLION TO THE GOOD WE PUT 2 MILLION AWAY IN THE UNDESIGNATED FUND BALANCE AND WE HAVE $9 MILLION TOWARDS NEXT YEAR’S BUDGET >> OKAY >> SO WE CAN GO UP MID YEAR THIS IS A VERY — AGAIN, A VERY GOOD SLIDE AND I WILL GIVE STAFF CREDIT AND THE BUDGET, FINANCE, I.T., EVERYONE, IN TERMS OF LITERALLY HUNKERING DOWN AND SAYING HOW CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE ANY KIND OF SAVINGS WE CAN GET IN THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, WE’RE LOOKING AT 2013 AND WE WANT TO PROTECT JOBS SO WHERE CAN WE MAKE CHANGES RIGHT NOW THAT CAN HELP US? AND I’LL SAY THAT UNLIKE IN PREVIOUS YEARS WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT WE’RE TRACKING A $5 MILLION, YOU KNOW, SHORTFALL IN THE MIDDLE OF A FISCAL YEAR OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, WE’RE ACTUALLY TRACKING TO BE AGAIN IN THE POSITIVE TERRITORY AT JUNE 30, 2012, TO THE TUNE OF 5 TO 7 MILLION OKAY? >> THAT’S TAKING THE 9 MILLION DON’T USING IT? >> LEAVING THE 9 MILLION THERE

WE’RE SAYING SET THAT ASIDE WE GO TO HOW WE’RE GOING TO OPERATE IN 2012, AND AGAIN, RIGHT NOW, WE FEEL GOOD THAT WE CAN STILL HAVE ANOTHER SURPLUS, IF YOU WILL, AT THE END OF 2012 IN THE 5 TO $7 MILLION RANGE BUT LET ME TELL YOU, WE’RE DOING SOME THINGS, YOU KNOW, BACK IN THE FALL, THE BUDGET DIRECTOR SENT OUT MEMOS TO ALL THE DEPARTMENTS BASICALLY SAYING WE’RE GOING TO HAVE SOME SAVINGS STRATEGIES IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, SO THERE’S SOME THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IN THE ADMINISTRATION THAT WILL PRODUCE SAVINGS IN 2012 ABSENT THAT, WE WOULD NOT HAVE THIS TYPE OF SAVINGS I WILL SAY TWO PIECES THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE, WHILE WE’RE SAYING IT’S GOING TO BE TWO TO $3 MILLION LESS THAN ANTICIPATED, ABOUT $4 MILLION OF THAT IS RELATED TO A NEW WAY THAT THE STATE IS GOING TO HANDLE STATE CAREY IMPURSMENTS — CARE REIMBURSEMENTS NOTHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE PROGRAM, BUT INSTEAD OF THE STATE GIVING THE MONEY TO THE CITY AND THE CITY PROVIDING, IT’S GOING TO GO DIRECTLY TO THE PROVIDER SO IF I COUNT THAT 4 MILLION, WE’RE ACTUALLY TRACKING AHEAD REVENUE AT THIS POINT, WHICH IS HUGE SOME OF THOSE REVENUE SOURCES THAT YOU SAW, SALES TAX, MEALS TAX, AGAIN, THAT GROWTH IS CONTINUING THROUGH 2012 AGAIN, ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, WE’RE TRACKING TO, YOU KNOW 8 TO $10 MILLION UNDER BUDGET AND I’LL SAY THAT SAME $4 MILLION THAT’S GOING TO HURT ME ON THE REVENUE SIDE IS GOING TO HELP ME ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT UNLIKE IN PREVIOUS YEARS (INAUDIBLE) UNLIKE IN PREVIOUS YEARS, WE’RE TAKING TOES SAVINGS STRATEGIES THAT WE HAVE IN 2012 AND WE’RE GOING TO START 2013 JUST IMPLEMENTING THEM IN OTHER WORDS, NOT JUST ONE TIME SAVE IT HERE AND THEN LET’S RESET THE BUDGET AGAIN IN, YOU KNOW, AND YOU HAD WHAT YOU HAD AT THE BEGINNING OF THE FISCAL YEAR AND THAT’S VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE AT SOME POINT WE’RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT A STRUCTURALLY SOUND BUDGET AND WE NEED TO HAVE SOME ONGOING SAVINGS STRATEGIES AND NOT JUST GO THROUGH A FISCAL YEAR AND EVERY FALL, YOU KNOW, SEND OUT THE RED WARNING AND SAY, OKAY, WHAT CAN WE DO NO, WE NEED TO JUST CHANGE THE WAY WE DO BUSINESS I MENTIONED THIS EARLIER BASICALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MID YEAR UPDATE, TWO THINGS HAPPEN I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT TO SAY THAT IN TERMS OF BEING GOOD ON THE REVENUE SIDE, ONE PIECE OF IT IS THAT WHEN THIS BUDGET WAS BUILT, THE ASSUMPTION WAS THAT REAL ESTATE REVENUE WOULD DECLINE ALMOST 5%, 4.9 OR 5% WHEN THE NUMBERS CAME OUT FROM THE ASSESSOR, THEY WERE CLOSER TO 3.5% DECLINE, SO THAT IN AND OF ITSELF PROVIDED US SOME REVENUE WE DIDN’T THINK WE WOULD HAVE BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHAT I LIKE SEEING HERE ON THE GOOD NEWS FRONT IS AGAIN, THE SALES, MEALS, HOTEL, ADMISSIONS TAXES, THROUGH THE FIRST FIVE MONTHS OF THE FISCAL YEAR ARE STILL GROWING THEY’RE GROWING OVER THAT SAME PERIOD OF TIME IN 2011 NOW, HERE’S THE CHALLENGE THE CHALLENGE IS TO BEGIN WITH REAL ESTATE WE’LL GET MORE UPDATED NUMBERS FROM THE ASSESSOR, BUT RIGHT NOW, IT APPEARS THAT THE OVERALL, THE OVERALL REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENTS WILL DECLINE BETWEEN 2.5 TO 3% THAT WOULD BE THE THIRD YEAR OF DECLINE IN REAL ESTATE ASSESSED VALUES THAT’S UNHEARD OF TWO CONSECUTIVE YEARS WAS UNHEARD OF AND NOW WE’RE GOING INTO THE THIRD YEAR I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT OVERALL ASSESSED VALUES AND I DON’T THINK IT’S FAIR TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, AND I GO BACK TO 2002 WHEN OUR OVERALL REAL ESTATE ACITIESMENTS FOR — ASSESSMENTS WERE ABOUT 8 BILLION WHEN YOU GO TO 2010, OVERALL ASSESSMENTS WERE ABOUT 19 BILLION, SO EVEN THOUGH WE’VE THESE THREE YEARS OF DECLINE, IN 2012, OVERALL ASSESSMENTS ABOUT 18 BILLION 18 BILLION IS STILL TWICE AS MUCH AS OUR OVERALL ASSESSMENTS BACK IN 2002 SO WHILE WE’RE GOING THROUGH SOMETHING RIGHT NOW, IT DOESN’T DISCOUNT THAT THERE HAS BEEN A GREAT DEAL OF ASSESSED VALUE INCREASE IN THE CITY OVER THE LAST DECADE BUT THAT’S GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE TO US, FOR VARIOUS REASONS, AND ONE IS THAT REAL ESTATE VALUES HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR ABILITY TO ISSUE DEBT AND I’LL GET INTO THAT AND MAYOR, I DON’T KNOW HOW WE’RE DOING ON TIME I DON’T KNOW HOW — IF WE NEEDED SOMETHING TO (INAUDIBLE) I WILL SAY REAL ESTATE TAXES IS ABOUT 25% OF OUR OVERALL REVENUE AND I ALWAYS PUT THIS CHART IN BECAUSE AS THE REAL ESTATE ASSESSED VALUES INCREASE, WE GO BACK TO 2007, ALMOST 25%, AND AS

THOSE ASSESSED VALUES INCREASE, THE COUNCIL MADE A DECISION TO CUT THE RATE YOU WILL SEE THAT THE ASSESSED VALUES, AND WE GET TO 2006, ALMOST 70% INCREASE, AND 25% INCREASE OVER THE 17% INCREASE AND THAT’S WHY THE RATE GOES FROM ABOUT A DOLLAR-40 FOR $100 OF ASSESSED VALUE TO WHERE WE ARE IN 2011, BUT AGAIN, AS YOU START TO LOOK AT THE LAST THREE YEARS AND PROJECTION FOR 2013, UNCHARTED TERRITORY, THREE CONSECUTIVE YEARS OF NEGATIVE GROWTH ON THE NEXT SLIDE, PUT THIS INTO PERSPECTIVE, I GO BACK TO 2010 WHEN WE COLLECTED ABOUT $192 MILLION IN REVENUE RELATED TO ASSESSED REAL ESTATE, ABOUT 25% OF THE PORTFOLIO, IF THIS 2.5 TO 3% DECLINE HOLDS TRUE, WE’LL BE BACK TO 175 MILLION IN 2013, WHICH IS ABOUT $13 MILLION OFF OUR PEAK, SO YOU HAVE THE SITUATION OF THE DECLINING REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT REALLY HAVING A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR OVERALL BUDGET AND I’LL SKIP THAT SLIDE AND GO TO JUST A QUICK ASSESSMENT OF WHAT THAT MEANS WHEN YOU PART TO TALK ABOUT REAL ESTATE DECLINES WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THE TAXPAYER IF YOU LOOK AT 2010, THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER’S TAX BILL WAS ABOUT 25 — $2,570 IF WE HAVE ANOTHER DECLINE OF THIS MAGNITUDE IN REALLY ESTATE, THE BLENDED RATE IS 2.5 TO 3, PROJECTED TO BE 3.5% DOWN, THEN THE TAX BILL WOULD BE, INSTEAD OF BEING ALMOST 2600, WOULD BE CLOSER TO $2300, SO THAT’S ABOUT A $300 SAVINGS THAT’S TO AN INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYER, BUT TT CITY, WHAT — TO THE CITY, WHAT DOES THAT SAME MATH MEAN TO THE CITY? YOU GO BACK — AND FOR ONE IS SUGGESTING A REAL ESTATE TAX INCREASE AT ALL I’M JUST DOING THE MATHEMATICAL ASSESSMENT HERE TO GET BACK TO THAT $192 MILLION, HERE WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT OF THE TAX RATE BEING TEN CENTS HIGHER LET’S DO IT A DIFFERENT WAY AND I THINK THIS IS THE KEY POINT HERE THAT EVEN IF REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENTS GREW BY 3%, IN OTHER WORDS, TRYING TO MAKE UP THOSE THREE YEARS OF LOSSES, EVEN IF WE GREW BY 3% EACH YEAR AFTER 2013, IT WOULD TAKE ME UNTIL 2017 JUST TO MAKE UP WHAT WE’VE LOST IN THOSE THREE YEARS AND IF YOU LOOK AT IT THAT WAY, THAT WOULD BE ALMOST SEVEN YEARS OF WHAT I CALL BELOW-AVERAGE REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT GROWTH WHICH IS IN THE 6% RANGE SO THAT IS ONE OF OUR CHALLENGES GREAT NEWS ABOUT WHERE WE ARE IN 2012, BUT BECAUSE OF THIS, IT PUTS A STRAIN ON OUR ABILITY TO ADDRESS THE BUDGET I WILL GO — WE’RE ABOUT AT TIME I DO WANT TO SHOW YOU ONE THING THE 2013 PRELIMINARY GAP, UNLIKE IN THE PAST, I’M NOT GOING TO THROW A GAP OUT HERE AND SAY WE’VE GOT A PROBLEM SURE, IF I STARTED TO ADD UP ALL THE ISSUES AUTO THERE, I COULD START OUT WITH A GAP OF ABOUT 25 MILLION, BUT REMEMBER, WE HAVE $9 MILLION FROM ’11 WE’RE PROJECTING SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 5 TO 7 IN ’12 IF I PUT THOSE TWO TOGETHER, THE GAP CLOSES TO 7 IDENTIFY $5 MILLION — $7.5 MILLION I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE CAN SOLVE THAT GAP WHAT WE NEED TO KEEP ON THE RADAR IS IF WE SOLVE THAT, THAT DOESN’T MEAN THAT WE SOLVE ’14 RIGHT NOW, WHILE WE FEEL COMFORTABLE ABOUT ’13, THAT WE WILL CLOSE THAT GAP, ’14 BECOMES A PROBLEM BECAUSE WE CAN’T ASSUME THAT WE’RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE SURPLUSES AND BETTER YET, I DON’T THINK WE’LL HAVE TYPE TONIGHT, BUT I’D LIKE TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE TAKE THOSE SURPLUSES AND WE’RE PUTTING IT IN OUR 5% RESERVE, PUTTING IT IN OUR RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE, PUTTING IT IN OUR ECONOMIC, YOU KNOW, DOWNTURN LEVELING RESERVE AND I’M SURE PEOPLE SAY, EVERY TIME THEY GO INTO A RAINY DAY FUND, BUT THAT’S THE CONVERSATION I’D LIKE TO HAVE WITH COUNCIL AS WE POFD FORWARD, THAT WE CAN ADDRESS ’13, BUT MY CONCERN NOW IS ’14 AND HOW CAN WE MAKE SOME SYSTEMATIC CHANGES TODAY THAT MAKES ’14 MORE TOLL HER RABBLE I KNOW I HAVE — TOLERABLE I KNOW I HAVE MORE SLIDES, BUT IN RESPECT TO TIME >> I KNOW NEXT WEEK, WE’RE GOING TO MEET (INAUDIBLE) BUT ONCE THEY’RE GONE, WHY DON’T WE HAVE SOME OF THIS CONVERSATION AGAIN WOULD THAT BE OKAY? SO GET SOME OF THESE — BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE QUESTIONS I’D LIKE TO KNOW HOW ALL THIS — WHETHER YOU CALCULATED, YOU KNOW, THE SCHOOL SYSTEM’S NEEDS, AND WHETHER YOU’RE JUST TALKING ABOUT LEVEL FUNDING OR, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THAT’S GOING TO BE A CONCERN I MEAN, THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF THINGS WE HAVE IN OUR — OUR FOLKS HAVEN’T HAD PAY RAISES IN FOUR YEARS I MEAN, ALL OF THAT NEEDS TO GET

OUT ON THE TABLE AND THEN, YOU KNOW, HOW DO YOU AGGRESSIVELY DIVERSIFY THE ECONOMY? IF WE HAVE A DOWNTURN MAYBE IN DEFENSE SPENDING, WHAT ARE YOU — YOU MENTION WATERSIDE AS MAYBE ONE OF THOSE THINGS, BUT ONE OF THE WAYS THAT WE DOUBLE THE ASSESSED VALUE OF THIS CITY WOULD BE PRETTY AGGRESSIVE IN OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MAYBE WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT STRATEGIES THERE TOO >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT >> ALL RIGHT WE HAD A GREAT AFTERNOON >> GOOD JOB, MR. MANAGER CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY CAPTION ASSOCIATES, LLC www.captionassociates.com