Special Investigatory Committee on JEA - Apr 27, 2026

Good afternoon, and welcome to the Special Committee, Investigative Committee on JEA. Let's start with introductions to my far left. Colleen Hampsey, Council Research. Mary Stafopoulos, Office of General Counsel. Brian Parks, Council Auditor's Office. Kim Taylor, Council Auditor. Jason Teal, Council Legislative Council. Good afternoon, Rory Diamond District 13, the Beecher. Ron Salem, Group 2 at Large. Kevin Carrico, City Council District 4. Welcome, Mr. President. Glad to have you here. Council Member Pittman will be here momentarily, so let's just start going through the agenda. And on the expanded role of the sick, the committee received, here's Ms. Pittman, the committee received a memo from Council President Carrico and has asked us to look at the combined cycle. You okay? Okay. As well as the impact of the combined cycle on JEA's annual contribution to the city and JEA's financial stability and outlook causing the need to increase utility rates for JEA customers. I have some concern just about the timing of all this and maybe trying to set up some additional meetings, number one. And number two, received an email from General Counsel Fackler just a little while ago on this subject. And Mr. Thiel, would you like to comment on his email or help us understand the issues there? Sure. Through the chair of the committee. So the email was related to a nondisclosure agreement that JEA entered into with a bidder or a potential bidder, I guess, on a project. And it's called GE Vinova Operations, LLC. And part of that is, I guess, there's some confidential information that is part of that discussion or negotiations for the contract. And the concern that Mr. Fackler raised was that through this proceeding, they may inadvertently disclose some information or that's covered by the nondisclosure agreement. I did want to point out, though, that that is, well, first of all, that it's a valid concern. But the nondisclosure agreement actually has a provision in it that talks about compelled disclosure of confidential information. So it's not to say that they can't, and this proceeding would, in my opinion, fall into that category of compelled if that did come out. But what I would advise the committee is that go through your analysis in terms of the expanded charge. See, first of all, you probably haven't had it long enough to really have mapped out fully exactly what areas you want to get into. But leave it up to JEA to say, you know, during that testimony that this is something that we want to assert the privilege on. If the committee does desire or feels like it does need that information, first of all, I don't think you would based upon what's covered by this. But if there is that, there's a method to be able to handle that situation that's embedded in the NDA itself. So I don't think it should hamper you as far as your exploration of the expanded charge that you've been given. I think JEA can feel that it can assert that privilege, just like we dealt with with the Regina Ross situation. And then if in the given instance where it is asserted, if you feel like you do need to explore it more, then there's a path forward I think that we could cover if and when we need to. So please, and Mr. Fackler's here as well in case we want to pull him up if we need to. Yeah, I mean, look, I read the NDA. Obviously, I haven't read the contract that's covered by the NDA. It's 800 pages, and I just got that memo about 30 minutes ago. But from my point of view, this doesn't give me any heartburn because the stuff that is covered by an NDA is very narrow. The stuff that we need to do is high-end policy, figure out, is the city in a bad spot? If we happen to get down into one of those niches where it may cover not only, as Jason says, can we have Mr. Fackler can object or someone from JEA can assert the privilege, that's no big deal either. But it's not like we're in trial here. It's not like this is going 10,000 miles an hour. We can't just say timeout. Let's figure this out. Let's put this issue aside and just make sure that we don't get JEA in any bad spots. At the same time, we can do our duty to the citizens because they are worried about this. So this doesn't give me any heartburn, but I'm glad that we're being thoughtful. Thank you. It seems to me that the first thing we need is an explanation of a combined cycle, what it entails, why did we get into it, what was the analysis of JEA to pursue this, and that ought to be the opening meeting on this subject. Do you agree, Council Member Diamond or Council Member Pittman? Yeah, and the reason I mentioned it in our last meeting, I don't think this is any mystery to anybody, is that, you know, Plant Vogel left us with this hangover, which, you know, maybe Vogel is a great deal today. Maybe it's not. But since we had a huge decision that was made, and now we're hearing from employees at JEA that maybe this wasn't the best decision, that there might be issues with PSC, there might be issues down the road. It's just like, let's just get all the cards out on the table on this in a very general kind of way, and then we can figure out if there's stuff that we need to sharpen in on. In particular, I think the question is, how does this relate with PSC? And I do think that we need to get some sort of assurance from them that this isn't going to be a problem, because if it is, then it's a massive problem, right? That's huge. For those at JEA that may be listening back at headquarters, hopefully you can identify someone from the staff that could come before us and give us a basic understanding of combined cycle at a future meeting. I would ask JEA to identify who that person might be to answer all those types of questions. And Council Member Diamond and Pittman, it seems like that we might need to meet in addition to these every other Mondays, and is there a time that would be better for y'all that you can kind of throw out there? Council Member Diamond? I mean, I always have Mondays and Tuesdays kind of like earmarked for council business. So if it's possible to wedge it in until Monday or Tuesday, I'm sure I can make it work. If I don't mind getting here early or whatever, if that's possible. So you're suggesting we could do something like at 10 a.m. today and then take a break for lunch and come back in the afternoon? Council Member Pittman, how does that sound to you? Okay. I think the room is readily available before this, is it not? Okay. Well, why don't we do this? Let's schedule two weeks from today at 10 a.m. A combined cycle seminar, for lack of a better term, on what it entails, the decisions, why we're in it, those kinds of things. And if JEA, if they can help, and it doesn't have to go for two hours by any means, but at least we will allot two hours, take a break for lunch, and then come back at 1 o'clock with the testimony of Jody Brooks and Regina Ross. And then we'll continue that pattern as we need to. Okay. Update on the employee survey. Mr. Thiel, do you have anything else? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the chair of the committee. So as you all are aware, it went through committees last week, and I think it was amended to remove the emergency language. So it's going to go through a normal council cycle. And so it should come out of council, barring any hiccups, at the May 12th meeting. And so I did communicate that with our representative from the company. And so he's ready, willing, and able to move forward as soon as we're ready for him. So it is in committee next week? It is in committee next week, yes, sir. Okay. I would just ask, and that's in rules and finance, as I recall? Okay. I'm on both, but any support my colleagues can come and bring to that would be helpful. So we'll take care. Capacity fee update. Ms. Taylor? Yes, sir. Through the chair to the committee, we have continued with multiple meetings with staff. We're met with over 13 people because they have a project team that is working on all of this. So staff has tried to touch base with each of those people that are involved in that, trying to determine what they've identified as problems with the additional capacity fees, what they're doing to address it. Keep in mind, I do want to mention that for the baseline calculation, or capacity, there are over 25,000 business accounts that they have been going through over the past year and have kind of narrowed that down to, I want to say about 4,500, is that correct, Brian, that we, where they really intensely had to look at. So they are going through that process. Any data that they get, and they are putting things into their system now that, well, that's the first issue is, what was that initial capacity? Because some may have overpaid initially or bought more capacity in or things like that. And there's, like I mentioned before, old agreements, things like that. So that baseline is very important to then use to determine what additional capacity may be. So as they are getting, going through, verifying data for that initial capacity fee, we will have to verify that information. We will not just be taking information that JEA is getting. So we will verify that information. That's one of the things is that baseline capacity. And then looking at the usage, we will be looking at that for additional capacity. They are pulling those that have an actual usage over, you know, that certain mark. They're focusing on certain meter sizes. So they have been doing that as a team to say, what can we flag? Keep in mind the tariff has some interpretations that they're also sorting out to make sure that they are fair and consistent with all of their customers. For example, it may not just be the 20%. That may be a flag that they want to identify. But there are also, for example, in the tariff, additions to commercial or industrial may on its own just trigger an additional capacity fee. So they have to sort through to make sure the biggest thing, and you've seen that with that outside legal counsel, is anything they implement, it needs to be consistent through their various customers. So there are nuances as they encounter them that as they implement things for the additional capacity fee, they want to make sure that they're going to be consistent. I do want to mention, too, there's various agreements. There are some exemptions in some of those agreements, so that can affect the calculation. JEA is discussing a statute of limitations internally and with OGC as well. Our plan is to still go back as far as we can in validating, because even if it can't be collected, just to maybe get an overall impact or a range as far back as we can potentially go on that. But that is one of the things that may, from their standpoint, impact how far they can go back to customers and what they do going forward and how they implement. Again, consistency is the big thing that they've got to make sure that they're doing with each of the customers. So our next steps, once we get, we are, you know, having to learn their system. We will pull data ourselves. Starting to work, hopefully we have one last meeting scheduled at this point with Ms. Brooks tomorrow, just to kind of go through everything and make sure we have a good understanding and then begin pulling some of the data that they have to where we can hopefully begin all the calculations once we know that they have some data in the system that we can work off of. Mr. Parks, did you want to add anything else? Okay. I think that's it, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Dyer, I have some comments. I'll go to you first. Through the Chair to Ms. Kim, I guess my only question was really, like, when do you think that you'll have your head around enough to give us some sense of, like, how much money wasn't charged? The issue being, you know, it was set up here that it was immaterial to, like, bondholders, but, I mean, if we're at, like, over $10 million, that's, like, material to taxpayers and ratepayers. So when do you think you'll be able to get to that, you know, some sense of the end of that rainbow? Through the Chair to Council Member Diamond, I wish I had a good answer for you at this point. Until we get into the data and seeing various old agreements and where there may be exemptions on some and knowing, just at this point, I can't give you a good answer, unfortunately. Fair enough. And through the Chair, who's helping you understand the kind of legal stuff? So if you just look at, like, Mayo, it goes way back with all these different agreements and letter agreements and all this stuff. Who's helping guide you through that piece of the puzzle to figure out, you know, was this actually no charge or is it, like, in accordance to the contract? Through the Chair to Council Member Diamond, Mr. Fackler and Mr. Reingold, to this point, I know he obviously will be losing him, but Mr. Fackler has been the one that we've met with. Thank you. Ms. Tuttle, I think it's extremely important that you go back as far as you can, and if there is a statute of limitations that the general counsel or office of general counsel wants to put in place, I think the committee needs to understand why that is and what is that statute of limitations, because I want to make sure we're attempting to collect as much as we can. That's question number one or comment number one. Question number two is, is it your opinion that, I'll use the expression, has the bleeding been stopped? Are we now looking at all these customers as they potentially go over their original capacity fee and putting in place a way of catching it and implementing a second capacity fee of some sort for all those business customers that are involved? Mr. Parks. Through the Chair to the committee. They really have to get to the baseline piece, because if you can't necessarily start charging people for going over until you ensure what the baseline is for everybody and that you're treating everybody equitably, equally, and everything else like that, based on the part of the tariff they're coming from. So I don't want to say that they're doing that piece yet. They are looking at all of the different, the $25,000 plus to make sure to go through, and they're validating that data currently. They're also starting to look at some of the consumption stuff, but there's different, like Kim mentioned, there's different things they have to kind of work through, and you kind of have to work through some of those before you start sending, like, before you decide whether or not there's a bill, because if you make this decision here, you get to, like, another kind of unique, and then it's all of a sudden you're treating people differently. So they've kind of got to solve the overall problem beforehand, but they have put in place is better tracking of what people are doing, and that's actually been in place for several years now of when people are paying for a capacity fee, of tracking that in the system. I mean, when we're talking about stuff from the 70s, 80s, and 90s, as you can imagine, that's on a piece of paper sometimes. You know what I mean? Like, of just what was done in the past and how that got brought into systems is one of the big problems that they are working through. So, but they're in a much better spot kind of going forward with some of this to hopefully once this is up and running, it'll be a very simple process for them to implement and put in place. House Member Diamond, you're recognized. You said, through the chair, you said statute of limitations. He caught my attention here. Help me out. What do we care about the statute of limitations right now? I mean, we're not at, you know, is it, what does it matter? If we fail to charge somebody and, therefore, the city of Jacksonville and JEA has less money, this has nothing to do with customers. What does the statute of limitations have to do with this? Through the chair to Council Member Diamond, it may impact what they can charge back to a customer. So whether they make decisions on let's move forward from this point and we forgive past or whatever they've got away, they've got to be consistent. But the point had been raised that they may not be able to go back. Let's say they do realize that 10 years ago a customer was not charged properly for additional capacity. They may not have that ability to go back that far to build them. So that's where the time frame, and I'm not saying that there's been a decision made. That was just a point that was brought up to us to keep in mind. We're trying to just be cognizant of that but not for our calculation. We would like to be able to just go back in time however far back we can go, regardless of the impact of that. Yeah, I'm with the chair on this one. Like, yeah, it would be helpful to know what our cutoff is where we can't go and get the money. But I still care about how much money we lost if we didn't do this right. All right, thank you. Council Member Pittman. First of all, thank you so much for giving explanation. But, again, I'm always about fairness and equity and making sure that we have engagement from the residents. And I know we've decided to, you know, make increases. Have we done any surveys with the residents regarding increases as well? Just curious to know. Through the chair to Councilwoman Pittman, that's going to hit on more of the base rates for your residential customers, I think, is your. That's what they had talked about at their workshop. I'm not sure I'd have to talk to JEA to see. I don't believe typically, and I know the general, I believe, is here as well. I don't believe they typically send out surveys. They have that discussion at their workshops, and they have, you know, financial presentations as to why the rate increases are needed and such. But I'm not aware of any surveys related to that. But that would be separate from the commercial accounts that we're looking at. Okay. I just wanted to ask that question while we were discussing it. Thank you. While we're discussing the workshop, and this is sort of a side issue, I went on my computer to watch the workshop and found out that it was not available. My understanding was in the past, workshops and committee meetings were available. I'm told now that only the board meetings are streamed. And here was a workshop where they talked about rate increases and capacity fees that I think a lot of people were interested in and couldn't watch it. So anyone at JEA, as you're watching or listening, could let me know when that changed, and is it possible for the benefit of the public to stream your committee meetings? I mean, we stream here at the council everything, everything, because I think the public deserves to be able to watch it at home. And I think we own JEA, and I think everything over there should be streamed. So I'd like to understand when it changed and how we can get it back on track, if someone can help me there. Okay. Item number five, the six requests for attorney-client privilege. Mr. Thiel, can you help us and kind of tell us where we are with Ms. Ross as well? Thank you, Mr. Chair. At that same workshop that wasn't streamed, they did take up the six requests to have the JEA board waive any attorney-client privilege that may exist between JEA and Regina Ross while she was serving as their legal counsel. And I made a presentation. I was allowed to do that. Mr. Fackler made a presentation to the board. Ultimately, what ended up happening was that they denied the request. However, Mr. Fackler at that meeting did offer up to allow Regina Ross to participate in front of this body. And so that is why she's on the agenda for the next meeting. But basically where they ended up was they did not agree to a blanket waiver of the privilege. However, they did say that if there are specific questions that come up out of this process that the sick would like to present to the JEA board to see if they could do a limited waiver for any particular question or under any circumstance, they would be willing to consider that. But the chair did not or indicated that he was not going to put it on the agenda, the waiver on the agenda for the full board meeting, the regular board meeting. He considered the matter closed after the discussion at the workshop. So that's where that stands. Okay. Sure. Council Member Diamond. Mr. Chair, I think that's totally ridiculous. I listened to some of the comments that the board over there made, and I feel like they're looking at the Jacksonville City Council and saying, we are going to do as little as possible to help your investigation into what you tell us is important to the people of Jacksonville. Like, to that board, the city owns that entity. We are the elected representatives of those people. What do you have to hide? What are you hiding? What did you tell Regina Ross that cannot be said at this podium? I don't think there is a single thing that could have happened in a public entity with a public board and a publicly paid attorney that is covered by attorney-client privilege. This is ridiculous. And to then just say, oh, this matter is closed is also ridiculous. It's not closed. We're going to have her up here, Regina Ross. We're going to talk to her. Then she's not going to answer questions because Mr. Fackler is going to object and say that's attorney-client privilege. I'm going to make a list of every single one of them, and I'm going to go to that board and say, why? Explain it to us. Why? This is a public entity. This isn't going away. You can't board us away. I'm going to fall this one into the gates of hell if I have to because it's the principle of the matter that they have to testify. They have to tell us what's going on. The whole point of Florida law is that it's all in the sunshine. It's uncomfortable. It's not fun. We've all been in this, but you have to. Thank you, Council Member Diamond. Okay. Other items? I should ask, Mr. Teal, if you would send an invitation to Ms. Kavey for the meeting after next. I don't know the exact date of that, but that Monday at 1 o'clock meeting. So, oh, okay. That presents a problem, doesn't it? Everything gets shifted, right? Yeah. So let's go to Tuesday. What day is that? May 26th. If you'd extend an invitation for her for May 26th at 1 o'clock. Chair Salem, would you like to consider adjusting the meeting time at all, being that that's a Council Tuesday, or would you like to keep the 1 to 3 o'clock range that you would normally meet on the Monday? 1 to 3? 1 to 3? They want to keep it at 1 o'clock. We'll determine. I don't envision a 10 o'clock meeting on that day because of the Council meeting, but I think a 1 o'clock would work. Okay? Okay. Anything else? Mr. President, do you have anything? Okay. Ms. Moser. She's asked for about 15 minutes of an opening statement. Mr. Chair? Yes. I apologize. Before we leave that last meeting schedule, that is the day of Council elections, and so that typically happens before the meeting, and so just bear in mind that we'll have to switch over from a legislative services standpoint into the next meeting, so there's an earlier aspect to it, I think. Why don't we say noon? Noon to 2? 2.30, let's just say. Okay. Give them time to switch over. Is that going to work? Okay. Let's say noon. Okay. Ms. Moser. Thank you for coming. We appreciate your attendance, and if you'd introduce the lady sitting next to you, please, as well. Yes, sir. I have with me. Pull that a little closer to you. Diane Moser, Chief Human Resources Officer at JEA. I have with me today Rita Mayers from the Office of General Counsel. She's just going to keep me out of hot water. Okay. Can we start the clock, please? Oh, thank you. Before you go, let me swear you in. The presiding officer, or in his absence, or either the member of the board, body committee, may administer oaths, and—oh, I'm sorry. Do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth under the penalties of perjury? Okay. Please go ahead. And if I may introduce my team, I brought three members of my team. First, we have Sunny Lee. She's over talent management. Karen Arlington, over learning and development. And Eric Atkinson, over—he's over our recruiting area. We call it TAS, which stands for talent acquisition section. So I might use TAS and recruiting interchangeably. I'll try to use recruiting. So I was requested to provide many documents, and you should have all received a package, many packages, actually of the documents to ensure that nothing got hung up because the files were too big. The first document that you asked for was to provide the total number of JEA employees, including a breakdown of appointed employees, certified bargaining unit employees, and any other employee classifications. So 1.1 through 1.3 shows just that. It's the number of the appointed employees, which is close to 500 employees. Certified bargaining unit employees, close to 1,800 employees. And then we have other employees would be just our managerial and confidential category. We also have part-time and temporaries, and they're on that list as well. Two is a request to provide an organizational overview of positions and roles, including the total number of positions by department and leadership level. And you've got that. We're showing three years. The first chart is 4126. You see the CEO and then the chiefs that are listed there, broken out, two by vice president, director, manager, and individual contributor for a total. And currently, we had 2,292 employees. The chart also shows for April 1st of 25 and April 1st of 24. That's your two-year look back. 2.2 is for a summary of title changes, promotions, and reclassifications. So between April 1st of 24 and April 1st of 26, there were 223 title changes, 62 minorities and 161 non-minorities. There were 393 promotions, 99 minorities, 294 non-minorities, nine demotions, two minorities, seven non-minorities, and 22 reclassifications, six minorities and 16 non-minorities. 2.3 is compensation ranges and pay grades. So those are just sheets from our five collective bargaining agreements. And then you've also got the appointed and the MNC ranges. That takes us to item three. Item three was to provide an aggregate workforce data related to diversity, including the number and percent of minorities in leadership roles. So we have about 25% of minorities in leadership roles. And that's over all three years. Then minorities hired as a percentage of overall hiring. That number's higher at 37% or 38%. And retention, we have about, I did the math the other day. Let's see. We had minorities resign at a rate of about 43% to the 57% non-minorities. But we also included those that didn't report in that category. So that category of minorities might be overinflated. And after that, we provided some more information on trends in hiring, promotion, and retention of diverse employees. So we want to make sure that you understand that we're committed at JEA to diversifying our highly technical workforce by partnering with community organizations, schools, workforce programs, and professional networks. Our outreach through job fairs, social media, and local engagement connects us with candidates across all backgrounds and career stages. Now we're on item four, and that's to provide a summary of executive level transitions, including the number of executives, managers, who've separated from JEA, and the general categories of separation and report in aggregate. So you could see from this chart that we've had 32 separate employment from April 1st, 24 through April 1st, 26. Eight were dismissed for cause. Of those, three were minorities. Six were non-minorities. The job was eliminated for five non-minorities. Resignation is 14, with nine of them being non-minorities. The other five minorities, three retirements, non-minorities. And then a temporary assignment ended for two minorities. And the question is about discipline. What percentage or how many leaders do we have that were disciplined? Because these leaders are all appointed, what we would normally do as they were being disciplined was put them on performance improvement plans. So we have a total of seven that were placed on performance improvement plans. Two minorities, two non-minorities, and then three other minorities in the Hispanic category. So a total of seven. And then the promotions and demotions were provided previously on a different tab. Five is an outline of any programs and internal initiatives currently in place to support employee growth and career advancement that lead to career progression internally, including leadership development programs. We're very proud of our training. That's one of the areas that we take great pride in it. And we think it's very important to develop our leaders. We've got a number of leadership programs. So we've got four listed on that sheet. We've got LEAD, which stands for Leadership Expectations and Development. We have Frontline Supervisors. That's for the Jacksonville Supervisors Association, which is one of our unions, for those employees that are promoted into that. We have Leadership Essentials and then the Employee Development Program. Those are four of the leadership programs that we have. Tuition Assistance and Education Benefits. We do have a tuition reimbursement policy. The policy is in your packet. It's open to any JEA employee. Education should be job-related, approved by the manager, and provided by an accredited institution. And the reimbursement is limited to $12,000 a year for undergraduate classes and $16,000 a year for graduate classes. And that's a calendar year. And the question is about workforce training. We have workforce training besides the leadership. We've got what we call a JEA Academy. Those are really your soft skills. I don't like the term soft skills. I think it really underestimates how important these skills are. But we've got all types of training, soft skill training, through the JEA Academy. We've also got customized classes and individual coaching sessions. Then we have our technical side of training. We're obviously a utility. We take safety very seriously. And we have extensive training courses for those starting out as apprentices and going beyond that. So these are training programs scheduled for many of our different technical positions. Then you asked about certifications. Certifications are very similar to the tuition reimbursement program. It's open to all employees. Obviously, if we require certification for a job, employees are able to attend whatever training is required if it requires a certification. And that's limited to $12,000 a year as well. And there's information on our career pathways. We're also very proud of this. We've got career pathways for 54 different class series. And that's over 1,500 of our employees are within any of these classifications. So that's the majority of our workforce has a career pathway. Then internal promotion and succession planning. At JEA, we move talent through structured career framework with roughly half of the roles filled internally each year. And then succession planning. We do have a strong succession planning program as well. And so each – the positions are identified as to whether we need succession planning for those positions. So if it's a leadership position or it could be an individual contributor position that's really unique in nature, those are the positions that we have succession planning for. Now we're on to item six, provide utilization data for the programs, including employee participation. So participation in the reimbursement program, we've had 63 people in 24, 116 people in 25, and 35 people so far in 26 that have requested either tuition reimbursement or certification reimbursement. After that, you have a list of those that have attended our leadership training. I'm not going to go into each of these – it's kind of a lot of information on this one sheet, but it tells you how many seats are open and then the number of participating employees. And oftentimes, not all our seats are filled. And then we get into the participation in apprenticeship and training programs. That's in there as well. We've also got required compliance training. JEA, we have training that's required once a year. Right now, I know I have a couple of trainings that are sitting in my queue. It's HIPAA training that I have to take, as well as security training. And then, of course, ethics training is once a year as well. But there are other trainings that we offer, compliance trainings that are required every year. Number seven, equitable access to advancement. Going back to those career pathways, we have formal job specifications that are ground in bona fide occupational qualifications for each position. And per the civil service rules, we can't have artificial barriers in place. So what we do is we look at positions in similar utilities and see what their requirements are, and we ensure that ours are supported by both the market and then internally what you need to be successful on the job. And then number eight, the last item is what surveys we've done in the past. We've been doing surveys since 98, 99, and we've done numerous surveys throughout the years with a little break during COVID for obvious reasons. But it's very common for us to do engagement surveys. The last engagement survey, the results were produced in October of 24. And as you know, we're doing an engagement survey as we speak. Do you have any questions about anything that I... I think we'll go into questions at this point. I'm going to turn over to Council Member Diamond to go first. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can I do this just once through the chair? Yes. All right. Hey, Ms. Moser. I haven't seen you in ages. It's nice to see you today. So just a couple of buckets of stuff I'd like to talk about. So the first one is there are folks who are working at JEA who would be covered by collective bargaining, and then there's those who we would call appointed. Is that a fair way to divvy those up? Yes, sir. Okay. So how many approximately appointed folks are there? Through the chair to Council Member Diamond, we have about 500 appointed employees, and the majority of the rest are union employees. Yeah, and covered by the collective bargaining. Okay. And so recently, you all just went through, like, the collective bargaining. There's still one group that's left out, but there's essentially deals made with those folks. Is that right? Yes, sir. Okay. And the appointed folks, I hear that they are getting raises recently, like dozens of them. Is that right? In the last month, have any of the appointed folks been getting raises outside of the normal annual raise? So the appointed folks get what's called a performance increase if they qualify for the performance increase. So they could get some additional dollars beyond the general wage increase. Okay. So just so I understand this, if I'm an appointed appointee, I'm a chief or something, how many raises would I would normally be eligible for in a given year? So you would get the general wage increase, and then if you qualify, you would get a performance increase. Okay. This is not outside of the norm. We've been doing this for years. Yeah, sure. So recently, have there been any raises? Yeah, I'll let her chat. She's my comp expert. It's good. I'm sorry. She said we also just did compression increases. So let's talk about the compression increases. How many of those were there? About 20. So in a compression increase, I'm going to guess is that there is usually a spread between management and unit employees, and that a compression increase essentially keeps that spread continuous over time? Yes, sir. Okay. The timing of these compression increases for appointed, did it have anything to do with the survey, to your knowledge? Yes. Okay. During the discussions with the union reps, was there any discussion about appointed employees not getting raises outside of the normal merit increase or annual increase? I was at the table for some discussions, not all discussions, but I'm not aware that there would have been any discussion because at that point, we didn't know what the increase was going to be. That decision was made pretty much close to when all the four were agreed to, and our increase was 3.5 percent, where the unions received 4 percent. Okay, and I want to be fair to you, just your knowledge, was it ever represented to the union reps on behalf of the collective bargaining units that there would be no appointee raises outside of the normal, just like year-over-year rose? Not to my knowledge, sir. Okay. Okay. Let's switch to kind of separation policy. Okay, so you've got the CEO, Ms. Cavey. Who's, like, what are the name of, like, the people who are, like, one block below her? They're called the chiefs. Okay. How many chiefs are there? We have seven. Of the seven chiefs, how many have, like, turned over in the last couple of years? Do you know? I would say three since I've been there. How long is that? I've been there since October of 24. So, since 24, there's a turn-up. Ms. Cavey's tenure? Sure, yeah. That might be. Yeah, I'm just going to ask the witness what she knows. When did Ms. Cavey start? She started, I believe, in February of 24. Okay. I would encourage her to try to relate the turnover and such to her tenure. Understood. So, okay, so I'll re-ask the question. Since Ms. Cavey has been the CEO, how many chiefs have been, have turned over? That would be four. Okay. And what is the policy for severance for a chief who's outgoing, whether they were terminated or resign or anything like that? We follow the state law, but it depends on the circumstances, too. So, state law says you can't give more than six weeks severance. Is that right? Correct. But some of them were getting more than six weeks severance. Is that right? Not to my understanding. To any of the chiefs that turned over, were any of them simply kept on payroll for longer than six weeks after it was decided that they would no longer be at JEA? There were two that were in consulting positions, and they were accessible anytime that JEA contacted them. When they were accessible to JEA, anytime they contacted them, were they being paid similar to what they were being paid? Yes. So, we just paid. How many executives were sitting in a consulting role getting paid, essentially, just to get a call whenever that was? We had two employees. You get that. It looks like a workaround of a six-week severance, right? It doesn't look good to do that. I understand, sir. Okay. Kurt Wilson, what did he get any severance when he left? No, sir. You were part of his termination. Is that right? I was not part of a termination for Kurt Wilson. Did you have any communication with him about exiting JEA? I did. What were those? My communication happened the day he did exit. He asked me to call him, and so I called him, and he basically said to me that I know that he and Vicki have not been getting along. And this was on a Thursday. This was February 19th. And he said that he knows that when people are going to be let go, that they're normally let go at the end of the week, and that Vicki gave him a mean look. So I asked him if he was resigning or retiring, and he said no, but he never came back after that. Gotcha. And then, to your knowledge, what happened after that with regard to Mr. Wilson? So that was in the morning of February 19th, and then in the afternoon, because if he wasn't going to come back, then we needed to get him off the books. So at that point, I called him back in the afternoon, and I put the phone on speakerphone, and I had Jody Brooks with me, and I just let him know we were going to pop him, and that's the term for we're going to remove his access from everything. We have to be really careful in the utility. We have compliance issues, so if somebody's not planning on coming back to work, we disconnect their access. And he, it was an interesting call because he was giddy, and he said, well, I understand. And so he knew that he was not going to have access. He had his cell phone and badge, and he said he would drop it off in the morning. Gotcha. Okay, so just so I get this, Mr. Wilson, that morning on the 19th, he indicated to you that he thought he was going to get fired. Is that fair? That would be the impression I got from him. Okay. And then in the afternoon, he did get popped, as you said. What happened between that a decision was made to pop him, as you say? I did ask him if he had any terms for his exit, and he said that he would like to get to a certain date in June so that he could be fully vested. Gotcha. But, I mean, why did you ask him that, what his terms would be? Did someone tell you to fire him? No one told me to fire him. I got the impression he wasn't coming back. Did you talk to anyone about what Kurt Wilson told you that morning, later on in the day? Well, I let Vicki Cavey know. And what did she say to you? I think they had had previous conversations that he was going to be leaving JEA. You'll have to ask her about the details, but I don't think it was a surprise because he had previously mentioned he was planning on leaving at some point. Okay. I'm going to jump up here and just make sure I understand this. Did he quit or was he fired? He wasn't fired. He quit. So it's HR's view that he quit. Yeah. Okay. Was he going to be fired if he didn't quit? Not to my knowledge. Okay. What kind of employee do you think Kurt Wilson was? Was he good at his job? He didn't report to me, so I can't really tell you how good at his job he was. Do you have an opinion if he was good at his job? I think Kurt was really good in terms of maintaining relationships. Okay. And that was a part of his job. Tracking. Okay. Who's Jerry Boyce? Jerry is our communications person, written communications. Okay. Is she an employee or is she a consultant? She's a part-time employee. Part-time employee. Okay. How many people at JEA work in, like, communications as employees? I don't have the number off the top of my head. Can you give me, like, a... Let's say five, but I don't really have the number off the top of my head. Okay. Can I step in here? Just was Miss Boyce brought back recently in a part-time role? Yes. I think that's... Okay. I'm sorry. No, no, all good. So, why was Miss Boyce brought back? We needed more help. Why? Because all this started, so we needed more help. So, the city council having an investigation means that you needed more help with communications? And Kurt leaving and everything that was happening. Yes, we needed more help. And we started getting bombarded with public records requests. Bombarded would be, I think, an accurate word to use. Yeah. We needed more help. Yeah, I understand. Besides public records requests, what else was she brought back in to help with? Just wording, how to word things, communications. Help me understand, though. Why did you need help? Just because there... Was it the volume? Or was it what was going out? Well, we were looking... I mean, our people have different skill sets. And so, part of it was the volume and part of it was the subject. The subject. In particular, like... I don't want to put words in your mouth. I'm just trying to understand. Was it, like, trying to protect JEA from whatever was out there in the universe? Trying to position JEA in an accurate light. In an accurate... And you feel like there was inaccuracies being said about JEA? I've heard inaccuracies. What inaccuracies? I knew that would be your next question. Actually, I just... I don't want to answer that question. Because it's just what I think might be inaccuracies. And there could be more that... There might be more than I understand or know. I want to be fair. I'm just asking your opinion. Like, what you know, what's in your brain, it's totally unfair to ask you to speak for all of JEA. That's not what I'm doing. I'm just saying, in Diane Moser's head, what was inaccurate being said in the ether about JEA? Yeah, I'm just going to leave it at that. I'll leave it to the chair. You're under an obligation to answer our questions as an employee of JEA. And you're under oath as well. Yes, and I'm here answering all your questions. Well, not that one. So, can you help me out? What inaccuracies were being said about JEA? Well, let's start at the beginning, or with the two biggest things, that there's a racist and toxic work environment working under Vicki Cavey. So, I believe that that's inaccurate. Okay. So, racist, work environment, inaccurate, toxic, inaccurate, tracking. What else? Anything else? That's a good start. Yeah, that's good. Yeah, I mean, I'm not trying to exhaust you here, but is there anything else out there other than those two things? Well, Kurt Wilson tried to discredit me. I mean, that's something. He did that at the board meeting. In what way? Sorry, I don't actually remember. I was there, but I don't remember him speaking about it. You helped me out. Yeah, he didn't say my name exactly, but he said you can't trust the CHRO. Okay, gotcha. Okay, so, fair enough. I put that one off to the side, too. Those three things, anything else? That's it. So, yeah, of course. So, to the chair, and this will be my last time I said it, right? So, when you all looked at hiring or bringing this board back, did you look at other departments? Because you said that you really needed help in the marketing and communications. Were there other departments that you had considered that may have needed help at that time? Jerry Boyce is a retiree, and we were familiar with her skills. And so, we called her up and asked her if she wanted to come back because she had worked as a part-time employee before. I want to ask that question again. Before you brought her back, had you all looked at and evaluated other departments that might have needed support or help? I did say that, no, we did not do that. Thank you. Thanks. I'm almost done with these questions about media. So, all in, how much have we paid? Has JEA paid Ms. Boyce? Do you know? I don't know off the top of my head. Okay, but it's about $100 an hour that we pay? That sounds about right. Okay. To your knowledge, has anyone at JEA, an employee or a consultant, done any public records requests to the city council? I don't have any knowledge of that. I'm just asking. I don't know anything here. I'm just asking. To your knowledge, has anyone at JEA or any consultants tried to plant letters relating to the city council in any publications or media stories? I have no knowledge of that. Okay. In addition to Ms. Boyce, JEA hired a media consulting group. Is that right? Yes. Who is that? I'm not sure of their job title. It might have Bachman in the title. Yeah. Bachman. Former News 4 Jacks Bachman. Gotcha. Do you know how much you're paying him? I have no idea. Yeah. Why was he brought in, do you know? They helped me prepare for this. So you sat down with Mr. Bachman, and he's like, Rory's a jerk, and he's going to ask these terrible questions of you. I wouldn't categorize it like that. He's an Iowa fan, so I have to be nice to him. Big 10 fan. Okay. They just wanted to make sure I was okay being uncomfortable. Yeah, yeah. None of this is fine. Trust me, I'd rather be doing other stuff, too. I promise you. So in addition to, you don't know how much Mr. Bachman's firm is being paid? I do not. Okay. So in addition to Ms. Boyce and Mr. Bachman's firm, is there any other consultants that have been hired to help with media or all this stuff going on? Do you know? Not that I'm aware of. Okay. I'm going to move on and list other questions on this topic. I don't have any. Okay. The only concern I have, it just, there seems to be an effort, and you alluded to it, like over the weekend, a letter to the editor. I'm seeing more media attention about JEA, and I think he asked you directly, are these media people, such as Ms. Boyce or Mr. Bachman, coordinating in any shape or form negative pieces on the president or on the city council? Have you heard anything of that effect? No, sir, and I'm probably not the right person to ask. Well, we'll get to that person, I guess. Go ahead, Mr. Tyman. Okay. I mean, just to be clear, the reason why I'm asking these questions is, like, I just want to get to the bottom of this so that we can do our charge. And if there's an effort by JEA to make it more complicated, I just want to know that that's happening and figure out why. Sure. But, okay, let's, I'd like to get to kind of like surveys and complaints. Let's get to the heart of HR land. So who is Brad Kroll, K-R-O-L, do you know? Brad is a former chief. He was our chief of technical services. What does that person do? IT. So all of IT, like top of IT universe? Okay. Are you familiar with Mr. Kroll being concerned about answering a quote-unquote anonymous survey? Do you have any knowledge of that? I don't. Would it surprise you that Mr. Kroll didn't trust JEA's anonymous survey such that he complained and said, I don't trust this, even though he's the guy who runs IT? First, I don't know if that's true. But if it is true, I don't know that it would concern me. Okay. When it comes to, and I just want to like talk generically, if I'm an employee, let's assume I'm not an appointee. Can I have a few there for us? Sure. Of course. You're not concerned that the chief of IT would be concerned about answering a JEA survey? Because he's afraid that his results may be identified or something. I mean, that's the heart of one of the issues here is your, let me finish, please, that your employees, from everything I'm hearing, are petrified of responding to any type of survey, whether it's yours or ours, frankly, because they're afraid they will be identified. And you don't care about that? I talked to our current chief of TS, and that is Steve Selders, and he feels confident about the survey being confidential. And I can tell you how we've made it confidential. So I can't be concerned with what Brad said, because first of all, I don't even know if it's true. So that's what I'm not concerned about. So what I can tell you is that with EnerGage, and we had Glint in the past, we're using EnerGage now, under their terms and conditions, and I looked into those right before I came over, they won't provide us information for each employee. It's in their terms and conditions. So the survey is anonymous, they wouldn't allow us, or confidential, they wouldn't allow us to do the survey if they thought we would be requesting that information. And then the other thing that we've done to make the survey even more confidential is employees can take the survey, when they get the email from EnerGage, they can take that, forward it to their own address, email address, and fill it out on their own computer. Sounds familiar, doesn't it, Mr. Thiel? Go ahead, Mr. Diamond. Okay, I'm trying to understand kind of the chain of like a complaint. And so I'm a, let's say I'm a union employee who's like working in the water division, and I think that my boss is doing something illegal. What are my options for reporting up that I see my boss doing something illegal? There are a myriad of ways to report. It could go to the ethics hotline, so that would be one way. You could take it to, above that boss, to another boss. You could report it to our labor relations group, which is in my area. You could take it to an HR business partner. Depending upon the complaint, if it's a complaint dealing with discrimination, it could come over to here, to the Jacksonville Human Rights Commission. It could also come over to here, to the ethics office, or if it's related to fraud, waste, and abuse, it could go to the inspector general's office. Okay. And then there are also state and federal places to take your complaint. Sure. Yeah, of course. So I wanted to ask this question. So when someone is reprimanded or you have a correction active with employees, do you send them, African Americans, to Mr. Moreland, or how is that done? To Mr. Mr. Moreland. Dr. Moreland, when there are issues or if there are an improvement plan that you have for employees, you just said a few minutes ago there are different ways that they can go and share the information. And I guess I'm asking you because a lot of them feel that if there's an issue or maybe something you don't agree with is that you send them to Mr. Moreland. And I'm asking you, is that true? Is that yes or no? I have one employee that I know that we sent to Mr. Moreland related to performance. One. That's the only one I know of. One. Are you sure? That's the only one. I only know of one. That you sent, that anybody else on your team may be sent staffed to Mr. Moreland. I only know of one. Okay. Thank you. I see Kevin's on the queue. I'm sorry. Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really just have to get in the queue because I have a TDC committee meeting that started at 2 o'clock and I'm getting lots of text messages requesting my presence over there so I can chair that meeting. So I'm going to have to leave you. I would just want to echo some of the thoughts on the media company. And I think if that's taxpayer funded dollars for a media company that could be coordinating with local news outlets to attack members of this body that we should probably have them in front of us too and ask them those questions. So I'd like you to consider that. And I got to go chair TDC, sir. Thank you. Yeah, you beat me to the punch, Mr. President. And I was going to say let's ask them the questions. They're taking – one's an employee. I'd love to ask them questions about what's been going on. But let's go back. Ms. Moser, thank you. So just go through the list. So we've got ethics hotline. You can go up your chain. You could go to a labor relations board. You can – if it's labor-related, you could go to HR. And, of course, you can do all the non-JEA ones, OIG, ethics, the Human Rights Commission, all the rest. Okay. But let's just stick inside your JEA options. I think my boss is stealing. It's going up the chain. My boss – let's say I go and lodge something with the ethics hotline at call. Can you do that anonymously? Yes. Okay. And then where does that go? If someone says, you know, this person X is stealing, who gets that? So first and foremost, I just want you to know the ethics piece is not under my area. Okay. It's in a different business unit. Who's in charge of the ethics hotline? Wallet Stanford is the director over our ethics hotline, and that reports up to Jody Brooks. I have not heard her name in so long. You made me smile. Okay. So that goes to Jody Brooks. To your knowledge, what happens if an ethics hotline complaint goes to Wallet, and then she gives it to Jody Brooks? Is that your understanding? She may or may not give it to Jody Brooks. It would depend. But if it's – It sounds real. If it's related to something that might need a fact finding, which is an investigation, then she might give it to my labor team, and they would open up the investigation. And then something could result in discipline. So I guess that's my question is – let me follow this up. So it goes up to the ethics hotline. That will be in Jody Brooks' bucket. Who has access to those ethics complaints? Do you know? I believe it's just Wallet, but I think I'm not the right person to ask that question. Sure. We'll ask Ms. Brooks in two weeks. It sounds like it's her bucket. Okay. So when it comes to investigations, if there's an allegation of a problem, whether it's stealing or mismanagement or whatever, are all those under your purview? So – Outside of OIG maybe? Outside of OIG and outside of whatever goes to Wallet for ethics, pretty much everything else would fall within HR. Okay. Unless it goes to an outside agency. And then who runs the investigations? Do you have like a team for that? I do have a team. Okay. How many people are on that? Say five. Okay. Now, if you've got an issue that runs up through HR, let's say I think my boss is stealing, I then go to HR and I say, hey, Ms. Moser, my boss is stealing. What happens with that complaint? So if it involves something like stealing, we're going to pull in security and probably JSO. Okay. Maybe that's an unhelpful example. I think my boss is doing something illegal but not great for management. Is that something you would handle then? We would handle it. Okay. And then who has access to those investigation files? It would just be my labor relations team. But up the chain has access also. Is that right? All the way to the CEO? No. The CEO doesn't have access to your HR files? No. Why not? Not that I'm aware of. Yeah. How does this work? If I'm the CEO of JEA and I want to read an HR file, do I have the right to read it? Any file? She could come and ask to see the file, absolutely, and then provide it unless there was some reason that she wasn't allowed to see the file. What would be a reason not allowed to see the file? Well, if there was an investigation opened up related to her, then obviously that would be something that she wouldn't see. Gotcha. So, to your knowledge, how many of those are there? Right now we have five complaints that have come in for this fiscal year. Yeah, I'm tracking. So, those five, who do you report up to then to manage an internal complaint about the CEO? Like, do you have someone who, is it the board chair, or is there someone above Ms. Cavey that works with you on that? I would go to the board chair. Okay. And have you? No, because there have not been any complaints. Just help me out. I thought you said there had been five this fiscal year. So, the five, pardon me, and she just. Yeah, it's okay. Yeah, I said five. So, the five are field employees complaining about what's happening in their work facilities. And so, Vicki would not see those. Okay. I just want to make sure I got this right. I'm not trying to trick you, I swear. Were there any complaints about the CEO, about the CEO doing their job, or anything about that? And we'll give it for the last two years. There have been no complaints. Okay. All right. That makes sense. Okay. So, let's just go back to the surveys. I'm almost done, I promise. Let me just see here. Oh, the list, you don't know, just want to make sure I ask this. You don't know whether or not the CEO has access to the ethics complaints. Is that right? I don't know. Okay. So, the law firm hired to do an outside survey, Jackson Lewis, have you employed, were you involved in selecting them? So, Jackson Lewis is already on retainer with JEA. Right. And so, you said an outside survey. That would be an investigation. So, they're two different things. Okay. So, what is Jackson Lewis hired to do? Jackson Lewis is an employment attorney. Yeah. And do they have any relation to the survey being done? No. Okay. Do they have any relation to the investigation being done? Yes. What are they doing for the investigation? Jackson Lewis found an attorney from Tampa that is working with us on the, through OGC. So, I really have no involvement, except I'm sure I will be interviewed, but is working with, through OGC, on the investigation into whether we have a toxic work environment. Gotcha. And then, so, they're supposed to investigate the toxic work environment. Are they also investigating allegations of racism? I believe so. Is what they do confidential? If I'm an employee of JEA and Jackson Lewis' person in Tampa wants to talk to me, is that private and confidential, or is it public? So, investigations, while you're doing the investigation, it's private. Once the result is out, whatever that report is, that becomes public. So, if I'm an executive, let's say, at JEA, and I've witnessed a toxic work environment from the CEO, or I've seen racism from other executives, my name is going to be attached to that after the report is released? It depends how the report is put together. She probably won't identify names, but I don't. Who has access to the raw data from the report? The access is going to go to the board. To the board entirely? The board's going to go to the board. What about the CEO? Will she have access to that? My understanding is the report's going to the board, not the CEO. And then I would think that the board would then let the CEO know what was in the report. Okay. So, just one more question, sir. So, then, if I'm someone who has seen toxic work environment from the CEO or racism from the CEO, and I'm not saying that's happened. I'm just saying, if I'm an executive who has or an employee who has, and I want to keep my job at JEA, how on earth can I be honest to the investigator if my bosses are going to find out that I ratted them out? If the report's put together in a way where the people are not identified, then it could be in the report without a name. But, I mean, you're the head of HR. This investigation is going on. Is the name going to be attached to the raw data? Again, I'm not involved in the investigation or the report because, remember, I was discredited by Kurt Wilson. So, I'm keeping my hands out of everything to ensure that something isn't viewed as being unfair. So, who at JEA is doing this work with the investigator? The Office of General Counsel. OGC is running it directly? Okay. Would it surprise you that the first person interviewed by the investigator was told by the investigator that every single thing that they said, including their name, would be made public? Would it surprise me? I don't know what I would have expected. And I'm not trying to derail you here, but how on earth can you be honest to an investigator if it may mean losing your job? I plan to be honest, but... Yeah, yeah. Okay. I'll leave you there. Okay. I just have a couple before I go to Ms. Pittman. I want to go back briefly to the February board meeting. You're familiar with what happened. Motion was made by Morales, not seconded. The board commented repeatedly several different members about HR is the place to go. If you have a complaint, we think you should go to HR. We're not going to... I think the word witch hunt was used. We're not going to start anything here, et cetera, et cetera. After that meeting, I think, is when the council president began putting together this committee to investigate because the board had not even seconded the motion for discussion. When Mr. DeSalvo came before us, there was some mention of one complaint that had come in after the board meeting, which I'm told sparked the law firm as well as the survey. Is that your understanding, this one complaint that came to the hotline? My understanding is there is one complaint that came to the hotline. I don't know exactly when it came into the hotline, but what we did, we don't need board approval to start an investigation. The survey, there are two different things, and I think that's another example of something that I've heard kind of get confused, is that people often combine the two. They're two separate things. We had been working on this survey for months. We had been talking about doing a survey for close to a year. We had to go through the procurement process, which did not take long, but we went through the procurement process, and Vicki had told the board in previous meetings that we were going to do an engagement survey. So that has nothing to do with anything that we're talking about. I want to make that perfectly clear. But is the engagement survey that you're now going to undergo where you're – is it to the same extent it would have been if not for all this attention that's been brought upon JEA and its toxic culture? It's identical to what it would have been. So it has nothing to do with a toxic culture. We're asking questions, but it's not changed in any way. Okay, I guess I'm trying to understand you. There was one complaint. Have there been any more complaints to the hotline? So after the board meeting, apparently I'm told day or two after that there was one call, and I have that document of a summary of that call that came in. And from that one call, when the board would not second a motion for a survey or some analysis at the board meeting, you're bringing in this attorney at, I think, $380 an hour to talk to your employees about the culture. Before I even knew about the call, we were bringing in the attorney, and that's because we take all complaints seriously. So Kirk got up, made a complaint. We're hearing other people make complaints. So we're going to look into it. We don't need board approval for that. Where did those complaints – they didn't come through the hotline. So where are these complaints coming from? I'm trying to understand if you're getting – are you getting internal complaints? I'm hearing from these hearings that many of our employees have come to you complaining. I've heard that. Now, we haven't seen those complaints. But if people are complaining, then we have a good reason to open up an investigation. So from that board meeting where there was absolutely no attention to this, no second of the motion, there was one complaint after that, and now you're moving towards bringing this law firm in. And my understanding is you are asking them – there's no expectation of privilege or confidentiality when you talk to these employees. I don't know of any employee that is given that type of information where anything they say, there's no expectation of privilege or confidentiality, is going to be honest. Because they're afraid they'll lose their job, if they're honest, potentially. We're using the processes that we have available to us. Okay. And if people don't trust it, all we can do is do our best to try to make people trust. All right. I'm going to go to Mr. Diamond for one quick question, then we're going to Ms. Pittman. Sorry. I just wanted to go back to one issue. The day on the 19th when Kurt Wilson and you had that conversation in the morning and then he got popped, as you said, later on, I'm trying to figure out how that makes sense with the email Vicki KV said where she said she was getting rid of the chief of staff position altogether. So help me understand. Was there a decision to get rid of the chief of staff position before the conversation that you had with Mr. Wilson that morning? So Vicki and I had been talking for a while about, a while like a couple of months, that we need to do something about Kurt's title. It's really not, we don't need a chief of staff. And then we talked about a chief of governmental affairs. And so that discussion had been occurring for a couple of months. What was the problem with the title chief of staff? We didn't need a, Vicki doesn't need a chief of staff. She's got chiefs that are strong in their areas. And, you know, everybody's different when they come in as the CEO. People have different structures they want to implement. And so she just, she really didn't need a CEO at this time. Yeah, chief of staff. When did those conversations start? A few months ago. So Kurt happened in February. They probably, I don't remember exactly when, but a few months before that. So maybe November. Did you or anyone else communicate to Mr. Wilson that his position was going to be removed? It wouldn't have been removed. It would have been reclassified. Would you agree that going from chief of staff to chief of government relations is a demotion? I don't know because we never worked on the job description. We didn't finalize it. I don't think her intent was to demote them, but you'll have to ask Vicki that. It sounds like a demotion though, right? Chief of staff, now chief of government relations. Is it really that that's the same level? If it's still chief and whether it's government relations or staff, I don't know. We, we didn't have a job description. Was there a discussion about between you and Ms. Kavey that Kurt Wilson was trying to undermine her? There was, I was in a meeting where he knew that she, she asked him a question and he knew that she wouldn't like the answer. And he said, you're not going to like this. So that would be undermining Vicki. I appreciate you like trying to get this answer out. That didn't make sense to me though. Speak to me like I'm in third grade. Like when did it, when did this happen? Who was in the room? What was the context? So this would be, this would be, I'm going to keep this very high level because it involves, it involves Liuna. And you know, we're at impasse with Liuna. So evidently, Kurt talked to somebody and he knew Vicki would not be happy with who he talked to. And so at that point, and he said it, you're not going to, you're not going to like it. And so in the room was Vicki, Jody, myself, and Kurt. I'll leave it there because I know Ms. Pittman needs to go. Ms. Pittman. Please. Ms. Mosher, thank you so much for being here today. But before I start my series of questions, I do want to go back to that question that I asked you. You were saying only one person went to Mr. Moreland for a performance. And then I followed up, were there any other reasons why they go to Mr. Moreland? Because his title is Chief Customer Experience Officer. So when an employee need counseling, who do they go to? Is there anybody else on your staff besides Mr. Moreland that you send staff to? So I do see a number of people outside of Mr. Moreland's area in his office. I do know that he's a mentor to numerous people. We have a formal mentoring program. The only two chiefs that signed up for the program are Mr. Moreland and myself. And so that could be a reason that people go and talk to him because they would select him. The people get to select who their mentor is. So I know he's got people that selected him as a mentor as well as I have people that had selected me as a mentor. But that's all I'm aware of. Okay. But when I asked you if there were any other reasons, you said no. So my question is, some of the employees, and I will just say the African Americans, say when there are counseling that they go to him. Out of the African Americans, has anyone ever come to you and asked you to be their mentor? Yes, ma'am. How many? I've had two mentees. Both are male. One is an African American male, and the other is an Asian male. Okay. And so how many would you say that have gone to Mr. Moreland? I don't have any idea. You just say you see people in his office. I would say he's popular. Okay. He's popular. So is that his job description is to counsel staff? I don't know if we're confusing counseling and mentoring. They're two different things. Well, okay, mentoring, is that what you want to call it? But from what I hear from the staff, that they are recommended to go to him for counseling. So if it's counseling or if it's mentoring. But again, I recommended him for counseling for one person, and then I know that the mentees get to select their mentor. If they are having difficulty selecting a mentor, we'll make a recommendation. Okay. My next question is, do you believe your leadership team reflects diversity of JEA workforce and the community it serves? Do you believe that? As being a leader? I do. And diversity means different things to different people. But yes. But what does it mean to you? It means people with different ideas. It could mean people with different skin color. But we hire on merit. And I like to have people with different ideas and different skills. So if a position really requires somebody to be detail-oriented, that's the kind of person I'm looking for that position. But I believe I have a team that is diverse in thinking. But the bottom line is we hire for merit. Okay. So merit and skills is what you look for, right? So when I asked you a question earlier, how often do you evaluate the divisions that you have to actually know if those divisions need support or resources to ensure that they have productivity in operations? So I have regular discussions. They're one-on-ones with each of my leaders. So I have those discussions every other week. So you say every week? Every other week. Plus we have a staff meeting, a leadership team meeting. Okay. And then we also have a full all-hands meeting every quarter. So is that appointed staff or is it the frontline staff that you supervise? All staff is every other quarter, or every quarter. So that's four times a year, all staff. The one-on-ones are with those that are my direct reports. And again, that's every other week. And then I have the team meeting. That's every other week as well. So do you feel you get real-time information from your staff without them feeling like if they have ideas and they want to share with you that you don't listen to them or getting their input? It sounds like you meet with them often. Regularly. Right? Yes, ma'am. And so individuals that I've talked to, what they say is that you dismiss ideas. And I'm just trying to find out from you if that's the case. Do you feel like you have a relationship with your staff? I do feel like I have a relationship with my staff. I may not always agree with my staff. And if I don't agree, I will let them know and I will tell them why. My next question is, given the concerns that have been raised and some of the questions that my colleagues have asked you today, have any employees that you've supervised, have you asked them if they felt like they worked in a toxic environment or they feel racially discriminated against? I've not. You have not. So there's no one that you've talked to? Has anybody come to you to share that there are concerns about a toxic environment or racially environment that has been harmful? There have been people that have come to me and said they don't see what you're hearing. But no one's come to me and said there was a toxic work environment. And so when they came to you, what was your action? Did you have a corrective action? And did you go back to that person and address their feelings? So no one has come to me is what I'm saying. No one? No one. Okay. And you do have updated job descriptions for everyone? We update our job descriptions on a regular basis. Do you? Okay. Well, maybe I should ask that question. Have you updated all of your job descriptions for your staff? And when was the last time? May I turn around and ask one of my staff members? Okay. The answer is yes. We have updated job descriptions. And when was that? Within the last six months. Within the last six months. And all staff? In HR. In HR. Okay. My next question is, can you provide like a high-level overview of the functions and responsibilities of your departments under your leadership? Sure. So under my leadership, I've got talent management. And talent management consists of compensation, the HR business partners, and recruiting. I have HR operations, which consists of HRIS and payroll. HRIS is, you know, the Oracle system. It's putting the employee data in the system that maintains it. There is report writing in that area. And I also have a group of black belts that work on a solutions team. Right now, they're conducting a workforce analysis. I have benefits. I have labor relations. And labor relations is both employee and labor relations. I have safety, and I have learning and development. And you're always in contact with them, and you understand what's going on in their department? If I don't understand what's going on in a department, then that would be because it wasn't brought to my attention. Okay. Are you also familiar with, like, the day-to-day responsibilities and the workload demands of each team leader under your leadership? I believe so. That's a yes or no question. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Have you conducted direct or indirect engagement, such as skip-level meetings? With your staff and being able to utilize the feedback that they've given you? I have not. You have not. Okay. And then I want to talk about the workload a little bit. Have you received reports of high workloads, stress, or staffing shortages for teams under your leadership? So, from time to time, we have employees that go out on FMLA or other types of leave. It could be military leave, although that's not the case right now. But if a team is lean, that does create some staffing challenges, and we have to work through those challenges. Right now, I have a few people that are either out on FMLA or going out on FMLA, and we're working through those challenges now. And so, do you go back to the employees and say, okay, we have this personnel, how do you ensure that they have the work tools and the resources that they need if they're complaining about stress and working overtime and ensuring that the personnel department has all they need? I don't go and talk to every employee in each of those units. I have almost 90 employees. I don't go and talk to each of them. I expect the leader in that group to bring it to my attention, and I deal with it through the leader. Okay. So, let's go back to the leader. Has the leader in those departments came to you and said, we need resources, we need staff, and how are you addressing that? Because one of the questions I asked you earlier, if all of the departments that you have, are they scaled up to what they need and the operation of the departments? So, I have two areas under me that, again, have employees that are either out on FMLA or about to go out on FMLA. So, there are two areas. One just hired a new employee. So, I feel like that area is much better staffed, and then the person out on FMLA is coming back in June. So, I feel okay about that area. There's a second area that we're working through. I'm not going to say what these areas are, but we're working through that, and we found somebody from a different area to go and help that. Okay. So, why you can't say what those areas are? Okay. I'll say, so my benefits team was the first area, and then my payroll team is the second area. Okay. So, tell me about your payroll team. Yeah. How many people are in that department? Well, we have, under that leader are 15 people, and there are about five people, including the accountant in the payroll area. So, we're going to be assigning somebody who was a previous payroll manager to help during the time period that they need some additional assistance. Okay. So, in your opinion, out of all your departments, what is the most important department that you just could not live without? I have a few. The top three. Payroll. Name the top three. Well, payroll and benefits. Are two of the top three. And you're staffed in every one of those areas to ensure that the operations of those departments are done? Yes. Okay. And I also want to know, in decision making and information, what process do you use to verify information before making a decision in a department? Is it you make a decision, or do you get input from your supervisors? Of course I get input. So, payroll, for example, has 15 people, not just payroll, because it's payroll, HRAS, and it's the solutions team. There's a whole team of black belts. Well, they're not doing anything that is critical in terms of deadlines. Deadlines, they're very busy because they're doing workforce analyses, but that's not critical to meet a deadline. So, my first thing that I'm going to look at is who can assist with the payroll processes. Maybe not with payroll itself, but maybe the time and attendance part of it, because that's an important piece of it, but it's not something that other people can't then learn, and learn it pretty quickly. These are black belts. They look at processes. So, the very first place I went was, well, is there anybody under this particular leader, the team of 15, who can fill in before we go to other areas that might be lean as well? So, prior to coming here, have you had a meeting with those three departments in the last two months? Not with the three departments. I had a meeting with the leader of those three departments. And who was that? Delphine Maiden. Okay. And so, when you met with her, did she share what she needed? She shared what she needed, and then she didn't like the idea of the black belts helping out. Okay. So, that's when I went back, and I explored other options. Okay. And those options are supposed to be done by when? Well, they'll be done in time for the first payroll. I don't know if they need somebody for the May 4th payroll, or it's for the other two payrolls. So, it's going to be done for whatever payroll is needed. And again, it's the former manager of payroll is going to be helping. Okay. So, what is your approach in compensating? I know, Councilman, you asked about that. But there's a concern when individuals are taking on additional responsibilities, and they're not compensated for it. So, can you tell me a little bit about that in terms of what you plan to fix it, or is it a lateral move? Tell me how you can share how that's done when someone takes on additional responsibilities. When they take on additional responsibilities, it's not uncommon, and it's actually very common, for people to get paid for those additional responsibilities. And that's, it's more common than not. They would be paid for the additional responsibilities, unless there's some reason not to. Mm-hmm. Okay. Are compensations decisions applied consistently across employees in similar situations? We have a comp team, and so it's centralized. And yes, that's our goal, is to apply it consistently. Yes. Okay. That's your goal, but is it done across the board? Ms. Pittman, of course there could be a situation where it's, it's, it's an anomaly. Mm-hmm, okay. Prior to compensation's commitments made by leadership, always been honored when it comes to compensation? Has, has it always been honored or not? Or has it been delayed? If an employee receives a letter that says that we're doing something, it's honored. And it's never delayed? I can't say there's not a never. I'm, I'm telling you, our practice is to honor and offer in, that's in writing. Okay. What standards are used when issuing discipline or performance write-up? Can you tell me a little bit more? You talked a little bit about it, but can you share with us a little bit more? What standards are used? So we, we hold our employees to similar standards. Our appointed, I'm assuming you're talking about appointed employees. Um, so we've got standards that are in our civil service rules. The appointed employees do not fall under those rules, but we use those same standards, uh, to judge our, make sure that our employees are following, uh, the standards that are acceptable. Okay. How would you describe your, um, communication style with your employees doing high-pressured, um, situations? I think I'm a collaborative leader. Um, if I'm in a high-pressure situation, then I, and somebody wants to go into detail about something, then I, I might not be able to listen to it at that point. So, um, at that point, I would just say, you know, we'll have to talk about this later. Has there been any, um, concerns regarding, um, your interaction being perceived as aggressive and intimidating with your staff? Not to my direct reports that I'm aware of. Okay. So you actually feel that your staff feel comfortable coming to you about issues that they're having, and you're addressing them in a timely manner? I don't know what everybody's thinking, so, I mean, I, I just come to work, and I do the best job that I can. Um, have there been supervisors that, you know, I wasn't wild about? Absolutely. So you're saying that employees are encouraged to openly discuss the workplace with you and policies and concerns, and you can identify them? Anyone who has requested a meeting with me, I have met with them. So I want to talk a little bit about the culture. Um, how do you address the concerns related to workplace culture or employees' well-being? Um, we take employee well-being very seriously. We have, um, a very solid wellness program. In terms of workplace culture, um, maybe, uh, could you be more specific? No, I'm just saying in, in terms of someone comes to you about an issue and they feel like it needs to be, um, supported by you, and I want to know how do you, how do you do that? If you're not just hearing it from one person, do you feel like they can come to you and you feel like you can address it? I, I do feel like they could come to me and, um, and I would do my best to address it. Um, you know, if, if I agree, I may not agree. Mm-hmm. Okay. I'm entitled to my opinion, especially as the chief. So, how do you ensure that all teams, including those led by minority leaders, are supported for equity in their departments? Supported for equity? Mm-hmm. In, in what? Yeah. In the work environment. Are, are you hiring, when you go to hire staff, are you looking at, um, um, education and qualifications? Are, are you looking at people that you know, and some of the internal staff might be more educated or skill sets, and you choose someone else when, when staff might be interested in a certain position, and you're not giving them an opportunity internally, and you bring someone on the outside. Okay, from the outside. Mm-hmm. Um, I, I, I, it's the hiring manager that makes the decision. Okay. So, when you first started, um, in your role, who was the first person that you hired? Maybe, promoted? No, hired, when you first started. I didn't, I don't recall hiring anyone. Okay, so you, you didn't hire Sunny? Uh, Sunny was promoted. She was promoted. Did you know her prior to coming to JEA? I've known her for years. Okay. We worked together at the city. And was that disclosed? Yeah. That you knew her? Who did you disclose that to? Vicki knew that I knew her. I'm sorry? Vicki knew that I knew her. So, Vicki was the only person that knew that? No, I'm not saying that. Okay, you just said that. So, which one is it? I, I didn't say that. So, what'd you say? I said that Vicki knew. There, there could have been others who knew. I, we, it wasn't a secret. Okay, so did you interview other people besides Sunny? And how many did you interview? And were any of them internal? I interviewed four other people, and all of them were internal. Okay, and have there been any disagreement regarding direction or contributions of certain team members that, um, reveal biases or undetermining behaviors? Can you repeat that again? I didn't catch that. Have there been any disagreements regarding the direction or contribution of certain team members and, or any biases that you're aware of? I don't, I really don't understand the question. So, individuals that have come to you of color who are interested in getting support and, or interested in other jobs, when they come to you, either they, um, and some of them have even retired or they felt like they've been pushed out, um, the workforce. And I'm just asking you, were you aware of that? When someone, um, have said they're interested in a certain job, um, they feel like they have been, um, reprimanded for certain things? And have you been a part of that? So there are, anytime you select someone for a position and if others interview for it, then, um, those others are going to feel some sort of way and, and how they feel is totally up to the individual. Right now, I don't know, you probably haven't seen or heard of some of this. I've talked to some of the resident, I mean, some of the employees who have been there for a long time and I've also talked to some, uh, employees, um, who've retired or they feel like they were pushed out. So I have five letters and they're not interested in coming forward until they make sure that there's some amenity and that they are protected and that they don't feel like they're going to be reprimanded in any way. I'd just like you to just listen. I just want to, if you don't mind, um, to share this. And it says, over the past two years, I have observed a gradual decline in awareness among the highest ranking decision makers at JEA. Senior leadership has made numerous decisions without providing a clear rationale, despite the organization's stated commitment to transparency, the response to key, um, decisions, often like true openness. Since the arrival of our new chief and a new CEO, employees' feedback have not been sought through the survey. And if there is a survey, I'm very concerned that I would be reprimanded and no explanation or timeline for this return has ever been given until leadership was compelled to respond due to a recent allegation. Due to a recent allegation, um, the absence of communications regarding the survey discontinuation formed my, uh, my, um, opinion that employees' voices are no longer valued. The organization previously demonstrated progress in terms of representation at the leadership level. However, with recent changes, minority representatives and leadership has steadily diminished. Individuals in minority roles were replaced with direct appointments of predominantly white candidates, except for one appointments are made without a competitive process. This shift has altered the landscape of leadership and undetermined the appearance of our support for inclusiveness historically. This is another one historically, HR leadership and precise improvise the importance of diversity interviews and selection panel and talent acquisition services enforces it. It may have been more of an unwritten practice, but to my knowledge, it was the norm. The current actions do not align with principles. At least two director levels positions involve panels that include it. Is it the CHRO? What does that stand for? Chief Human Resources Officer. Okay. Okay. Um, but lacked interview panel diversity. For me, that seemed to further build the perception of appointments being less common for non-white employees. Another one. And I'm not going to read all of them, but I just want to get you. The reason why I was asking you those questions is because of the letters that I received. I'm writing anonymously out of concern for the current state of the organization's culture. At JEA, many longstanding employees have witnessed a significant shift in the work environment over recent years. A shift that has deeply impacted morale, trust, and engagement. Many employees perceive a transition toward a more rigid, top-down leadership approach. Open dialogue appears limited, descending, and are discouraged. And decision-making often make them feel driven by external political pressures rather than internal operational expertise. The emphasis seems to have shifted from collaboration and transparent to compliance and control. There is a growing concern that leadership stability is being prioritized over accountability. And this section, selection members of executive leadership operate in alignment with meaningful internal challenges. This has created an atmosphere where employees feel cautioned about speaking openly, which is not innovative, and it reduces trust. JEA has the foundation, talent, and the history to be an industry-leading organization again. However, restoring trust will require renewed transparency, our authentic engagement with employees at all levels, and leadership that encourage constructive dialogue rather than suppressing it. And so I'm concerned. I got a few more. When I read these, I was horrified. And so I know what you were telling me today. I'm here because I'm really concerned about the staff and some of the people who are in the union. I also received a book that one of the leadership teams wrote while they were there and made derogatory statements about African-American and brown people. So I don't know if you're aware of any of this. I hope you're not up in the sky and not looking down to see what your staff is doing. And if by answering the questions today, I know that you are probably going to be meeting. You said you're going to be meeting with some of them. But I'm concerned that people don't feel engaged like they used to. You know, this last one, I have to just say a little bit. This person says the workplace has become a system that diminishes rather than develop its people. The gap between employee roles and their actual competency is not only visual, but often intentionally maintained. Advanced degrees and professional certifications are routinely devalued. And I have personally been penalized for my achievements due to other biases, insecurity and jealousy. Racial tension further shapes how opportunities are disputed and have individuals and how individuals are treated. This hostility is overt, creates an environment where employees of certain races and ethnicities, backgrounds are scrutinized more harshly, dismissed more quickly and supported less consistency. So I wanted to just share that because you're saying today, you didn't know any of this was going on in terms of me asking questions. And I just feel like there's no alignment if you didn't really know some of this going on where I don't work there. I'm just a council person. And they felt compelled to call me because they know I care about people. And what this is about is people. And that's what it should be. And at the bottom line, yeah, we're interested in making money, but not off the backs of the people. So I hope that through these letters that you are listening and you can come back at some point or send us. And I would like that if you don't mind, because I'm very concerned. Can I ask you a question? Yes. Are all these letters within the human resource area under her supervision? They're human resources and union. Okay. Yeah. Okay. So, and I think more would come forward, but they are afraid. And so unless we know that we can protect them, unfortunately, I can't give up no names, right? Now, I don't think the ones that have left JEA under your supervision, they probably really don't care. But the ones that, they got to work. They got to keep the lights on and they got to feed their families. And so if they have been there, you know, several years, I think that matters. And whatever matters to them, it should matter to the staff, whether you're in leadership position or you're working side by side. I was appalled in the conversations, just having it. I mean, got an ear full. And this is nothing in terms of what I've heard. And so either we need to get it together or we need to have some new policies in place. And so I wanted to share this with you all today. And at some point in time, if I know that they are protected, I have some that are willing to come here and testify. Thank you. May I respond to some of that? I'm sorry? May I respond to some of that? That was? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you. So I heard several different things, and it's kind of difficult to sit here and write and listen at the same time. I'll start with what I think is the easy one, the book. The book was written by one of our appointed employees, and he was at the bargaining table. The book was written in 2016. I ordered the book because I heard the same thing that you heard. I looked through the book, and I couldn't find anything that was derogatory. So if you think there's something in the book that was derogatory, and I mean derogatory. I don't mean like the book was written under the Obama administration. It was a political book. I believe the author did not like President Obama. I think that came out to me. But I looked, and we asked the union as well to point out what in that book, and when I looked at the specific paragraph they were referring to, I didn't read it the same way. Okay. Well... But I have the book. It's in my office. Yeah, and so do I. And I spent money on that book. And I've had an opportunity to read as well. And then, you know, also bringing your political bias, and I will share this with you, that I was told that Vicki said that make JTA great again, and they took that as an offense because they know that it is President Trump. That's his tagline. And so I'm not sure in whatever space it was in, but the space that it was in, they didn't receive that very well. So if they didn't say that to you, you wouldn't have known. But I'm just saying, you know, we all have different political views, but bringing your views to work is unacceptable. And if I may respond to that one, and then I wasn't done with my other one. Vicki has done a presentation, and she does mention MAGA. And what she says about MAGA is it's the big four. Microsoft, Amazon, she might put Apple second. I don't know. Google and Apple. And that's what she's talking about. She's not talking about a movement. She's not talking about a specific president. She's talking about the big four companies. That's the context it's used in. And that's why context is important. And that's why going back to the book, context is important. But I heard you say you were talking about the chiefs. And yes, do the chiefs look different now than they had prior to Vicki? Yes, they do. Since Vicki, and I know you asked about this earlier, we've lost two African-American chiefs. Yes, they were both dismissed. And we've also lost two white males. One resigned in lieu of termination, and the other one is Kurt Wilson. So it's two and two. And right now, this is a moment in time. Do we only have one African-American chief? Yes. But it's a moment in time. These things ebb and flow. And again, we hire for merit. I heard the survey. This survey has been in talks for a long time. If somebody watched the board meeting, they would have heard Vicki months ago. I don't mean at the February one. I mean last year when she mentioned we're going to be doing a survey. We do it every other year. That's except for pulse surveys, which might be done more often. But we did the survey. The last survey, we got the results in October of 24. It's not been this length of like five years since a survey. We do surveys on a regular basis. And then the other thing I want to say is personnel decisions, we don't discuss that with the employees. We give them the high-level information. But I'm HR. I have to be careful what I discuss. I'm not going to come in front of you and talk about personnel issues that then might result in a lawsuit or something like that. So, employees don't always see what's happening. That is absolutely correct, especially the lower you are in the organization. Employee feedback not being sought. I mean, I think doing the survey is a good example of we are seeking employee feedback. We're seeing how engaged our employees are. What I see is happening here is that you're focusing on the disgruntled employees. There are people who are very happy working for JEA. I'm one of them. And you're not going to hear from people like me. So, we're putting a lot of emphasis on the disgruntled employees. And that's a problem. I'm not saying don't take what they say into account. So, I would disagree with you because they're not all African-American. There's some Caucasians. No, I'm just saying. I want to let you know that. I didn't say that. No, no, no. You didn't have to say that. But I want to let you know that the people that I've talked to, they're not going to come to you because they don't feel comfortable. And they don't feel like you are aligned with them. So, if that's the case, that means that you might need to dig a little deeper in order to get them to trust you and or share information with you. So, I'm not there, so I can't say what I believe. I'm just going by what I heard and you had a chance today to share what you needed to based on my questions to you. So, I just wanted to let you know, I think some things need to be fixed in that area. And I hope you take that as an opportunity to develop corrective actions in those departments and or, you know, training for the staff. I don't know once a staff person takes training, if they have to make sure that they remain with the organization a certain period of time. I don't know that, but maybe so. I know with the city, if the city pays, you know, for you to go to college, they want you to stay over a period of time. So, I'm just sharing with you so you can be aware of what the talk is, or as the kids say, the T. So, you will be informed about what is being said. So, I appreciate you being here today and answering the questions that I asked you. And I'm hoping that we can bring some of those people here. So, you know, it's not just on the letters that was forwarded to me, but that you are interested in making a transformational change inside your departments that you're responsible for. Thank you. Let me make a couple points that I have learned through this process. The Human Rights Commission employees can go to, if they feel they have been discriminated against, and he can provide protection to those employees. So, that would include JEA employees. So, I hope they're listening. That is an avenue for those people. The Inspector General does not get into issues such as this. After the last board meeting, after the February board meeting, he had several JEA employees, and I don't want to speak for him, but I did meet with him, that came forward, which is why we're here. Because he can't investigate this. That's not his role. It's fraud and abuse. So, in addition to the capacity issue, this particular issue was punted to us. Our survey. We want to do a survey. I understand, and I think my colleagues understand, that we're not responsible for personnel issues at JEA. That is the board. I respect that. But some of my colleagues are excited about us doing a survey. We will get those results, and we will provide those to JEA. I welcome them to be involved in our survey if they want to, if they wish. And I've said that to people at JEA. We got involved in our survey after that February board meeting where it appeared to me after that that the board had no desire at that time to do anything other than go to HR, go to the hotline. That was their response at that time. I don't think anybody can argue with that. Now, it changed within three weeks, and I'm still not clear why it changed so abruptly other than I think the council getting involved, and they felt like they had to respond to us. That's my personal feeling, but that's where we are. Sure, and I want to go to Mr. Thiel and see if he has any further comments. Please go ahead. Well, just, Mr. Chair, I mean, I watch the news. I read the Facebook articles and the editorials. This committee has taken a lot of heat. People say that we shouldn't be doing this, and I just want to say in one hearing, just one few hours, in addition to everything Ms. Pittman just brought to light, which is shocking, in addition to that, we found out JEA was paying outgoing execs full salaries for essentially doing nothing, what appears to be circumvention of state law. JEA is paying new execs just for media spin and hired an outside media consulting group just to limit questions and shape coverage of JEA, which is exactly one of the reasons we zapped Aaron Zahn. JEA's internal investigation does not appear to protect employees' anonymity. JEA was working to fire Kurt Wilson months before, or at least demote him, months before than they originally admitted, which blows up this whole notion that there's a smear campaign that just happened to come out of the Ballard contract. The math and the timing now does not add up. In a couple of hours, we got all that out. A couple hours. Mr. Teal, do you have any comments or questions? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a couple. Ms. Moser, you said that there were four of the chiefs that turned over since Vicki started with JEA as CEO. Is that right? Yes. And you said two of them were put into consulting positions. Do you know whether or not any of the four had any nondisclosure agreements as part of their termination or consulting agreements? I don't know. And then, Mr. Chair, you just touched on this, but I'm kind of confused a little bit about some of your comments in terms of the timing on certain things. On the one hand, you said that you had not, and as far as you know, HR had not received any complaints about Ms. Kavey. Is that right? That's correct. Okay. Now, but the board was told by, I think, Mr. DeSalvo that the motivation for engaging the employee satisfaction survey was because they'd received a complaint about Ms. Kavey. Did you understand that? I heard that as well. Well, the engagement survey was, again, started before any of this started. Okay. And it might just been that the general, the general's not as in the weeds as those of us doing the work, and that's just an in the weeds question. Okay. So you think he might have been wrong? If we want to mention wrong, I feel like what Councilman Diamond just said was wrong. With Mr. DeSalvo, do you think he's wrong about receiving the complaint? The survey is different than the investigation. I'll make that clear. So the survey is one thing. That was already being done, and the investigation came as a result of what we heard Kurt say. Okay. So you didn't answer the question. You're under oath. So is Mr. DeSalvo— You're under oath. He asked a question. Was Mr. DeSalvo wrong? Councilman Salem, I gave you an answer, and I think it's a good answer. I think things got confused. The survey is one thing, and the investigation is another. They're not one and the same. I'm not saying he was malicious if he was wrong. Often we get confused or have the wrong information, but you're still wrong. Councilman Salem, sorry. If you want to talk about verbatim what he stated, which neither of you have done, then she can say whether it was factually wrong. She's having to rely on what you said, General DeSalvo said, at a meeting a couple of weeks ago. I didn't say it. It's not a fair question, and therefore she can't give you a fair answer under oath. So if Mr. DeSalvo said that the motivation for engaging the Employee Satisfaction Survey was because they had received a complaint, would you agree with that? She was saying something to me at the same time that she was. That's a fair question. So repeat that. Can you ask it again, Mr. T. So if Mr. DeSalvo said that the reason why JEA engaged the Employee Satisfaction Survey after the city council said they were going to engage one was because at that point they had received a complaint about Ms. Kavey, would you agree with that? Yes, but we were always going to have an engagement survey prior to when council said they were going to do theirs. So if Mr. DeSalvo was correct that they had in fact gotten a complaint about Ms. Kavey and that complaint did not come to you because you said you had no complaints about Ms. Kavey, where would that complaint have gone? It could have gone to a board member. Okay. So and a board member also being Mr. Morales? Yes. Okay. Now you said that you were in discussions for a year about doing a survey. How many employees are going to participate in that survey? Right now we have about 37% that have completed it. It opened up April 20th and closes May 8th. Now how many total employees are allowed to participate? All 2,200 plus employees. So it's JEA wide? Yeah, I'm on the list. Okay. And so it's not a targeted survey in other words? Not at all. Okay. You also said that the law firm was brought in in response to the council saying that they had received complaints. Is that right? Jackson Lewis? So we brought, so Jackson Lewis was already on retainer and we heard the complaint that Kurt said about Vicki and the toxic work environment. I also heard the term racism thrown out there as well. And that's the reason we engaged this attorney to conduct the investigation. So why was it that Kurt's testimony to the city council triggered it when Kurt's statements to the board and General DeSalvo didn't trigger it? It was prior to the city council. So your timing is off. You're saying it was Kurt's initial statements that triggered bringing in of the law firm? Correct. And those initial statements were to General DeSalvo? To Rick Morales and I think General DeSalvo. But it was in the beginning, before the city council got involved, we decided that we were going to do an investigation and go through the normal HR process. So the normal HR process for somebody this high up in the organization is to engage a third party. That's the normal HR process. And that's what we followed. Going back to the October 2024 survey, that was the GLINT survey, right? Yes. Okay. And you drew a distinction between GLINT and their survey with the current company that you guys hired as far as providing assurances to the employees that it would be anonymous, right? Only because I can't speak to what GLINT offered versus what Energage offers. I know what Energage offers. Okay. So you don't know that GLINT didn't have that same assurance as part of their practice? I don't know that. Isn't it standard practice for an employee satisfaction survey company to assure? Yes. Okay. That is standard practice. So that's not a big deviation between GLINT and as far as you know? I don't think so. But I also didn't do any research on that matter. So that's why I made a differentiation between GLINT and Energage. Okay. Now, have you reviewed the results of the GLINT survey? I did. And the comments that were mass part of that document? Yes. And it's normal for us to have a lot of comments. So there was one particular employee that seemed to come up a lot as far as a toxic environment and belittling employees, including employees that were not in his group. What happened to that employee? He's no longer with JEA. Is he one of the ones that? Yes, sir. And he's one of the, is he a white employee? No, he was Asian. Okay. He was dismissed. One of the chiefs? No. You said, you started off your comment in response to Council Member Diamond's question about what was inaccurate. And you said that the first thing was, is that it's a, it was inaccurate to say that it's a racist or toxic work environment. What are you basing that on? I'm basing that on my opinion. I'm basing it on my experiences and I work directly with Vicki. Okay. One of her direct reports. And I'm basing it on talking to other employees that report directly to her. Now, are you familiar with that, that access to the seventh floor has been restricted? Yes. So how many employees have direct access to the seventh floor? Do you know? I don't have that number on my, on the top of my head and security is not in my area. Okay. But you're one of the ones that has access? My office is on the seventh floor. Yes, I have access. And would it be safe to say that all of the chiefs have access? All the chiefs have access. They're executive assistants and then anybody who comes to visit me on a regular basis. So all of my direct reports have access. Who determines who has access to the seventh floor? Well, obviously anybody who's housed on the seventh floor is going to have access. And then access is limited unless there's an exception. So again, if you have a reason to be on the seventh floor regularly, you're going to have access. It was really just meant, it was, it was really done because there were securities that were put in place in the building and we weren't taking advantage of them. And so we decided we should take advantage of all the security in the building. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's all the questions I have. That security change just occurred recently. Is that correct? It's been a few months. Okay. It would have been not this calendar year. Okay. Ms. Pittman, you're, you're done. Everyone else. Thank you, Ms. Moser for coming. We appreciate you spending time. I know it's not easy. We're adjourned.