Posted: 7/5/05
By MaryHelen Swanson
A 29-page report on an internal investigation of the goings on at the Chisago County attorneyís office has received attention lately, not only locally, but in metropolitan media.
The report became public when the county board agreed that the position of county attorney falls under ìpublic officialî and not ìemployeeî status therefore the report is not constrained by data privacy.
Still, with one or two exceptions, all names have been blackened out in the report which can be obtained by request and a payment of $7.50.
The Chisago County board became aware of an investigation when it was brought to the attention of at least one member that the board had approved a $24,000 payment to NeuVest Consultant of Edina, Minn.
The approval of payment was included in bills approved as part of a consent agenda this spring. The investigation was conducted in January and the report was completed Feb. 21.
According to County Administrator John Moosey, the investigation came about after some employees in the county attorneyís office made complaints to county human resource director Renee Kirchner.
Some complaints were done in e-mail, a number of others by personal visits to Kirchnerís office.
And when in late November, 2004, one of the employees indicated the desire to file an official complaint, Kirchner sought approval from Moosey to have an investigation done with an outside firm. Kirchner picked the firm, Moosey said, after he gave her the go ahead. Moosey said the person doing the investigative interviews had given a seminar to county employees on sexual harassment.
While the report is not good and shows there is room for improvement, Moosey said, it gives no indication of criminal wrongdoing.
A statement in the document notes that nothing in the report should be construed as reaching any conclusion regarding the merits of the claims. And, it goes on, the report does not offer any legal advice, counsel or recommendations as to whether corrective action is necessary. Moosey said he is not recommending the county board do anything with the report. He also noted that since the office of county attorney is elected, the county administrator is just advisory to the attorneyís office.
Moosey believes the foundation for the complaints is a change in office routine.
He confirmed that in the past year five employees have left the county attorneyís office ñ three attorneys and two office staff. The resigning attorneys have been replaced through the normal advertising, interview process, Moosey noted.
He noted that there were between 40 and as many as 60 applicants per ad for the positions. Currently there are eight attorneys in the office.
The formal complaint filed with Kirchner listed three allegations against County Attorney Katherine Johnson and others in the office. They were favoritism, hostile work environment and retaliation.
Chisago County has an adopted personnel policy dealing with harassment, offensive behavior and violent behavior. But as noted in the report, Kirchner has indicated that the county ìdoes not have a general Code of Conduct that prohibits, for example, unfair treatment or states that personnel shall act with honesty and propriety and provide a working environment that allows all personnel to be productive in their jobs.î
A total of 18 people were interviewed for the investigation.
On favoritism
The details of the report show that current and former employees in the attorneyís office allege favoritism of at least four individuals by Johnson and at least one other person.
One individual commented that there had always been division in the office, but the difference is now Johnson has taken sides. More than one comment centered on the allegation that Johnson turns to one specific person on a regular basis which is construed as favoritism.
Johnsonís reply to these allegations in the report is that she denies favoring any specific person or turning to anyone for everything.
She said, ìIím trying to do what I think is bestî and ìI have a high regard for (blackened out), but I don't do everything she wants.î
Johnson also commented that she (herself) is accomplished and didnít get to where she is by having someone tell her what to do.
There were also comments that Johnson doesnít show favoritism and that she does not treat people differently.
On hostile work environment
Allegations of hostile work environment were made by current and former employees in the report. There were strong accusations that Johnson specifically targeted an employee and had ìdemoted" her and taken away responsibilities.
One commented that the stress she feels because of work is affecting her emotionally and physically. Many allegations were that Johnson was acting in a mean-spirited fashion, to the point that at least one felt Johnson was making life miserable so some employees would quit.
It is noted by the interviewer that Johnson admitted to some of the allegations and denied or offered explanation for others.
On retaliation
One interviewee told the interviewer that if someone does not agree with Johnson, they are considered a troublemaker.
Another claimed to have been ìdumped on.î This person said he/she gets in trouble for saying anything. Allegations were that there were changes in caseloads and that some in the office felt the changes were wrong.
Another reported that Johnson speaks to her in a condescending tone and makes no eye contact. Johnsonís comments included the fact that she didnít expect to encounter as much open hostility as she got.
While some interviewees allege that Johnson is more like a bully and seems insecure, still others said she is very open and friendly.
One interviewee said Johnson views disagreement as insubordination and claims that Johnson has said she expects respect and loyalty from the staff.
Of her own management style, Johnson is quoted as saying she expects that people ìdonít air dirty laundry outside the office.î
Johnson explained that while she does not expect blind adherence to office policies, she does expect people to explain why something is not going to work.
There were also allegations of a perceived division in the office based on gender.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County attorney responds to internal investigation report
By MaryHelen Swanson
County Attorney Katherine Johnson told the Post Review she didnít really know why the investigation was needed, but said she was agreeable to open up the office for the investigation.
She said there is a really good staff in the office, but that itís not uncommon for people to leave when thereís a change in administration.
She said one of the attorneys who left had been a 14-year veteran of the office, two had been there between five and six years, she believed. She noted that there are still some long-time employees in the office.
She noted that the office has a good record, a good conviction rate and other successful programs.
Johnson said that in 2002, after taking office, she talked with the attorneys and support staff and they had three issues: too much work, not enough space and they were short-staffed.
Johnson said she proceeded to put together a reorganization plan dividing civil and criminal assignments. Some responsibilities and caseloads were shifted, she admitted.
She went to the county board for approval of her reorganization plan which resulted in not only approval, but the hiring of two new attorneys and one paralegal position.
Some people felt it was not their environment, she said of the office, and moved on. She noted that one employee went to the attorney generalís office.
She said the office is fully staffed now, with the exception of office manager which still needs to be filled, but that others had picked up some of the work. She said she has a great staff and thinks things are going well. She has a desire, she said, to make the office a premiere place to work.
She also noted that the county board has given her the tools (including scanning capabilities) which makes retrieval of old files much easier.
©ECM Post Review
6448 Main Street
North Branch, MN 55056
Telephone: 651-674-7025
Fax: 651-674-7026
E-mail: editor.postreview@ecm-inc.com