November 5, 2010
Bakke
asked Long questions about Sandy Blunt's criminal charges.
Bakke: Were the criminal charges related to
promotional items provided to WSI staff?
Long: I don't have full knowledge.
Bakke: He was never accused of stealing?
Long: I don't know that.
Bakke: Just promotional items?
Long: That's my understanding, yeah.
Bakke
asked several questions about Long's human resources experience. Long said he'd worked at Midwest Business
Systems and Contract America. Bakke noted that Long's employment
application at WSI did not mention human resources. Long replied that he had overseen human
resources at his other positions.
Bakke
said Long had been terminated from his job at Cross Country. Long said he was laid off because of a
reduction in the work force.
Bakke: They didn't tell you they thought you were
not qualified to be the human resources manager and that you could transfer
into a lower position?
Long: No.
That's not accurate.
Bakke: In fact, they replaced you with someone else.
Long: No.
They flattened the organization and moved someone else in.
Bakke
then handed Long the Cross
County employment
termination notification. Under the
item, is this person eligible for re-hire it was written no, possibly in a
different role with less accountability.
It said the main reason for leaving was that there was a more qualified
employee that shifted into that position as HR manager.
Bakke
then moved onto the issue of Dave Spencer having received confidential employer
listing documents.
Bakke: You testified you believed inappropriate
documents were provided to Spencer when he on sick leave. You do not know what data was given to him,
do you?
Long: No, I do not know.
Tom
Tuntland then began his redirect of Long.
Tuntland: Let's pick up at Dave Spencer. What did Blunt tell you regarding getting
that data?
Long: He told me Dave wanted to start a company
writing grants and that he needed contact information including voicemail and
computer data.
Tuntland
then moved onto the topic of the ITTP project.
Tuntland: Did you have anything against Doug Hintz?
Long: He's a nice guy. No. I
was concerned about the project.
Tuntland
then introduced emails that showed Long had brought his concern to the
board. Board member Mandigo sent Long an
email on October 3, 2007, "as to staffing of the team involved in ITTP, that
is not a board concern. Successful
delivery of bringing the project in in 2009 is."
Tuntland: Did Hintz get the position he wanted?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland
moved the questioning into Billie Peltz.
Tuntland: Did you and Peltz have business meetings over
lunch?
Long: Lots of people did.
Tuntland: You don't need a meeting to tell someone
they're doing wonderfully. Is there
anything romantic about that?
Long: No.
Tuntland
then moved onto the topic of the Cross
County termination memo.
Tuntland: It doesn't have your signature?
Long: No.
Tuntland: I noticed the box, "reduction of work
force" was checked and crossed out.
Were you told a more qualified employee was shifted to your position?
Long: No.
Tuntland: Were you told you could be hired in a lower
position?
Long: No.
Tuntland: Were others laid off at the same time?
Long: Yes.
They were terrible times.
Tuntland
then moved to the WSI employee handbook and asked whether Long was familiar
with the fraternization policy.
Tuntland: Anything in that fraternization policy that
prohibits friendships?
Long: No.
Tuntland: It prohibits intimidate, romantic, or dating
relationships between a supervisor and a subordinate. Were you intimate?
Long: No.
Tuntland: Romantic?
Long: No.
Tuntland: Dating?
Long: No.
Tuntland: Were you married?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: Was Billie married?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: The second part deals with what is to be done
if a romantic relationship develops. The
persons reported could be reassigned.
Long: Correct.
Tuntland: Were you both asked if it was romantic?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: Did you both deny that?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: Anything in your personnel record about this?
Long: No.
Tuntland
then moved to the complaint filed with Risk Management.
Tuntland: You didn't sign this?
Long: No.
Tuntland: Did you go to Risk Management?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: Why did you go to Risk Management?
Long: The state auditor said if there were any
problems on this issue, we were required to let Risk Management know.
Tuntland
then asked questions about any complaints of Long's management style.
Tuntland: Cindy Ternes expressed dissatisfaction with
you as her supervisor.
Long: Correct.
Tuntland: Are you aware Cindy had expressed
dissatisfaction with others as her supervisor?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: What kind of person is Cindy?
Long: Smart.
High maintenance. She requires
constant attention.
Tuntland
then asked whether Long had applied for the University system's Chancellor
position. Long said he had. Tuntland then brought out the copy of Jim's
list which noted Chancellor position, did I have a future? He asked whether this reference was to the
Chancellor position. Long couldn't
say. Tuntland asked whether he
remembered making that document. Long
did not recall, nor did he remember leaving a notebook in his desk.
Tuntland: You did not provide this document to Mr.
Bakke?
Long: No.
Tuntland: As a state employee, did you think you had
the right to privacy in your desk?
Long: Of course not. It's public property.
Tuntland
then turned to Chad Nodland.
Tuntland: Did you know Chad
before the bruhaha with Sandy?
Long: No.
Tuntland: How were you introduced to Chad?
Long: John Halvorson said they had been roommates
in college, but I don't really recall how I met him.
Tuntland: Do you remember if Halvorson introduced you?
Long: No.
Just that Halvorson said he was a good guy.
On next
to the topic of nepotism.
Tuntland: Were you concerned about nepotism?
Long: Yes.
It's against the law.
Tuntland: Isn't there an exception when there's an
urgent situation?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: How long would an urgent situation last?
Long: A couple of weeks, maybe a couple of days.
Tuntland: Months?
Long: No.
Next onto
the tape recording between Long and Peltz.
Tuntland: You don't know if that was an accidental
recording?
Long: No.
It's digital. It's like a cell
phone. It's easy to just turn on.
Tuntland: How long will this digital tape record?
Long: 96 hours or until the battery dies.
Tuntland: Did you play that recording to Halvorson
before you were suspended?
Long: No.
Tuntland: Did Halvorson discuss that conversation
before you were suspended?
Long: No.
Tuntland: Do you recall if you talked with Risk
Management before or after that conversation with Billie?
Long: I believe after.
Tuntland
then asked about the dummy email account Long had set up in the name of Brad
Freeze.
Tuntland: Did you set up the account or did your wife?
Long: I don't recall.
Tuntland: You didn't want your name associated with
what's being sent to the press?
Long: No. I
was scared to death.
Tuntland: During discovery, Mr. Bakke asked you for
that data.
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: Are the Brad Freeze emails not saved on your
computer?
Long: No.
It's gmail. It's saved elsewhere.
Tuntland: Did you forget your password?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: Did you let Mr. Bakke know you would sign
releases to allow gmail to give him those emails?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: Did you offer to cooperate?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: As a state employee, you do not have the
expectation of privacy?
Long: Yes. One
of the first things you are told is state equipment is state property including
everything you write down.
Tuntland: Emails?
Long: Same thing.
State property.
Tuntland: You were asked about open records. Mr. Armstrong told you what it would cost to
get the records?
Long: It was hundreds of dollars. I couldn't afford health care so I couldn't
afford that.
Tuntland: Did you become aware the state auditor was
asking questions about Dave Spencer's sick leave?
Long: I became aware the state auditor was asking
questions about where Dave Spencer was at.
Tuntland: You told Blunt that?
Long: I told him that they were asking questions.
Tuntland
then showed a memo from Billie Peltz to Camie O'Connor. O'Connor had worked in the finance department
and cut checks. Long said she'd had
concerns because her name was associated with certain checks.
Tuntland: It says, "Jodi and I (Peltz) reviewed
the relocation policy and determined Spencer would not have to reimburse WSI
for moving expenses."
Long: That's what it says.
Tuntland: Wasn't Spencer's payment part of the basis
for Blunt's conviction?
Long: My understanding, yes.
Tuntland: Who did Jodi report to?
Long: Sandy Blunt.
Tuntland
then turned to questions about the Armstrong journal.
Tuntland: You were asked about your concerns that he
was planning to use his position to derail the prosecution?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland
then read from the journal, "In my role as Burleigh County Commissioner,
need to determine what appropriate action I can take without jeopardizing my
family and position."
Tuntland: Armstrong, he was communications executive at
WSI and a Burleigh County Commissioner?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: The Burleigh County Commission fixes
salaries?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland
then turned to questions about what's become known as Long's manifesto. He established Long had made some small
changes to the document after giving it to Assistant States Attorney Cynthia
Feland and that Tuntland had submitted the document to the States Attorney, not
Long. He established the document had
been provided to Mike Quinn at BCI also and that it had information that led to
the conviction of Sandy Blunt.
There
next was a discussion of FLSA exemptions which had to do with exempt workers
filling out timesheets. Long was
concerned that that would prove an employee was non-exempt which meant an
organization would then have to pay overtime, fines and penalties. It could be criminal and could cause huge
problems for an organization. Long had
argued against exempt employees submitting timesheets and that was part of what
was submitted to States Attorney and BCI.
Tuntland
next asked about violations of the Veteran's Preference Law and established
that Long thought Blunt's hiring of Hutchings and Nallie, who were friends of
Blunt's, and who were making $150,000 per year, was a violation of the law,
because veterans were not allowed to apply for those positions.
Tuntland
then moved to Angela Scherbenske. Long
said she had to leave because of ethical reasons, that she had been working in
finance and felt she had been coerced into signing vouchers that she did not
want to sign. Tuntland then produced an
email from Blunt on the topic. Long said
that Blunt thought it important to put it in black and white, that there were
no problems with procurement. He said he
had learned of these ethical problems not through Angela, but through her boss,
Dave Sandy.
Tuntland: Did you know if the payment of promotional
items was legal or illegal?
Long: I didn't know for sure. It seemed if there was a line, we should stay
to the left.
Tuntland
referred to emails which had been sent to legislators from Long. Long said that Blunt had a hand in every memo
that went to the legislature, that Blunt would often write those memos himself.
Tuntland: You were asked to talk to Mike Quinn
regarding the Blunt prosecution?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: Did you think Blunt was coming back to WSI?
Long: Could be.
Tuntland: Was there an advantage to you in talking to
Quinn?
Long: No, I didn't want to, but it was the right
thing to do.
Tuntland: Were you trying to cover yourself so you
would not get fired?
Long: That's ridiculous. All I had to do was play ball and I would be
the golden child.
Tuntland: Wahlin and Forward, who were they reporting
to?
Long: Jodi Bjornson.
Tuntland: Who assigned Wahlin and Forward to the
investigation?
Long: John Halvorson.
Tuntland: Halvorson was one of the suspects?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: And their report was addressed to Halvorson?
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: Did you think it was wrong to let the
suspects know what evidence you had?
Long: Yes.
Long: Yes.
Tuntland: But you had to give this information to
Halvorson or you'd be fired?
Long: Correct.
Tuntland
then established that Long had been certified as a professional in human
resources before he started at WSI.
Next
topic, the radio interview that Long had done with Joel Heitkamp.
Tuntland: Were you working at your office at WSI
when you talked with Joel?
Long: No.
Tuntland: Were you suspended?
Long: He referred to my not working and getting
paid.
Tuntland: You talked about being denied your
performance evaluation. When would that
have been?
Long: I was supposed to have been evaluated and
receive a pay increase in December, but didn't receive either.
Tuntland: Regarding your termination at Cross Country,
how much notice did you get?
Long: None, it was immediate.
Tuntland: Were you surprised?
Long: No. We
had many meetings about the hard times and how there would be lay offs.
Bakke
again resumed his cross examination. He
returned to the issued of the Risk Management complaint. Long said that that
report was not signed by him.
Bakke: The fact is, it was electronically filed,
isn't that right?
Long: I don't recall.
Bakke: The reason it's not signed, if you file it
electronically, you don't sign it?
Long: No, I'd sign it.
Bakke: Do you continue to tape record today?
Long: No.
Bakke: Did you turn over your tape recording of
Peltz?
Long: No.
Bakke: The reason was, if you turned it over to
Halvorson, you'd be fired immediately?
Long: I don't know.
Bakke: About the gmail sent to northdecoder, are you
aware we did try to get these records?
Long: I think so.
Bakke: That gmail sent legal objections, remember?
Long: I remember talking to them.
Bakke: We went to Nodland referencing those emails.
Long: I didn't know that.
Bakke: And he asserted legal objections, did you
know that?
Long: No.
Bakke: We did try.
Did you know that?
Long: I didn't know.
Bakke
then asked questions about open records and established that Long had requested
significant amounts of open records including records of card access when
people would come in and out of the building, records of the current board,
former board, executive staff, Tim Wahlin, Rob Forward. Bakke asked if Long understood that would require
significant amounts of time. Long said,
no, it would take five minutes on the computer.
Bakke noted Long had requested all emails of executive staff and WSI
attorneys, folders, subarchives, sent and deleted files.
Bakke: This could be thousands of documents, true?
Long: Kind of like you have with me.
Bakke: We have yours for one person, this is many.
Long: True.
Bakke: Emails from the office of the Attorney
General, Office of OMB, there's 50 employees there, you cite no names, this is
thousands of documents.
Long: It's easy to query this.
Bakke: Wouldn't you have to get names?
Long: No.
Bakke: There'd have to be redactions.
Long: You did it for Sandy Blunt.
Bakke: You're talking about many man hours,
thousands of documents, no time limit, true?
Long: Yes.
Bakke
turned to the Peltz memo regarding Spencer not being required to reimburse WSI
for moving expenses. Long said he
understood from Jodi Bjornson she felt pressured to write that memo.
Bakke: Isn't it good enough that an attorney put
this in writing?
Long: Fair, but I did have alternative information
from the attorney who wrote it.
Bakke: Regarding Cindy Ternes, you said she
complained about all of her supervisors?
Long: She had problems with others.
Bakke: The only supervisor she had at WSI was you.
Long: Yes.
Bakke
turned to the information given to Dave Spencer.
Bakke: Did you download 11 to 12 names of personal
contacts from his computer?
Long: I don't recall.
Bakke: You don't deny it?
Long: I don't recall. I have a different context.
Bakke: If you have a different context, how can you
not remember? Do you remember printing
out that list and handing it to Halvorson?
Long: I don't recall that.
Bakke
turned to the issue of Long's claim that Veteran's Preferences were not
followed in connection with the hiring of Hutchings and Nallie.
Bakke: Were you at WSI before Nallie was hired?
Long: No.
Bakke: Hutchings?
Long: Yes.
Bakke: These were appointments. Is there anything wrong with that?
Long: Yes.
Tag Anderson
told me that it was improper.
Bakke
then turned back to the issue of Angela Scherbenske and the email from Blunt
asking whether Angela had alerted Long to any unethical procurement
activities. He then showed Long's reply
which said Long was never alerted to any unethical procurement activities.
Bakke: Did you ever investigate it?
Long: No, other people did.
Bakke: You never talked to Angela?
Long: Angela would have used her chain of command
which was Dave Sandy. She would not have
come to me.
Bakke
then produced an email from Long to Scherbenske. In that email he tells her directly, "I
need to know about anything unethical occurring at WSI. So I am issuing an order that you notify me
of problems."
Long: I talked with her and told her she should go
to Risk Management. She told me she was
not comfortable with that.
Bakke: But there were people who advised Blunt about
Scherbenske.
Long: She reported to Dave Sandy. Dave Sandy was in the same boat as everybody
else, he was afraid.
Bakke: Why did you write to Scherbenske saying you
gave her a direct order?
Long: Blunt told me to.
Bakke: Did anyone at WSI tell you you were
terminated for making a whistelblower complaint?
Long: They wouldn't do that.
Tuntland
concluded his direct examination.
Tuntland: Scherbenske would voice her concerns to Dave
Sandy?
Long: Dave responded to Blunt with a very long
email. He said there was no intentional
violation of procurement rules.
Tuntland: Did Dave express to you that he was afraid of
Blunt?
Long: Yes, that's why he left the
organization. So did Tammy Dolan.
Tuntland: Were you afraid of Blunt because of his
power?
Long: Yes.
No comments:
Post a Comment