BCC Minutes 05/22/2007 Closed Session (#12B-Litsinger) MINUTES
Litsinger
May 22 , 2007
Printer Friendly Version Page 1 of 4
Collier County print Paoli Close Window
fi
CLERK OF TlE CIRCUIT COURT
Case Information
Styles WILLIAM S LITSINGEP vs COLLIER COUNTY Fl.
Uniform Case Number: 112006CA0004320001XX Flied:03/17/2006
Clesim Case Numbers 0600432CA
Court Types CIRCUIT CIVIL Disposition Judges CARLTON,CHARLES T
Case Types OTHER CIRCUIT CIVIL WRIT Disposed:08/29/2007
Judge:CARLTON,CHARLES T Reopen Reason:
Case Statues DISPOSED Reopened:
Next Court Dates 00/00/0000 Reopen Closes
Last Docket Dab:08/29/2007 Appealed:
Pasties
Name Type DOI City,State,Zip
LTTSINGER,WILLIAM S PLAINTIFF
COWER COUNTY FL DEFENDANT
COYLE INDMDUALLY,FRED W DEFENDANT
HUBBARD,JACQUELINE WILLIAMS DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY NAPLES,FL 34112
GOLD,SAMUEL C PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY NAPLES,FL 34107
POTANOVIC,JOHN F DEFENDANTS ATTORNEY FT MYERS,FL 33902
Dockets
Date Text
02/22/2006 NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF JEAN MERRITT
02/22/2006 NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF AMY PATTERSON
02/22/2006 NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF LEO OCHS
03/17/2006 CORRESPONDENCE FROM COUNSEL TO CLERK
03/17/2006 CIVIL COVER SHEET
03/17/2006 COMPLAINT,DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
03/22/2006 SUMMONS ISSUED(2)COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA&FRED W COLEY SENT TO
COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF
03/31/2006 UNEXECUTED SHERIFF'S RETURN SUMMONS FRED COYLE
03/31/2006 UNEXECIITED SHERIFF'S RETURN SUMMONS COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
05/01/2006 DIVISION JUDGE REASSIGNMENT ORDER FROM:TED H BROUSSEAU TO: FREDERICK
HARDT ORDERED BY HUGH 0 HAYES ON 04/18/2006
05/03/2006 ANSWER&AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FRED W COYLE
05/03/2006 MOTION TO DISMISS AS TO COUNT III/FRED W COYLE
05/04/2006 WAIVER OF SERVICE OF PROCESS BY JACQUELINE WILLIAMS HUBBARD ESQ FOR
COWER COUNTY
05/30/2006 MOTION TO DISMISS BY COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
06/08/2006 MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT PLAINTIFFS
06/08/2006 MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGME PARTIAL
06/ZZ/Z006 NOTICE OF UNAVAILABIUTY OF JACQUELINE W HUBBARD ESQ FROM 6/28/06-
7/4/06
06/26/2006 NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION JAMES MUDD
06/26/2006 NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION JAMES MUDD
06/27/2006 NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION JAMES COLETTA
httpJ/apps.collierclerk.com/public inquiry/Case.aspx7UCN=112006CA0004320001 XX&... 4/18/2013
Printer Friendly Version Page 2 of 4
07/01/2006 DIVISION JUDGE REASSIGNMENT ORDER FROM:FREDERICK HARDT TO:CYNTHIA A
ELLIS ORDERED BY HUGH D HAYES ON 04/18/2006
07/06/2006 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS BY FRED W COYLES
07/06/2006 NOTICE OF SERVICE OF ANSWERED INTERROGATORIES(1ST)BY FRED W COYLES
07/06/2006 REPLY TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION BY FRED W COYLES
07/06/2006 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER BY FRED W COYLE
07/06/2006 NOTICE OF SERVICE OF ANSWERED INTERROGATORIES BY COLLIER COUNTY
07/07/2006 NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER/COLLIER COUNTY
07/10/2006 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER BY PLTF
07/10/2006 PROCEEDING MOTION HEARING ON:07/10/2006®13:00
07/10/2006 PRESIDING JUDGE: PIVACEK,CYNTHIA A
07/10/2006 PLAINTIFFS ATTY DEES 6 DEFENDANTS ATTYS POTANOVIC 6 HUBBARD AU.
07/10/2006 PRESENT TELE PHONICALLY/MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING THE
07/10/2006 DEPOSITIONS OF JAMES MUDD 6 JAMES COLETTA GRANTED/THE DEPOSITIONS
07/10/2006 WILL SE SCHEDULED AFTER SEPTEMBER 7TH,2006/ATTY POTANOVIC WILL
07/10/2006 PREPARE THE ORDER-THE ATTYS WILL COORDINATE THE DEPOSITIONS WHICH _
07/10/2006 WILL BE PUT IN THE ORDER
07/10/2006 FAX CORRESPONDENCE COVER SHEET
07/10/2006 NOTICE OF HEARING;CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
7/10/6 AT 1 PM
07/10/2006 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 0/5/0 DEFENDANT FRED W COYLE
07/13/2006 CORRESPONDENCE FROM COUNSEL TO JUDGE
07/13/2006 ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL OF APPEAL FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER S/ELLIS
7/13/06
07/13/2006 NOTICE OF FILING AFFIDAVIT OF SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
07/13/2006 AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
08/22/2006 CORRESPONDENCE FROM COURT REPORTER
08/22/2006 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT WILLIAM S LITSINGER
08/22/2006 NOTICE OF FILING DEPOSMON OF JOSEPH K SCHMI7T ,
08/22/2006 DEPOSITION OF JOSEPH SCHMTIT
09/158006 NOTICE OF HEARING 10/9/06.1:00 ON PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF SUMMARY
JUDGMENT HEARING
10/06/2006 NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY COLLIER COUNTY 10/13/06-10/17/06
10/09/2006 PROCEEDING MOTION HEARING ON: 10/09/2006®13:00
10/09/2006 PRESIDING JUDGE:PIVACEC,CYNTHIA A
10/09/2006 PLAINTIFFS ATTY GOLD PRESENT/DEFENANT COLLIER COUNTYS ATTY HUBBARD
10/09/2006 PRESENT/DEFENDANT FRED W COYLE&ATTY POTANOVIC NOT PRESENT/MOTION FOR
10/09/2006 SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING WILL BE POSTPONE IN ORDER TO HAVE DEFENDANTS
10/09/2006 ATTY POTANOVIC PRESENT/ATTY GOLD WILL RESET THE HEARING ,
10/23/2006 NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION WILLIAM S LITSINGER 12/14/006 9:00AM BY
DEFENDANT COYLES
11/13/2006 MOTION TO DISMISS SUPPLJEMENTAL/OR TO STRIKE CLAIM FOR PUNITIVE
DAMAGES BY COLLIER COUNTY
12/14/2006 RENOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION WILLIAM S LITSINGER
01/04/2007 RENOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION(2ND)OF WILLIAM S LITSINGER
01/18/2007 NOTICE OF FILING DEPOSITION OF FRED COYLE
01/18/2007 DEPOSITION OF FRED COYLE 11/2/06
01/19/2007 AFFIDAVIT IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDG PARTIAL ,
01/19/2007 NOTICE OF FILING DEPOSITION OF JOSEPH SCHMITT
http://apps.collierclerk.com/public inquiry/Case.aspXNCNN112006CA0004320001XX&... 4118/2013
Printer Friendly Version Page 3 of 4
01/19/2007 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY
JUDGMENT BY FRED W COYLE
01/22/2007 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CLAIM FOR PUNITIVE
DAMAGES BY COLLIER COUNTY
01/22/2007 NOTICE OF HEARING 1/22/07 0 2:00 MOTTO DISMISS
01/22/2007 PROCEEDING MOTION HEARING ON:01/22/2007 0 14:00
01/22/2007 PRESIDING JUDGE: PIVACEK,CYNTHIA A
01/22/2007 PLAINTIFFS&ATTORNEY GOLD PRESENT/DEFENDANTS ATTORNEYS HUBBARD&
01/22/2007 POTANOVIC PRESENT/PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT-
01/22/2007 RESERVED TO REVIEW MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN RESPONSE/DEFENDANTS MOTION TO
01/22/2007 STRIKE COUNT 2 PUNITIVE DAMAGES-GRANTED-ATTORNEY HUBBARD TO SUBMIT
01/22/2007 ORDER/ATTORNEY GOLD TO SUBMIT A PROPOSED ORDER FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/
01/22/2007 PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND PUNITIVE DAMAGES-NOT HEARD TODAY
01/22/2007 (RAN OUT OF TIME ALLATED)/COURT REPORTER KAY GRAY OF GREGORY COURT
01/22/2007 REPORTING PRESENT
01/22/2007 NOTICE OF HEARING FAX COPY 1/22/07 0 2:00 ON DEFENDANTS MOTION TO
DISMISS OR ALTERNATIVELY TO STRIKE CLAIM FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES
01/22/2007 AMENDED NOTICE OF HEARING FAX COPY 1/22/07 0 2:00 ON PLAINTIFFS
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND TO CLAIM FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES
01/29/2007 CORRESPONDENCE FROM COUNSEL TO JUDGE
0 29"007 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STRIKE NO PUNITIVE DAMAGES MAY BE ASSESSED
AGAINST COLLIER COUNTY S/ELLTS 1/29/07
02/20/2007 NOTICE OF HEARING;CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 05/07/07 0 3:00 MOTION TO
DISMISS
02/27/2007 NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY FOR JACQUELINE W HUBBARD 6/13/07-6/15/07
02/27/2007 NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY FOR JACQUELINE W HUBBARD 5/10/07-5/11/07
02/28/2007 NOTICE OF HEARING AMENDED 5/7/07 0 3:00(30 MIN)ON DEFENDANTS
MOTION TO DISMISS
02/28/2007 NOTICE OF HEARING(AMENDED)5/7/07 0 3:00(30 MINUTES)ON DEFENDANTS
MOTION TO DISMISS
02/28/2007 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PARTIAL S/ELLLS 2/27/07
02/28/2007 CORRESPONDENCE FROM COUNSEL TO JUDGE WITH ATTACHMENT
02/28/2007 CORRESPONDENCE FROM COUNSEL TO JUDGE WITH ATTACHMENT
03/02/2007 NOTICE OF PRODUCTION FROM NON PARTIES DIRECTED RC ELTON WILTON LE HEW
JRMD
03/09/2007 NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY COLLIER COUNTY
03/21/2007 MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT&MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF
MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT BY FRED W COYLE
03/22/2007 ORDER OF REASSIGNMENT TO THE HONORABLE CHARLES T CARLTON S/MARTIN
3/22/07
03/22/2007 ORDER OF RECUSAL S/E LIS 3/14/07
04/02/2007 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER BY PLAINTIFF
04/23/2007 MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED/BY COLLIER COUNTY
05/17/2007 NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF JACQUELINE W HUBBARD ESQ FROM 5/22/07-
5/28/07
08/29/2007 VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE/FAXED COPY
Events
Docket Type Judge Court Date Court Time
HEARING 01/22/2007 14:00
HEARING 10/09/2006 13:00
HEARING 07/10/2006 13:00
http://apps.collierclerk.com/publicinquiry/Case.aspx7UCN=112006CA0004320001 XX&... 4/18/2013
Printer Friendly Version Page 4 of 4
Flnandolo
There are no Financials for this awe.
http://apps.collierclerk.coni/public inquiry/Case.aspx?UCNa112006CA0004320001XX&... 4/18/2013
vv�r..96. ♦Ir, a11.1, L.J11�N Bull 19 1.h 1 1fIR 1. Ib30 pm PAGE 2/003 F IYV2•YCl J! 1
RVII•+V..M�Y 11aiYaay S/a.4/6Wf Y.V.L•
••• I
Diiir 040.P1 i
C N 0
pt
irt. i,
..
, . 111,1, . II • 1 . 001110611WIN
. •
O
C. c
non
el m ••••4s0
x
M
�,,. .• ,,T _,=>;,-.,-.ji
q1
r a '
L�J , `
a
•14••. ,0,-. 91 . •
•
i .
nub. c t ON, JV I Ln• a La t I r m �, pm peas 31003 F...4 „va'1ra.
Iiagtav o a u ra a sa Q/AdiI&VW a Iva c av
•
•
• •
•
•
M
{ •
•
•
•
•
ti •
A •
May 22, 2007
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, May 22, 2007
CLOSED SESSION
Item #12B — William Litsinger
Case Number 06-432-CA - William Litsinger versus Board of County
Commissioners and Fred Coyle, Individually.
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, met on this date at
12:20 p.m., in CLOSED SESSION in Building "F" of the Government
Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Jim Coletta
Tom Henning
Frank Halas
Fred W. Coyle
Donna Fiala
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Mike Pettit, Assistant County Attorney
Page 1 — Item #12B (William Litsinger)
May 22, 2007
Item #12B
THE BOARD IN CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL
DISCUSS: SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND STRATEGY
RELATING TO LITIGATION EXPENDITURES IN WILLIAM
LITSINGER V. COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND FRED
COYLE, INDIVIDUALLY, CASE NO. 06-432-CA, NOW
PENDING IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. — CLOSED SESSION
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Let's go at it. Everybody's
already had a session with the county attorney, so this shouldn't take
long.
MR. WEIGEL: I'll start briefly here then, and that is that the
closed session scheduled and noticed for May 22, 2007, at 12 noon is
commencing. It's at the request of the county attorney and it's in
regard to -- listed as agenda item 12B in regard to the case of Stan --
William Litsinger versus Collier County and Mr. Fred Coyle
Individually, case in the Circuit Court for Collier County.
And as you commissioners are generally aware, we're here to
discuss settlement negotiations and strategies related to expenditures
and things of that nature. We have, in fact, negotiated -- pursuant to
the direction of the board at a prior meeting -- have gone back with the
employment plaintiffs counsel and negotiated settlement. The
settlement's in the aggregate, the gross amount of$290,000, which
under the term of the agreement, proposed agreement, provides for
15,000 of that $290,000 to be paid from the county to Mr. Litsinger's
deferred compensation. The remaining 275,000 is to be paid to Mr.
Litsinger.
If the Board of County Commissioners were to approve the
settlement agreement today in open session subsequent to its closed
session, Mr. Litsinger will, in fact, tender his resignation effective
Page 2 — Item #12B (William Litsinger)
May 22, 2007
today and no longer be in the employ of the county.
There is a time period to come into play regarding payment of
settlement fee or amount to Mr. Litsinger, and that is related in part to
the -- his request for withdrawal of a complaint that he has with the
EEOC. That is a separate complaint from this lawsuit, but we, the
county, would be looking for, in fact, then a termination of his
complaint and a termination of proceedings by the EEOC relative to
this separate matter which he had raised a complaint relating to Collier
County employment practices.
Again, that is separate from this lawsuit but it has been bundled
into the settlement agreement so that this would be a comprehensive
settlement agreement effectively ending this case in its entirety.
I'll briefly mention that the settlement agreement does provide, in
fact, as do settlement agreements typically, that, in fact, all causes
issued, et cetera, and liabilities are waived. And this settlement
agreement also has a specific statement, and it's located on the first
page incidentally -- you could pass these out if you wish to see them.
We do have copies of the agreement.
On the first page it does provide midway down that, in fact, Mr.
Litsinger indicates in this agreement that he sees no maliciousness on
the part of Mr. Coyle.
I'll entertain any questions you may have, and Mike and I do
have some additional comments pertinent to the settlement objections
and the payment of costs and expenses.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you give us some more
information about his lawsuits against the EEOC?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, I can, at least to a limited degree, and that
was subsequent to his demotion, which became an element of this
lawsuit, there was -- a position had opened up in the Community
Development Environmental Services Division, he applied for it. He
was not selected. He came in either third or fourth in, I think, four
Page 3 — Item #12B (William Litsinger)
May 22, 2007
applicants that were reviewed and -- call it top tier review, and so he
believed and he contended that that was an age discrimination against
him, and that was the nature of his complaint that he filed with the
EEOC.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Oh, okay. EEOC is not
MR. WEIGEL: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of
the federal government.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now I understand.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's not Emergency Operations.
MR. WEIGEL: Pardon me. Okay. If you would like then, Mr.
Pettit will chat a bit about some of the aspects of payment and
settlement, perhaps costs and fees as well.
Mike?
MR. PETTIT: As I understand it, $15,000 is going to be paid
into Mr. Litsinger's account if the board were to approve this
settlement later today, and this is deferred compensation account, an
additional $275,000 would be paid to Mr. Litsinger from our property
insurance casualty fund, which is, I think, Fund 516. That's going to
require, according to Mr. Walker, our Risk Manager, at some point a
budget amendment to reimburse the property and casualty fund from
general fund reserves by the amount not paid by the excess carrier.
Now, the only difficulty we have as we sit here today is we know
the excess carrier's going to make a contribution to the settlement.
Initially the excess carrier had advised Mr. Walker and Jacqueline
Hubbard that they would contribute approximately 39 percent of a
settlement of up to $400,000, which would have been a contribution of
$143,000. Now, we've settled at substantially less than that.
Mr. Walker has told us in the last 20 or 30 minutes that he still
thinks that the contribution's going to be around $100,000, but that's
not -- that's not an absolute figure at this point.
So one of the things that, if the board were to move forward on
Page 4 — Item #12B (William Litsinger)
May 22, 2007
this today, when we go back out on the record after the lunch break
under 12C and make a vote for an approval, they would also -- I think
the desire is, David, to have a budget amendment or at least
acknowledge the need for a budget amendment at that time.
MR. WEIGEL: That's correct.
MR. PETTIT: Which would allow then property casualty fund to
be reimbursed from the general fund. So that is one issue.
Another issue is in this settlement agreement it talks in terms of
the payment costs and attorney's fees and it states that all parties will
be responsible for their costs and attorney's fees, that's a standard term
in a lot of settlement agreements, and the idea is to make it clear that
we're not paying any additional sums to the plaintiff there, but the
intent of that provision is also to have the county pay Mr. Coyle's fees
if, in fact, that's the desire of the board.
What I can tell you is, is that we have advanced Mr. Coyle's fees
to his attorney up to this point pursuant to prior board action, and that
that's consistent with our policy governing lawsuits which is resolution
adopted back in 1995, 95-632.
I think to make it absolutely clear, again, if the board is to move
forward on -- the settlement is to acknowledge that -- the intent of that
provision, the settlement agreement on attorney fees is to include Mr.
Coyle's fees, and the board would not be seeking any reimbursement
in light of the fact that we've settled the case.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So do we bring that up at -- you
know, when we meet in session again?
MR. PETTIT: If there is a motion to approve the settlement
agreement, I think as part of the motion, we just want to clarify that
Mr. Coyle's fees are going to remain at the cost of the county just to
make sure there's no confusion, because basically you've got
boilerplate language.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We must do it for every
commissioner. We serve here at the pleasure of the community and
Page 5 — Item #12B (William Litsinger)
May 22, 2007
somebody, for any reason, wants to try and sue us, we must defend
ourselves.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, can I expand upon that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, in my case and
Commissioner Coyle's case, that's true, but recently we paid for
attorney's fees for an employee who pleaded that -- pleaded out. So
what I'm saying is one doesn't fit all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I just mentioned commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I mean, if we had -- if we
had a Stadium Naples type thing, that definitely doesn't fit that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah, you're right about that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I understand what you're saying
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- but I just wanted to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. That's good point. Yeah, I
shouldn't make a blanket statement.
MR. PETTIT: What I can tell you, Commissioner Fiala,
historically in civil cases where either commissioners or an individual
county employee have been sued -- and I was involved -- there
actually were more of those for some reason between 1995 and 2000
than there are now. But we had a lot of employment litigation at that
time. And what would tend to happen is people would file lawsuits
and they would sue the county and then they might sue their
supervisor individually, they might sue the county manager
individually. I think we had a couple where individual commissioners
were sued.
And I can think of no case where the fees weren't paid for by the
county, whether through settlement or resolution, however the lawsuit
was resolved. So that's been a pretty standard practice at least in civil
cases with this county.
Page 6 — Item #128 (William Litsinger)
May 22, 2007
I also have -- David's secretary and my secretary just brought us
some news that may be good news from Mr. Walker. He's stating that
the estimate right now is we may receive 174,000 of the $290,000
from the excess carrier, so that would significantly reduce the ultimate
payback to the property casualty fund and from the general fund. It's
not firm yet, but that's the most recent news we have.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, clarify for me how we handle
this issue about reaffirming the fact that the county is paying my
attorney fees.
MR. PETTIT: I think that if there's a motion to approve this
settlement, that the motion maker would have to state, and this would
include the payment of Mr. Coyle's fees individually having been sued
as a commissioner, acting in his capacity as a commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or you can say, pay all defense
costs.
MR. PETTIT: All defense costs for any -- for both the county
and for any individual county commissioner or employee that was
subject to the suit.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, just so you cover the whole
thing --
MR. WEIGEL: That covers it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Can Commissioner Coyle vote on
this?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, no. I'm not going to.
I probably could -- maybe I could, but I'm not going to.
MR. WEIGEL: We think maybe you couldn't, but based on --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Perception.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can research on it?
MR. PETTIT: Yeah. I went -- and in terms of this -- in terms of
this meeting, I guess what I'd like to do is I'll explain that to you
outside the meeting because I think we're limited here to discussion of
settlement. I mean --
Page 7 — Item #12B (William Litsinger)
May 22, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just joking.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Where else we got to go with this?
We got it pretty well wrapped up now? Anybody got any additional
questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just one thing. Fred, has your
lawyer said anything about this, this settlement? Is it something that
your lawyer advises?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Enough said.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: He has talked with me and he
thinks it's the proper thing to do, and --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It puts an end to everything.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The general consensus is we'll
spend at least this amount of money getting it through trial, so why
send it -- get it through a trial when we can get out of it now?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, my only concern is -- and
you have to do a business decision, but I hope it doesn't send a
message to those people, this is the normal thing that we do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That is a real -- very valid concern,
and it's been my concern all along. I would prefer this guy get
absolutely nothing, but from a standpoint of economics, you can't
predict what a jury's going to do. Once you get it there, you never
know what way it's going to go.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I hate to interrupt you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'm just --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Here's my concern. I got to get this
out, Commissioner Henning. Anyone that's ever going to do anything
to the county, if they got any attorney that's worth their weight, they're
going to review this tape. We're talking all sorts of strategies and
thoughts here that we shouldn't even be getting into. I hate to lay it
out to the point where somebody looks at it as a road map to follow.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me just say this. This
Page 8 — Item #12B (William Litsinger)
May 22, 2007
is the last time this is going to happen, how's that?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Can you underline that? Underline
that, last time this is going to happen. Good. That's a good ending for
that part.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And an undeserving employee gets
rewarded for his bad behavior.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, second that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Is that it? Good. We're done.
(The closed session concluded)
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County in closed
session, the closed session was adjourned by order of the Chair at
12:31 p.m.
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 9 — Item #12B (William Litsinger)