Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2018CV3204 - LORI FRANK V. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, TERENCE F. JONES AND JEROME SCHIAGER - 077 - DEFENDANT SCHIAGER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 20 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN LORI FRANK, Plaintiff, V. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, a municipality, and JEROME SCHIAGER, former Deputy Chief of Police, in his individual capacity, Defendants. DEFENDANT SCHIAGER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendant JEROME SCHIAGER ("Schiager"), by his attorneys, moves for summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 on the one claim against him for denial of equal protection. I. Introduction and Summary of Motion Plaintiff Lori Frank ("Frank"), a Crime Analyst with Fort Collins Police Services ("FCPS"), brought this action on December 14, 2018, alleging a number of claims against the City of Fort Collins, but just the Eighth Claim against Schiager, her former supervisor, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a denial of equal protection based on her gender. Schiager moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), and the Court partially granted the motion as to most allegations, based on the statute of limitations and his lack of personal participation. This greatly narrowed the claim to three alleged events falling in a window of less than two months, as discussed in Part II below. Schiager now seeks summary judgment as to the remainder of the claim, based on his statement of undisputed facts in Part III below, and alternative legal arguments. First, as discussed Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 20 in Part V, Schiager contends that he is entitled to summary judgment because the undisputed facts show that there is no proper claim for denial of equal protection. This contention is based on several arguments, including that Frank's claim against Schiager is not a constitutional claim for gender discrimination but instead is a personal dispute, Frank and her witnesses who were disclosed to testify that Schiager discriminated against female employees could not identify any such female employee, the unfavorable employment evaluation that Schiager gave Frank was not "discipline" and did not cause any material adverse action, Schiager had a good basis to give such an evaluation, Schiager did not improperly exclude Frank from any meetings, and the defenses of the statute of limitations and lack of personal participation bar all or almost all events on which the claim is based. Second, Schiager contends in Part VI that he is entitled to qualified immunity because Frank cannot bear her burden of proving both that Schiager violated her constitutional right to equal protection and the law was clearly established at the relevant time as to the particular facts here. H. The Court's August 20, 2019, Order SignificantlyNarrowedFrank's Claim Against Schiager On January 31, 2019, Schiager filed a motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P.12(b)(6) (Doc. 20). On Schiager's argument that the claim against him was barred by the two-year statute of limitations, the Court ruled on August 20, 2019, that events that allegedly occurred prior to December 14, 2016, were barred. (Doc. 40, pp. 10-11.) The Court also noted that Schiager had no personal participation in events allegedly occurring after February 7, 2017, because Frank conceded that Schiager ceased to be her supervisor when he was placed on paid administrative leave on that date. As a result of these rulings, the Court's Order limited Schiager's exposure to events that occurred in a window of less than two months, from December 14, 2016, to February 7, 2017. 2 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 20 The Court also ruled, however, that the Complaint contained allegations of three events in that window that survived the motion to dismiss: (1) Schiager placed an unrealistic error rate on Frank's work without doing so to a male colleague (Erik Martin) who made errors; (2) Frank did not get her expected pay raise on January 1, 2017, because Schiager placed her on a Performance Improvement Plan ("PIP"); and (3) Schiager treated Frank differently by excluding her from two staff meetings in January 2017 (Doc. 40, p. 12). The Court also held that Frank's allegations in the Complaint were sufficient to survive the other arguments in Schiager's motion. (Id, at pp. 17-22.) Schiager contends that the undisputed facts developed in discovery show that these remaining allegations are barred by one or more of the arguments in sections V and VI below. III. Schiager's Statement of Undisputed Facts Schiager contends that for the purposes of this motion, the following facts are undisputed: 1. Frank has worked for FCPS for about 20 years as a Crime Analyst, and researches and analyzes information on crime -related topics for the FCPS and the community. (Doc. 2, Complaint, ¶¶ 24, 34.) 2. Schiager has worked for FCPS for about 28 years in various positions from police officer to Interim Chief. He is presently the Lieutenant in charge of Community Policing. (Ex. A, Declaration of Schiager, 11.) 3. There was an incident between the parties in April 2014 after Police Chief John Hutto put Schiager in charge of a staffing study and Frank disagreed with how he handled it and defined her role. Later, Frank sent an email opposing the purchase of some software for the study, and Schiager responded that she was "pointing out again your lack of support for the staffing study." 3 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 20 Frank complained and the Chief gave an oral reprimand to Schiager. (Ex. A., ¶¶ 3-4.) 4. In about November 2015, Frank's supervisor, Deputy Chief Cory Christensen, left FCPS and Chief Hutto appointed Schiager to that position, so he became Frank's supervisor for about 15 months, until February 7, 2017. (Ex. A, 15.) 5. Frank testified that there were two events that caused Schiager to retaliate against her when he became her supervisor: (1) Schiager's remark in the email he sent to Frank in April 2014 that she was not supportive of the staffing study which led to a reprimand of Schiager; and (2) when she challenged Schiager in 2011 when he tried to take credit for a report that she created. (Ex. B, Frank deposition, pp. 173:21 - 174:8; 176:13 - 179:13.) 6. On November 3, 2015, Frank sent a memo to Chief Hutto entitled "Concerns of Retaliation" where she stated that when Schiager becomes her supervisor, he may retaliate against her because of the April 2014 reprimand and "marginalizing" her job duties. (Ex. A, ¶ 6; Ex-C.) 7. In a November 23, 2015, memo, Chief Hutto said he expected Frank and Schiager to have a professional relationship and "as your supervisor, Assistant Chief Schiager has the right, and is in fact expected to, set standards for your performance"; he invited her to bring any concerns to him. (Ex. D.) Frank agreed Schiager had the right to set her work standards. (Ex. B, p. 197: 9-20.) 8. On or about January 8, 2016, after obtaining the approval of Chief Hutto, Schiager gave Frank a memo setting forth his "Goals and Expectations" for her in 2016, including that her work must be "accurate" and she is to check it before distributing it to others. Schiager and Chief Hutto met with Frank at that time to review the memo. (Ex. A, ¶ 8; Ex. E.) Frank did not object to Chief Hutto about this memo. (Ex. B, pp. 197: 21 - 199: 18.) In Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 20 9. In February 2016, Frank met with Schiager and Janet Miller of the City's Human Resources Department to request that her job be reclassified. Schiager and Ms. Miller denied the request, concluding that her duties were covered by her existing job description. (Ex. A,¶ 9.) 10. In about May 2016, Schiager gave Frank his performance review for the first quarter of 2016. His overall rating in each category of "Behaviors" and "Results" was that she was "on track," but he pointed out what he believed were several errors in her work. One of those was her quarterly report on the "priority one response time" metric, which shows the amount of time from when a citizen makes a 911 call on a serious issue to when an officer gets to the scene. Schiager wrote that this report continues to be a challenge, non -serious calls should have been "scrubbed" from the report, Frank is responsible to make the report accurate, this is a "very visible report to the community" as it is posted on the FCPS online "dashboard," and that they need to meet with the head of the dispatch unit (Carol Workman) to correct the issue. Schiager also described several other areas where Frank was making errors. (Ex. A, ¶¶ 10-11; Ex. F, pp. 735-737.) 11. Frank responded in the first quarter review that Schiager "is now retaliating against me for receiving that letter of reprimand." (Ex. F, p. 738.) 12. The errors in the priority one response time metric were raised in Frank's 2014 review by her previous supervisor, Mr. Christensen, who wrote that it "was Lori's metric to create, analyze, and provide to the reporting structure," there was drastic change in the metric and Frank was asked to review it, she discovered that we had been reporting the metric incorrectly "all along" which "caused issues with executive leadership and explaining the error to City leadership and City Council." (Ex. G, p. 971.) E Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 20 13. In about August 2016, Schiager gave Frank his review for the second quarter of 2016, again rating her as "on track" in both areas, but raising some issues, including that he was looking forward to meeting with Frank and Ms. Workman on the priority one response time metric and to meet and discuss the accuracy of the data prior to its next posting. (Ex. A, ¶ 12; Ex. H, p. 987.) 14. For the third quarter of 2016, Schiager believed that Frank's work quality had declined. After consulting with, and obtaining the approval of, Chief Hutto and Deborah Mossburgh of the City's Human Resources Department, Schiager gave Frank a rating of "needs improvement" on "results" (but, again "on track" for "behaviors") and issued a memo to Frank dated November 16, 2016, which described several specific areas where she had made errors. One of these areas was Frank's repeated failure to meet with Ms. Workman to improve the priority one response time metric and publishing incorrect data without meeting with him in advance as previously directed. Other areas included failing to provide the Chief material he needed for an article, releasing inaccurate information to the local newspaper and crime statistics reports. (Ex. A, ¶ 13; Ex. I.) 15. Also on November 16, 2016, Schiager issued a document placing Frank on a PIP with certain goals to meet. In ¶ 3.A. of the PIP, Schiager stated as to one of the goals, the quarterly priority one response time metric, that he expects it "to be accurate and free of errors every time (consistently)." (Ex. J, p. 2.) Schiager wrote that this particular report was to be "free of errors" because he was frustrated with the long history of errors in this public report and Frank's failure to correct the report. (Ex. A, ¶ 14; Ex. J.) The PIP was designed to improve Frank's performance and was not a disciplinary action. To be a disciplinary action at FCPS would require meeting some specific requirements. Schiager does not remember giving a PIP to any other employee he directly C� Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 20 supervised at FCPS. (Ex. A, 116.) 16. While supervising Frank and others from November 2015 to February 7, 2017, Schiager imposed the "free of errors" standard only on this one quarterly report by Frank, and did not impose it on her or any other employee he supervised. He had previously given "on track" ratings to Frank in the two prior quarters despite her errors, told her that he did not expect perfection in her work, and allowed an 8% error rate on another report. (Ex. A,¶ 15; Ex. N.) 17. Frank testified that she produces in each quarter of the year about 1300 reports (or 4,000), almost all of which are "automatic" (that she previously set up to run at specified intervals, and she reviews only "tenish" of those) and the remainder are about 100 responses to requests for various types of data from FCPS or the public. (Ex. B, pp. 240:4 - 241:4; 267:15 - 268:17.) 18. The City of Fort Collins has a policy that employees placed on a PIP will have their salary increases delayed. Schiager had no involvement in setting the policy. He requested that Frank not have any delay in her expected annual salary increase on January 1, 2017, but was instructed by Ms. Mossburgh that could not be done as it would be contrary to the City policy. (Ex. A, ¶¶ 17, 24.) 19. Frank twice admitted in discovery that she knew in November 2016 when the PIP was imposed that it would delay her January 1, 2017, annual raise. (Ex. B, p. 255:16-24; Ex. K, pp. 10- 20. On September 9, 2016, Frank complained in a memo to Chief Hutto that Schiager was retaliating in various ways against her. (Ex. L.) Those allegations were investigated internally by Lori Greening, an employee of the City's Human Resources Department, who issued a report to Chief Hutto in November 2016, concluding that Schiager had not retaliated against Frank. (Ex. A, ¶ 18.) VA Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 20 21. On November 30, 2016, Frank's attorney sent a letter to the City objecting to Schiager's third quarter evaluation and PIP as retaliatory and requesting a new investigation because Ms. Greening was biased. (Ex. M, pp. 716-718.) In her memo that accompanied the letter, Frank stated that Schiager continued to retaliate against her because of "discipline" he received from Chief Hutto because of her complaint, his "motive is obvious, ... revenge," and that "no one else in the agency" is held to the "error free" standard that Schiager imposed on her. (Ex. M, pp. 721-722.) 22. The City agreed to have a new investigation of Frank's complaints of retaliation by an outside investigator (Ex. A, ¶ 19.) On February 7, 2017, Schiager was informed by Chief Hutto that he was placed on administrative leave with pay during the outside investigation. (Ex. A, ¶ 20.) 23. The outside investigator concluded that Schiager had not retaliated against Frank by his actions; there were no complaints by Frank of gender bias. The investigator did state that Schiager admitted that the reference to the "error free" rate on one report was too high a standard, but she concluded it was not retaliatory. A separate outside investigator later concurred in a further review. (Ex. A, ¶ 21.) 24. After Schiager ceased to be her supervisor, Frank continued to refuse to review the records on 911 calls for the priority one response time metric later in 2017, which led to a confrontation with a different Deputy Chief and Ms. Workman, and a "needs improvement" rating from a different supervisor, as stated in her fourth quarter 2017 review. (Ex. O, pp. 113-117.) 25. Schiager was reinstated without any discipline on July 27, 2017, as the Lieutenant in charge of Community Policing by Interim Chief Terrance Jones. (Ex. A, ¶ 22.) 26. In about September 2017, Frank's January 1, 2017, annual raise that had been delayed 8 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 20 by the PIP was reinstated effective retroactively to the pay period ending July 31, 2017, at the biweekly rate of $64.98. (Ex. P.) 27. In June 2016, Erik Martin became a full-time employee at FCPS as a Financial Analyst. His duties were very different from Frank, and included managing the budget of the FCPS and supervising an employee. (Exs. Q and R, the job descriptions of Frank and Mr. Martin.) Mr. Martin was also supervised by Schiager until February 7, 2017, but did not see any significant errors in Mr. Martin's work that would have caused a PIP to be imposed. (Ex. A, 125.) 28. The salary ranges for City employees are set by the City. As a manager in the City, Schiager had only limited influence on salaries. As for Mr. Martin, his salary was set by the City Finance Department in relation to other Financial Analysts in other City departments, with a small increase for his supervisory responsibilities. Schiager had no involvement in setting Frank's salary which was done before he became her supervisor. (Ex. A, 124.) 29. Schiager held no meetings of all of his staff during the period when he served as Frank's supervisor because he did not think that such meetings would be helpful. Frank testified that Schiager held two meetings of some of the staff in January 2017 where Schiager invited two women who did attend. (Ex. B, 273:14-274:21.) Schiager held those meetings just for managers, which he believed would be helpful, and included Sgt. Jackie Pearson who was head of the FCPS Internal Affairs Department and Kate Kimball who headed the Public Relations Department, who were in the manager category. (Ex. A, ¶ 23.) 30. Frank testified that she could not identify any female employee other than herself whom Schiager discriminated against on the basis of gender or retaliated against. (Ex. B, 278:13-19.) 9 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 20 Defendants deposed four female FCPS employees or former employees who Frank disclosed as allegedly having knowledge that Schiager discriminated against women, but each testified that she had no knowledge that Schiager discriminated or retaliated against her and/or any other female employee (other than Frank told some that Schiager retaliated against her, which is not admissible). These women are Carrie Held (deposition excerpt attached as Ex. S, pp. 65:25-67:19), Monica Gavin (Ex. T, p. 44:16-21), Bridget Widerman (Ex. U, pp. 32:17 - 33:12), and Michelle Rizo. (Ex. V, pp. 97: 1-232 104:5-11.) 31. On December 13, 2017, Frank submitted her complaint to the Colorado Civil Rights Division ("CCRD") claiming that all events she complained about going back to 2011 were discrimination based on sex. (Ex. W.) IV. The Standard of Review on Summary Judgment "The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). A fact is material "if under the substantive law it is essential to the proper disposition of the claim." Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.,144 F. 3d 664, 670 (1 Oth Cir.1998). The Court "asks whether reasonable jurors could find by a preponderance of the evidence that the plaintiff is entitled to a verdict." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 252 (1986). V. Schiager is Entitled to Summary Judgment on the Eighth Claim In Frank's Eighth Claim against Schiager for denial of equal protection she generally alleges that based on disputes she had with Schiager in 2011 - 2014, he retaliated and/or discriminated against her after becoming her supervisor in about November 2015. (Doc. 2, pp. 36-38.) Frank did 10 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 11 of 20 not make a claim against Schiager for retaliation for protected speech. Frank's claim for equal protection is based on disparate treatment, which requires "intentional discrimination." Morman v. Campbell County Memorial Hospital, 632 F. App'x 927, 932 (1 Oth Cir. 2015) (not published). "To prove an equal -protection claim based on disparate treatment, a plaintiff must provide either direct evidence of discrimination or prevail under the burden -shifting framework of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 ... (1973)." Id. at 933, citing Khalik v. United Air Lines, 671 F.3d 1188, 1192 (1 Oth Cir. 2012). Frank's case is not based on direct evidence of discrimination. Therefore, under McDonnell Douglas, generally the plaintiff must first prove a prima facie case of discrimination, then the burden shifts to the defendant to provide a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for the adverse employment action, and then the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to show that the employer's explanation is pretext. Id. First Element. To "establish a prima facie case of discrimination," a plaintiff must demonstrate "that he is a member of a protected class and suffered an adverse employment action under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination." Lucas v. Office of Colorado State Public Defender, 705 F. App'x 700, 703, (1 Oth Cir. 2017) (not published), citing DePaula v. Easter Seals El Mirador, 859 F. 3d 957, 970 (loth Cir. 2017). The plaintiff need make only a de minimus showing to establish this prima facie case, and there is a flexible standard that may vary depending on the claim. Bird v. West Valley City, 832 F. 3d l l88, 1200 (loth Cir. 2016). Schiager concedes that Frank is a member of a protected class. But, she cannot meet even her light burden to show an adverse action or circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination because this is a case based on a personal dispute with her supervisor. Furthermore, Frank relies on 11 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 12 of 20 events that are barred by the statute of limitations and Schiager's lack of personal participation. To start with the statute of limitations, the Court has ruled (see Part H above) that events prior to December 14, 2016, are barred by the two-year statute of limitations, except for allegations as to three events that survived Schiager's motion to dismiss. But, discovery has shown that two of those three events occurred prior to December 14, 2016, and should also be barred. The first of those two events, that Schiager placed an improper error rate on Frank while not doing so to Mr. Martin, is based on Schiager's statement in the November 16, 2016, PIP that Frank's one quarterly report on priority one response times is to be "error free." (Fact 15.) But, Frank complained about this in a November 2016 memo that accompanied her attorney's November 30, 2016, letter to the City, stating that "no one else in the agency is held" to that standard, so all other males and females were being treated differently, not just Mr. Martin. (Fact 21.)Therefore, she had sufficient knowledge at that time to trigger the statute of limitations. Alexander v. Oklahoma, 3 82 F.3 d 1206,1216 (l 0th Cir. 2004). The second event that survived the motion to dismiss, that the PIP delayed Frank's January 1, 2017, annual raise, was based on an allegation that Schiager told Frank on January 6, 2017, that her raise was delayed (Doc. 2, ¶ 139), which implied that she learned of the delay at that time. But, Frank admitted twice in discovery that she knew in November 2016 when she was given the PIP that the raise would be delayed. (Fact 19.) This second event is also barred for Schiager's lack of personal participation in creating the policy that a PIP delays a raise, which he tried to have the City waive 12 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 13 of 20 but was unsuccessful! (Fact 18.) Even if these two events are not barred for the reasons discussed above, the alleged actions did not take place under "circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination," as required for an equal protection claim. Frank's dispute with Schiager was based on her complaints that he was retaliating against her personally for her challenges to him in 2011 - 2014, primarily as to her April 2014 complaint that caused him to get an oral reprimand (Fact 5), not because she is a woman. Frank wrote in her November 2016 memo that Schiager's "motive is obvious, ... revenge." (Fact 21.) This is also supported by Frank's statements in numerous documents including: Frank's September 3, 2015, complaint to the Chief about Schiager becoming her supervisor (Fact 6), her response to Schiager's criticisms in her first quarter 2016 review (Fact 11), her September 9, 2016, complaint to the Chief (Fact 20), and the November 30, 2016, letter by her attorney and memo by her to the City. (Fact 21.) See Bird, 832 F.3d at 1205-06,1208-09 (inappropriate conduct by a supervisor that was mostly gender neutral is insufficient for plaintiff to avoid summary judgment for employer on a Title VII hostile work environment claim or an Equal Protection claim based on the same evidence). It does not appear from the voluminous documents in this case that Frank even raised the gender discrimination issue until December 2017 when she filed a complaint with the CCRD. (Fact While on the subject of salaries, it should also be noted that Frank's allegation that Mr. Martin improperly received a higher salary than Frank when he became employed on a full-time basis in June 2016 is also barred by the statute of limitations, Schiager's lack of personal participation in setting the salaries of Frank and Mr. Martin (Fact 28), and the fact that Mr. Martin held a completely different position of Financial Analyst in charge of the FCPS budget and other financial matters so he is not similarly situated to Frank. (Fact 27.) 13 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 14 of 20 31.) Frank alleges generally that Schiager discriminated against women, but when asked about it in her deposition, she could not identify any such women. (Fact 30.) Defendants also deposed four current or former female employees who had been identified in Frank's disclosures as having knowledge about Schiager's alleged discrimination against female employees, but each testified that she had no personal knowledge that Schiager discriminated or retaliated against her and/or any other female employee. (Fact 30.) Because the evidence Frank offers is based on personal retaliation by her supervisor, her claim is also barred by Engguist v. Oregon Dep't of Agriculture, 553 U.S. 591 (2008). When Engquist's j ob was eliminated, she sued on various theories including denial of equal protection, but offered evidence to show she was terminated for vindictive reasons. Id. at 594-595. The jury found for Engquist on the equal protection claim, but the Court of Appeals reversed. Id. at 595-597. In affirming, the Supreme Court stated that the government has far broader powers when .it acts as an employer than as a sovereign, the government could not function if every employment decision became a constitutional matter, and a federal court is not the appropriate forum to review the wisdom of personnel decisions taken by a public agency. Id. at 598-600. The Court stated that "we have never found the Equal Protection Clause implicated in the specific circumstance where, as here, government employers are alleged to have made an individualized, subjective personnel decision in a seemingly arbitrary or irrational manner." Id. at 605. The Court concluded that allowing this type of case to proceed on a class -of -one equal protection theory would impermissibly "constitutionalize" public employee grievances. Id. at 608. Now that discovery has demonstrated that Frank's complaints at the relevant time were 14 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 15 of 20 always for personal retaliation and not gender, the equal protection theory cannot be maintained against Schiager. Frank's claim rests on her disagreements with the normal, discretionary acts of a supervisor who issued one negative performance review. She may disagree with Schiager's view, but she cannot "constitutionalize" such discretionary employment decisions to make a claim in federal court. Returning to the alleged "error free" work standard that is Frank's primary complaint, it does not amount to gender discrimination for many reasons: It only applied to the one report on the priority one response metric of the 1300 (or 4,000) reports Frank claimed to produce each quarter (Facts 15-17), it did not apply to any one else (Fact 21), it was issued for Frank's repeatedly poor performance in preparing this report (Facts 10,13-14), Schiager told Frank at other times that he did not expect her to meet that standard and gave Frank earlier "on track" reviews even though she made errors (Facts 10, 12,16), the Chief instructed Frank that Schiager had the right to set her work standard and she agreed (Fact 7), Frank was given a memo of goals and expectations in January 2016 that required that her work be accurate and checked (Fact 8), Schiager raised the deficiencies in this report to Frank in his first and second quarter 2016 reviews (Facts 10, 13), and other supervisors before and after Schiager recognized that Frank had not prepared this report properly. (Facts 12, 24.) Finally on the first element, Frank cannot show a sufficiently significant adverse action, which, in a discrimination claim, must affect employment or alter the conditions of the workplace, involving a "significant change in employment status, such as hiring, firing, failing to promote, reassignment with significantly different responsibilities, or a decision causing a significant change in benefits." Lucas, 705 F. App'x at 704, quoting Pierce v. Maketa, 480 F.3d 1192, 1203 (1Oth Cir. 15 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 16 of 20 2007). Here, Frank repeatedly received "on track" reviews in three quarters, and just one "needs improvement" review accompanied by a PIP, which is not a form of discipline. (Facts 10-15.) A "disciplinary or corrective action, `standing alone, is not an adverse employment action. "' Lucas, at 705, quoting Haynes v. Level 3 Communications, LLC, 456 F.3d 1215, 1224 (1Oth Cir. 2006). See Kelley v. Mills, 677 F. Supp 2d. 206, 222 (D.D.C. 2010) ("nor does placing plaintiff on a PIP constitute an adverse employment action"). Frank's annual raise was restored effective for the July 31, 2017, biweekly pay period (Fact 26), which suggests a pay loss of about $900. But, even if that is a sufficiently "significant" loss in benefits to satisfy the adverse action requirement, it was not caused by Schiager who did not create the City's policy and tried to have it waived. (Fact 18.) Second Element. Under the McDonnell Douglas test, if plaintiff satisfies the first element, "the defendant must articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse employment action suffered by the plaintiff." DePaula, 859 F.3d at 970. The Court stated in DePaula that the defendant's burden is "exceedingly light," the reasons need only be legitimate and non- discriminatory on their face, the defendant must provide evidence of a "legally sufficient" explanation for the action, and the burden is one of production, not a credibility assessment. Id. Here again, the allegations of Schiager's actions that Frank relies on all occurred prior to December 14, 2016 (except for one to be discussed below), and are therefore barred by the statute of limitations as previously discussed. In addition, Schiager's performance reviews on Frank were based on legitimate, nondiscriminatory actions. After stating his expectations and goals for Frank in the January 8, 2016, memo, his reviews in the first and second quarters of 2016 gave overall 16 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 17 of 20 ratings of "on track" but Schiager pointed out specific errors she had made, especially with the important priority one response time metric. (Facts 10, 13.) For the third quarter, Schiager wrote a detailed memo on how Frank's performance had declined and listed several specific errors, again including the priority one response time metric. (Facts 14-15.) Frank also released that metric in the third quarter of 2016 without having Schiager review it as he had instructed in the prior review. (Facts 13-15, Exs. H-I.) The problems Frank had with this particular report are part of a pattern that led to criticism from Frank's earlier and later supervisors. (Facts 12, 24.) Frank's failings on this one report are sufficient alone to show the non-discriminatory basis for Schiager's November 2016 "needs improvement" rating and PIP, but the reviews cited above show more errors. There is one other event in the window of December 14, 2016, to February 7, 2017, that the Court ruled was sufficient to survive the motion to dismiss, which is that Frank alleged she was not invited to two staff meetings in January 2017. But, there was no gender discrimination as Schiager explains that he did not hold meetings for the whole staff when he supervised Frank because he had not found them to be helpful, but he started to hold meetings for managers in January 2017 because he thought that could be helpful. (Fact 29.) Sgt. Jackie Pearson (head of Internal Affairs) and Kate Kimball (head of Public Relations) were the female managers who were invited, as Frank conceded. (Fact 29.) In addition to not being discriminatory, not being allowed to attend these meetings is also not an adverse action. Armstead v. Wood, Case No. 10-cv-2783-CMA-KMT, 2012 WL 2298495) at *6 (D. Colo. 2012). This evidence is sufficient to satisfy the second element of the test. Third Element. If the defendant satisfies the second element, the burden shifts back to the 17 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 18 of 20 plaintiff. Schiager expects to address Frank's arguments in his reply brief. VI. The Claim Against Schiager is Barred by Qualified Immunity As an independent defense, Schiager contends that the Eighth claim against him is barred by qualified immunity. When a defendant asserts a qualified immunity defense, plaintiff shoulders a heavy burden to show that: (1) defendant violated her constitutional rights; and (2) the law was clearly established at the time of the alleged unlawful activity. Perry v. Durborow, 892 F.3d 1116, 1120-1121 (1Oth Cir. 2018). Although Frank has this burden, Schiager will briefly discuss it. As to the first element, Schiager has explained in Part IV above why there is no violation of Frank's right to equal protection. Among other arguments, Schiager explained that (1) almost all of the events on which the claim is based are barred by the statute of limitations and/or Schiager's lack of personal participation, (2) her claim is one for alleged personal retaliation and "revenge" by Schiager and not an equal protection claim at all, (3) her evidence that Schiager treated her in a disparate manner is based on events that are unique to her and do not apply to other employees, not just Mr. Martin, (4) Schiager had legitimate concerns about Frank's work performance to exercise his discretion to impose one negative review and PIP and he did not cause adverse action to Frank, and (5) complaints about discretionary supervisory decisions by public employers are not constitutional equal protection claims that may be raised in a federal court. Schiager will reply on this subject later to arguments raised in the response brief. As to the second element of qualified immunity, Schiager contends that Frank cannot prove that at the relevant time (November 2015 - February 2017) there was clearly established law that would deprive Schiager of his immunity. Under District of Columbia v. Wesby, U.S. , 138 18 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 19 of 20 S. Ct. 577, 589-590 (2018), existing law must have placed the defendant's conduct "beyond debate," the defense protects all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law, the legal principle must be "settled law" and not merely suggested by then -existing precedent, every reasonable official would know and understand the law, and the legal principle must clearly prohibit the officer's conduct in the "particular circumstances" before him, which requires a high degree of specificity. As to what cases could define the clearly -established law, the Supreme Court stated that "[w]e have not yet decided what precedents - other than our own - qualify as controlling authority for purposes of qualified immunity. Id. at 591, n.8. The Supreme Court case most closely on point appears to be EnRguist, which rejected the employee's argument that she could maintain an equal protection claim against a public employer and its supervisors for allegedly malicious actions. Without waiving the argument that Supreme Court case law defines what is clearly - established, it has been held in the Tenth Circuit that a plaintiff can prove clearly -established law by (1) identifying an on -point Supreme Court or a published Tenth Circuit decision, or (2) showing the clearly -established weight of authority from other courts. P rr , 892 F.3 d at 1123. It should be noted that the Tenth Circuit held in Morman that the plaintiff failed to meet the requirement of case specific facts by merely citing "general principles of equal protection jurisprudence." 632 F. App'x at 937. For Frank to satisfy this second prong, she must produce published cases from the relevant period that hold it is wrong for a supervisor to place a public employee on a PIP, to refuse to reclassify her job, and the other particular actions which Frank complains of in this case. Schiager requests that this Court grant summary judgment to him on the Eighth claim. 19 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page M of 20 Respectfully submitted, Date: January30, 2020 s/ David R. DeMuro David R. DeMuro VAUGHAN & DeMURO 720 South Colorado Boulevard Penthouse, North Tower Denver, CO 80246 303-837-9200 (phone) ddemuro@vaughandemuro.com (e-mail) ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT SCHIAGER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 30ih day of January, 2020, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following e-mail addresses: Jennifer Robinson irobinson(oDraemployment.com Robert M. Liechty rliechty(a)crossliechty.com Cathy Havener Greer cgreer()warllc.com Kathryn Anne Starnella kstarnellana,warllc.com Jenny Lopez Filkins ilopezfilkinsna,fcsov.com Sara Ludke Cook scook(a,vaughandemuro.com s/ David R. DeMuro David R. DeMuro 20 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10 EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT A Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN LORI FRANK, Plaintiff, V. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, a municipality, and JEROME SCHIAGER, former Deputy Chief of Police, in his individual capacity, Defendants. DECLARATION OF JEROME SCHIAGER I, Jerome Schiager, state the following: 1. 1 have been employed by the Fort Collins Police Services ("FCPS") for about 28 years in various positions from police officer to interim chief of police. I am presently the Lieutenant at FCPS in charge of Community Policing. 2. Plaintiff Lori Frank has been employed by the FCPS for about 20 years as a Criminal Analyst. 3. 1 worked with Ms. Frank on various matters from time to time prior to November 2015, but did not serve as her direct supervisor. There was an incident between us in April 2014 after the Chief of Police, John Hutto, put me in charge of a police staffing study. 1 asked Ms. Frank to do some of the work on the study, but this was a higher level staffing study than we had done before and I came to the conclusion that we did not have sufficient expertise and we needed to hire an outside consultant to help us. I asked Ms. Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 10 Frank to take the lead in working with the consultant, but she made it clear that she did not support the hiring of the consultant and that she should have been allowed to do this work. 4. In April 2014, Chief Hutto asked for comment about a computer software product that helps police departments conduct staffing studies. In her response, Ms. Frank criticized using outside resources for this type of work. I then sent an email to Ms. Frank stating "Lori, l appreciate you pointing out again your lack of support for our staffing study initiative." Ms. Frank complained to Chief Hutto who gave me an oral reprimand for my comment, which I agreed was not a professional way to handle the issue. To me, this was not a significant event and did not change our working relationship or cause me to use my rank or authority against her in any way. 5. In about November 2015, Ms. Frank's supervisor, Deputy Chief Cory Christensen, left to take another position. Chief Hutto assigned me to Mr. Christensen's position, which meant that I also became Ms. Frank's supervisor. I served in that role for about 15 months, from about November 2015 until February 7, 2017. 6. On November 3, 20159 Ms. Frank sent a memo to Chief Hutto on her uconcerns of retaliation" by me when I became her supervisor, based on the oral reprimand I had received from the Chief in 2014 for the comment I made in an email as noted above and because I supposedly had "marginalized" her position by taking away some duties. 7. Chief Hutto responded to her in a memo dated November 23, 2015, where he stated that he expected both of us to have "a professional and civil work relationship." He also stated in the memo that he had discussed with her "that, as your supervisor, Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 10 Assistant Chief Schiager has the right, and in fact is expected to, set standards for your performance." 8. On or about January 8, 2016,1 gave Ms. Frank a memo I wrote on her "goals and expectations for 2016," which included that her reports and other work must be accurate and she is to analyze all data and check it before it is released. I noted how the FCPS and the public needed accurate data. l discussed the memo in advance with Chief Hutto, who also attended the meeting with Ms. Frank and me. 9. Ms. Frank had requested that her crime analyst position be reclassified by the City to a higher level because she believed that she was performing duties that exceeded those in her job description. In February 2016, 1 met with Ms. Frank and Janet Miller of the Fort Collins Human Resources Department to discuss this issue. Ms. Miller and I concluded that the duties being performed by Ms. Frank were consistent with those in her existing job description so we could not support a request to the City to reclassify Ms. Frank's position. 10. In about May 2016, 1 gave Ms. Frank her performance review on her work during the first quarter (which I believe the City then defined as FebruaryApril). I gave her an overall rating of "on track" for the quarter in both the "results" and "behavior" categories, but I pointed out several specific areas where she was making errors and her performance should improve. The areas included the priority one response time metric (discussed below), a response to an ACLU open records request that had incorrect data, a report to the Homeless Coalition on camping citations that was inconsistent with her later report on 3 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 10 the same subject to the City Council, and a poor response to a request from the Chief to analyze the decrease in certain respnses in the latest Citizen Survey. Ms. Frank responded in her comments section of the review by claiming that my criticism was done to retaliate against her for the April 2014 incident where 1 received an oral reprimand from the Chief. 11. One of the areas in the first quarter review where I stated that her work must improve was on the priority one response time metric. This metric is important as it measures the time on our most serious calls from when a citizen makes a 911 call to when our officers arrive at the scene. It was her responsibility for the performance metrics to be accurate (as stated in my January 8, 2016, memo to her on goals and expectations), but there had been numerous problems with it in the past and some non -serious calls needed to be scrubbed from the report. It is also important because it is posted on the City "dashboard" on the internet so that the public has access. I wanted Ms. Frank to meet with Carol Workman, the Dispatch Manager, to review the records on these 911 calls (probably only about 20-30 per month) to determine which actually turned out to be priority one calls to improve the accuracy of the metric, but Ms. Frank resisted that each quarter. 12. For the second quarter of 2016, 1 gave Ms. Frank another review in about August 2016, again rating her overall as "on track" in each category, but raised some issues, including the priority one response time metric and need to meet with Ms. Workman, and that I wanted to see the results before she published them. 13. In the third quarter of 2016,1 felt that Ms. Frank's work quality was declining. After consulting with, and obtaining the approval of, Chief Hutto and Deborah Mossburgh, El Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 10 also in the City's Human Resources Department, I gave Ms. Frank a review where I rated her as "needs improvement" in the results category but still "on track" in the "behaviors" category. I also wrote a detailed memorandum dated November 16, 2016, to Ms. Frank reviewing issues on prior reviews and discussing new specific projects where I felt she was making errors, including a request the Chief made for data for an article he was writing for the Coloradoan newspaper on an increase in disturbance calls, inaccurate data she released to the Coloradoan on bicycle citations, and crime statistics reports. I also addressed the continuing problems with the priority one response time metric. 14. Also on November 16, 2016,1 issued Ms. Frank a "performance improvement plan" (PIP) that set forth four objectives that she needed to meet. One of the issues that I addressed was the recurring problem of Ms. Frank reporting inaccurately on the quarterly priority one response time metric, which is the same issue I had raised in prior evaluations. Because of the importance of the issue, the difficulties in having accurate data in the past, and the pressure to improve the data, I wrote in ¶ 3.A. of the PIP that she was to "Set up a meeting with Carol Workman, yourself and me prior to publishing next quarter's response time metrics" and "I expect this dashboard metric to be accurate and free of errors every time (consistently)." I used that language because I was frustrated by the history of Ms. Frank's failures to improve this metric. By the time of this review, she was still resisting meeting with Ms. Workman or reviewing the records even though I had tasked her with these duties. Ms. Frank also published the data without clearing it first with me as I had instructed her to do in the prior review. 5 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 10 15. 1 told Ms. Frank later that I was not using a "free of errors" standard for her work, as I had written as to only one quarterly report in the November 16, 2016, PIP. I have not used such a standard for Ms. Frank or any other employee as 1 do not expect any employee to perform perfectly all the time. For example, I gave Ms. Frank "on track" ratings in the prior two reviews even though each review identified reports where she had made errors. I also allowed Ms. Frank to have an 8% false positive rate in the missing records report for the Records Department in February 2017. 16. A PIP is not a disciplinary action in the FCPS, but instead is used to improve the performance of the employee, and that was my intent when I decided to give Ms. Frank the PIP, as recommended to me by Ms. Mossburgh. If the PIP had been a disciplinary action it would have to meet a number of separate requirements for discipline in the FCPS including a chain of command review and the use of a disciplinary action form. I did not place any other employee on a PIP while I was supervising Ms. Frank. I do not remember giving a PIP to anyone else I directly supervised at FCPS, but that involves many reviews and employees over many years, so I cannot be sure about that. 17. At the time the PIP was given in November 2016, 1 requested that Ms. Frank's annual raise, which was scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2017, be allowed to go through despite the PIP. But, Ms. Mossburgh told me that could not be done because City policy required that any raise be delayed while a PIP was pending. 18. Ms. Frank sent a memo to Chief Hutto on September 9, 2016, alleging that I was biased and had retaliated against her. That complaint was assigned for investigation L Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 10 to Lori Greening, another employee of the City's Human Resources Department. Ms. Greening concluded in a report to Chief Hutto in November 2016 that I did not retaliate against Ms. Frank. 19. After Ms. Frank and her attorney objected that Ms. Greening's investigation was biased, the City agreed to have an outside investigator, Lori Karl of Mountain States Employers' Council, conduct an investigation of Ms. Frank's complaints against me. 20. On February 7, 2017, Chief Hutto advised me that he was putting me on administrative leave with pay while the investigation was being conducted. I ceased to be Ms. Frank's supervisor at that time, and other members of the department have supervised her since then. 21. On March 3, 2017, Ms. Karl issued her report on Ms. Frank's complaints about me. The complaints were about retaliation and my alleged conduct toward Ms. Frank, but there were no complaints of gender bias. Ms. Karl found that I had not retaliated against Ms. Frank. The only negative finding was that I held Ms. Frank to an improper error standard by stating in the PIP that the quarterly priority one response time report should be "free of errors." l had conceded to Ms. Karl during the investigation that the "free of errors$$ statement was too strong. Ms. Frank alleged that Ms. Karl's investigation was biased, so the City retained another outside investigator from another company, Jody Luna, who reviewed Ms. Karl's report and concluded in her report of May 10, 2017, that Ms. Karl's investigation had been conducted properly. 22. On July 27, 2017, the interim Police Chief, Terry Jones (Chief Hutto had 7 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 10 retired in about May 2017), ended my administrative leave, imposed no discipline against me, and reinstated me as Lieutenant in charge of Community Policing. He also issued a memo to the FCPS stating that my new assignment was not a disciplinary move. 23. During the period when I served as Ms. Frank's supervisor, I did not hold any meetings of my full staff, which included Ms. Frank, because I did not believe that full -staff meetings would be worthwhile. In January 2017, 1 decided to begin holding meetings of managers on my staff, as I hoped that such meetings would be valuable. I included in this meeting two females who fell in the management category, Jackie Pearson, who was the Sergeant in charge of internal affairs, and Kate Kimball, who was the manager of public relations. I did not include Ms. Frank and others on my staff who did not fall into this category. I believe that I held only two such meetings of managers on my staff in January 2017 before I was placed on paid administrative leave. It is my understanding that my successor today in my former position continues to hold the same type of limited meeting for managers, rather than the whole staff. 24. As a manager within the City organization, I have limited influence into the salaries of my employees. Salary ranges for each position are set by the City, and managers have very limited ability to affect an employee's salary. When Erik Martin was hired, his salary was set by the City Finance Department in relation to financial analysts in other departments around the City, with a small increase for his supervisory responsibility. His salary was not compared to that of Ms. Frank since her position and responsibilities were very different. I had no involvement in setting Ms. Frank's salarywhich :V Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-1 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 10 was set before I became her supervisor. I also had no part in establishing the policy that caused a delay in Ms. Frank's annual pay raise on January 1, 2017. 25. While I supervised Ms. Frank, I also came to be the supervisor of Erik Martin, who became the FCPS's full time employee In June 2016. He served as the FCPS financial analyst in charge of the budget of about $40 million - $50 million at the time, and other FCPS financial issues. Mr. Martin's job duties were very different from those of Ms. Frank as these two individuals worked in different subject matter areas and Mr. Martin supervised one employee. In the brief time I supervised Mr. Martin (until February 7, 2017),1 did not see him make any significant errors that would have justified a PIP. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Is true and correct. Executed on January M, 2020. c e me Schlager Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 12 ' ' & , VS. CITY OF FORT COLLINS Deposition LORI FRANK 1011512019 Meadors Court Repordng 4025 automation Way Unit D-2 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 970-482-1506 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 12 Meadors Court Page 173 1 A No. 1 2 Q Were you at all rude to Brandi that day? 2 3 A I don't believe so. 3 4 Q So tell me what happened with -- your 4 5 understanding of the incident when Mr. Schiager 5 6 criticized you for not Inviting her to lunch. 6 7 A That's what I -- that's the complaint I 7 a received from Jim Szakmelster, that when we all got 8 9 back from lunch, Jerry asked Brands, Oh, where did 9 10 you guys go, and she said she went home to lunch, and 10 11 he said, Oh, you didn't go with Lori and the tralner. 11 12 And she said no, and he made the comment that that 12 13 was junior high behavior. 13 14 Q Did you ever apologize to Brandl for how 14 15 you treated her that day? is 16 A Why would I apologize to her? 16 17 Q I don't know. Did you? 17 18 A I didn't have anything to apologize for. 18 19 Q Okay. So then you did not. 19 20 A That's a loaded question. 20 21 Q There was an incident also described in 21 22 your Complaint, and you've made an allusion to it 22 23 earlier today of an email where I think you said 23 24 Mr. Schiager made a snide remark or -- 24 25 A Yes. 25 Page 174 1 Q -- I don't remember your exact words, In an 1 2 email exchange. 2 3 MR. DeMURO: I think I have -- let me see. 3 4 (Exhibit 21 marked.) 4 5 Q (By Mr. DeMuro) You've been given 5 6 Exhibit 21, which is an email string that, I think, 6 7 refers to this issue. Is that right? 7 8 A Yes. 8 9 Q If you go to -- and email strings being 9 10 what they are, if you go to the bottom of the second 10 11 page, it appears to start with an email from Chief 11 12 Hutto to Mr. Schiager on February 26th, 2014? 12 13 A Uh-huh. 13 14 Q Where he's apparently attaching or 14 15 forwarding a -- an inquiry from a patrol staffing 1s 16 from University of North Texas. And then 16 17 Mr. Schiager forwards it to -- where it says, Thanks, 17 18 and then says, Lori, will you please look into this. 18 19 See if it adds value? 19 20 A Uh-huh. 20 21 Q All right. And then the next email on 21 22 page 295 up above is your response. 22 23 A Uh-huh. 23 24 Q Am I right? 24 25 A Uh-huh. 25 Page 175 Q And -- and you say in here, it appears it does the -- Chief and Jerry -- my apologies for the delayed response, et cetera. Then it says, After reading the description of what MAPP, M-A-P-P, provides, it appears as though the same thing that Ops Force Deploy does. And ops Force Deploy, as I understand It, Is the software from Corona Solutions? A Correct. Q All right. And yet -- actually, I think you say that In the next sentence. Much like the staffing study Etico Solutions recently provided. Is that right? I'm sorry. Do you see where I'm reading? A Right. Q And -- I'm sorry, you know,. I said it wrong before. Let me start over again. Because I think I took us offllne. I think what you're saying -- I think the Ops Force Deploy is -- did I say -- I should have said -- well, why don't you tell me, because you're so much more knowledgeable about this than I am. Is that the software staffing materials that are used by which company? Corona? A What? Q The one Ops Force Deploy? Page 176 A Yes. Q Okay. And you say, MAPP is a one-time look like the staffing study that Etico Solutions recently provided. Do you see where I've read that? A Uh-huh. Q Is that -- now, that's the study that you didn't feel Etico -- or you tell me. Did you feel Etico's staffing study materials were inferior to those provided by Corona? A I -- I didn't make that determination whether they were Inferior. It's a -- Etico's staffing study was a one-time look. Q Okay. And you say in the second paragraph,? In my opinion, It is much more advantageous and economical to use what we already have in place, which was, what, the Corona Solutions? A Correct. Q And then the next email at the bottom of the first page, Mr. Schiager says -- he writes to you and only you. He doesn't copy the chief, right? A Uh-huh. Q And he says, Lori, I appreciate you pointing out again your lack of support for our staffing study initiative. And is that the email you'd objected to? LORI FRANK 1011512019 44 (173 - 176) Case 1:18-cv-03204-M-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Meadors Court Page 177 A Yes. 1 Q And the staffing study initiative at that 2 point was being done through Etico Solutions, 3 right -- through Etico Solutions, wasn't it? 4 A Yes. 5 Q And did you -- isn't it true that you did 6 not support the Etico -- the staffing being done 7 through Etico Solutions? 8 A I didn't -- no, that's not true. 9 Q Okay. You didn't -- you thought it was 10 just fine being done by Etico Solutions. 11 A I would have preferred that I be able to do 12 my job that I was hired to do. 13 Q I thought you told me, though, the Etico 14 Solutions software resulted in not only the 15 expenditure for the software but also resulted in 16 higher overtime costs. 17 A It did. is Q Okay. And then you forwarded that email to 19 Mr. Szakmelster, and your email on that issue is in 20 the middle of the page. Is that right? 21 A Uh-huh. 22 Q And the email at the top, you see he 23 responds. 24 A Uh-huh. 25 Page 178 Q And then is it your understanding that 1 Chief Hutto then did some sort of reprimand to 2 Mr. Schlager for this -- for his email? 3 A Yes. 4 Q And did you see the reprimand yourself? 5 A- I saw it. 6 Q Saw a written -- oh, I see that written. I 7 mean, a written reprimand. a A Yes. 9 Q And as I understand it, he showed it to you 10 but did not allow you to have a copy. 11 A Correct. 12 Q Do he tell you, or do you know whether he 13 gave a copy of that document to Mr. Schlager? 14 A I have no Idea. 15 Q Now, in the Complaint, you refer to the 16 reprimand that Mr. Schiager got as being -- in this 17 incident in April 2014, for causing him to retaliate 18 against you in numerous ways in the future. 19 A Uh-huh. 20 Q Specifically, when he became your 21 supervisor. 22 A Correct. 23 Q Are there other Instances where you feel 24 something occurred between you and Mr. Schiager that 25 Page 179 caused him to retaliate against you when he became your supervisor, other than this Incident we just talked about? A When I corrected him when he tried to claim credit for the report that I created. Q All right. And that's the Manford report that we looked at earlier from about 2011? A Uh-huh. Q Is that right? A Uh-huh. Q Anything else you can think of that caused him to retaliate? A No. Q Let me take you back to one Issue I forgot to ask about, We were talking about that so-called PERF study, the staffing study, done a number of years earlier. A Okay. Q And you told me you'd worked some on that. A Yes. Q Was your role different on the PERF study than it was on the Etico study more recently? A I was more Involved In the PERF study. Q In what way? A Just in the conversations In working with Page 180 the -- the people from PERF. Q Who was the -- within the department, were you the leader of working with PERF, or was someone else the lead point on that? A Someone else was. Q Who is that? A I don't remember. Q We're probably going to take a break pretty soon, or if you -- A Okay. Q -- want It sooner, you're welcome, because I'm about to switch subjects on you again. (Exhibit 22 marked.) Q (By Mr. DeMuro) Ms. Frank, you've been handed Deposition Exhibit 22, which I believe is the -- your 2004 [sic] review by Mr. Christensen; is that correct? A Uh-huh. Q And I know Mr. Szakmeister had done the prior review we looked at, but then we found out he retired. A Correct. Q And so then Mr. Christensen took over. You at this point were in the administration division, as opposed to the prior division you'd been In. LORI FRANK 1011512019 45 (177 - 180) Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 12 Meadors Court 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 1s 16 17 118 25 Page 197 meeting. Do you remember meeting with Chief Hutto to 1 discuss this? 2 A Sounds familiar. I don't have -- it's not 3 Crystal clear recollection, but yeah. 4 Q Do you remember anything that took place In 5 the meeting? 6 A Not specifically. 7 Q He says in the second paragraph, he expects 8 both of you to be professional and have a 9 professional, civil work relationship. He says, We 10 discussed the fact that, as your supervisor, 11 Assistant Chief Schiager has the right and, In fact, 12 Is expected to set standards for your performance. 13 Do you see that? 14 A Uh-huh. is Q Do you disagree with that? 16 A No. 17 Q As your supervisor, he does have that 18 obligation to set the standard. 19 A Yeah. 20 Q And at the bottom, It says that, As I've 21 stated to you before, I remain open and available to 22 any concerns you may have. We'll come back to that 23 part later. 24. And as I understand it, the -- during that 25 Page 198 first quarter, Mr. Schiager and Chief Horton -- or 1 Chief Horton -- Chief Hutto met with you to discuss a 2 memo on goals and expectations for that year? 3 A Yes. 4 MR. DeMURO: I'm sorry. He's got to give 5 you that one. I apologize. 6 (Exhibit 27 marked.) 7 Q (By Mr. DeMuro) Is this a copy of the memo a you were given by Mr. Schiager on the goals and 9 expectations for 20167 10 A Yes. 11 Q Did he send it to you In advance of the 12 meeting, or was it given at the meeting? 13 A I don't remember. 14 Q And Chief Hutto also attended -- there was is a meeting on this Issue. 16 A I think so, yes. 17 Q And Chief Hutto was also present? is A I don't recall. 19 Q Do you remember anything about the meeting? 20 A Not specifics. 21 Q Did you go over this memo? 22 A Probably. I don't -- I don't specifically 23 remember. 24 Q He says In the memo, In the second 25 Page 199 paragraph, Mr. Schiager writes, all reports, data, performance metrics, etcetera, released must be accurate. Do you think that's a fair standard to set for you? A I think it's unreasonable to say that I can never make a mistake. Q Well,, that's not what he said, though, is It? A Yeah. Pretty much. Q Okay. So you feel this -- your reading of that first sentence I read means that you must be error -free. A Yes. Q Okay. Did you protest in any way when that was given to you? A No. Q Did you contact Chief Hutto about It? A No. Q The next sentence Is, Please double-check everything before it's published. Is that a fair standard for him to set? A I guess. Q Well, what's -- what's -- you say you guess. Why is -- isn't that your job, to produce reports that are accurate? Page 200 A It is. I'm not going to say that I'm Infallible, though, and I won't ever make a mistake. I will do my best to put out accurate information, and I did put out accurate information. In fact, my error rate was extremely low. Q So does that mean you double-checked the reports before you published them? A I may or may not have. It depends on how much time I had. Q Well, let me -- let's break that down a little bit, because from reading the materials, It sounds like you worked out at least a couple of different kinds of reports. One would be, sometimes people would ask you, whether internal or external, as we were talking before. They would ask you for a report on some subject, and you would have to work from scratch on that particular Issue to create a report for whatever their need was. Is that right? A Yeah. That's correct. Q You told me before, sometimes that may have taken a very long time -- A Yeah. Q —sometimes short. It's hard to -- A Yeah. LORI FRANK 1011512019 50 (197 - 200) Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 12 Nfeadors Court 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 s 9 10 Page 237 line, you say, I'm being tasked with a project and 1 still have not received the report from Etico. 2 What report did you need to be able to work 3 on the reactive time project? 4 A The report that Tim Friezmeyer produced. 5 Q Didn't you have access to that report? 6 A Not the follow-up. 7 Q You couldn't have asked Mr. Frlezmeyer? a A He'd already provided it to the department. 9 Q So did only Mr. Schiager have the report? 10 11 A I don't know if he's the only one that had 11 112 it. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 I14 1s 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Wasn't it put into your shared computer system? A That one was not. Q Okay. So you couldn't move at the time on the reactive time issue until you got that report. A I needed the background -- Q All right. A -- of how he did it. Q And Mr. Schlager wouldn't give you the report? A I asked him for It. He didn't give It to me. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q Okay. In the next paragraph, on page 715, 125 Page 238 it says, I've now been assigned the responsibility of 1 vetting CAD calls for priority legitimacy. And this 2 Is back to the Priority 1 call Issue? Correct? 3 A Uh-huh. 4 Q So Mr. Schiager is the one who assigned you 5 that? 6 A Yes, yes. 7 Q And you see in the second sentence is 8 task -- well, the second sentence says, This task had 9 previously been handled by the Comm Center manager, I 10 take, is Ms. Workman? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And it says, This Is well outside the 13 boundary of my authority. 14 A Yes. 15 Q If Mr. Schlager had assigned it to you, why 16 was it outside the boundary of your authority? 17 A As I stated before, it says right here, I 18 have no control over how CAD calls are handled and 19 processed In the Comm Center. But I'm now being 20 tasked with conducting quality control on the 21 dispatcher's work. 22 Q I understand the part about you have no 23 control over how CAD calls are handled, but why 24 couldn't you still go examine the files and malte a 25 Page 239 determination as to what the proper times were to Insert Into the report? A That's not vetting the call for priority legitimacy. That's not what that means. That means -- this means basically doing quality control on CAD calls. Q That's what you think the assignment was from Mr. Schlager? A That's what vetting CAD calls for priority legitimacy means. Should the call remain in the calculation or should it be thrown out. Q You say a few lines down in here -- It's about maybe ten lines down -- a line -level employee with no decision -making authority Is not the average member of these teams and committees. A Correct. Q Are you a line -level employee? A I am a line -level employee. Q Okay. I'm sorry. If you please go back to the last exhibit. There is one thing that I skipped. And this is Exhibit 36, again, on the second page. If you go to the longest -- the second -to -last full paragraph on page 714. This is your discussion. I think we've basically covered but I just want to hit this one Page 240 more time, on how you determine your percentage -- how to determine your error percentage, right? A Okay. Q And It says, in this particular quarter, you got about 90 requests for Information and research. Is that right? A Okay. Q In addition to approximately 1300 reports. And now I've created and now monitor the word automatically distributed. And those are the reports we talked about before that go out automatically that you -- I think your testimony was, there was a handful you will look at before they go out? A There's a handful that I am -- that I monitor, that I actually look at. It's not necessarily before they go out. Q Okay. Which are the ones you monitor? A I don't want to misstate that, so I'd have to look at the list. Q Well, about, when you say "a handful," about how many are there? A How many are there that I -- Q That you monitor. A --that I monitor? Ten-Ish. LORI FRANK 1011512019 60 (237 - 240) Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 12 Meadors Court Reporting Page 241 Page 243 1 Q So the other 1300 reports go out without 1 on the third quarter items. If you go to page 101, 2 being reviewed by you before they go out; is that 2 which Is the second page of Exhibit 37. 3 correct? 3 In the third paragraph, he says, In August 4 A Correct. 4 2016, the chief asked for data to support an article 6 Q All right. You say in here, it's about oh, 5 he was writing for the Coloradoan about the work of 6 two-thirds of the way down, you say the -- you say, 6 the District 1 team and the data showed an increase 7 Using a conservative number for 1400 reports, It's 7 in daytime disturbance calls -- Increase in daytime 8 below that. Oh, I'm sorry. That I distributed, a disturbance calls in the downtown area from 24 to 9 after the 1400 reports, I distributed over this time 9 111. io period. One mistake in one report. What's the 10 Do you remember that report that showed ii report you're referring to there? 11 that increase? 12 A I'd have to look at my notes. 12 A Yes. 13 Q All right. That's all on that exhibit. 13 Q That was a report that you did, right? 14 Now, your complaint of September 9 of 2016 that you 14 A Uh-huh. 15 sent to Chief Hutto, that was investigated by Lori is Q Did you review that report before it went 16 Greening of the Human Resources Department? 16 out? 17 A Yes. 17 A I don't know. I don't — I don't remember. 18 Q And she made a determination that there was 18 I mean, I looked at it. 19 no retaliation. Is that her determination? 19 Q Did -- would it be very surprising to have 20 A If that's her wording on that -- on her 20 daytime disturbance calls increase that much in the 21 finding. 21 space of one year? 22 Q All right. Did you ever see her final 22 A That was due to the data Issues that we 23 report? 23 were having. 24 A No. 24 Q And what were the data Issues that affected 25 Q She offered to meet with you, didn't she, 25 that? Page 242 Page 244 1 to go over the report? 1 A We had done an upgrade In 2014 to our CAD 2 A She offered to meet with me. I don't think 2 RM5 system. And unbeknownst to us, until we started 3 that she stated to go over the report. 3 researching it, they decommissioned certain tables 4 Q Well, did you -- but you did not go through 4 within that upgrade that, in a sense, deleted data. 5 the meeting, did you? 5 Q Okay. So -- so you used that report to 6 A No. 6 draw the data and it gave you a bad number, 7 Q Why not? 7 essentially. a A I -- I can't answer that. I don't know. I 8 A It gave me the number that it gave me. 9 don't have a reason. 9 It's not a bad number. It's what was In the system. 10 Q Now, in the third quarter, for the third io It's the data that was in the system. i1 quarter of your work, Mr. Schlager gave you a 11 Q Well, but if you'd reviewed this 12 performance review and put you on a performance 12 beforehand, you would have noticed that that was just 13 Improvement plan or a PIP. 13 an extraordinary increase In that one metric, 14 A Yes. 14 wouldn't you? 15 (Exhibit 37 marked.) 1s A Knowing that the data was missing would 16 Q (By Mr. DeMuro) Is Deposition Exhibit 37, 16 explain that. 17 is this the memo from Mr. Schlager, November 16, 17 Q Well, I understand that, but what I'm 18 2016, on your -- his performance concerns about you? 18 asking about is something a little different. Why 1.9 A Yes. 19 didn't you review the report prior to sending it out 20 Q He -- he recounts in here a number of 20 and realize it was obviously not going to be correct? 21 Issues we have already covered in some of the 21 A It's not Incorrect. It's the data that was 22 performance reviews, so I'm going to try to skip 22 In the system. 23 ahead. 23 Q So even though the data was completely 24 Well, I'm sorry. He also picks up some 24 faulty, you're saying you didn't make a mistake, 25 things from the third quarter. Let me try to focus 25 because that was the data that the system gave you. LORI FRANK 1011512019 61 (241 - 244) Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 12 Meadors Court 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 :14 15 16 17 1a 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 253 anomalies in the data you find. Was that an unfair 1 request for him to make? 2 A I guess not. 3 Q It says -- and then it says, the end of the 4 numbered paragraph 2, Analyze and flush out the 5 reasons, proofread and/or double-check and correct 6 any errors. 7 Wasn't that a reasonable position for a 8 supervisor to take? 9 A It might be reasonable to ask that, but to 10 expect 1400 reports In a quarter to have no errors Is 11 unreasonable. And that has even been stated by the 12 Investigators that investigated this case. 13 Q In -- which investigator was that? 14 A Lori Karl and Jody Luna. 15 Q Okay. In paragraph 3 on page 2 of the 16 document, he says, Finalize the discussion with 17 department managers, make necessary changes on the 18 performance metrics. To clarify, this includes, and 19 A says, Set up a meeting with Carol Workman, 20 yourself, and me prior to publishing next quarter's 21 Response Time Metrics. I expect this dashboard 22 metric to be accurate and free of errors every time 23 consistently. Have I read that correctly? 24 A Uh-huh. 25 Page 254 Q And his reference there is to the one 1 specific quarterly report, the Response Time Metric? 2 A Okay. 3 Q Ail right. That's the only reference he 4 made to a report having to be free of errors in this 5 document, isn't it? 6 A I guess. 7 Q He also says, prior -- oh, on the Carol e Workman, had you set up the meeting yet at that 9 point? 10 A I don't know. 11 Q And B, he says, Prior to December 15, 2016, 12 I expect you to demonstrate to me your progress on 13 creating the minutes of Reactive Time Metric. And I 14 think you told me -- well. Let me just ask. 15 Why was it not ready yet? Why was that 16 progress -- what progress had you made at that point? 17 A I don't know what progress I'd made, but 18 I've already addressed the fact that I needed the 19 background Information that I did not have from Tlm 20 Friezmeyer. 21 Q And then C says, Set up a meeting with each 22 Deputy Chief and other managers necessary to finalize 23 the development of the additional performance metrics 24 we've talked about, and he lists some there. Are 125 Page 255 those -- was that an assignment you had previously? A Yes. Q Were you working on that assignment? A I was -- yes. I had done what I could do and was waiting for executive staff to do their part on It. Q Now, you testified earlier today that you were much offended by receiving a PIP. A Uh-huh. Q Is that right? And do you know how Mr. Schlager -- do you have any knowledge as to whether he's given PIPS to other employees at Fort Collins -- A I don't know. Q -- Police Department. Okay. One other thing about this I wanted to ask you about. You understood at the time, November 16, 2016, that one of the effects of a PIP is that as long as It remains in effect, you cannot receive your raise. A Correct. Q And that's something you knew In November of 2016. A Yup. (Exhibit 39 marked.) Page 256 Q (By Mr. DeMuro) Now, Exhibit 39 is an email from Chief Hutto of November 1, 2016, to a bunch of people. And then about his holiday party. Is that right? A Yup. Q And you are not in the list of ail those emails that are listed there, correct? A Correct. Q And then it's typed above here, I was the only person in the organization not to be Invited. Clear violation of shunning me due to my claim of retaliation. I assume that's your typing. A Yes. Q And did this upset you, when you found out about his holiday party? A It upset me that I was shut out of that. Because I was around this same time, I started getting excluded from staff meetings as well. Q What staff meetings are these? A Admin staff meetings. Q For what, from Mr. Schlager? A Uh-huh. Q My understanding from reading some of your other materials are, that when Mr. Schlager became the supervisor, the unit he was supervisor of while LORI FRANK .1011512019 . 64 (253 - 256) Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 is Meadors Court Page 261 supervise. 1 A Correct. 2 Q All right. By pointing out good things as 3 well as bad things -- 4 A Yes. 5 Q -- in your report, because Mr. Schiager, 6 reading those reports, also gave you a number of 7 compliments, didn't he? a A If he did, they were not very numerous. 9 Q All right. Isn't he just holding you 10 accountable for mistakes you had made, just like 11 Mr. Yeager should have held Mr. Martin accountable? 12 A Again, that was not a mistake. He's 13 holding me accountable for something that isn't a 14 mistake. 15 Q Okay. 16 A He was searching for anything that he could 17 to degrade my performance, to create a paper trail, is if you will, to set It up for me to be on a PIP, for 19 me to eventually get fired. 20 Q And he was doing that because he was 21 retaliating against you for what you had caught him 22 for earlier. 23 A I stood up to him. 24 Q Okay. If you please, go over to page 1036 25 Page 262 of this Exhibit 40. In the middle paragraph -- well, 1 I don't know, there's not a middle paragraph, It's 2 the second paragraph, beginning with the Performance 3 Plan with Chief Schiager. Do you see this? 4 About five lines down, it says, Chief 5 Schiager is expecting me to never make an error, yet 6 no one else in the agency is held to this standard, 7 including Chief Schiager himself. Do you see that? a A Yes. 9 Q Is that literally true, you felt you were 10 the only one in the agency that he was holding to 11 that high standard? 12 A Yes. 13 Q And he held no one else to that standard, 14 not sworn or unsworn, not men or women; is that is right? 16 A He wasn't holding Erik Martin to that 17 standard. 1s Q Well, you say "no one else in the agency." 19 I'm just trying to confirm literally, it means, no 20 one else in the agency. 21 A I'd be shocked if somebody else In the 22 agency was held to a zero mistake standard. 23 Q And you felt that was the standard he was 24 holding you to. 25 Page 263 A It was. Q Okay. , A It even says in here, he had mistakes. His overt actions In the past, opened the City up to potential liability. For example, when he bent the rules in order for a young female applicant to pass the physical fitness test. I learned from previous depositions that -- not only that but that he applied pressure to his subordinates to not say anything about It. Q So actually, on that particular thing, did you also learn from prior depositions that the investigator found that he did not assist the young woman In passing the physical -- A I haven't seen the -- Q -- fitness -- A -- I haven't seen the -- Q Okay. A -- report on that. (Exhibit 41 marked.) Q (By Mr. DeMuro) On Exhibit 41, these are some entitled PIP Meeting Notes, and If -- to go back a little bit, as I understand the process, Mr. Schlager set upa process where he and Mr. Martin would meet with you, after the PIP, they'd meet with Page 264 you every couple of weeks; is that right? A Correct. Q And these are notes that I think you created after the meetings? A It is. Q All right. And on the first one, the December 8, 2016, the third bullet point down, it says, He claims he is not expecting 100 percent accuracy. It's not true. What did he say to you about not expecting 100 percent accuracy? A I don't know other than what my notes say. Q Okay. But you felt it was -- that was not true. A I know it wasn't true. Q Okay. And under the 12/22/16 category, there's a discussion of reactive time and that the consultant -- there's -- there was an error rate on the data of probably 1 percent. And that he said that margin of error was acceptable. Is that -- am I saying that right? Or tell me If I'm not. A No. I told him I had -- I had discovered coding errors with what Tim Friezmeyer had done. He said, The error rate on those was probably around 1 percent. And he said, With staffing studies, some LORI FRANK 1011512019 66 (261 - 264) Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1a 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Meadors Court Page 265 margin of error Is acceptable. Q There was an Issue that arose -- well, at least I've seen emails about It later, in December 2016, where Jeff Willard, who I -- who was information manager or one of the information managers? Information service managers? A Uh-huh. Q Sent an email about a report called the Missing Case Report? A Uh-huh. Q And apparently, Matt Lee, who you had mentioned earlier, he had been asked by the Records Department to do a new version of that report? A Uh-huh. Q Had you been doing that report in the past? A Yes. Q Had Records Department expressed any dissatisfaction with the reports you had been doing? A Not to me. Q Were you surprised to learn that they had approached Matt Lee to try to do the report? A Yes. Q What happened then when you found out that they were trying to do another report? Where died the project go from there? Page 266 A I met with Matt Lee and Lisa Robles to discuss the different approaches that Matt and I took to the project. Then It was turned over to me, and the end result was that Matt couldn't produce a report that contained all of the data that was needed. The report I created had a -- had some false positives, but rather than go with something that didn't have everything, they chose to use mine that did have everything, but had false positives. Q And by the "false positives," there's a reference to some of the stuff, that because of the false positives, there may be an error rate of about 8 percent in that report? A Correct. Those false positives constituted about 8 percent of -- Q That was just something he couldn't avoid In preparing the report. It's just the nature of the data. A Correct. Q And as I understand it from the smalls, that Lisa Robles accepted that, that there would be some false positives -- A Yes. Q -- with an 8 percent error rate? A Yes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 1s 16 17 1s 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 267 Q And Chief Schiager also accepted that error rate. A I don't know. I guess. Q Okay. MS. GREER: Can we take a break? MR. DeMURO: Yes. Do we need to check the time? We can go off the record. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record. 5: 13. (Recess.) THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Back on the record. 5: 22. Q (By Mr. DeMuro) Ms. Prank, I'll have another document marked. (Exhibit 42 marked.) Q (By Mr. DeMuro) Ms. Prank, he's given you Exhibit 42, which is your review for the fourth quarter of 2017 by 3errod Kinsman. A Uh-huh. Q Do you recognize this document? A Uh-huh. Q I'm going to ask you about a couple of things in here. On page 112, also says page 5 of Sr at the top, this Is apparently written by you in this area of the document. It says, I field -triage and complete a variety of incoming reports and requests Page 268 on a daily basis. During fourth quarter 2017, I received 107 requests for research, statistical analysis, consultation, and results. Says, This is In addition to monitoring and maintaining more than 4000 automated reports I created that were sent during the quarter. The earlier documents we looked at said 1300 to 1400. Is this 4,00 correct or did something different happen? A I'd have to look at my notes as to where I got the figure. Q Okay. Did your workload increase or anything like that that would have been resulting -- A My workload is always Increasing. Q But you're just not sure where this 4,000 came from. A No. Q On the next page, 113, there Is discussion here, starting about eight lines down. That Mr. Kinsman writes, It begins with the words, Additionally, I was informed of concerns by Deputy Chief Yeager, Assistant Chief Cronin, Lieutenant Yonce, regarding reporting of response one times. And he writes, It was clear from the information that Lori had not taken the time to LORI FRANK 1011512019 67 (265 - 268) Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 11 of 12 Meadors Court n 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1s 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 273 who'd only worked for the City six months to apply. 1 Who were the two qualified female applicants? 2 A I don't know their names. 3 Q What's the basis -- how did you get this 4 information, that this is how It worked? 5 A People that -- I mean, this was just kind 6 of conversation that was had. I don't remember who 7 specifically. s Q Rumors in the building? 9 A Conversations in the building. 10 Q With whom? 11 A I don't remember. It was conversations in 12 the admin wing. 13 Q Okay. If you can please skip over to the 14 next page, number 58 on the bottom. And these are 15 dated Items, so if you go down to 1/12/17 and 16 1/26/17, it says.. Schiager held an admin/training 17 staff meeting. Do you see where I'm referring to? 18 A Uh-huh. 19 Q And It says, He excluded me from the 20 meeting. 21 A Yes. 22 Q Now, this issue came up a little bit 23 earlier, and I -- I think you agreed with me that he 24 was not holding staff meetings in 2016 but then he 25 Page 274 started holding meetings -- these'two meetings in 1 2017? 2 A Correct. I guess. 3 Q Okay. And the -- as I understand It, there 4 were females who did attend that meeting. Is that 5 right? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And that would be Sergeant Jackie Pearson 8 and Kate Kimball? 9 A Correct. 10 Q Who was the manager of public relations? 11 A Correct. 12 Q But that you were not invited to the 13 meeting? 14 A Correct. 15 Q Isn't it -- do you have any knowledge as to 16 whether he decided to have a different group attend 17 the meeting? Of just managers and supervisors? 1s A It was -- I don't know what the logic 19 behind It was. I know that It included all of his 20 direct reports except for me. 21 And the meetings prior to this, that he 22 didn't hold, but his predecessor Included all of 23 those direct reports that did include me. 24 Q All right. What about his successor? Is 25 Page 275 his successor Mr. Yeager? A Yes. Q Does he hold meetings that Include you? A The -- I was included in the meetings that he had. Q All right. So you attended all -- after Mr. Schiager ceased to be the head of that -- that section, his successor had meetings, and you were invited to those; Is that right? A Yeager's. Q Yeagees. A Yes. Q I'm sorry. So Yeager -- you've had a number of bosses over the time. A Yes. Q It was Schiager, and then Yeager, and then who, Kinsman? A Kinsman. Q Kinsman. How did he handle the staff meeting Issue? A He didn't have staff meetings. Q He didn't have them. Okay. And since then, who Is it now? A Christie Valesky. Q Okay. And who did she -- did she have Page 276 staff meetings? A No. Q Okay. A The staff meetings are held by the head of the division, which would be the deputy chief. Q Okay. This document, Exhibit 43, Is entitled, Statement of Discrimination. I assume you typed that. A I did. Q This is the first time I can remember seeing the word "discrimination" used. In all of your other documents I can find, it says, "retaliation." Do you -- did you -- are there earlier allegations you made In any of the documents you can remember where you say you were being discriminated against on the basis of gender? A I don't know that I -- I don't know what those earlier documents say. Q Okay. Is there some reason this has discrimination in the title? A Because Its discriminatory behavior that's being explained in there. Q And this was about a month before you filed your charge of discrimination with the EEOC? A Correct. LORI FRANK 1011512019 69 (273 - 276) Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-2 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 12 of 12 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1s 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Meadors Court Page 277 Q And in that -- well, let's just mark it. 1 (Exhibit 44 marked.) 2 Q (By Mr. DeMuro) In Exhibit 44, is this 3 your charge of discrimination filed about December 4 13, 2017? 5 A Yes. 6 Q And in the discrimination statement on the 7 first page, it says, and I'm looking for Roman a numeral IV here, item number 2 says, Beginning in 9 about 2011 or ongoing, Assistant Chief of Police 10 Schiager repeatedly discriminated against me based on 11 my sex. 12 What was the sexual discrimination, gender 13 discrimination, beginning in 2011? 14 A That's when I stood up to him for trying to 15 take credit for my work. 16 Q All right. So the stuff -- you've already 17 talked at length about all this stuff. I won't go 18 back over it. But is it fair to say that the things 19 you described to me earlier and to Ms. Greer about 20 that you labeled as retaliation are now you're 21 saying, discrimination? 22 A It was -- and we've heard other -- I heard 23 this In another deposition. Jerry doesn't like it 24 when strong females stand up to him. I did that. 25 Page 278 And I suffered the consequences of that. Because I 1 am female. Because I did get him 1n trouble. It's 2 discriminatory behavior and retaliation, because how 3 dare me, Lori, a civilian female, call him out for 4 bad behavior for trying to circumvent the rules. 5 Q All right. Getting back to my question. 6 Would you agree with me that the Instances you've 7 described to us today, now in this document or in the 8 prior one, calling it discrimination for the first 9 time as opposed to retaliation? 10 A I don't know if it was for the first time 11 or not. 12 Q Do you know of any female employees other 13 than yourself that Mr. Schiager discriminated against 14 on the basis of their gender? 15 A I don't know. 16 Q Any female employees he retaliated against? 17 Do you know of any? 1s A I don't know. 19 Q There was a -- we were told during the 20 mediation that there were -- a mediator told us that 21 you had focused on five women who were --- you 22 expected to testify about employment discrimination 23 by the City. Is there such a list of five women that 24 you have that you expect to testify on that Issue? 25 Page 279 A I'd have to look -- MS. ROBINSON: I'm going to ask you not to answer questions that are related to what was said during the mediator -- during mediation. MR. DeMURO: I don't think that's privileged, MS. ROBINSON: Well, that's your opinion. MR. DeMURO: I think -- then I'll just ask a question without regard to the mediator. MS. ROBINSON: Good idea. Q (By Mr. DeMuro) Who are the women you think that were going to testify to support your claim of discrimination against females by the City? A I'd have to look at my list. Q But you can't name anyone today. A I don't know If they're going to testify or not. I don't know -- Q Well, who are the possibilities? MS. ROBINSON: I'm going to ask you to not answer that, to the extent that It discusses what we discussed -- THE WITNESS: Okay. MS. ROBINSON: -- about testifying. And evidence. Q (By Mr. DeMuro) I won't to ask you what Page 280 you discussed with your lawyer. I want to find out who do you think -- MS. ROBINSON: Then don't answer. Q (By Mr. DeMuro) -- and then who do you think was discriminated against by the City or Mr. Schiager? A I'm -- I'm going to refer back to my notes. Q So there's -- you don't know anyone. A I didn't say that. I said I'd have to refer back to my notes. Q Today's the only chance we get to take your deposition -- A Well, don't answer for me, then. Q Well, then, I'm sorry. I don't want to argue with you. I just needed the information to defend my case. A Well, and I'm not going to misstate something that I need to refer to my notes on. Q Earlier, you testified In regard to Ms. Greer regarding teaching you had done. And you produced for us in a response to a discovery request some lists of some conferences and such. And it looked like you start working for the Corona Solutions people or at least the first item I can find on this list is November of 2014 that you LOR1 FRAiUK 1011512019 70 (277 - 280) Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-3 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT C EXHIBIT C Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-3 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: C1I1E1? HU ITO .FROM: 10RI DRANK .SUBJEc r: .CONCERNS 0171111TALIM ION DATE: .NOVEMBE-113, 2015 .CC: DEBRA MOSSBURGH,14UMAN R13SOURCr3S Chief Hutto: With the upcoming appointment of Deputy Chief Schiager to the position of Assistant Chief, and therefore my direct supervisor, I feel compelled to highlight my concerns regarding retaliatory, malevolent, and depreciatory behavior towards me from Assistant Chief Schiager, based in part as a result from a letter of reprimand he received regarding a complaint I filed. Assistant Chief Schiager did not rescind his statements to one, not did he offer an apology, indicating he maintains the same negative opinion and does not hold respect for me. Assistant Chief Schiager has already marginalized my position, stripping away my job responsibilities and reassigning them to a sworn officer. This was done without being my direct supervisor. Now that he will have more control over my job duties and responsibilities, I fear further ma%inalization will occur. For the past couple of years, I've worked on a professional goal to reclassify my position. Recently, I've made great strides towards accomplishing that goal. I fear now, that not only will I lose supervisory support; efforts will be made against me obtaining that goal. Assistant Chief Schaiger will now have the latitude, liberty and authority to make this position, one that I've excelled in for over 22 years, very arduous, hostile and unpleasant. I will continue to maintain a professional relationship with Assistant Chief Schiager, showing him the same level of respect I always have, and my hope is that none of my fears are realized. Fort Collins -Jones 000711 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-4 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT D EXHIBIT D Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-4 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2 City of %ort Co.7- Po�(be llins _Police Servicibs MEMORANDUM TO; Lori Frank, Crime Analyst FROM John Hutto, Chief of PO DATE: November 23, 2015 SUBJECT: Follow-up to memo dated 11-3-15 Office of the Chief of Police 2221 South Timberline Road PO Sox 680 Fort Collins, CO 80622.0580 970.221.6660 970.416.2085 - fax (hutto(Ofcgov com This memorandum is follow-up to your memo to me and our subsequent meeting re the concerns that you raised relating to your professional relationship with Assistant Chief Jerry Schiager. As I stated to you my expectation of both of you is that a professional and civil work relationship be maintained. Anything else is unacceptable. We discussed the fact that, as yoW supervisor, Assistant Chief Schiager has the right, and in fact is expected to, set standards for -your performance. If he believes you are in some way not measuring up to an established standard it is incumbent upon him to address any deficiency in a respectful manner consistent with policy and procedure and back that assertion up with facts. In addition to meeting with you I met with Assistant Chief Schiager and discussed with him my expectations of him in this matter. Hopefully I have made my position clear as from my perspective it remains simple; you are expected to do your job as defined by your position and Assistant Chief Schiager, as your supervisor, is expected to treat you in a respectful manner and give you the tools and resources necessary for you to perform your job. As I have stated to you before; I remain open and available to any concerns you may have and I would expect that you would bring any future issues to me so that they may be dealt with. JHJh Fort Collins -Jones 000712 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-5 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT E EXHIBIT E Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-5 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2 `"rrt°bolUns Date: January .,%2016 To: Ldri Frank, Crime Analyst From: Jeri* Sthfter} Assistant Chief RE: Goals and Expectationsfor 2' 016 CrI ro*eanalysis *ls b6tothl6it Increasingly lMport.ant-'-:AgefiC16s 06..q pected to g!deploy resources based on data. The public and them' edla"Ao exiJe�#access :t Information government to r rmatidn and niftent period of growth and Is transparencyIn our operations. -The City IS 60 theVOtge of a. -Sig Increasingly re4ulring performance metrics for budget requests and programs. In this context; I Would like to shaed.some ofmythdughts and expectations as we begin -working together; Aocueicy: All reports; data, pqrfoftran;q,metr1CS etc: must atcuratcPI Os do' bletheck e rythlog before I It ls,60bllshod WO.Wlll likely- bia-IMO..leih another Data Driv 6 P,611dqg.ve e e project in cc tational.0 nits so they can properly the future and we must be accurate In w hatis published to ope Or deploy their resources to*-Onfron't community Ity' Crime. problems. AnalVqls: Please apalyze all data before It ls:releAsed. Filter-.0 ut,t e flyers; provide thoughtful analysis .to help -people undersOind public; safety Issues. Please topy.m e*on Information that It'released to the media or others* outside:the UjildIfti.16clu'din other departments. g. ContioWn''S educationt I WoOld like y6u to maM a plan for building your copetenty through advanced training,:edutatibn and 'ceftificatl . on. I'am-committed to supporting youeprofessional development with work time and paying the expense S of this training. Resource allocation stiArVewill be.contlnulng:oor relationship* with Etico Solutlon's*Io-analyAe.our staffing In'eadV*2016..We Ma fOO rw. 16 ard with. additl dnb[work: ln'otheiro reai:* We of the department (o1sp'a4ch, 01j)j expectyou td eng akqj90 h this process and sup rt It, -,:It is the department difection. You. will have onopportunitV.to demdns*'tO6*te.Voutability as't'he leaciperson In thls.effort: Please.provide Wha 0verd ata Is requested In .6 timely nAnhe. TeqMwqrk; 1. expect you to -be a.ppsitjvelea n member with other divisions and perso."nel.] expect you to provide assista nee. where you can and demonstrate your.experlence with others. including the patrol Crime analyst, the InvestigatIV6 aides and other area I appreciate your attendance in the recent " 60 et* pme Ungs, Perior ante metrics: e perf6rmance .rM cs.% I expect you .to own: the f metrics thatareused In budget, dashboard and; h d do0irtmen I t pperptions. Pleitd make t0rd.they are accurate. and mooln I You are expected to Sup j6jt.therO4OgOtaqq.perform �a . nce'Mana . gement p: cets- by treating and maintaining -th 6s me trics. iWics- Please Make sure all of this work is accurate before it I . S.poblli.he.d. FRANK 0329 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-5 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT E EXHIBIT E Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-5 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2 'IT UI1S ,,e Date: January8, 2016 To: Lori frank, Crime Analyst From: Jerry Sthlager, AssistaritChief REs Goals and Expectations for 2616 Crime analysis is becoming increasingly Important. Agencies are..expected to:deploy and justi . resources iaased on. data.The public and thg media also expect -access to government Infoeniatidn and transparency to our operations..The City is. on tlieverge:of.a:signiflcant period of growth and is increasingly requlring.performance metrics for budget requests and programs. In this context; I would Ilke to.share.some of-my'thoughts and expectations as we begin working toge#her: Acw0cy: All reports, data, performance: metrics etc .released must be accurate. Please.double check. everything before it is.pubIIshed.-WO.Wlll likely be lMplemenfing another Data Driven P61161ng.proj40 in the future and we must be accurate •1n what.it pubib hed to our operation a1.unIts so they can properly deploy their resources to:confront community crime-. problems,. Analysis: Please analyze all data before it is released. Ftlter.outahe flYerS; provide thoughtful analysts to help ,people understand public safety Issues, Please: copy, me on information that Is released to the media or others outside the buflding;.iricluding.other clty departments. Continuing education:. i would like you to make a plan for building.your competencythrough advanced train ing;:education and certification. i am;commftted to supporting your..professional development with work time and paying the expense, s. of this training.. Resource allocation study: We -will be. continuing our relationship: with Etico Solutions'.to -ahalyze,our staffing in early2016.1Ne may move. forwardwith additid nid.Work in other areas: of the department (l3ispatch, CID),.I expect.you, to engage.ln this process. and support it;:it is:the department dlrectlon.:You will have an opportunity to demonstrate your ability as.f lead.person to thh .effort: Please.provlde whatever data is requested in a timely manner. Teamwork: I expect you.to-be a.positive team member with other divisions and personnel. l expect you to provide assistance. where you can and demonstrate your.experience with -others. including the patrol crime analyst, the investigative aides and other area agencies; i appreciate your attendance in the recent group.meetlogs, Performance metrics: i expect you to own the performance metrics that.are:used In budget,.dashboard: and department operations. Please make:su.re.theyare accurate.an.d theaningful: You are expected to support.the budget and performance-.managementprocess aycreating and maintaining these metrics. Please rrmake sure ail of this work is accurate before it is pubiishad. FRANK 0329 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-6 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT F EXHIBIT F Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-6 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 5 2WO17 TelergREWARD Self Servlee QPA 2016 1st Quarter: Review of LORI FRANK by JER.OM SCHIAGER RESULTS: Provide a brief description of accomplishments and progress achieved In pursuit of individual. goals: Results are the "What", Behaviors are the"How". - - Answers LORI TRANK -Employee Rating Answer On Track Comment I am fulfilling Incoming projects, dufies and requests in my current position. The duties of my position varywidely in both complexity and . scope. I am recognized as an expert in this field and am sought after to conduct training. A couple of examples to help demonstrate that recognition include: 1.1 was asked to teach a one -week college level Grime Analysis course at the University of Northern Colorado. I was asked to not only teach the class, but develop the curriculum, provide quality material, i create quizzes and create tests. This was the firettime this class had been offered at UNC, so there was no blueprintfrom which to work, so the entirety of the curriculum and material was created by me. The classwas very well received by the students and my teaching reviews were wonderful. At the conclusion of the class, I was approached by many of the students who Inquired about doing an internship with me. I'm making great strides in developing my Intern program and the interest shown by the students is a testament for the program. I am representing the City of Fort Collins In a highly respected manner, providing opportunity and exemplifying a very professional organization. 2.1 was contacted by CSUPD about conducting a class on Crystal Reports. Several months prior, TrrTech had conducted a class on i SSRS, which people from CSUPD attended. The training did notmeet their needs, so they asked me to come conducts class that would be easier to understand and allow them to extract data from the system. Feedback from the participants of the CSUPD Crystal Class: "Even though I didn't get to stay for the whole class, the portion that I was there forwas very helpful. Thanks a lot for coming over and presenting and if you come back for more I would definitely be Interested in attending." "I thought it was great, the little information I was able to pull while playing with Crystal amazed me." "I found the class to be very beneficial for me. I am not a tech savvy person but the way you taught the class allowed me to feel like I actually understood and could maneuver through the Crystal reports you so generously shared with us. I know that I will need a refresher course in the future but for now, I am going to practice with the reports you shared to build my skills so I can actually utilize the system the way It was meant to be u tilized. Thanks again. I look forward to working with you and being taught by you in the futurel" "Your class was great, I really understand table structure now and picked up a few other things. Your teaching style is wonderful and you are one of my favorite people!!!" "Your class was fantastic." JEROME SCHIAGER - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer On Track hlips:l/lcgm.ehr.cmgRevimt&nmarylRWmSummeryReadOnlyFinallPrinlRevimS mmary/34726/I Fort Collins -Jones 000735 114 Case 1:18-cv-03204-Rl3J-NRN Document 77-6 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 5 2/6/2017 Comment TalentlREWARD Self Service Lori has been asked to. copy me 06 all 00.he.rep'prls anti data she pfoduOes outside of the building. -She released 2016 crime stats'to the :Colcirailoao and created a table of camping -related charges for City Counc€l. i appreclate the thoroughness of the report to Council that details several potential charges that could relate to camping. She also. responded to'ilie. IACp about calls related to people with AlzhMmer's disease. She compiled a huge amount of data for the Benchmark Cities conference, and she received positive recognition for that work. There some areas where her accuracy should have been better: Lori repiied to.an ACLU open recofds request related to camping citations: The spreadsheet she produced had dOplicate.entries, making the. overall numbers Incorrect.'She also reported to the Homeless Coalition that there were np violations of the camping section under Municipal Code Section 23 in 201 G. She reported to City Council that there were 41 citations under section 23-10.(D) which Is Die -section dealing with camotng. When I asked her about it, she sold that the difference was okplalnabie because oftho'Way she did the search, Regardless, she should have been more clear in`her response. Analysis is also an.important area to coniinue.to focus on. The expectation Is that Lori think critically�about the'reports and data she i produces.!his is'espectally I' pottarit With the issUes we have -experienced with the new Tburdn*systent. We havwt*a'1ked about making sore her�work adds value to. the end user. One situatign Ehat demonstrates.room tar improvementwas a project the Chief asked her to work on regarding a decrease in numbers to the latest Citizen Survey. After*a month I asked her about the progress and she pradtrced a document that was irery poor quality and ,did not answer lhe..quest%ons shE had been asked. I gave,her feetlbadi_about the work and a month later she sent three charts that also did not answer the chiefs question. -The Chief commented 'that'tiie knforination was riot ` useful to him and did not represent.gooO analysis work. Lori needs to Work* on the tlu.altty.atld timeliness ofthis-type'ofVucrk. Lori 4as had good conversations with ESta[f about Improving our performance:measures; She will be working with the.managers to finalize the new metrics. Priority i response time data --continues to be a challenge. The 04 data contained calls that should have been scrubbod (pizza robbe *y call, parental kidnappings). This is a very visible report to the community. I asked.Lorl about the calls that should have been removed from the data; she sake that it was not her job to remove inaccuracies from the data. She said thatthe dispatch managet was responsible for the data. I told Lori that I eicpected that anything she published is accurate. We w111, be. meeting. with the dispatch manager to correct this ongoing issue.. Overali I am rpting.Lori On Track -in the Results a►ea, although I expect to see improvement in the areas listed In the coming months. JOHN HUTTO-1=eedbacic Provider. Rating Answer -- No Response -- i r Comr'nent -- No Response -- i Section: BEHAVIORS BEHAVIORS; Provide a brief description on the means and methods used to achieve results, as well as the actions f and values that were demonstrated. Include behavior competencies demonstrated that support Individual, team, f and City goals. Results are the "what", behaviors are the "how". Answers LORi FRANK -Employee Rating Answer On Track https:llfcgov.ehr.com/ReviewtSummary/Revie SunimaryReadO*Final/PriNReviewSurnmaryrM726/1 Fort Collins -Jones 000736 214 Case 1:18-cv-03204-Rl3J-NRN Document 77-6 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 5 ZWO17 Tale lIREWARD Self Service Comment i actively seek activity that will embed my job function to further both my personal goals as well as those of the agency and city. I am a member of the BFO - Transportation Team once again In the BFO process. Inclusion in the BFO process demonstrates the vast reach of my position and the contributions I make on a large scale. I recognize opportunities to make positive impacts and demonstrate professionalism both within the organization and outside the organization. was asked to provide insight on crime trends to the local media organization. I provided an intelligent and insightful response that was carried by the local media. After reading my response, one of our FCPS media members provided this comment "Not that my say so matters, but this is awesome info for them and put together in a way that offers excellent perspective. Thanks for taking the time to do IV' I represented the City of Fort Collins in a very professional and respectful manner. Each year FCPS participates in the Benchmark Cities Survey. The coordinator of the survey asks each participantto review the rough draft of the information, which is over 200 pages of material. After reviewing the rough draft, I sent the coordinator some edits I had found. This was his response:'rThank you, as usual you have a sharp eye. Thanks for the help, I appreciate it:' The Benchmark Cities Survey coordinator went on to tell me: "I hope you know that a few years ago when I took this over from Gerry, both he and Ed Salazar made sure I knew that you were my best resource for help with this project outside of our agencyi" This demonstrates the respected and esteemed reputation I have developed over the years. I anticipate the needs of my customers and look for ways to help others improve processes and achieve success. Some examples of the manifestation of those behaviors: [RE: Responding to a Clery Act Report- fast turn around time] "Thank you so much forgetting those to me today, you're amazingl" [RE: Assisting on a data extraction for a media request - anticipating needs] "Lady, you rocklill I owe you. Every field is exactly what she asked for] You're the bests" JEROME SCHIAGER - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer On Track Comment i appreciate Lori's work with the Benchmark Cities group. Chief and Mike Trombley commented that her relationships and work with that group are very good. Her willingness to supervise an intem and teach him about crime analysis is appreciated. Lori volunteered to be on a BFO Team again this cycle. I appreciate her willingness to share her knowledge and experience by teaching Crystal Reports to CSUPD. She has also instructed a college -level course on her own time. These are good examples of Lori's willingness to share her experience and knowledge and represent the department. Lori proposed a change in title for her position. She and i metwith Janet Miller to discuss this proposal. The final decision was that Lor''s job description describes the work she does and she is being paid within her range in accordance with City policy. There won't be a change in her job title or description at this time. Lori has done a good job of leading a discussion at Estaff about performance metrics, I encourage her to see this project through and finalize the metrics we have discussed. This is an area that will continue to be a focus in her job. She needs to collaborate with the Involved managers to develop meaningful metrics and get their buy in. Lori has been a member of the Fitness Team for several years. i appreciate her dedication to this important aspect of the department Mips:/lkgovehrcom/ReviewlSummarylReviewSummaryReadOdyFlnWiPrintReviewSummary/3472&1 Fort Collins -Jones 000737 3/4 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-6 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 5 2l0I2017 TalenllREWARD Self Service JOHN HVTTO-Feedback Provider RathlgAnswer— NoResponse -- I Comment — No Response — Attachmr ents :,.7s � a v 1, a . No Attachments an file. Attachments From Others Upload Date Uploadeq By ; Fite Namo Dose r1pli-on 5/11/2016 IJEROMEA Crime analysis expectatlons.docx SCHIAGER Employee Regarding the Camping Tickets mentioned. There is no way to determine the specific charge Comments beyond Natural Areas Violations in our system. The reports I produced accurately reflected the questions at hand. I did not Infer that the Natural Areas Violations were for camping, as that would have been inaccurate. Regarding the Citizen Survey. I produced adequate data for the Assistant Chief and the Chief to compose an agency response. I am not, nor should I be, responsible for authoring the agency response as to why people feel less safe from the previous Citizen Survey. I provided the data that was requested. To provide conjecture on why people feel less safe would simply be a guess Guessing is not accuracy. Regarding the response time data. The procedure for auditing calls, having the Comm Center Mgr be responsible for excluding any calls over 8 minutes, was established long ago. As part of EStaft, Assistant Chief Schiager was aware of the procedure, yet never questioned it before now, after becoming my supervisor. The timing to question this now and Imply it is my responsibility, after becoming my supervisor, Is suspicious and indicative ofretallation. He is Implying that I am responsible for the audit. Based on my position, I do not have the authority to audit the calls, nor do I have the right to supersede the Comm Center Mges decisions. I was on track with my previous supervisor to have my job reclassified. I had support from the previous Assistant Chief to reclassify my position and had done the work asked to make this happen. Now that Assistant Chief Schiager Is my supervisor, he has halted that process and slates that I am properly classified and my salary is sufficient { Assistant Chief Schiager is utilizing his position as my supervisor to retaliate against me. Assistant Chief Schlager received a letter of reprimand due to an inappropriate and unprofessional comment he made to me. He is now retaliating against me for receiving that letter ofreprimand, LORI FRANK 5/13/2016 10:58 AM MDT I acknowledge that I have read this review and my supervisor has discussed it with me, Reviewer Comments No Comments Provided Version 83.0.441 JEROME SCHIAGER 5111/2016 4:27 PM MDT I acknowledge that I have discussed this review with my Employee. TalenilREWARD 0ledinotogy from Towers Watson. o:.- 2017 All rights resww:d. Mpsl/fcgm,,efvcam/ReviewlSummwy/RevimSwnmaryReadOnlyFiml/PrintRev!mSummary/347m1 Fort Collins -Jones 000738 4/4 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 12 TalentIREWARD Self Service Page 1 of 11 2014 Review: Review of LORI FRANC by CORY CHRIST ENSEN Competency Assessment Set and Articulate Direction Measures the degree to which the supervisors/managers define a future direction for their organizational unit and articulates that direction to the team members. • Sets the tone for their organizagonal unit through communication and actions. • Provides direction about the goals of the grganizational unit and the Interaction of the organizational unit with others inside and outside the City. • Articulates the long range vision for the organization, Including future offerings/services and the value of the organizational unit to the community; works with others to get clarity on this vision. Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer Proficient Comment I am always professional and respectful in my communications, both Internally and externally. I anticipate questions before they are asked and attempt to clarify complex Ideas In the most understandable way. possible. Here Is an example from Lt. Yonce, regarding the understanding of Telestaff workload data: "For what it's worth, It makes sense to me." "very good data.....good to know.' I worked on a request to update a DataUnk report after the cut -over. The request was forwarded by the point of contact for Investigations. This person mentioned the original requester, so when the work was completed, i copied both the point of contact and the odglnal requester, as to expedite the final delivery of the work, This is from the original requester'Thanks very much Lori .... that's awesome See also: Mid 2014 Performance Evaluation: Communicationslinterpersonal CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer Proficient Comment Lori is very professional In her communications with others. This Is demonstrated both In her written communication as well as her verbal communication. I have noticed that Lori is quick to respond to those who request her assistance and work toward a solution an those requests. Ail of my requests from Lori have been tumed around very quickly. An example of this Is an extensive natlonal survey where several pieces of Information fell into Lod's field. Lori gathered and compiled the necessary information quickly and exceeded my expectations an her deadline. Lori Is excellent on sharing Information with me. She Is good with logistical information such as time off and other needs for her day to day schedule. Lori also does a nice job of communicating with me when she feels the Information will be Important for me to know. A recent example Is her work as the liaison between the organization and a local vendor. Lori made sure I was aware of a possible issue with communication with that vendor artd she wanted to make sure I was In the loop. That Fort Collins -Jones 0�6 httas:l/fctrov.ehr.comlReview/Summarv/ReviewSummarvReadOntvFinal/PrintReviewSum... MUMIENT Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 12 TalenlREWARD Self Service Information did come in handy and was timely. Please also see her mid -year review conducted by Deputy Chief Szakmeister. It is attached. "Customer Service Page 2 of I I - Understands the customer's needs and how our operations and service affect them - Provides outstanding service and are committed to finding new ways to exceed our customer's expectations - Is flexible and considerate - Partners - Cooperates - Balances competing interests - Involves customers In decision -making processes - Anticipates needs and provides solutions Ustens and dearly communicates; remains respectful; uses tact and diplomacy - Takes ownership of Issues - Follows up to ensure satisfactory resolution - Recognizes and respects differing opinions and ideas, seeks workable solutions to address and minlmize conflict Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer Exceptional Performance Comment 1 recognize that my role in the organization Is to offer customer service to a wide variety of stakeholders. I provided excellent customer service In fielding more than 240 project requests of varying scope 1n the last eleven months. I have provided my personal cell phone number for the agency, so that people could reach me, even outside of normal business hours. One example of that, cram former Sgt. West: Of wanted you to know that Lori helped me out yesterday, Sunday December 22.1 had a Coloradan reporter call and say she had not received her daily "incident Report Lag'. She really wanted it and I was not famitlar with this report. I called Lori on her day off and asked her If she knew about the report or could help me get the reporter a copy of it. Lori worked on her own time, she figured out how to get the report via email and sent me an email with the report attached. She did all of this with an awesome attitude and did not complain a hesitate In helping me. I don't know how tong It took her to figure this out but her customer service to me was outstanding. Often times, as you know, people don't even answer their phone or respond to text on days off. I sure appreciated Lod's help and was able to consequently provide hood customer service to the reporter. Funny thing was, her °email -- In box" was full and that Is why she didn't get it. " When the Tiburon upgrade occurred, the agency was In the midst of a workload analyst being done by a consultant. The day prior to the cut - over. I was asked to work with the consultant, as he needed some additional information. I was provided several days to compile the needed data, but anticipating the potential for technical difficulties, I suggested we gather the Information that day, prior to the cut -over: I Immediately began worpng on extracting the data, thus ensuring the consultant would have the data he needed and could continue his work. This note was received In regard to additional nationwide data I anticipated would be needed for a Council Workplan clarification pertaining to our Part l Crimes 6 Year Trend: "Great update. Thank you! 1 was going to ask about what the rest of the nation was doing:' I often reach beyond the scope of traditional approaches and employ a variety of techniques to best serve my customers. I am flexible and https://fcgov ehr.com/Review/Summary/ReviewSun maryReadOnlyFin htggNRgas PAM77 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 12 Talen4REWARD Self Service accommodating to balance competing Interests, recognizing the Importance of and maintaining neutrality when necessary. I take ownership of issues when the responsibility falls with me. I discovered an error with the data point I was utilizing In regards to the Community Dashboard, Response Time Measurement. I Immediately brought this to the attention of my supervisor and alerted the affected stakeholders. See also: Mid 2014 Performance Evaluation: Customer Service CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer • Rating Answer Proficient Comment Lori has a very large customer base. She dearly understands that her customers depend upon her for Information. It was discovered that when Records Manager Susan Neiman left the organizatiorl that a very Important report was no longer being produced. This was a report necessary for our School Resource Officer program about crime offenses at our local schools. This report was a bit of a puzzle about who was responsible for It. Lori jumped In and assisted one of the records supervisors in creating the report. Deputy Chief Yeager sent a note complimenting Lori on her work with that supervisor to get this report handled In a short amount of time. Lori also responds to request from outside police services. It was discovered, after the CAD/RMS upgrade, that a regular report was no longer being routed to the sales tax office. This was a report the office used to deal with solicitor violators. Lori worked to create the report so that the sales tax office could again get this valuable Information. Please also see her mid -year review conducted by Deputy Chief Szakmelster. It Is attached. Knowledge of Operations Page 3 of 11 Measures the degree to which a supervisor/manager demonstrates knowledge of his/her own operation and the overall "business° of the City. -Demonstrates a working knowledge of the areas that he/she toads; knows the inputs and outputs of the processes that he/she manages. *Understands the reason (*why) the organizational processes exist. -Actively works within his/her organizational unit and across organizational units to resolve operational issues; can distinguish the processes that cross other organizational units as well as those that reside only within the organizational unit that he/she manages. -Can articulate how the processes In his/her own organizational unit impact the other organizational units In the City and external entities (ncluding citizens). Answers 0 LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer Exceptional Performance Comment My years of experience as a crime analyst have provided me with In- depth knowledge and a level of expertise found only amongst seasoned analysts. This expertise allows me to find the necessary resources t need to enhance my skills as a crime analyst 1 am recognized In the field of crime analysis as an expert and am frequently asked to present on this topic. In April of this year, I was asked to sit on the Sociology College to Career Panel at Colorado State University. I was once again asked to speak at different taw NUChttps://fegov.ehr.com/Review/Summary/ReviewSununaryReadOnlyFinl eview�u°n... 1I381ZOI7 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 12 TalenlREWARD Self Service enforcement classes at Colorado State University. My previous lectures have been well received and 1 continue to be invited back to teach. Because of my knowledge, expertise and reputation, I was asked to participate In the hiring process for a crime analyst from a local law enforcement agency. I helped review applicants and sat on the oral board Interview process. I was asked by the CCRN to teach at their Spring Conference. I had previously taught for them and they sold my session was so well received they wanted to have me back to repeat the class. Here are a few feedback comments from my presentation: "She Is always a pleasure to listen to and learn from:' "Quite interesting and well done. Lori clearly has mastered her job and presented the Information clearly and relatable to all." "Good speaker, Interesting examples to demonstrate how RMS date is used by crime analysts." "I so enjoyed Lod - She was an extremely Interesting speaker. Very, very knowledgeable. t teamed a totl Wish our crime analyst was here In attendance." "Lori was great, really gave good insight how can mess up stars and data by not being accurate" "I like your presentation so much because it gives a sense of value to our jobs in records." When the Records Manager left the agency, I recognized my technical knowledge could help others solve Issues they faced when inquiries arose as a result of data she previously provided. Neighborhood Services had previously been receiving an automated report, which had not yet been resurrected after the Tiburon update. I updated and Improved the automated report and they are now getting their Information. The agency received an Inquiry as to why we had not fulfilled our requirement of reporting school crimes In a timely manner. I offered to help locate the report that previously provided this information, to which I found and was able to extrapolate the purpose and parameters needed to comply with the reporting requirement. This year I took on a new project, the next survey of the Natlonal Police Research Platform. I worked with the survey coordinators to extract the needed information and set up the system that complies the data on a weekly basis. This will continue until we have enough citizen responses to make the survey valid. See also: Mid 2014 Performance Evaluation: Knowledge, Skills and Abilities. CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer Exceptional Performance Comment Lori continues to be a state and national representative of Fort Collins Polio through both the state and national crime analyst associations. She was Invited as a return speaker this year by CCRN due to interest In her previous classes. "Results Lori Is called upon to create and disseminate several reports that assist others In their efforts to use data generated by police services. These reports point to LoWs knowledge and skills in the area of data extraction and reporting. Please also see her mId-year review conducted by Deputy Chief Szakmelster. It Is attached. Page 4 of 11 • Understands, works toward accomplishing organization, department, and/or work unit goals, objectives and timelines F t WlknWones D g https:l/fegov.ehr.conVReview/Summary/ReviewSummaxyReadOnlyFinal�i�nviem... 1931�12�� Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 12 TalenlREWARD Self Service Page 5 of 11 • Work is timely, accurate, concise, complete, within budget, using available resources • Finds creative, resourceful, innovative and/or alternate ways to achieve goals and solve problems. Encourages others to explore alternative approaches and new Ideas • Adapts effectively to changes in the work environment Takes an additional responsibility where appropriate • Responsible steward of the community's natural, human, and financial resources • Accountable, ethlcal, responsible. Owns and admits to errors; takes responsiblity for correcting/improving • Is a self starter and looks for ways to be proactive Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer Exceptional Performance Comment i consistently provide quality products to my customer base. t recognize competing Interests amongst varying projects and use my skills and knowledge to make other people's jobs easier. I help promote a positive Image of the agency by accommodating and exceeding project expectations. This Is from the Colcradoen regarding a short -notice request for Information: "Rockstarl. This is perfect." I worked diligently with CSU Conflict Resolution to create an effective method or giving them the inrormation they needed to complete their mission. From CSU Assistant Director of Conflict Resolution and Student Conduct Services: "Thank you so muchl I really appreciate ail of the extra effort you've put Into thisl" and "Thank you so much for all of your help with this. It's paying noticeable dividends with getting our students connected to resources quicker." After the Tiburon upgrade, I tirelessly worked to get the data people needed to continue their jobs back up and running. I worked on getting case management reports back up, from the customers: "Thank you very much..... IN working. You rockl" and "Thanks very mach Lod .... that's ewesomel" 1 worked on getting all of the sex offender reports back up and running, and received this feedback:"Thank,you so muchl This Is absolutely perfect for what i need. Thank you very muchl" Because of my expertise. I was asked to assist on a research project that the city's i?epartment of Social Sustalnablflty regarding the Murphy Center. I researched and came up with the appropriate data they needed, and received this comment: "This Is perfects Thank you so much for the time you spent of this. It is extremely helpful." I was part of the team that was recognized by ICMA. I collected, collated and analyzed the required data. This note was received by the coordinator: "I would like to personally thank you again for all your work in gathering and reporting data for the 2013 ICMA Center for Performance Measurement (CPM) Comprehensive Program. We just got notification from the ICMA that we were once again awarded the ICMA -CPM Cerillicate or Excellence awardl This award recognizes those entities that demonstrate the ability to meet and exceed the standards established by the ICMA —CPM In publlc reporting of key outcome measures, surveying, and performance measurement reporting. This award recognizes the work we put In reporting the survey data and the City's ability to continually evolve Its integration of performance measurement In transparently reporting how well the City is providing service to the citizens of Fort Collins. Again, thank you for your contribution to this effort, It is sincerely recognized and appreciatedl" I was proactive In becoming part of a BFO team this year. I expressed Interest in becoming a team member, and was asked to replace someone that was unable to fulfill the requirement. See also: Mid 2014 Performance Evaluation: Results F1$rt CRoll(ns-Jones 00 0 https://fogov,ehr.com/Review/Summary/ReviewSummmyReadOnlyFina rant eviewSun 130/ 17 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 12 TalenlREWARD Self Service CORY CHRISTENSEN -Primary Reviewer Rating Answer Proficient Comment Lori is very results oriented. Her work Is timely and she works very hard at an accurate and useful product for her customers. Many times the data Is requested on short notice and Lori Is able to turn that Important task around to meet those timellnes. She has received praise from her customers on her extra efforts and results from those requests. "Safety One area where there was a stumble this year was In the area of reporting response time to priority one calls. This metric was designed 'to track the time of responding to priority one calls and was Intended to be measured from the time a dispatcher picks up the emergency phone call (hello) to when the officer makes contact with the citizen requesting the assistance (Hello) or from "hello to hello". We had been reporting those numbers In a City Council reviewed and public reporting mechanism for over 1 year. This was LorYs metric to create, analyze and provide to the reporting structure. When there was a drastic downward spike In the metric. Lori was asked to take a deeper look Into the Issue. She discovered that the report we had been pulling was actually measuring from officer dispatch to arrival and that we had been reporting the metric Incorrect all along. This caused issues with executive leadership and explaining the error to City leadership and City Council. To Loris credit when she discovered this error she Immediately brought it to my attention and asked for further guidance on how we wanted to proceed. She has also gone back and adjusted the reporting metric to add consistency to the public metric. Please also see her mid -year review conducted by Deputy Chief Szakmelster. It Is attached. Page 6of11 SAFETY MEASURES IN OFFICE AND IN FIELD • Follows all applicable safety policies • Maintains a safe work environment for self, coworkers, the public, and property • Recognizes and reports unsafe conditions • Models and encourages proper safety behaviors and techniques • Uses safety and operations equipment according to proper procedures and techniques • Keeps abreast of changes In safety procedures and completes all applicable safety training • Completes required Injury and accident reports correctly and on time ADDITIONAL SAFETY MEASURES IN OFFICE ENVIRONMENT • Maintains an ergonomic workstation and has periodic ergonomic evaluations • Maintains safe housekeeping to enable passage toNrom office. • Example: manage cordslcables to avoid trip hazards, close file drawers, keep office neat and orderly, eliminate potential falling objects such as over -stacked paperwork, boxes, binders, eta • Avoid fire hazards (i.e. stores items >1 W from sprinkler on celling, no candies, use approved space heaters.) • Knows emergency procedures and follows evacuation routes without delay ADDITIONAL SAFETY MEASURES IN FIELD ENVIRONMENT • Wears appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) - Operates machines and equipment only with proper training • Completes tasks In a safe manner • Use chemicals In accordance with labeling • Add chemicals (cleaning, etc.) to work site Inventory; file MSDS https://fegov.ehr.com/Review/Summary/ReviewSummaryReadOnlyFinal�nnt�ev ew UM.eS ]9����I� Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 12 Talen4REWARD Self Service Answers LORI FRANK -Employee "Teamwork Rating Answer Proficient Page 7 of I I Comment I follow all applicable safety pelldes and maintain a safe work environment for myself, my coworkers and the public. I asked to have an ergonomic slt/stand desk Installed In my office, to help be more ergonomically correct, See also: Mid 2014 Performance Evaluation: Safety CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer Proficient Comment Lori is active In her safety and the safety of others. She Is an active member of the police services fitness learn and those efforts contribute to the safety and welfare of other employees. • Please also see her mid -year review conducted by Deputy Chief Szakmelster. it Is attached. • Fosters and demonstrates accountability, respect, innovation and trust • works cooperatively and collaboratively with others • Influences others to work cooperatively and facilitates teamwork • Fully participates in and respectfully supports team activities and decisions • Keeps supervisor and team members apprised of project/work progress or obstacles and Ideas for resolution • Positively and effectively represents the team. department, service area, and the City • Recognizes the work loads of others and offers assistance In times of critical need - Mentors others • Resolves conflicts • Shares Information • Puts objectives of the team before self. Helps colleagues solve problems. Highlights the skills and successes of others. • Leverages strengths and resources by partnering to create exceptional results Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer Proficient Comment I enjoy the opportunity to participate In a teamwork environment on a daily basis. With the addition of a second analyst, and the delineation of duties, we work wail together In fielding and forwarding requests to each other that may be out of our purview. When I come upon something that I think the new analyst has not yet encountered, I am cognizant to start her. I am fortunate to work with all divisions within the agency and I strive to lead by example to share information and expertise. I continue to be a member of the Fitness Team and regularly participate In the meetings, new hire testing and bi-annual fitness testing. This year brought the resurgence of a CPR Team. This team had been active In the past, and due to attrition, I was the only member left which stretched my resources very thin when CPR certifications were needed. There Is now a team of U Instructors and 1 am a current and participating member. See also: Mid 2014 Performance Evaluation: Teamwork CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer i https: m //fcgov.ehr.com/Roview/Sumary/ReviewSummaryReadOnlyFinrint eview u m. eSIQ30/z0 �.1 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 12 TalentjREWARD Self Service Rating Answer Proficient. Comment Lori participates In several team efforts. Not only does she partner within the organization but also seeks apportunitles outside of the organization. Lori volunteered to participate as a BFO team member and wanted to gain a deeper understanding of how the budget process works for the City. This is a large task and extremely important to the biannual budget process for the City. Lori was selected to participate on the Transportation BFO team. I commend her for her Initiative. Lori continues to be an Integral part of the fitness team at police services. This program is valuable to the organization and promotes healthy habits for the employees. r Lori Is a CPR instructor. She has been active In the area for several years. This year there was a resurgence of effort in CPR certificatlon for sworn officers. At the time, Lori was the only team member still certified and she dedicated time to assist in not only conducting training but also growing the team of instructors. Please also see her mid -year review conducted by Deputy Chief Szakmeister. It Is attached. Page S of 11 Optional Step- Job Specific Responsibilities Section: Job Specific This section is to define any additional responslbllltles and competencies that are not Identified In Core andfor Supervisor Competencies. This could be a specialty focus area for the job. Supervisors and employees should discuss this section to make sure there is alignment if any job specific competencies are identified. EXAMPLE: Job Responsibilities: Translation. (For an employee who provides translation services as needed for communication and marketing materials.) Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer Comment — No Response -- - No Response -- CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer _ Rating Answer Comment — No Response — — No Response -- Skill Ladder Position Assessment Only Objectives Assessment Objective Create more of a worMfe balance far myself and return to the 4/10 schedule I was on for the first V years of employement here at the City of Fort CoilinslPolice Services. Objective Progress Roadblocks Due Date 9/26/2014 6:00 PM MDT wrf C�olllnsslones p�g7 https://fcgov.ehr.com[Review/Summary/ReviewSummaryReadOnlyFina rant eview um... 193(�/ZUh Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 12 TalenlREWA,RD Self Service Page 9 of I 1 Measure Approached my supervisor to discuss. He sold he did not want to make any changes prior to his departure. Approached my next supervisor and As denied request at this time. Sensitivity Viewable by Supervisors Only of LORI A FRANK Changed By LORI A FRANK Last Change Date 9/22/2014 Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer Proficlent i Comment See objective details. ' i CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer Proficient Comment Lori did seek to change up her work schedule. Due to the requirements of this position it Is designed to be a regular work day type of job and requires a Monday through Friday schedule. Lars Is given considerable flexibility in how she applies those workdays. Objective Integrate Benchmark Cities Survey Into IACP Mid -Sized CIUes. Objective Progress On Track Due Date 9/25/2014 6.00 PM MDT Measure I attended the IACP Mid -Sized Cides/Senchmark Conference and volunteered to be on the Integration committee. Sensitivity Viewable by Supervisors Only of LORI A FRANK Changed By LORI A FRANK Last Change Date 9/=014 Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer Proficient Comment See objective details. CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer Proficient Comment -- No Response -- Objective Obtain CPR/First Aid Certificalon through AHA and move away from Red Cross Certification Objective Progress Complete Due Data 9/26/2014 6:00 PM MDT https://fegov.ehr.com/Review/Summary/ReviewSummmyReadOnlyFin��r�inV1l1ns-,JonesBYW6 ; U Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 11 of 12 TalenJREWARD Self Service Measure Completed. Sensitivity Viewable by Supervisors Only of LORI A FRANK Changed By LORI A FRANK Last Change Date 9/2212014 Answers LORI FRANK • Employee Rating Answer • Profident Comment See objective details. CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer Proficient Comment -- No Response — Objective Explore/Research job reclassification Objective Progress On Track Page 10 of 11 Due Date 9/25/2014 6:00 PM MDT Measure I approached my supervisor about the Issue. He took It to the Chief, and both are supportive of the effort. Sensitivity Viewable by Supervisors Only of LORI A FRANK Changed By LORI A FRANK Last Change Date' 9/22/2014 Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer Proficient Comment See.objective details. CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer Proficient Comment This is an ongoing objective. Overali Rating Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Overall Rating 3.5 Override Rating 3.5 https://fcgov.ehr.c,onVReview/Summary/ReviewSummaryReadOnlyFin rm Rffig+ilNi.es 9903P7 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-7 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 12 of 12 TWengREWARD Self Service Comment I'm a dedicated. long-term employee. I maintain a positive attitude and continue to took for new ways to contribute to the organization and to make other people`s jobs easier. I'm a recognized expert In the crime analysis profession and I promote the field of crime analysis through my continued Involvement In the Colorado Crime Analysis Association and the Intemallonai Association of Crime Analysis. CORY CHRISTENSEN - Primary Reviewer Overall Rating 3.2 Override Rating 3.2 Comment -- No Response — Attachments Upload Date Uploaded By 9122/2014 LORI A FRANK Comments File Name Description Mid 2014 Performance Evaluation.pdf Employee Review period has been closed administratively. Comments Closed as of 9131201512:58 PM MDT Reviewer Comments Review period has been closed administratively. Closed as of 9131201512.58 PM MDT Version 8.3.0.441 Page 11 of 11 TalentlREWARD 0 technology from Towers Watson. 0 2017 AU rights reserved. F rt i111nWones https.-//fogov.ehr.com/Review/Summary/ReviewSummaryReadOnIYPinal�rin eevew um... 19 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-8 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT H EXHIBIT H Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-8 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4 TalentIREWARD Self Service Page l of 3 QPA 2016 2nd Quarter: Review of LORi FRANK by JEROME SCHIACER Quarterly Performance Alignment (QPA) Section: RESULTS RESULTS: Provide a brief description of accomplishments and progress achieved In pursuit of individual goals. Results are the "What" Behaviors are the "How". Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer On Track Comment 1 am fulfilling incoming projects, duties and requests in my current position. The duties of my position very widely in both complexity and scope. I am recognized as an expert In this field and am sought after to conduct training and provide guidance. A few examples to help demonstrate include: 1.1 was asked to be a guest lecturer at CSU for the Sociology Department and lecture to the Criminal investigations class. I'm often approached after such lectures from students who did not know about the profession before I spoke to their class, about their desire to do an Intemshiphrolunteerwlth me in Crime Analysis at Fort Collins Police Services. 2.1 was contacted by an outside law enforcement agency to provide advise and expertise on setting up a Crime Analysis function within their department, including what services and duties were crucial to a successful program and prioritizing Information provided. 3. A fellow crime analyst in another jurisdiction sought input on providing Information to her agency regarding weekly crime trends. I responded to her and provided Insight and examples of products I've used In the past and helped guide her In a meaningful direction to proceed. She responded, "May I share the document you sent me? There were 3 other analysts from the iACA mail loop that had asked me to share what I learned. I like your example a lot and feet like they would benefit from it as well." JEROME SCHIAGER - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer on Track Comment Lod has done a good job lately of being responsive and timely with data requests. I appreciate her efforts. An area for continued improvement Is In making sure the reports she provides are accurate the first time they go out. There have been a few examples of initial reports sent out with errors that had to be, quickly changed when she realized the Issue. An example of this was the report done for tar. Dworkin on frequent service utilizers. The first report listed the time spent In minutes Instead of hours. Having to correct reports like this does not help people build confidence In Lod's work. I am looking forward to seeing the results of Lod's work on creating a report for minutes of reactive time In the patrol division. I would like to see that completed In the coming quarter. I am also looking forward to working with Lori and Carol Workman on the priority one response time metric. Prior to the next posting of this data I have asked to meet and discuss the accuracy of that data. Qrt Colljns-Jones 00 �9MMNT httns://fcaov.ehr.com/Review/Rummarv/ReviewSummarvReadOnlvFina�lPrintReview�um... 1 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-8 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4 TalengREWARD Self Service Page 2 of 3 Overall Lod's work Is an track. Section: BEHAVIORS BEHAVIORS: Provide a brief description on the means and methods used to achieve results, as well as the actions and values that were demonstrated. Include behavior competencies demonstrated that support Individual, team, and City goals. Results are the "what", behaviors are the "how". Answers Attachments No Attachments on file. Comments Employee Comments LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer On Track Comment I adively seek activity that will embed my job function to further both my personal goals as well as those of the agency and city. For the second lime. I served on a BFO Results team for the citywide BFO process. Tasked with a shortage of money and Increasing service needs, I contributed to the successful completion of our teams directive. I am an ongoing member of a citywide data Initiative project team looking at bringing more transparency to data within the City of Fort Collins. This project is In the beginning phase, and my contributions have and will continue to move It forward. I sit on a citywide team aimed at attaining the Baldrldge Awardt. My supped, participation and input on this team has been valuable in attaining the goals thus far. I will continue to serve and contribute to these citywide teams and Initiatives. JEROME SCHIAGER • Primary Reviewer Rating Answer On Track Comment Lori Is on track In this area as well. She has been good a keeping me Informed about what she Is doing and when she will be away from the Office. As stated above, I appreciate Lori's responsiveness to our customers Inside the department. I think she is doing well In this area. I am glad that Lori has found Interesting ways outside of the building to develop her career by teaching and being a resource to others. Lori has also become a resource for other people In the city organization for data -related projects. I appreciate her willingness to work on these Inigatives and represent our department. Period closed administratively 8/23/2018 Closed as of 8/23/2016 4:53 PM MDT Reviewer Comments Period closed administratively 8/2312016 Closed as of 8/23/2016 4:53 PM MDT F rtollinslones MY$htttss://fcaov.ehr.com/Review/Summarv/ReviewSummaryReadOnIYFinall$ run eview urn...1 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-8 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4 TalenlREWARD Self Service Page 3 of 3 Version 8.3.0.441 TotentIREWARD@ lechnolegy from Towers Watson. 0 2017 All dShts reserved. TRrt Rollins-JonesIhttas:l/fcizov.ehr.corntReview/Summarv/ReviewSummarvReadOnivFinarin eviewSum... Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-9 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7 EXHIBIT I EXHIBIT I Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-9 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 7 TalentJREWARD Self Service Page 1 of 2 QPA 2016 3rd Quarter: Review of LORI FRANK by JEROME SCHiACER Quarterly Performance Alignment (QPA) Section: RESULTS RESULTS: Provide a brief description of accomplishments and progress achieved In pursuit of Individual goals. Results are the "What", Behaviors are the "How". Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer On Track Comment I am fulfilling incoming projects, duties and requests In my current position. The duties of.my position vary widely In both complexity and scope. I am recognized as an expert In this field and am sought after to conduct training and provide guidance. Some examples to help demonstrate Include. - From the Coloredoan, In response to providing data they had requested: "You rock! Thank you for this, Lori. I appreciate It and will let you know if I have any further questlons.0 From Rocky Mountain HIDTA In response to providing seizure weights: "Lori...This Is exactly what I was looking for In terms of gram weights ....I also get the °DW reference .....I have seen that repotted elsewhere as everything from a true .1 gram to a single balloon 'shanks for the quick turn around on this....." From Lt. Yonce, after working with him on a project to Identify frequent offenders and provide the data is a format that would allow users to navigate easily through the data: "That Is awesome, thank youir JEROME SCHIAGER - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer Needs Improvement Comment Consulting with HR on this evaluation Section: BEHAVIORS BEHAVIORS: Provide a brief description an the means and methods used to achieve results, as well as the actions and values that were demonstrated. Include behavior competencies demonstrated that support individual, team, and City goals. Results are the "what", behaviors are the "how". Answers LORI FRANK - Employee Rating Answer On Track Comment I actively seek activity that will embed my job function to further both my personal goals, as well as those of the agency and the city. I am an ongoing member of citywide data Initiative project team looking at bringing more transparency to data within the City of Fort Collins. This project is in the beginning phase, and my contributions have and will continue to move It forward. I am responsible for including Fort Collins Police Services in the IACP Net Law Enforcement Benchmarking and Performance Analytics Tool, launched at the 2016 IACP Conference by IACP Net. The Inclusion of FCPS In this Initiative, which Is a spin-off of the Benchmark Cities, provides excellent publicity for the agency as one https://fcgov.ehr.com/Review/Summary/ReviewSummaryReadOnlyFinar//19?jb&g, Slgk9 A$%$M6NT 12 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-9 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 7 TalengREWARD Self Service of the leaders In this industry when it comes to data sharing and transparency. There are currently only a handful of agencies participating and FOPS Is one of them. I am also seeking to include FOPS in the White House's Police Data Initiative. Again, my actions are helping to advance the reputation of the agency. I continued my participation on the @aldddge Award team, meeting to finalize the lnterwlew process and culminating In the team Interviews during the site visit, which will hopefully result In the City of Fort Collins.recetving the award. JEROME SCHIAGER - Primary Reviewer Rating Answer On Tradc Comment Consulting with HR on this evaluation Attachments No Attachments on file, Page 2 of 2 Comments Employee No Comments Provided Comments Closed as of 11/2/2016 5:08 PM MDT Reviewer Comments No Comments Provided Closed as of 11/2/2018 5:08 PM MDT Version 8.3.0.441 TalentIREWARD ® technology from Towers Watson. ® 2017 All rights reserved. Fort Collins -Jones 000992 httr�a•/Ifrnrnti al�r rnrr+%RA�riPsst/C��smmors►IQP��lotarCttrnmarioD^aAn,+i074%olPDAvs A asolo,,revv % f 10)711)A1 ? Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-9 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 7 Fort CoWns Pollee Sawkes C�#y f Adminlsh0va Melon ins 2221 S. Tlmbergne Road PO Box 680 Fart Capns, CO e0622 870.22i.GM 970AI6.2980 • fax CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM Date: November 16, 2016 To: Lori Frank, Crime Analyst From; Jerry Schiager, Assistant thief of Police R6: Performance concerns (Q3 QPA Feedback) In January 20161 was transferred to the Administrative Division and began supervising you In your position for the first time. I met with you and Chief Hutto to establish goals and expectations for your work. I gave you the attached memo that explained the goals and expectations for the year 2016. The first two items described In the memo were directly related to Accuracy and Analysis. i Intentlonally, focused on these areas is they are critical to the department since that data is used in management's decision making and Is released outside the building. Data Integrity Is critical for the credibility of Police Services, so consistent accurate and reliable reporting is essential for your position. In addition, providing thoughtful analysis adds value to the consumer. In your first quarter 2016 performance evaluation I addressed the following issues. "Cori replied to an ACLU open records requestrelated to camping citations. The spreadsheet she produced had duplicate entries, making the overall numbers incorrect. She also reported to the Homeless Coalition that there were no violations of the camping section under Municipal Code Section 23 In 2015. She reported to City Council that there were 41 citations under section 23-193 (D) which Is the section dealing with camping. When l asked her about It, she said that the dtfference was explainable because of the way she did the search. Regardless, she should have been more clear In her response." Also from the Q12016 performa nce evaluation: 'Analysis Is also an important area to continue to focus on. The expectation is that Lori think critically about the reports and data she produces. This Is especially important with the Issues we have experlenced with the new Tiburon system. We have talked about making sure her work adds value to the end user. One situation that demonstrates room for improvement was a project the Chief asked her to work on regarding a decrease in numbers In the latest Citizen Survey. After a month I asked her about the progress and she produced a document that was very poor quality and did not answer the questions she had been asked. I gave her feedback about the work and a month toter she sent three charts that also did not answer the Chiefs question. The Chief commented that the Information was not useful to him and did not represent good analysis work. Lori needs to work on the quality and timeliness of this type of work" In your Q2 2016 performance evaluation the following note was made. "An area for continued Improvement is In making sure the reports she provides are accurate the first time they go out. There Fort Collins -Jones 000994 ATTACHMENT 13 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-9 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 7 A Kins have been a few examples of Initial reports sent out with errors that had to be quickly changed when she realized the Issue. An example of this was the report done for Dr. Dworkin on frequent service utilizers. The first report listed the time spent in minutes instead of hours. Having to correct reports like this does not help people build confidence in torl's work." In this latest performance rating period (Q3 2016) you produced three reports that had significant errors. Given that we have talked about the importance of data integrity numerous times, these errors demonstrate to me that you are not meeting Job expectations when interfacing with the data and/or are not double checking yourwork before it is deemed final and before it is shared or distributed to others. There Is a consistent pattern of errors in reporting data and a lack of analysis that needs to be addressed. In August 2016, the Chief asked for data to support an a rdcle he was writing for the Coloradoan about the work of the District One team. The data that you provided showed an Increase In daytime disturbance calls in the downtown area from 24 In 2013 to 111 in 2014. There was no explanation, comment or analysis stated or documented about the huge increase In one year. The Chief and I immediately recognized this jump In the data and asked you what was responsible for the increase. You responded that there was data missing in the tables that made the daytime vs nighttime stats unreliable. You then provided further analysis that showed there was not an increase In calls between 2013 and 2014. The significant increase In calls should have been caught, noted, and the additional analysis provided in the first request. As it was, the Chiefs article was due befe these corrections were made, and he did not have the Information he requested In order to Inform the community about issues in the downtown area. In September 2016, Cassa from the Coloradoan newspaper requested the number of bicycle tickets that officers had written over previous years. You produced the number of violations for 2011 thru VTD 2016. In 2015 you reported 140 tickets and for 2016 (thru September 1st) you reported 10 tickets. This represents a significant decrease In enforcement year-to-date. When Cassa received this Information from you, she contacted the public relations manager directly, requesting clarification or an explanation about why there was such a big decrease in bicycle tickets this year. The Traffic Unit sergeant became Involved In answering this question and found 19 bicycle citations in RIMS that were written In July alone, yet they were not accounted far In these statistics. Sergeant Rynd spoke to you and you soon realized you had made an error in how you had produced the data for the Coloradoan. In this case, the Impact of this error caused work for others In the department and likely caused us to lose credibility with ourlocal news media and/or a negative opinion about the data integrity and quality about what we provide them. I expect you to Interface with the data, question the Information, double check the data and be able to explain all the figures. Your,job requires you to recognize when the data you produce Indicates an anomaly and research it further before sending any reports to the media or anyone else. In October 2016, Deputy Chief Haywood requested Part 1 crime stats by quarter for the last two years. This data was to be used In the Quarterly Service Area Report with the City Manager. If you recall, you sent DC Haywood a table containing the data. At the bottom ofthe table was a row called `Total Part r. The totals in this row were off by a factor of more than 2 in each column. The error is very apparent 2 Fort Collins -Jones 000995 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-9 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 7 C when you look at the numbers in the table. Two days later, you sent a corrected table with the proper totals. Apparently you realized the mistake and corrected the table. Fortunately we were able to change the presentation to the City Manager and include the corrected slide. Once again, this error rate does not meet the job expectation related to accuracy and analysis that has been repeatedly communi- cated. Another area that was addressed in the Goals and Expectations for 2016 was performance metrics that the City me niters In ClearPolnt. The memo stated: "I expect you to own the performance metrics than are used In budget, dashboard and department operations. Please make sure they are accurate and meaningful. You are expected to support the budget and performance management process by creating and maintaining these metrics. Please make sure all of this work Is accurate before it is published." The results that you have produced in this area have been unacceptable to date. An area of continuing concem has been the priority one response time data. In Q2 2016 the following notation was made: "Lori has had good conversations with E Staff about Improving our performance measures. She will be working with the managers to finalize the new metrics. Priority 3 response time data continues to be a challenge. The Q4 data contained calls that should have been scrubbed (pizza robbery call, parental kidnappings). this Is a very visible report to the community. I asked Lori about the calls thatshould have been removed from the data; she said that it was not herJob to remove inac- curades from the data. She sold that the dispatch manager was responsible for the data. I told Lori that I expected that anything she published Is accurate. We will be meeting with the dispatch manager to correct this ongoing Issue." In Q2 2016,1 again addressed the Issues with this metric and directed you to set up a meeting between the dispatch manager, yourself and me prior to publishing the data for the next quarter. My comment was "I am also looking forward to working with Lori and Carol Workman on the priority 2 response time metric Prior to the next posting of this data I have asked to meet and discuss the accuracy o, f that data." You took It upon yourself to publish the September 2016 data without following my direction; once again posting an underperforming result. The Patrol Deputy Chief has expressed his frustration to me aboutyour lack of consistency in reporting this data. The E•Staff has discussed with you the creation of metrics to track police report completion, response times to lesser priority calls and the minutes of reactive time for patrol officers. There has been little progress in developing and publishing these metrics. On October 6, 2016, l requested the Clearpoint brlefing book for the current quarter. You responded that the data had been entered but there was a system problem creating the briefing book. When the budget office was able to publish the report € noticed that the data for two areas of traffic enforcement were missing forAugust and September. When I asked about this, you responded that there was usually a 2-3 month delay in getting those stats. The Traffic unit sergeant reported that she receives the data In a timely way and she did not realize that you wanted or needed the data sooner. Asimple phone call from you to Sergeant Lynd would have 3 Fort Collins -Jones 000996 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-9 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 7 `r�tColltns cleared this issue upright away. I am disappointed that you have not fulfilled the stated expectations of taking ownership of the performance metrics. All of this Information has been taken into consideration and I have not seen you demonstrate acceptable performance In the area of RESULTS. It has been addressed in the previous quarterly performance evaluations, Including the warning in the Q1 performance evaluation "Overalll am rating Lori On -Track In the Results area, although I expect to see improvement In the areas listed In the coming months." Evidence shows that your work results in Q3 proved to be declining versus Improving. The errors you made were significant and unacceptable In the eyes of the Executive Staff of the department. The number and frequency of errors and the critical nature of the errors Is serious and cannot be taken lightly. I expect you to take this performance feedback seriously and demonstrate Improvement In this area. Based on results and the lack of expected improvement, I have decided to place you on a SO -Day Performance Improvement Plan which will go into effect Immediately and Is attached for discussion & clarification. I acknowledge receipt of this memorandum. Lori prank Attachment: January ZO16 Memo cc: HR File Date 4 Fort Collins -Jones 000997 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-10 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT J EXHIBIT J Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-10 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4 rt WOns CONFMENTL4L MEMORANDUM Date: November 16, 2016 To: Lori Frank, Crime Analyst From: Jerry Schiager, Assistant Chief of Police III Re: Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) You are an important part of the team at Police Services, and your work is critical to our agency and the community. As you know from previous discussions, I am seeing a decline in your performance that I feel must be addressed. Due to the outcome of your 2016 Performance Evaluations, your work results have been below standards in the areas of analysis and accuracy; hence, rated "needs improvement'. This said, I feel strongly that a performance improvement plan is warranted per City Policy 5.5. Please feel free to refer to your QPA reviews for specific facts and information about my observations and those of others. It is my sincere hope that you will successfully complete expectations outlined in this PIP and be successful in your career is this department. You have been counseled in the past about expectations related to the importance. of data integrity in your reporting efforts as it relates to your job as a Crime Analyst, and to date, there has not been any evidence of significant improvement. While the City of Fort Collins values you as an employee, it is my intent to make you fully aware of this situation and to assist you in improving your work performance in these areas. As a part of this improvement plan, for the next 90 days, effective November 17, 2016 to February 15, 2017, I will be more closely monitoring your work results, giving you an opportunity to demonstrate improvement in the following expected areas: I expect , ou to meet the following perfo --mace objectives and sus in this performance: 1) Review the "Goals & Expectationsfor 2016" memo (attached) that was given to you and discussed on January 8, 2016. As you recall, these are the basic expectations for your job; they remain unchanged. In the event something is not clear about this information, I expect you to let me know without delay so that I can answer any questions and clarify to ensure clear understanding. 2) Copy me on ALL documents that you produce, both internal and external. All work must be accurate prior to publishing. Analyze, identify and question any and all anomalies in the data you find. Analyze and flush out reasons, proof read and/or 5 Fort Collins -Jones 000999 ATTACHMENT 14 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-10 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4 � tAl�li15 I-e double check and correct any errors. 3) Finalize the discussion with department managers and make necessary changes on the performance metrics. To clarify, this includes. - A) Set up a meeting with Carol Workman, yourself and me prior to publishing next quarter's response time metrics. I expect this dashboard metric to be accurate and free of errors every time (consistently). B) Prior to December 15, 2016,1 expect you to demonstrate to me your progress on creating the "minutes of reactive time " metric. C) Set up a meeting with each Deputy Chief and other managers as necessary to finalize the development of the additional performance metrics we have talked about (Le. Priority3-4 response times, report completion, quarterly clearance rates) 4) By December 31, create a plan for continuing education intended to build your competency as a Crime Analyst. This could be the IACA certification course or another comparable learning opportunity. We will meet to review your progress on each of the above items approximately every two weeks. Erik Martin will be assisting us in these meetings to help evaluate your perfommnce and suggest methods that you can improve in your accuracy and analysis. Erik is also available to assist you in checking your work product prior to publishing data reports if you would like to use this resource. I hope that this arrangement will assist you in becoming a higher performing employee at the City of Fort Collins. The goal of the improvement plan is for you to be able to perform the responsibilities of your position at an acceptable, "on track" Ievel. These improvements that you make will need to be maintained going forward. As always, I am available to you to discuss any concerns or assistance you may need. I acknowledge receipt of this memorandum. t1_ 23- f&,- Date f ( - x r/ Date ro Fort Collins -Jones 001000 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-10 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4 ©ate: .January 8, 2016 To: Lori Frank, Crime Analyst From: .terry Schiager, Assistant Chief RE: Goals and Expectations for 2016 Crime analysis is becoming Increasingly important. Agencies are expected to deploy and justify resources based on data. The public and the media also expect access to government information and transparency in our operations. The City Is on the verge of a significant period of growth and is increasingly requiring performance metrics for budget requests and programs. In this context; I would like to share some of my thoughts and expectations as we begin working together. Accuracy: All reports, data, performance metrics etc. released must be accurate. Please double check everything before it is published. We will likely be Implementing another Data driven Policing project In the future and we must be accurate in what Is published to our operational units so they can properly deploy their resources to confront community crime problems. Analysis: Please analyze all data before It Is released. Fitter out the flyers; provide thoughtful analysis to help people understand public safety issues. Please copy me on information that is released to the media or others outside the building, including other city departments. Continuing education: I would like you to make a plan for building your competency through advanced training, education and certification. I am committed to supporting your professional development with work time and paying the expenses of this training. Resource allocation study: We will be continuing our relationship with gtico Solutions to analyze our staffing In early 2016. We may move forward with additional work In other areas of the department {Otspatch, CID). I expect you to engage in this process and support It; it Is the department direction. You will have an opportunity to demonstrate your ability as the lead person In this effort. Please provide whateverdata is requested In a timely manner. Teamwork: I expect you to be a positive team member with other divisions and personnel. I expect you to provide assistance where you can and demonstrate your experience with others including the patrol crime analyst, the Investigative aides and other area agencies. I appreciate your attendance in the recent group meetings. Performance metrics: I expect you to own the performance metrics that are used in budget, dashboard and department operations. Please make sure they are accurate and meaningful You are expected to support the budget and performance management process by creating and maintalning these metrics. Please make sure all of this work is accurate before it Is published. T Fort Collins -Jones 001001 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-11 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT K EXHIBIT K Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-11 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ NRN LORI FRANK, Plaintiff, VS. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, a municipality; TERENCE F. JONES, former Interim Chief of Police, in his individual capacity; and JEROME SCHIAGER, former Deputy Chief of Police, in his individual capacity, Defendant. PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Plaintiff Lori Frank {"Frank" or "Plaintiff'), by and through her undersigned counsel, files her answers and RESPONSEs to Defendant's First Set of Written Discovery to Plaintiff., stating as follows: GENERAL OBJECTIONS A. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement and/or change her answers should further information or documents come into her knowledge, possession, or be discovered as this action progresses. B. Plaintiff objects to each and every Request for Production of Documents to the extent that the Request seeks documents not currently in existence, but which would have to be specially created by Plaintiff. PIaintiff will produce only such documents that already exist in Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-11 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 5 o Analyze o Interpret o Effectively present information *Reasoning Ability o Identical in both job descriptions INTERROGATORY 10: Please explain how and when you learned of Erik Martin's salary, including his starting annual salary and post- "Job Architecture" salary, as alleged in paragraphs 95,205, and 206 of the Complaint. RESPONSE: All salaries are posted here for public consumption: https://opendata.fcgov.com/browse?q=employee%20earnings&sortBy=alpha Post Job Architecture info found on internal citynet site. Since Martin was hired on June 6, 2016 Plaintiff did not learn of his salary until sometime after January 2017 when salaries were posted. As to the Job Architecture salary, the Complaint states at paragraph 201 that on March 23, 2018 Defendant released the "Job Architecture" results. Plaintiff would have learned of the salary some time after March 23, 2018. INTERROGATORY 11: Please identify the individuals who complained of a "lack of training and holding women back in spite of their seniority and excellent performance reviews," as alleged in paragraph 102 of the Complaint. RESPONSE: In RESPONSE to this Interrogatory Plaintiff states that all investigative information/files/complaints have been requested from Defendant. Plaintiff will supplement this RESPONSE once documents are produced. INTERROGATORY 12: Please identify when and how you learned that "[elmployees on a PIP [performance improvement plan] are not eligible for certain pay increases," as alleged in paragraph 120 of the Complaint. 10 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-11 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 5 RESPONSE: When the PIP was issued (11/16/16). In addition, City of Fort Collins 2017 Annual Pay Increase Guidelines states "Employees on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) are not eligible for a pay increase until they come off the PIP and sustain "On Track" performance for one QPA" INTERROGATORY 13: Please identify the training opportunities for which you sought, but were denied, approval to pursue, as alleged in paragraph 138 of the Complaint, including the date of your request(s) and to whom you made the reguest(s). RESPONSE: Public Safety Leadership Development Program Spring 2018. Date of request 11/8/17 to Jerrod Kinsman. INTERROGATORY 14: Please explain the basis of your belief that Erik Martin was "assigned" to research and prepare a report known as the Sworn Strength Report, as alleged in paragraph 161 of the Complaint. RESPONSE: Plaintiff bases her belief on a conversation had with Erik Martin. INTERROGATORY 15: Please explain the basis of your belief that "Schiager's demotion was related to his adverse treatment against Frank as well as other department employees," as alleged in paragraph 172 of the Complaint. RESPONSE: Jerry Schiager -- Assistant Chief and Gary Shaklee - Sergeant were the only two employees placed on Administrative leave while the Employment Matters LLC investigation was being conducted. Gary Shaklee returned to duty as a sergeant. Jerry Schiager returned as a Lieutenant, one rank below Assistant Chief. In a paramilitary structure, which law enforcement follows, it is common knowledge that an assignment to a lower rank is considered a demotion. Even the new Chief of Police, Jeff Swoboda verbalized in a discussion with me that he too thought Jerry Schiager had been "demoted". The consensus of agency members is that Jerry Schiager was demoted. Jerry Schiager's "demotion" also came the same day that Interim Chief Terry Jones met 11 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-11 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 5 VEicATrON .I, O tLF BAN , as r -. � a vrmi'that# a a�asvt�ers=t fi�ese:atosponses t© Jpefe0dant'4 First Set oflntogataes and;Requests Fir Pmducion oDoctes are true and comet to tbte.:best 'of my. knowledge ai�d:�belief. - 3igaatuY� STM- E OF Ca�QRADa 3 COO OF: The.foregoing was executed and ac,� Owledge.-before 1601bis: day-af iJ. 20.I9 Lon Frank. Y V'tness :my. �htaad and -official seal. Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-12 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT L EXHIBIT L Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-12 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4 090916 Lori Frank to Chief Hutto During the first six months of your tenure here at FCPS, in a meeting with you and Deputy Chief Christensen, I proposed creating an analytical unit comprised of the crime analysts (we had not yet hired the second analyst), and the Investigative aides. I indicated that I would like to head that unit and advance the agency's data driven policing efforts. That idea was rejected; however the idea of creating an upgraded position, such as a Crime Analyst II, was discussed. After this meeting, I embarked on my goal of reclassifying my position, knowing that I had the Implied support of both you and Dep Chief Christensen. The research I conducted, combined with my career goals led me to pursue a job reclassification of Senior Management Analyst. Under the implied support of my current subsequent supervisors (Dep Chief Szakmeister and Dep Chief Christensen), I created a proposed job description and was hopeful, based on conversations with Dep Chief Christensen, that the reclassification was a plausible endeavor. When Asst Chief Schlager became my supervisor the job reclassification process was abruptly terminated. I feared that Asst Chief Schlager would use his position to prevent the request from moving forward, out of retaliation for a letter of reprimand he received based on my complaint. I indicated these fears to you in a memo, dated November 3, 2015. It was evident from the outset that Asst Chief Schiager was not supportive of my job reclassification and he continued to question how my current job classification was not applicable. I explained that the work I had done up to that point had addressed those differences. Due to the fact that this Is not a hard science related job, much of the reclassification was up to interpretation. In February 2016 Asst Chief Schlager, Human Resources representative Janet Miller and I met to discuss my current job classification. It was obvious that I was not going to get the support of Asst Chief Schiager in that meeting. I firmly believe that if my previous supervisor, Asst Chief Christensen, had been in that meeting, he would have advocated for me and the job reclassification would have been approved. Instead, Asst Chief Schiager did exactly as I had feared and terminated my request, saying that my current job description was adequate and that my current salary was sufficient. Another example of Asst Chief Shiager's pattern of negative behavior towards me, is when I asked Dep Chief Szakmelster (my supervisor at the time) permission to work a 4/10 schedule, stating that Brandi had agreed to cover any pressing needs in my absence . Dep Chief Szakmeister told me that I could not move to that schedule because Dep Chief Schiager said "Brandi will NOT be covering for Lori". I've now been told by Asst Chief Schiager that Brandi and I should not be gone at the same time and to coordinate our scheduled time off so that one of us is always here. It seems that Asst Chief Schiager made the decision back then that would least benefit me and now seems to contradict that very same decision. If he would not let Brandi cover for me then, why is it Imperative now that we cover for each other? His decision at that time was not made with any regard to agency needs, only to deny something that I was asking for. As an example of disparate treatment, the office chair that 1 was using broke last fall. I asked permission from my supervisor, Asst Chief Christensen, to order a new chair which he approved. During this time, a new Internal Affairs Sgt. assigned to the office next to mine also sought approval to order a new chair. She and I worked with the vendor to test various chairs and ultimately place the orders. During this time, Asst Chief Schaiger took over the Administrative Division and became my supervisor. When it came time to order the chairs, I asked Asst Chief Schiager if I could go forward with the order. He denied the request, saying that broken chairs in the department were scheduled to be fixed, however my old broken chair had been removed from the 3rd floor storage area. Fort Collins -Jones 000713 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-12 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4 090916 Lori Frank to Chief Hutto Asst Chief Schiager approved the chair order for the IA Sgt. but denied mine, a simple request that would have benefitted me. In your response letter, dated November 23, 2015, you state that as my supervisor, Asst Chief Schiager has the right and Is expected to set standards for my performance, and if he feels I'm not measuring up to those standards, he is expected to address any deficiencies in a respectful manner. The level of scrutiny placed upon me and the oversight of my work by Asst Chief Schiager is completely unreasonable. I'm being held to a much higher standard than I have in the past, and my work products are closely examined for any possible errors. During my 17+ years with FCPS, I have been transferred and moved about a great deal. In those 17 years, I've had 14 supervisors, and the current level of scrutiny and oversight over my work is absolutely out of the norm. My ability to adapt and change is clearly evident with how many times my position has been moved, transferred and changed hands over the years. I have always been praised in my evaluations for the results of my research and attention to detail in my products. The complexity of the data systems we now operate have become Increasingly complicated. I've met the challenge of keeping up with the continual database and system changes, and the Increased responsibility and requests from city council and citizens. My ability to handle the increased responsibilities and additional workload Is evident by the remarks made by previous supervisors in prior performance evaluations. Asst Chief Schiager continually seeks any nugget of information that would support a negative opinion of my results and capabilities. There was never an Issue with my job performance until I came under the supervision of Asst Chief Schiager. I am continually asked to provide complex research and analysis from the media, DAs office and city council, and my capabilities are well known and relied upon. The only thing that has changed is the person in charge of making that determination, who, coincidentally happens to be the person with reason to retaliate against me. During the 2"d quarter of 2016,1 received about 90 requests for information and research. This is in addition to the approximately 1,300 reports I've created and now monitor that were automatically distributed during that time. Additionally, there are hundreds of ad hoc reports that I created and monitor to be run at -will from various agency personnel and by members of the DA's office. I provide this information for context In assessing my workload and level of service. In my evaluation, Asst Chief Schiager chose to cherry -pick one instance in which an inadvertent mistake was made in a report I created. I immediately caught the mistake, made the correction, and resent the report. The report had not yet gone to anyone other than two people inside the agency. Using a conservative number of 1,400 reports that I distributed over this time period, one mistake In one report is a percentage of .0007% which means that 99.9993% of my reports were mistake free. However, Asst Chief Schiager uses this one example in my evaluation to say that "this does not help people build confidence In Lori's work". I challenge anyone to say that a 99.9993% accuracy rate does not instill confidence. Asst Chief Schiager is attempting to influence people's confidence level In my work. This is completely unjustified and is an example of his retaliatory treatment. This is akin to spreading rumors about my work product, which is a direct violation of our Anti -Retaliation policy. In the past when I have caught and corrected mistakes discovered in my reports, I was praised for revealing the mistake and making the correction, yet now It Is a negative reflection in my performance evaluation given to me by Asst Chief Schiager. Fort Collins -Jones 000714 Fa Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-12 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4 090916 Lori Frank to Chief Hutto I have been tasked with the project to collect and analyze reactive vs non -reactive officer time. This was initially given to Etico Solutions, a vendor that was hired this year to complete the project. I provided data to Etico for completion of the project and was not notified if Etico had completed the project or given any results. I'm now being tasked with taking over the project and still have not received the report from Etico. If Asst Chief Schiager planned to assign this project to me, I should reasonably expect to be given the project findings from Rico. Since being assigned, I have spent a great deal of time an this project, with no historical reference and no background concerning decisions made about workload. The scope and results of the work done by Etico Is absolutely crucial to getting the project completed, yet he neglected to pass along any Information. He made sure that Etico, the consultant, had all of the data they needed, that I provided, to complete the project, but did not extend the same professional courtesy to me. The expectation that I am able to accomplish this task without the data he controls is preposterous and implies that he is setting me up for failure. I've now been assigned the responsibility of vetting CAD calls for priority legitimacy. This task had previously been handled by the Comm Center Manager. This is well outside the boundary of my authority. I have no control over how CAD calls are handled and processed in the Comm Center, yet now I'm tasked with conducting quality control on dispatcher's work. If I'm taking over a task previously handled two supervisory levels above me, how can it be said by Asst Chief Schlager that my current job classification is accurate and should not be re- evaluated? I'm taking on tasks and projects previously handled by consultants, managers and Information Services (task not mentioned above). I've been placed on city-wide teams tasked with designing processes (Performance Management, Open Data) and managing projects that have high-level Implications (Malcolm Baldridge). These teams are comprised of division heads, managers and supervisors. A line -level employee with no decision making authority is not the average member for these teams and committees. While my expertise, skill set and input are needed (why I am asked to join said committees), my position should reflect the same. To say that my job description and Job Analysis Questionnaire, created more than a decade ago, is still accurate Is absurd. Asst Chief Schlager's denies that these additional responsibilities are outside my job classification. His refusal to adjust my job classification Is directly indicative of retaliation. He has demonstrated that anytime he's in a position to nit-pick, be hypercritical of my work, and make decisions that will adversely affect me, he does. It is clearly evident that Asst Chief Schlager is unable to be un-biased, impartial and objective when it comes to evaluating my work and make decisions about my career advancement inside this organization. I truly belleve there is no path to success for me under Asst Chief Schiager's supervision. I am unbelievably frustrated at the position in which I've been placed. I have clearly illustrated my fear and apprehension at being stuck in such position. There is nothing more I am able to do to make things better in this situation. 3 Fort Collins -Jones 000715 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 EXHIBIT M EXHIBIT M Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 8 Marc V. Colin Aaorney at Law November 30, 2016 VIA U.S. MAIL & EMAIL Janet Miller Assistant HR Director Ft. Collins Police Services 2221 S. Timberline Road Ft. Collins, CO 80525 LAW OFFICES BRUNO, COLIN & LOWE, P.C. SUU94300 1999 BROADWAY DE M%COLORADO80202 TELr6PI[ONEf (303) 831-1099 FAX: (303) B31-1088 WWW.BRU,XOI.AWYERS COM Re: Fort Collins Police Department Employee Lori Frank Dear Ms. Miller, LOU1s B. BRUNO SENIOR COUNSEL IiRANKA. BRUNO (1904-1979) Please accept the attached Formal Complaint of retaliation from FCPD civilian employee Lori Frank (Attachment'W) in response to the continuing retaliation she has been subjected to by Assistant Chief of Police Jerry Schiager. I represent Ms. Frank and any follow up or scheduling can be handled through my office. As you may already be aware, Ms. Frank filed a complaint against then Deputy Chief of Patrol Jerry Schiager in April of 2014, alleging that Chief Schiager had been disrespectful and insulting to her in an e-mail, Ms. Frank forwarded Chief Schiager's e-mail to her supervisor at the time and to Chief Hutto, and Chief Hutto appropriately reprimanded Deputy Chief Schiager for his conduct. At the time of the incident giving rise to Ms. Frank's original complaint, Assistant Chief Schiager was not in her direct chain of command. Thereafter however, in November of 2015, Chief Schiager was re -assigned to a positron in which he directly supervised Ms. Frank. At the time of this reassignment, Ms. Frank expressed concerns to Chief Hutto that Jerry Schiager would take the opportunity to retaliate against her for her prior complaint against him and these concerns were soon proven valid. Based upon a variety of retaliatory acts, which are more fully described in Ms. Frank's attached complaint, Ms. Frank filed a complaint of retaliation with your department, a complaint which was unfortunately assigned to Lori Greening for investigation, with the predictable result that the complaint was denied with no explanation or analysis, a response which historically is typical of the outcomes of the majority, if not all Fort Collins -Jones 000716 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 8 Janet Miller Page 2 11/30/2016 complaints assigned to Ms. Careening for investigation (See Attachment "B') . Having been thus enabled and encouraged in his efforts to retaliate against Ms. Frank, Jerry Schiager then set upon a course to destroy Ms. Frank's career and credibility. Specifically, despite having consistently received outstanding evaluations for more than a decade from a variety of supervisors, Chief Schiager has recently rated Ms. Frank as below standard on several evaluation components and has placed her on a work plan. Thus, either all of Ms. Frank's previous supervisors for the past 15 years have been wrong about her and Chibf Schiager is the first to actually notice that she is a substandard employee OR Assistant Chief Schiager has some ulterior motive for falsely claiming that Ms. Frank's performance is below standard. We believe that it is the later, and that Assistant Chief Schiager, having been led to believe by Ms. Careening that his retaliation against Ms. Frank was sanctioned by Human Resources, has now escalated his retaliation. There is additional evidence to support this conclusion. As noted by Ms. Frank in her attached Complaint, FCPD and HR policies require monthly meetings between a supervisor and subordinate to identify performance areas that need improvement and give the employee an opportunity to correct them. At no time prior to the recent quarterly evaluation meeting, did Assistant Chief Schiager meet with Ms. Frank and advise her that ANY areas of her performance required improvement. Hence, there can be no legitimate claim that Assistant Chief Schiager's actions were designed to improve Ms. Frank's performance, since her alleged performance deficiencies were never pointed out to her prior to her evaluation. In addition, the alleged facts recited by Assistant Chief Schiager justifying the below standard ratings are provable as false. Hence, it would appear irrefutable that Assistant Chief Schiager's current "Needs Improvement" evaluation of Ms. Frank and the work plan resulting therefrom is not the result of a legitimate effort to identify performance areas that require improvement, but rather, reflect an effort to set Ms. Frank up for the next inevitable step, which will be Jerry Schiager's conclusion that she failed to meet her work plan requirements and must be terminated. We anticipated that Assistant Chief Schiager would engage in the conduct above described and outlined in Ms. Frank's Formal Complaint prior to her scheduled evaluation meeting with Chief Schiager. Thus, the day before Assistant Chief Schiager was scheduled to meet with Ms. Frank, I attempted to contact Assistant City Attorney Jenny Lopez-Filkins to suggest that both she and I attend the evaluation meeting scheduled between Assistant Chief Schiager and Ms. Frank in order to try to head offthe anticipated retaliation. I was advised by Ms. Lopez-Filkins that no City or FCPD policy authorized my attendance at the meeting and thus I was prohibited from attending, with predictable results (see Attachments "C" & "D"). For the reasons more specifically set forth above, Ms. Frank is requesting an investigation into her attached Formal Complaint of retaliation. She is requesting that this Formal Complaint be investigated by someone independent of the City of Ft. Collins Human Resources department since Ms. Careening has demonstrated an inability to conduct a thorough, complete and unbiased investigation. I am also sending a copy of this Formal Complaint and Fort Collins -Jones 000717 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 8 Janet Miller Page 3 11 /30/2016 correspondence along with the Attachments to the independent investigators (Kevin Paul and Liz Rita) currently looking into targeting of employees and retaliation by Sgt. Shaklee, Assistant Chief Schiager and other FCPD supervisory personnel. For the reasons more specifically set forth above and in the attached Formal Complaint, Ms. Frank demands that her most recent quarterly evaluation by Assistant Chief Scbiager be removed from her personnel file and all other files maintained by the City and the FCPD and that a new and accurate evaluation be substituted in its stead. Ms. Frank further demands that "Work Plan" which she has been placed on by Assistant Chief Schiager be rescinded and that the work plan itself be removed from all City and FCPD files and destroyed. Ms. Frank also expects that Assistant Chief Schiager will suffer appropriate sanctions for the behaviors in which he has engaged. I look forward to receipt of notification from your office that the attached Formal Complaint has been accepted and will be investigated by an independent investigator and scheduling that investigator's interview of my client, Should you have any questions or concerns, or should you wish to discuss any aspect of this Formal Complaint or my letter further, please feel free to contact me. MFC/hb Attachments: Ex A,B,C&D Sincor I. ; t) c F. Colin Fort Collins -Jones 000718 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 8 To: Janet Miller I have been a Crime Analyst at FCPS for 17 years and 4 mos. In total, I have over 23 years of experience as a Crime Analyst. During my entire tenure here at FCPS, I have always met or exceeded expectations on my evaluations, especially in the area of my results. To be precise, dating back to 2001(for which I have records), here are the ratings I've received for my results: • 2015 — On Track C 2014 ---4 (Highest Rating) • 2013 -- Exceptional Results • 2012 — Exceeds City Standards • 2011-- Exceeds City Standards • 2010 — Exceeds City Standards • 2009 — Exceeds City Standards • 2008 — Exceeds City Standards • 2007 — Exceeds Expectations • 2006 — Excellent • 2005 — Excellent • 2003 — High Quality • 2001-- Above Average It is very clear that I have a pattern of excelling in the results category. I am highly regarded for my knowledge, skills, abilities and results. I have and continue to receive numerous accolades for my work, as documented in my previous evaluations. My work and reputation has led to my involvement on high- level citywide critical functioning teams such as the Malcolm Baldridge Team and the Performance Management Development Team. I've also been asked to serve on two consecutive BFO Teams. I am a recognized expert in my field. I lecture and teach Crime Analysis at the college level. If one were to look at these accomplishments and the history of my work, it is illogical that In the period of less than a year, my performance has reversed 180 degrees to the need for an Improvement plan. It is Inconceivable that such a great employee would demonstrate the poor performance that Assistant Chief Schiager Is alleging. The only change to my work In this time frame has been the assignment of a new supervisor. A supervisor with clear motive for retaliation and retribution. For the past year, ever since Assistant Chief Schalger became my supervisor, i have maintained that he has retaliated against me in response to discipline he received from Chief Hutto due to a complaint that I filed. At the time of the discipline, Chief Schiager was not my supervisor. It was evident that Chief Schaiger took no responsibility for his actions that caused the discipline and when assigned to become my direct supervisor set upon a course for retribution and retaliation. The fact that my previous two supervisors applauded me for actions that Chief Schiager is now using as an excuse for a performance improvement plan can only be construed as retaliation. Fort Collins -Jones 000719 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 8 I recognized the potential for this to happen and warned Chief Hutto about my fears, hoping he would take necessary precautions to protect me from this retaliation, but that did not happen. A simple change In supervision could have prevented this hostile work environment. The retaliation began immediately with the denial of my quest to reclassify my position, which I had support and backing from my previous two supervisors. The retaliation continued with my first Quarter Evaluation in which Chief Schlager laid the responsibility of another person's decision on me and scolded me for the outcome of which i had no control over. The absurdity could not be clearer. He states in the evaluation that a duplication In records indicated an erroneous result, which Is not accurate. What appear to be duplicated records are In fact additional charges. Chief Schiager never discussed this with me, never investigated how the data is housed, or how the data is extracted. He goes on in the evaluation to question the results of two reports. i reiterated that the results of those reports were defendable in relation to the individual questions at hand, which were not the same. He ignored any explanation 1 could provide and unfairly berated me for his erroneous interpretation. The retaliation continued in my second Quarter Evaluation where Chief Schiager cherry picked a minor mistake, one in which I noticed and corrected within a few minutes, and he used that to indicate a failure in my work. I have documented the volume of work that I do, and an error rate of less than one percent. It is preposterous to imply that my work is deficient. Now In the third Quarter Evaluation he claims that 3 errors have created a pattern that requires a performance improvement plan to correct. One of his 3 examples Is again an error that I recognized and corrected within 48 hours. Another example Involved a sophisticated coding procedure, which when Identified I worked with the subject matter expert and corrected the code. A business practice adhered to and approved of for over 17 years. Chief Schiager admonishes me in the evaluation for the procedure I used to audit the Priority I calls, again I maintain that this is well outside of my area of expertise and job description. i should not be doing quality control on the work of a dispatcher. I met with the Comm Center Manager to get instruction on how she audited the calls and used the documented criteria put In place by E-Staff to make each and every audit. Chief Schiager could have at any time set a meeting to discuss the details. it is evident he has no intention of working through what he sees as an issue, rather his intention is collect any piece of Information to use as ammunition for ambushing my evaluation. Our QPA process is clear that the supervisor is to have regular conversations and provide feedback to avoid surprises and address Issues in a timely and appropriate way. Chief Schiager's claim that I've not made progress on the reactive time project Is completely false. I told him in our second quarter evaluation discussion that I had been working on the project but needed the report that the consultant had done, so that I had the historical information and results critical for me to continue. He never provided the report. The worksheet he sent, months later, was not the report and told me if I needed further information that I was to call the consultant. This is a failure on his part to provide support and the tools necessary to do my job. When I asked him about some critical definitions that needed addressed to maintain continuity with what the consultant had done, he never responded. He refuses to accept any culpability in the situation, and turns It around to admonish my performance. The city policy and process guide on evaluations, clearly states (5.5.1— 4) that guidance or direction should be provided regarding actions the employee should take to improve. (QPA Process Guide) That Fort Collins -Jones 000720 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 8 the supervisor should have regular conversations and provide feedback to avoid surprises, address Issues In a timely and appropriate way, as well as provide direction, support and coaching. Chief Schiager clearly violated this policy. At no time during the past quarter did he meet with me to discuss my performance. At no time during the past quarter did he indicate that my performance was substandard or make suggestions to improve it. His goal was not to understand my work or how the work is done. Rather his goal has been to document what he falsely claims is substandard performance to justify adverse employment actions in retaliation for my sustained complaint against him. Had my performance actually experienced the drastic deterioration claimed, the policy requires that Chief Schiager meet with me to let me know that my performance had slipped and where It needed improvement. This did not occur because it was not Chief Schlaget's goal to point out and correct performance deficiencies, but rather to fabricate them. All of the Issues described in my most recent performance evaluation came as complete surprises to me. None of them had been addressed with me in the past quarter, and as noted above, they are for the most part, complete fabrications. If they had any merit, i should have been given notice of the alleged performance issues and an opportunity to correct them prior to my evaluation. At any point throughout the past year, dialog could have taken place to troubleshoot any misinterpreted results In my work. instead Chief Schiager has sought revenge for the discipline that I caused him. This level of scrutiny on me is clearly not In the best Interest of the department and the department's reputation, as he claims. if that were the case, the business practice adhered to for 17 years of working through Issues would have been adopted by Chief Schiager. His motive is obvious, he wants revenge. His over -the -top, venomous punishment In the proposed performance improvement plan has a clear underlining retaliatory objective. A previous supervisor, who lauded my abilities and results, made the comment (In a performance evaluation), some may question her capability or accuracy, "this is due to people not understanding the vast amount of technical expertise necessary to produce the data requested. Her job is not just punching a few keystrokes and obtaining results in minutes." The systems I work with are highly complex and complicated. In addition, there are numerous errors made in data entry and capture. To lay blame on me for technical issues and human data entry errors, all of which are outside my control shows once again that Chief Schiager's motive is not to have cleaner more accurate data. If they were he would be focusing efforts to better understand and fix the technical and data issues. Chief Schiager's motive has been clear since he became my supervisor, to seek revenge. Much of my work is considered computer programming. Anyone familiar with the practice knows that it involves a series of trial and error to arrive at the desired result. Chief Schiager is either not aware of these details of my job, or more likely, doesn't care and is too focused on laying (unfair) blame. A manager should help educate others on the obstacles and be supportive, rather than using their position to harass and retaliate like Chief Schiager has done. He has been allowed to fall as a manger and abuse his power for selfish, retaliatory reasons. The performance plan that Chief Schlager has placed upon me requires no mistakes be made ever. I've already proved that when I find my inadvertent mistakes, l correct them. The expectation that there will never be a miscode while programming is completely unrealistic. Even sophisticated, highly trained computer programmers can't live up to that expectation. Chief Schiager is expecting me to never make Fort Collins -Jones 000721 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 8 an error, yet no one else in the agency is held to this standard, including Chief Schiager himself. His mistakes (overt actions) in the past have opened the city up to potential liability, for example when he bent the rules in order for a young, female applicant to pass the physical fitness test. Other applicants were not given the opportunity to bend the rules In order to pass. What would the potential liability be If they found out the rules weren't bent for them In order to pass. Chief Schiager went on record in the newspaper and referred to homeless people and transients as animals. He tries to imply the minor mistakes I've made causes a negative view to the public and diminishes our reputation. Compared to what Chief Schiager has purposely done in the past, that is a laughable statement, The performance plan also doesn't allow for me to make any errors, period. There are data entry errors and coding errors made constantly, that's the nature of the business when you're human. Under Chief Schlager's logic, everyone should then be on a performance plan. Yet, I'm the only person not allowed to make any errors, period. I challenge anyone to defend that as reasonable. In the performance plan Chief Schiager has identified someone to check my work that has no experience with the data I work with. This person he claims is good with MS Excel, however my Job mainly deals with SQL programming and Crystal Reports. This gate keeper has no knowledge or experience with the Tiburon system or tables. This illustrates what little knowledge Chief Schiager has about my job and how It is done. I find it negligent that while I had an active claim of retaliation against Chief Schiager, he was allowed to not only continue supervising me, but that he was also given the latitude to author my performance evaluation. The negative results of which were completely predictable given his history with me. I have learned that this retaliatory behavior from Chief Schiager is not Isolated to my particular case, but that he has developed a pattern of this behavior over the years. Back in 2011, while he was not my supervisor, Chief Schiager asked me to research any calls made to particular address. This was the address of a home that the City Manager was attempting to purchase, but was not inside the city limits. While I told Chief Schiager that we had access to that data, It legally did not belong to us, and therefore we could not release the information. The information would have to be released by LCSO, as it belonged to them. Chief Schlager pressed me for details about a call at that location, which I provided to him as he was a ranking official in our department, but again expressed my discomfort in doing so, knowing this was not for law enforcement purposes. This example again displays Chief Schiager's pattern of bullying behavior, and his attitude that policy and rules don't apply to him. I did not want to have anything to do with researching that information, but felt compelled because it came from Chief Schiager and I felt if I did not comply, I would suffer ramification. Even a reasonable person could see that if an employee has great evaluations, is applauded for their work, recognized for their expertise, and commended for finding and correcting mistakes then is suddenly portrayed as a failure for the exact same results; the problem is not within the employee, but rather with the evaluator. An evaluator with clear and distinct malevolent intentions. Fort Collins -Jones 000722 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 EXHIBIT M EXHIBIT M Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 8 Mare V. Colin Attorney at Law November 30, 2016 VIA U.S. MAIL & EMAIL Janet Miller Assistant HR Director Ft. Collins Police Services 2221 S. Timberline Road Ft. Collins, CO 80525 LAW OFFICES BRUN'o, COLIN & LOWE, P.C. SUM4300 1999 BROADWAY DvMR, COLORADO 80202 TELEPHONEf (303) 831-1099 FAX: (303) 831-1088 WWW.HRUNOLAWYI;RS.COM Be: Fort Collins Police Department Employee Lori Frank Dear Ms. Miller, LOUIS B. BRUNO SENIOR COUNSEL FRAKKA. BRUNO (1904-1979) Please accept the attached Formal Complaint of retaliation from FCPD civilian employee Lori Frank (Attachment'W) in response to the continuing retaliation she has been subjected to by Assistant Chief of Police Jerry Schiager. I represent Ms. Frank and any follow up or scheduling can be handled through my office. As you may already be aware, Ms. Frank filed a complaint against then Deputy Chief of Patrol Jerry Schiager in April of 2014, alleging that Chief Schiager had been disrespectful and insulting to her in an e-mail, Ms. Frank forwarded Chief Schiagees e-mail to her supervisor at the time and to Chief Hutto, and Chief Hutto appropriately reprimanded Deputy Chief Schiager for his conduct. At the time of the incident giving rise to Ms. Frank's original complaint, Assistant Chief Schiager was not in her direct chain of command. Thereafter however, in November of 2015, Chief Schiager was re -assigned to a position in which he directly supervised Ms. Frank. At the time of this reassignment, Ms. Frank expressed concerns to Chief Hutto that Jerry Schiager would take the opportunity to retaliate against her for her prior complaint against him and these concerns were soon proven valid. Based upon a variety of retaliatory acts, which are more fully described. in Ms. Frank's attached complaint, Ms. Frank filed a complaint of retaliation with your department, a complaint which was unfortunately assigned to Lori Greening for investigation, with the predictable result that the complaint was denied with no explanation or analysis, a response which historically is typical of the outcomes of the majority, if not all Fort Collins -Jones 000716 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 8 Janet Miller Page 2 11/30/2016 complaints assigned to Ms. Greening for investigation (See Attachment " W) . Having been thus enabled and encouraged in his efforts to retaliate against Ms. Frank, Jerry Schiager then set upon a course to destroy Ms. Frank's career and credibility. Specifically, despite having consistently received outstanding evaluations for more than a decade from a variety of supervisors, Chief Schiager has recently rated Ms. Frank as below standard on several evaluation components and has placed her on a work plan. Thus, either all of Ms. Frank"s previous supervisors for the past 15 years have been wrong about her and Chief Schiager is the first to actually notice that she is a substandard employee OR Assistant Chief Schiager has some ulterior motive for falsely claiming that Ms. Frank's performance is below standard. We believe that it is the later, and that Assistant Chief Schiager, having been led to believe by Ms. Greening that his retaliation against Ms. Frank was sanctioned by Human Resources, has now escalated his retaliation. There is additional evidence to support this conclusion. As noted by Ms, Frank in her attached Complaint, FCPD and HR policies require monthly meetings between a supervisor and subordinate to identify performance areas that need improvement and give the employee an opportunity to correct them. At no time prior to the recent quarterly evaluation meeting, did Assistant Chief Schiager meet with Ms. Frank and advise her that ANY areas of her performance required improvement. Hence, there can be no legitimate claim that Assistant Chief Schiager's actions were designed to improve Ms. Frank's performance, since her alleged performance deficiencies were never pointed out to her prior to her evaluation. In addition, the alleged facts recited by Assistant Chief Schiager justifying the below standard ratings are provable as false. Hence, it would appear irrefutable that Assistant Chief Schiager's current "Needs Improvement" evaluation of Ms. Frank and the work plan resulting therefrom is not the result of a legitimate effort to identify performance areas that require improvement, but rather, reflect an effort to set Ms. Frank up for the next inevitable step, which will be Jerry Schiager's conclusion that she failed to meet her workplan requirements and must be terminated. We anticipated that Assistant Chief Schiager would engage in the conduct above described and outlined in Ms. Frank's Formal Complaint prior to her scheduled evaluation meeting with Chief Schiager. Thus, the day before Assistant Chief Schiager was scheduled to meet with Ms. Frank, I attempted to contact Assistant City Attorney Jenny Lopez Filkins to suggest that both she and I attend the evaluation meeting scheduled between Assistant Chief Schiager and Ms. Frank in order to try to head off the anticipated retaliation. I was advised by Ms. Lopez-Filkins that no City or FCPD policy authorized my attendance at the meeting and thus I was prohibited from attending, with predictable results (see Attachments "C" & "D"). For the reasons more specifically set forth above, Ms. Frank is requesting an investigation into her attached Formal Complaint of retaliation. She is requesting that this Formal Complaint be investigated by someone independent of the City of Ft. Collins Human Resources department since Ms. Greening has demonstrated an inability to conduct a thorough, complete and unbiased investigation. I am also sending a copy of this Format Complaint and Fort Collins -Jones 000717 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 8 Janet Miller Page 3 11 /30/2016 correspondence along with the Attachments to the independent investigators (Kevin Paul and Liz Rita) currently looking into targeting of employees and retaliation by Sgt. Shaklee, Assistant Chief Schiager and other FCPD supervisory personnel. For the reasons more specifically set forth above and in the attached Formal Complaint, Ms. Frank demands that her most recent quarterly evaluation by Assistant Chief Schiager be removed from her personnel file and all other files maintained by the City and the FCPD and that a new and accurate evaluation be substituted in its stead. Ms. Frank further demands that "Work Plan" which she has been placed on by Assistant Chief Schiager be rescinded and that the work plan itself be removed from all City and FCPD files and destroyed. Ms. Frank also expects that Assistant Chief Schiager will suffer appropriate sanctions for the behaviors in which he has engaged. I look forward to receipt of notification from your office that the attached Formal Complaint has been accepted and will be investigated by an independent investigator and scheduling that investigator's interview of my client, Should you have any questions or concerns, or should you wish to discuss any aspect of this Formal Complaint or my letter further, please feel free to contact me. MFC/hb Attachments: Ex A,B,C&D Sincer c F. Colin Fort Collins -Jones 000718 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 8 To: Janet Miller I have been a Crime Analyst at FCPS for 17 years and 4 mos. In total, I have over 23 years of experience as a Crime Analyst. During my entire tenure here at FOPS, I have always met or exceeded expectations on my evaluations, especially in the area of my results. To be precise, dating back to 2001(for which I have records), here are the ratings I've received for my results: a 2015 — On Track a 2014 —4 (Highest Rating) • 2013 -- Exceptional Results • 2012 — Exceeds City Standards • 2011— Exceeds City Standards • 2010 — Exceeds City Standards 2009 — Exceeds City Standards • 2008 — Exceeds City Standards 2007 — Exceeds Expectations • 2006 — Excellent • 2005 — Excellent • 2003 — High Quality • 2001—Above Average It is very clear that I have a pattern of excelling in the results category. I am highly regarded for my knowledge, skills, abilities and results. I have and continue to receive numerous accolades for my work, as documented in my previous evaluations. My work and reputation has led to my involvement on high- level citywide critical functioning teams such as the Malcolm Baldridge Team and the Performance Management Development Team. I've also been asked to serve on two consecutive BFO Teams. I am a recognized expert In my field. I lecture and teach Crime Analysis at the college level. If one were to look at these accomplishments and the history of my work, it is illogical that in the period of less than a year, my performance has reversed 180 degrees to the need for an improvement plan. It is inconceivable that such a great employee would demonstrate the poor performance that Assistant Chief Schiager is alleging. The only change to my work in this time frame has been the assignment of a new supervisor. A supervisor with clear motive for retaliation and retribution. For the past year, ever since Assistant Chief Schaiger became my supervisor, I have maintained that he has retaliated against me In response to discipline he received from Chief Hutto due to a complaint that I filed. At the time of the discipline, Chief Schiager was not my supervisor. It was evident that Chief Schaiger took no responsibility for his actions that caused the discipline and when assigned to become my direct supervisor set upon a course for retribution and retaliation. The fact that my previous two supervisors applauded me for actions that Chief Schlager is now using as an excuse for a performance improvement plan can only be construed as retaliation. Fort Collins -Jones 000719 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 8 I recognized the potential for this to happen and warned Chief Hutto about my fears, hoping he would take necessary precautions to protect me from this retaliation, but that did not happen. A simple change In supervision could have prevented this hostile work environment. The retaliation began immediately with the denial of my quest to reclassify my position, which I had support and backing from my previous two supervisors. The retaliation continued with my first Quarter Evaluation in which Chief Schlager laid the responsibility of another person's decision on me and scolded me for the outcome of which i had no control over. The absurdity could not be clearer. He states in the evaluation that a duplication in records indicated an erroneous result, which is not accurate. What appear to be duplicated records are in fact additional charges. Chief Schiager never discussed this with me, never investigated how the data is housed, or how the data is extracted. He goes on in the evaluation to question the results of two reports. I reiterated that the results of those reports were defendable in relation to the Individual questions at hand, which were not the same. He ignored any explanation I could provide and unfairly berated me for his erroneous interpretation. The retaliation continued in my second Quarter Evaluation where Chief Schlager cherry picked a minor mistake, one In which I noticed and corrected within a few minutes, and he used that to indicate a failure in my work. I have documented the volume of work that I do, and an error rate of less than one percent. It Is preposterous to imply that my work Is deficient. Now In the third Quarter Evaluation he claims that 3 errors have created a pattern that requires a performance improvement plan to correct. One of his 3 examples Is again an error that I recognized and corrected within 48 hours. Another example Involved a sophisticated coding procedure, which when Identified I worked with the subject matter expert and corrected the code. A business practice adhered to and approved of for over 17 years. Chief Schiager admonishes me in the evaluation for the procedure I used to audit the Priority I calls, again I maintain that this is well outside of my area of expertise and job description. I should not be doing quality control on the work of a dispatcher. I met with the Comm Center Manager to get instruction on how she audited the calls and used the documented criteria put in place by E-Staff to make each and every audit. Chief Schlager could have at any time set a meeting to discuss the details. it is evident he has no intention of working through what he sees as an Issue, rather his intention is collect any piece of Information to use as ammunition for ambushing my evaluation. Our QPA process is clear that the supervisor is to have regular conversations and provide feedback to avoid surprises and address Issues in a timely and appropriate way. Chief Schiager's claim that I've not made progress on the reactive time project is completely false. I told him in our second quarter evaluation discussion that i had been working on the project but needed the report that the consultant had done, so that I had the historical information and results critical for me to continue. He never provided the report. The worksheet he sent, months later, was not the report and told me if i needed further information that I was to call the consultant. This is a failure on his part to provide support and the tools necessary to do my job. When I asked him about some critical definitions that needed addressed to maintain continuity with what the consultant had done, he never responded. He refuses to accept any culpability in the situation, and turns It around to admonish my performance. The city policy and process guide on evaluations, clearly states (5.5.1-4) that guidance or direction should be provided regarding actions the employee should take to improve. (QPA Process Guide) That Fort Collins -Jones 000720 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 8 the supervisor should have regular conversations and provide feedback to avoid surprises, address issues in a timely and appropriate way, as well as provide direction, support and coaching. Chief Schiager clearly violated this policy. At no time during the past quarter did he meet with me to discuss my performance. At no time during the past quarter did he indicate that my performance was substandard or make suggestions to improve it. His goal was not to understand my work or how the work is done. Rather his goal has been to document what he falsely claims is substandard performance to justify adverse employment actions in retaliation for my sustained complaint against him. Had my performance actually experienced the drastic deterioration claimed, the policy requires that Chief Schiager meet with me to let me know that my performance had slipped and where it needed improvement. This did not occur because it was not Chief Schiager's goal to point out and correct performance deficiencies, but rather to fabricate them. All of the issues described in my most recent performance evaluation came as complete surprises to me. None of them had been addressed with me in the past quarter, and as noted above, they are for the most part, complete fabrications. If they had any merit, I should have been given notice of the alleged performance issues and an opportunity to correct them prior to my evaluation. At any point throughout the past year, dialog could have taken place to troubleshoot any misinterpreted results In my work. Instead Chief Schiager has sought revenge for the discipline that I caused him. This level of scrutiny on me is clearly not in the best Interest of the department and the department's reputation, as he claims. If that were the case, the business practice adhered to for 17 years of working through issues would have been adopted by Chief Schlager. His motive is obvious, he wants revenge. His over -the -top, venomous punishment In the proposed performance improvement plan has a clear underlining retaliatory objective. A previous supervisor, who lauded my abilities and results, made the comment (in a performance evaluation), some may question her capability or accuracy, "this is due to people not understanding the vast amount of technical expertise necessary to produce the data requested. Her job is not just punching a few keystrokes and obtaining results in minutes." The systems I work with are highly complex and complicated. In addition, there are numerous errors made in data entry and capture. To lay blame on me for technical issues and human data entry errors, all of which are outside my control shows once again that Chief Schiager's motive is not to have cleaner more accurate data. If they were he would be focusing efforts to better understand and fix the technical and data issues. Chief Schiager's motive has been clear since he became my supervisor, to seek revenge. Much of my work is considered computer programming. Anyone familiar with the practice knows that it involves a series of trial and error to arrive at the desired result. Chief Schlager is either not aware of these details of my job, or more likely, doesn't care and is too focused on laying (unfair) blame. A manager should help educate others on the obstacles and be supportive, rather than using their position to harass and retaliate like Chief Schiager has done. He has been allowed to fall as a manger and abuse his power for selfish, retaliatory reasons. The performance plan that Chief Schiager has placed upon me requires no mistakes be made ever. I've already proved that when I find my inadvertent mistakes, I correct them. The expectation that there will never be a miscode while programming Is completely unrealistic. Even sophisticated, highly trained computer programmers can't live up to that expectation. Chief Schlager is expecting me to never make Fort Collins -Jones 000721 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-13 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 8 an error, yet no one else in the agency is held to this standard, including Chief Schiager himself. His mistakes (overt actions) in the past have opened the city up to potential liability, for example when he bent the rules in order for a young, female applicant to pass the physical fitness test. Other applicants were not given the opportunity to bend the rules in order to pass. What would the potential liability be If they found out the rules weren't bent for them in order to pass. Chief Schiager went on record In the newspaper and referred to homeless people and transients as animals. He tries to imply the minor mistakes I've made causes a negative view to the public and diminishes our reputation. Compared to what Chief Schiager has purposely done in the past, that is a laughable statement. The performance plan also doesn't allow for me to make any errors, period. There are data entry errors and coding errors made constantly, that's the nature of the business when you're human. Under Chief Schiaget's logic, everyone should then be on a performance plan. Yet, I'm the only person not allowed to make any errors, period. I challenge anyone to defend that as reasonable. In the performance plan Chief Schiager has Identified someone to check my work that has no experience with the data I work with. This person he claims is good with MS Excel, however my job mainly deals with SQL programming and Crystal Reports. This gate keeper has no knowledge or experience with the Tiburon system or tables. This illustrates what little knowledge Chief Schiager has about my job and how It is done. I find It negligent that while I had an active claim of retaliation against Chief Schiager, he was allowed to not only continue supervising me, but that he was also given the latitude to author my performance evaluation. The negative results of which were completely predictable given his history with me. I have learned that this retaliatory behavior from Chief Schiager is not Isolated to my particular case, but that he has developed a pattern of this behavior over the years. Back in 2011, while he was not my supervisor, Chief Schiager asked me to research any calls made to particular address. This was the address of a home that the City Manager was attempting to purchase, but was not inside the city limits. While I told Chief Schiager that we had access to that data, It legally did not belong to us, and therefore we could not release the Information. The Information would have to be released by LCSO, as it belonged to them. Chief Schiager pressed me for details about a call at that location, which I provided to him as he was a ranking official in our department, but again expressed my discomfort In doing so, knowing this was not for law enforcement purposes. This example again displays Chief Schiager's pattern of bullying behavior, and his attitude that policy and rules don't apply to him. I did not want to have anything to do with researching that information, but felt compelled because It came from Chief Schiager and I felt if I did not comply, I would suffer ramification. Even a reasonable person could see that if an employee has great evaluations, is applauded for their work, recognized for their expertise, and commended for finding and correcting mistakes then is suddenly portrayed as a failure for the exact same results; the problem is not within the employee, but rather with the evaluator. An evaluator with clear and distinct malevolent Intentions. Fort Collins -Jones 000722 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-14 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT N EXHIBIT N Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-14 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 f 3 Jerry Sch#a From: Jeff Willard Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 4:25 PM To: Lori Frank; Jerry 5chiager; Matt Lee cc Lisa Robles Subject: RE: Missing Case List Follow Up Hey Lori, After talking with Lisa today, she's okay with going with your report with the 8% for now. Can you please send the report directly to Lisa though Instead of to the Sergeants? you can hold off on your work on this. Lisa, if I'm misrepresenting anything please correct me. Thanks everyone ........................ JEff •li ILLARD..._..__.__-----. _._. __.- _.... _..---.•------- Information Services Services Manager-- information Technology CRY qJ Fort Collins 2221 S. Timberline 970-221-6211 office 970-568-6728 cell iwillard@fcga, z-go Teii us about our serytce. LA+e want to tngw "Do not fix blame, fix the problem"- Anonymous From: Lori Frank Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 201711:28 AM To: Jerry Schfager; Jeff Willard; Matt Lee Subject: Missing Case List Follow Up I had one of my interns work on checking the false positive rate on the report I created for January 2017. There was an 8% false positive rate for the month. 97 Missing Cases 8 False Positives Just FYI...... it took my intern less than 10 minutes to check all 97 cases and she had just learned how to use Tiburon. If this were to be automatically distributed to the Sgts and grouped by Unit ID (they can easlly identify their people that way), I don't think they would have to sift through very many false positives. At first glance, it appears that theTals'e positives are because the officer Is initiating the report and not pulling the CAD Info. Perhaps a bit of training could solve the vast majority of these raise positives. It takes but a few seconds to push the button that says "Get CAD Info", so this is not a huge task. That Is also proper procedure. z'or%.rank Crime Analyst Fort Collins Police Services CONFIDENTIAL SCHIAGER 000158 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-14 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 KI Schi From: Jeff Willard Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 201711:32 AM To: Lori Frank,; lent' Schlager, Matt Lee Subject: RE Missing Case List Follow Up Jerry, Would It be possible to find out if this is an acceptable amount? Personally, it sounds like there's not that much extra work being done by those who would be checking the reports anyway. If this is sufficient, I'd rather go this route than having Matt do a bunch more worts improving upon his report. JEFF WILLARD Information Services Manager-- Information Technology CBM of a Coffins 2221 S. Timberline 970-221-6211 office 970-556-5728 cell jwillardQ(c cv,cam Tell us about our service, we want to Imaw "Do not fix blame, fix the problem" - Anonymous From: Lori Frank Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 201711:28 AM To: Jerry Schlager; Jeff Willard; Matt Lee Subject: Missing Case List Follow Up I had one of my interns work on checking the false positive rate on the report I created forlanuary 2017. There was an 8% false positive rate for the month. 97 Missing Cases 8 False Positives Just FYI...... it took my intern less than 10 minutes to check all 97 cases and she had just learned how to use Tiburon. If this were to be automatically distributed to the Sgts and grouped by Unit ID (they can easily identify their people that way), I don't think they would have to sift through very many false positives. At first glance, it appears that the false positives are because the officer Is initiating the report and not pulling the CAD Info. Perhaps a bit of training could solve the vast majority of these false positives. It takes but a few seconds to push the button that says "Get CAD Info", so this Is not a -huge task. That is also -proper -procedure. . .zDY2, fY6lx.f Crime Analyst Fort Collins Police Services 2221 S. Timberline Rd. Fort Collins, CO 80525 970-416 2S15 Ifranft@fceov.com CONFIDENTIAL SCNIAGER 000169 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-15 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT O EXHIBIT 0 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-15 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 9 city of Coltins C w`" �' z - REVIEWER JERROD KINSMAN (Manager) CRIME ANALYST Job Type CLASSIFIED Classirication 611/1999 Hire Date JERROD KINSMAN Manager Fort Collins -Jones 000108 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-15 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 9 Vt_ ���_I i CAREER Attend Training Seek out and attend valuable training to develop and maintain skills and stay abreast of current theories and practices. Start Date 1/1/2017 LORI FRANK - 7/13/2017 6:15:54 PM Due Date 12131/2017 Status Completed Will be attending International Association of Crime Analysts conference in September. LORI FRANK-10/17/2017 7:24:44 PM Attended the 2017 IACA Conference. Will continue to look for valuable training opportunities, however my workload is increasing to the point that it may be prohibitive to training. Intern Program Continue the internship program I have cultivated with CSU, which contributes to FCPS's goal of Community Engagement. Start Date 1/1/2017 Due Date 12/31/2017 aPro ress Visibility 100% Yes Status Completed LORI FRANK - W13/2017 5:17:41 PM Had two interns that completed the program for college credit, finishing in May 2017. One intern was in a volunteer status prior, and continues to serve in that volunteer/intern role. LORI FRANK - 10/17/2017 7:20:37 PM The internship program I have built has become increasingly valuable. For example, the current intern is working on a project to properly classify our DUI arrests for alcohol or drugs (by type). This is currently not captured properly in our system, however we are required by the state to classify these records in that manner. LORI FRANK - 1/12/2018 9AG:20 PM My one remaining intern is anticipated to depart in the near future. I've been asked by CSU to guest lecture this semester, so there is a potential for more intern participation. QPA20171Q4 LORI FRANK Fort Collins -Jones 0001&80e12of8 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-15 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 9 Fo`r� t`inS CAREER Reclassify Position Reclassify my position to better align with current responsibilities and evolution of the position, including parallel roles within the city. Start Date Due Date Status 1/1/2017 12/31/2017 On Track Progress Visibility Yes LF - Comparison v.ith olher city employees.pdf LORI FRANK - 7/13/2017 6:16:02 PM I'm frustrated by the lack of progress on this goal. I've been told to be patient, and wait until the next, permanent chief is hired. I've been striving towards this for more than 5 years, and have put a lot of work and effort into the process. Former unjustified obstacles prevented this from moving forward, for which the responsibility lies with the city. The current investigation into those unjustified obstacles is not yet resolved. I'm being asked to remain patient under these circumstances, which is frustrating. I've attached a comparison of citywide teams I have been and continue to be a part of to illustrate the inequity of my current position. LORI FRANK - 10/17/2017 7:36:21 PM There has been no progress made on this goal. The investigation concluded but diet not resolve the obstacles that have been unjustly placed in the way. I continue to serve the city on high-level citywide teams with team members far above in job classification. I've been told again that 1 must wait for the new Chief to be hired before action can be taken. This is a choice that is being made, not a policy -driven decision.I continue to be frustrated by the lack of progress, enthusiasm and action that is being taken on this goal. LORI FRANK - 1/12/2018 9:51:29 PM There has been no progress made on this goal, however not for my lack of effort. While the high-level citywide teams I continue to serve on are composed of team members far above the in job classification, I am not gaining any support to move this forward at this time. The team members I serve with are considered leaders in the city. I applied to attend leadership training, however was denied. I'm frustrated, as the Financial Analyst 11 in the agency has attended leadership training, yet this person does not serve on the type of high-level teams as I do. Support Organizational Development Represent FCPS on a variety of high-level city-wide, cross -functional teams constructed to heighten our visibility and recognition, strengthen our reputation, increase transparency and increase data -driven initiatives. • Malcolm 8aldridge • Open Data Initiative • Performance Measurement QPA 20171 Q4 LORIFRANK Fort Collins -Jones 000118a e3 of 0 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-15 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 9 CAREER o elearpoint Start Date Due Date Status 1/1/2017 12/31/2017 Completed Press Visibility e� pit 100% Yes ON I LORI FRANK-10/1712017 7:27:58 PM 1 represented the City of Fort Collins In the Baldridge process by participating as a selected team member, attending regular meetings, producing needed results and meeting with the on -site assessors. I continue to be a pail of the Open Data project, which is a long-term city wide project. I've also been selected to be a member of the What Works Cities (WWC) citywide initiative and project. This is a subset of Open Data and requires producing results, participating in meetings and providing insight into data utilization. I continue to be a key agency member in the Performance Measurements citywide team LORI FRANK - 1/12/2018 9:54:40 PM My representation for FCPS and the City of Fort Collins as an integral member of high-level teams is helping to advance our overall organizational development. Rating Scale IN Outperforming Employee consistently demonstrates superior performance and goes above and beyond the scope of his or her current role (i.e. taking on and succeeding in additional responsibilities or accomplishing major milestones). On Track Employee consistently meets expectations and is successful In current role (most common rating). Needs Improvement Employee performance is below expectations in one or more areas. Rating does not mean employee is failing, but rather some action Is required to get back on track. A performance improvement plan or development goals should be established RESULTS: Provide a brief description of accomplishments and progress achieved in pursuit of individual goals. Results are the "What", Behaviors are the "How". LORI FRANK (Selo JERROD KINSMAN (Manager) QPA20171 Q4 LORIFRANK Outperforming On Track Fort Collins -Jones 000,11Page 14 of 8 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-15 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 9 ortCol[Ins � CAREER��-�t LORI FRANK (Self): I field, triage and complete a variety of incoming projects and requests on a daily basis. During Q4 20171 received 107 requests for research, statistical analysis, consultation,and results. This is in addition to monitoring and maintaining more than 4,000 automated reports that I created and were sent during the quarter. The more time-consuming and larger projects included: a A full extraction and analysis of traffic citations for a traffic surcharge project. I worked in conjunction with the Financial Analyst II in an effort to illustrate the financial impacts of reduced staffing and higher workload of the Traffic Unit. • Completed a Data Inventory for the ongoing OpenData project. This is an effort to increase the data transparency of the City of Fort Collins. Research and backfill data for the Community Dashboard metrics. I was instrumental in creating a more logical and realistic performance metric. Examples of the exceptional results I produce, and justification for the outperforming rating include: o [Grand Prairie TX PD reached out for input on creating 10-Hour Patrol Shifts - I proved a complex and comprehensive response based on my knowledge and expertise, especially having just completed work doing the same thing for FCPS] - "Thanks so much Lori! This answer was the most thorough and helpful of all." o (Research and analysis provided to NET regarding citizen concerned about the number of vehicle trespasses and burglaries in the neighborhood. I provided a thorough analysis that clearly indicated there was not an issue in the neighborhood, rather a spree of activity. This allowed the officer to calm the citizen's fears.] - "This is great! Thank you! The informant was going to call me back with the details of his incident later so now I have some good stats for him. I'm sure it was the few incidents they had in a short time that raised his concern." e [A commander with Warren AFB conducted a threat assessment and had never included FCPD data before. As she was new to this type of analysis, and given my experience with threat assessments I was able to walk her through what data would be appropriate.] - "Thank you Lori, you rock!" • (A homeless advocacy group made a claim in a Denver newspaper article that 83% of smoking violations are being issued in Fort Collins were to homeless people and transients. The Ladmer County Health District was confronted about this information by both the advocacy group and the Denver Health District. I was able to provide defensible research that showed in fact, only 32% of tickets were written to transients and homeless individuals. The 83% was a misrepresentation of the data.) - 'This is so great to know! And it's interesting that over the time of the ordinance, more tickets were written for persons that were not homeless and the violations even more out among the populations. Thanks so much for your help on this!" e [Norman OK PD was researching retention policies on background files. I provided a thorough, clear response to aid in their research.] - "This is perfect, Lori." JERROD KINSMAN (Manager): This quarter Lori has continued to work towards the goals and expectations she has set for herself and those I have set for her in the past. Some of her results include producing a report regarding traffic citations stats and working with the Agency's financial analyst to inform police executive staff and city management of some deficiencies. The data was imperative to the success of this report and she completed the project under a very sudden and short timeline. 1 have noticed inconsistency in the accuracy of work produced by Lori. Often her work product is well done and meets the needs of her customers, however it appears sometimes Lori does not provide a thorough review of her results before sending them out as a final product. The Impact this has on customers who rely on her to produce data they can trust is notable, as customers are finding errors which effect their timeliness and credibility. QPA 20171 Q4 age [ 5 of 8 LORI FRANK Fort Collins -Jones 00011 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-15 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 9 Otyof ors CAREER There were a couple of examples this quarter of work where Lori could have improved her delivered work product. Lori provided data to the Information Services Acting Director which was delivered to the City Manager regarding data on transient problems and case dispositions. Acting Director Workman noted regarding this data request, "I also received an Update from Lori Frank that the initial data she sent was not correct and that there were some duplicates within the data." Given this example and past examples, Lori needs to make sure information is checked for basic errors, such as duplication, prior to releasing it to her customers. Additionally, 1 was informer) of concerns by Deputy Chief Yeager, Assistant Chief Cronin and Lieutenant Yonce regarding reporting of part 1 response times. It was clear from information received that Lori had not taken time to analyze the data and included calls which skewed the results. For instance, she included a call which was a Larimer County call and included a response time on a call which was changed from priority 4 to priority 1 however Lori included the entire time the call was holding. I do not expect Lori to provide perfect work all the time, however these examples are oversights which would be avoided if Lori carefully reviewed her work product prior to release to those requesting it. Lori had presented the Information to AC Cronin for a QSAR and on the City's Community Dashboard. DC Yeager and Acting Director Workman learned later when they set a meeting with her that Lori was not reading all of the call data or even looking at all the calls with response times over the Agency's target. This type of data reporting has been problematic as the Agency has few priority one calls to establish an average response time and is reporting the response time as a metric to the community. Lori needs to continue to work on a more thorough review of her work prior to release. In addition to the good work Lori describes in her self -evaluation, I took special notice on how she assisted another department with data related to the performance of an enforcement team. Lori was asked again with short notice to produce data related to the activity level of the City's TSOs. Her data was instrumental in helping the Acting Director of Transfort see a clear picture as to the activity level of his enforcement team and take actions to remedy concems from City Management. The comment made to Lori was, "Thank you so much for getting to this so quickly! This is extremely helpful." Greatjob Lori. Rating Scale Outperforming Employee consistently demonstrates superior performance and goes above and beyond the scope of his or her current role (i.e. taking on and succeeding in additional responsibilities or accomplishing major milestones). On Track Employee consistently meets expectations and is successful in current role (most common rating). Needs Improvement Employee performance is below expectations in one or more areas. Rating does not mean employee is failing, but rather some action is required to get back on track. A performance improvement plan or development goals should be established QPA20171 Q4 age 16 of 8 LORIFRANK Fort Collins -Jones 00011 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-15 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 9 F, Yes CAREER BEHAVIORS: Provide a brief description on the means and methods used to achieve results, as well as the actions and values that were demonstrated. Include behavlor competencies demonstrated that support individual, team, and City goals. Results are the "what", behaviors are the "how". LORI FRANK (Self) Outperforming JERROD KINSMAN (Manager) Needs Improvement LORI FRANK (Selo: I am able to effectively and efficiently triage and respond to a high volume of requests for research and analysis from a wide variety of data consumers. I will often apply innovative approaches to reach the best solution. I'm recognized Outside the agency for my expertise and am often sought as a resource. 1 continue to participate in high-level, cross -functional citywide teams that are charged with carrying out goals of the city, This includes: • Baldridge Team -I've been an integral part of this team since inception in 2015. The onsite interview and evaluation was held during Q4, 2107.1 was directly involved in this process, not only being contacted but participated on and in- depth assessment interview. I am one of the few in the PD that had a direct correlation to the city receiving the award. • (From Interim Chief Jones regarding the Baldridge Award) - "For those of you that were contacted by the evaluation team, you made a tremendously positive impression. Your knowledge of your area of expertise was impressive. Your dedication to duty was noted, and the professionalism displayed was acknowledged. • Open Data/What Works City - My continued involvement on this team ensures that law enforcement data is included, (a subset of data highly desired by the community) is sustained and plays a forward role in our efforts to push data and transparency outward. • Crystal Reports SME for FCPS - this role was previously held by Matt Lee, Police Systems Analyst. When Matt resigned it left a knowledge gap in the agency given our heavy reliance on Crystal Reports. I was asked to fill that gap, and continue to provide high-level quality service in this area. • FCPS Fitness Team - I continue my involvement on this team and this quarter saw the Fall Fitness Testing, where more than 150 people (56% of the department) tested in a 3 week time span. I not only physically tested many of the participant, I also compiled and analyzed the test data to show the agency that this is a worth -while program. • FCPS Academy Team - I a member of this 6 person team tasked with justifying the need for FCPS to build, start and maintain its own POST Academy. This is a grand task with monumental financial and resource implication's. Tile research and analysis I provide to this endeavor will be crucial. [Response to knowledge I've provided thus far] - "Thank you ma'am for your hard work!" • Benchmark Cities - I remain the only constant contact from FCPS with the Benchmark City group. The work 1 do with and for the Benchmark Cities was highlighted during the Baldridge onsite interviews. My value to this group has been recognized, as I've been asked to lead the Analytical Breakout Session for the 2017 Conference. I recognize that my expertise can benefit others, and I seize those opportunities to make things easier for others if I'm able. • [Automated several reports that the user previously had to run manually and individually) - "Perfcal Thanks! Thanks a BUNCH for getting these set up for me! It really did save me time not having to run each of them." QPA 2017 ( Q4 Fort Collins -Jones 00011 Na0e 17 of 0 LORI FRANK Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-15 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 9 aty.of f� CAREER (ixl; i `s��; • [Assisting in a response to a city council request. I not only provided the information, but broke it out in a more clear, concise understandable format) - "You are awesomel" JERROD KINSMAN.(Manager): Lori's responsibilities are a vital part to the success of the Agency as she is responsible for managing relationships internally and externally regarding data. She is driven to provide good customer service and has participated in representing the Agency in areas such as Open Data/What Works City and the Baldrige Team. However, the inconsistencies in her work product and what some perceive at times to be a, defensive or unapproachable nature hold Lori back from fully reaching her potential. Many customers have shared accolades and appreciation for the work Lori does. Lori provided concrete and knowledgeable responses to the Baldrige assessor's questions which demonstrated her ability to effectively communicate with external customers. Lori has done a great job with providing data to many efforts focused on the future of the organization. One such effort is the work being put into the development of a FCPS Police Academy. Lori has been able to provide historical data which will support the need for this program's development soon. Regarding the project mentioned in results regarding priority 1 response times to calls for service, information was passed on to me that Lori showed signs of visible frustration with the critique of her work and the requests being made of her. Assistant Chief Cronin and Lieutenant Yonce informed me that Lori was "a bit put off" by their request for her to look through CAD calls to determine more accurate response times. Additionally, when Deputy Chief Yeager and Acting Director Workman met with Lori to discuss errors in her report, he described a moment when they were discussing the need for her analysis that she sighed and asked Incredulously if they expected her to read every Priority 1 CAD call because it would cause so much work for her. DC Yeager told her that was needed and Acting Director Workman offered instruction from Dispatch to help her see the changes in calls. DC Yeager told me that Lori ultimately agreed that reading the calls would be the only way to vet the information as thoroughly as possible. He and Acting Director Workman were surprised to learn that Lori had not analyzed all the calls, especially those of the target, A person who had been outside the meeting room later made a surprised comment to DC Yeager about Lori's negative speaking tone in the conversation. For Lori to be successful, I need her to maintain professional composure when dealing with her customers,_ to include the executives of the organization. Both incidents resulted in the perception that Lori is resistant to constructive feedback about how to improve her work performance and may be unwilling to complete a particular work assignment as requested. Good customer service, including completing work assignments as directed, needs to be the foundation of Lori's work. Although there are a couple of examples of areas where Lori can continue to improve, I am confident in her skills and abilities in her work. Lori can produce good work and good customer service so I am encouraged about her ability to , focus a little more on the areas mentioned in this quarterly assessment. My personal experience working with Lori has been that she is passionate about her work but sometimes is quick to take offense regarding feedback. Lori is a valued member of the Agency and my team and I look forward to her accomplishments in the future. I know Lori can effectively produce timely results as she did with a request from The George Washington University. This quarter Lori was asked by Deputy Chief Yeager to respond to a request from the college and responded with results in the same day. This type of responsiveness is great. My requests of Lori in the future are for her to provide more structure to her review process to minimize errors and for her to improve her reactions to critical feedback and requests for data. Lori can work well with others and has demonstrated this in her work with the fitness team. Her passion for the health of our employees has shown in her dedication to working with department members on fitness testing days and maintaining statistical records of achievement and involvement. QPA 20171 Q4 LORI FRANK Fort Collins -Jones 0001 Vfa e 18 of 8 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-16 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT P EXHIBIT P Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-16 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 5 IA ACT ONNPIEL `+acn veEMproYme I $ 3 , —,F"._� Action Type (sae beaPk) .._,: FQRM_ _ �l �•� � egNum�— `ONLY COMPLETE INFORMATION THAT ISCHANGING ' Last Name Phsl Name Middle Employee IDS SSNAI•daeback) Name Cq Homo Bus Unit [)apartment WaMslte Code 6 DM211on Chk Rl Coda SupvrlDq Su urvisw Name ir t �-�-1 F�200° :-1 `�°�°}.4�?!�1--�='-_? (ibo pauceaultniNof.. oaior.._.:1 i2sme_:J`.�-,�tisRaoD�-; _ Dalo CurnenlJob Jab Type Job Tille POalson ID Union Code Renard Gmup Fmolml Status Super Leval ---=_'--'-- ==�-'-- - _. _ C '-: __ � __:. __:_. _ J gam_=, �:__; f...:. -i �- - r— ._ I L _- ......__, BFdeekly, Salary �,'U,1ya��r FM Bhveekly Hours %Incroeoo SWII Level Pay Grade OTFxempt OwCeOPsy/Mr S �d Date Staded 11 Fudough Dula Review Typo Intro Period End Onto Contract End Uato LOAData LOARatum Deal Tax Method (F cA'dtIQ89r, 6W.. " W in amv Amount H Oblect Subs1diaN Subledaer Sub Tvpo Pammt RR Use only Date Filmed: 31114017 ElheWe Dote: Change Reason Codes: 0 $ Data EnlonaMniBsb: 7 a. Lost Day Worked: Last Day on Payroll; Ronson for soparaUam Is address changing7 (C0mPk3te Pa=nsi Inl0=Unn Farts) Yes No VACTYiYai�r�d$111ONSTANej-_ ❑ RoplecefTo Se Fliled ❑ PlannediDn Hold ❑ Eliminated '(iam» G�cvndNlms,_'""•ere'n�O'16� ur�'vtfa"r"jidve -1 19 P Yee PR .�Vparvl-ear ana a Dept Head or Service Director Data City Memllaror Dimclorol Human Resources Dare Fort Collins -Jones 000223 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-16 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 5 E* Alison Halopoff From: Jamie Heckman Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 4:16 PM To: Alison Halopoff, Linda Williams Cc: Janet Miller, Cheryl Juergen Subject: RE: Lori Frank PA form Hi Linda, E� Thank you for the PA Form. Per the conversation 1 just had with Jerrod and the circumstances that caused the retroactive adjustment, I approve and we will get this processed. Thanks again. Jamie ..................... JAMIE HECKMAN Compensation and Technology Manager City of Fort Collins 970-416-4221 Original Message From: Alison Halopoff Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 2:11 PM To: Linda Williams Cc: Janet Miller, Jamie Heckman; Cheryl Juergens Subject: RE: Lori Frank PA form Hi Linda, Thank you for sending over the PA form for Lori Frank. I will get the information entered In the system. We have made some changes in the department and Jamie Heckman Is now the person responsible for approving all retro pay requests. I have copied Jamie on this email. Have a great holiday weekendl Thank you. All Halopoff I HR Specialist City of Fort Collins 1 215 N. Mason, Ft Collins, CO 80524 1 970.416.2661 ----Original Message ----- From: Linda Williams Sent: Friday, September 01, 201711:36 AM To: Cheryl Juergens; Alison Halopoff Cc: Janet Miller Fort Collins -Jones 000224 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-16 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 5 Subject: Lori Frank PA form Hi ladies.. C� Attached is Lori Frank's PA form as she is eligible for an increase in pay and It should have been effective as of 07/31/17. Janet - could you please approve this retro pay? Please let me know If you need anything else or have questions. Linda Williams Executive Assistant Fort Collins Police Services Email: lilliams@fceov_.com Phone: 970.221.6550 2 Fort Collins -.Jones 000225 Ret ro Pay for: Lori Frank EE # 8484 RETRO PAY REGULAR $ 129.96 OT'is $ TOTAL DUE $ 129.96 PAY PERIOD BWA'! T PAID NEW BW I SALARY . RETRO AMOUNT 'DUE 31-Jul-17 $ 2,598.89 $ 203.87 $ 64.98 14-Au -17 $ 2,598.89 $ 216W.87 $ 64.98 TOTAL $ 5,197.78 $ 5,327.74 $ 129.96 RATE NEW ' . NEW-A'MT ; 'TOTAL {Oi'y HRS PAID AMT. -PAID RATE :DUE I AMT'DUE $ - $ O.W. 0.00 $ _ $ _ Fort Collins -Jones 000228 m A 0 c m 4 rn «. m a 0 FA w 0 o C cn v 0 ,�A 0 1 Q 0 1w c0 m 0 h cn Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-16 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT P EXHIBIT P Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-16 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 5 R-q� P11 b, N 0 AAKE -1 I- "FARAMWUWACUOn TM (002 bock)) � P 0 . NLY COMPLETE INFORMATION THAT IS CHANGING* Faq -flumLw ...Home Ca Rome Bus Unit Docadmant Worksits Code & DaRtrinlInn rhURICIed.Al.ing Ru..M.N 771ostBr11F r�—W—mgl7j IL I f I I Dale CumsentJob Job Typo JobTWo PoelSon ID Union Code Benefit (31cup Emphnt Status Super Level nwr—j V—AFT-77 -7—Alf'PR A BlymklySalory A"Ou'dT.=61 FFE e1wooklyHours %Irxmaoo SWIlLevel PayGrado OTExampt OrvCol[Foy/Mor z663.8 3, 1 1 1 1 21SUA 1 1 1 1 Data Started Furlough Dole ReAwTYpe Intro Period End Data Conbect End Data LGAVoto LOA Return DBLo Tax&lelhod J1 A=nt# Obl"I SubsIdlary Subleduar Sub Tyco Percent r)(fri) PAr HR the Ofilit 6116017 Effecltve Dab: '711 Change Reason Codes: M Entepadfttlalo: LostDayWatRed: LwWayonPayroll; Reason for sapnrallon: Is addrace dmSing? yes No (Complete Parsamal Information Form) Final d1ract deposit stub 6 W2 will be mailed to 40me on file, ❑ Repiscarra Be Filled [3 PlanaudiOnHold ❑ EIMInated] US% wnp wparvloy //r m0no Were apt Head or Sarvlw Director COW City Manager or DlrecAor of Human Raeourcee 00TV Fort Collins -Jones 000223 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-16 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 5 EO Alison Halopoff From: Jamie Heckman Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 4:16 PM To: Alison Halopoff, Linda Williams Cc: Janet Miller, Cheryl Juergens Subject: RE: Lori Frank PA form Hi Linda, EO Thank you for the PA Form. Per the conversation 1 just had with Jerrod and the circumstances that caused the retroactive adjustment.. I approve and we will get this processed. Thanks again. Jamie ..................... JAMIE HECKMAN Compensation and Technology Manager City of Fort Collins 970-416-4221 original Message From: Alison Halopoff Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 2:11 PM To: Linda Williams Cc: Janet Miller, Jamie Heckman; Cheryl Juergens Subject: RE: Lori Frank PA form Hi Linda, Thank you for sending over the PA form for Lori Frank. I will get the information entered In the system. We have made some changes in the department and Jamie Heckman Is now the person responsible for approving all retro pay requests. I have copied Jamie on this email. Have a great holiday weekend! Thank you. All Halopoff I HR Specialist City of Fort Collins 1 215 N. Mason, Ft Collins, CO 80524 1 970.416.2661 ----Orlginal Message ----- From: Linda Williams Sent: Friday, September 01, 201711:36 AM To: Cheryl Juergens; Alison Halopoff Cc: Janet Miller Fort Collins -Jones 000224 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-16 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 5 Subject: Lori Frank PA form 0, HI Ladies, O Attached is Lori Frank's PA form as she is eligible for an Increase in pay and it should have been effective as of 07/31/17. Janet - could you please approve this retro pay? Please let me know if you need anything else or have questions. Linda Williams Executive Assistant Fort Collins Police Services Email: Williams@fceov.com Phone: 970.221.6550 2 Fort Collins -Jones 000226 Re#ro Pay for: Lori Frank EE # 8484 RETRQ PAY REGULAR $ 129.96 OT 1.5 $ TOTAL DUE $ 129.9& .PAY PERIOD BW AUT PAID NEW BW SAi.ARY RETRO AMOUNT DEIE 31-Jul-17 $ 29598.89 $ 2,663.87 $ 64-98 '! 4-Au -17 $ 2,598.89 $ 2,663.87 $ 64.98 TOTAL $ 5,197.78 $ 5,327.74 $ 129.96 tOTj HRS RATE PAID AMT PAID NEW RATE NEWjA'�IT ; :DUE TOTAL AWDUE $ - $ - 0.00 0.00 Fort Collins -Jones 000228 m n N CD A 0 c m r+ Vii CD a. 0 w 0 N O C 0n v 0 0 0 a 0 cfl m LrI h U1 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-17 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT Q EXHIBIT Q Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-17 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3 City of Fort Collins Classification Description Title: Crime Analyst Department: Police Services I~LSA Status: Nonexempt Approved Date: March 31, 2009 SUMMARY Researches, analyzes, interprets, and provides information on crime related topics and issues to police services, various agencies, and the community. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES The following duties and responsibilities are Illustrative of the primary functions of this position and are not intended to be all inclusive. Research and analyze information on a variety of crime related topics. Disseminate information using pattern and trend reports, staff reports, bulletins, computer readouts, graphs, charts, tables, written reports or other methods to police personnel, other City agencies, and the community. Determine patterns in criminal activity and crime trends, using a variety of methods such as Interpretation of complex data and application of a variety of statistical methodology In addition to geographical analysis using complex geographical information systems (GIS) techniques. Aid in patrol operation and officer deployment by collecting, analyzing and dissemination information from a variety of sources in the form of crime pattern bulletins and forecasting reports. Aid In manpower allocation (scheduling) by collecting extensive data on workload and providing analytical reports to patrol administration. Develop basic and complex programming tasks, using structured query language (SQL) or Crystal reports to extract needed data from computerized record systems. Extract and analyze data on response times, calls for service and officer activity to assist with department budgeting. Analyze and interpret information to find significant differences In relationships among sources of Information, and prepare conclusions and forecasts based on data summaries. Report to work on time and maintains an acceptable attendance record. Other duties as assigned. SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES This job has no supervisory responsibilities. QUALIFICATIONS The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skills and abilities required to perform the necessary functions of this position. KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ABILITIES Ability to use word processing, desk top publishing, graphics, software packages, and spreadsheet computer programs. Ability to conduct statistical analysis. Knowledge of geographic Information systems (GIS) techniques. Knowledge of writing structured query language (SQL) and Crystal reports Fort Collins -Jones 00100JMUNT 17 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-17 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3 Ability to analyze information and detennine patterns and trends. Ability to communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing. Ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with all Internal and external agency customers and personnel. Ability to use general office equipment including computer, copier and fax. Ability to work independently and unsupervised at times. EDUCATION and EXPERIENCE Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university in criminology, statistics, computer sciences, or related field; three to five years related experience; or equivalent combination of education and experience. LANGUAGE SKILLS Ability to read, analyze, and interpret general business periodicals, professional journals, technical procedures, or governmental regulations. Ability to write reports, business correspondence, and procedure manuals. Ability to effectively present information and respond to questions from groups of managers, clients, customers, and the general public. REASONING ABILITY Ability to define problems, collect data, establish facts, and draw valid conclusions. Ability to interpret an extensive variety of technical Instructions in mathematical or diagram form and deal with several abstract and concrete variables. PHYSICAL DEMANDS: The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is regularly required to sit and talk or hear. The employee frequently is required to use hands to finger, handle, or feel. The employee is occasionally required to stand, walk, and reach with hands and arms. WORK ENVIRONMENT: The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is occasionally exposed to a normal office environment. The noise level in the work environment Is usually quiet. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Fort Collins -Jones 001004 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-18 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT R EXHIBIT R Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-18 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4 Harnan Resources 215 N. Masan Street tom TA Floor PO Box 580 }ill rt O-A h n Fort Collins, CO 80522 HHp 970.221.6829 970.221.6238 - tax POSITION TITLE: FINANCIAL ANALYST II (Full -Time Regular) (Classified) (Internal) REQUISITION #: reg701 DEPARTMENT: Office of the Chief LOCATION: POLICE BUILDING BENEFIT CATEGORY: Classified (Non-CBU) View Classifications & Benefits EMPLOYMENT TYPE: Full -Time Regular ANNUAL SALARY RANGE: $52,744.00 - 73,589.00 (Salaries are paid biweekly) SELECTION PROCESS: Application deadline is 3:00 p.m. MT on 5/15/2016. You will receive an email acknowledgment when you have successfully submitted an application, Your completed application will be forwarded to the hiring manager. You will be notified if you are selected for further testing or interviews. Please keep your contact information up-to-date. The status of your application will be updated in your applicant profile. This position is in Police Services and Is subject to additional background investigation. Post -offer drug test may be required. SUMMARY: Manage finances for Police Services by preparing budget, monitoring revenue and expenses, investigating variances and reporting to stakeholders and service area management. Accumulate, analyze and Interpret complex financial information on business Issues to produce forecasts and recommendations for service area management. Manage financial processes, create and deliver presentations, communicate Issues and lead ad hoc projects with service area implications. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: • Prepare budget vs actual variance analysis and narrative assessment reports. Lead Investigation of variance root causes, develop proposed course of action and communication of impacts and results. • Lead budget development and forecast projections with management team. Document details and rationale for use in periodic variance reporting. • Analyze, interpret and communicate complex data using standard accounting and finance concept knowledge. • Data mine, compile, and analyze data from various sources and systems (including ERP) in support of the analysis of business Issues, concerns and opportunities. Develop recommendations on business decisions based on the financial analysts. • Participate in capital improvement plan for core City Infrastructure, coordination, validation, assessment. • Manage financial ad hoc projects, capital estimates, and grant research and reporting with service area impacts. • Assist in identifying issues of a financial nature and make recommendations for Improvement and work with operational leadership to implement corrective actions as needed. • Perform standard financial and accounting work procedures while continuously looking for ways to Improve processes and methods. • Reconcile accounts and verify data Integrity. • Establish, monitor and report KPIs, performance metrics and measures. FEXH118111T Fort Collins-J Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-18 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4 • Process data entries, accounting journals, payments (AP), invoices (AR), and general bookkeeping per documented procedures. • Responsible for Federal and State Grant funding, documentation, and legal research. • Train department staff In budgeting and implementation of new financial systems. • Supervise accounts payable and all deposit activity, Including seizure and evidentlary deposits. • Prepare bl-weekly payroll report by resolving errors, and finalizing data for processing. • Prepare quarterly performance feedback and coaching/development for direct report. • Serve as department Purchasing administrator, ensures City policy and procedure are followed, supervise procurement card program. • Track department personnel (FTE) activity for budget preparation, and unfunded liability status. • Create department specific financial and payroll expense reports as needed. • Assist department personnel with creating financial procedural language for policy development and intergovernmental governmental agreements with outside entities. • Serve as primary department contact for auditors from Internal and external entities. SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES: This position may have supervisory responsibilities. QUALIFICATIONS: The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to perform the necessary functions of this position. KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS.. AND ABILITIES: • Knowledge of local government accounting principles, Governmental Accounting Standard Board (GASB) pronouncements and Interpretations. • Knowledge of fund accounting. • Possess critical thinking skills, analytical thought process and business acumen. • Effectively able to manage multiple projects with limited guidance. • Intermediate skill level In Excel and Microsoft Office software. • Basic statistical analysis. • Strategic and critical thinking in approach to problem solving, issue resolution and solution development. • Ability to effectively summarize and communicate financial issues, complex problems and analytics, both orally and in writing. • Use of a variety of reporting tools and financial software. • Ability to communicate and influence both up and down the chain of command effectively. EDUCATION and EXPERIENCE: Bachelor's degree In Accounting, Finance or Business from an accredited college or university; minimum of three+ years related experience required or equivalent combination of education and experience. LANGUAGE and PRESENTATION SKILLS: Ability to read, analyze and interpret technical journals, financial reports, and legal documents. Capability to appropriately respond to common Inquiries or complaints from customers (both internal and external), regulatory agencies, or members of community. Effectively create presentations and communicate to a wide audience. Fort Collins -Jones 000097 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-18 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4 REASONING ABILITY: Ability to define problems, collect data, establish facts, and draw valid conclusions. Ability to Interpret an extensive variety of technical instructions in mathematical or diagram form. CERTIFICATES, LICENSES, REGISTRATIONS: None required. PHYSICAL DEMANDS: The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is regularly required to sit. The demands on the visual senses are very high. The employee is occasionally required to stand, walk; use hands to finger, handle, or feel; stoop, kneel, crouch or crawl; and talk or hear. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 25 pounds. WORK ENVIRONMENT: The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee would encounter while performing the essential functions of this job. Normal office environment with moderate levels of noise. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 221-6535 for assistance. The City of Fort Collins is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Applicants are considered for positions for which they have applied without regard to race, religion, gender, age (40 years or older), national origin, color, creed, ancestry, marital status, sexual orientation, or other characteristics protected by law. BACKGROUND CHECK AND DRUG TEST REQUIRED. Note: Some information In your application may be public information under the Colorado Open Records Act. City Employees: To apply, log Into the EC Career —A Connect - select the Career Center tab from the menu bar. Check the box to only include open jobs. Click on the title of the position to apply. See Agglying for ]obs.docx for more detailed Instructions on applying through Career Center. Interns/Volunteers/Temporary Agency Employees: Please Click hereto create a profile and apply. Fort Collins -Jones 000098 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-18 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT R EXHIBIT R Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-18 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4 Human Resources �...•�pp`rf r k 215 N. Mason Street . ., gyp{ I' 2"i Floor Box 80 '+��ki 6 � (1 � in E� FFF�ttll Fort Calf s, CO 80522 970.221.6829 �• 970.221.6238 - fax POSITION TITLE: FINANCIAL ANALYST II (Full -Time Regular) (Classified) (Internal) REQUISITION *: reg701 DEPARTMENT: Office of the Chief LOCATION: POLICE BUILDING BENEFIT CATEGORY: Classified (Non-CBU) View Classifications & Benefits EMPLOYMENT TYPE: Full -lime Regular ANNUAL SALARY RANGE: $52,744.00 - 73,589.00 (Salaries are paid biweekly) SELECTION PROCESS: Application deadline is 3:00 p.m. MT on 5/15/2016, You will receive an email acknowledgment when you have successfully submitted an application. Your completed application will be forwarded to the hiring manager. You will be notified if you are selected for further testing or Interviews. Please keep your contact Information up-to-date. The status of your application will be updated in your applicant profile. This position Is in Police Services and is subject to additional background investigation. Post -offer drug test may be required. SUMMARY: Manage finances for Police Services by preparing budget, monitoring revenue and expenses, investigating variances and reporting to stakeholders and service area management. Accumulate, analyze and interpret complex financial information on business Issues to produce forecasts and recommendations for service area management, Manage financial processes, create and deliver presentations, communicate Issues and lead ad hoc projects with service area implications. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: • Prepare budget vs actual variance analysis and narrative assessment reports. Lead Investigation of variance root causes, develop proposed course of action and communication of impacts and results. • Lead budget development and forecast projections with management team. Document details and rationale for use in periodic variance reporting. • Analyze, interpret and communicate complex data using standard accounting and finance concept knowledge. • Data mine, compile, and analyze data from various sources and systems (including ERP) in support of the analysis of business issues, concems and opportunities. Develop recommendations on business decisions based on the financial analysis. • Participate in capital improvement plan for core City infrastructure, coordination, validation, assessment. • Manage financial ad hoc projects, capital estimates, and grant research and reporting with service area impacts. • Assist In identifying issues of a financial nature and make recommendations for improvement and work with operational leadership to implement corrective actions as needed. • Perform standard financial and accounting work procedures while continuously looking for ways to Improve processes and methods. • Reconcile accounts and verify data integrity. • Establish, monitor and report KPIs, performance metrics and measures. M Fort Collins-J Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-18 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4 • Process data entries, accounting journals, payments (AP), invoices (AR), and general bookkeeping per documented procedures. • Responsible for Federal and State Grant funding, documentation, and legal research. • Train department staff in budgeting and implementation of new financial systems. • Supervise accounts payable and all deposit activity, Including seizure and evldentlary deposits. • Prepare bi-weekly payroll report by resolving errors, and finalizing data for processing. • Prepare quarterly performance feedback and coaching/development for direct report. • Serve as department Purchasing administrator, ensures City policy and procedure are followed, supervise procurement card program. • Track department personnel (FTE) activity for budget preparation, and unfunded liability status. • Create department specific financial and payroll expense reports as needed. • Assist department personnel with creating financial procedural language for policy development and intergovernmental governmental agreements with outside entities. • Serve as primary department contact for auditors from internal and external entities. SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES: This position may have supervisory responsibilities. QUALIFICATIONS: The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to perform the necessary functions of this position. KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES: • Knowledge of local government accounting principles, Governmental Accounting Standard Board (GASB) pronouncements and interpretations. • Knowledge of fund accounting. • Possess critical thinking skills, analytical thought process and business acumen. • Effectively able to manage multiple projects with limited guidance. • Intermediate skill level In Excel and Microsoft Office software. • Basic statistical analysis. • Strategic and critical thinking in approach to problem solving, Issue resolution and solution development. • Ability to effectively summarize and communicate financial issues, complex problems and analytics, both orally and in writing. • Use of a variety of reporting tools and financial software. • Ability to communicate and influence both up and down the chain of command effectively. EDUCATION and EXPERIENCE: Bachelor's degree in Accounting, Finance or Business from an accredited college or university; minimum of three+ years related experience required or equivalent combination of education and experience. LANGUAGE and PRESENTATION SKILLS: Ability to read, analyze and interpret technical journals, financial reports, and legal documents. Capability to appropriately respond to common Inquiries or complaints from customers (both internal and external), regulatory agencies, or members of community. Effectively create presentations and communicate to a wide audience. Fort Collins -Jones 000097 Case 1:18-cv-03204-M-NRN Document 77-18 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4 REASONING ABILITY: Ability to define problems, collect data, establish facts, and draw valid conclusions. Ability to interpret an extensive variety of technical Instructions in mathematical or diagram form. CERTIFICATES, LICENSES, REGISTRATIONS: None required. PHYSICAL DEMANDS: The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is regularly required to sit. The demands on the visual senses are very high. The employee is occasionally required to stand, walk; use hands to finger, handle, or feel; stoop, kneel, crouch or crawl; and talk or hear. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 25 pounds. WORK ENVIRONMENT: The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee would encounter while performing the essential functions of this job. Normal office environment with moderate levels of noise. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 221-6535 for assistance. The City of Fort Collins Is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Applicants are considered for positions for which they have applied without regard to race, religion, gender, age (40 years or older), national origin, color, creed, ancestry, marital status, sexual orientation, or other characteristics protected by law. BACKGROUND CHECK AND DRUG TEST REQUIRED. Note: Some information in your application may be public information under the Colorado Open Records Act. City Employees: To apply, log into the FC Career & Connect - select the Career Center tab from the menu bar. Check the box to only include open jobs. Click on the title of the position to apply. See Applying for Jobs.docx for more detailed Instructions on applying through Career Center. Interns/Volunteers/Temporary Agency Employees: Please click here to create a profile and apply. Fort Collins -Jones 000098 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-19 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT S EXHIBIT S Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-19 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 5 E IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-cv--03204-RBJ-NRN DEPOSITION OF CARRIE HELD EXAMINATION DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 2019 LORI FRANK, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, a municipality; and JEROME SCHIAGER, former Deputy Chief of Police, in his individual capacity, Defendants. PURSUANT TO NOTICE, the deposition of CARRIE HELD was taken at 9:00 a.m, on September 17, 2019, at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, before Nathan Stormo, Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of Colorado, said deposition being taken pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Nathan Stormo Registered Professional Reporter Stormo Reporting, Inc. (303) 200-4792 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-19 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 5 65 1 think he commits a lot of errors in his work; what sort 2 of projects? 3 A Well, from -- he can't spell or create a 4 sentence, No. 1, 1 mean, from the minimal to errors in 5 billing. 6 Q And I'm smiling because the way you describe 7 him, he sounds like a bit of a computer nerd. 8 A Just a little bit. 9 Q More than a little bit? 10 A Just a little bit, yes. 11 Q Would you say he is a little lacking in social 12 graces? 13 A Just a little bit. I don't think that is an 14 excuse. 15 Q I understand. 16 A Dr. Dan and I had that conversation, and it's 17 not an excuse. If he is given the responsibility to 18 supervise, then he needs to be competent in his 19 supervision. 20 Q Do you think part of the way he treats you is 21 generational problems? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Excuse me for hesitating, but I'm trying to 24 follow up on some questions from Ms. Starnella. 25 Was Mr. Schiager ever your supervisor? Stonno Reporting, Inc. (303) 200-4792 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-19 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 5 . M. 1 A Yes. 2 Q Do you remember about when? 3 A when Tricia left, so January of 116 through 4 June of 116 when Erik started. 5 Q Did he ever give you a performance review? 6 A One that I recall. 7 Q And how was that? 8 A Fine. 9 Q was it meets expectations? 10 A Yes. !11 Q Or -- to the best of your memory? 12 A Uh -- huh . 13 Q Did he ever put you on any PIP plan? 14 A No. 15 Q Do you have any reason to believe that 16 Mr. Schiager ever discriminated against you based on 17 gender? 18 A Me? 19 Q Yes. 20 A No. 21 Q Do you have any reason to believe Mr. Schiager 22 ever retaliated against you in any way? 23 A No. 24 Q How was your relationship with him? 25 A Casual. Stormo Reporting, Inc. (303) 200-4792 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-19 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 5 67 1 Q Is it -- did you not have much interaction with 2 him? 3 A Not at all. 4 Q Okay. And I perhaps am wrong on this, but you 5 can tell me. It sounds like it would be less since 6 Mr. Martin was hired and Mr. Schiager ceased to be your 7 supervisor; is that right? Less interaction you would 8 have with him? 9 A Right. None. I mean, I had none after Erik 10 came. 11 Q Okay. Do you have any knowledge that 12 Mr. Schiager ever discriminated against any other female 13 employees of the police services? 14 A Just hearsay. 15 Q And what is the hearsay? 16 A That -- let me think. Discriminated against a 17 woman. I think the things I heard aren't necessarily 18 discrimination -- could be necessarily considered 19 discrimination, so probably no. 20 Q Did Ms. Frank ever tell you she felt 21 Mr. Schiager felt he discriminated against her based on 22 gender? 23 A Yes. 24 Q And what did she tell you about that? 25 A Okay. My mind is blank again. Stormo Reporting, Inc. (303) 200-4792 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-20 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT T EXHIBIT T Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-20 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN DEPOSITION OF MONICA GAVIN EXAMINATION DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 2019 LORI FRANK, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, a municipality; and JEROME SCHIAGER, former Deputy Chief of Police, in his individual capacity, Defendants. PURSUANT TO NOTICE, the deposition of MONICA GAVIN was taken at 12:57 p.m. on September 17, 2019, at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, before Nathan Stormo, Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of Colorado, said deposition being taken pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Nathan Stormo Registered Professional Reporter Stormo Reporting, Inc. (303) 200-4792 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-20 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3 44 1 1 head and service area director; is that right? 2 A Correct. 3 Q And is it your memory that Mr. Schiager was 4 supportive? I know you've told me you felt Mr. Yeager 5 was the more moving force, but was Mr. Schiager 6 supportive of your trying to get your position 7 reclassified? 8 A I have no recollection of him -- I'm sure -- I 9 have no idea. I can't remember. 10 Q All right. None of these documents refresh 11 your recollection about that? 12 A No. My feeling was that Greg Yeager was very 13 instrumental in my JAQ. 14 Q Let me go back to -- get this piece of paper 15 out of the way and get back to my questions. 16 Do you believe Mr. Schiager ever discriminated 17 against you based on your gender? 18 A No. 19 Q Do you believe he ever retaliated against you 20 based on your gender --- based on anything? 21 A No. 22 Q Do you believe he discriminated against 23 Ms. Frank based on her gender? 24 A I have no direct knowledge of that. 25 Q Do you believe he ever retaliated against Stormo Reporting, Inc. (303) 200-4792 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-21 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT U EXHIBIT U Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-21 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4 Meadors Court Reporting IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN LORI FRANK Plainitff, vs. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, a municipality; and JEROME SCHIAGER, Former Deputy Chief of Police, in is individual capacity; DEPOSITION OF BRIDGET WIDERMAN October 16, 2019 Pursuant to Notice and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the deposition of BRIDGET WIDERMAN, taken by Plaintiffs, was held at 300 Laporte Avenue, Garden Level, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521, on Wednesday, October 16, 2019, at 9:58 a.m., before Jason T. Meadors, RPR, CRR, CRC, and Notary Public for the State of Colorado. BRIDGET WIDERMAN 1011612019 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-21 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4 Meadors Court Reporting 1 Q And you have no indirect knowledge of that. 2 A No. 3 Q And when you said that you're sure it 4 happens, you don't have any direct knowledge, correct? 5 A No, other than I do live in this world, and I 6 know it exists. 7 Q But all you can do at this point is to 8 speculate that it occurred, correct? 9 A Correct. 10 MS. STARNELLA: I have no further questions. it EXAMINATION 12 BY MR. DeMURO: 13 Q Ms. Widerman, I'm David DeMuro and I'm the 14 lawyer for Jerry Schiager. And I have a couple of 15 questions for you. 16 A okay. 17 Q Did Mr. Schiager ever supervise you? 18 A No. 19 Q Did you work with -- did you have any 20 connection with --- did you work with him at all -- 21 A No. 22 Q Okay. I think you mentioned you had seen him 23 in passing -- 24 A Yes. 25 Q -- and said Hello or something. Ever work on BRIDGET WIDERMAN 1011612019 32 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-21 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4 Meadors Court Reporting 1 any projects together or anything like that? 2 A No. 3 Q Do you -- do you have any knowledge that he 4 discriminated against you or retaliated against you in 5 any way? 6 A No. 7 Q Do you have any knowledge that he 8 discriminated against for a moment, we'll leave out 9 plaintiff, Ms. Frank -- that he discriminated against 10 women other than plaintiff or retaliated against women 11 other than plaintiff? 12 A Not that I know of. 13 Q Okay. And you have said that Ms. Frank 14 indicated to you that she felt he had retaliated 15 against her by putting her on the performance plan? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Is there anything else you can add to what 18 you've already testified today about what she told you 19 about that? 20 A Other than the male employee that Lieutenant 21 Schiager gave some of her duties to. 22 Q Okay. And who is that male employee? 23 A I don't recall his name. 24 Q All right. There was an employee, could it 25 be Eric Martin? BRIDGET WIDERMAN 1011612019 33 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-22 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT V EXHIBIT V Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-22 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4 Meadors Court Reporting IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN LORI FRANK Plainitff, vs. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, a municipality; and JEROME SCHIAGER Former Deputy Chief of Police, in his individual capacity; DEPOSITION OF MICHELLE RIZO October 16, 2019 Pursuant to Notice and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the deposition of MICHELLE RIZO, taken by Plaintiffs, was held at 300 Laporte Avenue, Garden Level, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521, on Wednesday, October 16, 2019, at 1:30 p.m., before Jason T. Meadors, RPR, CRR, CRC, and Notary Public for the State of Colorado. MICHELLE RIZO 10/1612019 1 Case 1:18-cv-03204-R13J-NRN Document 77-22 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4 Meadors Court Reporting 1 David DeMuro. I represent Jerry Schiager. 2 I want to start --- near the end of your 3 testimony, I think you said regarding Mr. Schiager, I 4 did not have too much experience with him. Is that 5 right? 6 A Correct. 7 Q In my experience, I had -- the experience you 8 did have with him, you had no negative experiences with 9 him? 10 A Correct. 11 Q My contact was pretty limited, I think you 12 also said. 13 A Yes. Like, he was, like, higher-up 14 supervisor, and he was pleasant to me. 15 Q All right. So he never discriminated against 16 you, to your knowledge? 17 A Not to my knowledge, no. 18 Q Or retaliated against you in any way? 19 A Not to my knowledge. I mean, unless it 20 trickled down the chain of command that I did have an 21 issue with, no. But not directly, no. 22 Q You didn't have personal knowledge? 23 A No, sir. 24 Q The next part of my questions -- for the 25 purpose of the next part of my questions, I'm going to MICHELLE RIZO 1011612019 97 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-22 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4 Meadors Court Reporting 1 A Oh, yeah. I understand allegations. That's 2 how all criminal charges work too. 3 Q Bear with me a second. I'm just looking back 4 through my notes to see if there's anything else. 5 So is it fair to say that you don't have any 6 personal knowledge that Mr. Schiager discriminated 7 against any female employee? 8 A Yeah. Other than hearsay, I guess. 9 Q Okay. And also, no personal knowledge that 10 he retaliated against any female employee. 11 A Correct. 12 MR. DeMURO: I think that concludes my 13 questions and also concludes the confidential --- this 14 portion of the deposition to be designated as 15 confidential. Thank you. 16 EXAMINATION 17 BY MS. ROBINSON: 18 Q I just have a couple of questions and I'll go 19 really fast. 20 I want to get some time frames correct. I 21 want to show you what's previously been marked as 22 Exhibit 35, and this is an email from John Hutto on 23 August 4th, 2016, Employee Concerns. And it looks like 24 it went out to everybody, FCPD users. 25 Is this what you were talking about that kind MICHELLE RIZO 1011612019 104 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-23 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT W EXHIBIT W Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-23 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3 COL•ORADO DIVISION DEC 13 2017 OF CIVIL RIGHTS CHARGE OF DISCRIMINATION EEOC Charge No. The Privacy Act of 1974 affects this form. 31:h" 2018 - 6 41 y See Privacy Act Statement before completing this form. CCRD Charge No. FE2018763067 COLORADO CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION AND EEOC Name (Charging Party) (Area Code) Telephone Lori Frank (970) 229-1380 Street Address City, State# and Zip Code County 4204 Wellington Drive Fort Collins, CO $0526 Latimer The Employer, labor Organization, Employment Agency, Apprenticeship Committee, State or Local Government Agency who discriminated against me is: Name (Respondent) Number of Employees (Area Code) Telephone City of Fort Collins Police Services 15+ (970 221-6540 Street Address City, State, and Zip Code County 2221 S. Timberline Road Fort Collins CO 80301 Latimer Discrimination Based on: Date Most Recent Discrimination occurred Sex (Female ; Retaliation 8 1j2017 I. Jurisdiction: Each named Respondent is subject to the Jurisdiction of the Colorado Civil Rights Division and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and is covered by the provisions of the Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.1973, § 24-34-301 at seq.) as re-enacted, the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA) (29 U.S.C. 1206 et seq.), and Title VII of rite Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. J 200e et seq.). Ili. Personal Harm: OA or about July 27, 2017, prior thereto and continuing, I was subjected to discriminatory terms and condldous of employment based on my sex (female) and/or in retaliation for engaging In protected activity. On or about August 1. 2017, prior thereto and continuing, I was mot paid fairly based on my sex (fermate) and/or in retaliation for engaging in protected activity. M. Respoodent's Position: Ualmown. IV. Discrimination Statement., I believe 1 was unlawfully discriminated against because of; my sex and/or in retaliation for engaging in protested activity in violation of the Colorado Anti-Discrimivation Act (CADA), the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), and Title Vli of the Civil Bights Act of 1964. 1)1 bepu my employment with the Respondent as a Crime Analyst on or about June 1.1999, and at all times performed satisfactorily. 2) Beginning in or about 2011 and ongoing, former Assistant Chief of Police Jerry Sehiager ("Schrager") (male) repeatedly discriminated against me based on my sex. I repeatedly complained about Schiager but my complaints were mover taken seriously. Most recently. on or about July 27, 2017, interim Chief Terry Jones (motto) found my allegations against Schrager were "bnfoundeV 3) On or about November 16, 2016, and continuing through July 27, 2017. I was placed on a performance Improvement Plan (PIP) by Schrager. Financial Analyst U ErikMartin {"Marten') (male) had more severe performance issues than me but he was never placed on a PIP and was allowed to supervise me and evaluate my performance. I was kept on a PEP for longer than the standard 90 days and my PIP was cover removed from my file after it should have been. 4) Beginning on or about Tune 6, 2016, and as recently as August 1, 2017.1 have not beta paid fairly based on my sex. Martin was hired as a Financial Analyst 1% which is a position substantially equivalent to mine, but he to paid more than me. When I asked for my position to be reclassified, which would raise my salary, my requests were repeatedly denied. The Respondent arbitrarily enacted a yearly raise for me beginning on August 1, 2017, instead of retroactively applying it from January 1, 2017, when it became effective for everyone else. 5)1 believe I was discriminated against because of my protected class andror in retaliation for engaging in protected activity. V. WHEREFORE: The Charging Part} prays that the Colorado Civil Rights Division grant such relief as may exist within the Division's power and which the Division may deem necessary and proper. Fort Collins -Jones 0000" Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-23 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3 I vaunt this charge filed with both the Equal Employment Opportunity Conu nission and the State or local agency, if any. 1 will advise the agency If change my address or tolephone number, and I will cooperate fully whir them in the Erocessial of m char a itt accordauca with their rocedums. 1 declare under penalty ofpedury that the foregoing is true and correct. l Date Z -1 " I eh 'a P /Comp lainant Si ature COL•ORADO DIVISION DEC 13 2017 OF CIVIL RIGHTS Fort Coll ins-Jones.000045 Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-24 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT X EXHIBIT X Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN Document 77-24 Filed 01/30/20 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 18-cv-03204-RBJ-NRN LORI FRANK, Plaintiff, V. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, a municipality, and JEROME SCHIAGER, former Deputy Chief of Police, in his individual capacity, Defendants. DECLARATION OF DAVID R. DeMURO I, David R. DeMuro, attorney for defendant Jerome Schiager, state that the documents and depositions, or excerpts thereof, attached to Mr. Schiager's January 30, 2020, motion for summary judgment, are true and authentic copies of materials produced by the parties in disclosure and discovery in this case. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 30, 2020. David R. DeMuro