Q: Okay. And 26-9, what is that? A: I think this was--let me read this a minute. (Witness reviews document.) A: I think this was--after the Personnel Committee met, I think these were the allegations that the Personnel Committee felt the Executive Committee should look at and determine whether the Executive Committee was going to put her on immediate administrative leave ... And so I drafted the memo to the Executive Committee, which would have been 26-3 and 4. Maybe these--maybe 26-5, 6 and 7 were attached. Maybe not. I don't know. And then after the Executive Committee met, the Executive Committee was inclined to ask that Laura be put on administrative leave, but we felt that had to be done at a full board meeting and after she had a chance to respond to the questions. ... And then after the Executive Committee met, the Executive Committee was inclined to ask that Laura be put on administrative leave, but we felt that had to be done at a full board meeting and after she had a chance to respond to the questions. ... This 26-9 may have been a document that I drafted for the purpose of the Executive Committee just based on the recommendation of the Personnel Committee that we put--I know the proposal to them was we put her on immediate administrative leave for these reasons. ... Q: Let me look back at 26-3. This is a memorandum from the Personnel Committee which consisted of you, Erin Furr and Julie Tenney-- A: Uh-huh (affirmative). Q: --is that right? A: Uh-huh (affirmative). Q: And in this memorandum, the three of you write that you, "UNANIMOUSLY," in capital letters, "feel that what has happened and the way it has happened has seriously damaged APS. It has put our animals and wildlife at risk. It has seriously undermined the confidence in our organization that the public had of us. It has disturbed several board members. It has destroyed all morale and confidence that our employees have in us, and we need to take remedial action," capital letters, "IMMEDIATELY"; is that right? A: That's what it says. Q: And is that what you felt at the time that your committee drafted this memorandum? A: Obviously. It says, "UNANIMOUSLY," and I was one. Q: And the date of this memorandum is July 25, 2002? A: That's correct. Q: All right. Now, at that time, were Judith Reitman or Elliot Cramer involved at all in any manner with APS? A: Not that I recall. ... A: The statement says--it says, "The Personnel Committee met last night, July 24th, to deal with all of the complaints, letters, phone calls and articles in the press about Bobby Schopler being fired." That's what the press reported it as. I wasn't characterizing that he was being fired or he was--or he resigned. It made no difference to me. Q: All right. A: He was told to sign it by 5 o'clock, and if he didn't, he was gone. He was gone. Q: All right. Now, the Personnel Committee unanimously recommended that Laura Walters be put on administrative leave-- A: That's right. Q: --is that right? A: I believe that's what we did. Q: Okay. And-- A: Let me read this and-- (Witness reviews document.) A: Yes, it says, "We recommend that she be put on administrative leave pending further fact finding." Q: Okay. And then recommendation number 2 was, "Eliminate Associate Director position and offer Darra the open bookkeeping position"; is that right? A: Yes. ... The recommendation was not that that be done provisionally, but that the Associate Director position be eliminated and Darra be offered the open bookkeeping position. So was it the recommendation of the Personnel Committee, the three of you, that Darra be removed as Associate Director and offered the bookkeeping position? A: I don't know how to answer that. It speaks for itself. It says, "eliminate the Associate Director's position and offer Darra the bookkeeping position." ... Q: All right. So did the Personnel Committee think that Darra was not qualified to perform the Associate Director position when it wrote the memorandum dated July 25, 2002? A: I think we thought there were problems with her in that position, yes. Q: Okay. And was anything--when Laura was kept on as Director, did the Personnel Committee take any action with regard to the Associate Director position or Darra having that position? A: We talked to Laura about what kinds of things Darra would do in that position. ... Q: All right. But Laura was having trouble dealing with staff also, and the Personnel Committee was recognizing problems with Laura's dictatorial manner of dealing with staff; isn't that right? A: It was Laura's mannerisms. The staff liked Laura. From my conversations with the staff, they enjoyed working for her. ________________________________________________________________ Q: And did the Personnel Committee determine that Associate Director Darra Das cannot independently perform the duties as required? A: I don't know that we specifically made that finding. We--you have our recommendation. Our recommendation is to put her back as bookkeeping. Q: Okay. And does that reflect the determination that she was unqualified for the position of Associate Director by the Personnel Committee? A: No, it reflects our collective judgment that she wasn't good at some tasks that an Associate Director in our opinion should have, if we were going to have an Associate Director, and she was better served to be in the bookkeeping. ... Q: All right. Four, F, "She cannot control her outbursts (i.e., yelling at a board member and telling the board member that the board just ignores her)." Was that you or another board member? A: No, no. That was me. Q: That was you. "Also, the problem with Pamela when she put her on an appeal." What was that? A: I vaguely remember something about she and Pamela getting into a screaming match in front of somebody, and I didn't think that was appropriate. Q: And Pamela is? A: Pamela Bayne. Q: Okay. Another board member? A: Yes. ... Q: Okay. Four, G, "Instructing Darra not to pay Linda Smaltz. Not to pay Linda for her one day of work unpaid to date and accuse her of stealing and erasing files in order to avoid paying her. She wants her money." I believe you told us there was--it was a matter of two hours of work rather than a full day; is that right? A: It was two days--it was two hours. Q: Two hours. And what is the reference to "accuse her of stealing and erasing files in order to avoid paying her"? A: That apparently is what Linda's complaint to me was, and I remember talking to both Laura and Darra about it. And they said, "No," and I--that's when I just said, "For God's sakes, just give her her two hours and stop. I can't be dealing with this anymore." Q: All right. Did you have any concern about Linda Smaltz saying that Laura had accused her of stealing and erasing files? A: No. Q: And why is that? A: Because everybody I talked to about Linda said that she was angry and off balance and not to be--not to listen to what she said. Q: Did you ask Laura whether she accused Linda of stealing and erasing files? A: I might have. I don't remember. Q: Okay. You don't remember what she said, then? A: I do not. Q: Okay. And who told you that Linda Smaltz was angry and off balance? A: Some of the employees that were working at the front desk. Q: Do you remember who any of them were? A: I don't remember their names. Q: So you talked to employees about this incident with Linda Smaltz? A: I came in one day to talk to Darra about it, and I asked somebody about Linda. And that's what they told me. ... Q: Okay. And then you've written in all caps at--near the bottom of the page, "BOTTOM LINE. LAURA HAS PUT APS, OUR FUND-RAISING EFFORTS, OUR REPUTATION, OUR PUBLIC PERCEPTION, OUR ANIMALS AND POTENTIALLY OUR LEGAL STATUS AND CONTRACTS WITH COUNTY AT RISK. IS SHE A LIABILITY WE CAN'T AFFORD?" Is that right? A: Yep. Q: Is that what you believed at the time? A: That's what the question was to present at--be presented to the Executive Committee. That's correct. Q: Okay. The statement before the question beginning, "BOTTOM LINE," that sounds--is that what you believed at the time? A: Until I got some of the answers from Laura, yeah, probably. Q: Okay. And what answers from Laura satisfied you that Laura had not put "APS, our fund- raising efforts, our reputation, our public perception, our animals and potentially our legal status and contracts with the county at risk"? A: Some of her answers to the questions. What was it? Q: Yeah. What answers satisfied you that she had not put APS at risk? A: That it was Pat (Beyle) that directed her to give such a short leash to Bobby in signing the contract or not signing the contract, that she had indeed talked to--thought about it and figured out what she was going to do with the federal license and--or at least she had a plan on what she was going to do with the federal license for the drugs and for the birds, that she had indeed thought about unemployment, that she had consulted with Ron Merritt, some of her answers about some of the other allegations. I don't remember exactly what they were. Q: Did you believe that the situation with Bobby Schopler at that time had put "APS, our fund- raising efforts, our reputation, our public perception, our animals and potentially our legal status and contract with county at risk"? A: I didn't know. CLICK ON 'BACK' TO RETURN