CCSO Employees deal second blow to Sheriff Beseler

Very simplistic wondering here.  If Sherrif Beseler is so bad then why are we just now hearing about it?  I'm undecided how I feel about everybody at the moment but I am curious.  Why has there been nothing said before now, the blogs have existed for nearly a year and it's just been recently this has begun.

To me a bad Sheriff is a bad Sheriff even if it's not close to election time.  Or have I missed something?

Very good question.  It appears the problems have existed almost since he took office.  I spoke with some of the members of the Sheriff's Office to see what the problems are and why it is "so bad".  I was provided a copy of a letter where candidate Rick Beseler made several unkept promises, including...

1) No one will be fired.  (Ask Director Danny Thomas and others if that promise was kept.  Danny is now the Director at the Baker County Sheriff's Office after privately making a derrogatory comment about Rick Beseker's lack of leadership that was overheard by one of Rick's friends that was brought from the State Attorney's Office.)

2) I will do everything possible to provide competitive salaries and benefit packages to attreatct and retain the best employees, including a step plan.  (Ask some of the 235 members that have quit, taken early retirement or been fired by Rick how training someone that made more money than the senior person felt.)

3) No one has been promised a job, there are plenty of fine officers on the current staff to select from.  (Ask some of the candidates that withdrew from the previous election, or the 7 friends brought over from the State Attorney's Office about this one.)  In any event, the promotions did not come from within.  Experienced Deputies and Supervisors have been overlooked for promotion as Sheriff Beseler gave command jobs to his friends with less experience. 

4) Sheriff Beseler told members of the Sheriff's Office that he was pro-Fraternal Order of Police and understood their issues stating "I have walked a mile in your shoes and understand your concerns and problems.  I will be the type of boss that I would have wanted to work for when riding a beat."

5) Finally, he pledged to Deputies to "be a leader with which you will be proud to serve, whose management style is to create an atmosphere where employees cna grow and prosper and not be subjected to fear and intimidation."  (He simply did the exact opposite.)

According to Deputies, the lack of experience by Sheriff Rick Beseler and his command staff has allowed babies to be taken to drug deals, under cover identities of police officers to be compromised for media glory, investigations of potentially bad police officers to be compromised, major investigations of heinous crimes to be mishandled and civil rights violated so that criminals will never be prosecuted.

Why has the public never heard of these things?  Deputies told me that if they come forward, they will be fired.  This is why deputies have sought the union for protection so that they will not lose their jobs as they finally have a chance to do something about these problems and educate the public. 

I received a telephone call from someone that provided me some additional information regarding the status of the Corrections Deputies.  It seems a Correctional Deputy was recently suspended from work with pay for 6 weeks pending an investigation.  This poor Deputy and his family were faced with passing the Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's season without knowing if he would have a job to come back to.  In the end, he basically received a written notice or warning of some type for not being nice. 

If he did something terribly wrong, why did it take 6 weeks to investigate?  If it wasn't so terrible, why did it take 6 weeks to investigate?  And, why after an investigation conducted by the Sheriff (I must assume he is the only one that can authorize a suspension wtih pay for 6 weeks) did the young man only receive a written warning for not being nice?  There is definitely something wrong here. 

If the young man was so bad, maybe he should have been fired. But the investigation should have developed substantial proof of misdeeds.  How can a boss put a loyal employee and their family through 6 weeks of the unknown?  That is pretty bad.

I can't imagine waiting for such a decision and all the stress it would create. However, the sheriff may not completely to blame. I work for a large beaurocracy and our human resources procedures are onerous and often nonsensical. Paperwork must be filed, deadlines for responses allowed, etc, etc. Oftentimes, once a procdure is begun, the wheels move slowly, and it can't be abandoned, or that looks just as bad.

Look at the sop's and union contract type regs for such disciplinary action and see if the rules about the process may also have something to do with why it took so long. If they don't, well, that could be very telling as well. I'd be interested in the answers.

NCLB: No Chocolate Left Behind

I have heard something about this also.

The reason this situation took so long was not due to policy, procedure, or union contract (this is a supervisor and they have NO union – although they may need one is the facts ever come out.) The reason this took so long was because the Sheriff and the Command staff of the jail WANTED a certain conclusion i.e., sustain the complaint so the trouble making supervisor could be fired.

The internal was originally given to a corrections investigator who has no training in such matters, but does hate the target. She also follows orders from her boss who also wanted the guy fired. This is a very long ordeal and I may give more details if needed but suffice it to say that after two days of the real internal investigators involvement ( 6-7) days total it was obvious that there was nothing to investigate once the veneer was removed.

Had the supervisor not hired an atty. (his expense) and made the Sheriff play by the STATUTES, he would have been fired.

The whole tale is documented in a 15 page internal.

He was disciplined for supposedly “making a farting noise” (I am not kidding), while in the booking room of the JAIL. I am sure people have heard worse, and I am not sure it ever occurred but, that is the environment these people (employees) face every day.

Get a copy of the internal. You will be amazed.

adios, you said "the Sheriff and the Command staff of the jail WANTED a certain conclusion i.e., sustain the complaint so the trouble making supervisor could be fired." (my emphasis)

Am I to understand that this supervisor is perceived by the sheriff and others to be a "troublemaker" outside of his regular duties, which farting noise notwithstanding[insert eyeroll here], is otherwise without complaint? Or are you saying that he's just generally disliked by the admin and they're creating reasons to fire him? And that it took the lawyer 6 weeks to get him off the hook after the initial investigation?

Obviously either case does not speak to a very positive work environment, but I want to understand what you guys are talking about. The sheriff's race always seems to attract several candidates and lots of rancor; my head swims just thinking about it.

Generally, I'd say that illustrations like the above (from all sides and candidates) are very helpful. Without them, such complaints and allegations of general discontent can be perceived by the public or dismissed by opponents as sour grapes from cranky employees. I don't think that's what you're trying to achieve.

I'd like to encourage equally specific positive suggestions as well. We need to know what can be done to make the agency better.

Thanks for the specifics.

NCLB: No Chocolate Left Behind

What I am saying is that this administration does not like the individual. Now, I will concede that maturity may have been an issue when he was first hired 10 (ten) years ago and he may have ruffled some feathers now and again BUT to target someone for discipline PRIOR to investigation violates the law.

They violated his rights when this investigation began and continued to do until he hired counsel. What if he had just thrown in the towel and not fought?

They began the investigation claiming he acted deliberately indifferent toward an inmate. Now that type of language strikes fear into any sane Sheriff and it did this one. If someone would have stopped and evaluated the complaint and not jumped to hang someone anyone would have seen this for what it is. NOTHING.

It only took the real internal investigator two days and a couple of appropriately conducted interviews to conclude that this was nothing. But remember there was an agenda (fire him) so they went to extremes to make something out of nothing.

He received written discipline and was made to attend counseling for what his reported action MAY have caused.

Not what it did cause but for what it could have caused. Maybe they can give us some lottery numbers seeing as they can so clearly predict the future.

There is another supervisor who is still on suspension, he is another victim of not being in line with the administration... so he gets what the other got and is still getting it.