http://www.omaha.com/article/20091202/NEWS01/712029929
By Paul Hammel
WORLD-HERALD BUREAU
A split Foster Care Review Board opted against suspending its longtime director, Carol Stitt, after confusion erupted Tuesday over how many votes were needed to take that step.
The board voted 5-4, with one abstention, to suspend Stitt with pay until a federal investigation concluded whether she should be removed from her job of 26 years for improperly urging her employees and foster families to attend a 2006 political campaign event.
But the vote was rescinded after questions arose about whether five votes constituted a legal majority of the 10 members present, and thus enough to pass such a motion.
Stitt, recently honored by the Nebraska Supreme Court for her work with children, expressed relief after the topsy-turvy meeting. She said she hopes to resolve the long-festering issue before the board meets again.
Advertising
“There’s no question about it, it’s been a distraction,” said Stitt of the allegations. “We all need to get back to work.”
The board voted to seek a legal opinion from the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office on whether five votes are enough to pass a motion when 10 members are present or whether a majority of those present is needed.
Once that opinion is rendered, which will take at least a week, the board will decide whether to meet again to vote on Stitt’s job status, said Georgie Scurfield, the board chairwoman and one of the five who supported a suspension of Stitt.
“There needs to be a board response to what happened. At the moment, we have no response,” Scurfield said after the meeting. “We’re kind of suspended between taking a course of action and not taking one.”
Tuesday’s emergency meeting of the Foster Care Review Board was called after a federal agency filed a complaint last month asking for Stitt’s removal for allegedly violating the Hatch Act, a federal law that prohibits government employees from participating in political activities while at work.
The civil complaint by the U.S. Office of Special Counsel was made to the Merit Systems Protection Board, which could take months to decide the issue.
While the federal board has no authority to remove Stitt, it could withhold about $186,000 in federal funds, or two years’ worth of Stitt’s salary. The foster care review agency gets about 30 percent of its $2 million a year in funding from federal sources.
During Tuesday’s meeting, Stitt admitted violating the Hatch Act by placing postcards advertising a 2006 primary campaign event for then-gubernatorial candidate Tom Osborne on a file cabinet in her Lincoln office.
Stitt repeated that her intent was not to pressure employees to support Osborne or contribute to his campaign but to inform them that he would be speaking about a relevant topic — improving the foster care system in Nebraska.
Stitt and her attorney, Steve Grasz, said they have sent a letter to the federal merit board in hopes of reaching a plea deal.
Grasz said at Tuesday’s meeting that a short, unpaid suspension was the typical reprimand for a federal employee for what he termed a minor violation of the Hatch Act.
Grasz argued that suspending Stitt with pay for several months, until the federal board’s decision is rendered, would be much harsher than warranted.
Stitt has said previously that she had no training on the provisions of the Hatch Act. But at least a couple of board members said that should be no excuse for actions that some employees viewed as pressuring them into supporting Osborne.
Still, all 10 employees of the board’s central office in Lincoln submitted a letter Tuesday expressing their support of Stitt, calling her a “formidable ally for children” who doesn’t always make friends but has been the agency’s leading force.
Among Stitt’s supporters in the audience was Lancaster County Attorney Gary Lacey, who said during a break in the meeting that Stitt was the only official to sound the alarm a few years ago when a rash of children were dying in state care.
During board discussion, even those who supported suspending Stitt praised her as a children’s “advocate extraordinaire.” The board was clearly split over whether the agency’s work would be hampered or helped by suspending her.
Board member Mario Scalora of Lincoln said that the agency was split into “two camps” and that its credibility required that Stitt “be benched” until the investigation is concluded.
Judy Meter, a board member from Gering, led the defense of Stitt, saying the board should wait until the federal agency concludes its deliberations. She said removing Stitt would be detrimental, particularly because the state is implementing a plan to privatize services for the 4,200 children who are state wards.
In the end, Scalora, Scurfield and board members Gene Klein of Omaha, Mary Jo Pankoke of Lincoln and Alfredo Ramirez of Norfolk voted to suspend Stitt with pay. Voting no were Meter, Ron Albin of Norfolk, Sarah Ann Kothian of Omaha and David Schroeder of Lexington.
Lisa Borchardt, a board member from Lincoln, abstained. She declined after the meeting to comment on her reasons.
Dr. Larry Brown of Omaha resigned from the board within the past week — leaving confusion about whether five votes were enough to suspend Stitt.
After two phone calls to the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office during the meeting, Dale Comer, an assistant attorney general, told Scurfield he couldn’t render a legal opinion in “60 seconds” and needed a written request. The board passed a motion to do that.
The board also rescinded its 5-4 vote after Scalora said he didn’t think five votes were enough to take such an action.
Tuesday’s vote marked the second time this year that the board has declined to remove Stitt. In January, the board voted to retain her despite criticism of her management style in a legislative performance audit.
The agency oversees citizen reviews of the care of children in the foster care system, monitors facilities that house children and makes recommendations about the child welfare system.
Scurfield said she hopes some compromise can be worked out between Stitt and the federal agency but that, regardless, the foster care review board’s work will continue.
