MEMORANDUM To: Merrett Stierheim, City Manager Cc: Jorleen

MEMORANDUM
To:
Merrett Stierheim, City Manager
Cc:
Jorleen Aguiles, Human Resources Director
From: Barbara Herrera, City Clerk
Date: December 17, 2012
Re:
Response to Letter from Christina Munoz Dated December 17, 2012
Dear Mr. Stierheim,
I am writing to you to address the accusations / allegations made by Ms. Christina
Munoz, Advisory Board Coordinator, against me in my capacity as her supervisor and
as the City Clerk. Needless to say, I was dismayed and troubled by the statements
made by Ms. Munoz in her letter dated December 17, 2012 as these statements are 1)
blatantly false; 2) a complete misrepresentation of the truth; 3) filled with
misperceptions; and 4) alarmingly malicious.
Moreover, I found the statements made in the letter to be disingenuous on the part of
Ms. Munoz as she had never shared with me the concerns that she expressed in the
letter. In addition, she never brought her concerns to the Human Resources
Department to attempt to address and resolve whatever problem she perceived she
was having. In a professional environment, it is expected that Staff and Supervisors
discuss and air differences for the purposes of promoting harmony in the workplace.
Ms. Munoz never made the causes of her anger and resentment known to me thereby
not allowing me an opportunity to address them.
In order to best respond to Ms. Munoz’ statements, I have numbered the paragraphs
and pages presented in the letter she submitted (Exhibit A) and will proceed to respond
to them in the order in which they appear:
1. Paragraphs 1 – 3, pp. 1 and 2
On December 14, 2012, in the presence of Ms. Rita Garcia from Human
Resources, Ms. Munoz was issued a written reprimand for insubordination,
defiance to my authority, and the display of a disrespectful and overall toxic
attitude that hindered the work of my Department. The details of the reprimand
Page 1 of 14 are stated in the Employee Disciplinary Action form that was submitted to the
City Manager (Exhibit B) and signed by me and Ms. Munoz.
2. Paragraph 4, p. 2
Regarding a meeting that I held with Assistant City Attorney Joe Jimenez, Ms.
Connie Diaz, and members of the IT Department to discuss a complex public
records request, Ms. Munoz stated as follows: “[I] found it in poor taste for
Barbara to have called a meeting on such date about a topic which relates to my
duties in the City Clerk’s Office and yet not include me.” As the City Clerk and
Director of the City Clerk’s Office, it is my prerogative to hold a meeting with the
individuals that I deem important in order to address any issue that may be
presented.
The participants present at the meeting discussed the subject matter, and the
task that resulted from the meeting was completed in a timely manner. Ms.
Munoz’ presence was not required at the meeting and it was not necessary for
me to explain my decision to her. Instead of her understanding that this was an
executive decision on my part, she chose to take offense but, yet, remain silent.
Ms. Munoz never addressed her concerns with me regarding this matter.
If Ms. Munoz is not included in the decision-making process of my Department, it
is because she is not the decision-maker in the Department. Most staff members
in non-supervisory positions understand their role. Clearly, Ms. Munoz does not.
In addition, she expressed embarrassment when she was asked a question by
“Council, Directors, or City Employees, and not have any idea of what they are
relating to.” In instances such as these, it is expected that the employee would
have the presence of mind to refer the question to the Director or to her
Supervisor. Based on her statements, Ms. Munoz does not seem to understand
this very basic expectation of her in her capacity as a staff member in the City
Clerk’s Office.
3. Paragraph 5, Subsection 5 A, 5 B, p. 2
I addressed Ms. Munoz during the discussion relating to the written-reprimand of
December 14, 2012 and told her that her attitude for the last few months had
been overtly negative and that she appeared to be highly sensitive to
constructive criticism. I told her that her demeanor was creating a toxic
environment in the City Clerk’s Office which hindered our ability to operate
effectively.
Ms. Munoz stated that “this was the first time that [I] had expressed these
unwarranted feelings to [her].” This is untrue. Throughout the course of her
tenure in the City Clerk’s Office, Ms. Munoz and I have had several verbal
conversations whereby I expressed the concerns stated above.
Page 2 of 14 Moreover, Ms. Munoz’ negative attitude and demeanor had proven to be a
problem with another Staff member, Ms. Christina Cubela, Receptionist. Ms.
Cubela found it necessary to complain, in writing, to her superiors about Ms.
Munoz’ attitude and demeanor (Exhibit C): “[Ms. Munoz] expresses unwanted
attitude and I will not tolerate being disrespected. There are circumstances
where her actions speak louder.
For example, a simple passing of
documentation is expressed with anger…I don’t think is [sic] just with me only,
sometimes I see that she treats a lot of our coworkers with disrespect and
anger.”
I did express to Ms. Munoz that the quality of her work product was good and
that I felt that she was talented and had much to offer. I reminded her that I reenforced this belief by promoting her to Advisory Board Coordinator. However,
part of being a good worker is also being a good team member, something which
she had not demonstrated. I encouraged her to change her demeanor by being
more open to constructive criticism and to discuss her concerns instead of letting
them fester without being addressed. The written reprimand gave her the
opportunity to learn from her mistakes and move on in the professional manner
that was expected of her.
4. Paragraph 5, Subsection 5 C, p. 2
I understood from Human Resources that an employee is required to sign the
written reprimand acknowledging receipt of said reprimand and that it was not
allowed to remove it from the meeting site. Any comments that were to be added
needed to be done at the time of the written reprimand.
Ms. Munoz was asked several times if she wanted to make any comments to
which she responded “no.” She was further asked if she wanted to discuss any
issues that she may have with me. Although she stated that she did have some
concerns, she would not specify what they were. I told her that that was the time
to discuss our differences and that she should speak her mind. Ms. Munoz was
given the opportunity to discuss her issues in the presence of a Human
Resources representative but she refused to do so.
5. Paragraph 5, Subsection 5 D, p. 2
Pursuant to the City Charter, Ms. Munoz is an employee of the City Manager. As
such, I notified Merret Stierheim about my intention to issue a written reprimand.
In the form, I clearly noted that correction of the situation was to be immediate
and that failure to do so would result in termination.
Page 3 of 14 6. Paragraph 6, p. 3
Ms. Munoz complains that she had been treated poorly and “shunned” from
meetings and trainings which hinder her ability to carry-out her duties. This claim
is untrue.
Ms. Munoz and I routinely (at least three or four times a week) meet to discuss,
public records requests, contracts and agreements, Advisory Boards, recordings
of Special Magistrate orders, etc., all subjects that are within the scope of her job
duties and responsibilities. In addition, I recently sent Ms. Munoz on a two (2)day training on Records Management so that she may broaden the scope of her
duties as well as her understanding of the responsibilities of the City Clerk’s
Office. The purposeful omission of these facts reflects the disingenuous nature
of her statements.
7. Paragraph 7, p. 3
Ms. Munoz makes the most serious allegation of all by stating that I have
discriminated against her due to her sexual orientation. This is unequivocally
untrue. At no time have I ever made any derogatory comments to Ms. Munoz
nor have I discriminated against her in any way.
On the contrary, when Ms. Munoz was first hired (about a few weeks after she
started), she came to me to tell me that she wanted to make sure that I knew that
she was gay. I thanked her for her candor and assured her that her sexual
orientation and the overall private lives of my Staff were none of my business. If
Staff members decide to share with me something about their private lives that is
the prerogative of the Staff member. I told her that I understood that private lives
are difficult to discuss especially with a new boss so I, again, reassured her that
her sexual orientation had no bearing on how I viewed her as a worker.
I have made it clear on different occasions to Ms. Munoz (as it will be detailed
later) that I have not only been supportive of her as a Staff member who has
chosen to revel her sexual orientation, but have also worked to ensure that her
sensitivities to her sexual orientation are respected. Based on the comments
that I read in her letter, it is apparent to me that the “discriminatory comments”
that she has perceived result from a highly sensitive individual who has chosen
to believe and amplify imaginary injustices without addressing the issues or
correctly stating the facts.
8. Paragraph 8, p. 3.
Ms. Munoz alleges that I told her to not make then Councilman Boria “feel
uncomfortable” because she was gay. What she purposefully and maliciously
decided to do was “twist” the truth about the conversation she and I had. In fact,
Page 4 of 14 it was she who came to me upon being hired and inquired about whether then
Councilman Boria would accept her as gay being that he was a religious man.
I told Ms. Munoz that the Councilman was indeed known to be a religious man
but, during the last year of my working with him (this conversation took place
around September 2011), he had not proven to be cruel or unkind, or had ever
demonstrated intolerance toward others. The true context of my statement to
Ms. Munoz was as follows: “You do not need to feel uncomfortable about your
orientation in this workplace. You are not expected in any way to discuss your
private life with the Councilmembers. But, if you choose to reveal to Councilman
Boria that you are gay, that it your business and yours alone.”
I clearly remember Ms. Munoz to be relieved when she heard me say these
words being that she appeared to be greatly concerned as to how the
Councilman would react. To date, I do not know if Ms. Munoz chose to have said
conversation with Luigi Boria when he was a Councilmember or now, as Mayor
of the City.
In September 2012, I attended the wedding of Ms. Munoz to her partner, Julie. I
received the invitation during the summer of 2012 and was asked by her to
confirm if I would be attending. I was truly excited to go and share in her joy
during the event. It was a lovely wedding which was spoken about with much
praise amongst me and the other employees who attended namely: Assistant to
the City Clerk, Connie Diaz; Assistant to the Code Compliance Director, Vilmar
Villafane; Assistant to the (then) Mayor, Susie Castillo; and Receptionist,
Christina Cubela.
If she felt so vehemently against me and my treatment of her because she is gay,
why did she invite me to her wedding? Why did she show an interest in my
attendance at her wedding by asking for a confirmation if she felt I was
unsupportive?
In fact, I authorized her week vacation to go on honeymoon even though it was
during the budgetary season and told her that I wished her well. She thanked me
for letting her take this vacation during the difficult budget time. Furthermore, I
remember having a conversation with Ms. Munoz, in the presence of Connie
Diaz, when she came back from her honeymoon whereby she excitedly shared
the stories of her trip. I also told her that she and Julie looked beautiful during
the wedding and the attention to detail at the reception would have made anyone
envious. She seemed very pleased.
However, Ms. Munoz stated that I “subtly” asked that she not display any
photographs of her female partner on her desk. This is completely untrue. I
never hinted, stated or implied anything of the sort. I have never dictated to her
or any of my Staff members which pictures they can have on their desks. In fact,
Page 5 of 14 Ms. Munoz currently has a picture of her and her partner on her desk and I have
never asked her to take it down. Never.
Moreover, Ms. Munoz once invited her partner, Julie, to come to City Hall
whereby she proceeded to introduce her to me and to other Staff members while
showing her around the office. I greeted Julie in my office and told her that it was
a pleasure to meet her. I later commented to Ms. Munoz that I was glad that I
had the chance to meet Julie and Ms. Munoz expressed the same sentiment. I
have been consistently supportive of Ms. Munoz and she has never expressed
any concerns to the contrary to me at any time.
Another example of my support of her sensitivities to her sexual orientation in the
workplace occurred when Ms. Munoz came to my office in tears asking to be
removed as the liaison from the Faith Based Advisory Board. She told me that
she felt that the religious and personal beliefs of the board members made them
opposed to homosexuality making her feel “terrible” having to sit in on their
meeting being that she is gay.
Because she felt that way, I told her not to worry and that I would not expect her
to serve in a capacity that made her uncomfortable. I told her that she was
immediately removed her from her duties as liaison to the board and I proceeded
to notify then City Manager Yvonne Soler-McKinley of my decision. I assigned
Connie Diaz, Assistant to the City Clerk, to serve as the liaison to the board.
Her relief at my immediate action was palpable. She even proceeded to hug me
in gratitude and relief! I reassured her that it is always my intention to make sure
that my Staff members are comfortable and welcome in our workplace. Again,
she smiled, thanked me, and went on with her work.
I am absolutely flabbergasted, and admittedly saddened, by Ms. Munoz’
accusations and allegations of discrimination and derogatory remarks regarding
her sexual orientation. The statements made in her letter omit facts and
manipulate the truth in a manner that demonstrates a lack of character, integrity,
and gratitude for the support that has been shown to her.
9. Paragraphs 9, 10, 11, 12, pp. 3 and 4
Ms. Munoz describes in these paragraphs an incident that she claimed resulted
from a computer error and the involvement of an IT employee, Mr. Carlos
Guerra, who she stated was present to correct said error. My recollection is as
follows: I had observed Ms. Munoz on previous occasions to be socializing with
other staff members in her general work area. Inviting people to socialize for
prolonged periods of time was considered by me to be unprofessional. As such,
I told her that I preferred that she not socialize for prolonged periods of time with
other staff members in her work area. I did not yell or raise my voice to Ms.
Munoz. I simply stated my expectations.
Page 6 of 14 In addition, the computer issues that she detailed mask the fact that she failed to
complete in a timely manner the task which I had assigned her even though she
had access to another PC. She simply was not getting the job done. I
proceeded to explain to her the other ways in which she could finish her task. I
pointed out that she had lacked initiative and resourcefulness in getting her task
done and that in the future, she needed to demonstrate these qualities when
faced with an unexpected setback.
Ms. Munoz stated that my asking Ms. Diaz while on speakerphone as to the
status of her task made her feel “humiliated” in front of her colleagues. It was a
question that I posed to Ms. Diaz because I was speaking to her about another
matter and simply decided to ask her about the progress being made.
As her Director, it is my prerogative to pose whatever questions I feel necessary
to the Staff member of my choice. It is also my prerogative, as the Director of my
Department, to point out Ms. Munoz’ failures and areas of improvement. This is
a reasonable expectation of any Director. If Ms. Munoz chooses to take personal
offense when she is questioned about a task that is being performed, that is an
issue with which she must deal in order to effectively work in a professional
environment.
10. Paragraph 13, p. 4
A few days after the incident detailed in the above section, I learn from former
City Manager Yvonne Soler-McKinley, that Ms. Munoz had met with her to
complain about me and her position in the City Clerk’s Office. I clearly recall that
Ms. Soler-McKinley shared with me that Ms. Munoz had “barged into” her office
without a previously scheduled meeting and without asking the Manager’s
Assistant if the Manager was available. Ms. Soler-McKinley further indicated that
she tried to calm Ms. Munoz down as she was very irate and decided to hear her
out. Ms. Munoz proceeded to complain about her perceived injustices
experienced in the City Clerk’s Office. Ms. Soler-McKinley told Ms. Munoz that
she should have taken her frustrations to me directly as I am her Director.
Lastly, Ms. Soler-McKinley told Ms. Munoz that she needed to “grow up” as her
concerns were taken out of proportion and they could be easily resolved if only
she chose to address them. Ms. Soler-McKinley expressed to me that she was
“shocked at her audacity” in thinking that she can circumvent the existing process
to air her complaints.
Upon learning of Ms. Munoz’ visit with the former City Manager, I met with her to
discuss the concerns she had expressed to Ms. Soler-McKinley. She did
mention that she was shocked that I was bringing this up as she thought her
meeting with Ms. Soler-McKinley was confidential. I told her that Ms. SolerMcKinley was a fellow Charter Official who had extended a professional courtesy
Page 7 of 14 to me by sharing what had happened with my Staff member – a courtesy which
Ms. Munoz did not extend to me. Nonetheless, I wanted to give her the
opportunity to air her concerns.
Ms. Munoz appeared to be absolutely livid that I was confronting her about her
discussion with Ms. Soler-McKinley and proceeded to tell me that she was upset
because she felt I was not supportive of her sensitivities to her sexual orientation.
(Note: This was the only time she made mention of any such sentiment.) At no
time during that conversation did she mention that she felt that I was trying to
make her hide her sexual orientation
I was taken aback by her statement and told her that this matter must be
addressed and resolved.
I suggested that we call Human Resources
immediately so that we can have a witness present in order to ensure that there
is no miscommunication or misunderstanding, and that statements are not
misinterpreted. I distinctly recall her telling me that such a meeting with Human
Resources was not necessary. She was just upset at my having learned the
details of her meeting with the former City Manager. Ms. Munoz did not provide
any specific information about her concerns.
I pointed out examples of the support that I had shown her regarding her
sensitivities to her sexual orientation during past occasions and that I was willing
to hear her out. I further told Ms. Munoz that I wanted to make sure that she
understood that her comfort in our working environment was very important to
me. I asked her about whether she was happy in the City Clerk’s Office and, if
not, if she wanted to try to find another position, she had my full support. Ms.
Munoz stated that she was happy overall and wanted to continue working in the
City Clerk’s Office.
Incidentally, this was the same question that I posed to her during the discussion
over the written reprimand. In the presence of Ms. Rita Garcia, Human
Resources, Ms. Munoz indicated to me that she was happy in the City Clerk’s
Office and wanted to continue working in her current capacity.
At no time during the conversation described in this incident, or at any other time,
did Ms. Munoz indicate to me that she was uncomfortable or intimidated by
Human Resources Director, Ms. Jorleen Aguiles. In her letter, Ms. Munoz stated
that she feels that because Ms. Aguiles and I are “great friends” we would rally
against her. Ms. Munoz has no basis for such a statement. No one has ever
“rallied” against her. In addition, my friendship with Ms. Aguiles has developed
over the years in the workplace. Rarely do we meet outside of the workplace to
socialize.
The “great friendship” observed by Ms. Munoz between myself and Jorleen
Aguiles is the combination of camaraderie, collegiality, and compatible
personalities. However, at no time have I seen Ms. Aguiles to be anything but
Page 8 of 14 professional in her duties and caring toward employees. The question remains if Ms. Munoz was so upset with her perceived mistreatments and was told by the
former City Manager to follow the proper procedures to air her grievances, why
didn’t she request to meet with another member of Human Resources team to
address her issues?
11. Paragraph 14, p. 4
Ms. Munoz makes reference to a conversation she had with our records
management consultant, Steve Lewis, whereby she divulges her sexual
orientation directly to him. Mr. Lewis made mention of this conversation to me in
passing and there were no further comments made. As I didn’t know how the
conversation began, I made it a point to assure Ms. Munoz that I did not discuss
her private life with anyone. She told me that it was “no problem” and that she
and Steve had a “nice conversation.” The additional statements made by Ms.
Munoz in this paragraph are untrue and purposefully misconstrue a simple
conversation that she and I had.
12. Paragraphs 15, 16, and 17, pp. 4 and 5.
The incident described by Ms. Munoz involves a particularly disturbing incident
whereby Ms. Munoz decided to ignore a clear directive given to her and which
also involved a Councilmember. I had asked Ms. Munoz to assist the
Councilmembers if they needed to box their personal belongings in preparation
for the move to the new City Hall location. Councilwoman Ana Maria Rodriguez,
who was in her third trimester of pregnancy and who was working full time, asked
for such help and specified that, she only had one (1) hour to dedicate to this
task. Councilwoman Rodriguez and I coordinated the time of 12 noon to have
Ms. Munoz assist her.
On this same day, the former City Manager was giving a tour of the new City Hall
to employees. Ms. Munoz had expressed that she wanted to go see the new
building. I told her that she can go on the tour provided that she takes her own
vehicle so that she can be back in time to meet Councilwoman Rodriguez at
noon. I re-emphasized to Ms. Munoz that she had to be back by noon as the
Councilwoman’s time is limited. Ms. Munoz claimed that she understood and
that it would not be a problem.
I had stepped out of the office at a little before noon on that day and, at around
12:30 p.m., I received a call from Councilwoman Rodriguez. The Councilwoman
was asking where Ms. Munoz was and that she had been waiting for her for a
while. I immediately called Ms. Munoz and asked her what had happened? Did
she forget to be at City Hall at noon like we discussed? I told her that the
Councilwoman had been waiting for her and the she was to go directly to City
Hall immediately to assist.
Page 9 of 14 Ms. Munoz stated that I began to yell “hysterically” at her over the telephone.
This is an absolute lie as I have several witnesses to my conversation including
Assistant City Manager Mark Taxis; Planning & Zoning Director Nathan Kogon;
and City Attorney Jimmy Morales. These individuals can readily state that
although I was upset, I was calm and respectful of Ms. Munoz at all times.
I met with Ms. Munoz later that after to discuss what had happened. I asked why
she was not in City Hall at noon. She responded that she was in the tour and it
would have been “disrespectful” to the former City Manager to have left the tour
prior to it concluding. I simply could not believe the audacity with which she
responded that she had unilaterally decided to ignore my directive.
I told her that she chose to purposely disregard my direct instructions and that
she should have had the presence of mind to excuse herself from the tour and
comply with her assigned responsibilities. Being that the Councilwoman was the
former City Manager’s superior as well, I informed Ms. Munoz that I am sure that
the former City Manager would not have had a problem with her leaving before
the tour ended.
Moreover, I informed Ms. Munoz that she demonstrated incredible lack of
judgment and disrespect toward me and my Office. As I had hoped that this was
an isolated incident, I gave her the benefit of believing that such poor judgment
was never to be repeated. However, I verbally put her on notice saying that
should she ever display such disrespect to me again, I will give her a written
reprimand with a next step being termination if improvement is not made.
Ms. Munoz states in her letter that had I texted her to remind her to be there for
Councilwoman Rodriguez, all of “this” would have been prevented. This
statement is surprising in its insolence and in Ms. Munoz’ absolute refusal to
accept responsibility for her lack of judgment and professionalism. Morever, this
is another example of Ms. Munoz’ inability to have her failures pointed out by a
superior without becoming extremely agitated and offended. It is important to
note that, with the exception of the weeks surrounding her wedding in September
2012, this was the beginning of the observable deterioration of her demeanor
and her increased negative attitude.
13. Paragraph 18, p. 5
The allegations made in this paragraph are false. I routinely ask both of my Staff
members who they are meeting with when a member of the public makes an
inquiry. It is my responsibility as a Director to know with whom my Staff interacts
and I will continue to exercise my right to ask whenever I deem fit. Ms. Munoz
decided to take offense with my inquiry and my only response is that this is a
personal shortcoming with which she must deal.
Page 10 of 14 14. Paragraph 19, p. 5
The allegations made in this paragraph are false. On the night of the SwearingIn Ceremony for the new Council, I was riding the elevator to the third floor with
several other people and Ms. Munoz. I didn’t know she would be attending the
ceremony and stated: “I didn’t know you were coming tonight, Christy.” It was a
simple comment.
Again, the fact that Ms. Munoz dedicated a paragraph
detailing the offense that she took at that simple comment indicates a
hypersensitivity that is often irrational and illogical.
15. Paragraph 20, p. 6
Ms. Munoz states that I occasionally ask her to do personal favors for me. This
is a false statement. She refers to a request I made of Connie Diaz during her
lunch hour. I asked her if she would be willing to do me a favor and pick up a
shirt for my daughter as it was an urgent matter and I was unable to leave. Ms.
Diaz said “no problem.” Ms. Diaz was with Ms. Munoz at the time who never
indicated that this would be problematic for her. I never demanded or ordered
Ms. Diaz or Ms. Munoz to help me in this manner, I simply asked as I was in a
real bind at the time. They returned in a timely manner, and I heard no mention
of this again until I read Ms. Munoz’ letter.
It is disingenuous of Ms. Munoz to mention this request as she has occasionally
requested that I bring back a McFlurry dessert for her from McDonald’s or a
Starbucks Frappuccino. In addition, Ms. Munoz conveniently forgets that I have
also on a few occasions brought her and Ms. Diaz lunch. I do not consider these
to be personal favors but rather something that I have done with good will and in
the spirit of camaraderie. Based on the statements made by Ms. Munoz, I
believe that Ms. Munoz neither appreciates nor understands the importance of
these qualities.
16. Paragraph 21, p. 6
The statement made by Ms. Munoz related to online shopping is false. I do not
shop online during working hours. I do, however, ask to have some of my
packages delivered to City Hall when I know I will not be home to receive them.
I find her “accusations” of my receiving packages at work to be laughable as her
statements had some seemingly convenient omissions. During the preparation
for her wedding, Ms. Munoz received several packages at City Hall of wedding
favors and decorations. She was very excited to show off her purchases to me
and to Connie Diaz. I never mentioned to her that she couldn’t receive said
packages at work since they were inconsequential.
Page 11 of 14 In addition, I did install privacy screens on my desk just as several other
Directors have done. Lastly I requested to have a table placed in the file room to
have an additional surface to spread out if needed.
Ms. Munoz’ statements in paragraph 21 of her letter indicate her propensity to be
overly-concerned about matters which do not concern her. If Ms. Munoz feels an
overwhelming urge to know what I am doing on my computer and where I choose
to have my lunch, she can simply ask.
17. Paragraph 22, p. 6
Upon leaving for lunch, I let the receptionist know that I am stepping out and that
should she / he need to reach me that they can do so on my cell phone.
Routinely, either Ms. Diaz or Ms. Munoz are in the building when I leave
(depending on their lunch rotation) and I inform the receptionist accordingly. I
have never demanded that Ms. Munoz leave her cellphone number with the
Receptionist as both Ms. Diaz and I are readily available should we need to be
reached. If the Receptionist does have Ms. Munoz’ cellphone, then Ms. Munoz
should kindly inform him / her that she is not to be called at that number. She
has the option to make this request of the Receptionist at any time but, for
reasons that only Ms. Munoz understands, she has chosen not to do so.
18. Paragraph 23 , p. 6
The statements made relating to the incident that Ms. Munoz described as being
reprimanded by me for walking Ms. Sandra Ruiz through the building are
completely false. This incident did not occur.
Regarding the other statement made by Ms. Munoz and my perception of Ms.
Sandra Ruiz, Ms. Munoz asked me about some of the disagreements which she
had heard about between Ms. Ruiz and I when Ms. Ruiz was a Councilmember.
I told Ms. Munoz, that Ms. Ruiz and I did have a few disagreements back in 2008
and 2009 but we managed to work together until her term ended in 2010.
I also indicated to both Ms. Munoz and Ms. Diaz that regardless of the
differences, Ms. Ruiz who was recently re-elected to the City Council, will get
nothing but the same respect and courtesies extended to each of the other
elected officials. As a current member of the City Council, I have emphatically
stated, that now Vice Mayor Ruiz deserves the respect of her title and that as the
City Clerk’s Office, we will do what is necessary to be responsive to the needs of
all the Councilmembers.
I remind my Staff members that they are not to expect to form friendships with
the Councilmembers. I expect them not to socialize with the Councilmembers or
be informal when addressing them. I believe that this is important to maintain a
spirit of respect as well as a separation from the politics of the City Council.
Page 12 of 14 19. Paragraph 24, p.6
With regards to Ms. Munoz’ statements referencing a missed response to a
public records request, I do not recall this incident. However, if an item was
missed by me via e-mail, I will readily acknowledge it and attempt to correct the
problem. Because of the volume of e-mails that I receive, I often ask my Staff
members to give me verbal or hand-written reminders about items that I feel are
important.
Often, I may verbally respond to an e-mail inquiry that was sent to me by either
Ms. Munoz or Ms. Diaz as we are within a few feet of each other in our Office.
My verbal response should suffice in giving Ms. Munoz the direction that she
needs.
At times, I ask my Staff members to “take the lead” in resolving issues and ask
for my assistance when necessary. By her own admission, Ms. Munoz finds it
difficult to proceed in completing tasks and cannot find a way to progress in
finishing simple functions if she does not have clear direction from me. I have
told her on several occasions to try her best to “figure out” a solution to the
problem on her own. This leads back to Ms. Munoz’ demonstrated lack of
resourcefulness and initiative.
20. Paragraph 25, p. 7
In this paragraph, Ms. Munoz complains that I have ceased the twice weekly staff
meetings. It is true that I have ceased this practice as I have found it to be much
more helpful, informative, and productive to conduct one-on-one meetings with
each of my Staff members. This has been a decision I have made exercising my
prerogative as the Department Head. If Ms. Munoz has felt that these one-onone meetings have lead to disorganization, she should have expressed her
concerns to me so that they can be addressed. However, to date, Ms. Munoz
has not mentioned anything regarding said concern outside of the letter that she
wrote.
Page 13 of 14 In summary, Ms. Christina Munoz submitted a letter, in response to a written reprimand
she received, with statements detailing complaints laden with incorrect accounts and
misrepresentations of the truth. The submission of such statements and her willful
refusal to address her concerns with me or Human Resources demonstrate Ms. Munoz’
lack of character, integrity and gratitude for the support that she has so consistently
been given.
Moreover, by not addressing her concerns, Ms. Munoz demonstrated cowardice and
lack of professionalism. This decision on her part allowed her resentments to fester to
the point of developing passive-aggressive behaviors which affected the well-being of
my Department. Ms. Munoz never afforded me the opportunity to address or correct
her concerns. In fact, although I tried to reach out to her on several occasions, she
purposeful chose to stay silent.
Ms. Munoz has further demonstrated a hypersensitivity to constructive criticism
whereby, instead of listening to what is being said, she often chooses to take personal
offense. As Ms. Munoz has chosen to not communicate her concerns, these perceived
offenses, again, result in building resentment and passive-aggressive behavior. This
hypersensitivity has escalated to her misunderstanding and misconstruing the simplest
of comments. Overall, Ms. Munoz’ attitude and demeanor have proven toxic to the
environment of my Office and defiant toward my authority.
Lastly, Ms. Munoz’ decision to circumvent the City Manager and myself by addressing
the members of the Council directly with her contrived grievances is proof of her willful
insubordination and disrespect toward me and the City Manager.
Based on the facts listed in this memorandum, and based on the disturbing and
malicious allegations made by Ms. Munoz, I find it impossible to work with her in any
capacity. By way of this memorandum, I am recommending the termination of Ms.
Christina Munoz effective immediately.
Thank you.
Page 14 of 14