Animal control officer appeals firing
BY ANGELA GARY
Jackson County animal control officer Rhonda Stebbins has appealed her having been fired by the county.
County officials said the firing is not related to the current case involving almost 300 animals taken from an alleged puppy mill in Nicholson. County manager Darrell Hampton did not give a reason for Stebbins’ termination. She was fired by her supervisor, E.C. Brogan, the county’s senior code enforcement officer.
The first step in the appeal process will be for Stebbins to meet with her department head to discuss the firing. If no resolution is reached during that meeting, Stebbins’ appeal will go to the human resources director, Melanie Thomas, for review. The next step will be for the appeal to be heard by Hampton.
In Stebbins’ letter of termination, Brogan gave the following reasons for the action:
•Insubordination: “Failure to obey direct orders from supervisor regarding placement of animals at Commerce Vet, use of county cell phone.”
•Violation of county policy regarding falsifying of county records or willfully giving false statements to supervisors, officials or to the public: “Falsified records regarding location of animal pick up on impound notice.”
•Repeated rudeness or intemperate statements to the public, supervisors and fellow employees: “This has been an on-going problem. You have been counseled on this issue numerous times and yet the problem has continued. We have received more complaints from citizens as recently as Friday, April 18, 2008, about your conduct and rudeness.”
•Non-harassment policy: “You have made threats against fellow employees to other staff members. Used improper language when speaking to fellow employees.”
The personnel file includes one reprimand to Stebbins for improper use of cell phones.
“After reviewing your phone records, it is very obvious that you have ignored my previous order in reference to personal phone calls,” Brogran wrote in a letter in Stebbins’ file. “I hereby order you to reimburse the county for your personal phone calls.”
The letter in the file has a hand-written note on it from Stebbins stating the following: “I was told that we had free incoming calls, as well as 1,000 minutes per month and free nights and weekends.”
The personnel file also includes the most recent employee evaluation, which is mostly positive. The only negative comment in the evaluation is that “Rhonda needs to work on her communication skills with the general public.”
Interestingly, Hampton recently praised Stebbins’ work on the puppy mill case. In a letter dated March 21 in Stebbins’ personnel, Hampton praised work on the case.
“As the L&D Farms case has been unfolded, it is evident that you have a great amount of care and concern for the duty that has been assigned to you,” Hampton wrote. “You have worked very hard to speak for those that cannot speak for themselves. You have worked countless hours on their behalf, working in all weather conditions to see that they were cared for...The professionalism that you have exhibited in dealing with this very emotional issue has been exceptional…Please accept this memorandum as a small token of my thanks for the work you did in this matter and how you conduct yourself every day.”
Stebbins had been employed with the county since Aug. 19, 2004. She was first hired as a temporary animal control officer and then began work full time on Feb. 12, 2005. Her last date of employment was April 22.
