A three-year-old sexual harassment complaint against Tax Collector John Drew and a settlement agreement with the woman who made it has prompted County Attorney Mike Mullin to review current policies and procedures.
On April 14, 2013, Teri Murray – a customer service representative working in the Nassau County Tax Collector’s office since June 2012 – tendered her resignation.
During an exit interview with two office supervisors, Murray reported she had been subjected to repeat acts of verbal sexual harassment. According to case documents from the resulting investigation, Murray told department manager Tracy Bazar and then-Finance Director Michael Love, who also handled human resources, that she was resigning because of the harassment, but at first refused to identify who harassed her. At a follow-up meeting, she alleged Drew made the comments.
No record of Drew being formally interviewed by investigators for his side of the story was included in county records or the insurance claim case file. Per the stipulations of a 2013 settlement agreement, the tax collector’s office paid Murray $20,000 and covered $1,652 in attorney’s fees for a mediation session. The settlement bears no evidence of approval or personal input from Drew, the county attorney or county commissioners. The county’s liability insurance company approved it.
The total amo-unt was below the county’s $25,000 insurance deductible and was paid directly by the tax collector’s office.
“The tax collector vigorously denies the allegations asserted by Murray,” states the settlement agreement obtained by the Record’s sister newspaper, the News-Leader, “but desires to resolve the matter to limit any further expenses and/or litigation.”
The settlement agreement pro-
vided for a favorable letter of recommendation for Murray and an agreement by the tax collector to conduct additional training for management and staff.
When questioned about Murray’s claims, Drew advised that, on the advice of his attorney, he could not discuss the matter due to restrictions instituted by the settlement agreement.
Several attempts to contact Murray by phone and in person were unsuccessful.
According to an investigation report, Murray told Bazar and Love that “the harassment had been going on for some time and was so bad that she had to go to counseling and was on medications.”
The report, filed in May 2013 by Meg Zabijaka, an attorney and partner with employment law firm Constangy Brooks & Smith, LLP, was obtained pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request filed in January.
“Murray stated that all occurrences of harassment occurred after February of 2013. Before that time, she stated that Drew was always professional,” Zabijaka wrote in her report. “Murray stated that there was no physical touching by Drew – the harassment was limited to comments in the workplace.”
Bazar and Love offered to reassign Murray to another office building at no loss of pay or benefits, but Murray refused.
After resigning her position, Murray reported her allegations of harassment to the county’s human resources office and to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, complying with established policy.
Allegations
During Murray’s interview with Zabijaka, Murray claimed Drew made offensive, vulgar and obscene comments on 10 occasions.
Murray also told Zabijaka she had confided in others about the incidents, including her husband, four coworkers and a deputy sheriff, who she said was aware of other incidents and wanted to help her.
“Throughout the interview, Murray was tearful and appeared to make a very sympathetic witness. Murray stated that she would like to consider mediation, and her preference was to have this matter mediated before it became public,” Zabijaka’s report concluded. “I explained to Murray that I would look into the possibility of mediation and whether my investigation could be halted to allow the mediation process to work. ... mediation was scheduled and held May 29, 2013 and the parties reached a settlement. ... As a result, we understand that this matter is closed.”
According to Murray’s statement to Zabijaka, there were no witnesses to any of the events, although she stated that other people in the office were aware of Drew’s behavior in general.
Bazar, who is still an employee at the Tax Collector’s office, told the News-Leader that she has never witnessed Drew speak in a harassing or sexual manner, nor had she heard complaints regarding inappropriate conduct other than Murray’s claim.
No information in the case file or investigation report indicates Zabijaka interviewed Drew or any tax collector’s office employee. Nor was any mention made in the report of the contents of Murray’s personnel file, which was provided to Zabijaka prior to interviewing her, according to the report. The personnel file includes 10 disciplinary write-ups and an extension of Murray’s probationary period. The first disciplinary form was issued July 12, 2012 and the final write up was issued March 19, 2013. Bazar or supervisor Erica Dupree signed the disciplinary forms. Drew’s signature did not appear on any of them.
Agreement to settle
According to Zabijaka’s report, Murray requested compensation for loss of employment and emotional suffering. She also requested that Drew be “forced to step down” from his elected position and “required to receive counseling.”
Drew advised the News-Leader that he was told he was not allowed to be present at the mediation, although Grogan, representing Drew and the insurance company, was present.
Bazar, who signed the settlement agreement as the representative of the tax collector’s office, said she was present the day of the mediation.
“I was in a separate room; they just came in and told me it was settled and told me to sign (the settlement document),” she said.
According to the agreement finalized May 29, 2013, “Neither this agreement nor anything contained herein is to be construed as an admission by either party of any liability, wrongdoing or unlawful conduct whatsoever.”
Murray’s EEOC complaint against Drew was withdrawn as a condition of the agreement.
New procedure sought
According to Mullin, his goal now is to ensure a thorough investigation of allegations prior to entering into a settlement agreement for any similar cases.
Although he was not the county attorney at the time of the mediation and settlement, he has looked into the matter, and said there are several procedural policies and actions he will be discussing with FMIT.
Mullin says the handling of the Murray/Drew case strayed from common practices on a number of points, including the fact that Murray was not required to provide a sworn statement regarding her allegations, instead giving verbal recollections of events.
Mullin is also concerned that other tax collector’s office employees were not interviewed as part of the investigation.
“The fact that John (Drew) was not interviewed, that other office employees were not interviewed, that is bizarre,” he said.
No apparent attention given to Murray’s personnel file also strayed from what Mullin said he has experienced as standard procedure in harassment cases or pre-suit mediation settlements.
Per the terms of the county’s contract with FMIT, if the insurance company recommends settling a liability claim, and that recommendation is ignored, FMIT will not pay any judgment or costs associated with the claim. That risk can discourage county officials from opposing the settlement, Mullin said.
Insurance companies will often settle out of court in sexual harassment cases in order to avoid the risk of litigation, regardless of whether the accusations have been proven, he said.
“I don’t want to use the word sloppy, but as I said (to FMIT), sexual harassment claims should be taken seriously and should be thoroughly investigated,” Mullin said. “When you investigate just one side and you put that in a file, and that is a public record; when you release that, then for someone in public office, that is very damning because you don't have the other side.”
“This is a weird settlement, and now (Drew) can’t even talk about it,” Mullin added.
A background search conducted by the News-Leader into Drew’s legal and employment history revealed no prior civil or criminal cases involving Drew, outside tax assessment-related appeals. County records contain no allegations of harassment or workplace complaints against Drew other than Murray’s.
A similar background search conducted on Murray revealed court cases in Nassau and Orange counties, including two petitions for domestic violence injunctions filed by Murray. The first, in 1985, had an order of abatement issued on a temporary injunction with no further action on record. The second, in 2011, found “the petitioner failed to allege facts sufficient to support the entry of an injunction for protection,” court documents state, adding that the acts alleged by Murray were not recent.
Rush to resolve
In Florida, 68-69 percent of all civil cases filed are resolved in mediation and are not heard in court, Mullin said.
“Either the parties determine that this is going to be expensive if we continue our claim, or it is an insurance company saying (it) will pay ‘x’ amount on your behalf and ‘we think that is best because it saves us litigation costs that could end up more than the settlement, plus the risk of losing the case,’” he explained. “I have to say, in this case, it’s almost like as soon as (the insurance company) was told it was a sexual harassment case, they said ‘we have to get this settled.’”
A rush to settle a case without proper investigation is something Mullin hopes to avoid in the future.
“I want to ultimately look at and address the fact going forward about how we are going to deal with this type of claim,” he said. “Surely not in this fashion. We have to say to the insurance (provider), ‘what is your procedure, and if you don't have a procedure, let’s develop one for everyone’s protection.’”