Los Alamos Fire Marshal Jeff Wetteland, left, and Chief Building Official Michael Arellano review construction plans recently. The two men filed a request for an investigation of County Councilor James Chrobocinski Feb. 15 with County Human Resources Manager Denise Cassel. Photo by Maire O’Neill/ladailypost.com
By MAIRE O’NEILL
Los Alamos Daily Post
Two Los Alamos County employees have filed a request for an investigation into County Councilor James Chrobocinski alleging harassment and intimidation under Los Alamos Code Ordinance No. 02-240, commonly known as the Code of Conduct.
Los Alamos County Councilor James Chrobocinski
Fire Marshal Jeff Wetteland and Chief Building Official Michael Arellano filed the request Feb. 15 with Human Resources (HR) Manager Denise Cassel. Under the Ordinance, Cassel is required to “maintain the confidentiality of the complaint and the identity of the complainant” and “investigate the matter properly”.
The Ordinance states that the HR manager may refer the matter to the County Attorney or a private investigator as appropriate. While details of the complaint are confidential from the County’s side, they are not exempt from an Inspection of Public Records Act request.
The County entered into a $12,000 contract Feb. 28 with attorney Debra J. Moulton of Kennedy, Moulton & Wells, PC, to conduct an investigation into complaints “by certain County employees” alleging violations of Article 1 of Chapter 20 of the County Code “by a certain member of the County Council”. A review of documents attached to the complaint revealed that it refers to Chrobocinski’s involvement with a property at 11 Sherwood Blvd. in White Rock, which is being renovated to be the future home of the Pig & Fig Restaurant.
“We have been harassed, intimidated and threatened by Councilor James Chrobocinski on several occasions. We no longer feel that we can do our jobs for fear of further retaliation and retribution as has been evident in the newspapers, in council meetings and in person. He has made our work environment a hostile place. In our roles as code officials we must often make code interpretations that may be challenged through proper channels. He chose to not follow the proper appeals process as prescribed in our municipal ordinances,” the complaint states.
The complaint outlines the appeal process that should have been followed by Chrobocinski to appeal a decision under the Fire Code, which is Chapter 22 of the County Code, that includes a hearing before the Fire Chief, the Community Development Department director and the Public Works Department director or their designees. A decision by those three can be appealed to the County Council and a decision by the Council can be appealed to State District Court.
The complaint states that Chrobocinski has “used his position on Council to manipulate Code Enforcement to the point of badgering us on the Facebook Page The Good the Bad and the Ugly, in the newspapers and by word of mouth”. It cites a section of the Code of Conduct that states, “Full disclosure of real or potential conflicts of interest shall be a guiding principle for determining appropriate conduct. At all times, reasonable efforts shall be made to avoid undue influence and abuse of office in public service”.
The complaint also cites another section of the Code of Conduct, which states, “A public official who has or may have a conflict of interest in a matter that requires official action, shall, prior to the matter being discussed or decided, disclose the conflict of interest, be it real, potential or alleged by a third party. An official shall not take any official action unless and until all issues pertaining to such conflict have been resolved”.
Another section of the Code of Conduct that deals with Misuse of Position is referred to in the complaint. That section reads, “In the course of official duties, public officials shall assist members of the public and other public officials in a courteous manner. Except in the course of official duties, public officials shall not enhance another person’s position in a county transaction; offer policy statements or opinions on behalf of the county; or promise to authorize or prevent future official action”. The final section quoted states, “Public officials shall not use, or attempt to use, an official position improperly to avoid the consequences of illegal acts for any person”.
The friction appears to have begun in November when Chrobocinski and his contractor began renovations at the Sherwood Boulevard property and Chrobocinski was informed by Wetteland and Arellano that he needed a demolition permit for the work and an asbestos report for the property. In email correspondence, Chrobocinski expressed his aggravation with the two men, emailing Fire Chief Troy Hughes while copying County Manager Harry Burgess and CDD Director Paul Andrus asking why Wetteland, the fire marshal was involved if LAFD was not involved in demolition permits.
“Abuse of power…”, the email concluded.
He eventually told Wetteland in an email that he was giving up on the permit and that the dropped ceilings were installed in 1990 so there was no asbestos. He said he was not going to get asbestos testing done, adding, “No wonder everyone tries to not have to worry about permitting”. Wetteland responded that giving up on the demolition permit was not an option as the work had already been done and said, “We need to talk about this further”.
Chrobocinski replied, “Everyone knows that there is no asbestos involved here. Go ahead and give me the citation and we’ll fight it out in court. I’m not spending thousands and wasting months of time on a stupid asbestos report”.
At the end of November, Chrobocinski filed a tort claim with the County alleging that Wetteland and Arellano “have demonstrated severe abuse of power, harassment and have lied to me several times during this situation”.
“It is obvious that this is in retaliation for me pushing back against their overzealous code enforcement in my role as County Councilor,” Chrobocinski’s claim stated. He requested immediate issue of the demolition permit and that Wetteland and Arellano have no input directly or indirectly on the Sherwood Boulevard property or any future permits involving him.
Although throughout the correspondence, Chrobocinski stresses that he was writing as a community member, not as a County Councilor, his emails are all sent from his personal email account and state, “Owner/Broker, Zia Realty Group, Los Alamos County Councilor”.
Included in the employees’ request for an investigation is a statement by LAFD Senior Fire & Life Safety Coordinator Stephen Rinaldi concerning his Nov. 30 interaction with Chrobocinski at the Sherwood Boulevard property.
“As he exited his vehicle, he asked me what this was about, referring to me being on site. I explained that there were some workers seen around the building and I was there to see what was being done … Mr. Chrobocinski asked me if Jeff had sent me (referring to Fire Marshal Wetteland) and I answered yes. At that time Mr. Chrobocinski appeared very upset and stated that he was going to sue his ass (referring to Fire Marshal Wetteland). Mr. Chrobocinski then called FM Wetteland a mother (expletive) and stated that he was going to be fired … he then apologized to me and said he knows this is not me, that he was very pissed at that mother (expletive),” Rinaldi said in his statement.
In November, Burgess said his HR staff was performing an investigation and that at that time he had not found any evidence to support claims that County staff had taken “excessive or egregious steps” in the situation. That investigation reportedly found no wrongdoing by Wetteland or Arellano.
Chrobocinski said Monday afternoon that the first he had heard of the request for an investigation was when he was asked about it by a Los Alamos Daily Post reporter. He said he was frustrated with the way Wetteland and Arellano were treating him during the November-December timeframe but thought things had moved on.
“I am surprised that they filed a complaint in February,” Chrobocinski said.
Los Alamos County Attorney Alvin Leaphart said Monday afternoon that his office will not be commenting on the request for an investigation at this time.
Cassel said Wednesday morning that because the Code of Conduct prohibits it, she can not speak to what would happen to Chrobocinski if it was determined that he violated the Code.
Section 30-16 of the Code states, “A public official who violates any provision this Code of Conduct is subject to discipline, removal, civil or criminal penalties under federal or state law, County Charter or Los Alamos County Code, policy, rule or regulation”.
