The agreements were sent to my attorney by MERS' contract attorney, Lisa Ward. In her cover letter, she says that "all relevant documents" are enclosed. I had also expected one for Shirley Roe, who was fired without warning or explanation at the end of August, 2004. Last I heard, Shirley had a lawyer and was negotiating with MERS.

To make sure that none of the requested agreements were overlooked, my attorney sent a letter offering to settle the lawsuit if MERS paid my attorney fees ($1456.20) and provided a signed statement from Anne Wagner that there were no other agreements. Lisa Ward replied 6/20/05 saying that although there were no termination agreements for Diane Anderson or Gale Larsen, "the situation with Ms. Roe has not yet been finalized."

So. Is there anything wrong with these terminations? Let's see:

• The termination agreements are disingenuous. Marian and Brian's terminations are characterized as resignations while Chris' is called "voluntary separation." The MERS personnel manual defines resignation as "voluntary employment termination initiated by the employee." These terminations were not initiated by the employee and were not voluntary. No two-week notice was given. Other staff who were close to these employees know that they were surprised and upset. If the terminations had been voluntary, no payoffs would have been made. MERS employees who really have resigned in recent years were not offered severance pay.
   
• There is no mention of severance pay in the MERS personnel manual. The chief executive officer has no authority make payments to employees other than as compensation for time worked and for reimbursement of work expenses.
   
• The personnel manual contains guidelines for employee performance evaluation and progressive discipline. There is a proper way to discharge an employee who is not performing satisfactorily, "In situations of conflict", says the manual, "employees will be allowed to use the 'just cause' process" which "is the attempt to maintain civil rights and due process. . ."
   
• MERS is a public agency subject to the Freedom of Information Act. It has no business making "confidential" agreements, especially when they involve expenditure of public funds. MERS' legal staff should have known this.

If these terminations had really been voluntary, there would have been no need for payoffs. Nor would payoffs be required if proper procedure had been followed to establish that the employee had not performed satisfactorily. These employees were bullied into resigning and then paid not to put up a fight about it. It saved the CEO from having to justify her action, and it cost her nothing. It wasn't her money. The employees were paid off with public funds - money contributed by municipalities for payment of their employees' pensions.

And the MERS Board approved - assuming they knew about it.  We do know that they unjustly denied me access to the termination agreements.

See FOIA Lawsuit for a complete chronology of events.