BAER Hearing 120717

1
1 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS

2 _______________________________________________
3 IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINARY CHARGES AGAINST
4 KAREN BAER
5 PURSUANT TO SECTION 75 OF THE CIVIL SERVICE LAW
6 OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
7 ________________________________________________
8
9 HELD ON: December 7th, 2017
10 HELD AT: Tompkins County Health Department
Brown Road, Ithaca, New York
11
12 HELD BEFORE: MURRY SOLOMON, Hearing Officer
5264 Westhersfield Road
13 Jamesville, New York 13078
murrysolomon@gmail.com
14
15 FOR TOMPKINS COUNTY:
JOHN MCCANN, ESQ., HANCOCK ESTABROOK
16 1500 AXA Tower I, 100 Madison Street
Syracuse, New York 13202
17 jmccann@hancocklaw.com
18 FOR MS. BAER:
ZOE SALZMAN, ESQ.
19 ANDREW G. CELLI, JR., ESQ.
EMERY CELLI BRINCKERHOFF & ABADY, LLP
20 600 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor
New York, New York 10020
21 zsalzman@ecbalaw.com
22
REPORTED BY: DELORES HAUBER
23 Shorthand Reporter
Notary Public
24
2
1 HEARING OFFICER: Let me say first of

2 all good morning to everybody. My name is
3 Murry Solomon. It has an unusual spelling.
4 M-U-R-R-Y. It's usually A-Y, but my mother
5 decided to leave the A out.
6 In any event, getting down to
7 business. It's my understanding that there
8 have been charges preferred in this case
9 against Karen Baer who is an employee of
10 Tompkins County. It's my further
11 understanding that Ms. Baer at her
12 opposition has opted to have this become a
13 public hearing to which you're all invited.
14 So what has happened and what we'll get
15 into momentarily, the county has filed
16 charges against Ms. Baer, and along with
17 the charges it makes certain specifications
18 within each charge. Ms. Baer has responded
19 to those charges and essentially denies
20 them or raises what's called, this is
21 lawyer speak, affirmative defenses. She's
22 made arguments in support of her position.
23 The county has asked me to serve as
24 the hearing officer and has set up with
3
1 cooperation between counsel for the parties

2 the date, time and location for the
3 hearing.
4 I would just say and I would ask
5 please that inasmuch as you may favor the
6 position of one side or the other, that you
7 remain quiet and nonresponsive during this
8 hearing. My understanding that the
9 audience, as welcome as they are, there is
10 no one in there that will be testifying.
11 MR. CELLI: I don't believe so.
12 MR. MCCANN: And we would ask that
13 the witnesses be sequestered.
14 HEARING OFFICER: And I assume you're
15 going to say the same thing?
16 MR. CELLI: Of course.
17 HEARING OFFICER: That's lawyer speak
18 again. What we're going to do is sequester
19 anybody that's going to testify. The
20 reason for that is that if one person was
21 listening to the testimony of another, it
22 might influence that person. The best way
23 to keep the hearing clean and honest, I
24 suppose, is to make sure each witness comes
4
1 in, testifies honestly. They will be sworn

2 under oath and then we will bring the next
3 witness in.
4 Inasmuch as the charging party, the
5 county, has brought the charges, the burden
6 of proof is with the county. And then the
7 burden to disprove it, of course, would be
8 with Ms. Baer and her counsel. Did I
9 explain that well enough?
10 MR. CELLI: Yes. Thank you.
11 MR. MCCANN: Yes.
12 HEARING OFFICER: Prior to the
13 commencement of going on the record, the
14 parties agreed and we made certain
15 evidence, I'll call it certain documents,
16 hearing officer's exhibit, to wit; Hearing
17 Officer Exhibit 1 for the record, Hearing
18 Officer Exhibit 1 is the charges and that's
19 dated October 13, 2017.
20 (HEARING OFFICER EXHIBIT NUMBER 1 WAS
21 MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
22 HEARING OFFICER: Hearing Officer
23 Exhibit 2 is my appointment to serve as the
24 hearing officer.
5

4 Exhibit 3 is an investigative report, I
5 believe it's about 28 pages to be exact,
6 that was conducted by an independent party,
7 so meaning a party not employed directly by
8 the county.
12 Exhibit 4 is Ms. Baer's response to the
13 charges.
14 (HEARING OFFICER EXHIBIT NUMBER 4 AND
15 5 WERE MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
16 HEARING OFFICER: And Hearing Officer
17 Exhibit 5 is a one page letter from
18 Counselor McCann and sets up a date, time
19 and place for the hearing. Let the record
20 further show that it's not necessary, even
21 though these are hearing officer, exhibits
22 there is, by counsel for the county, a
23 standing objection to Hearing Officer
24 Exhibit 4 mostly not pertaining to the
6
1 document, but pertaining to the validity of

2 the document. The document was received by
3 the county and has it in its records, but
4 it's not vouching for the validity of it.
5 Likewise, counsel for Ms. Baer has
6 objected to Hearing Officer Exhibit 3 and
7 that was the investigative report. The
8 report is on file, but Ms. Baer does not
9 necessarily agree with it. We good so far
10 folks, counselors?
11 MR. CELLI: Yes.
12 MR. MCCANN: Yes.
13 MS. SALZMAN: Yes.
14 HEARING OFFICER: I don't know if you
15 have prepared opening statements or whether
16 you want to get directly into testimony by
17 witnesses who will as you might expect be
18 sworn in this instance. Time out.
19 (RECESS TAKEN.)
20 MR. CELLI: We do have an opening
21 statement, Your Honor. It's substantial
22 because there is a lot of evidence in the
23 case, so it's a few minutes long, but it's
24 Mr. McCann's burden.
7
1 MR. MCCANN: I have a brief opening.

2 HEARING OFFICER: Let me start with
3 Mr. McCann. Start with the charging party
4 and provide his opening statement.
5 MR. MCCANN: Thank you, Mr. Hearing
6 Officer. In order to make sure you can
7 hear me, I'm kind of soft spoken, I'm going
8 to stay right here and not make use of the
9 podium. The charges are brought actually
10 on behalf of the Tompkins County
11 legislature rather than the Tompkins County
12 per se. The Tompkins County legislature
13 has a responsibility to its employees and
14 to people in the county it represents to
15 enforce its policies in favor of diversity,
16 against discrimination. The director of
17 the county's Office of Human Rights is
18 delegated the duty and responsibility by
19 the legislature to carry out these policies
20 and advance these important purposes.
21 Karen Baer has failed and refused to
22 fulfill the responsibilities as a
23 representative of the legislature. In July
24 of 2016 and again in October of 2016, Ms.
8
1 Baer made allegations to the legislature of

2 systemic discrimination within county
3 government against women and persons of
4 color including herself. Her allegations
5 centered upon claims that she had been
6 excluded from county committees and
7 functions. And these are serious
8 allegations, which if true, would be an
9 affront to county policies and goals.
10 The county hired an independent
11 investigator with impeccable credentials to
12 conduct an investigation in to these
13 allegations and the legislature directed
14 Ms. Baer to corporate in that
15 investigation. She refused. The
16 investigation went forward without her
17 cooperation or participation. At the same
18 time Ms. Baer was refusing to support these
19 serious allegations of exclusion, she
20 withdrew from important committees to which
21 she had been appointed. She resigned from
22 the critically important work force
23 diversity and inclusion committee which she
24 had been appointed by the legislature. She
9
1 also refused to attend meetings of the

2 compliance committee, even though her
3 participation as a member of that committee
4 is required by the county's compliance
5 program.
6 Ms. Baer's refusal to comply with the
7 legislature's directive to cooperate with
8 the investigation over alleged systemic
9 discrimination and her refusal to fulfill
10 her responsibilities to cooperate and
11 contribute to the work of these legislative
12 committees, committees established by the
13 legislature, has created a dysfunctional
14 environment within county government and
15 made her continued employment as the
16 director of the Office of Human Rights
17 untenable.
18 Mr. Hearing Officer, by a 14 to zero
19 unanimous vote, the legislators of this
20 county have preferred the charges before
21 you. There is no genuine dispute of any of
22 the facts that I just recited. Excuses we
23 expect Ms. Baer to now offer to somehow
24 justify her conduct do not provide excuses
10
1 for her failure to follow the legislature's

2 directives and to fulfill her
3 responsibilities to the county. Her
4 conduct in a word is inexcusable.
5 The legislature respectfully submits
6 that you should recommend the charges in
7 this case be sustained in their entirety.
8 Thank you.
9 HEARING OFFICER: Counselor?
10 MR. CELLI: Good morning.
11 HEARING OFFICER: Good morning.
12 MR. CELLI: I hope, Mr. Solomon, you
13 will indulge me. My remarks are somewhat
14 longer than Mr. McCann's and I think the
15 reason for that will become clear as we go
16 along.
17 Good morning. What's happening here
18 today is wrong. What's happening to Karen
19 Baer today is very wrong. Today in this
20 hearing room, Karen Baer stands accused of
21 what people who have spoken out against the
22 status quo are always accused of and have
23 always been accused of throughout history;
24 insubordination, creating dysfunction,
11
1 making waves. Today Karen Baer, an

2 accomplished lawyer, a seasoned
3 administrator, a fearless human rights
4 advocate and a woman of color stands
5 accused because she spoke her mind and she
6 followed her conscience. She stands
7 accused because she asked -- no, she
8 insisted that due process be followed and
9 that her voice be heard.
10 I'm going to stop for a moment, Mr.
11 Solomon, only to say that I believe one of
12 the women who came in just now may be a
13 witness in the case.
14 HEARING OFFICER: Can we go off the
15 record.
16 (OFF-THE-RECORD DISCUSSION.)
17 HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Back on the
18 record.
19 MR. CELLI: This is a case about
20 anger and retaliation. Karen Baer's
21 complaints about racism and sexism in
22 Tompkins County government angered county
23 officials. These officials responded by
24 investigating Karen herself, by
12
1 marginalizing her, by trying to silence

2 her. That's what this case is about, but
3 that's the big picture. In this opening
4 statement, we're going to go deeper than
5 that and walk through the timeline and
6 explain what the evidence will show in the
7 case.
8 And I'd like to start by talking
9 about three basic principles that I think
10 all sides agree on. The first is that
11 people have the legal right, I would say
12 the human right, to speak out when they see
13 or experience discrimination or injustice
14 in the workplace. In our legal system
15 speaking out, calling out the possibility
16 of racist or sexism or any form of
17 discrimination has a specific protected
18 status under the law. It is expressly
19 protected by the Civil Rights Act and by
20 the New York State Civil Service Act. And
21 it's protected because we all agree that
22 it's important to encourage people to speak
23 out and to have their voices heard when
24 they see something wrong.
13
1 This brings us to the second

2 important principle in this case and that
3 is that complaints about discrimination are
4 protected as long as they are reasonable,
5 as long as they are made in good faith
6 whether or not they turn out to be wrong.
7 It's a powerful concept if you think about
8 it. We value these complaints so highly
9 that we give them all the protections of
10 the law, even if in the end they turn out
11 not to be correct. You're going to hear a
12 lot about these concepts of reasonableness
13 and good faith in this hearing. Really
14 what it means is that a person complaining
15 has to have a basis for the complaint. And
16 you're going to hear about that basis
17 directly from Karen Baer.
18 The third principle I think we all
19 agree on is one that's embedded in the soul
20 of our American culture and that is that
21 people are entitled to due process, fair
22 process, open and transparent process.
23 It's as American as apple pie. When a
24 person stands up for what they think is
14
1 right and they do so in good faith, they

2 are entitled to be treated fairly. It is
3 Karen Baer's insistence on this basic
4 principle that caused her her biggest
5 problem. It was that insistence that
6 brings us here today.
7 Those are the big principles, but let
8 me zoom in on the facts. Let's get really
9 specific. What happened here? Who was
10 involved? How did this play out?
11 I would suggest respectfully to my
12 adversary Mr. McCann, he would ask you to
13 look at this like a snapshot. Like a
14 moment frozen in time starting in July of
15 2017. He asked you to look at the conduct
16 of the parties, Michael Lane, who is the
17 chair of the county legislature, and Karen
18 Baer, my client, in isolation and in a way
19 that makes Karen's behavior he would argue
20 look irrational, incendiary and
21 insubordinate. So we all know that
22 snapshots don't tell the whole story. You
23 have to see the whole movie. You have to
24 see the beginning, the middle and the end
15
1 to really reveal the arch of the story and

2 what people's actual motives were. And
3 only by seeing the whole movie in this case
4 can you judge Karen Baer's conduct and her
5 character.
6 The evidence we present is going to
7 take you through the whole sequence, but
8 the movie begins in 1961 going back that
9 far when Karen was born to an
10 African-American father and a white mother
11 in the tiny farming community of Penn Yan,
12 New York. You will hear how Karen grew up.
13 She graduated from Cornell. She attended
14 and graduated from Syracuse Law School,
15 became a lawyer and launched her career as
16 government administrator and human rights
17 professional in Geneva, New York, up the
18 road where she served for 14 years.
19 You will hear how in 2013 Karen was
20 hired to be the director of the Office of
21 Human Rights here in Tompkins County. The
22 only person of color to head up a county
23 wide office in this county. And you'll
24 hear how Karen succeeded. She succeeded
16
1 beyond all expectations in that role.

2 When Karen took over, the Tompkins
3 County Office of Human Rights was all but
4 defunct and through her efforts it
5 blossomed and was back on track. And she
6 was praised for that by her boss, Joe
7 Mareane. Joe Mareane was the county
8 administrator at the time. He is retired
9 now as of last week and I'm not sure that
10 we'll get the chance to meet him, which is
11 very unfortunate, because it was Mr.
12 Mareane who appraised Karen for her amazing
13 work and it was Mr. Mareane who later
14 became impatient and angry when she spoke
15 out about racial issues in county
16 government.
17 MR. MCCANN: Objection.
18 MR. CELLI: Now the precise details
19 of how this all began --
20 HEARING OFFICER: You had an
21 objection and the objection was to?
22 MR. MCCANN: Characterization of Mr.
23 Mareane.
24 MR. CELLI: And we're going to put on
17
1 evidence about his anger.

2 HEARING OFFICER: Okay. I understand
3 that. Opening statement of course is not
4 demonstrative of approved evidence. So
5 I'll allow it.
6 MR. CELLI: It is all in the context
7 of what we will show you.
8 HEARING OFFICER: Right. I'll allow,
9 I'll allow you to continue.
10 MR. CELLI: Thank you. Here's the
11 basic arch of the story and the precise
12 details really are not that important. But
13 in March of 2015, Karen had been on the job
14 for about a year and a half, two years. A
15 controversy arose behind the scenes in
16 Tompkins County government. It involved
17 the Tompkins County Human Rights
18 Commission, which is a volunteer board,
19 that advises the legislature on issues of
20 race and discrimination in the county. On
21 one side of the controversy was the woman
22 who has been the chair, her name is Pat
23 Pryor. Pat Pryor is a former legislator.
24 She sat on the Tompkins County legislature
18
1 for some number of years, and Pat Pryor's

2 white; and both of those facts are an
3 important part of the story.
4 On the other side of the controversy
5 were a number of human rights
6 commissioners, other volunteer members of
7 the committee who sat on the commission,
8 including a number of people of color, who
9 were troubled by Miss Pryor's leadership
10 style at the commission. They were
11 troubled among other things by the way she
12 treated Karen Baer who was the director of
13 the Office of Human Rights. The dispute
14 between Pat Pryor and the commissioners had
15 what Karen called in an e-mail racial
16 overtones. It pitted the white board chair
17 against commissioners of color on a board
18 whose job was to deal with racial tension
19 and racial issues.
20 And Karen was so concerned about that
21 that she told her boss about it, Joe
22 Mareane. She brought these issues to his
23 attention. That's what you would expect
24 her to do. Joe Mareane wasn't happy. The
19
1 evidence will show that he viewed Pat Pryor

2 as a well-liked, influential person. That
3 he was concerned that legislators who liked
4 Miss Pryor and respected her would be upset
5 about this controversy. And he turned his
6 anger on Karen Baer about the conflict and
7 about the fact that she actually agreed
8 with the commissioners of color in their
9 critique of Miss Pryor's leadership. He
10 wanted the whole thing to go away, but it
11 wouldn't.
13 MR. CELLI: And in August of 2015,
14 Pat Pryor resigned from the Human Rights
15 Commission. She resigned in the face of a
16 no confidence vote brewing among the
17 commissioners. And it was at this point
18 that everything changed between Joe Mareane
19 and Karen Baer.
20 Joe Mareane who only months before
21 had praised Karen to the skies, froze her
22 out, excluded her from opportunities that
23 had been promised. He blocked her from
24 hiring people. He refused to support a new
20
1 law that she wanted to have passed to

2 expend the powers of her office. Even
3 stopped coming to events for the Office of
4 Human Rights. And Karen came to believe
5 reasonably that Joe Mareane and his bosses,
6 the key legislators, were angry at her for
7 her involvement and support of the
8 commissioners of color on the Human Rights
9 Commission. Karen Baer became persona non
10 grata.
11 On November 20th, 2015, Karen
12 formally complained to Mr. Lane, who I
13 believe is going to testify in this case,
14 and she complained in writing that her
15 support for commissioners of color and her
16 opposition to the white former chair, Miss
17 Pryor, had resulted in retaliation against
18 her. That's the first complaint.
19 Retaliation, we know what it means,
20 but let's be clear about it. It means
21 punishing somebody for speaking out. It
22 means depriving them of resources for
23 speaking out. It means denying them the
24 support that they would otherwise have as a
21
1 result of their speaking out and it's

2 against the law. That's what Karen
3 complained about in November of 2015, and
4 she will explain to you her reasons for it
5 and there are many.
6 Now what happened to, what happened
7 to Karen's November 2015 complaint, how was
8 it treated? This is critical context to
9 what happens in 2017. Here's the basic
10 story. In response to Karen's complaint,
11 the county hired an outside lawyer, a man
12 named Edward Hooks to look into the issues.
13 Now Mr. Hooks was supposed to investigate
14 whether the things that had happened to
15 Karen and her office were in fact
16 retaliatory, but that's not what he did.
17 What Mr. Hooks did is he flipped the whole
18 thing around and he issued a report where
19 there was supposed to be an investigation
20 of Karen's complaints and it became an
21 investigation of Karen herself. And it
22 became a condemnation of Karen and a
23 celebration of Pat Pryor, the woman who
24 Karen had opposed.
22
1 Karen's experience with the Hooks'

2 investigation is essential to understanding
3 what happened later when she was asked to
4 cooperate in the investigation conducted by
5 Mr. Taylor in 2017. In the Hooks' matter,
6 Karen provided extensive information to Mr.
7 Hooks. She gave him documents. She sent
8 her resume. She sat for a long
9 face-to-face meeting and what happened?
10 During the interview he actually dozed off,
11 feel asleep during their face-to-face
12 interview. He took two or three lines of
13 notes in an interview that spanned more
14 than an hour. And when the report came
15 out, Mr. Hooks grossly mischaracterized the
16 statements and comments made by witnesses
17 of color including Ms. Baer. Mr. Hooks
18 even attached Pat Pryor's resume to his
19 report and didn't say a word about Karen's
20 background and education and
21 accomplishments. It was the absence of due
22 process in the Hooks' investigation. It
23 was an investigation turned upside down and
24 inside out and it was an insult to Karen.
23
1 When she got the report in March of

2 2016, and we have it on our timeline, she
3 was stunned and she was even more stunned
4 to learn that Mike Lane, the chair of the
5 legislature, and the legislature were
6 considering adopting this report. It
7 wasn't that Mr. Hooks had disagreed with
8 her. That wasn't the issue. It was that
9 it had been turned around and attacked her
10 and praised a person who really had nothing
11 to do with the report per se. This was
12 supposed to be an investigation of Karen's
13 complaint, not a celebration of Pat Pryor.
14 And somebody with real government
15 experience and a finely tuned sense of
16 racial justice, Karen saw the Hooks' report
17 as a new form of retaliation.
18 Now meanwhile from November 2015 to
19 March of '16, while this Hooks' matter is
20 being investigated, so-called, some of the
21 original freeze out activity by Mr.
22 Mareane, exclusions, leaving her out of
23 things were continuing and in fact were
24 intensifying. Karen and her office were
24
1 excluded from a whole host of civil rights

2 and human rights initiatives in the county.
3 And this was pretty blatant. This was
4 blatant. Karen and her team were literally
5 not invited to meetings on key civil rights
6 subjects. They had to read in the
7 newspapers about projects they had
8 championed for years and then were moving
9 forward with other people and they had not
10 been included. And their expertise in key
11 civil rights areas like the ADA and LGBT
12 issues were totally ignored.
13 Karen wrote an e-mail on July 6th,
14 2016 to Mr. Lane and she described the
15 experience of that exclusion as feeling
16 invisible. That July 16 e-mail together
17 with some other e-mails that she wrote
18 throughout the summer and fall into October
19 of 2016 constitutes the complaint that led
20 to the Taylor investigation.
21 And by this point Mr. Mareane was so
22 angry with Karen they were barely on
23 speaking terms. And Mr. Lane had resorted
24 to communicating with her almost entirely
25
1 in writing.
2 This brings us to January 23rd, 2017.
3 Mr. Lane on behalf of the Tompkins County
4 legislature wrote Karen Baer two letters.
5 The first one informs her that the
6 legislature has adopted the Hooks' report.
7 This report that was so problematic in her
8 point of view, that demeaned Karen Baer,
9 was adopted by the legislature. It was a
10 slap in the face to the county's only
11 commissioner of color of a major county
12 agency.
13 The second letter that Mr. Lane wrote
14 on January 23rd, and again it's on our
15 timeline, was the one in which he informed
16 Ms. Baer that a new investigation had been
17 launched. This one was led by another
18 outside lawyer. Not Mr. Hooks this time,
19 but Timothy Taylor. And the second
20 investigation would view the things that
21 happened since November of 2015 going
22 forward. In that letter Mr. Lane asked
23 Karen, quote, please give Mr. Taylor your
24 full cooperation.
26
1 Now even though the order came from

2 Mr. Lane and not from her direct boss, Mr.
3 Mareane, Karen complied with the order to
4 cooperate. She had already provided a
5 detailed list of opportunities and
6 initiatives from which her office had been
7 excluded. In fact she provided a mountain
8 of evidence to Mr. Taylor. And she will
9 walk you up that mountain and describe
10 every step along the way. It's a walk that
11 requires some detail and some careful
12 observations. Tompkins County government
13 is not a place where you find people using
14 the N word or turning fire hoses on
15 peaceful protesters. Thank goodness.
16 There's nothing like that. And Karen Baer
17 never claimed that there was racism or
18 retaliation of that kind, of that severity,
19 in that form. What she described was
20 something more subtle. Something much more
21 nuanced. An environment of exclusion and
22 hostility towards her, her message and her
23 mission that appears in several different
24 ways which you'll hear about.
27
1 She believes that she was treated

2 differently than other department heads,
3 all of them white and she had a reasonable
4 basis for doing so.
5 I think it's important to pause for a
6 minute and talk about how Karen Baer
7 conveyed her complaints and what she asked
8 to be done about them. This is not a case
9 where you will here about raised voices or
10 personal attacks or public tirades, name
11 calling, accusations. Karen Baer is not
12 that kind of person as you will see. You
13 will see that Karen raised her concerns
14 about discrimination and retaliation in a
15 series of sober, careful and respectful
16 e-mails to the people in power. Mike Lane
17 most notably. I don't want to minimize,
18 but I agree with Mr. McCann. These were
19 serious allegations and they carried grave
20 implications for the county. But the
21 evidence will show that they were presented
22 soberly, in a professional tone and
23 respectfully.
24 In her communications with both Mr.
28
1 Taylor in 2017 and Mr. Hooks before him,

2 Karen made it clear what her goal was in
3 all of this, to conciliate her complaints.
4 To sit down and talk through the issues in
5 an open and transparent way with the people
6 that she worked with. She wanted to
7 conciliate things. And she wanted them to
8 understand what it felt like to be the only
9 department head of color, a woman of color
10 in Tompkins County.
11 Now the last thing I want to say
12 about her complaints specifically is it's
13 important to say that she fully articulated
14 a factual basis for her complaints. And
15 Timothy Taylor understood that basis. How
16 do we know this? We know this because Mr.
17 Taylor addresses them one by one in the 27
18 or 28 page report that sits on the table in
19 front of you. What Mr. Taylor went on to
20 do is not just address her complaints, he
21 then slams Ms. Baer in his report. He
22 blames her for not sitting with him in a
23 face-to-face interview and he calls this
24 insubordinate which is the charge in this
29
1 case.
2 Here we get finally to the crux of
3 the matter and the crux of this case is
4 hollow. Let's be clear, in February of
5 2017, Karen Baer and Tim Taylor spoke at
6 length on the telephone. In that call
7 Karen Baer agreed to sit with Mr. Taylor
8 for an interview. She reasonably and
9 respectfully asked that before she sit for
10 an interview, Mr. Taylor first communicate
11 to her in writing what procedures he
12 intended to follow in his investigation.
13 She wanted to understand the rules of the
14 road. She wanted to know how this was
15 going to be handled and where it was likely
16 to go. And after her experience with Mr.
17 Hooks, you can understand why.
18 What exactly did she want to know?
19 She wanted to know who was being
20 investigated and for what so that the
21 investigation wouldn't get turned around
22 the way the Hooks' investigation had. She
23 wanted to know what approach Mr. Taylor was
24 going to follow. Would it be a
30
1 conciliation or would it be an adversarial

2 investigation? She wanted to know that
3 fair procedures would be followed. That
4 people would take notes. That witness's
5 testimony would be communicated fairly and
6 accurately. She wanted to know what the
7 possible outcomes were and she wanted to
8 know that she would be protected from
9 retaliation. That's key. There's a two
10 word phrase for this. Due process. Due
11 process. Open process. Fair process. And
12 this was a reasonable request on Ms. Baer's
13 part. And that's not just me saying it.
14 That's Tim Taylor saying it. Tim Taylor,
15 the investigator, accepted this request.
16 He never says in his report or anywhere
17 else that I'm aware of that Ms. Baer's
18 request for due process was ridiculous or
19 unreasonable or obstructionist. He
20 acknowledges it's reasonable and he tells
21 her I'm going to ask the people at the
22 county what procedures we're going to use
23 here. I'll come back to you and tell you
24 what they are.
31
1 Here's the weird part though. He

2 never comes back. He never comes back and
3 explains to her the procedures that she was
4 waiting for before she would sit with him
5 for an interview. He gets the answers and
6 he reports that he speaks to county
7 leadership about what the procedure would
8 be, but for five months he doesn't send an
9 e-mail, he doesn't write a letter, he
10 doesn't leave a message telling her what
11 the procedures would be. There is silence
12 on that subject. You'll hear that he
13 called a few times, but he never gave her
14 the procedures.
15 In June of 2017, he gets to the end
16 of his investigation. He still hasn't sat
17 with Karen. He writes her a letter. And
18 he says, listen, I'm at the end of my
19 investigation. Is there anything you want
20 to add? Karen writes back a letter on June
21 9th, which will be in the record, and she
22 says I'm waiting for the procedures. I'm
23 waiting for you to explain to me the due
24 process that I'm entitled before I sit. He
32
1 never responds to that. It's almost like

2 he didn't want to hear from her.
3 Ultimately his report comes out. You
4 have it. It makes, it confirms two things.
5 Number one, the Taylor report confirms that
6 Karen had a good faith basis for her
7 complaint. There are ten specific examples
8 that Karen provided about exclusion and he
9 goes through every one of those ten and
10 finds that in fact she and her office were
11 excluded or did not participate in the
12 process.
13 Now he also concludes that exclusion
14 was not discriminatory. That's his
15 conclusion. But really that's neither here
16 nor there for this case because the
17 principle is if you speak out about
18 discrimination and retaliation and you do
19 so in good faith, you can't be punished for
20 that even if you're mistaken about it. As
21 long as you're reasonable, you don't need
22 to be right. And Tim Taylor's 27 page
23 report by its very nature demonstrates the
24 reasonableness of the complaint.
33
1 The other thing that the report

2 demonstrates is that her request for due
3 process, to understand the procedures was
4 reasonable. There is no other way to read
5 that report. What's troubling and
6 disturbing is that he never gives her the
7 procedures and then he blames her for not
8 cooperating. That's blaming the victim.
9 Finally, I know you've been extremely
10 patient, but it's a bit of a long story.
11 The Taylor report, like the Hooks' report
12 before it, demonstrates the length to which
13 the county through its agents will go to
14 get rid of Karen Baer. They didn't just
15 investigate her claims and find them to be
16 unsubstantiated. If that's all there was,
17 we would have been disappointed, but we
18 would have understood because not everybody
19 sees these nuanced issues the same way.
20 Mr. Taylor went much further. He declared
21 her insubordinate. He declared the office
22 dysfunctional, and there is absolutely no
23 evidence to support those findings. In
24 fact you will hear evidence that shows that
34
1 this office was never more functional,

2 never more effective than under Karen
3 Baer's leadership. Mr. Taylor's report was
4 not a fair assessment of the facts. It was
5 the first draft of the charges in this
6 case.
7 You've been incredibly patient and I
8 appreciate it and it is a long story, but
9 the context matters. You have to see the
10 movie. We are going to demonstrate through
11 our evidence that the principles we all
12 agree on were violated in this case and the
13 only just result is to restore Karen Baer
14 to her job as the director of the Tompkins
15 County Office of Human Right. Thank you.
16 HEARING OFFICER: Thank you. We did
17 opening statements obviously. Is the
18 county prepared to call its first witness?
19 MR. MCCANN: Yes, we are.
20 HEARING OFFICER: I'll have you swear
21 in the witness.
22 (RECESS TAKEN.)
23 MR. MCCANN: The county legislature
24 calls Timothy Taylor as its first witness.
TIMOTHY TAYLOR by MR. MCCANN 35
1 T I M O T H Y T A Y L O R,
2 having been called as a witness,
3 having been duly sworn, was examined
4 and testified as follows:
5 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY
6 MR. MCCANN:
7 Q Good morning, Mr. Taylor.
8 A Good morning.
9 Q As you know I'm John McCann, attorney
10 representing the charging party in this case, the
11 Tompkins County legislature. With me here this
12 morning is Kathy Culver who is the clerk of the
13 legislature.
14 Mr. Taylor, what is your present
15 occupation?
16 A Presently I'm an arbitrator, mediator and
17 adjunct professor.
18 Q How long have you been an arbitrator?
19 A Since 2011.
20 Q Can you describe what your profession
21 entails as a professional arbitrator?
22 A As a professional arbitrator, mediator, I
23 serve as an unbiased and neutral in proceedings
24 that require me to be a fact finder in many
1 cases. I also resolve disputes mainly in the

2 sector of labor and employment law.
3 Q How were you selected to be an
4 arbitrator?
5 MS. SALZMAN: Objection, relevance.
6 MR. MCCANN: It goes to his
7 qualifications, credentials, background and
8 experience.
9 HEARING OFFICER: I'll allow some
10 background to be brought into it as to his
11 background and experience and professional
12 credentials, whatever it might be.
13 MR. MCCANN: Thank you.
14 A Arbitrators are chosen by the parties, so
15 being acceptable to both sides is the number one
16 thing. We strive to be fair and impartial. We
17 strive to have integrity and we also strive to be
18 confident in all matters that we become selected
19 for.
20 Q When you say both sides in the context of
21 labor relations, you're speaking of the employer
22 and the union?
23 A Both the employer and union or employee.
24 Q Are you presently a member of any
1 permanent arbitration panels?

2 A Yes, I am. Several.
3 Q What panels?
4 A The American Arbitration Association.
5 The Federal Conciliation and Mediation Service.
6 The Public Employer Relations Boards. I'm also a
7 mediator for the Civilian Police Review Board in
8 Albany. I serve on the New York State, New York
9 State Corrections Officers PBA. I also severe on
10 New York State Services or what we call Security
11 Services PBA. Those are the -- I'm also a full
12 time mediator for the City of New York, their
13 Department of Education and the United Federation
14 of Teachers.
15 HEARING OFFICER: Excuse me for
16 interrupting, but I want to get this, I
17 think you know what I'm going to say. I
18 want to get this clear. This hearing
19 officer also is a panel member for PERB,
20 the Public Employment Relations Board. I
21 serve under that board as a mediator and I
22 serve under that board also as a fact
23 finder. I have not worked, I've heard Mr.
24 Taylor's name, but I have not worked with
1 him in any way. Is that fair for, have we

2 ever met?
3 THE WITNESS: I don't believe we have
4 ever met, no, sir.
5 HEARING OFFICER: I want to just make
6 sure that that's part of and on the record.
7 MR. CELLI: And we have no issue with
8 that at all. That's totally appropriate.
9 HEARING OFFICER: I just wanted to
10 make sure, and I know you don't, but I
11 wanted to have it on the record as such
12 especially since PERB, the Public Employer
13 Relations Board was brought up. Excuse me
14 for interrupting.
15 Q As an arbitrator how do you go about
16 getting appointed to permanent panels for
17 agencies such as the American Arbitration
18 Association, the Federal Mediation and
19 Conciliation Service and the Public Employment
20 Relations Board?
21 A There are different ways depending on the
22 panel, but all of them require an extensive
23 background in terms of experience in the fields
24 that they represent, mainly labor and employment.
1 They also require some individual training. Many

2 of them require that you go to a week long
3 training, extensive training. On a yearly,
4 annual basis you have to go for continuing
5 education. They also, many of them require that
6 you actually be selected by parties before you
7 could even apply to be on their panel. Many of
8 them also require that you issue awards and
9 opinions and you are required, for example in the
10 federal panel, you're required to submit at least
11 five awards or decisions that you have written.
12 All of that goes to an overall feeling that the
13 parties will find you acceptable. They do that
14 kind of extensive. And then they do of course
15 background checks and things like that to make
16 sure that you have integrity.
17 Q I believe you testified you're also a
18 professor?
19 A I am a professor.
20 Q Where are you a professor?
21 A Currently I'm a professor at SUNY Albany
22 and currently in the Department of Africana
23 Studies, but I'm also a professor in the
24 Department of Political Science and I've recently
1 been asked to join the Rockefeller Institute

2 which is a quasi think tank dealing with issues
3 of state and local government.
4 Q Can you describe your role or your
5 responsibilities within the Department of
6 Africana Studies?
7 A To develop courses. I've been with them
8 since 2007, 2008. After that time I have
9 developed courses in the history of the civil
10 rights movement, law and the black community.
11 I've also taught on, developed courses in Black
12 Lives Matter and I'm currently developing a new
13 course on race law and society.
14 Q Is your role or responsibilities in the
15 Department of Political Science different or
16 different courses or is that included --
17 MS. SALZMAN: I have to object again,
18 Mr. Hearing Officer. Mr. Taylor is not
19 here as an expert witness. His academic
20 qualifications, while impressive, are not
21 relevant to the work that he was hired to
22 do in this matter or to the areas I believe
23 he is here to testify about, mainly the
24 report that he produced. So I would like
1 to move this along to an area of some

2 relevance to the hearing today.
3 HEARING OFFICER: Response?
4 MR. MCCANN: It's directly relevant
5 based not just on the background of the
6 case, but also the opening statement where
7 issue was taken of the role or the
8 investigation done by Edward Hooks. The
9 county legislature went to extreme to find
10 the most impeccable person they could to
11 conduct another investigation. And Mr.
12 Taylor's credentials are directly relevant
13 to both the reasons why he was selected and
14 to be responsive to any concerns that Karen
15 Baer may raise for the impartiality and
16 fairness of the investigation that Mr.
17 Taylor was asked to do.
18 HEARING OFFICER: I'm going to allow
19 the testimony. There is, I do want to see
20 the credentials, the knowledge, background,
21 the experience and the like of this
22 particular witness. It will play upon his
23 ability to conduct a fair investigation.
24 So yeah, I think it is relevant and
1 important so I'm going to respectfully ask

2 the witness to continue in that regard.
3 Thank you.
4 Q I believe the outstanding question was
5 directed to your role and responsibility within
6 the Department of Political Science?
7 A That's a role that I undertook about a
8 year and a half, two years ago. They asked me if
9 I would create a course on contemporary issues
10 and the one that they had a particular interest
11 was in the Black Lives Matter movement. So I
12 have been teaching that course for a year and a
13 half. I've taught that course three times now.
14 Yeah, I believe three times now. And as a result
15 of the success in that course, they asked me if I
16 would switch departments and also create a course
17 in race law and society which I'm working on now.
18 Q Is it fair to say that all the courses
19 that you made reference to, whether in the
20 Department of Africana Studies or Political
21 Science, were courses that you personally
22 developed?
23 A The courses that I personally developed,
24 yes.
1 Q What is your educational background?

2 A Starting from grade school?
3 Q Start with college.
4 A Okay. Starting with college I attended
5 the University of South Carolina in Columbia,
6 South Carolina. I graduated there in 1982. And
7 then I attended Cornell Law School and graduated
8 from Cornell which is here. So I graduated from
9 Cornell Law School, I don't even remember, I
10 think it was 1987, 1986. So from there I passed
11 the bar and have been practicing law ever since.
12 Q Where did you practice law upon
13 graduating from law school?
14 A I worked for, I went to the private
15 sector and worked for a law firm called Rowley,
16 Forrest, O'Donnell & Hite. They are a private
17 firm in Albany, New York. Their focus is mainly
18 on labor law and employment law, but they also
19 have private accounts so they represented
20 individual employers as well as state employees,
21 local employees. My practice there related to
22 police and firefighters and also correctional
23 officers, university police officers.
24 Q Did you represent unions or employees in
1 that capacity?
2 A They were unionized employees, but I also
3 had a practice where I represented individuals
4 and businesses. Some smaller doctor offices in
5 the health care industry as well. Also claim to
6 fame, I sold the Dewey Decimal System, for those
7 of you who remember that.
8 Q The what?
9 A The Dewey Decimal System. You know, the
10 system that they use in libraries. I represented
11 the family that owned the copyrights to the Dewey
12 Decimal System and we sold it to an online
13 computer systems.
14 HEARING OFFICER: You might object to
15 that.
16 MR. CELLI: It is kind of
17 fascinating.
18 HEARING OFFICER: It rounds it out.
19 Q How long were you at that firm?
20 A I was at that firm for roughly two years.
21 Q Where did you go from there?
22 A I left there and I joined the legal staff
23 of New York State United Teachers which is a
24 statewide organization that represents teachers
1 in all 711 school districts throughout the State

2 of New York.
3 Q What were your duties and
4 responsibilities as staff counsel?
5 A I did a little bit of everything. I was
6 a litigator so I represented the union and union
7 members in any and all actions. The bulk of the
8 work was representing teachers who were brought
9 up on disciplinary charges and did everything
10 from the initial investigation, meeting with
11 witnesses, traveling throughout the state. We
12 didn't hire private investigators, so we were
13 tasked with doing that ourselves as we looked
14 into the allegations that were brought forth
15 against them and worked on developing defenses.
16 So we had to spend a lot of time on the road,
17 interviewing, taking notes, everything that is
18 involved in investigations; and then we would
19 also present the case, defend the case. If we
20 won or lost the case, we would have to represent
21 them in the state and courts all the way from the
22 appellate division up to the Court of Appeals.
23 It was a full practice.
24 Q How many investigations did you conduct
1 as a staff attorney for the New York State United

2 Teachers?
3 A I would say in the time that I was there,
4 the 23 years that I was there I think a fair
5 number would probably be 300 to 400.
6 Q Did any of your investigations involve
7 claims or allegations of discrimination or
8 retaliation?
9 A Many of them did and most of those
10 however would be claims raised by what we call
11 the despondent. That's our client. The teacher
12 who is accused of certain actions many times,
13 their defense would be a counterclaim of
14 discrimination and we would have to then set
15 about to investigate their particular claims.
16 And many times that would lead to us filing in
17 the State Division of Human Rights or we would
18 file in Federal Court with the EEOC to try to get
19 a right to sue letter.
20 MR. MCCANN: I'd like this marked as
21 Charging Party Exhibit 1.
22 (CHARGING PARTY EXHIBIT NUMBER 1 WAS
24 Q Mr. Taylor, can you identify the document
1 I've had marked for identification as Charging

2 Party Exhibit 1?
3 A It appears to be a resume, my resume or
4 part of my resume.
5 Q Is this resume current?
6 A It's not, it's not current as of today.
7 I always, even at my age I'm also trying to do
8 different stuff and add to my resume, so there
9 are things that are changed.
10 Q What has changed?
11 A Where it says professional affiliations.
12 It has me listed as the cochair of the
13 legislation and regulatory committees for the New
14 York State Bar Association. I'm no longer
15 cochair of that committee. I'm cochair now of
16 the labor arbitration committee.
17 Q That's a committee of the New York State
18 Bar Association?
19 A The New York State Bar Association's
20 Labor and Employment Law Section. I'm also now a
21 member of the American Bar Association. Decided
22 to rejoin. I'm a member of the Albany County Bar
23 Association. So that has changed. Where it says
24 arbitration experience, I've been added to the
1 New York State Department of Education URT panel.

2 I'm also, believe, this says fact finding so
3 that's on there. I may have joined a couple or
4 been admitted to a couple of other panels. It
5 doesn't have some of my legal stuff. Like I'm
6 admitted to the Federal District Courts, the
7 northern, southern, eastern and western. I'm
8 also admitted to the U.S. Supreme Court, but
9 those things aren't here.
10 MR. MCCANN: I'd offer Charging Party
11 Exhibit 1.
12 MS. SALZMAN: No objection.
13 HEARING OFFICER: With no objection,
14 Charging Party Exhibit 1 is admitted into
15 the record evidence.
16 Q Mr. Taylor, were you contacted at some
17 point to conduct an investigation on behalf of
18 the Tompkins County legislature into allegations
19 made by Karen Baer?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Do you recall when you were retained to
22 conduct that investigation?
23 A I believe I was actually retained by
24 County Attorney Wood sometime either in late
1 December or early January. Late December 2016 or

2 early January 2017.
3 Q And did you agree to conduct an
4 investigation?
5 A I did.
6 Q What steps did you take to commence an
7 investigation of those claims?
8 A The first thing I can recall was that I
9 received e-mail transmissions that had gone on
10 between Ms. Baer and the county legislature. And
11 upon reviewing those documents, the next thing I
12 can recall doing is looking at my calendar. And
13 I was looking at my calendar for the purpose of
14 trying to get an idea of what dates I could
15 actually travel to Tompkins County and begin the
16 investigation; and I wanted to have those dates
17 in front of me before I made any phone calls.
18 Once I looked at my calendar and I had those
19 dates, I remember I placed a phone call to the
20 office -- and I'm losing my voice. I've been
21 sick so I apologize for that. But the next thing
22 I can recall doing was calling the Office of
23 Human Rights and I believe I spoke to someone in
24 the office and I asked to speak to Mrs. Baer and
1 they indicated they would take a message and I

2 left a message for her to call me and I left my
3 number and everything like that.
4 Q Did she call you?
5 A Yes. I believe she did call me, yes.
6 Q Do you recall that conversation?
7 A I recall speaking with her and we went
8 over, she wanted to know who I was. And so I
9 tried to tell her who I was, a little bit about
10 my background and why I was reaching out to her.
11 And she expressed some reservations about going
12 through the process with me. I can recall that
13 she wanted to know about the process. She also
14 wanted to know, I remember her telling me that
15 she did not want it to be an adversarial process
16 and that she was looking for conciliation and
17 mediation. And after that I said I would like to
18 meet with her and I said I would look into
19 whatever the process was for the county to
20 investigate the claims that she had and I told
21 her that I would get back to her once I found
22 that out.
23 Q When you refer to the process, what do
24 you mean?
1 A How they handled allegations of

2 discrimination, whether they be race or gender
3 bias. I wanted to know exactly what that process
4 was and I wanted to find out and I wanted to get
5 back to her.
6 Q Do different employers have different
7 procedures for that?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Did you get back to her?
10 A I did. I attempted to call her office on
11 numerous occasions to let her know what I found
12 out.
13 Q What happened when you called?
14 A At the beginning I think there was
15 someone who answered the phone and after the
16 first one or two attempts, there would just be an
17 answering machine that I could leave a message
18 with and so I would leave a message. And then I
19 believe after a certain point, there didn't even
20 appear to be an answering machine. That's just
21 my recollection, but I remember trying on
22 numerous occasions to leave messages. When I
23 could leave a message, I would leave a message
24 for her to get back in touch with me.
1 Q How many times did you attempt to contact

2 Ms. Baer?
3 A I know I made an attempt to call her at
4 least every time I was going to come out to
5 Tompkins County. I made five separate trips. I
6 remember calling her from the Tompkins County
7 office that I was using at the time when I was
8 out here. And the last thing I recall doing is
9 sending her a letter as my investigation was
10 wrapping up.
11 Q Did Ms. Baer ever return any of your
12 calls?
13 A I never heard back from her.
14 Q As part of the opening statement given
15 this morning --
16 MR. CELLI: Objection. This is not
17 about characterizing the opening statement.
18 If he has a question, he should ask a
19 question. That is an improper question in
20 my view. Sorry to jump in.
21 HEARING OFFICER: I have some
22 discretion in an administrative hearing as
23 you're well aware, so I don't think it's
24 going to prejudice me or counsel to restate
1 what you stated already. So I'll allow the

2 question.
3 MR. CELLI: I respect your ruling and
4 I'll be quiet, but the issue really is
5 about the witness. The witness is not
6 permitted to be here for opening
7 statements. What we're hearing now is an
8 attempt to communicate things that were
9 said in opening statement and I think
10 that's the basis of the objection. I'm not
11 concerned about you, sir. I'm concerned
12 about the witness.
13 HEARING OFFICER: Can you rephrase
14 the question?
15 MR. MCCANN: Yes, I can, but I can
16 also respond to that. Mr. Taylor is here
17 today. He is from Albany. Based on the
18 opening statement given by Ms. Baer's
19 counsel --
20 MR. CELLI: I would object to this
21 colloquy happening in front of the witness.
22 MR. MCCANN: Then stop your own
23 colloquy.
24 MR. CELLI: Exactly the point. We
1 shouldn't be depositing the opening

2 statement when a witness is in the room.
3 That's the whole point of sequestration.
4 MR. MCCANN: No. Sequestration does
5 not go to opening statements. It goes to
6 testimony. You do not sequester witnesses
7 from opening statements.
8 MR. CELLI: You do sequester
9 witnesses during opening statements.
10 HEARING OFFICER: I'm going to cut
11 off the banter back and forth despite how
12 much you counselors must enjoy that and
13 let's, I'll allow the question. But,
14 Counsel, please know I'll give you the same
15 kind of leeway.
16 MR. CELLI: Thank you, sir.
17 Q In his opening statement in support of
18 Karen Baer's position, counsel for Karen Baer
19 made the statement that after the conversation
20 where she asked to know the process that you
21 followed, that you never got back to her. Is
22 that a true statement?
23 A That is not a true statement.
24 MR. CELLI: If I may, Your Honor. I
1 have to object. It's not what I said.

2 MR. MCCANN: It is what was said.
3 MR. CELLI: If he wants to ask if he
4 ever got back and get an answer to that,
5 that's fine, but that's not what I said. I
6 was very careful with what I said and I'm
7 not going to repeat it because that would
8 communicate the issue to the witness which
9 isn't fair. So that is not what was said
10 and we can look at the transcript.
11 HEARING OFFICER: Let me try this if
12 I may without being an advocate for either
13 side. Do you recall if Karen Baer asked
14 for the procedures you would employ?
15 A She asked me to inform her of the
16 process.
17 HEARING OFFICER: She did?
18 A Yes.
19 HEARING OFFICER: And did you do
20 that?
21 A I attempted to do that.
22 HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Is everybody
23 happy as they can be?
24 MR. CELLI: That's fine.
1 Q And by attempt to do that, you called her

2 office?
3 A Yes.
4 MS. SALZMAN: Objection to leading
5 the witness. This is direct examination.
6 MR. MCCANN: We're just getting back
7 to where we were before the objection
8 because he testified to this.
9 HEARING OFFICER: I'm going to allow.
10 Rather than being highly technical and I
11 understand your objection with respect to
12 leading the witness on direct examination,
13 I'll allow the question.
14 MR. MCCANN: I can just start over
15 again.
16 MS. SALZMAN: Conduct your
17 examination as you see fit, John.
18 Q Did Ms. Baer ever get back to you in
19 response to the messages you left for her?
20 A Yes.
21 Q When?
22 A She wrote me a letter in June, June 9th I
23 believe it was, when -- I think on or about June
24 9th is when I received it. I don't remember the
1 date of the letter.

2 Q I'll come back to the letter, but in
3 response to your phone messages?
4 A I never received a telephone response. I
5 never received a call back.
6 Q Did Ms. Baer at any point agree to
7 cooperate in your investigation?
8 A No.
9 Q Did Ms. Baer present a mountain of
10 evidence to you?
11 A I received no evidence.
12 Q Did Ms. Baer agree to conduct an
13 interview with you?
14 A No.
15 Q After contacting or attempting to contact
16 Ms. Baer, what other steps did you take to
17 conduct an investigation?
18 A I looked at the e-mails that had gone
19 forth between Ms. Baer and the legislature. I
20 reviewed those e-mails in great detail. I then
21 began to identify individuals whose names
22 appeared in the e-mails. After I identified
23 individuals whose names appeared in the e-mails,
24 I then set about dissecting the e-mails and
1 trying to discern from them what her allegations

2 were. I looked for patterns. I also looked for
3 discrete categories of claims of retaliation and
4 exclusion. I was able to identify just by
5 looking at those various e-mails some 11
6 different categories that I felt were discrete
7 enough that I could begin to use those as issues.
8 Once I had my issues and once I had the
9 individuals, I then looked at my calendar again
10 and I then began to call up the county
11 legislature.
12 In particular I wanted to talk to the
13 deputy, I wanted to talk to the county
14 administrator first of all because I needed
15 background information as to how things worked in
16 Tompkins County. So I set up an interview with
17 him and then I set up an interview with the
18 deputy administrator and I began to set up
19 interviews with the different individuals who
20 were listed in the e-mails.
21 Q What did you do next?
22 A Packed up and drove to Ithaca on several
23 occasions. Made sure that I had a secure
24 location in which to meet with people. The
1 county arranged for me to have a secure location.

2 I wanted to make sure that this was kept as
3 confidential and as private as possible, so I
4 needed a very discrete location, a place that was
5 not going to be in public. I traveled to Ithaca,
6 set up shop and then began calling in individuals
7 to have an in-person interview.
8 Q How many interviews did you conduct?
9 A I believe it was 13.
10 Q How did you determine who to interview?
11 A They were individuals who were listed on
12 e-mails and then once I met with those people, I
13 would ask them if there was anyone else they
14 thought I should talk to. And sometimes people
15 had other names for me to speak with and
16 sometimes they didn't.
17 Q After conducting the interviews with some
18 13 individuals, did you make any further attempt
19 to contact Ms. Baer?
20 HEARING OFFICER: Excuse me for
21 interrupting. When you say individuals,
22 does that mean employees of the county or?
23 A Human beings.
24 HEARING OFFICER: Some might not have
1 been employees of the county? If you

2 recall.
3 A I believe all of them were either county
4 legislators. I don't know if that makes you an
5 employee or not, but there were county
6 legislators. There were the county
7 administrator, the deputy county administrator.
8 There was the head of the largest department in
9 the county. And there were, I wanted to speak to
10 someone who had knowledge of their personnel
11 policies.
12 HEARING OFFICER: Thank you.
13 A So there were that type.
14 HEARING OFFICER: Pardon me for
15 interrupting.
16 Q My question was did you make any further
17 contact or attempt to contact Ms. Baer?
18 A As I was concluding my investigation
19 there was one county legislator who I recall
20 being out of the country, but he was going to be
21 returning in June and I looked at my calendar and
22 there was a date in June that I set aside to
23 return to Ithaca. And before I returned, I
24 wanted to give Ms. Baer another opportunity to
1 provide me with any and all information that she

2 thought was going to be pertinent to my
3 investigation; and also I wanted to give her
4 another opportunity to meet with me on that
5 occasion.
8 HEARING OFFICER: Marking for
9 identification please.
10 MR. MCCANN: For identification.
11 HEARING OFFICER: Marked for
12 identification at this point.
13 Q Mr. Taylor, can you identify what I have
14 had marked as Charging Party Exhibit 2?
15 MS. SALZMAN: John, can I just ask
16 this appears not to be the final version of
17 the letter. Are you deliberately putting a
18 draft in front of the witness?
19 MR. CELLI: I have a final version.
20 MR. MCCANN: If you let me lay a
21 foundation with the witness, I believe your
22 question will be answered.
23 Q Mr. Taylor, can you identify the document
24 I've had marked as Charging Party Exhibit 2 for
1 identification?
2 A Yes. This appears to be the letter that
3 I sent to Ms. Baer.
4 Q Is there a reason why his particular
5 letter is not on letterhead?
6 A My practice, and this just comes from the
7 old school way of doing things. We would always
8 send formal letters out on office stationery, but
9 the letter to file would always be printed on a
10 plain either pink, many people don't remember
11 this, but they would be pink or yellow tissue
12 like paper. I just still follow those old
13 practices.
14 Q Did you send a letter to Ms. Baer on
15 letterhead dated June 5, 2017?
16 A Yes.
17 Q And was that letter signed by you?
18 A That letter was signed by me.
19 Q And was that letter the same as the
20 letter that appears before you as a copy?
21 A I believe it was.
23 Exhibit 2.
24 MS. SALZMAN: Why don't we use the
1 final letter? We have a copy. Would you

2 like one?
3 MR. MCCANN: Sure, if you want to
4 give it to me.
5 HEARING OFFICER: Yeah. If you have
6 the final, we will have that be Charging
7 Party 2 rather than this.
8 MS. SALZMAN: Right.
9 MR. MCCANN: I will withdraw what had
10 been marked as Charging Party 1.
11 HEARING OFFICER: I assume there is
12 no objection?
14 HEARING OFFICER: With that, Charging
15 Party 2 is admitted into the record.
16 Q Just for clarification, Mr. Taylor, would
17 you compare Charging Party 2 as presently marked
18 for identification with the copy that you have
19 previously given testimony on and let me know if
20 the contents are identical?
21 A They are not identical, no.
22 Q How are they different?
23 A The re line, the one that the one I think
24 was marked, but not received, the re line says
1 complaint. While on the actual letter that I

2 sent it says investigation. Also on the second
3 line on the unsigned letter, there is not a comma
4 after New York nor is there a comma after the
5 year 2017. I believe those are the only changes.
6 Q Okay. Thank you.
7 HEARING OFFICER: I still have
8 Exhibit 2 in evidence.
10 MR. MCCANN: Received in evidence?
11 HEARING OFFICER: Yeah.
12 MR. MCCANN: I'll have this marked as
16 Q I'm going to show you a document I've had
17 marked for identification as Charging Party
18 Exhibit 3. Can you identify that document?
19 A This is the correspondence that I
20 received from Karen Baer.
21 Q Did you receive that on or about or
22 shortly after the date indicated June 9, 2017?
23 A Yes. I recall receiving this before I
24 was scheduled to go to Ithaca on the 13th, and so
1 I recall receiving it during that period of time.

2 Q Can you read the last two sentences of
3 her letter? Let me do this first.
4 MR. MCCANN: I would offer Charging
5 Party Exhibit 3.
7 HEARING OFFICER: Without any
8 objection, Charging Party 3 is admitted.
9 A It says these reasons, of course, are why
10 I have not responded to your calls and will
11 continue to do so in the future. I will
12 eventually tell my story, but on my own terms and
13 in my own time. Sincerely, Karen W. Baer.
14 Q After receiving this letter, did you make
15 any further effort to attempt to interview Ms.
16 Baer?
17 A No.
18 Q Did you return to Ithaca for your final
19 interview after you received this letter?
20 A No.
21 Q Is there a reason why you did not?
22 A Yes. The individual that I needed to
23 speak with contacted me and even though we had
24 arranged to meet because he was my last interview
1 that I was going to conduct and it was not going

2 to be a substantial one, it was not going to take
3 more than one or two hours, we both agreed that
4 the time that it would spend for me to drive out
5 to Ithaca, interview him for two hours and then
6 return was not an efficient use of time. And so
7 instead of doing an in-person interview, I called
8 him at a designated time and conducted the
9 interview over the telephone.
10 Q Who was that individual?
11 A I don't recall. He was a county
12 legislator. He had been out of the county. I
13 just, I don't recall who it was. It's going to
14 be -- I just don't recall.
15 Q Did you take any other steps to conclude
16 your investigation?
17 A Yes.
18 Q What did you do?
19 A I reviewed all of the documents and all
20 of the policy manuals and guidebooks that had
21 been provided to me during my visits. I also
22 went back over all of the notes that I had taken
23 from all of the interviews. I also went onto the
24 website again and I checked the Tompkins County
1 website at various departments. Looked at the

2 various department handbooks and guides. I
3 reviewed the policies. I looked at the charters.
4 I looked at the job duties of the director for
5 the Office of Human Rights. I reviewed minutes.
6 Some of the minutes were online. I reviewed
7 minutes from all of the different committees and
8 subcommittees that have had meetings. I recall
9 doing all of that at the end just to make sure
10 that I had enough information to move forward.
11 Q And by moving forward, what do you mean
12 by that?
13 A The final writing of the investigation
14 report or the report of investigation.
15 Q Did you prepare a report?
16 A Yes, I did.
17 MR. MCCANN: Mr. Hearing Officer,
18 would you show the witness Hearing Officer
19 Exhibit 3?
20 Q Can you identify that document?
21 A Yes. This is my report of investigation.
22 Q This report appears to be directed to the
23 Honorable Michael Lane, Chair of the Tompkins
24 County Legislature. Did you send the report to
1 Mr. Lane?
2 A Yes, I did.
3 Q Did you send it to him on or about the
4 date indicated, July 11, 2017?
5 A Yes, I did.
6 Q And is that your signature that appears
7 on page 27 of your report?
8 A That is my signature.
9 Q And is that the report that you prepared
10 as part of your engagement by Tompkins County to
11 conduct an investigation?
12 A Yes.
13 MR. MCCANN: I offer into evidence
14 Hearing Officer Exhibit 3.
15 HEARING OFFICER: I thought those,
16 maybe it was my misunderstanding, I thought
17 those were already in the evidence record
18 and agreed they were part of the record.
19 Is that?
20 MR. MCCANN: I believe we agreed it
21 was part of the record, but not actually
22 admitted as evidence into the record in the
23 sense that these documents exist, but I'm
24 offering that document as evidence in this
1 case.
2 HEARING OFFICER: Let me -- Counsel?
3 MS. SALZMAN: Yeah. We are just
4 conferring. If we could have just one
5 minute.
6 HEARING OFFICER: Sure.
7 MS. SALZMAN: Mr. Hearing Officer, we
8 don't dispute the authenticity of this
9 document or that it was a report created by
10 Mr. Taylor and submitted to the
11 legislature. We do obviously take issue
12 with Mr. Taylor's findings, many of the
13 findings made in the report. But with that
14 objection noted and preserved on the
15 record, I think it is appropriate to have
16 in the record that he wrote this report and
17 submitted it to the legislature.
18 HEARING OFFICER: Sure. Let me do
19 this. I've made Hearing Officer Exhibits 1
20 through 5, I thought they were entered into
21 the record, all right, already. But with
22 the understanding that these are documents
23 on file in the record, but that you're not
24 necessarily agreeing to their contents at
1 this point. Fair statement?

2 MR. MCCANN: That's a fair statement.
3 HEARING OFFICER: Okay. With that
4 statement, can we put Hearing Officer's
5 Exhibit 1 through 5 in the record?
6 MR. MCCANN: No. It goes back to the
7 conversation we had at the outset. The
8 difficulty that the county has is that the
9 answer submitted on behalf of Karen Baer
10 is, A, not a personal statement, B,
11 includes a lot of hearsay statement and, C,
12 includes a lot of unsubstantiated
13 allegations that is incumbent upon Ms. Baer
14 through her counsel to present evidence in
15 support of. The document itself is not of
16 evidentiary value absent some kind of
17 support, authentication, foundation laid
18 for the various statements set forth in
19 that document. We have no difficulty with
20 it being presented as her answer and that's
21 why it was marked as Hearing Officer
22 Exhibit 4. But we would object to it being
23 offered for the truth of the contents of
24 the document.
1 HEARING OFFICER: And that was my

2 understanding. They are not being offered
3 or accepted into evidence with the
4 understanding that the parties are agreeing
5 to the truthfulness or accuracy of the
6 document. Only that they are on file as
7 documents.
8 MR. MCCANN: I think we've done that
9 by marking it as Hearing Officer 4.
10 HEARING OFFICER: And can we put that
11 into the record now though, 1 through 5 are
12 admitted with no understanding or agreement
13 whatsoever as to their validity or
14 accuracy?
15 MR. MCCANN: With that understanding,
16 yes.
17 MS. SALZMAN: Agreed.
18 HEARING OFFICER: Okay. For the
19 record let me say Hearing Officer Exhibits
20 1 through 5 are only accepted into the
21 record as documents on file. It's the
22 parties' further understanding that there
23 is no agreement as to their validity or
24 accuracy. Okay, Counsel?

2 MS. SALZMAN: Thank you.
3 Q Mr. Taylor, I would like to direct your
4 attention to the first page of your report toward
5 the bottom. There is a reference to the Hooks'
6 report of investigation. Do you see that
7 reference?
8 A Yes.
9 Q What is the Hooks' report of
10 investigation?
11 A It was a report of investigation that was
12 completed by an attorney who I believe was also
13 retained at some point by the legislature and Mr.
14 Hooks had done an investigation and his
15 investigation was reduced to his report.
16 Q Did you review his report?
17 A I reviewed his report. Not in great
18 detail however. I did receive it. I did review
19 it. But I was tasked with not going back over
20 the material that he had covered in his
21 investigation.
22 Q For what purpose did you review his
23 report?
24 A I believe it was submitted to me by way
1 of background. Just to have an idea of what the

2 actual allegation was that led to her claim that
3 on November, the November 20th date sticks out in
4 my mind was an important date and that was the
5 date related to the Hooks' investigation.
6 Q There is a reference on the next page to
7 the date of November 20, 2015. Do you see that
8 reference?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And appears to be a reference to a
11 letter. Do you know what that letter was?
12 A I believe that she wrote a letter and
13 that was the date of the letter. And in her
14 November 20th letter, she had some objections to
15 the report and investigation by, this is my
16 recollection, by Hooks and that letter was kind
17 of the catalyst because in that letter she had
18 made claims I believe of retaliation.
19 Q Let me direct your attention to the
20 sentence, you read it to yourself to refresh your
21 recollection, it appears just after the November
22 20th letter that starts specifically.
23 A Right after that one?
24 Q Yeah. If you can just read it to
1 yourself and I'll ask if that refreshes your

2 recollection.
3 A Okay.
4 Q Does that refresh your recollection in
5 any way as to the reasons why you reviewed the
6 November 20th, 2015 letter or the Hooks'
7 investigation report?
8 A I just remember, and like I say I
9 remember that her letter, and I don't know if
10 I've got, if there is a copy of it. I remember
11 that her letter was that that moment that once
12 she had sent that letter in, she believed that
13 her writing that letter had led to acts of
14 retaliation and exclusion.
15 Q Directing your attention to page seven of
16 your report. Would you read the paragraph, the
17 first full paragraph without any indentation that
18 appears at the bottom of the page starting Ms.
19 Baer as director of the Office of Human Rights.
20 A Ms. Baer, as the director of the Office
21 of Human Rights, should know that a person filing
22 a complaint must be prepared to identify the
23 individuals, if any, who saw or heard something
24 that supports her claim of discrimination. She
1 must also identify any other individuals who in a

2 situation similar to hers may have been treated
3 the same or differently by the alleged
4 discriminator. And she must identify the
5 specific dates of the incidents or acts. Her
6 allegations were unspecified and lack the facts
7 needed to make a claim of discrimination.
8 Without her assistance. I attempted to
9 investigate her allegations through visits to
10 Tompkins County, in-person interviews, telephone
11 conversations and document reviews.
12 Q Why did you include that paragraph in
13 your report?
14 A I guess I was, I was shocked and dismayed
15 that someone whose primary function as an
16 employee was to know how to file complaints and
17 how to navigate civil rights and claims of
18 discrimination would not in her complaints set
19 forth a prima fascia case, who would set forth
20 the sufficient details to actually make a claim
21 of discrimination and I found that to be off
22 putting at the beginning. And I found great
23 difficulties with that failure.
24 Q I'll direct your attention to page ten of
1 your report. Would you read the last full

2 paragraph on that page, again the paragraph after
3 the indented portion that starts without the
4 benefit?
5 A Without the benefit of Ms. Baer's input
6 and articulation of her broad, unspecified
7 claims, it was very difficult to develop a
8 framework of analysis. It is extremely unusual
9 for a claimant to refuse to participate in the
10 investigation of her claims. Ms. Baer's employer
11 has directed her to participate into the
12 investigation of her claims and yet she has
13 refused. In my opinion her conduct is
14 insubordinate. The fact that the claimant who is
15 refusing to participate is the director of the
16 Office of Human Rights makes this refusal
17 outrageous. Her behavior has also caused
18 unnecessary delay and obfuscation.
19 Q On what basis did you conclude that Ms.
20 Baer's employer had directed her to participate
21 in the investigation?
22 A I received as part of the e-mail packet
23 that I received a letter from I believe it was
24 Legislator Michael Lane that directed her to
1 cooperate with my investigation.

2 Q Do you recall the statement Mr. Lane used
3 to direct her participation?
4 A I believe it was words to the effect
5 please participate or please cooperate with the
6 investigation.
7 Q Do you consider that to be a directive?
8 A Yes. When it comes from your boss and
9 your boss is telling you to do something, that's
10 a directive.
11 Q Staying with this paragraph, why did you
12 consider Ms. Baer's refusal to participate in the
13 investigation to be outrageous?
14 A The claims that Ms. Baer was making.
15 They were claims of systemic racism and gender
16 discrimination by the county government. That's
17 a very serious claim. It's a severe claim. It
18 goes to the relationship of all citizens in the
19 County of Tompkins with their elected officials.
20 She, in the position that she had, her duties as
21 the director of human rights was to act as a
22 conduit between the citizens and their government
23 on these important issues of human rights and
24 civil rights. The fact that she herself was not
1 participating in the investigation of claims when

2 it was her duty to do so caused there to be a
3 toxic environment. To put that kind of
4 allegation in the air, to make that kind of claim
5 against the entire county government and then not
6 back it up and then not work with the
7 investigator to explore and to validate her
8 claims was outrageous.
9 Q Now part of what you read a few minutes
10 ago you nevertheless went forward and conducted
11 an investigation as best you could without her
12 support?
13 MS. SALZMAN: Can you repeat that
14 question? I didn't hear you.
15 MR. MCCANN: I believe it was part of
16 his testimony a few minutes ago that he
17 indicated he attempted to continue to
18 conduct an investigation without her
19 cooperation.
20 Q And my question is were you able to
21 complete an investigation?
22 A To the best of my ability.
23 Q Did you make findings of fact and
24 conclusions?
1 A I believe that I did.

2 Q I direct your attention to page 25 of
3 your report under the heading findings. Would
4 you read that paragraph?
5 A For each of the above claims of
6 discrimination I find that Ms. Baer has not
7 established that the county intended to take an
8 adverse action against her in the manner alleged.
9 I find that even assuming that an adverse action
10 was taken, there was a legitimate non retaliatory
11 reason for the action. I also find that Ms. Baer
12 has not established that the adverse action would
13 not have been taken but for her November 20th,
14 2015 claims.
15 Q And you referred to each of the above
16 claims of discrimination. Is that a reference to
17 the 11 discrete areas that you identified to
18 pursue during the course of your investigation?
19 A Yes. Those were the items that when I
20 looked at the e-mails that had gone back and
21 forth that I was able to call out as isolated
22 claims to the best of my ability to do so. And
23 then I set forth each one of those under a
24 different heading. And I then met with the 13
1 different individuals. I would ask them

2 questions, pretty much the same questions of the
3 same people that related to those topics.
4 Because I wasn't really given a framework for
5 analysis by the complainant, I had to develop one
6 based on e-mails and documents that had been
7 given to me. And so those different areas became
8 my framework as I moved forward.
9 Q Did you address each of those areas in
10 your report?
11 A I attempted to do so.
12 Q Does that appear in the pages that appear
13 before your findings of fact on page 25?
14 A Those start on page 13 and run through
15 page 25.
16 Q I'd like to direct your attention now to
17 the conclusion, conclusions set forth in your
18 report. And in particular to the last three
19 paragraphs that start on page 26 starting plainly
20 stated. Would you read those please?
21 A Plainly stated, the Tompkins County
22 director of human rights is alleging that the
23 county government is engaged in systemic and
24 institutional discrimination against women and
1 people of color. She alleges overt and covert

2 acts of discrimination, exclusionary and
3 retaliatory practices. She makes these severe
4 allegations without any evidence and refuses to
5 even meet with an independent investigator. Her
6 behavior is baffling and bizarre. The fact that
7 the director of OHR has made very serious
8 allegations of racism and sexism, but refuses to
9 participate in the investigation of those
10 allegations have created a dysfunctional
11 environment. Her behavior has completely
12 delegitimized the work of the OHR. In my opinion
13 her actions constitute insubordination,
14 incompetence, neglect of duty and misconduct. As
15 a result, I believe that the OHR can no longer
16 carry out its functions and the director can no
17 longer carry out her duties. After a full and
18 fair investigation I find that Ms. Baer's claims
19 are unfounded, unsubstantiated and unsupported by
20 any credible evidence.
21 Q Thank you, Mr. Taylor.
22 MR. MCCANN: I have no further
23 questions.
24 HEARING OFFICER: Are you prepared to
TIMOTHY TAYLOR by MS. SALZMAN 82
1 start your cross or do you want to take

2 time?
3 MS. SALZMAN: I'm prepared. I'm
4 going to use the podium if that's all right
5 with everyone. I can stay a little more
6 organized up there.
7 CROSS EXAMINATION BY
8 MS. SALZMAN:
9 Q Good morning, Mr. Taylor. Just shy of
10 the afternoon.
11 A Good morning.
12 Q My name is Zoe Salzman. I'm a lawyer
13 from a law firm called Emery, Celli, Brinckerhoff
14 & Abady and we represent Karen Baer in this
15 proceeding. As you know it's my job to ask you
16 some questions on cross examination.
17 You began your testimony by talking at
18 some length about your impressive qualifications
19 including your experience as an arbitrator,
20 correct?
21 A I did not characterize them as
22 impressive.
23 Q Well, let the record reflect I
24 characterized them that way. But fair to say you
1 began your testimony talking about your

2 experience as an arbitrator?
3 A Yes, ma'am.
4 Q And you described that in an arbitration,
5 both sides choose you to work on their case,
6 correct?
7 A Yes, ma'am.
8 Q And that's not what happened here, right?
9 Karen Baer wasn't asked to participate in the
10 selection of you as the person who would
11 investigate her complaints; is that fair to say?
12 A I don't know.
13 Q Well, you were hired and paid by the
14 county legislature; isn't that right?
15 A Yes, ma'am.
16 Q This wasn't an arbitration, correct?
17 A It was not an arbitration.
18 Q It was supposed to be an investigation?
19 A It was an investigation.
20 Q Now you described your initial steps when
21 you were first retained by the county and you
22 said you made a phone call to the Office of Human
23 Rights and you left a message for Ms. Baer and
24 then she called you back, right?
1 A I believe that's correct.

2 Q And you had an initial phone call with
3 Ms. Baer that lasted some length, correct?
4 A Some length, yes.
5 Q Approximately 40 minutes?
6 A I don't recall how long it was.
7 Q You have no recollection of how long the
8 call was?
9 A I don't.
10 Q And during that phone call Ms. Baer
11 informed you that she had concerns about the
12 process that you were going to be employing,
13 right?
14 A I believe she had concerns about the
15 process.
16 Q Well, about your process, right?
17 A I don't know if it was my, if it was my
18 process.
19 Q Let me direct your attention to your
20 report, which I think you still have in front of
21 you, and to page eight which is a section Mr.
22 McCann did not ask you to read from.
23 A Page eight?
24 Q Yeah. You wrote in your report on
1 February 1st, 2017, I phoned Ms. Baer to

2 introduce myself and arrange a meeting. Ms. Baer
3 informed me that she did not trust the process
4 and wanted to know what procedure the county was
5 following to address her claims. Ms. Baer told
6 me that she did not want to meet with me until
7 she was aware of the process for investigating
8 her complaints. Do you see that, Mr. Taylor?
9 A Yes.
10 Q So in that initial phone call Ms. Baer
11 told you that she had concerns and she wanted to
12 know what the process was going to be for your
13 investigation, right?
14 A She wanted to know what the process was
15 for investigating her complaint.
16 Q And you were doing that investigation,
17 right?
18 A I was conducting an investigation into
19 the claims that she had made, yes.
20 Q And it's not uncommon for victims of
21 discrimination and retaliation to be afraid of
22 further retaliation, right?
23 A I don't know.
24 Q In the course of your 3 to 400
1 investigations, have you encountered victims of

2 discrimination and retaliation who are afraid of
3 further retaliation?
4 A Many of them are afraid of losing their
5 jobs.
6 Q And that would be a form of retaliation,
7 right?
8 A It would -- well, it depends. If it was,
9 if there was a connection, yes.
10 Q And Ms. Baer was telling you in this
11 initial phone call that she was afraid, right?
12 A I didn't get that sense.
13 Q You knew she was alleging retaliation had
14 happened to her already, right?
15 A I didn't have any real clear idea of what
16 her claims were at that point. At that point I
17 had received some information in terms of some
18 e-mails, but I hadn't sat down because I don't
19 like, my practice was and still remains to know
20 as little as possible about a case before I
21 actually sit down with the person who is making
22 the allegations.
23 Q Mr. Taylor, you testified on direct
24 examination the very first thing you did was
1 review e-mails --
2 A Yes, I did.
3 Q -- that you had received between Karen
4 Baer and the legislature; isn't that right?
5 A The first thing I did was look at the
6 e-mails and then looked at my calendar.
7 Q And those e-mails that you looked at
8 between Ms. Baer and the legislature, they stated
9 that she believed she was experiencing
10 retaliation, correct?
11 A Without having them in front of me, I
12 don't recall exactly what was said.
13 MS. SALZMAN: Let's put them in front
14 of you.
15 HEARING OFFICER: Is this to be
16 marked for identification?
17 MS. SALZMAN: If we could mark it as
18 Respondent's Exhibit A.
19 (RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT A WAS MARKED
20 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
21 HEARING OFFICER: Respondent Exhibit
22 A is before the witness.
23 MS. SALZMAN: Thank you, Mr. Hearing
24 Officer.
1 Q Mr. Taylor, looking at the documents I

2 placed before you. Are they a series of e-mails
3 between Karen Baer and Michael Lane and other
4 members of the Tompkins County legislature?
5 A I believe I did see this one. This one
6 is dated October 23rd. Is that the one you want
7 me to look at?
8 Q I would like you to look at all of them.
9 A Okay.
10 Q I'm just trying to refresh your
11 recollection --
12 A I would have to actually look at this.
13 Q -- that they were what you received.
14 Please take your time.
15 A Yes. I believe these were, I don't know
16 if these are all that I had at the beginning, but
17 these were, I've seen these e-mails before.
18 MS. SALZMAN: Mr. McCann, can we move
19 those into evidence?
20 MR. MCCANN: If you're offering it, I
21 have no objection.
22 HEARING OFFICER: With that,
23 Respondent A is admitted into evidence.
24 Q And do you see, directing your attention
1 to the July 6, 2016 e-mail in Exhibit A, Mr.

2 Taylor.
3 A July 6.
4 Q The last one in your stack.
5 A July 6. Yes, ma'am.
6 Q Do you see where Ms. Baer wrote I fully
7 realize that many of you are not motivated to
8 exclude or even know or believe the fuller story
9 as I have conveyed it, but I did want to make you
10 aware that there exists a climate within this
11 county work force where exclusion and retribution
12 is able to take hold in a very oppressive way.
13 So I relate to you this story by way of example
14 in order to allow you an opportunity to possibly
15 empathize with what it must feel like for me and
16 my staff, all persons of color, to read the
17 highlights of your meeting last night and realize
18 how invisible it makes us and our efforts seem in
19 your eyes. In many ways what has transpired does
20 not appear dissimilar, both in style and impact,
21 to the types of old school tactics used for
22 decades to exclude people like us. Do you see
23 that?
24 A Yes, ma'am.
1 Q So when you reviewed this e-mail and the

2 others you were aware when you had that initial
3 phone call with Karen Baer that she was concerned
4 about retaliation, correct?
5 A I don't recall if I had read the entire
6 packet to the degree that you're reading it now
7 before I made that first phone call, before I
8 made that first phone call and then she returned
9 my phone call.
10 Q On the phone call Ms. Baer told you that
11 she had allegations of discrimination and
12 retaliation and that she was concerned about
13 further retaliation, correct?
14 A I don't recall that.
15 Q Ms. Baer told you that she wanted a
16 written explanation of the process before she sat
17 down to be interviewed by you, correct?
18 A I don't recall that either.
19 Q Well, let me direct your attention to
20 your report again, page eight and nine, last
21 sentence on page eight. Ms. Baer told me --
22 HEARING OFFICER: Just a second. Let
23 me get it in front of the witness. You
24 said pages eight and nine?
1 MS. SALZMAN: Yes, the sentence

2 begins on page eight.
3 Q This is your report summarizing that call
4 that you had with Ms. Baer, correct?
5 A The beginning of, you're talking about
6 where it says investigation?
7 Q Correct.
8 A Yes, ma'am.
9 Q And you wrote Ms. Baer told me that she
10 did not want to meet with me until she was aware
11 of the process for investigating her complaint.
12 That's what you wrote there, right?
13 A Yes, ma'am.
14 Q And then you also wrote I informed her
15 that I would contact her after I learned of the
16 exact procedure or process; do you see that?
17 A Yes.
18 Q So Ms. Baer asked you for the process and
19 you told her you would get it for her?
21 A Yes. I informed her that I would contact
22 her.
23 HEARING OFFICER: Excuse me. What
24 was your objection?
1 MR. MCCANN: Mischaracterizes his

2 testimony with get it for her. That was
3 not his testimony.
4 MS. SALZMAN: This is cross
5 examination. I'm not characterizing his
6 testimony.
7 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Misstating
8 and mischaracterizes the testimony. If you
9 want to ask the question a different way, I
10 have no objection.
11 HEARING OFFICER: Can you rephrase to
12 this extent, if Karen Baer asked and he
13 recalls her asking it and if he responded.
14 MS. SALZMAN: Well, he's already
15 testified that he recalls her asking.
16 HEARING OFFICER: Right.
17 Q And you wrote in your report I informed
18 her that I would contact her after I learned of
19 the exact procedure or process, correct?
20 A That is correct.
21 Q So you communicated to her that you would
22 get back to her with the process, correct?
23 A I communicated that I would contact her
24 after I learned of the exact procedural process.
1 Q You didn't tell her she wasn't entitled

2 to know what the process was before she met with
3 you, right?
4 A I don't know, I don't understand your
5 question.
6 Q You didn't tell her when you were
7 speaking with her on the phone that she didn't
8 have a right to know the process before she met
9 with you; is that correct?
10 A I did not say those words to her.
11 Q And you didn't tell her that it was
12 insubordinate for her to ask for the process
13 before she met with you, right?
14 A I did not say those words either.
15 Q And according to your report, the next
16 thing you did after that was meet with county
17 administrator Joe Mareane and some other county
18 officials, right?
19 A I don't believe that was my testimony.
20 Q I'm asking about what you wrote in your
21 report. After you wrote I informed her that I
22 would contact her after I learned the exact
23 procedure or process, you went on to write,
24 "after meeting with County Administrator Joe
1 Mareane, Deputy County Administrator Paula

2 Younger and the Deputy Commission of Human
3 Resources Stephen Estes I contacted the OHR to
4 inform Ms. Baer of the process and left several
5 messages to contact me." Do you see that?
6 A Yes, I do see that.
7 Q So after you had the phone call with Ms.
8 Baer where she asked for the process, you had a
9 meeting with Mr. Mareane and other county
10 officials to determine what the process was,
11 right?
12 A That was part of my reason for meeting
13 with them.
14 Q And Mr. Mareane, that's Karen's boss,
15 right?
16 A Yes. That's one of her bosses.
17 Q Well, who's her other bosses?
18 A The county legislators.
19 Q Are you aware that in Karen's job
20 description she reports to the county
21 administrator and not the legislature?
22 A I know that's who she reports to, but
23 sometimes the person we report to is not the only
24 employer that we have.
1 Q I didn't use the word employer. I used

2 the word boss. Her direct supervisor was Mr.
3 Mareane, the county administrator, correct?
4 A Her direct supervisor, yes, ma'am.
5 Q And that's who Karen was alleging was
6 retaliating against her, right?
7 A I didn't, that was not my understanding.
8 Q When a person reports that they are being
9 retaliated against in their job, isn't it your
10 experience as an investigator that the most
11 likely person to be engaging in retaliation is
12 their boss?
13 A I don't know if I've ever drawn those,
14 those conclusions the way you're stating them.
15 Q You knew at this time that Ms. Baer was
16 alleging retaliation, correct? We've established
17 that?
18 A I knew at this time when I met that she
19 had a general claim of retaliation and then from
20 my subsequent review of e-mails I was able to
21 discern that some of her claims also went to
22 claims not only of retaliation, but to
23 retribution and exclusion.
24 Q And you knew -- withdrawn. Ms. Baer also
1 in your phone call with her indicated in addition

2 to her request for the process, she asked what
3 protections you were going to put in place to
4 protect her and other employees from retaliation,
5 right?
6 A No, I don't recall that at all.
7 Q You don't recall that?
8 A No.
9 Q So after Ms. Baer asked you for the
10 process, what you did was go meet with her boss,
11 Joe Mareane, to ask him what the process should
12 be?
13 A He was one of the individuals that I
14 arranged to have interviews with.
15 Q And one of the things you wanted to ask
16 him about is what your process should be,
17 correct?
18 A Not my process. It wasn't my, my process
19 was to conduct an investigation. There was a
20 general need to establish and that's why I even
21 met with people in the personnel department and
22 people in civil service about what, what were the
23 overall policies and procedures in place within
24 the county to address allegations of racial or
1 gender discrimination, how those complaints were

2 processed; and I also inquired of civil service
3 what type of status the employees that worked in
4 county government had. And so I start from zero.
5 I start with no information and I'll try to
6 expand and learn as I go along. And then loop
7 back around and learn more and then validate or
8 confirm the information that people give me. I
9 really try to maintain an open mind.
10 Q My question, Mr. Taylor, was specifically
11 about the investigative process. And one of the
12 goals you just testified of your meeting with Mr.
13 Mareane was to learn what the process would be,
14 correct?
15 A No. No. That's not. The investigative
16 process is different than the process by which
17 the county handles complaints.
18 Q Your request for more information about
19 how the county handled complaints was so that you
20 would be able to get back to Karen Baer about how
21 her complaint would be handled, correct?
22 A I wanted to get back to her about her
23 concerns about process and what that process was
24 going to be based on the complaints that she had
1 made in e-mails to the county legislature.

2 Q Now in your report you say that after you
3 had that meeting, you contacted the Office of
4 Human Rights to inform Ms. Baer of the process
5 and you left several messages for her to contact
6 you, correct?
8 Q You didn't send Ms. Baer a letter
9 explaining the process, correct?
11 Q You didn't send Ms. Baer an e-mail
12 explaining the process, correct?
14 Q And in none of your messages did you
15 reference or describe the process in any way,
16 correct?
18 Q You did subsequently write a letter to
19 Ms. Baer, right?
20 A At, yeah, as I was wrapping up my
21 investigation.
22 Q On June 5th, right?
23 A On or about June 5th.
24 MS. SALZMAN: I think we marked that
1 as, or went into evidence as county,

2 Charging Party Exhibit 2. Could we have
3 that exhibit, Mr. Hearing Officer?
4 HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry. I was
5 making a note. Exhibit 2?
6 MS. SALZMAN: Exhibit 2.
7 Q In your June 5th letter, Mr. Taylor, you
8 didn't describe the process, did you?
9 A No.
10 Q Your June 5th letter doesn't refer in any
11 way to the process, right?
12 A No.
13 Q In fact the letter doesn't refer to Ms.
14 Baer's request for the process at all, right?
15 A No.
16 Q And your letter of June 5th also doesn't
17 say that you view Ms. Baer's request for the
18 process before meeting with you to be
19 insubordinate; does it?
20 A It doesn't say that.
21 Q And Ms. Baer wrote back to you, right?
22 A Yes, she did.
23 Q That's Exhibit 3 I think. Am I wrong
24 about the numbering?
1 MS. SALZMAN: The June 9th letter.

2 MR. CELLI: Charging Party 3.
3 HEARING OFFICER: Yep. There it is.
4 MS. SALZMAN: Nope. Somehow it's
5 gotten, did you not mark this one? The
6 June 9th letter?
7 HEARING OFFICER: Charging Party 3.
8 There it is.
9 Q Exhibit 3 is Ms. Baer's June 9th letter
10 that she sent you, right?
11 A Yes.
12 Q So you wrote to her and she wrote back,
13 right?
14 A She did, yes.
15 Q And let me direct your attention to a
16 portion of that letter you did not read in your
17 direct examination and that's the very beginning
18 of the letter. Do you see where Ms. Baer wrote,
19 quote, "during our initial phone call I shared
20 with you my reasons for not wanting to
21 participate in any investigation that is
22 conducted or paid for by Tompkins County. As a
23 reminder my reasons are as follows: Bullet point
24 number one, requested, I requested, but you did
1 not provide me with, the written process that you

2 intended to follow. I told you that Tompkins
3 County does not provide its work force with any
4 written, transparent or standard policy for how
5 employee complaints based on race will be
6 processed." Do you see that?
7 A I do.
8 Q And you testified on direct examination
9 that after you received this letter from Ms. Baer
10 you never wrote to her again, correct?
12 Q You never contacted her again?
14 Q After you received Ms. Baer's June 9th
15 letter you never sent her the process, correct?
17 A That's correct.
18 Q You went ahead and finalized your report
19 on July 11th --
20 HEARING OFFICER: There was an
21 objection raised, but I'll overrule it.
22 MR. MCCANN: It's the continuing
23 characterization of the process being a
24 document and I don't hear that in the
1 testimony. There was a discussion of a

2 document being provided.
3 MS. SALZMAN: I'll address that. I
4 think your colloquy is an improper
5 characterization of the testimony.
6 MR. MCCANN: I am responding to the
7 hearing officer's question.
8 HEARING OFFICER: I was stopping you
9 inasmuch as there was an objection, and so
10 the objection was to the process that was
11 being used, the characterization of the
12 process.
13 Q So let's address that. In Ms. Baer's
14 letter of June 9th, her very first bullet point
15 she wrote "I requested, but you did not provide
16 me with the written process that you intended to
17 follow," she wrote that, right?
18 A I don't know if she wrote it. That's
19 what the letter indicates, the document
20 indicates. I don't know who wrote it.
21 Q And you went ahead and finalized your
22 report on June 11th without ever giving Ms. Baer
23 the written process, correct?
24 A Correct.
1 Q Let me direct your attention, Mr. Taylor,

2 to page 11 of your report.
3 A Yes, ma'am.
4 Q And you wrote at the top of this page her
5 response to me, Ms. Baer's response to me that
6 the county does not provide its work force with
7 any written transparent standard policy for how
8 employee complaints based on race will be
9 processed is false. The county has a workplace
10 discrimination and sexual harassment policy. Do
11 you see that?
12 A Yes.
13 HEARING OFFICER: This will be marked
14 for identification as Respondent's B.
15 (RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT B WAS MARKED
17 HEARING OFFICER: You want me to put
18 it in front of the witness?
19 MS. SALZMAN: Yes, please. Thank
20 you, Your Honor.
21 Q Is the document before you the county's
22 workplace discrimination and sexual policy that
23 you're referring to, Mr. Taylor?
24 A You have to give me a moment to look at
1 it.
2 Q Take your time.
3 A I believe this is.
4 MS. SALZMAN: Can we move it into
5 evidence, John?
6 MR. MCCANN: No objection.
7 HEARING OFFICER: With that, it's
8 received into evidence.
9 MS. SALZMAN: Thank you, Mr. Hearing
10 Officer.
11 Q Mr. Taylor, just so we're totally clear,
12 you never sent a copy of this policy to Ms. Baer,
13 right, Exhibit B?
14 A Yes, I did not send this to Ms. Baer.
15 Q And you never wrote to Ms. Baer and told
16 her you were going to follow this policy, Exhibit
17 B, correct?
18 A And I never wrote to Ms. Baer and told
19 her I was going to follow Respondent's B.
20 Q And you just had a look through the
21 county policy. It doesn't include a description
22 of the investigative process that's going to be
23 used in investigations of discrimination, does
24 it?
1 A I don't know. Can I look at the

2 document?
3 Q Please. I said take as much time as you
4 would like.
5 A It has a section called internal
6 grievance complaint procedure for handling
7 harassment and other forms of discrimination.
8 Q And that directs an employee where they
9 can call to report a claim, right?
10 A It does more than that.
11 Q Does it set forth investigative
12 techniques that are going to be used?
13 A Investigative techniques, no.
14 Q Does it set forth anywhere in this policy
15 a prohibition of retaliating against employees
16 who allege race discrimination?
17 A I'd have to read the document again to
18 see what is exactly in it.
19 HEARING OFFICER: Do you want to take
20 -- let's go off the record.
22 Q Does this policy anywhere prohibit
23 retaliation against employees who complain of
24 race discrimination?
1 A Yes.
2 Q Where is that?
3 A It says it is the policy of the Tompkins
4 County legislature and management of Tompkins
5 County to maintain a work environment free of
6 unlawful discrimination and harassment for all of
7 its employees and customers.
8 Q But I asked you, does this policy
9 prohibit retaliation against employees who
10 complain of discrimination, yes or no, Mr.
11 Taylor?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Where does the words --
14 A It says unlawful discrimination.
15 Retaliation is unlawful discrimination.
16 Q Isn't it your experience in your 3 or 400
17 investigations that antidiscrimination policies
18 usually specifically prohibit retaliation against
19 employees who report harassment and
20 discrimination?
21 A Some do. Some don't.
22 Q And this one doesn't, right?
23 A If you want me to review to see if those
24 words, are you looking for the actual words
1 retaliation?
2 Q I'm looking for the actual words
3 retaliation.
4 A I don't know if they have the actual
5 words retaliation in this document.
6 Q And you also claim -- withdrawn. Let's
7 go back to Karen Baer's -- I'm sorry. Let's go
8 back to your report which I think you should
9 still have in front of you to page nine.
10 HEARING OFFICER: Do you still have
11 it?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Page nine, the section we were looking at
14 about your initial call with Karen Baer. Very
15 first sentence on the top of page nine, quote,
16 she indicated that she preferred conciliation and
17 not an adversarial process; do you see that?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And you're familiar with a conciliation
20 process, right?
21 A Yes.
22 Q It's used at PERB all the time, right?
23 A Yes.
24 Q And conciliation would you agree is a way
1 of bringing the parties together in a nonbinding

2 way to talk about and try to resolve their
3 differences and forge some common ground, right?
4 A Yes.
5 Q You didn't accept Ms. Baer's suggestion
6 that the process here be a conciliation, correct?
7 A It's not up to me to accept conciliation.
8 That's, that's the role for the parties, the
9 parties accept. If this was an arbitration, if
10 this was a mediation, it's the parties who drive
11 conciliation.
12 Q Let's get one thing straight here, there
13 was no conciliation here, right?
14 A Not on my part.
15 Q And the people who hired you in the
16 county legislature, they didn't ask for a
17 conciliation, correct?
18 A They did not ask me to engage in
19 mediation or conciliation.
20 Q Did you convey Ms. Baer's request for
21 conciliation to the county officials who had
22 hired you?
23 A Yes, I did.
24 Q And how did they respond?
1 A They took the information and they didn't

2 respond either way that it was positive or
3 negative.
4 Q But you were not instructed after that
5 time to engage in a conciliation?
6 A I was not instructed to engage in
7 mediation or conciliation.
8 Q Now during the same initial call with Ms.
9 Baer she informed you that one of the reasons she
10 was concerned about the process and procedure was
11 because of her experience in the Hooks'
12 investigation, right?
13 A I don't recall.
14 Q Ms. Baer told you that she had
15 participated in Mr. Hooks' investigation
16 believing it was going to be a conciliation,
17 right?
19 Q You did testify on direct examination
20 that you did review the Hooks' report, right?
21 A I did, I did review the Hooks' report.
22 Q And that report was very biased against
23 Ms. Baer, wasn't it?
24 A I didn't, I didn't review it in great
1 detail, but I did review it. I don't remember

2 coming away with the feeling that Mr. Hooks was
3 biased.
4 Q Mr. Hooks made a finding of fact that Ms.
5 Baer was threatening and intimidating, didn't he?
7 Q That's a common stereotype about women of
8 color, isn't it?
9 A Common, what do you mean common?
10 Q It's a stereotype about women of color
11 that they are aggressive and intimidating?
12 A It's a stereotype that some people have.
13 Q It's one you're familiar with, correct?
14 A It's a stereotype that I'm familiar with
15 that some people have about some women of color,
16 absolutely.
17 Q And did you know that the person that Mr.
18 Hooks said was intimidated by Ms. Baer actually
19 denied ever feeling that way?
20 A No.
21 Q Are you aware that Mr. Hooks agreed with
22 Mr. Mareane that Ms. Baer should apologize to Pat
23 Pryor, the white woman she had had a disagreement
24 with?
1 MR. MCCANN: Objection, foundation.

2 MS. SALZMAN: He read the Hooks'
3 report.
4 MR. MCCANN: Is the Hooks' report in
5 front of him?
6 MS. SALZMAN: He just testified he
7 didn't remember it in any detail. I'm
8 asking if he remembers --
9 MR. MCCANN: You asked him questions
10 about the Hooks' report that he doesn't
11 remember?
12 HEARING OFFICER: He may not even
13 remember it. Do you remember anything?
14 MS. SALZMAN: He doesn't recall
15 reading that?
16 A I don't recall that. I'm sorry.
17 Q And Mr. Hooks made a finding of fact that
18 incontrovertibly Miss Pryor's experience made her
19 a very qualified appointee to head the Human
20 Rights Commission; do you remember that?
21 A I remember the name Pat Pryor. I
22 remember some things in general, but I indicated
23 my task was not to relitigate or go back over
24 what was in the Hooks' report. So when I read
1 it, I tried to do it in a very cursory fashion

2 and not to get an opinion. I tried not to focus
3 too much on the Hooks' report at all.
4 Q Well, let me take you back to Karen
5 Baer's June 9th letter that should be in front of
6 you. Karen Baer's June 9th letter I believe is
7 Charging Party 3. And do you see Ms. Baer's
8 second bullet point, quote, "I shared with you
9 that I previously participated in a county
10 investigation," investigation is in quotes, "that
11 turned out to be unfair, clandestine and an
12 expense farce. To wit, instead of focusing on my
13 concerns of retaliation, the county engaged in
14 efforts to further retaliate against me calling
15 into question my personal and professional
16 integrity. In the end the county process
17 produced a distorted report that I took to be
18 retaliatory and discriminatory on its base;" do
19 you see that?
20 A I see that.
21 Q After receiving the June 9th letter, did
22 you go back and read the Hooks' report a little
23 more closely now?
24 A No.
1 Q Let's talk about -- bear with me. Let's

2 talk about your report and the 11 categories you
3 devoted your report to reviewing and going
4 through.
5 HEARING OFFICER: Do you have the
6 report in front of you?
7 A Yes, sir.
8 HEARING OFFICER: Which page were you
9 on?
10 Q Well, let's start by you list in your
11 report on I think it's page eight 11 specific
12 examples of exclusion that Ms. Baer had raised in
13 the e-mails that you were provided with, right?
14 A Yes, ma'am.
15 Q And the first ten are examples of
16 specific exclusions and the last one, the 11th is
17 hostile work environment, right?
18 A Yes.
19 Q More of a general category, correct?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Talking about those first ten examples of
22 exclusion. You gleaned from Ms. Baer's e-mails
23 that she was alleging that she and her office had
24 been excluded from these county opportunities and
1 initiatives, correct?
2 A Yes.
3 Q And you found in your report that in fact
4 she and her office had been excluded from all ten
5 of these initiatives and opportunities, right?
6 A No.
7 Q Well, let's go through them one by one.
8 The first one is ban the box, right?
9 MR. MCCANN: What page number?
10 Q Is that right, Mr. Taylor?
11 A It's the first one listed on page eight.
12 Q I'm just going to follow the order of
13 your report.
14 HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry. What
15 was the question?
16 MR. MCCANN: Page 13?
17 HEARING OFFICER: 13 was it? Yeah.
18 Q Yep. You discussed ban the box on page
19 13, 14 and 15, correct, and 16, 17, 18, right?
20 Five pages on ban the box?
21 A Yes, ma'am.
22 Q And you say on page 14 that there was a
23 ban the box working group, right?
24 A I say that on what page?
1 Q 14, third paragraph down, a working group

2 was formed on November 5th, 2015.
3 A A working, yes. I see that now. Yes,
4 ma'am.
5 Q Ms. Baer was not part of that working
6 group, correct?
7 A I don't believe so.
8 Q And you refer in the next paragraph to a
9 December 2015 meeting; do you see that?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Ms. Baer did not participate in that
12 meeting, correct?
14 Q And if you turn the page to page 15, you
15 see at the beginning that there was an ad hoc ban
16 the box committee that met late in December and
17 early January; do you see that?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And Ms. Baer was not part of the ad hoc
20 ban the box committee, correct?
21 A I don't believe she was.
22 Q And a little later in this report you
23 describe -- I'm sorry, in the same paragraph you
24 describe that this committee prepared a report
1 about ban the box, correct?

2 A Can you draw my attention?
3 Q The exact same paragraph where we were.
4 Preparing impact reports. Reports were submitted
5 on February 22nd, 2016. It's the first
6 paragraph.
7 A About the ad hoc ban the box committee?
8 Q Right.
9 A I believe that they did produce a report.
10 Q And Ms. Baer did not contribute to that
11 report, correct?
13 Q And ultimately there was a draft
14 resolution that Mr. Mareane and Ms. Gerary
15 (phonetic) drafted, third paragraph of page 15;
16 do you see that?
17 A Yes.
18 Q And Ms. Baer was not asked to contribute
19 to the draft resolution, correct?
20 A I don't know if she was or not. I don't
21 believe she was.
22 Q So you concluded on page 18, quote,
23 "there was no reason to include Ms. Baer in the
24 process of adopting the legislation," correct?
1 A On page 18?
2 Q Yeah. It's the first full paragraph.
3 Right above antidiscrimination law.
4 A There was no reason to include her in the
5 process of adopting the legislation.
6 Q So it was your finding that Ms. Baer was
7 not included in the ban the box legislative
8 process, correct?
9 A No, that's not correct.
10 Q You wrote in your report that she was not
11 included, Mr. Taylor, right?
12 A No. I don't believe I wrote that.
13 Q You found that Karen Baer was not
14 included in the ban the box legislative process
15 and according to you there was no reason she
16 should be, correct?
17 A I don't believe that was my conclusion.
18 MR. MCCANN: Also misstates the
19 report.
20 HEARING OFFICER: If you can draw the
21 witness's attention to refresh his memory
22 if you're looking at something specific.
23 MS. SALZMAN: I am and I read it to
24 him.
1 MR. MCCANN: You misstated it,

2 Counsel.
3 Q Quote, "there was no reason to include
4 Ms. Baer in the process of adopting the
5 legislation." You're referring to the ban the
6 box legislation.
7 A But it says there was no, in my report
8 the words that I used were there was no reason to
9 include Ms. Baer in the process of adopting the
10 legislation. I don't believe that was your
11 question though.
12 Q My question was Ms. Baer was not included
13 in the ban the box legislation, correct?
14 A I believe that she was included, but I
15 don't think there was a reason to include her.
16 Q Where in your report do you say she was
17 included in the legislation?
18 A I believe I indicate she was a member of
19 what's called a WDIC committee and that committee
20 was specifically included in the ban the box
21 legislation. As a matter of fact, the WDIC was
22 specifically referenced in meeting minutes of the
23 legislature where they were specifically
24 acknowledged for their contributions. As a
1 member of the WDIC, she would have had direct

2 input and would have been included in any final
3 bill that came before the legislature. So I
4 believe that the WDIC --
5 Q So your testimony is --
6 A So I believe that --
8 examination.
9 MR. MCCANN: No.
10 HEARING OFFICER: I would like to
11 have him finish.
12 MS. SALZMAN: I'm entitled to an
13 answer to my question.
14 MR. MCCANN: I object. Let the
15 witness finish his answer.
16 HEARING OFFICER: Let him finish his
17 answer and then I'll have you re-ask the
18 question again if he didn't direct his
19 response to that question.
20 A So through her participation in the WDIC
21 she would have been included in the ban the box
22 initiative; however I did not find that there was
23 necessarily a reason to include her in the
24 drafting or the implementation or adopting of
1 that legislation.
2 Q And the sole basis for your testimony
3 that the WDIC was involved in this legislation
4 was a single reflection in the legislative
5 minutes, correct?
6 A No.
7 Q Do you see in your report on page 15
8 where you wrote that Ms. Gerary had written to
9 Mr. Mareane about the WDIC and said "I am
10 preparing an overview of the plans for WDIC as
11 well as perhaps the steering committee. Leslyn
12 hasn't responded to my request to meet/discuss
13 this subject." And you added "Leslyn McBean
14 Clairborne is a county legislator and the chair
15 of the WDIC;" do you see that?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Did you review a single minute from the
18 WDIC meetings that indicated that they had worked
19 on ban the box?
21 Q Does your report refer to any?
22 A What I do recall is that there was a
23 relationship between the WDIC and the county
24 legislature and some of those committees.
1 There's some ongoing relationship. It's not --

2 Q My question, Mr. Taylor --
3 A It's not a one time occurrence.
4 MR. MCCANN: Mr. Hearing Officer, can
5 you direct counsel to let the witness
6 finish his answer before she tries to cut
7 him off not liking the answer.
8 MS. SALZMAN: Again this is cross
9 examination. He has --
10 HEARING OFFICER: My understanding is
11 he would get to finish the answer.
12 MS. SALZMAN: Not if it's not
13 responsive --
14 MR. MCCANN: It was responsive.
15 MS. SALZMAN: -- to my question on
16 cross examination. It's not.
17 MR. MCCANN: You make a record first.
18 HEARING OFFICER: Let's try the
19 question one more time.
20 Q My question was very simple. Did you
21 review any minutes from the WDIC indicating that
22 they had worked on --
23 MR. MCCANN: That was not the
24 question. Can I have the question read
1 back please?
2 MS. SALZMAN: That is my question,
3 Mr. McCann. This is my examination and
4 that was my question.
5 HEARING OFFICER: But here's --
6 MS. SALZMAN: I want to know if he
7 looked at any meeting minutes from the WDIC
8 reflecting that they worked on ban the box.
9 HEARING OFFICER: Do you recall that?
10 Q It's a yes or no question. Yes, I did.
11 No, I didn't.
12 HEARING OFFICER: Unless he doesn't
13 recall.
14 A I recall that I looked at several meeting
15 minutes from different committees and the
16 different committees that were involved in the
17 same type of work that the Office of Human Rights
18 was engaged in.
19 Q And so your testimony about the WDIC
20 meeting minutes is that you don't recall,
21 correct?
22 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Mr. Hearing
23 Officer, you got to control this hearing.
24 MS. SALZMAN: Excuse me, Mr. McCann.
1 MR. MCCANN: The witness is trying to

2 finish his answer before she cuts him off.
3 MS. SALZMAN: I'm entitled to conduct
4 my examination.
5 MR. MCCANN: You are entitled to his
6 answer.
7 MS. SALZMAN: You will have redirect
8 where you can have him go on and on as he
9 would like.
10 HEARING OFFICER: All right. Let's
11 try to finish this up. Your question is
12 very narrow as I understand it.
13 MS. SALZMAN: It is.
14 HEARING OFFICER: Did the witness
15 review anything pertaining to I think --
16 MS. SALZMAN: Did he review any WDIC
17 meeting minutes about ban the box?
18 HEARING OFFICER: Did you if you
19 recall?
20 A My answer is I reviewed meeting minutes
21 from all different types --
22 HEARING OFFICER: But you can't
23 recall specifically?
24 A I cannot tell you a particular meeting on
1 a particular date. I looked at WDIC meeting

2 minutes. I looked at ad hoc committee meetings.
3 HEARING OFFICER: You just don't
4 recall. You looked at a lot of them and
5 some of them pertained to ban the box?
6 A Right. And some were from the WDIC.
7 Q Nowhere in your report do you mention a
8 quote from any WDIC minutes about ban the box,
9 correct?
10 A I don't know. I would have to look to
11 see if I made any reference to meeting minutes.
12 Q Let's go on to your second list, the
13 second item in your list, the antidiscrimination
14 law. You found that Ms. Baer had drafted a broad
15 local antidiscrimination law, correct?
16 A Yes.
17 Q And you also found that County
18 Administrator Mr. Mareane did not support that
19 broad local law, correct?
21 Q Let's go on to the third item on your
22 list. The climate survey initiative. You found
23 that the county had a process of doing a climate
24 survey of county employees, correct?
1 A I don't know if the county had one. I

2 think a process was developed.
3 Q Well, the process was that climate survey
4 of county employees at the county work force,
5 correct?
6 A Yes.
7 Q And did you review the report that the
8 climate survey resulted in?
9 A You're asking if I reviewed the actual
10 document?
11 Q That was produced as a result of that
12 process.
13 A I believe I did.
14 HEARING OFFICER: To be marked for
15 identification?
16 MS. SALZMAN: That would be great,
17 yes. Respondent's C.
18 (RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT C WAS MARKED
20 HEARING OFFICER: You want this
21 before the witness I take it?
22 MS. SALZMAN: That would be great.
23 Thank you, Mr. Hearing Officer.
24 Q And do you see in Exhibit C, Mr. Taylor,
1 that there is a document entitled Tompkins County

2 Workplace Climate Initiative focus group recap, a
3 two-page document?
4 A I see that here.
5 Q And then a longer document entitled
6 Tompkins County Workplace Climate Initiative
7 report on focus group results and
8 recommendations; do you see that?
9 A Yes, I see that.
10 Q And these reports were generated by the
11 Workplace Climate Initiative, correct?
12 A I don't know.
13 Q Were these the records you reviewed?
14 A I don't think I've seen this document.
15 Q Well, let me direct --
16 MS. SALZMAN: Mr. McCann, can we
17 stipulate this into evidence? It's not
18 disputed that this is a county document,
19 correct?
20 MR. MCCANN: No, it's not relevant.
21 MS. SALZMAN: Oh, I believe it is.
22 Would you like me to lay the foundation?
23 HEARING OFFICER: Yeah. I was
24 wondering the relevance myself.
1 MS. SALZMAN: I'd be happy to lay the

2 foundation for that.
3 Q Before I ask you about this document, Ms.
4 Baer had alleged that there was systematic race
5 and sex discrimination going on in Tompkins
6 County, correct?
7 A I believe so.
8 Q That was one of the things you were
9 looking into, right?
10 A Yes, yes, yes.
11 Q So let me direct your attention to start
12 with page two of the focus group recap that is
13 before you. That is the shorter document that is
14 at the beginning. Page two.
15 A Okay.
16 Q Let me direct your attention to the
17 section entitled diversity and inclusion; do you
18 see that?
19 A Yes, ma'am.
20 Q And does that section say, quote,
21 "diversity and inclusion needs more attention.
22 Unequal treatment in the workplace, ongoing
23 occurrences of micro aggressions and the concern
24 that county leadership is not taking the
1 necessary measures to protect employees from

2 desperate conduct and retaliation for complaining
3 about it were the dominate themes across the
4 groups when discussing diversity and inclusion.
5 Many believe that, quote, if you stand up for
6 diversity or for your rights, you'll be shut
7 down, end quote, which could take the form of not
8 being promoted, being silenced in some way or
9 being shunned by your colleagues. Do you see,
10 Mr. Taylor?
11 A I see that.
12 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Two bases.
13 One, the document is not in evidence. You
14 need to lay the foundation before you start
15 reading from the document.
16 MS. SALZMAN: Your objection was
17 relevance not authentication.
18 MR. MCCANN: Counsel, I make the
19 objection. The hearing officer rules on
20 them. Not you.
21 HEARING OFFICER: You respond.
22 MS. SALZMAN: I understand.
23 HEARING OFFICER: He makes his
24 objection, you respond to the objection,
1 then I rule.
2 MS. SALZMAN: I read from the
3 document because the objection was
4 relevance not that it was an authentic
5 document.
6 MR. MCCANN: No. You said you would
7 lay a foundation. Reading from the
8 document is not laying a foundation.
9 HEARING OFFICER: Hold on. Let me
10 see what this document is. Continue on the
11 relevance of this. I know what you're
12 saying, but I don't know where it's
13 relevant yet.
14 Q Mr. Taylor.
15 A Yes, ma'am.
16 Q Would evidence documented by the Tompkins
17 County Workplace Climate Initiative documenting
18 this county employees were experiencing
19 discrimination, desperate treatment and
20 retaliation in the workplace be relevant to your
21 inquiry as to whether there was systematic race
22 and sex discrimination in the county?
23 A With the fact that they wrote those words
24 in a document be relevant, yes.
1 MS. SALZMAN: I think I've

2 established the relevance of this document.
3 MR. MCCANN: No, you haven't. If you
4 want to offer it, I'll do some voir dire.
5 You haven't offered it yet.
6 HEARING OFFICER: I think she did
7 offer it. I didn't make a ruling on it.
8 You wanted some voir dire?
9 MR. MCCANN: Yes.
10 VOIR DIRE BY
11 MR. MCCANN:
12 Q Mr. Taylor, you've never seen this
13 document before?
14 A I don't believe I've seen this document
15 before.
16 Q Did Ms. Baer present this document to you
17 in support of her allegations of systemic
18 discrimination?
19 A No.
20 Q Did she ever present to you the findings
21 of this document?
22 A No.
23 MR. MCCANN: I object on the basis,
24 number one, lack of relevance. This was
1 not part of the investigation. Number two,

2 this Section 75 proceeding is not the
3 opportunity for Ms. Baer to litigate the
4 allegations that she should have presented
5 to Mr. Taylor's part of this investigation.
6 If she wanted to present these issues, she
7 had the opportunity to do that.
8 This Section 75 proceeding is
9 addressed to her failure to cooperate in
10 the investigation and her failure to
11 participate in important county committees.
12 It is too late in the day for her to try to
13 litigate an issue that a report has already
14 been done on, she had a fair opportunity to
15 participate in and the county legislature
16 has already acted upon. She is not in a
17 position here to try to prove the case that
18 maybe she could have, maybe she couldn't
19 have proved if she cooperated with the
20 investigation. The reason why she is on
21 charges is not because of the climate
22 survey. It's because she refused to
23 fulfill her responsibility in making these
24 allegations to support them. Now is not
1 her opportunity to do it. Now is her

2 opportunity to displaying perhaps why she
3 refused to do these things.
4 MS. SALZMAN: I have a two-fold
5 response, Mr. Hearing Officer. First, this
6 investigator testified that he was
7 investigating her allegations that there
8 were systematic issues of race and sex
9 discrimination and specifically the climate
10 survey that resulted in the document that
11 is currently before him. So it's obviously
12 relevant to his investigation and so I'm
13 entitled to ask whether he saw the document
14 and considered it in his investigation and
15 is directly relevant.
16 HEARING OFFICER: I think his
17 testimony was he didn't see the document,
18 if I recall correctly.
19 MS. SALZMAN: That is relevant in and
20 of itself.
21 MR. MCCANN: You have that answer.
22 HEARING OFFICER: Maybe what we can
23 do is stipulate that he did not see this
24 document in his investigation.
1 MS. SALZMAN: I'm not disputing if

2 that is his testimony. I take his
3 testimony at face value, but I'm entitled
4 to establish that he had not seen this
5 document as part of his investigation.
6 HEARING OFFICER: I think that's
7 established. And if he hasn't seen it, he
8 can't respond to it.
9 MS. SALZMAN: I'm not disputing that,
10 but Mr. McCann is saying that this document
11 is of no relevance to this hearing. I'm
12 entitled to establish that it is relevant
13 that he did not see it.
14 HEARING OFFICER: Not through, as I
15 see it not through this witness anyway.
16 MS. SALZMAN: Just to finish my point
17 and then we can move on and do it through
18 another witness. I'm happy to do it that
19 way. This document is also relevant
20 because Ms. Baer has an affirmative defense
21 in this hearing and that is that she
22 repeatedly complained about discrimination
23 and retaliation and that these charges were
24 brought in retaliation for that. This
1 document establishes among many other

2 pieces of evidence we will put into the
3 record her reasonable belief that there was
4 widespread discrimination going on. I'm
5 happy to withdraw it and not use it for
6 this witness in light of his testimony, but
7 it is relevant to these proceedings.
8 MR. MCCANN: I'll repeat my
9 objection. The reasonableness of her
10 belief was an issue that she should have
11 presented to this investigator.
12 HEARING OFFICER: It's been withdrawn
13 and I'll suspect you'll, I'll be seeing it
14 again sometime in the not distant future.
15 MS. SALZMAN: You suspect correctly.
16 MR. CELLI: Are we keeping the
17 originals?
18 HEARING OFFICER: I got the
19 originals. I returned what was not
20 admitted, Respondent C.
21 MR. CELLI: Got it.
22 Q You did make a finding, I understand you
23 didn't see this document, Mr. Taylor, but you did
24 make a finding in your report that the reasons --
1 HEARING OFFICER: Excuse me. Did you

2 want this back in front of him?
3 MS. SALZMAN: That would be great.
4 Thank you. Probably keep it there for the
5 length of this one.
6 Q You did make a finding on page 19 of your
7 report that the reasons there were, there was a
8 climate survey initiative was because, quote,
9 "some employees were not taking advantage of
10 promotional opportunities. Additionally some
11 under represented employees did not feel valued
12 and appreciated in the workplace environment.
13 These included peoples of color, members of the
14 LGBT community, the less educated and those with
15 physical challenges, correct?
16 A Yes, ma'am.
17 Q Was that evidence relevant to your
18 investigation that there was systemic
19 discrimination going on in the county?
20 A It was relevant.
21 Q Now specifically on the climate survey
22 steering committee. Ms. Baer was not included in
23 that committee, correct?
24 A She was not included. I don't believe
1 she was a member of that committee.

2 Q Thank you. She was not a member of the
3 climate survey steering committee, correct?
4 A I don't believe she was.
5 Q And you wrote on page 21 at the end of
6 this section, quote, "it is unclear why Ms. Baer
7 believes that she needed to be included in the
8 CSI in order to do her job." Do you see that?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Indeed you wrote her job duties include
11 the same tasks as were assigned to the CSI,
12 correct?
13 A Yes.
14 Q So this was an area of expertise for Ms.
15 Baer, correct?
17 A What was an area of expertise?
18 Q The climate survey work that was being
19 done.
20 A I don't know if she has an expertise in
21 climate surveys, no. No. I don't know her
22 background.
23 Q Did you review Ms. Baer's resume?
24 A I don't know her background in
1 statistical analysis or data sampling or any of

2 those things.
3 Q But you made a finding that one of her
4 job duties was to do similar work to the work
5 that CSI was doing?
6 A Right, correct.
7 Q Did you review Ms. Baer's resume as part
8 of your work?
9 A I don't know if I ever got her resume.
10 Q Your next item on your list, the fair
11 housing officer position. You found that Ms.
12 Baer was not included in the selection of the
13 person to fill the fair housing officer position,
14 correct?
16 Q Are you aware that Ms. Baer's an expert
17 in fair housing law?
18 A I don't know what it means to be an
19 expert.
20 Q Are you aware that she has significant
21 expertise and experience working in the area of
22 fair housing law?
23 A I don't know.
24 Q Are you aware that Ms. Baer was
1 previously nominated to be the county's fair

2 housing officer in 2014, but that she was never
3 ultimately appointed?
4 A She never told me that.
5 Q Were you otherwise aware?
7 Q My question is did you know that, yes or
8 no?
9 A My answer as I don't believe she told me
10 that.
11 Q Did you know it otherwise?
12 A Otherwise I don't recall if anyone else
13 told me that as well.
14 Q What about the ADA coordinator point on
15 your list. Karen Baer you found was not included
16 in the selection process to select the ADA
17 coordinator, correct?
18 A I don't believe she was involved in the
19 selection process.
20 Q And the ADA is the Americans with
21 Disabilities Act, correct?
22 A Yes.
23 Q And that's another area of expertise for
24 Ms. Baer, correct?

2 A I don't know that to be true.
3 Q You don't know what her expertise is?
4 A I don't know what constitutes being an
5 expert.
6 Q The Title VI compliance coordinator. You
7 found Ms. Baer was not included in the selection
8 process for the Title VI compliance coordinator
9 either, correct?
11 Q And on the LGBTQ climate workshop, the
12 next one on your list, you found Ms. Baer was not
13 included in the LGBTQ climate workshop, correct?
14 A I was unclear as to what her allegations
15 were in regard to this.
16 Q You wrote on page 23 in connection with
17 this concern of Ms. Baer's, quote, "not being
18 invited to this workshop does not equate to
19 exclusion;" do you see that?
20 A Yes.
21 Q And you wrote that Ms. Baer, as the
22 director of OHR, can direct and manage her own
23 projects, correct?
24 A I did write that.
1 Q And you wrote on page 22 of your report,

2 very first sentence in this section, quote, "Ms.
3 Baer alleges that she was excluded from
4 participation in the LGBTQ climate workshop for
5 department heads", correct?
6 A Yes.
7 Q So you did understand that that was her
8 allegation, correct?
9 A I made, she was alleging that she was
10 excluded from participation in the climate
11 workshop.
12 Q In the LGBTQ climate workshop?
13 A I believe that's what she was alleging.
14 Q And you found in fact she was excluded,
15 correct?
16 A No.
17 Q You found she was not included, right?
18 A I don't know that that was my
19 determination either. I said that in the end she
20 has not provided proof, proof that she has been
21 excluded from county initiatives, titles and
22 discussions regarding her area of expertise.
23 Q My question is different though, Mr.
24 Taylor. My question is you found, quote,
1 "according to your report not being invited to

2 this workshop did not equate to exclusion," that
3 was your finding, right?
5 Q So Ms. Baer was not included in this
6 workshop, correct?
7 A She was not, she didn't participate in it
8 to my knowledge.
9 Q Well, you used the phrase not being
10 invited, correct, in your report?
11 A Not being invited. You have to point
12 where that language is.
13 Q Top of page 23 the third sentence on the
14 page. Not being invited to this workshop. You
15 found not invited?
16 A Right, not being invited.
17 Q The next item on your list new office
18 space. You found that Ms. Baer had requested
19 that the Office of Human Rights office be moved
20 to a new location, correct?
21 A If I could just read it.
22 Q Sure.
23 A Can you just re-ask your question again?
24 Q You found that Ms. Baer had wanted the
1 Office of Human Rights office space moved to a

2 new location, correct?
3 A No.
4 Q Consideration, according to your report,
5 was given to moving the OHR office to a new
6 location, correct?
7 A I believe consideration was given.
8 Q And consideration by Mr. Mareane, the
9 county administrator, Karen's boss, right?
10 A I believe so, yes.
11 Q And ultimately Mr. Mareane made the
12 decision not to move the Office of Human Rights
13 into a new space, correct?
14 A I don't know if it was his decision
15 alone, but I believe that decision was reached.
16 Q Ultimately the OHR was not moved into the
17 new space?
18 A Ultimately the OHR was not moved.
19 Q And one of the reasons to move the OHR
20 into a new location was to insure that it was
21 handicap accessible, correct?
22 A I don't know if that is true.
23 Q Well, you wrote in your report, quote,
24 "one legislator reported that Ms. Baer wanted to
1 move the OHR because its current location is not

2 handicap accessible," correct?
3 A That's what one legislator reported. In
4 my humble opinion that does not constitute
5 validity or truth. That's just what one person
6 said.
7 Q Did you visit the Office of Human Rights?
8 A I did not. I did drive by the building.
9 Q Do you have any knowledge as to whether
10 or not it's handicap accessible?
11 MR. MCCANN: Objection, relevance.
12 A I have no knowledge of whether it is.
13 Q Would it be pretty important for the
14 Office of Human Rights to be accessible to people
15 with disabilities?
16 A It would have been great if I had the
17 opportunity to be invited to visit the building
18 to substantiate that claim. However, I never had
19 that opportunity.
20 HEARING OFFICER: An objection was
21 raised and we went a little bit by it, but
22 the objection was on the basis of its
23 relevancy. How would you respond to that?
24 MS. SALZMAN: I'm questioning the
1 witness about findings he made in the

2 report specifically about the new office
3 space and he specifically wrote that one
4 reason to move it was because its current
5 location is not handicap accessible. He
6 now seems to be saying he doesn't know if
7 that is true or not. I'm just probing
8 whether he knew whether it was accessible
9 or not.
10 HEARING OFFICER: I'll allow the
11 question.
12 Q And the testimony is you didn't know?
13 A Did not know what?
14 Q Whether it was handicap accessible.
15 A I did not know whether it was or was not.
16 Q Source of income protection, the ninth
17 item on your list. Ms. Baer had presented
18 legislation to protect people from source of
19 income discrimination, correct?
20 A I think it was part of the
21 antidiscrimination law, the draft
22 antidiscrimination law.
23 Q The draft antidiscrimination law Ms. Baer
24 had prepared, correct?
1 A Yes.
2 Q And ultimately the legislature took no
3 action on the source of income discrimination
4 protection, correct?
5 A I believe that is correct.
6 Q On the tenth item on your ten point list
7 the amendment to eliminate the Office of Human
8 Rights. There was a legislative proposal in 2016
9 to eliminate the entire office of human rights,
10 correct?
12 HEARING OFFICER: In an effort to
13 move on, I'll allow the question.
14 MS. SALZMAN: I'm just questioning
15 him what he wrote in his report. We're on
16 page 24, amendment to eliminate the OHR.
17 MR. MCCANN: Didn't you say
18 legislative proposal?
19 MS. SALZMAN: On page 24. After the
20 annual committee budget forum took place,
21 Legislator Mike Siegler made an amendment
22 to eliminate the OHR.
23 MR. MCCANN: A particular legislator
24 made a amendment to a budget.
1 HEARING OFFICER: But it's in the

2 report. I'll allow the question.
3 MR. MCCANN: They are two different
4 things.
5 MS. SALZMAN: I will rephrase the
6 question very happily.
8 Q A legislator made an amendment to
9 eliminate the Office of Human Rights, correct?
10 A One legislator did.
11 Q And Ms. Baer was not included in the
12 discussions about whether to eliminate the Office
13 of Human Rights, correct?
15 MS. SALZMAN: I'm asking him that
16 question.
17 MR. MCCANN: If there were
18 discussions? I'm assuming there were
19 discussions. There is no foundation for
20 discussions.
22 examination. I'm asking him if she was
23 included.
24 HEARING OFFICER: Again I'll allow
1 some leeway on it.

2 MS. SALZMAN: You can bring it up on
3 redirect and ask him whatever you think
4 needs asking.
5 MR. MCCANN: My objection is to
6 foundation, Counselor.
8 question.
9 MS. SALZMAN: I have a basis for
10 asking that question. That's all I need on
11 cross examination.
12 HEARING OFFICER: You want to repeat
13 the question then?
14 Q Ms. Baer was excluded from the
15 discussions about whether to eliminate the Office
16 of Human Rights, correct?
17 A I don't know that that's true.
18 Q So in each of these ten opportunities
19 that you used to guide your investigation you
20 found that Ms. Baer was not included, correct?
21 A I don't know if that's true for each of
22 them.
23 Q Well, we just went through them. Was
24 there one that she was included in?
1 A I don't know. I'd have to look back.

2 HEARING OFFICER: I think we've got
3 testimony as to included, invited. We'll
4 let the record, it's established on that.
5 Q You testified in your direct examination,
6 Mr. Taylor, that Ms. Baer had not established a
7 prima facia case. Do you remember saying that?
8 A In my direct testimony? In regard to
9 what question?
10 Q Do you deny saying that Ms. Baer had not
11 established a prima fascia case in your view?
12 A In regards to what? I'm just asking in
13 regard to what question?
14 Q I'm just asking the question. You don't
15 remember testifying to that?
16 A I think that was in regards to the
17 question concerning whether or not she had set
18 forth a claim of discrimination.
19 HEARING OFFICER: That's my
20 recollection.
21 A So in that context I believe that, yes,
22 that she had failed to establish a prima fascia
23 case of discrimination.
24 Q Would you also take the position that she
1 failed to establish a prima fascia case of

2 retaliation?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Ms. Baer belongs to a protected category,
5 correct?
6 A I don't know what her classification is.
7 I never met with her. I never asked her those
8 questions.
9 Q You're unaware that Ms. Baer is a woman
10 of color?
11 A I believe that she presents as a female.
12 Q And Ms. Baer is qualified by virtue of
13 her resume to do her job, correct?
14 A I don't know if I've ever seen her
15 resume. She never sent me her resume.
16 Q Now you also testified on your direct
17 examination that you found a, quote, "toxic
18 environment," correct?
19 A Yes.
20 Q And that was as a result of you
21 interviewing I think you testified 13 county
22 officials and legislators?
23 A I don't know if it was the result of me
24 interviewing 13 people.
1 Q Well, you interviewed only 13 people,

2 correct?
3 A Right.
4 Q And by my count actually 11 of those 13
5 were legislators or senior county officials; is
6 that correct?
7 A 11 of those 13, yes, ma'am.
8 Q And as a result of those interviews you
9 formed an opinion that the environment was,
10 quote, "toxic," correct?
12 A That's not correct.
13 Q Fair to say that those legislators and
14 officials were angry and frustrated with Ms.
15 Baer?
16 A That's not correct.
17 Q Let's talk about your finding in the,
18 bear with me one moment here. Let's talk about
19 your finding in your report that Ms. Baer was
20 insubordinate. You remember that finding, right?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And the basis for that finding rests
23 entirely on your finding that she refused to
24 cooperate in your investigation, correct?
1 A Was that the exclusive rationale behind

2 insubordination?
3 Q Behind your finding that she was
4 insubordinate. Your basis for that finding was
5 that she refused to participate in your
6 investigation in your view, correct?
7 A No, that is not correct. It was based on
8 a directive that was given to her by her employer
9 that she do something and then she willfully
10 failed to do that. To me that constitutes, when
11 you're given a directive as an employee you have
12 to follow that directive unless there is an
13 overreaching safety concern or some act that is
14 illegal. Barring an illegal or unsafe action,
15 you have to do what your employer directs you to
16 do. You can then grieve later. You can protest
17 later, but you have to do what your employer
18 tells you to do.
19 HEARING OFFICER: I think we know the
20 answer to it. You had asked if there was,
21 if he found insubordination. He said yes
22 inasmuch as she didn't obey a directive
23 from a supervisor.
24 Q I just want the record to be clear that
1 that was the only basis for your finding of

2 insubordination; am I correct? That you found
3 she hadn't complied with a supervisor's directive
4 to participate in your investigation?
5 A I believe that was the main piece of
6 insubordination as I was looking at it. There
7 was a clear directive to do something and she
8 refused to do it.
9 Q Was there some other piece of the
10 insubordination because I don't see it in your
11 report?
12 A I'll answer it again. That's my
13 recollection.
14 Q Ms. Baer never told you that she refused
15 to participate in your investigation if you gave
16 her the written process she had asked for, right?
17 A I don't understand your question.
18 Q Did Ms. Baer ever tell you that she would
19 refuse to participate in your investigation if
20 you gave her the written process she asked you
21 for?
22 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Foundation
23 has not been established.
24 HEARING OFFICER: I think we're
1 starting to go over this. I understand the

2 basis of this and I know the answer to
3 that. She said, Mr. Investigator, I will,
4 I want the procedure because I feel I may
5 be victimized by impermissible retaliation.
6 Give me the procedure. If you give me
7 that, then I will participate. Absent
8 that, I'm not going to participate is what
9 your argument is? I get it. I guess.
10 MS. SALZMAN: Okay.
11 HEARING OFFICER: Is there something
12 I'm missing?
13 MS. SALZMAN: No. You summed it up
14 very well. Thank you.
15 Q During the course of your investigation,
16 did you ever tell Ms. Baer that you believe that
17 she was being insubordinate by refusing to meet
18 with you before receiving the process?
19 MR. MCCANN: Objection, asked and
20 answered.
21 A At what point?
22 HEARING OFFICER: Objection as to?
23 MR. MCCANN: Asked and answered.
24 HEARING OFFICER: Ask the question
1 again. Make sure I understand it.

2 Q At any point in the course of your
3 investigation, did you tell Ms. Baer you believed
4 she was being insubordinate by not meeting with
5 you before she got the written process?
7 witness to answer.
8 A I didn't have an opportunity. She didn't
9 return my phone calls.
10 Q Did you write that in your June 5th
11 letter that she was being insubordinate by
12 refusing to meet with you before you provided the
13 process?
14 A No. I urged her to take advantage of the
15 opportunity to meet with me.
16 Q And your answer is you didn't?
17 HEARING OFFICER: I understand all of
18 that, too. I don't mean to sound
19 conceited, but I figured it out.
20 MS. SALZMAN: If you understood,
21 that's my job is to move on. I've done my
22 job. And I am almost done.
24 Q And you made no findings in your report,
1 Mr. Taylor, that it was a neglect of duty for Ms.

2 Baer to resign from the WDIC, correct?
3 A I don't believe so. I don't recall
4 whether that came up.
5 Q And you made no findings in your report
6 that it was a neglect of duty for Ms. Baer to
7 resign from the compliance committee, correct?
8 A I don't recall if that was part of the
9 neglect of duty conclusion that I came to.
10 Q But my question was did you make any
11 findings in your report that it was a neglect of
12 duty for Ms. Baer to resign from the compliance
13 committee in your report that we're looking at?
14 A I'd have to read it. I think I may have
15 included some comment about that resignation.
16 Q Being a neglect of duty?
17 A I'd have to look.
18 HEARING OFFICER: Excuse me. As he
19 sits here, he doesn't recall all of the
20 details, and I wouldn't either of course,
21 as to what specific verbiage that he used.
22 I think the report, rather than going over
23 it and over it, you'll be able to hone in
24 on it and cite it to me in your post
1 hearing submissions. At least I believe

2 there is going to be post hearing
3 submissions.
4 MS. SALZMAN: Absolutely you'll get
5 them.
6 Q Are you aware, Mr. Taylor, final question
7 on this point that being on the WDIC and
8 compliance committee were not part of Ms. Baer's
9 job duties?
11 MS. SALZMAN: I'm asking if he was
12 aware.
13 HEARING OFFICER: Are you aware?
14 MR. MCCANN: You've stated a fact.
15 MS. SALZMAN: And I'm asking if he's
16 aware.
17 MR. MCCANN: You established there is
18 no foundation for that fact and asking him
19 a question about it.
20 MR. CELLI: Come on.
21 HEARING OFFICER: I think a quick
22 answer, if he is aware.
23 A I believe that being on that committee
24 may have been one of her job duties.
1 HEARING OFFICER: We don't have to

2 explore that any further. I think just the
3 fact that he is saying he believes, but
4 that isn't exactly a yes or no.
5 MS. SALZMAN: It's one of the charges
6 against her.
7 HEARING OFFICER: Okay.
8 MR. MCCANN: Are you going to show a
9 foundation so we can get a time frame?
10 MS. SALZMAN: Of the resignation?
11 MR. MCCANN: The resignation from the
12 committee.
13 MS. SALZMAN: I wasn't planning to
14 with this witness. You can do whatever you
15 want with him on redirect. This is cross
16 examination.
17 MR. MCCANN: I think it's misleading.
18 MS. SALZMAN: You can correct
19 whatever you think I'm not being fair
20 about.
21 HEARING OFFICER: This will be marked
22 for identification as Respondent's C.
23 (RESPONDENT EXHIBIT C WAS MARKED FOR
24 IDENTIFICATION.)
1 Q I put before you a document, Mr. Taylor,

2 entitled director of human rights, Tompkins
3 County; do you see that document?
4 A Director of human rights, yes, ma'am.
5 Q Is that Ms. Baer's job description?
6 A I think it's part of her job description.
7 Q Are you suggesting that the document I've
8 put in front of you is an incomplete document?
9 A I believe there is another document that
10 sets forth her actual job duties that's separate
11 from this document.
12 Q Is this a document, the one that is
13 before you right now, one that you reviewed
14 during the course of your work in this matter?
15 A I believe this was one of the documents
16 that I reviewed.
17 MS. SALZMAN: And can we move this
18 document into evidence?
20 MS. SALZMAN: So that will be C.
21 HEARING OFFICER: You've asked for
22 that to go into evidence, the document into
23 evidence.
1 HEARING OFFICER: With that,

2 Respondent's C is received.
3 MR. MCCANN: Off the record.
5 Q Does Exhibit C anywhere reflect that
6 serving on the WDIC and compliance committee are
7 within the job description of the director of
8 human rights?
9 A I believe so.
10 Q You believe it does?
11 A I believe that it does.
12 Q Can you take the time to read it then and
13 point it to us?
14 A I believe on the second page where it
15 lists here devise and implement results-oriented
16 advocacy strategies in support of special
17 emphasis programs, work force diversity
18 objections and goals and the execution of the
19 county's EEOC programs.
20 Q I'm sorry. Did you read out the word
21 WDIC or compliance committee?
22 A WDIC stands for workforce diversity
23 inclusion.
24 Q But my question is does this job
1 description list anywhere that she is required to

2 serve on those two specific committees?
3 A In my opinion, yes.
4 HEARING OFFICER: Let me interrupt
5 you. I think the question was do you see
6 that in the job description. He said I
7 believe it's contained within the general
8 statement there so I think we can move on.
9 I understand what you're saying. It may
10 not say it specifically, but he could say
11 look, I understand it's contained within
12 this general overall.
13 MS. SALZMAN: It's his opinion that
14 it's contained in the general statement. I
15 think we're done. Oh, one final thing.
16 HEARING OFFICER: No such thing.
17 MS. SALZMAN: I have one tiny more,
18 last question.
19 Q You testified a little earlier on cross
20 examination, I tried to be organized, that you
21 had never seen Karen Baer's resume in your
22 belief, correct?
24 Q Did you ever ask to see her resume?
1 A I never had the opportunity.

2 Q Did you ask in your initial phone call
3 when you spoke to her for 40 minutes?
5 HEARING OFFICER: And I understand
6 this one, too. You're going to say you
7 didn't ask for it.
8 MS. SALZMAN: In the phone call and
9 the letter and the messages.
10 HEARING OFFICER: And he's going to
11 say she didn't return my phone calls. I
12 get it all.
13 MS. SALZMAN: Okay. Thank you very
14 much, Mr. Taylor.
15 HEARING OFFICER: I concede I
16 understand it.
17 A As a matter of fact I did ask for it in
18 answer to your question. I gave her a final
19 opportunity in the June 5th letter. I said if
20 you have anything that you would like for me to
21 consider as part of my investigation please
22 contact me. I never got a response.
23 Q That's not true, Mr. Taylor.
24 A What I got is a letter that did not
1 include any additional information. What I got

2 was a response telling me that I have not
3 responded to your calls and I will continue to do
4 so. So there, even though I repeatedly asked for
5 information, I was repeatedly told that I'm not
6 going to answer your phone calls, I'm not going
7 to cooperate with your investigation and she held
8 out there this, this, I guess this initial phone
9 call not wanting to participate for the reasons
10 that she didn't know the process. What I found
11 through looking at what you marked as
12 Respondent's C it was her job to know the
13 process. That's where neglect of duty came from
14 in my mind. It was her job to know, because this
15 document spelled out exactly that she should have
16 known how to take complaints, how to investigate
17 complaints and how to develop policies if they
18 related to those complaints.
19 Q Mr. Taylor, Ms. Baer had asked for your
20 process?
21 A Not my process. I don't have a process.
22 The county has a process. It is the county's
23 process when you're an employee and you seek to
24 file a complaint alleging gender or racial
1 discrimination. That is the process by law that

2 you're required to follow and Tompkins County has
3 a process. As a matter fact, it was her job to
4 implement that process. It was her job to know
5 that process.
6 Q And you never told Ms. Baer that you were
7 following that process, correct?
8 A It was her job to know the process.
9 Q Answer my question, Mr. Taylor.
10 HEARING OFFICER: I understand this
11 again. The witness would say look, this is
12 the county's process. She as director of
13 HR should know the process. You would say
14 did you tell her you were employing the
15 county's process.
16 MS. SALZMAN: After she made a
17 specific request to know what process was
18 being followed in his investigation.
19 HEARING OFFICER: I understand.
20 A And I tried numerous times to let her
21 know in all of my efforts. No one returned --
22 Q Not a single e-mail, not a single letter?
23 A The letter I did get at the end telling
24 me that she is going to continue not to return my
1 phone calls.
2 Q Because you still haven't provided her
3 with the written --
4 HEARING OFFICER: I get it, folks. I
5 really do. I understand what's going on.
6 Q In Respondent's Exhibit A, Mr. Taylor,
7 the e-mails that you testified that you did
8 review between Karen Baer, Michael Lane and the
9 legislators, did you observe that Karen Baer's
10 resume was attached as an exhibit?
11 HEARING OFFICER: What are you
12 looking at?
13 MS. SALZMAN: Exhibit A, Respondent
14 A.
15 HEARING OFFICER: Respondent A. Got
16 it.
17 MR. MCCANN: In this e-mail?
18 MS. SALZMAN: If you look at the
19 third page of Exhibit A, you see K. Baer
20 resume doc pdf as an attachment.
21 A I don't know if I received that pdf
22 attachment to the e-mails I got.
23 Q Who gave you these e-mails? Was it Mr.
24 Lane?
1 A I got these e-mails from, I don't recall

2 at the beginning. It might have been from the
3 county administrator or from Mr. Wood.
4 Q So your testimony is they didn't send you
5 Ms. Baer's resume when they did that?
6 A I don't recall. I don't recall seeing
7 it. I don't recall printing it out. If it came
8 in a pdf, I usually would have printed it out. I
9 just don't have a recollection of seeing her
10 resume.
11 MS. SALZMAN: Thank you very much,
12 Mr. Taylor.
13 MR. MCCANN: Very brief redirect.
15 REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY
16 MR. MCCANN:
17 Q Mr. Taylor, directing your attention back
18 to Charging Party's Exhibit 3, Ms. Baer's June
19 9th, 2017 letter.
20 A Yes.
21 Q Under the first bullet point for her
22 reasons for not cooperating, did she request you
23 provide her with a written process?
1 Q Did she relay all of these reasons set

2 forth in the five bullet points in this letter
3 five months later in your telephone conference
4 with her at the outset of your investigation?
5 MS. SALZMAN: Objection. Can you
6 just, I don't think I heard that question
7 very well?
8 MR. MCCANN: Can you read it back?
9 (PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BACK.)
10 MS. SALZMAN: Five months earlier is
11 what you meant. I follow you. I think you
12 misspoke. You meant five months earlier in
13 the initial phone call.
14 MR. MCCANN: Pardon.
15 MS. SALZMAN: You said five months
16 later, but you meant five months earlier in
17 the initial phone call. I understand what
18 you're getting at.
20 Q What do you recall of any reason she gave
21 for not wanting to participate in the
22 investigation?
23 MS. SALZMAN: In the initial phone
24 call?
1 MR. MCCANN: I'm just reading from

2 her letter.
3 MS. SALZMAN: Well, I'm just trying
4 to understand if you're asking what's in
5 the letter or she said in the initial phone
6 call?
7 MR. MCCANN: On the phone call,
8 Counsel.
9 MR. CELLI: Are you talking about the
10 letter or phone call? It's not clear.
11 Your question is unclear.
12 MR. MCCANN: I'm referring to the
13 phone call.
14 MS. SALZMAN: That's all I'm asking
15 you to clarify.
16 HEARING OFFICER: From the very first
17 phone call.
18 MS. SALZMAN: What reasons did she
19 give in the phone call.
20 A In the very first phone call what I
21 remember was that she wanted, that she had gone
22 through a previous investigation. She wanted to
23 know who I was. She wanted to know about
24 confidentiality. She wanted to know about
1 conciliation. And there was a general feeling of

2 distrust. And she wanted to know about the
3 process. And I don't know if her desire for
4 process was either the complaint process that you
5 would go through to file a formal complaint under
6 the county's guidelines or if she was trying to
7 say what specific or unique process would I be
8 going through that was different from what she
9 had gone through before. And she wanted, and the
10 last thing I remember is she wanted me to get
11 back to her when I had that information. That's
12 what I remember.
13 MR. MCCANN: Thank you. No further
14 questions.
15 MS. SALZMAN: Just very briefly.
16 RECROSS EXAMINATION BY
17 MS. SALZMAN:
18 Q Mr. Taylor, on that last point what Karen
19 Baer asked you for in that initial phone call,
20 take a look again at your report that you wrote,
21 page eight. Ms. Baer told me that she did
22 not want to meet with me --
23 HEARING OFFICER: Let me and the
24 witness just get there on where you're
1 reading from.
2 Q Page eight, the same sentence we read a
3 couple times, but have trouble sticking to. Page
4 eight, Ms. Baer told me that she did not want to
5 meet with me until she was aware of the process
6 for investigating her complaint. That's what you
7 wrote in your report, correct?
8 A That is, uh huh.
9 Q In Karen Baer's June 9th letter to you
10 the very first bullet point that Mr. McCann just
11 asked you about, Karen Baer wrote in that letter
12 I requested -- this is a quote, "I requested, but
13 you did not provide me with the written process."
14 That's what she wrote, correct?
15 A That's what she wrote.
16 Q She did refer in her letter to a written
17 process?
18 A That's what she wrote in her letter.
19 That's not what I recall the conversation being.
20 And even when you look at those two documents,
21 there's a distinction to be made. In my
22 accounting she wanted to be aware of the process
23 for investigating her complaint. The process of
24 investigating her complaint is set forth in all
1 the county's policies and procedures. They are

2 clear about the different ways that the county
3 handles complaints about race or gender
4 discrimination. That is different than what she
5 recounts in her letter to me on June 9th where
6 she says she wants to get a written process that
7 you intend to follow. So those are two
8 distinctions from two people that may have
9 engaged in the same conversation. She thinks
10 she's asking me for a written process and that I
11 intend to follow. And I take away that she was,
12 that she is asking to be made aware of the
13 process for investigating her complaint which
14 could be two different things.
15 Q But by the time you got the June 9th
16 letter, to the extent you had any confusion about
17 what Karen Baer was asking for before she met
18 with you, that was cleared up. She said right
19 here the process that you intend to follow and
20 you didn't give it to her, did you?
21 A And from --
22 Q Yes or no, did you give her the written
23 process?
24 A In all of those five months much of this
1 could have been cleared up with a simple

2 returning of my phone call, but I never got a
3 single --
4 Q Excuse me.
5 A -- a single response to the eight to nine
6 phone calls that I put in. It seems to me if
7 you're really concerned about process, if you
8 really want to know what's going on and the
9 investigator calls you numerous times that you
10 know what most professional people do? They
11 return phone calls and they clear up --
12 Q And if you --
13 A -- whatever ambiguity that exists in
14 their mind between what they have asked for and
15 what they have received. That is generally the
16 standardized practice that I'm familiar with when
17 I deal with professionals.
18 Q And you were angry?
19 A I'm angry now.
20 HEARING OFFICER: I was just going to
21 say.
22 A That I come out here so many times to
23 deal with this fundamental question that could
24 have been cleared up with a simple courtesy
1 returning my phone call. That is the least

2 amount of effort that a human being can do is to
3 pick up a phone call and return to the person.
4 I've been out to Ithaca which is an over three
5 hour drive from Albany. I've been out here five,
6 six times, overnights. And if this is a point of
7 confusion, it could have been handled with a
8 phone call.
9 Q And, Mr. Taylor, after getting the June
10 9th letter, that to the extent there was any
11 confusion, made it very clear she was asking for
12 the written process that you were following in
13 your investigation, your choice was to finish
14 your report without ever giving Karen Baer the
15 written process and sitting down to interview
16 her; isn't that right, sir?
17 A What it led me to believe was that she --
18 Q Isn't that right, Mr. Taylor, yes or no?
19 A -- did not want any further
20 communications between myself and her. And when
21 a person indicates that they are no longer going
22 to respond to your calls and won't do so, they
23 have done it in the past, they are not going to
24 do so in the future, at some point even a lawyer
PAULA YOUNGER by MR. MCCANN 173
1 has to stop beating a dead horse.

2 MS. SALZMAN: Thank you, Mr. Taylor.
3 MR. MCCANN: No further questions.
4 HEARING OFFICER: I take it we're
5 done with this witness, Counselors?
6 MR. MCCANN: Yes.
7 MS. SALZMAN: Yes.
8 HEARING OFFICER: Thank you, sir.
9 (RECESS TAKEN.)
10 HEARING OFFICER: The district is
11 prepared to call its second witness and
12 we'll swear the witness in.
13 MR. MCCANN: I call Paula Younger.
14 P A U L A Y O U N G E R,
18 EXAMINATION BY
19 MR. MCCANN:
20 Q Good afternoon, Miss Younger.
21 A Good afternoon.
22 Q What is your present position of
23 employment?
24 A I am the, I wear a couple of hats right
1 now. I'm the interim county administrator and

2 I'm the deputy administrator and compliance
3 officer for the county.
4 Q What are your duties and responsibilities
5 as a compliance officer?
6 A Well, we initiated a compliance program
7 in 2011 and so I oversee that program. It's sort
8 of a board accountability measure for the county
9 so that we can demonstrate compliance with our
10 various entities, state affiliates, federal
11 agencies, any grantors and things like that. I
12 oversee and chair a compliance committee. We
13 provide training to staff. You know, just those
14 standard things that you would find in a general
15 compliance program that's my responsibility.
16 Q In general terms what are your duties and
17 responsibilities as deputy county administrator,
18 interim administrator? Is that the overlap?
19 A Yeah. Well, county administration in
20 general is in charge of county operations and the
21 majority of the departments report to us with the
22 exception of those that are managed by elected
23 officials. But even that there is a dotted line
24 responsibility because county administration
1 manages their budgets or oversees their budget.

2 So we are that extension of our legislature and
3 we insure implementation of the policies they put
4 in place. In terms of deputy county
5 administrator there are a lot of different kinds
6 of special projects that go on. Kind of once
7 again an extension of what the legislature would
8 like to see so I would manage those special
9 efforts. Sometimes there are special training
10 initiatives for all county staff. Administrative
11 policy development. I mean, if you think of
12 general operations from an overarching
13 administrative point of view that's what our
14 office does.
15 MR. MCCANN: Can I have this marked
16 as Charging Party 4?
17 HEARING OFFICER: Marked for
18 identification purposes as Charging Party's
19 Exhibit 4.
22 Q Miss Younger, I show you a document
23 marked for identification as Charging Party
1 A This is what we refer to as our

2 compliance program document so it is that
3 overarching policy and program management
4 document that gives guidance to what our program
5 is all about. So it includes a number of
6 different things, you know. The make up of our
7 compliance committee. Just in general the focus
8 of our program. Special protocols. For example
9 if there is a breach of sensitive information for
10 example that we have protocols to follow. So
11 this is sort of that master document that gives
12 guidance.
13 Q Are your duties and responsibilities as
14 the compliance officer set forth in this
15 document?
16 A Yeah. Because it does map out my
17 responsibilities, the general responsibilities of
18 the compliance committee.
19 Q I direct your attention just for
20 expediency to page eight.
21 A Yes.
22 Q It refers to the role of the compliance
23 officer. That is in reference to you as
24 compliance officer?
1 A Yes.
2 MR. MCCANN: We would offer Charging
3 Party's Exhibit 4.
4 MR. CELLI: No objection.
6 Party Exhibit 4 is entered into the hearing
7 record.
8 Q Does the compliance program set forth the
9 duties and responsibilities of the compliance
10 committee?
11 A Yeah. If you go over to the next page
12 there there lists the members of our compliance
13 committee and then the general roles and
14 responsibilities of that committee.
15 HEARING OFFICER: And you're
16 referring to page nine?
17 A Page nine.
18 Q Is there any reference in the membership
19 of the compliance committee to the director of
20 Office of Human Rights?
21 A Yes.
22 Q What is the reference there?
23 A The reference in terms of a list of
24 appointed members to that compliance committee?
1 Q Yes.
2 A That position is listed at the top of
3 page nine with the other members.
4 Q Direct your attention back to the first
5 page of that exhibit. There is a reference at
6 the bottom of the page, adopted by the Tompkins
7 County legislature. Do you have any knowledge as
8 to the process that was followed between
9 drafting, finalizing and adoption of this policy
10 by the legislature?
11 A The process that was?
12 Q Let me try to rephrase. Is this a
13 document that went before the Tompkins County
14 legislature for approval?
15 A Oh, yeah, definitely. The whole process
16 of putting a program in place was actually a
17 requirement from our county legislature so we
18 proceeded under their guidance. And then if you
19 look further on page seven of this you'll see
20 where the county legislature formally by
21 resolution was saying, was giving us that
22 authority to move forward and put the program in
23 place.
24 Q Miss Younger, did there come a point in
1 time in which Karen Baer did not report to a

2 compliance committee meeting?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Do you recall about when that was?
5 A It would have been roughly two years ago
6 now in the fall.
7 MR. MCCANN: Mark this as 5.
10 Q Miss Younger, does the document I've had
11 marked as Charging Party 5 for identification
12 refresh your recollection as to the date of the
13 meeting in which Ms. Baer did not report?
14 A That Thursday, yeah. That was the day
15 that the compliance committee met. We usually
16 meet in the morning.
17 Q The date indicated on this particular
18 document?
19 A Yes.
20 Q What is this document?
21 A What is this document?
22 Q Yes, what is it?
23 A This is an e-mail that I sent to Ms. Baer
24 because I was surprised that she wasn't at the
1 meeting that day.

2 Q This e-mail dated September 17, 2015?
3 A Yes.
5 Exhibit 5.
8 Party's 5 is admitted.
9 Q Would you read the e-mail please?
10 A Hi, Karen. I'm checking in because you
11 did not attend today's compliance committee
12 meeting. As you know Title VI was on the agenda,
13 you were slated to be our note taker. Typically
14 you touch base if there is a conflict. Is
15 everything okay? Please be in touch. Thanks,
16 Paula.
17 Q Had an agenda gone out before that the
18 meeting?
19 A Yes. We, I typically send out an agenda
20 a few days before the meeting starts and I often
21 times send out a little reminder e-mail because
22 we usually have our meeting sort of plotted out
23 already in advance, but just as a friendly
24 reminder I often send out an e-mail to let people
1 know.
2 MR. MCCANN: Marked as Charging Party
3 6 for identification.
6 Q Ms. Baer, can you identify the document
7 which I've had marked as Charging Party's Exhibit
8 6 for identification? Miss Younger, I apologize.
9 Miss Younger, can you identify the document that
10 I've had marked as Charging Party Exhibit 6 for
11 identification?
12 A Yes. This is our standard agenda
13 template for the compliance committee.
14 Q Is that the agenda for the September 17,
15 2015 meeting?
16 A Yes, it is.
18 Exhibit 6.
19 HEARING OFFICER: Charging Party 6
20 has been offered.
22 HEARING OFFICER: With that, it's
23 admitted.
24 Q Miss Younger, would this agenda have gone
1 out to all committee members?

2 A Yes.
3 Q I see there is a reference to Karen Baer
4 in particular on this document. Can you explain
5 that reference?
6 A Yes. At this time we had this practice
7 at that time where we would rotate members to
8 serve as note takers. We didn't take formal
9 meeting minutes, but still these were notes. And
10 just to sort of share the burden, if you will, we
11 would choose a little schedule. If you look at
12 the very bottom of the agenda where it gives the
13 next meeting date, we also gave a reminder of who
14 was on the agenda to be the next note taker. So
15 the one that was the note taker for that meeting
16 is up at the top of the agenda.
17 Q And that individual at this point is
18 Karen Baer?
19 A For that particular meeting on September
20 17th, yes, it was going to be Karen.
21 Q How long before the September 17th
22 meeting would the agenda have gone out?
23 A Sometime it's a week in advance, but
24 looking in on a Thursday maybe that Monday of
1 that week. Usually they have a few days before

2 the meeting starts.
3 Q How is the agenda transmitted to
4 committee members?
5 A Via e-mail.
6 Q Did Ms. Baer ever get back to you to
7 indicate between on or about Monday of that week
8 and Thursday, September 17, 2015 that she would
9 not be in attendance at the meeting?
10 A No.
11 Q Did she ever indicate to you that you
12 would have to get another note taker?
13 A No.
14 Q Were there particular issues on the
15 agenda that day that related to human rights?
16 A Well, there was a sort of process in
17 place to put a Title VI program in place for the
18 county. And I knew that Ms. Baer had had some
19 experience with that in her human rights efforts.
20 We had attempted to put together a small work
21 group earlier on about a couple of months prior
22 and I had engaged her to participate in that work
23 group. And so the Title VI plan was something
24 that was ongoing on our compliance committee
1 agendas as we started to develop something for

2 the county.
3 Q I take it that's a reference to agenda
4 item four?
5 A Yes.
6 Q I direct your attention back to Charging
7 Party Exhibit 5. Did Ms. Baer respond to that
8 e-mail?
9 HEARING OFFICER: Charging Party 5,
10 let me put that in front of her.
11 MR. MCCANN: It would be the
12 September 17th e-mail.
13 A I was saying yes to you I have it. I'm
14 sorry. Could you go back and ask your question?
15 Q Yes, I can. Did Ms. Baer respond to that
16 e-mail?
17 A Yeah. She did respond.
20 Q I had marked Charging Party Exhibit 7.
21 Can you identify Charging Party Exhibit 7, what
22 is that?
23 A It is an e-mail thread that embedded
24 within is the e-mail that I sent to Karen on the
1 17th asking her about why she didn't attend the

2 compliance committee meeting. It includes her
3 response, but it also includes another e-mail a
4 month prior when she was a part of a smaller work
5 group with regard to Title VI.
6 Q What are you referring to in terms of
7 that embedded e-mail?
8 A Well, on the second page of the document
9 that you have given to me there is an e-mail
10 dated August 25th where Karen is letting me know
11 that because she has a deficit in staff, not
12 enough coverage for staff, that she would not be
13 able to assist with the Title VI planning
14 efforts.
15 Q And just to make sure I'm clear in terms
16 of what the document represents was the August
17 25th e-mail part of this e-mail chain or was it
18 taken from a different e-mail chain?
19 A Well, it's taken from a different e-mail
20 chain because the September 17th e-mail that I
21 sent to Karen about connected to the meeting of
22 the compliance committee that day was just an
23 e-mail that I sent to Karen.
24 Q A standing alone e-mail?
1 A Right. Just between Karen and myself

2 that I initiated, that I sent to her. But her
3 response is connected to a separate e-mail that I
4 sent to compliance committee members and I can't,
5 I can't explain the e-mail itself because I
6 didn't originate this e-mail. I guess that's
7 what I'm saying. So it looks like other e-mails
8 creating a thread, if I'm explaining this
9 correctly, because it was this e-mail that she
10 sent in in response to my inquiry about why she
11 didn't attend the meeting, but it also included
12 other items that was not a part of my original
13 e-mail to her.
14 Q Leaving that August 25th e-mail aside, do
15 the rest of the e-mails set forth in this thread
16 appear to be e-mails that you received or sent on
17 or about the dates indicated in this exhibit
18 Charging Party Exhibit 7?
19 A Yes, because then it continues on with
20 her response to my original September 17th e-mail
21 and then my response to her response.
22 MR. MCCANN: I would offer Charging
23 Party Exhibit 7.
1 HEARING OFFICER: Received. Entered.

2 Q I'll direct your attention I guess to
3 start at this point with the repeat of your
4 September 17th e-mail to Karen Baer which
5 actually appears at the top of the second page.
6 If I understand the thread correctly, her
7 response appears on the bottom of the first page;
8 is that correct?
9 A That's correct.
10 Q And that response is dated September 17th
11 as well, the same date as your e-mail to her?
12 A Yes.
13 Q In that response Ms. Baer indicates she
14 is sorry about the misunderstanding. It didn't
15 occur to me that you hadn't received my notice
16 last month, see below, about being unable to
17 attend or assist. Did that answer that as a
18 reference to the e-mail she set forth below which
19 presumably is that August 25th e-mail --
20 A Yes.
21 Q -- provide a satisfactory response to you
22 as to why she did not attend the compliance
23 committee meeting?
24 A Well, as I respond to her I thought we
1 were talking about two totally separate things.

2 Q Why do you say that?
3 A Because I thought in the August e-mail
4 she was responding to the separate work group
5 regarding the development of the Title VI plan.
6 When my original e-mail to her on the 17th was
7 about attending the compliance committee meeting.
8 So it appears that what she was saying to me is
9 that in that August e-mail she was referencing
10 compliance in its entirety when I took it just to
11 mean that she could not assist with the special
12 activities related to Title VI planning.
13 Q And did you inform Ms. Baer of your
14 interpretation of the e-mail as part of your
15 response to her e-mail?
16 A Yes. That's part of my response that
17 continues on that first page, the e-mail sent at
18 3:57 that afternoon, when I said that she might
19 be confusing the two groups, i.e. our compliance
20 committee versus the small group working with the
21 Title VI plan. And I went on to say that I was
22 reaching out to her because she was an appointed
23 member of our compliance committee so I was
24 surprised that she wasn't there at the compliance
1 meeting.
2 Q Did Ms. Baer have the authority to decide
3 on her own that she would no longer participate
4 in meetings of the compliance committee?
5 A Well, this is a formal committee of the
6 county. I mean, it's all a part of the
7 legislature's approval of our program and all the
8 members are appointed by the county administrator
9 so it's a rather important position and it's
10 assumed a part of your duties.
11 Q Going back to the August 25th e-mail on
12 the second page. Ms. Baer indicates in that
13 e-mail that she would be unable to assist in any
14 future accounting compliance efforts including
15 Title VI/ADA planning until such time that my
16 office staffing situation becomes stabilized.
17 Did her office staffing situation become
18 stabilized in any way in August of 2015?
19 A Yes.
20 Q How so?
21 A Well, I mean, she was able to hire staff.
22 I can't speak to, you know, exact dates and so
23 forth, but since this time in 2015, yes.
24 Q And in that e-mail September 17, 2015 at
1 the bottom of the first page she reiterates that

2 by saying once her staffing is stabilized, she
3 looked forward to recommitting herself to this
4 important effort. And her final e-mail to you
5 dated September 18, 2015 she states once again
6 I'm hopeful to be able to rejoin you in these
7 efforts at some point in the future. Did she at
8 any point in the future recommit herself to this
9 important effort or rejoin you in these efforts?
10 HEARING OFFICER: Where are you
11 reading? I'm sorry.
12 MR. MCCANN: The e-mail at the bottom
13 of the page, September 17 and the e-mail at
14 the top of the page.
15 HEARING OFFICER: Thanks for checking
16 in?
17 MR. MCCANN: It's the last sentence.
18 HEARING OFFICER: Oh, I'm sorry.
19 Okay. At the top.
20 A And then there is another one on page two
21 at the bottom as well.
22 Q Did she ever -- maybe I'll restate my
23 question. Did she ever recommit herself to this
24 important effort or rejoin you in these efforts?
PAULA YOUNGER by MR. CELLI 191
1 A She never rejoined the compliance

2 committee.
4 questions. Thank you.
5 HEARING OFFICER: Counselor.
6 MR. CELLI: Thank you.
7 CROSS EXAMINATION BY
8 MR. CELLI:
9 Q Good afternoon, Miss Younger.
10 A Good afternoon.
11 Q We haven't met. My name is Andrew Celli.
12 I represent Karen Baer along with my partner Zoe
13 Salzman.
14 A Hello, Zoe.
15 Q If you don't mind I'm going to stand
16 here. I'd like to ask you a few questions about
17 the exhibits you covered with Mr. McCann. Have a
18 look at Charging Party Exhibit 4 which is the
19 county compliance program. Actually before we
20 get to that, am I correct that you were on the
21 committee that hired Karen Baer to be the
22 director of the Office of Human Rights?
23 A On the search committee?
24 Q Yes.
1 A Yes.
2 Q You were the chair, right?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And that search took place in 2013,
5 correct?
6 A I'm going to trust you on that date.
7 I'll say yes.
8 Q The reason I ask is that I notice that
9 the county compliance program document was
10 adopted in 2011; do you see that?
11 A Uh huh.
12 Q And it was revised in 2015, correct?
13 A Uh huh.
14 Q That's right on the first page?
15 A Uh huh, yes.
16 Q Am I correct in saying that when the
17 county legislature adopted the compliance program
18 that we've marked here today in 2011, the
19 director of the Office of Human Rights was not a
20 member of the compliance committee; is that
21 correct?
22 A That's correct.
23 Q I'm going to ask a few questions about
24 e-mails also, but first let's take a look at the
1 agenda which is Charging Party Exhibit Number 6.

2 In this agenda you referred in your testimony to
3 some responsibilities having to do with the Title
4 VI plan for the county, correct?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And on the agenda you're listed as the
7 person who is responsible for that discussion at
8 that meeting, correct?
9 A Usually the person that's kind of
10 responsible for just facilitating it, that's not
11 the only person engaged in discussion. It's just
12 another way of sharing the burden of managing the
13 meeting.
14 Q But you were the person in charge of the
15 Title VI discussion for this meeting; is that
16 fair?
17 A Uh huh, yes.
18 Q And one of the reasons that you were the
19 person in charge of the Title VI discussion is
20 that Title VI is something that falls under your
21 control as the deputy county administrator,
22 correct?
23 A As the compliance officer and Title VI
24 and ADA being part of the overall compliance
1 plan, yes.
2 Q And Title VI is the Civil Rights Law,
3 right?
4 A Well, yeah. I mean in this regard Title
5 VI refers to --
6 Q Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
7 right?
8 A Yeah.
9 Q That's a law, right?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Are you a lawyer?
12 A No.
13 Q I just wanted to be clear about that. So
14 when the meeting was planned for September 17,
15 2015 and you were the person in charge of the
16 Title VI conversation, Karen Baer's duty that day
17 was to be the note taker; is that correct? Let
18 me withdraw the question.
19 A I'm not sure I understand the question.
20 When you say only duty, I'm not sure I
21 understand.
22 Q I didn't say it quite like that, but have
23 a look at the exhibit. On the exhibit, Exhibit
24 6, it says the note taker for today's meeting is
1 Karen Baer, correct?

2 A Yes.
3 Q So her job that day at the meeting would
4 have been to take notes, right?
5 A It would have been to be a part of the
6 compliance committee meeting and all of our
7 discussions. It's just that we would rotate that
8 note taking responsibility across members.
9 Q And that day it would have been her
10 responsibility to take notes, correct?
11 A For that rotation, yes.
12 Q And your responsibility to lead the
13 discussion on the Civil Rights Law, right?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Let's look at what's been previously
16 marked, it's 7.
17 HEARING OFFICER: Seven, yes.
18 Q Couple questions about this. Have a look
19 at Charging Party Exhibit 7, the very last e-mail
20 on that chain. That's an e-mail from Karen Baer
21 to you on August 25th, 2015 time stamped at 4:39
22 p.m., correct?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Did you receive an e-mail from Karen Baer
1 on August 25th, 2015 at or about 4:39 p.m., this

2 e-mail?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Had you read this e-mail prior to the
5 meeting on September 17th about three weeks
6 later?
7 A I'm not sure I understand your question.
8 I mean I read the e-mail the day it was sent.
9 Q Fair enough. So on the 17th of September
10 at the meeting you had already read and
11 understood the e-mail that she had sent three
12 weeks earlier saying that she wouldn't be able to
13 be involved in compliance efforts, correct?
14 A I read the e-mail, but apparently I had
15 not understood that it meant that, in her mind it
16 meant that she was not going to be attending the
17 meeting as a member of the committee. I thought
18 at that time in relationship to the August e-mail
19 that she was referring to the extra
20 responsibilities with regard to Title VI
21 planning.
22 Q Fair enough. And then after your e-mail
23 saying we expected you at the meeting, you didn't
24 make it, are you okay, she explained what you had
1 misunderstood, right?
2 A I guess you could take it that way, yes.
3 Q I'm asking you. You testified that she
4 wrote you an e-mail on August 25th saying I'm not
5 coming. I can't be involved in any future
6 compliance efforts and you did not understand,
7 and she references Title VI as well, and you did
8 not understand that that meant that she wasn't
9 going to come to the meeting on September 17th
10 where Title VI was going to be discussed; is that
11 fair?
12 A I did not interpret that as her meaning
13 she was no longer going to be a member of the
14 committee.
15 Q It was a misunderstanding on your part?
16 MR. MCCANN: Objection,
17 argumentative.
18 Q It's just a question. That was a
19 misunderstanding on your part, Miss Younger,
20 right?
21 A I would say it was a misunderstanding on
22 both of our parts.
23 Q Well, actually she wrote you an e-mail at
24 3:04 on September 17th, 2015 in which she
1 apologized for the misunderstanding, didn't she?

2 Dear Paula, thanks for checking in. I'm very
3 sorry about the misunderstanding.
4 A That's what I'm saying. I would assume
5 it was a misunderstanding on both of us.
6 Q So there wasn't anything willful about
7 the way she crafted her e-mail on August 25th to
8 try to confuse you into thinking she was going to
9 be at the meeting, was there?
10 A You're talking about something that would
11 take place a month later so I don't know what she
12 was thinking in August for a meeting that was
13 going to take place in September.
14 Q When you got Karen's e-mail on September
15 17th, 2015, did you think she tried to mislead
16 you back in August?
17 A I wasn't thinking about misleading. I
18 was trying to figure out why she wasn't at the
19 meeting.
20 Q She wasn't at the meeting because there
21 was a misunderstanding on your part, fair?
22 MR. MCCANN: Objection,
23 argumentative.
24 MR. CELLI: I'll withdraw it.
1 HEARING OFFICER: I think it's been

2 answered. It's a mutual misunderstanding.
3 MR. CELLI: Fair enough.
4 Q Then you responded to Ms. Baer's
5 September 17th 3:04 e-mail where you say "you
6 might be confusing the two groups," right?
7 That's your September 17th, 2015 e-mail at 3:57
8 p.m., correct? You have to respond verbally.
9 A Yes, that's correct.
10 Q You write, "you might be confusing the
11 two groups, that is the county compliance
12 committee versus the small group discussion,
13 parenthesis, you and I had with Amy and Rick, end
14 parenthesis, that took place a few weeks ago
15 regarding the ADA portion of the Title VI plan."
16 You remember writing that, correct?
17 A Yes.
18 Q And what you were communicating to Ms.
19 Baer at that point was that the mistake had been
20 on her part; is that fair?
21 A Yes, I guess you could say that's fair.
22 Q You weren't saying this was my
23 misunderstanding, I apologize, right?
24 A I was trying to interpret what she had
1 written in her previous e-mail to make sure that

2 I was clear with her that I was talking about two
3 separate groups.
4 Q So at the end of the e-mail chain that's
5 been presented as Charging Party Exhibit 7, Ms.
6 Baer wrote to you, "as I clearly conveyed to you
7 in my August 25th e-mail please consider me
8 unable to participate in either committee,"
9 correct? You see that, right?
10 A Yes.
11 Q So she was referring to both the
12 compliance committee and also the smaller
13 subcommittee or smaller group; is that fair?
14 A The smaller group regarding Title VI,
15 yes.
16 Q And after you received that, did Mareane
17 communicate with Ms. Baer about her role on the
18 committee, the compliance committee to your
19 knowledge?
20 A I'm going to have to assume he did only
21 because I had to inform him because he appoints
22 the members of the committee.
23 Q But that's your assumption. You've never
24 seen a letter that Mr. Mareane sent or an e-mail
1 to Ms. Baer saying anything about the compliance

2 committee, have you?
3 A Not regarding this exchange explicitly.
4 I can't say I recall that.
5 Q So at no point in time to your knowledge,
6 you can only testify to what you know, at no
7 point in time to your knowledge after Friday,
8 September 18th, 2015, did anybody, Mr. Mareane or
9 anybody else, direct Ms. Baer to appear at a
10 future compliance committee meeting, correct?
11 A I can't confirm that.
12 Q Just sitting here today to your knowledge
13 you're unaware of anybody ordering her to go to a
14 compliance meeting after this date, right?
15 A I don't know that for sure. I don't
16 know.
17 Q Don't know one way or the other?
18 A You're --
19 HEARING OFFICER: I think I know what
20 you're saying. You just don't know as you
21 said in your words one way or the other.
22 Q Let me ask you more directly. You never
23 ordered Ms. Baer to go to a compliance committee
24 meeting after this date, right?
1 A I did not order her to, no.

2 Q And you couldn't order her because you
3 were not her supervisor, right?
4 A That's correct.
5 Q So let's talk about the structure of the
6 county and how things work. As I understand it
7 you are the interim county administrator today,
8 correct?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And that's because Mr. Mareane is
11 retired; is that right?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And the person who sits in the role of
14 director of the Office of Human Rights, that
15 person reports directly to the county
16 administrator or at this time to the interim
17 county administrator, right?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And the person who sits in that role
20 today is somebody named Kenneth Clark?
21 A Mr. Clark does not sit in the role of the
22 director of human rights.
23 Q What's his job?
24 A He serves in an advisory capacity just
1 giving general oversight to the office until a

2 further decision is made.
3 Q The office being the Office of Human
4 Rights?
5 A That's correct.
6 Q And he was hired by the county to give
7 the general oversight of the Office of Human
8 Rights after Ms. Baer was removed from her
9 position as a part of these proceedings?
10 A It is not a formal hire, it's a
11 contractual arrangement.
12 Q Fair enough. He goes to the office every
13 day, right?
14 A I think his contract says roughly 30
15 hours a week.
16 Q Sits in Ms. Baer's office when he is
17 there?
18 A I assume he does just because that's the
19 space available to work.
20 Q Tells the staff what to do on a
21 day-to-day basis, right?
22 A That's not his sole responsibility.
23 That's actually shared with the county attorney
24 that assists in reviewing the complaints or
1 whatever that come into the office.

2 Q But he is one of the people who does
3 that; is that fair?
4 MR. MCCANN: Who?
5 Q Who gives direction to the staff of the
8 Q You testified that --
9 A I'm needing the question again because it
10 got a little choppy.
11 Q You would agree that one of the people
12 who is permitted to give orders to the staff of
13 the Office of Human Rights is Dr. Kenneth Clark,
14 correct?
15 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Calls for a
16 legal conclusion.
17 HEARING OFFICER: Well, do you know?
18 Q Does he supervise the staff of the
19 office?
20 MR. MCCANN: Same objection.
21 Q Do you understand the question?
23 question.
24 A He assisted with general oversight, but
1 at this point he is not a hire of the county. So

2 things, it depends on how you're looking at
3 supervision because things like signing time
4 sheets and things like that, that is what the
5 county attorney does.
6 HEARING OFFICER: Just so I know,
7 too, what's an offer of proof what we're
8 trying to establish here?
9 MR. CELLI: It will be clear in just
10 a moment if that's okay.
12 Q Miss Younger, did you participate in the
13 decision to give a contract to Mr. Clark to
14 assist in the oversight of the Office of Human
15 Rights?
16 A I assisted the former county
17 administrator in identifying folks that might be
18 in that role.
19 Q And Mr. Clark or Dr. Clark is somebody
20 who is a personal friend of yours, isn't he?
21 A I do know Dr. Clark, yes, and that was
22 full disclosure at the time.
23 Q Understood. And he is friends of your
24 husband as well?
1 A Our entire family knows Dr. Clark.

2 Q And you know his family as well?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And Dr. Clark is a distinguished I guess
5 a theologian; is that fair? He studied theology?
6 A Yes.
7 Q And he is a, I believe he is a reverend
8 also, he is a minister?
9 A He is a minister, yes.
10 Q But he doesn't have any background in
11 running a government civil rights office; is that
12 fair to say?
13 A He has done some similar work, but not in
14 a government environment, that's right.
15 Q Well, the work he has done has been in
16 the area of religious studies and religious work;
17 is that fair?
18 A Yes, that's fair. But there is more to
19 his resume.
20 Q Let's have a look.
21 MR. CELLI: I'd like to mark as
22 Respondent's Exhibit D.
23 (RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT D WAS MARKED
1 Q Miss Younger, I have placed in front of

2 you what is marked as Respondent's Exhibit D.
3 I'll represent to you this is a printout of a
4 LinkedIn page with the name Kenneth Clark on it.
5 Does this appear to be the LinkedIn page of the
6 same Kenneth Clark who is now overseeing things
7 at the Office of Human Rights?
8 A He is the former director of Cornell
9 United Religious Works. That I can verify. I'm
10 just not familiar with the Facebook page.
11 HEARING OFFICER: Excuse me from
12 interrupting because I know this didn't
13 come up on direct examination. Is the
14 allegation that you're trying to show some
15 favoritism to the detriment was given to
16 this gentleman?
17 MR. CELLI: The answer is let me ask
18 one more question.
20 Q Miss Younger, if Ms. Baer is terminated
21 from her role as director of Office of Human
22 Rights, would you agree that one of the people
23 who is up for the job is Dr. Clark?
24 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Speculation.
1 HEARING OFFICER: I'm going to

2 sustain the objection. You know, it wasn't
3 discussed first of all on direct
4 examination, but that aside I don't see
5 that it's in anyway embedded in the charges
6 that are here. And whomever may get the
7 job after whatever is determined here is
8 going to be speculative at best.
9 MR. CELLI: May I ask one or two more
10 questions?
11 HEARING OFFICER: Maybe.
12 MR. CELLI: Maybe. Well, I think
13 they are not controversial.
14 Q You would agree, Miss Younger, that if
15 Ms. Baer is terminated from her role as director
16 of Office of Human Rights, it would fall to you
17 to make the decision as to who the next person is
18 going to be to get the job?
19 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Calls for
20 speculation.
21 HEARING OFFICER: I think you can
22 answer that one.
23 A As a department head, it would follow a
24 standard search process that we have at the
1 county. And that's not my sole decision to make

2 as county administrator, if I'm in that position.
3 You're asking me to speculate an awful lot.
4 Q If it happened today, you're the interim
5 county administrator, correct?
6 A Uh huh.
7 Q You would agree with me if it happened
8 today you would play a role in the decision
9 making as to who would fill that job?
10 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Calls for
11 speculation.
12 A I would play a role in the process.
13 HEARING OFFICER: Did you request
14 this to be admitted into evidence?
15 MR. CELLI: Yeah. I'll move for its
16 admission.
17 MR. MCCANN: Objections, lack of
18 foundation and relevancy.
19 MR. CELLI: I could go through the
20 whole thing and confirm all the steps.
21 MR. MCCANN: She said she can't
22 identify the document. That's her
23 testimony.
24 MR. CELLI: No. She said she
1 couldn't identify the basis.

3 document, but only for limited value as to
4 what the witness testified with respect to
5 certain credentials there.
6 MR. CELLI: Okay. Thank you.
7 Q Miss Younger, during the period prior to
8 October 13th of this year, you would agree that
9 Ms. Baer -- that is when Ms. Baer was removed
10 from her position?
11 A Okay.
12 Q You would agree that Ms. Baer reported to
13 Mr. Mareane; is that correct?
14 A Yes.
15 Q And Mr. Mareane was the person
16 responsible for giving her performance
17 evaluations, correct?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And Mr. Mareane only gave her one
20 performance evaluation in the four years that she
21 had the role, correct?
22 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Way beyond
23 the scope of direct examination.
24 HEARING OFFICER: It is, but I'll
1 allow a little bit of testimony further on

2 this.
3 MR. CELLI: Well, let me say this.
4 This is a witness who I'm happy to call in
5 our case if you would prefer to do it that
6 way. I do have questions, in fairness to
7 Mr. McCann, that are beyond the scope of
8 his direct, but the witness is here and I'd
9 prefer to just handle that.
10 HEARING OFFICER: Why don't we do it
11 this way from here on forward, she will be
12 regarded as your witness, but my
13 understanding is you would be bound by her
14 testimony.
15 MR. MCCANN: I would object to that
16 without some kind of notice that this
17 witness is going to be called for that
18 purpose.
19 MR. CELLI: I mean, look the
20 argument --
21 MR. MCCANN: You can do it as part of
22 your case, but I object to doing it right
23 now.
24 MR. CELLI: The argument is that a
1 witness has come forward to testify about

2 events. Her credibility is part of the
3 case. Her role is part of the case. And I
4 think this is all fair cross examination.
5 MR. MCCANN: I have no trouble with
6 questions as to credibility. That question
7 is not.
8 MR. CELLI: Well, we're going to be
9 fighting all day because every question I'm
10 asking is about her credibility.
11 MR. MCCANN: Her credibility is part
12 of the issue by whether or not Mr. Mareane
13 gave Ms. Baer an evaluation? How so?
14 MR. CELLI: I'm not going to argue
15 with counsel.
16 MR. MCCANN: Make an offer of proof.
17 MR. CELLI: I'll make an offer of
18 proof outside the presence of the witness.
19 MR. MCCANN: Fine by me.
20 MR. CELLI: If you want to waste the
21 time.
22 MR. MCCANN: It's not a waste of
23 time.
24 HEARING OFFICER: Let's go off the
1 record and talk. I'd like to talk to

2 counsel off the record for a moment.
4 HEARING OFFICER: Here is what we're
5 going to, how we'll proceed, is this
6 witness will be cross examined as it
7 pertains to her testimony on direct
8 examination. It may be that you would be
9 recalled for further testimony as it
10 applies to this case, but would be the
11 Respondent's, Karen Baer's, witness. Is
12 that it?
13 MR. CELLI: Yes.
14 HEARING OFFICER: You're called by
15 her counsel.
16 EXAMINATION BY
17 MR. CELLI:
18 Q Miss Younger, you mentioned in response
19 to one of my questions that you spoke to Mr.
20 Mareane about this issue of Karen's nonappearance
21 at the compliance committee meeting in September
22 of 2017. Tell me about that conversation.
23 A 2015.
24 Q I'm sorry. You're right. You're right.
1 You're absolutely right. Let me state it again

2 for the record. There was a compliance committee
3 meeting on September 17th, 2015. You testified
4 earlier today about the fact that Ms. Baer did
5 not appear at that meeting, correct?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Did you talk to Mr. Mareane about that
8 subject at any point?
9 A I would say, yes, just generally saying
10 that she didn't come.
11 Q And was there anything memorable about
12 his response to that?
13 A Memorable, no.
14 Q Did he say I'm going to send her a letter
15 and tell her she's got to start going to that
16 committee meeting or anything like that?
17 A He could have said that. I don't recall.
18 Q Could have said anything. I'm just
19 asking for your best recollection, ma'am. Did he
20 tell you I'm going to send her a letter or words
21 to that effect directing her to go to the
22 compliance committee meeting?
24 Q Are you familiar with the concept of
1 progressive discipline?
2 A Yes.
3 Q What is progressive discipline?
4 MR. MCCANN: Objection, relevancy.
5 Calls for a legal conclusion.
6 HEARING OFFICER: I think this is
7 going to her being your witness again.
8 MR. MCCANN: Argumentative.
9 MR. CELLI: There's a specification
10 that said she didn't do her job. I'm
11 asking whether she was subject to
12 progressive discipline. I'm laying the
13 foundation of doing that.
14 MR. MCCANN: This is not about
15 progressive discipline. This is a Section
16 75 proceeding. There is a process that is
17 followed.
18 MR. CELLI: That's your testimony,
19 Mr. McCann. I'd like the witness to
20 testify.
21 MR. MCCANN: So the process to
22 progressive discipline --
23 HEARING OFFICER: I'll allow a few
24 questions on it, but let's try to move it
1 along. The question before you is are you

2 familiar with the concept of progressive
3 discipline?
4 A I'm familiar with the concept, yes.
5 Q And you would agree that progressive
6 discipline is the policy of the County of
7 Tompkins, right?
8 MR. CELLI: Objection, relevancy.
10 question.
11 A Yes.
12 Q And you would agree that the policy of
13 progressive discipline applies to people who hold
14 the position, to someone who holds the position
15 of director of Office of Human Rights?
16 A Well, progressive discipline is just a
17 part of our general policy.
18 Q Exactly. Applies to everybody, right?
19 A Yeah.
20 HEARING OFFICER: We can maybe
21 stipulate if you want that the policy of
22 progressive discipline would apply to --
23 MR. MCCANN: We can't stipulate to
24 that. This is a Section 75 proceeding.
1 She can't be disciplined at all without

2 going through this proceeding. Progressive
3 discipline does not apply to a competitive
4 class employee. The policy he is referring
5 to has nothing to do with this
6 classification or this case.
7 MR. CELLI: Before Mr. McCann
8 continues his testimony, I would like the
9 opportunity to examine the witness on
10 exactly these questions.
11 HEARING OFFICER: Well, I can see
12 where it would, okay. I know the
13 difference though between a policy of
14 progressive discipline and what is provided
15 under Section 75. How many further
16 questions?
17 MR. CELLI: Let me ask a clarifying
18 question and maybe we can move on or maybe
19 not.
20 Q Is the director of the Office of Human
21 Rights a competitive class permanent position?
22 A It's competitive, yes. You have to
23 compete for the job.
24 MR. CELLI: Exactly. Can you pull
1 out 44 please.
2 HEARING OFFICER: This may be
3 something I understand that the person
4 holding the job has retained the position
5 through a competitive examination and that
6 she has received permanent appointment.
7 MR. CELLI: I'm going to ask about a
8 document, maybe five questions.
9 MR. MCCANN: Mr. Hearing Officer, we
10 will stipulate she is a competitive class.
11 That's why we are here. Going his way
12 instead of this way.
13 HEARING OFFICER: Right, and she has
14 permanent appointment.
15 MR. CELLI: I'd like to mark as a
16 document Respondent's Exhibit E.
17 (RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT E WAS MARKED
19 Q Miss Younger, this is a document that is
20 labeled Progressive Discipline in a Civil Service
21 Environment. Have you seen this document before?
22 A I can't say that I have seen this
23 particular document.
24 Q Do you believe that this is a document
1 that was prepared in the ordinary course of

2 business by the County of Tompkins?
3 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Her belief
4 is irrelevant to establishing a foundation.
5 HEARING OFFICER: I'm going to
6 sustain the objection in this sense that I
7 think now you're getting off into an area
8 that would be --
9 MR. CELLI: Let me try it a different
10 way.
11 HEARING OFFICER: -- that would be
12 more appropriate through your witness.
13 MR. CELLI: Let me try it a different
14 way.
15 Q To your knowledge -- strike that. Miss
16 Younger, can you explain to the hearing officer
17 your understanding of the term progressive
18 discipline?
19 MR. MCCANN: Same objection.
20 HEARING OFFICER: We'll allow that
21 question.
22 A I guess I would have to go by something
23 like this of what you have in your document, but
24 I would probably defer to my human resources
1 department in order to get guidance on the

2 process.
3 Q Okay. But you have, do you have a
4 working definition in your mind as you sit here
5 today what the term means? If you don't, it's
6 okay. I just want to make sure we're talking
7 about the same thing.
8 A In terms of working with your employee,
9 having conversations, documenting performance
10 issues.
11 Q Right.
12 A I mean, if you're talking generalities,
13 yes. I'm just saying beyond that, I would be
14 looking to my human resources department.
15 Q Fair enough. You would agree that at no
16 time was Karen Baer ever subject to progressive
17 discipline in her role as director of the Office
18 of Human Rights?
19 MR. CELLI: Objection, foundation.
20 HEARING OFFICER: Yeah. I'm going to
21 let the evidence so far speak for itself
22 whether there has been -- and you will
23 argue it certainly in your post hearing
24 submission -- whether there has been, first
1 whether she was entitled, Karen Baer, to

2 progressive discipline and second of all
3 does it apply to this case and why it does.
4 I think that all goes to argument.
5 MR. CELLI: I'll move to another
6 topic.
7 HEARING OFFICER: This has not been
8 admitted into evidence?
9 MR. CELLI: Fair enough.
10 HEARING OFFICER: So I'll return it
11 to the parties.
12 Q Miss Younger, do you hope to be a
13 permanent county administrator here in Tompkins
14 County?
16 MR. CELLI: Goes to credibility.
17 HEARING OFFICER: How does it go to
18 credibility?
19 MR. CELLI: I'll frame it a different
20 way.
21 Q You understand that it's the legislature
22 that decides who the next county administrator is
23 going to be here in Tompkins County, right?
24 A Yes.
1 Q And it's the legislature that is bringing

2 the charges in this proceeding against my client,
3 right, you know that?
4 A Yes.
5 Q And if you wanted to become county
6 administrator, you'd have to be selected by the
7 legislature, correct?
8 A If one wants to become the county
9 administrator, they would have to apply for the
10 job and be selected by the legislature.
11 Q So my question to you, Miss Younger, is
12 isn't it true that you would like to become the
13 permanent, full-time county administrator here in
14 Tompkins County?
15 A Can I look to counsel?
16 HEARING OFFICER: No, actually you
17 cannot because that would be -- no, you
18 can't.
19 A I think at this point you're asking a
20 confidential question right now.
21 Q Well, I'm allowed to ask a confidential
22 question I'm afraid.
23 A Yeah, I know. I'm just telling you
24 that's part of the reason of my hesitation in
1 looking forward.
2 HEARING OFFICER: If the theory is
3 that you're building upon, which seems to
4 me that you're building upon, look this
5 witness acted improperly so that she could
6 gain an edge on the job.
7 MR. CELLI: I'm not saying that at
8 all. I just want to understand where her
9 interests lie. And if she is, if you're
10 applying for a job, a permanent job as
11 county administrator, you'll have to be
12 approved by the very people who are trying
13 to remove my client from her job; isn't
14 that right?
15 MR. MCCANN: We'll stipulate to that.
16 HEARING OFFICER: We can stipulate to
17 that.
18 MR. CELLI: But if she is not
19 applying for the job, then I don't have
20 much of a point. You know what, I'll leave
21 it be. Nothing further. Thank you.
22 HEARING OFFICER: Counsel.
23 MR. MCCANN: No questions. Thank
24 you. No redirect.
1 HEARING OFFICER: Thank you. Let the

2 record reflect Paula Younger, who was a
3 sworn witness, will be called as a witness
4 for the Respondent now for questioning.
5 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY
6 MR. CELLI:
7 Q Good afternoon, Miss Younger. I'm sorry
8 for tieing you up longer. Are you familiar with
9 a committee in the county known as the Workforce
10 Diversity and Inclusion Committee?
11 A Yes.
12 Q And to your knowledge did Mr. Mareane
13 ever ask --
14 MR. MCCANN: Excuse me. Why don't we
15 put this on the record. You're now calling
16 her as your witness?
17 MR. CELLI: Correct.
18 HEARING OFFICER: I think I did.
19 MR. MCCANN: Did you?
20 HEARING OFFICER: I thought I did.
21 Fair enough.
22 MR. MCCANN: My apologies. I wasn't
23 sure that was on the record or not. Thank
24 you.
1 Q To your knowledge did Ms. Baer ever serve

2 on that committee?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And am I correct that it was not Mr.
5 Mareane who asked her to serve on that committee?
6 A I'm not sure. It might have been him or
7 might have been the chair of the committee.
8 Q Who is the current chair of that
9 committee?
10 A One of our legislators, Leslyn
11 McBean-Clairborne is the chair.
12 Q When you participated in the search for
13 the position of director of the Office of Human
14 Rights, did you disclose to candidates that one
15 of their job duties would be to sit on the
16 Workforce Diversity and Inclusion Committee?
17 A It might have been included in the
18 discussion. I honestly don't recall.
19 Q Did you circulate a job description for
20 candidates for that role when you were involved
21 in that search?
22 A Oh, yeah. All of our job descriptions
23 are posted.
24 Q Let's have a look. I think it's been
1 previously marked. I'm going to place in front

2 of you what's been previously marked as --
3 MS. SALZMAN: He should have a marked
4 copy.
5 HEARING OFFICER: If it's been
6 entered. Are you talking about
7 Respondent's Exhibit C?
8 MR. CELLI: C.
9 A What it is now?
10 MR. CELLI: He's going to hand it to
11 you.
12 HEARING OFFICER: Mine got out of
13 order here.
14 Q We marked as Respondent's C, is that a
15 job description for the position of director of
16 the Office of Human Rights of Tompkins County?
17 A It appears to be, yes.
18 Q Is that job description -- oh, I want to
19 direct your attention to the second page.
20 There's a notation at the very end of the
21 document that says originally created 12/20/1988;
22 do you see that?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Just having pointed that out to you. Is
1 this the job description that was circulated to

2 candidates for the position of director of the
4 A I will have to assume it is because on
5 the front page under revised it does reference
6 2013 or March 13th as a revision date.
7 Q That's helpful. Thank you. And does
8 this job description anywhere indicate that the
9 person who is the director of the Office of Human
10 Rights is required to sit on the WDIC?
11 MR. MCCANN: You want her to read the
12 document? It's in evidence.
13 A I'm sorry. I didn't hear that.
14 Q It was not directed to you.
15 A Oh, okay.
16 Q Do you see that anywhere on this
17 document? That's my question.
18 A Specifically, no. It's typically, you
19 know, under those other duties as assigned. We
20 have a number of department heads that serve on
21 different committees and advisory groups relative
22 to their work.
23 Q Fair enough. As you sit here today
24 though you are, can you point to any document by
1 which Ms. Baer was assigned to sit on the WDIC?

2 A That wouldn't be any documents that I
3 would handle. You might have to go to the
4 committee chair.
5 Q Fair enough. You're not aware of any as
6 you sit here today?
7 A Not in particular, no.
8 Q And it's not on the job description?
9 A Not that specifically, no.
10 Q Miss Younger, you are the highest ranking
11 person of color in the Tompkins County
12 government, aren't you?
13 A I don't often think of it that way, but I
14 guess so.
15 Q Okay. Would you agree that there are
16 very few other people of color in high positions
17 in Tompkins County in the government I mean?
18 A At the senior leadership level, no.
19 Q You would not agree with that?
20 A I'm sorry. You know what, the way you
21 phrased the question. No, there are not a large
22 percentage of persons of color in senior
23 positions in the county.
24 Q Right. Karen Baer was one of those
1 however, right?
2 A Karen Baer is one of those, yeah.
3 Q But there were no other agency heads,
4 there are no other agency heads in Tompkins
5 County who are people of color; is that correct?
6 A There might be one other person that I
7 might identify that way, but that person might
8 not.
9 Q Prior to coming to work in Tompkins
10 County you worked in Washington, DC; isn't that
11 right?
12 A Yes, I did. And for a while the interim
13 was I was commuting back and forth. I was living
14 here, but commuting to see my clients in
15 Washington.
16 Q I see. And you would agree that the
17 racial composition of the political leadership
18 and government leadership in Washington, DC is
19 very different here in Tompkins County?
21 MR. CELLI: We'll get there.
22 MR. MCCANN: Calls for opinion.
23 HEARING OFFICER: I'll allow a couple
24 more questions, but yeah, the relevance. I
1 mean, I know what you're trying to say and

2 prove and show.
3 MR. CELLI: No, I'm not sure you do
4 with all due respect, sir. I'm not quite
5 there yet, but I'm close. Trust me.
7 Q You would agree that the government
8 leadership in the District of Columbia is
9 primarily people of color whereas here it's not
10 the case; is that fair?
11 A Yes, in a general sense I agree with
12 that.
13 Q And you've commented on that to people
14 here in Tompkins County, haven't you?
15 A I don't know. I mean, within the
16 context, within what context?
17 Q Within any context. Have you ever said
18 to Ms. Baer DC has lots of people of color in
19 charge of the government and here we have almost
20 nobody, words to that effect?
21 A I don't, no. I don't recall that.
22 Q Would you agree, Miss Younger, that there
23 were times during your tenure here in Tompkins
24 County where you were disappointed that
1 government leaders were not more sensitive to

2 issues of race?
3 A I would say I always would wish that we
4 would be sensitive to all the needs of our
5 employees.
6 HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry. What
7 was that?
8 A I'm saying I wish that we would be
9 sensitive to the needs of our employees. In
10 other words to single it out just in terms of
11 race --
12 Q I'm actually asking a broader question.
13 Not so much about employees, but in general,
14 would you agree that during your time here in
15 Tompkins County there have been times when you've
16 been disappointed that the government leaders are
17 not more sensitive in general on issues of race?
18 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Relevancy.
19 Does not pertain to employment? What is
20 the relevancy?
21 HEARING OFFICER: What is the
22 relevancy?
23 MR. CELLI: I'll get there.
24 Q Miss Younger, isn't it true that you told
1 Ms. Baer that you felt that government leaders in

2 Tompkins County were not sensitive to the
3 questions of race?
4 HEARING OFFICER: I thought that was
5 asked and answered that she did not recall
6 making those --
7 MR. CELLI: No. I asked about the
8 racial composition of the county leadership
9 as opposed to the District of Columbia.
10 HEARING OFFICER: No. Prior to that
11 you asked if the witness had made a
12 statement to Karen Baer that she wishes
13 that the county administration was more
14 sensitive to the issues of minorities and
15 she said she did not, the witness said she
16 did not recall stating that.
17 Q Isn't it true, Miss Younger, that you
18 complained to Karen Baer that there was racism in
19 the county government here in Tompkins County?
20 A No. I did not complain to Karen Baer
21 about racism in Tompkins County government.
22 Q Did you make those comments along those
23 lines to Karen Baer? Did you refer to anybody
24 connected with Tompkins County government as a
1 racist?
2 A No.
4 Q Did you ever refer to anyone in Tompkins
5 County government as racist on a whole?
6 HEARING OFFICER: Unless you cite a
7 specific incident.
8 MR. CELLI: I tend to do that later
9 in the case.
10 HEARING OFFICER: I think this
11 witness has already I think made it clear
12 she had not made any comments about racism
13 in the county.
14 MR. CELLI: I'm trying to do this as
15 respectfully as I can, but I'm entitled to
16 probe specific examples that I have a good
17 faith reason to believe occurred and I want
18 to ask the witness. She can give her
19 truthful testimony.
20 HEARING OFFICER: Well, specifics
21 would be that Joe Smith, who was the
22 executive director of this, on such and
23 such a date said that he hates minorities.
24 That would be a specific example. You
1 asked nonspecific examples. Really you

2 asked generalities to wit the witness has
3 said no, I never said that.
4 Q Let me get a little more specific. Isn't
5 it true, Miss Younger, that you said to Ms. Baer
6 you thought that Mr. Mareane was racially
7 insensitive? Not necessarily that exact phrase,
8 but words to that effect?
9 A No.
10 Q You didn't complain or suggest or state
11 to Ms. Baer -- well, let me ask it a different
12 way. You recall the horrible shooting that
13 happened in Charleston, South Carolina in June of
14 2015, I think we all recall that?
15 A Yes.
16 Q And you recall that there were nine
17 innocent people killed in that church? It was a
18 national crisis, a national tragedy, right?
19 A Yes.
20 Q Do you remember telling Ms. Baer how hurt
21 you were that Mr. Mareane never said a word to
22 you or any other employees of color here in the
23 county about that tragedy?
1 MR. CELLI: It's about her good faith

2 basis to believe that there is racism in
3 the county.
4 HEARING OFFICER: You're asking this
5 witness that somebody else didn't make a
6 comment to staff about an incident so that
7 proves racism?
8 MR. CELLI: No. I'm not saying that
9 at all. I'm asking this witness whether
10 she said to my client that she felt that it
11 was incentive on the part of Mr. Mareane
12 not to comment on that horrible tragedy.
13 HEARING OFFICER: I'm not sure that
14 establishes racism. I'll allow the answer,
15 but --
16 MR. CELLI: I'm suggesting that it's
17 a small piece of puzzle on a good faith
18 basis.
19 HEARING OFFICER: I'm not even sure
20 if it's a small piece of the puzzle,
21 Counselor, but I'll let the witness answer.
22 MR. MCCANN: I'm going to state my
23 objection to relevancy. The charges are
24 not brought on Mr. Mareane.

2 answer.
3 MR. CELLI: Can you read the question
4 back?
5 A I was going to ask you can you repeat the
6 question.
7 HEARING OFFICER: It's such did Mr.
8 Mareane after the incident in Charleston
9 make comments to the employees --
10 MR. CELLI: No, no. I want to make
11 sure the record is clear. Forgive me.
12 HEARING OFFICER: Let the
13 stenographer reread it. Best way.
14 (PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BACK.)
15 A I don't, no.
16 Q Did you tell Ms. Baer that Mr. Mareane
17 excluded you from meetings between he and Mr.
18 Lane, Mike Lane, the chair of the legislature?
19 A Excluded me from meetings?
20 Q Yes. Not necessarily that word. That
21 you were not included in meetings between Mr.
22 Mareane and Mr. Lane and that was something that
23 bothered you?
1 HEARING OFFICER: I think, can you

2 just answer the question. We'll argue
3 about the appropriateness of the question,
4 but do you recall that?
5 A No. Mr. Lane is the chair of the
6 legislature, and the county administrator and the
7 chair have routine meetings.
8 Q That is not my question. My question is
9 very simple. Did you ever say to Ms. Baer that
10 you had a problem with the fact that you were
11 excluded from meetings between Mr. Mareane and
12 Mr. Lane?
13 A No.
14 Q Did you ever tell her that you had a
15 problem with the fact that you were excluded from
16 meetings between Mr. Mareane and Mr. Dennis, who
17 is also a legislator?
18 A I mean, I'm not a part of those meetings.
19 I'm just saying it's not --
20 HEARING OFFICER: Did you ever tell
21 her though?
22 A No.
23 Q Did you make that comment?
24 A No. I wouldn't have any reason to
1 express that.
2 Q Did you tell Ms. Baer that there were
3 times that you viewed Mr. Mareane as a racist
4 pig?
5 A No.
6 Q And you deny saying to Ms. Baer or
7 anybody else that Tompkins County is racist hell
8 hole, that phrase?
9 A No.
10 Q You deny that?
11 A Referring to Tompkins County as a racist
12 hell hole?
13 Q Tompkins County government.
14 A No.
15 Q You know who Pat Pryor is, don't you?
16 A Yes, I do.
17 Q She was a member of the Tompkins County
18 legislature?
19 A Yes, she was.
20 Q And she served there for a long time?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And you would agree that members of the
23 legislature have warm feelings toward Pat Pryor;
24 is that right?

2 MR. CELLI: It's relevant.
3 HEARING OFFICER: Offer proof please.
4 MR. CELLI: The offer of proof is
5 that the complaints in the case that we
6 believe were retaliatory grew out of Ms.
7 Baer's involvement with the human rights
8 commission and the dispute with Pat Pryor
9 who is the chair of the commission.
10 HEARING OFFICER: Do you have any
11 knowledge about that?
12 A No more than what has been public
13 knowledge about it. I mean, I wasn't involved
14 with the commission or anything like that.
15 Q Fair enough. But you're aware that in
16 2015 there were tensions between Miss Pryor and
17 other commissioners on the Human Rights
18 Commission, right?
20 Counsel is conflating the investigation Mr.
21 Taylor tried to conduct with this Section
22 75 proceeding.
23 HEARING OFFICER: I'm starting to
24 wonder where you're headed with this also.
1 MR. CELLI: Let me say it as plainly

2 as I can. Ms. Baer is going to testify
3 about a series of events that she regarded
4 as discriminatory and retaliatory. Either
5 she is getting signals from out of space or
6 there is a factual basis for them. I'm
7 trying to establish with this witness and
8 every other fact witness that we have that
9 there was a factual basis for it. Whether
10 you agree it equals discrimination or not
11 is irrelevant. It's a question of her good
12 faith belief. And if this witness can
13 testify that yes, there were tensions and
14 yes, that members of the legislature were
15 unhappy with Karen Baer at the time, that
16 all goes to the issue of her good faith and
17 retaliation.
19 HEARING OFFICER: I can see they
20 weren't pleased with her. I can see what's
21 going on here.
22 MR. CELLI: Well, I understand, but
23 we're trying to create a record also, with
24 all due respect, Mr. Solomon, whatever
1 happens here will likely end up in court

2 and so I need to explore with the witness
3 what she knows.
4 MR. MCCANN: I will have the same
5 objection if Ms. Baer testifies to that.
6 That is testimony that could have and
7 should have been presented --
8 MR. CELLI: That's argument.
9 MR. MCCANN: Can I finish? Could
10 have and should have been done with Mr.
11 Taylor. The issues before this hearing
12 officer are the Section 75 charges, three
13 charges, several specifications. What
14 happened in 2015 and what she could have
15 presented to Mr. Taylor and didn't is not
16 the charge of this hearing officer.
18 question. Let's move on as quickly as
19 possible then.
20 MS. SALZMAN: She also has an
21 affirmative defense in the Section 75 of
22 the Civil Service Law. There is a
23 relevance to that reading of the law.
24 MR. MCCANN: The evidence will have
1 to go to that defense. Not to 2015.

2 MS. SALZMAN: 2015 is part of that
3 defense.
4 MR. MCCANN: Cannot be.
5 Q You're aware, Miss Younger, that in
6 August of 2015 Miss Pryor resigned her position
7 as chair of the Human Rights Commission, right?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And you're aware that that resignation
10 occurred in the context of commissioners of color
11 on this commission being critical of her
12 leadership style, correct?
13 A I'm not sure I'm completely aware of all
14 of that. I'm aware of what is more or less
15 public knowledge around Miss Pryor stepping down,
16 but I don't have all the particulars.
17 Q As you sit here today, you agree with me
18 that there was tension between commissioners of
19 color and Miss Pryor, right?
20 A Based on public knowledge. That's all I
21 can agree to.
22 Q Do you deny attending a meeting where the
23 commissioners of color were sharply critical of
24 Miss Pryor prior to her resignation? You're
1 saying you didn't go to that meeting?

2 A Not a commission meeting, no.
3 Q A meeting of individuals connected to the
4 commission where commissioners of color on the
5 Human Rights Commission were sharply critical of
6 Pat Pryor?
7 A I only know of one meeting where members
8 of the commission wanted to speak with members of
9 the legislature, but I did not attend any
10 meetings of the commission.
11 Q You attended a meeting after Miss Pryor's
12 resignation where members of the legislature were
13 critical of the commissioners of color and how
14 that issue played out; is that fair?
15 A No, that's not.
16 HEARING OFFICER: I thought her
17 answer to that was no.
18 MR. CELLI: Okay. I just wanted to
19 make sure I get it clear on the record.
20 Q To your observation you would agree that
21 Mr. Mareane was unhappy with the fact that Pat
22 Pryor was in conflict with commissioners of color
23 on the Human Rights Commission?
24 A I don't have any knowledge of that.
1 Q Did he ever express irritation or concern

2 about that dispute?
3 MR. MCCANN: I renew my objection
4 based on relevance.
5 HEARING OFFICER: I think the answer
6 was no, that she is not aware of anything
7 about that.
8 Q You're aware that -- strike that. Are
9 you aware that in November of 2015 Ms. Baer made
10 a complaint about discrimination and retaliation
11 directed at her?
12 A I am aware that there was a complaint.
13 Q And you're aware that a private lawyer
14 was hired to investigate, a Mr. Hooks?
15 A Yes, I am aware of Mr. Hooks.
16 Q And you're aware that at the conclusion
17 of Mr. Hooks' work, Ms. Baer made a further
18 complaint; is that correct?
19 A Yes.
20 Q And that complaint is the one that led to
21 the charge of insubordination, correct?
22 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Legal
23 conclusion based on the way you phrased the
24 question.
1 HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry. I

2 couldn't hear.
3 MR. MCCANN: Objection. Calls for a
4 legal conclusion based on the way the
5 question was framed.
6 HEARING OFFICER: Can you reframe it?
7 Q At any point in time did you have any
8 discussions with any member of the legislature
9 about the fact that Karen Baer was complaining
10 about discrimination and retaliation?
11 A Did I have conversations with the county
12 legislature?
13 Q Yes.
14 A No. The only conversation has been the
15 formal investigation of the complaint process,
16 but not me with any legislator.
17 Q I'm not sure I know what you mean, but
18 did you ever participate in any discussion, not
19 necessarily a one on one, but perhaps in a group
20 setting where Ms. Baer's complaints about
21 discrimination and retaliation were discussed?
22 At any point in time?
23 A That's only during the formal
24 investigation of that complaint. When you
1 referenced the attorneys, those are the only

2 conversations I've had.
3 Q Tell me all the conversations that you
4 had involving Mr. Hooks and Ms. Baer's
5 complaints, who was present and what was said.
6 A With Mr. Hooks?
7 Q Involving the Hooks' investigation.
8 A It was just myself and Mr. Hooks, the
9 attorney.
10 Q I see. And why did you meet with Mr.
11 Hooks?
12 A I guess the same reason why when you have
13 a process like this I got called. I was on the
14 list of the way that he investigated the
15 complaints.
16 HEARING OFFICER: And he interviewed
17 you?
18 A And he interviewed me, yes.
19 Q Other than Mr. Hooks, you never spoke to
20 any legislator or Mr. Mareane about the Hooks'
21 investigation at any time?
22 A No.
23 Q How about with Mr. Taylor, did you ever
24 speak to any legislator about the Taylor
1 investigation, either when it was going on or

2 afterwards or since?
3 A No.
4 Q And with respect to Mr. Mareane, did you
5 ever speak to Mr. Mareane about the Taylor
6 investigation at any point in time?
7 A Only in the sense that I'm not going to
8 be in the office because I have to be
9 interviewed, I mean, but there was no
10 conversation about it.
11 Q Did Mr. Taylor come to you and ask you to
12 explain what process would apply to Ms. Baer's
13 complaint of discrimination and retaliation in
14 2017?
15 A I'm not sure I understand what process
16 would apply.
17 Q Did you have any conversations with Mr.
18 Taylor about how he was going to handle the
19 complaints that Ms. Baer made and that he was
20 supposed to be investigating?
21 A Only to the extent of just understanding
22 when he would need to interview me or if there
23 was any information I needed to gather.
24 Q Did Mr. Taylor ever tell you that Ms.
1 Baer wanted to understand the question that he

2 was going to use in his investigation before she
3 would sit down and give an interview with him?
4 A He may have said that. I don't know.
5 Q What do you recall about that?
6 A I'm just saying he may have said
7 something to that effect, but I don't know.
8 Q Did you assist Mr. Taylor in responding
9 to the information request that Ms. Baer had made
10 about what the process was going to look like in
11 terms of how he would handle the complaint?
12 A I might have assisted in if I had to
13 direct him to our HR office to know about a
14 process or to contact someone there. I mean if
15 that's what you mean in terms of assist.
16 Q Let me be really clear, Miss Younger,
17 because you might have done a lot of things. I'm
18 really just asking for your best recollection as
19 you sit here today, did you take any steps at
20 all, any sort to communicate with Mr. Taylor
21 about what the process would be by which he would
22 handle Ms. Baer's complaint of discrimination and
23 retaliation?
24 MR. MCCANN: Asked and answered.
1 Objection.
2 MR. CELLI: No, it hasn't been
3 answered.
4 MR. MCCANN: Yes, it has. She has
5 answered the best she can.
6 HEARING OFFICER: Well, let me make
7 sure I understand. What is your answer to
8 that?
9 MR. CELLI: Let's read the question
10 again. It's hard on the witness.
11 MR. MCCANN: I think she answered the
12 question may have.
13 HEARING OFFICER: I think she said
14 too she may have talked about scheduling a
15 meeting with Mr. Taylor.
16 MR. CELLI: Let's just hear the
17 question. It's a simple question.
18 MR. MCCANN: And the answer please.
19 (PREVIOUS QUESTION AND ANSWER READ
20 BACK.)
21 A And I guess I am just confused because I
22 don't know what steps I would have taken to reach
23 out to Mr. Taylor. It would have been simply if
24 there was a scheduling thing he needed assistance
1 with, if he needed, I don't know, verification of

2 who might have been on the commission and I could
3 direct him to where to get that information.
4 Maybe I'm just not clear on your question because
5 I don't know what other steps I would have taken.
6 Q I'm not asking about outreach. I'm
7 asking about any communication no matter who
8 reached out to whom, whether in any way in
9 communications with Mr. Taylor you assisted him
10 or directed him in any way to determine what
11 process would apply to the complaint that Ms.
12 Baer had made?
13 MR. MCCANN: Objection, asked and
14 answered.
15 A I don't know how or why I would have
16 directed Mr. Taylor to do anything. I was only
17 there to be interviewed by him.
18 HEARING OFFICER: So you don't recall
19 directing him to how to conduct the process
20 or directions about process?
21 A No.
22 HEARING OFFICER: No.
23 Q Did you ever review Ms. Baer's November
24 20th, 2015 complaint? Strike that. You
1 testified earlier that you're aware that on

2 November 20th, 2015, Ms. Baer made a complaint in
3 a memo to Mr. Lane about her treatment and about
4 discrimination and retaliation in the county; do
5 you recall that?
6 A I am only aware of the complaint to the
7 extent that I was interviewed by Mr. Taylor. So
8 there might have been portions of the complaint
9 in the same way you're asking me questions. He
10 may have been referencing that, but that's how
11 I'm aware.
12 Q I'm asking you if you read the document?
13 A The whole complaint, no.
14 Q It's a memo, one page. Did you read at
15 any point in time Ms. Baer's, the e-mails between
16 Ms. Baer and Mr. Lane that occurred between July
17 and October of 2016?
18 A Nothing specific. Unless somebody had
19 asked me to look at an e-mail. I don't have
20 access to Mr. Lane's e-mails so.
21 Q Did, are you aware that Ms. Baer
22 repeatedly asked Mr. Taylor and Mr. Hooks to
23 conciliate her complaint rather than treating it
24 in an adversarial way?
MICHAEL LANE by MR. MCCANN 252

2 A I have no knowledge of that.
3 Q As you sit here today, you've never heard
4 that before?
5 HEARING OFFICER: She has no
6 knowledge of it was the answer.
7 A I have no knowledge of that.
8 Q Have you ever heard that from anybody
9 before?
10 A No.
11 MR. CELLI: That's all I have. Thank
12 you for your patience.
13 MR. MCCANN: No redirect or cross.
14 MR. CELLI: Thanks for accommodating
15 me, Mr. McCann. And thank you, Miss
16 Younger.
17 (RECESS TAKEN.)
18 HEARING OFFICER: We're back on the
19 record.
20 M I C H A E L L A N E,
24 EXAMINATION BY
1 MR. MCCANN:
2 Q Good afternoon, Mr. Lane.
3 A Good afternoon.
4 Q I understand you are, excuse me, you are
5 a Tompkins County legislator?
6 A I am.
7 Q How long have you been a legislator?
8 A I'm completing my 20th year as a
9 legislator.
10 Q When did you first become a legislator?
11 A In 1994. The difference is there was one
12 term, a four year term which I did not serve
13 since then.
14 Q Do you hold any other position with the
15 legislature?
16 A No. Other than as a legislator I have
17 been elected for the past four years by the other
18 legislators to be the chair of the legislature.
19 Q What are your duties and responsibilities
20 as chair of the legislature?
21 A The chair of the legislature is the chief
22 elected official of the county. It is the
23 legislature who is charged under our charter to
24 form committees and to appoint the chairs and
1 members of those committees. We have standing

2 and special committees. In addition to that we
3 do a lot of public functions because we are the
4 political face of the county. There is a ribbon
5 cutting. Sometimes I'm called for that. If
6 there's other kinds of things. We meet regularly
7 with department heads and our administrator.
8 Q How is the county government set up for
9 Tompkins County?
10 A Of course county governments are
11 different across the state. Some counties have
12 elected executives which are like a mayor system.
13 Some of the bigger counties like Chemung or
14 Onondaga for example, Broome County. But we
15 don't have an elected executive. Our elected
16 officials are our 14 county legislators. We are
17 elected from geographic districts by
18 approximately equal populations. And it is the
19 legislators through a committee system that
20 govern the county. They appoint an administrator
21 who serves at the pleasure of the legislature to
22 run the day to day activities.
23 Q Mr. Lane, are you the individual who
24 signed the charges that are the subject of this
1 proceeding?
2 A I am.
3 MR. MCCANN: Mr. Hearing Officer,
4 could you show the witness I believe it's
5 Hearing Officer 1.
6 Q I'll represent to you that those are the
7 charges that were filed in this case. Is that
8 your signature that appears on that document?
9 A Yes, it is.
10 Q Did you sign that document in your
11 individual capacity or in your representative
12 capacity as the chair of the legislature?
13 A I signed it as the chair of the
14 legislature after authorization and direction
15 from the full legislature.
18 Q Mr. Lane, I show you a document that has
19 been marked for identification as Charging Party
21 A Yes. This is the action that was taken
22 in executive session by the Tompkins County
23 legislature on October 3rd, 2017. It was a
24 sealed record because it was a personnel matter
1 and it is the authorization to commence the

2 Section 75 proceeding with respect to Karen Baer.
3 Q Did the legislature take a vote on that?
4 A Yes, it did.
5 Q What was the vote?
6 A It was unanimous to proceed.
7 Q I understand there were, based on your
8 testimony, there were 14 legislators?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Were there 14 present that night?
11 A I believe there were.
12 HEARING OFFICER: Are you going to
13 move to have this submitted?
14 MR. MCCANN: I will. Yes, I will.
15 I'll do that now. I would offer Charging
16 Party Exhibit 8.
17 MR. CELLI: I don't really see the
18 relevance that the names of all the
19 legislators. We will stipulate that the
20 legislature approved the charges. This is
21 a document with people's pictures on it. I
22 would object to this.
23 HEARING OFFICER: I'm on this.
24 MR. CELLI: That's fine. I'm sorry.
1 Yes, that's fine. I have no objection.

2 HEARING OFFICER: I'm going to bring
3 Charging Party's 8 into evidence with the
4 understanding there is no objection to 8.
5 MR. CELLI: Correct.
6 Q Mr. Lane, I direct your attention to
7 Charging Party Exhibit 9. Can you identify that
8 document?
9 A My copy doesn't have the --
10 HEARING OFFICER: This one?
11 MR. MCCANN: Yeah. We should be
12 showing the witness the marked exhibit.
13 Charging Party 7.
14 MS. SALZMAN: The e-mail thread with
15 Ms. Baer.
16 HEARING OFFICER: I'll look for that.
19 MR. CELLI: And we do not agree to
20 admission of this document. I don't really
21 see what it adds.
22 HEARING OFFICER: Yeah, Counsel.
23 MR. MCCANN: I haven't offered it
24 yet. I think the fact that the legislature
1 unanimously adopted the motion in Charging

2 Party Exhibit 8, there's been a lot of
3 issues raised in terms of the diversity
4 within the county. The legislature itself
5 is very diverse and I think that it at
6 least goes to that beyond just identifying
7 who voted in favor of these charges.
8 HEARING OFFICER: So you would tell
9 me, you're trying to show by virtue of
10 Charging Party 9, that the legislature is
11 composed of women, composed of
12 African-Americans.
13 MR. CELLI: There is one of those.
14 HEARING OFFICER: Yeah. It's hard to
15 tell sometimes.
16 MR. CELLI: This is an improper
17 argument. This is an argument that
18 suggests that people vote according to the
19 color of their skin or gender. It's highly
20 improper. We vigorously object. If that's
21 the purpose, I mean, I'm shocked to hear
22 that is the purpose of the admission of
23 this document.
24 HEARING OFFICER: Well, there's a
1 general underlying allegation throughout

2 this hearing that your client has been the
3 victim of discrimination both directly and
4 retaliatory. I think it's, and you also
5 have made those claims and to show that the
6 legislature is not, to show that it's,
7 show its diversity, I think is acceptable.
8 MR. CELLI: It's highly improper in
9 my view, Mr. Solomon. I would be permitted
10 to cross examine each and every one of
11 these people which I'm sure no one wants to
12 have happen. If you want to admit it,
13 obviously that's your role, but we object
14 strenuously to this. It's an improper
15 argument. It's not appropriate for a court
16 or a hearing of any sort to suggest that
17 because of the color of people's skin or
18 the fact that they may be women as opposed
19 to men that therefore we know what their
20 views would be. We are prepared to
21 stipulate that 14 members of the
22 legislature approved the resolution.
23 That's all you need for these charges.
24 MR. MCCANN: It's a very good
1 argument. It's not mine. It's not what I

2 said.
3 MR. CELLI: Well, it was said by the
4 hearing officer and you're submitting it
5 for that purpose, John.
6 HEARING OFFICER: Well, the purpose
7 for submitting it for is to show its
8 diversity.
9 MR. CELLI: But that's not even true.
10 Even that is an improper argument. The
11 diversity by virtue of the color of their
12 skin? That's improper. We have to assume
13 that the one legislator who appears to be
14 African-American voted a particular way
15 because of the color of her skin, that's
16 outrageous. It's wrong.
17 MR. MCCANN: You have raised an
18 affirmative defense that these charges are
19 brought for discriminatory reasons.
20 MR. CELLI: Retaliatory purposes.
21 Retaliatory.
22 HEARING OFFICER: You were making an
23 argument too before about the legislators
24 discriminating.
1 MR. CELLI: Specific people we have

2 questions about, not the entire
3 legislature. We didn't go down the list of
4 14.
5 HEARING OFFICER: I'm going to admit
6 the document.
7 MR. MCCANN: It's your affirmative
8 defense on page eight of the answer under
9 Roman Numeral III, would you like me to
10 read it or do you want to read it?
11 MR. CELLI: No, you don't need to
12 read it. I wrote it. You need to read it.
13 MR. MCCANN: Your affirmative defense
14 goes to discrimination not retaliation.
15 MR. CELLI: This is reversible error,
16 let me tell you.
17 MR. MCCANN: You are alleging --
18 MR. CELLI: Let me tell you. Mark my
19 words. You cannot submit a document and
20 say that because people are of a certain
21 color they're not discriminating.
22 HEARING OFFICER: No. That's not
23 what he's saying.
24 MR. CELLI: It's improper.
1 MR. MCCANN: It's background.

2 HEARING OFFICER: I don't see that.
3 I'm just taking that, if I take the
4 document, it would just show the
5 composition of the legislature. If it were
6 all white would you say?
7 MR. CELLI: No, I wouldn't and, Mr.
8 Solomon, the work force is largely all
9 white. I'm not saying anything in
10 particular. The only document that is
11 competent it seems to me on the issue of
12 how people feel in the county is the
13 climate survey and that was objected to by
14 the county.
15 HEARING OFFICER: But you before were
16 talking about a situation as to how many
17 minorities were employed by the county with
18 the previous witness and how many were in
19 executive roles.
20 MR. CELLI: Yes. That's right.
21 Because she complained about it. Not
22 because it means anything. The point is
23 that my client has a good faith belief in
24 the claims that she made in the complaint.
1 One of the basis for that was that Paula

2 Younger complained to her. Now Miss
3 Younger denied that on the stand.
4 HEARING OFFICER: Yes.
5 MR. MCCANN: Can't have it both ways.
6 HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry?
7 MR. MCCANN: You cannot have it both
8 ways.
9 HEARING OFFICER: Can we go outside
10 for a minute?
11 (RECESS TAKEN.)
12 HEARING OFFICER: Counsel for the
13 county wants Charging Party 9 exhibit into
14 evidence. It's a picture in reference to
15 the people who make up the county
16 legislature. On the other hand counsel for
17 the Respondent feels that this is
18 discriminatory and should not be admitted.
19 My feeling is that there's an underlying
20 theme here that the Respondent has been the
21 victim of retaliation and the victim of
22 discriminatory practices. The only reason
23 this document is admitted is solely to
24 discern who makes up the county legislature
1 and to show that it is a diverse

2 legislature. For that purpose, I'm
3 overruling counsel for the Respondent and
4 admitting the document.
5 MR. CELLI: Mr. Solomon, I respect
6 your ruling although I vigorously disagree.
7 Let the record reflect that there is one
8 person of color among all the legislators.
9 I don't think it matters one way or the
10 other. I think the whole thing should come
11 out. But if you're going to suggest that
12 it's a diverse legislature, you're saying
13 that one person constitutes --
14 HEARING OFFICER: Diverse in the
15 sense that it's made up of both men, women
16 and a minority.
17 MR. CELLI: We object.
18 HEARING OFFICER: Oh, I understand.
19 You got it right there on the record.
20 Q Mr. Lane, I direct your attention back to
22 A Yes.
23 Q That's this one, right?
24 A Yes.
1 Q Were proposed charges presented to the

2 legislature on October 3 of 2017?
3 A Yes, they were.
4 Q Did the charges before you -- withdraw
5 that. Were the charges that were approved by the
6 legislature in substantially the same form as set
7 forth in Hearing Officer Exhibit 1?
8 A Yes, they are.
9 Q I direct your attention to Charge Number
10 1. In Charge Number 1 Ms. Baer is accused of
11 failing and refusing to fulfill full range of her
12 responsibilities as director of human rights for
13 the administration and enforcement of equal
14 opportunity laws, regulations and policies. What
15 responsibilities are you referring to in that
16 charge?
17 A The director of human rights under our
18 county charter is the department head for our
19 department and reports to the county, to the
20 administrator and ultimately to the legislature.
21 The difficulty here was that Ms. Baer had not
22 participated in certain activities that we think
23 are pretty important for our county in the issue
24 of diversity and inclusion. Among them are
1 stationed in our Workforce Development (sic) and

2 Inclusion Committee and our compliance group.
3 MR. MCCANN: Charging Party 10.
6 Q Mr. Lane, I direct your attention to what
7 has been marked as Charging Party Exhibit 10 for
8 identification. Is that the portion of the
9 charter you referred to a moment ago in your
10 testimony?
11 A I'm sorry?
12 Q Is that the charter that you referred to?
13 A This is the excerpt from the Tompkins
14 County charter.
15 Q This particular excerpt is for Article
16 26, Office of Human Rights?
17 A Yes, it is; and that is the section of
18 the charter that deals both with the Office of
19 Human Rights and the Human Rights Commission.
20 MR. MCCANN: I offer Charging Party
21 Exhibit 10.
24 is received.
1 Q I direct your attention to the first

2 paragraph of the charter.
3 A Yes.
4 Q Can you read the first paragraph?
5 A There shall be an Office of Human Rights
6 office headed by a director of human rights
7 director appointed by the county administrator
8 following consultation with the Tompkins County
9 Human Rights Commission and subject to
10 confirmation by the Tompkins County legislature.
11 The director shall be appointed on the basis of
12 the professional experience and other
13 qualifications appropriate to the
14 responsibilities of the office. The director
15 shall be directly responsible to the county
16 administrator for the implementation of policies
17 established by the Tompkins County legislature.
18 You want me to continue?
19 Q No, that's good. Did the legislature
20 confirm the appointment of Ms. Baer to the
21 position of director of the Office of Human
22 Rights?
23 A Yes, it did.
24 Q Does the charter also indicate any
1 reporting responsibilities the director of human

2 rights has to the county legislature?
3 A The charter sets forth the powers and
4 duties of the Tompkins County director of human
5 rights and they are set forth here. In addition
6 the obligation of that office is to investigate
7 complaints that come to it. To report to the
8 committees that we have. To advise us on issues
9 of diversity, inclusion and discrimination that
10 we have, might be in our community. And to help
11 us do what we think is pretty important and that
12 is to have an open and honest government. Open
13 to all the people of our county and to have no
14 discrimination. It's against our policies in the
15 county to do that and her job is to help us do
16 that.
17 Q I'd like to direct your attention to a
18 document that's already in evidence. It's
19 labeled Respondent's Exhibit C.
20 MR. CELLI: I'm sorry. What number?
21 MR. MCCANN: C.
22 Q Are some of the duties and
23 responsibilities that you outlined set forth in
24 Respondent Exhibit C?
1 A Yes, they are.

2 Q Let me direct your attention particularly
3 to the portion headed distinguishing features of
4 the class?
5 A Yes.
6 Q In particular to the sentence that starts
7 about half way through the incumbent is
8 responsible, can you read that sentence?
9 A The incumbent is responsible for the
10 administration and enforcement of
11 antidiscrimination laws, affirmative action,
12 equal opportunity and compliance programs,
13 policies and regulations and for coordinating the
14 functions of the Human Rights Commission and
15 carrying out the policies of the county
16 legislature.
17 Q If I may I would like to direct your
18 attention to the second page. At the top of the
19 page it's a continuation of typical work
20 activities which starts on the first page.
21 A Yes.
22 Q I direct your attention in particular to
23 the, count them here, the third item listed
24 there. Would you read that please?
1 A Provides technical advice and guidance to

2 agency officials and employees on the EEO process
3 and compliance programs.
4 Q Would you read the next item as well?
5 A Devise and implement results oriented
6 advocacy strategies in support of workforce
7 diversity objectives and goals in the execution
8 of the county's EEO programs.
9 Q And finally would you read the last item
10 listed in that category?
11 A In collaboration with the county
12 administrator and commissioner personnel assist
13 with internal audit of county policies,
14 practices and procedures to identify possible EEO
15 violations. Analyze employment data. Compile
16 and assist in preparing required statistical
17 reports.
18 Q I direct your attention now to a document
19 that is in evidence that is evidence as
20 Respondent Exhibit B.
21 HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry.
22 Respondent exhibit what?
23 MR. MCCANN: B.
24 Q Now this has already been identified as
1 Tompkins County workplace discrimination and

2 sexual harassment policy. I would like to direct
3 your attention to the first paragraph. Is this a
4 policy of the legislature of the county?
5 A First paragraph?
6 Q Yes. The question is is this a policy of
7 the legislature of the county?
8 A It most certainly is, yes.
9 Q Direct your attention to the second page
10 of the policy. Would you read the paragraph?
11 The first sentence which is two sentences of the
12 paragraph that starts about halfway on the page
13 Tompkins County department heads?
14 A Department county department heads,
15 managers, supervisors and employees must all
16 refrain from such conduct or behavior,
17 allegations of discrimination or sexual
18 harassment will be investigated immediately and
19 thoroughly. The facts when compared to the legal
20 standard for evaluating sexual harassment claims
21 will determine the response to each allegation.
22 You want me to continue?
23 Q Yes.
24 A Substantiated claims or discrimination or
1 sexual harassment will be met with appropriate

2 corrective/disciplinary action up to and
3 including discharge. All information gathered in
4 the disposition of such allegation will be
5 handled as confidentially as possible.
6 Q Did you expect the employees of the
7 county to adhere to the policy statements
8 established by the legislature?
9 A Yes. This policy I believe is on our
10 website and I understand it's been distributed to
11 all of our employees and distributed to new
12 employees as they are hired. And we certainly
13 expect them to adhere to it because that's why we
14 have a policy and why we inform them of it.
15 Q Did Karen Baer fulfill all the
16 responsibilities assigned to her pursuant to the
17 job description and the policies of the
18 legislature?
19 A She did not fully participate with the
20 compliance group and she did not fully
21 participate in the WDIC committee, Workforce
22 Diversity and Inclusion Committee. And basically
23 when we attempted to investigate the complaints
24 that Ms. Baer gave to us of discrimination and
1 retaliation, she did not cooperate in the end.

2 Q Let me direct your attention now to
3 another document that I believe is in evidence.
4 This one is Respondent Exhibit A.
5 HEARING OFFICER: The e-mail?
6 MR. MCCANN: Yes, there's a series of
7 e-mails.
8 Q Mr. Lane, I represent to you this is an
9 e-mail printed pursuant to whatever server Ms.
10 Baer utilizes so disregard the gmail references,
11 but direct your attention to the content of the
12 e-mails.
13 A Yes.
14 Q Have you seen these e-mails before?
15 A Yes.
16 Q This is an e-mail chain that starts out
17 an exchange with you. The reference to Michael
18 is Michael Lane, correct?
19 A Correct.
20 Q And it appears that these e-mails are
21 actually somewhat out of order with a July e-mail
22 string appearing after an October 2016 e-mail
23 string; is that right?
24 A Say the question again.
1 Q These e-mails are not in chronological

2 order?
3 A It looks that way.
4 Q Let me direct your attention to the July
5 6, 2016 e-mail which actually appears towards the
6 end of this particular exhibit.
7 A Yeah. This is an e-mail from Karen Baer
8 to a number of legislators, if not all of them.
9 Q And what is the subject line of this
10 e-mail?
11 A The ban the box efforts.
12 Q And what is ban the box or what was ban
13 the box at that time?
14 A Ban the box was an issue that had come
15 forward to the county actually from some public
16 and media officials that were asking us to look
17 at this, something that was gathering speed
18 nationally. It has to do with a disclosure on
19 job applicant applications as to whether that
20 person has a criminal record or not. The concern
21 being that if a person checks that that they will
22 immediately not be considered. Or even worse
23 that if a person knows that they have to disclose
24 that, they may be not, they may not submit an
1 application for which, for something they might

2 be otherwise qualified for. Not that later on
3 the issue of a criminal record might still need
4 to be examined, particularly for the positions
5 the person was applying for, but we were trying
6 to find a way to get even a broader, more diverse
7 applicant pool for our civil service and other
8 positions; and we wanted them to be able to, the
9 legislature wanted to look into whether we should
10 take that off our application's front page
11 basically.
12 Q Did the legislature ultimately do that?
13 A Yes, it did.
14 Q Did the Office of Human Rights have a
15 direct role in that process?
16 A It was really a personnel matter that
17 started in the personnel committee because they
18 have, they worked through our human resources
19 department which was called the personnel
20 department at that point. But the personnel
21 department administers all of our civil service,
22 all of our applications, all of our hiring
23 activities once a person is chosen for a
24 position. And so later on we heard from Karen
1 saying that she wasn't a part of this which was

2 kind of surprising, but there are a lot of
3 activities that we have at the county that
4 everybody is a part of everything.
5 Q I direct your attention, sticking with
6 that e-mail, to the paragraph toward the end of
7 the e-mail which starts I fully realize --
8 A Starts where?
9 Q Paragraph that starts I fully realize.
10 A Yes.
11 Q States -- sticking with the July 6, 2016
12 e-mail.
13 A Yes.
14 Q There's a reference to a climate
15 existing. Do you see that reference in that
16 paragraph?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Indicates that Ms. Baer wanted to make
19 you, this being directed to all of the county
20 legislature, that there exists a climate in the
21 county workforce where exclusion and retribution
22 is able to take hold in a very oppressive way.
23 What was your reaction to that?
24 A Well, that is pretty upsetting to read
1 something like that. It was not coupled with any

2 particular statistics or examples, but when
3 anyone alleges any kind of discrimination of the
4 county, we take notice. We don't allow that.
5 And if we know about it, we will take necessary
6 action to investigate and find out whether it is
7 happening. If it is actually happening, we will
8 take action to correct it.
9 Q Did the legislature discuss this
10 particular e-mail?
11 A We all received it so there may have been
12 informal discussions of it, yes.
15 Q Mr. Lane, directing your attention to
16 Charging Party Exhibit 11 for identification.
17 A This is a letter that I wrote to Karen
18 Baer in response to basically the e-mail chain
19 that we had about the ban the box issue and the
20 allegations of discrimination and retaliation.
21 Q What was the purpose of this letter?
22 A It was to inform her that we took it very
23 seriously that she made an allegation of that and
24 that we would, we were asking for any supportive
1 documents or evidence that would help us find out

2 whether her allegations were true. And that we
3 would eventually makes a determination on the
4 merits. It's a response to something that had
5 been brought to us and that we were going to
6 follow up on and investigate.
7 Q Were you directed by the legislature to
8 issue a letter of this nature to Ms. Baer?
9 A I was, as of the chair legislator I was,
10 and the fact that this had come through I was the
11 one tasked to do this. Whether it was the
12 direction of the 14 members or whether I took it
13 upon myself as the chair of the legislature to
14 respond promptly. Probably it's more of the
15 latter.
17 11.
20 is received.
21 Q Did Ms. Baer ever respond to the July 22,
22 2016 letter asking for evidence or support for
23 the claim she made in the July 6, 2016 e-mail?
24 A No.
1 Q Sticking with what was put in as a joint

2 exhibit or exhibit with several e-mails, which
3 would be Respondent Exhibit A, still now going to
4 the October e-mails that appear at the outset of
5 that exhibit.
6 A Okay.
7 Q Can you generally describe what those
8 e-mails are?
9 A Well, it's basically going back I think
10 before the formal letter, but I wanted her to
11 know right away that we would take them seriously
12 and we would respond to her allegations. And
13 that we were also saying that often the issue, in
14 this case the ban the box, that there were other
15 departments involved in that. There was a final
16 e-mail here it looks like on October 23rd in
17 which she sent a resume indicating that she had a
18 strong background in human rights issues and that
19 she felt, basically the way I read it, she
20 thought we should just kind of take her word for
21 it.
22 Q Take her word for what?
23 A That there was discrimination or
24 retaliation going on and she was being excluded
1 on the ban the box issue.

2 Q I direct your attention in particular to
3 the e-mail dated October 10, 2016.
4 A Yes.
5 Q In that e-mail Ms. Baer makes a
6 statement, "may reasonable I assume that I do not
7 have to provide my own evidence to show that I've
8 been excluded from the following county
9 initiatives, titles and discussions acutely
10 related to my areas of expertise." And then she
11 lists the several areas. Did you respond to her
12 comment that she thought she could reasonably
13 assume that she does not have to provide
14 evidence?
15 A I believe I did right after that in which
16 I said that we needed to have information as to
17 how she felt she was excluded. I put, in the
18 next e-mail October 14th I said "if you wish to
19 submit claims based on other alleged exclusions
20 from the county initiatives, titles and
21 discussions, you may of course do so. Please
22 note that here again you will be asked to provide
23 whatever evidence or other support you may have
24 that any of these were a form of discrimination
1 or retaliation." So yes, we needed more

2 information from her on this if we wanted to be
3 able to investigate them in the context of
4 discrimination or retaliation.
5 Q Did Ms. Baer ever provide any evidence to
6 you or any member of the legislature in response
7 to that letter?
8 A Beyond the resume, no.
9 Q Having received no evidence or support
10 for the allegations set forth by Ms. Baer in her
11 e-mails, what if any action did the legislature
12 take?
13 MR. CELLI: Objection. It states a
14 conclusion. We have plenty of evidence
15 that will be shown so.
16 MR. MCCANN: I'm sorry?
17 MR. CELLI: The way he's framed the
18 question is improper.
19 MR. MCCANN: I'm sorry.
20 Q Mr. Lane, did you receive any evidence
21 from Ms. Baer?
22 MR. CELLI: I heard the question and
23 then I heard the answer, but then you said
24 having received none and we're going to
1 contest that.
2 HEARING OFFICER: Well, why don't you
3 rephrase it.
4 MR. MCCANN: You're going to have
5 evidence that Mr. Lane and the legislature
6 received evidence?
7 MR. CELLI: Of course.
8 MR. MCCANN: Can I see it?
9 MR. CELLI: Indeed.
10 MR. MCCANN: I hope so.
11 Q Mr. Lane, did you or the county
12 legislature receive any evidence or other support
13 from Ms. Baer in response to your suggestion to
14 her in your October e-mail that she needed to
15 provide such evidence to support her allegations?
16 A I didn't see any from her, no.
17 Q What action, if any, did you take in
18 response to not having received any evidence?
19 A Exactly what we would always do in a
20 situation like this, we began an investigation.
21 And because of the nature of the claims, there
22 had actually been a previous investigation.
23 These were new allegations. We wanted to try to
24 find a person who was pretty objective and
1 outside the community and so we retained a person

2 that was Mr. Taylor to investigate these
3 allegations for us.
6 Q Can you identify that document, Mr. Lane?
7 A Yes. This is a letter of January 23rd,
8 2017 from me to Karen Baer advising her that we
9 had retained Attorney Timothy Taylor to
10 investigate her claims that she had been excluded
11 from county initiatives, titles and discussions
12 as a form of retaliation following her
13 submissions of the claims submitted in her
14 memorandum of November 20th, 2015. And I said in
15 the letter Mr. Taylor would be in contact with
16 her as he proceeds with his investigation.
17 Please provide your full cooperation to him.
18 Q Did you consider the statement please
19 provide your full cooperation to him to be a
20 directive to Ms. Baer?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Did you mean to suggest it was optional
23 for her to cooperate with Mr. Taylor's
24 investigation?
1 A No. When we ask a department head at the

2 legislature, certainly the chair of the
3 legislature or often cases an administrator to do
4 something, execute, provide something, my
5 experience over the years has been that the
6 department heads take that as a direction and we
7 usually get a response very, very quickly.
8 MR. MCCANN: I'll offer Charging
9 Party Exhibit 12.
12 is entered.
13 Q Mr. Lane, why was there a three month gap
14 between the October e-mails and the January 23,
15 2017 letter to Ms. Baer advising her of Mr.
16 Taylor's appointment?
17 A Well, as I said before we were trying to
18 find Mr. Taylor. We were trying to find someone
19 who was objective and outside the community that
20 could come and do a good job. Somebody who had
21 experience. That took some time. There were, we
22 only meet twice a month and things have to be
23 done in executive session and frankly it's
24 government and things don't always move along as
1 quickly as we would like to. But once we had

2 someone to potentially hire, we moved forward
3 with it. But yes, it took probably more weeks
4 than we would have liked it to.
5 Q Mr. Lane, I would like to direct your
6 attention to Mr. Taylor's report which is in
7 evidence as Hearing Officer Exhibit 3.
8 A Yes.
9 Q Appears that this particular document is
10 addressed to you as chair of the legislature?
11 A Yes, it was.
12 Q What was your reaction to Mr. Taylor's
13 report?
14 A Well, I immediately read it from cover to
15 cover and my reaction was I thought he had done a
16 thorough investigation. I was distressed to
17 learn that Karen Baer had not cooperated with him
18 allowing him to interview her.
19 Q Is that the first you knew that she was
20 not cooperating?
21 A Officially, yes. I had heard that there
22 was lack of cooperation and that Mr. Taylor had
23 tried to set up more than once a meeting with
24 her.
1 Q Did that concern you that she had not

2 cooperated?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Why?
5 A She is the director of our human rights
6 department. She's talking about discrimination.
7 Talking about retaliation. Talking about
8 departments, this is her department that helps
9 people with these kinds of complaints and it's
10 pretty important that a person like that
11 cooperate so when we have an allegation, we can
12 get to the bottom of it. So I was very
13 surprised.
14 Q Was it the intent of the legislature to
15 get to the bottom of it?
16 A Absolutely.
17 Q I direct your attention to page 26 of the
18 report.
19 A Yes.
20 Q In particular the paragraphs that begin
21 plainly stated.
22 A Uh huh.
23 Q If you would, they have already been read
24 here today. Would you read those to yourself and
1 I'll ask a question about it.

2 A You want me to read it to myself?
3 Q Yes.
4 A Yes.
5 Q Did you agree with the conclusions set
6 forth in the final three paragraphs of this
7 report?
8 MR. CELLI: I'm sorry. I didn't hear
9 the question.
10 Q Did you agree with the conclusions set
11 forth in the final three paragraphs of this
12 report?
13 A Yes. When I read the report, I agreed
14 with the conclusions. Of course this was shared
15 with all the members of the legislature and was
16 discussed and in the end the full legislature
17 agreed with the conclusions.
21 A Yes. This is an action taken by the
22 Tompkins County legislature in an executive
23 session on August 15th, 2017. It was a sealed
24 record because this was a personnel matter.
1 Q Is there an action item set forth in this

2 record?
3 A Yes, there was. The legislature after
4 reviewing and discussing Mr. Taylor's report
5 adopted it and his findings and conclusions and
6 established there was a legitimate non
7 retaliatory -- I'm sorry, that there was not a
8 legitimate non retaliatory reason. I'm saying it
9 wrong.
10 Q Let's start this over.
11 MR. MCCANN: Let me just first offer
14 Q Would you read the paragraph that starts
15 now therefore?
16 A "Now therefore be it resolved that the
17 legislature adopts the findings and conclusions
18 of July 11, 2017 report of investigation
19 presented in her memorandum dated July 6, 2016
20 and e-mails dated October 10th, 2016 and October
21 23rd, 2016 were not established and that there
22 was a legitimate non retaliatory reason for any
23 alleged adverse reaction taken against Ms. Baer.
24 And be it further resolved that Ms. Baer's claims
1 of discrimination, retaliation and hostile work

2 environment presented in her memorandum dated
3 July 6, 2016 and e-mails dated October 10th, 2016
4 and October 23rd, 2016 are dismissed in their
5 entirety."
6 Q Did the legislature inform Karen Baer of
7 the report issued by Mr. Taylor and the
8 determination of the legislature?
9 A Yes, we did that.
12 Q Mr. Lane, can you identify the document I
13 marked for identification Charging Party Exhibit
14 14?
15 A Yes. This is a letter from me, chair of
16 the legislature, to Karen Baer dated August 21st,
17 2017 and we advised her that we had received the
18 report of investigation from Tim Taylor and the
19 findings and conclusions set forth in the report
20 were adopted by the legislature. They had raised
21 serious and substantial concerns about her
22 suitability for continued employment as director
23 of the Office of Human Rights and that her
24 actions had created a dysfunctional environment
1 which had put her in a position that she could no

2 longer carry out the full range of her duties and
3 responsibilities as director. And we indicated
4 that the legislature believed it would be the
5 best interest of all concerned to pursue an
6 agreement for an amicable separation of your
7 employment with the county prior to consideration
8 of any further action in response to the findings
9 and conclusions.
10 MR. MCCANN: I'm going to offer
12 HEARING OFFICER: Charging Party 14.
13 MR. CELLI: Yeah, I guess I don't
14 quite see the relevance of the offer of an
15 amicable resolution. The rest of the
16 letter is fine, the findings and
17 conclusions. We have no objection to that.
18 MR. MCCANN: It's really only offered
19 for notification to her of the amicable
20 resolution.
21 MR. CELLI: Okay. No objection.
23 is admitted.
24 Q Mr. Lane, let me direct your attention
1 back to Hearing Officer Exhibit 1, the charges,

2 and specifically to specification two under
3 charge one.
4 A Yes.
5 Q What is the basis for that charge?
6 A This has to do with Karen Baer's ceasing
7 to participate in the Workforce Diversity and
8 Inclusion Committee.
9 Q What is the Workforce Diversity and
10 Inclusion Committee?
11 A That is really an advisory board to the
12 Tompkins County legislature. It is the one
13 advisory board that has a standing report to the
14 legislature on every legislature meeting. It's
15 that important. It reports also regularly to the
16 Tompkins County budget and personnel committee
17 because that's where personnel is located. And
18 the purpose of the committee is to advise us on
19 our progress and what we need to do to keep a
20 diverse workforce and to make it an inclusive
21 workplace for people of all backgrounds,
22 characteristics, etcetera for our county. It's
23 considered a pretty important part of our
24 committee and our commitment.

4 A Yes. This is the Tompkins County policy
5 with respect to diversity and inclusion.
6 Q Let me direct your attention to toward
7 the beginning of the policy. The left hand
8 margin there's a heading legislative policy
9 statement?
10 A Yes.
11 MR. MCCANN: Before I do that, I'm
12 going to offer Charging Party Exhibit 15.
15 is received.
16 Q Mr. Lane, again I direct your attention
17 to that legislative policy statement. This is a
18 statement adopted by the legislature?
19 A Yes, it is.
20 Q Would you read the policy statement that
21 appears before the bullet points start?
22 A "The Tompkins County legislature believes
23 that a diverse and inclusive workforce provides
24 internal and external advantages. Internally
1 cultivate an inclusive culture enhances employee

2 potential, encourages a variety of perspectives
3 that ultimately derives creativity and
4 innovation. Externally a diverse workforce
5 increases the county's ability to serve the
6 entire community. The Tompkins County
7 legislature is committed to creating and
8 sustaining a diverse, fully inclusive and
9 flexible workplace environment that continually
10 strengthens the organization and demonstrates
11 this commitment by," and then it lists the
12 bullets.
13 Q Read the first bullet please.
14 A Fostering a workforce ethic that embraces
15 diversity and makes it the norm of all
16 interactions including delivery of services to
17 the public.
18 Q And would you read the fourth bullet
19 please?
20 A Forbidding and/or taking disciplinary
21 action against all expressions of discrimination,
22 bias, harassment or negative stereotyping toward
23 any person or group.
24 Q Does the diversity and inclusion policy
1 adopted by the legislature maintain a reference

2 to a Workforce Diversity and Inclusion Committee?
3 A I'm sorry. It may very well do that.
4 Q Directing your attention to page three.
5 A Yes, it does. I see it now. It's over
6 on the third page here. It does.
7 Q And specifically looking at Roman Numeral
8 II of the policy statement, sub B, sub one?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Would you read that please?
11 A Tompkins County government shall
12 demonstrate organizational commitment by, one,
13 establishing a Workforce Diversity and Inclusion
14 Committee, WDIC, to guide, inform and monitor the
15 county's diversity and inclusion efforts. The
16 WDIC shall meet at least monthly to review
17 existing diversity and inclusion policies and
18 practice, recommend new initiatives or changes to
19 existing ones, assist with implementation as
20 needed and where appropriate and advise the
21 legislature to further the county's commitment to
22 diversity and inclusion. The WDIC shall report
23 to the legislative committee responsible for the
24 personnel function.
1 Q Was Karen Baer as director of the Office

2 of Human Rights appointed by the legislature to
3 the Workforce Diversity and Inclusion Committee?
4 A Yes, as all her predecessors were.
5 Q Is it the expectation of the legislature
6 that the director would serve on that committee?
7 A Absolutely.
8 Q Did there come a point in time when Karen
9 Baer resigned from that committee?
10 A Yes.
11 Q When did that take place?
12 A In May of 2017.
13 Q How did you become aware of her
14 resignation from that committee?
15 A Karen actually sent an e-mail to me
16 indicating that she was resigning.
17 MR. MCCANN: Mark this as Charging
18 Party 16.
21 Q Mr. Lane, can you identify Charging Party
22 Exhibit 16 marked for identification?
23 A Yes. This is an e-mail that I received
24 from Karen Baer on May 18th, 2017 and an e-mail
1 where I responded the same day.

2 Q And what's the subject line of the
3 e-mail?
4 A WDIC resignation.
6 Exhibit 16.
8 Q Would you read Ms. Baer's e-mail to you?
9 A She says, "Mike, I'm sending this e-mail
10 to let you know I'm resigning from the Tompkins
11 County Workforce Diversity and Inclusion
12 Committee effective immediately. At this time I
13 believe it is in the best interest of both myself
14 and the Office of Human Rights. My best, Karen.
15 Q And would you read your response, please?
16 A I respond, "Hello, Karen. This is a
17 surprise. Do you feel you can let me know why?"
18 Q Did Ms. Baer ever respond to your e-mail
19 asking if she could let you know why?
20 A No.
21 Q Did she ever give you any reason to
22 believe that it would be in the best interest of
23 the Office of Human Rights for the director of
24 that office to resign from the legislative
1 committee known as the Workforce Diversity and

2 Inclusion Committee?
3 A No.
4 Q Can you think of any reason why it would
5 be in the best interest of the Office of Human
6 Rights to participate in the Workforce Diversity
7 and Inclusion Committee?
8 A I guess the answer is no. I can't
9 imagine.
10 MR. MCCANN: Mark for identification
14 Q I represent to you, Mr. Lane, just to
15 expedite things a little bit here, this appears
16 to be the regular meeting minutes for the
17 Tompkins County legislature for December 16,
18 2014.
19 A Yes.
20 Q Without looking at every page, does that
21 appear to be what that document is?
22 A Yes. It looks like our standard form we
23 have for minutes.
24 Q Just a second. I want to save some time
1 and direct you to a page nine of those minutes.

2 A Okay.
3 Q There is a reference toward the bottom of
4 the page to the Workforce Diversity and Inclusion
5 Committee. Do you see the reference?
6 A Yes.
7 Q It appears to continue on the next page.
8 What does that reference?
9 A It's basically appointments that were
10 made during the legislative session on that
11 evening to the Workforce Diversity and Inclusion
12 Committee among others and Karen Baer was
13 appointed to the county staff representative of
14 the term expiring December 31st, 2017.
15 Q Is this the official record of the
16 legislature's appointment of Karen Baer to the
17 Workforce Diversity and Inclusion Committee?
18 A Yes.
19 MR. MCCANN: I offer 17.
21 HEARING OFFICER: 17 is so admitted.
22 Q Did she complete her term?
23 A No.
24 Q I direct your attention to specification
1 three on Charge Number 1 of Hearing Officer

2 Exhibit 1.
3 A Say again what you're directing me to?
4 Q Specification three of the charges under
5 charge one. What is the basis for that specified
6 charge?
7 A It has to do with the dysfunction that
8 was created.
9 Q I'm sorry. Specification three of charge
10 one?
11 A I got it wrong. Sorry. That has to do
12 with --
13 Q Take a moment if you need to. It's a
14 long document.
15 A Okay. That has to do with the compliance
16 committee of the county legislature. Not a
17 formed committee, but a group that works on
18 compliance issues throughout the county.
19 Q What was the basis for this particular
20 specification of charges?
21 A That Karen Baer had stopped participating
22 with that compliance group.
23 Q Now you testified before that the
24 legislature reviewed proposed charges and took
1 action to have charges preferred against Karen

2 Baer?
3 A That's correct.
4 Q Why did the legislature consider Karen
5 Baer's resignation from the Workforce Diversity
6 and Inclusion Committee and her failure to attend
7 compliance committee meetings to be a cause for
8 charges?
9 A Because it's important that the county
10 has this policy of antidiscrimination and
11 retaliation, that we understand it, that we are
12 informed regularly about what we have going on in
13 our, both in our workforce and in compliance with
14 other issues that come before us, for example
15 grant applications and things. We could easily
16 be subject to a loss of grant funding or fines if
17 we did not comply with the requirements of state
18 and federal agencies for example. Compliance is
19 a big issue for our county. We need to have that
20 advice from our director of human rights. And
21 for our director to stop participating leaves us
22 vulnerable for that lack of information that we
23 would receive.
24 Q I'll direct your attention now to charge
1 three which you started to go to before I pushed

2 you back to charge one, specification three.
3 Charge three states, "you have created a
4 dysfunctional environment in connection with the
5 relationship between Tompkins County and its
6 Office of Human Rights." What's the basis for
7 that charge?
8 A The failure to cooperate. Failure to
9 cooperate with Mr. Taylor's investigation after
10 allegations were made by Ms. Baer and failure to
11 participate in the organizations that we talked
12 about, the WDIC committee and the compliance
13 group.
14 Q Why do you consider that to be
15 dysfunctional?
16 A Because it's so important for the county
17 to have this. And we would think that our
18 director of human rights would do all she could
19 to make sure she was available and helping and
20 her voice was heard in both an investigation of
21 this major, it's kind of a major investigation
22 where there is something that's been alleged that
23 is across the whole county that needs to be
24 investigated, discrimination, retaliation. And
1 so that we can understand what's out in the

2 community and within our own workforce to try to
3 be able to have, if there are issues like that,
4 to be able to correct them.
6 questions.
7 HEARING OFFICER: Counsel, can we
8 chat for a minute?
9 (RECESS TAKEN. HEARING ADJOURNED AND
10 RESUMED ON 12/8/17.)
11 * * *
12
C E R T I F I C A T I O N
13
I hereby certify that the proceedings and
14 evidence are contained fully and accurately in the
notes taken by me on the above cause and that this
15 is a correct transcript of the same to the best of
my ability.
16
______________________________
17
DELORES D. HAUBER
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

BAER Hearing 120717

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BAER Hearing 120717

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

1 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS

1 HEARING OFFICER: Let me say first of

1 cooperation between counsel for the parties

1 in, testifies honestly. They will be sworn

1 (HEARING OFFICER EXHIBIT NUMBER 2 WAS

1 document, but pertaining to the validity of

1 MR. MCCANN: I have a brief opening.

1 Baer made allegations to the legislature of

1 also refused to attend meetings of the

1 for her failure to follow the legislature's

1 making waves. Today Karen Baer, an

1 marginalizing her, by trying to silence

1 This brings us to the second

1 right and they do so in good faith, they

1 to really reveal the arch of the story and

1 beyond all expectations in that role.

1 evidence about his anger.

1 for some number of years, and Pat Pryor's

1 evidence will show that he viewed Pat Pryor

1 law that she wanted to have passed to

1 result of their speaking out and it's

1 Karen's experience with the Hooks'

1 When she got the report in March of

1 excluded from a whole host of civil rights

1 Now even though the order came from

1 She believes that she was treated

1 Taylor in 2017 and Mr. Hooks before him,

1 conciliation or would it be an adversarial

1 Here's the weird part though. He

1 never responds to that. It's almost like

1 The other thing that the report

1 this office was never more functional,

1 cases. I also resolve disputes mainly in the

1 permanent arbitration panels?

1 him in any way. Is that fair for, have we

1 They also require some individual training. Many

1 been asked to join the Rockefeller Institute

1 to move this along to an area of some

1 important so I'm going to respectfully ask

1 Q What is your educational background?

1 in all 711 school districts throughout the State

1 as a staff attorney for the New York State United

1 I've had marked for identification as Charging

1 New York State Department of Education URT panel.

1 December or early January. Late December 2016 or

1 they indicated they would take a message and I

1 A How they handled allegations of

1 Q How many times did you attempt to contact

1 what you stated already. So I'll allow the

1 shouldn't be depositing the opening

1 have to object. It's not what I said.

1 Q And by attempt to do that, you called her

1 date of the letter.

1 trying to discern from them what her allegations

1 county arranged for me to have a secure location.

1 been employees of the county? If you

1 provide me with any and all information that she

1 final letter? We have a copy. Would you

1 complaint. While on the actual letter that I

1 I recall receiving it during that period of time.

1 that I was going to conduct and it was not going

1 website at various departments. Looked at the

1 this point. Fair statement?