Hatch "Clarifies" His Memo

HATCH ATTEMPTS TO CLARIFY HIS MEMO
Shortly after lunch today Costa Mesa City Chief Executive Officer Tom Hatch sent out the following message to all employees:

From: HATCH, THOMAS
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 1:19 PM
To: CITY-ALL
Subject: Speaking at City Council Meetings

Recently, I sent a memo to employees concerning state legal guidelines for involvement in elections/campaigns by City staff.  An employee had a question about whether it is legal to speak at City Council Meetings.  The clear answer is yes but the employee must be off duty and not be in a City uniform.  The intent with not speaking at an “official City meeting” relative to elections/campaigns was intended to address personnel participation while on duty, on paid City time including breaks and/or in uniform.  This point was not intended to be while on one’s own personal time. 

I don’t apologize for sending the memo, however I apologize for any confusion it may have caused.  The upcoming election will likely be very difficult and our role, while on duty, is to professionally and fairly facilitate the process and not be engaged in the process.  Everyone will be watching what employees are doing but even if they weren’t, the right thing to do is to follow the law and not put our professional credibility at risk.  

NOW YOU HAVE KINDA FREE SPEECH
So, I guess that means that employees MAY stand before the council at meetings and ask political questions, but not in uniform and not while on duty.  That means Helen Nenadal, President of the Costa Mesa City Employees Association, will have to change her work shirt with city logo if she plans to address the council on "political issues".

NO ANSWER TO MY MEMO
Hatch has still not replied to my memo to him on the 11th in which I asked him several questions, including the one he just answered.  Remaining unanswered are:

1) What is the penalty if an employee refuses to sign the form?
2) What is the penalty if an employee is observed violating the guidelines?
3) As "guidelines", does he believe his memo has the power of "rules"?
4) Was answered above
5) Does the list of "guidelines" apply to council members, too, since they are city employees?
6) How does he plan to enforce the "guidelines".  For example, his prohibition on the use of the City's wireless network.  How will that work?  Will he have a cadre of roving monitors prowling the corridors of City Hall, peeking over partitions and through windows to observe employee activities?
7) How will he enforce his prohibition on employees speaking to each other during work hours?  Will he use that same cadre of monitors?
8) How does he square his prohibition on employees expressing views on, for example, Jim Righeimer's Charter - which he cites as a misuse of  public funds (the staff time) - when VERY significant resources have been spent, and are being spent, to promote it?

 DON'T REALLY EXPECT TO HEAR FROM HIM
I don't really expect to hear from him on these issues, which is pretty disappointing.  I'm a 39-year resident and taxpayer - one of the few who actually pays attention to what's going on in the city - so I kind of thought he might respond.  I guess not.  Perhaps, if he did so he would be actually violating his own rules.  He is, after all, an employee and my memo to him had a very definite "political element" to it.  If that's the case, I guess we can't expect him to discuss anything about Jim Righeimer's Charter or anything else political until after the election, right?

NO WORD FROM THE OCEA
Also unknown is the reaction to Hatch's "clarification" from the Orange County Employees Association.  We do know they were NOT happy with the original memo.  I guess we'll hear about that soon enough.