December 1, 2008

State rejects Tingle's claims against city

Update: Click here to download the Equal Rights Division's full report dismissing Tingle's complaint.




Ben Hughes in his City Hall office.

City Administrator Ben Hughes has a reputation for being a "buttoned-down" manager at City Hall. In his own words, he's the "guy that wears a suit every day to the office, even on Fridays."

So sexual harassment accusations against him back in August came as a surprise. Former City Hall employee Sandra Tingle made a series of sensational, if somewhat bizarre, claims against Hughes and Mayor Gary Becker accusing them of creating a hostile work environment. The fact that those claims came a few weeks after Tingle was fired on July 18 raised some flags, but the complaint was sent to the state Equal Rights Division for investigation.

While the investigation was underway, Tingle's attorney released salacious documents to the press claiming Hughes gave her an over-night bag and the mayor used inappropriate language.

The city hired an outside attorney to investigate and found no substance to the report. Now, the state is backing up the city's findings.

An investigator with the Equal Rights Division released a report on Nov. 26 dismissing Tingle's complaint and refusing to move forward with a formal hearing. Tingle and her attorney, Nola Cross, can appeal the decision, but the ruling largely ends their case.

The complaint arrived at City Hall on Monday. In an interview in his office Monday afternoon, Hughes spoke out about Tingle's claims and the state's ruling. In a controlled tone - there were no signs of anger - Hughes described Tingle and Cross as "unethical" and as perpetrators of intentional lies designed to ruin his and Becker's careers.

"It's very sad, and also frustrating, that a small segment of our society, such as Sandra Tingle and Nola Cross, lack the integrity to use the law as it was intended," Hughes said. "Sexual harassment laws were designed for people who need that help ... anyone who considers themselves a feminist should be outraged at how they used the law."

Tingle's complaint cost the city thousands of dollars in legal bills, Hughes said. The case had to be handled by an outside law firm because a number of city employees were interviewed.

"None of this needed to happen," Hughes said. "Her (Tingle's) dismissal was caused by her own poor actions as an employee."

He added that Cross and Tingle owed Racine residents an apology for making false allegations.

"Citizens should know democracy worked here in recognizing a fraudulent claim," Hughes said.

The Division of Equal Rights report revealed the three witnesses who testified on Tingle's behalf during the complaint. They included Kay Collins-Schulz, who testified Mayor Becker swore in front of her and made a second lewd comment; Cindy Wanek, a health department employee, who testified Becker made additional inappropriate comments; and Alderman Jeff Coe, who said he had heard the mayor had used swear words to refer to women.

Investigator Christine Brunow concluded there was no evidence to support Tingle's claims.

On a personal level, Hughes said support from coworkers and city residents helped him through a tumultuous first year on the job. Despite a public grilling, including ugly accusations against his character, Hughes said he is more confident then ever that Racine is a good fit for him.

"I have not lost faith in Racine," he said. "I've chosen the right place to spend, hopefully, the rest of my career."

Hughes said he and Becker have been silent on Tingle's complaint out of their professional obligation not to address her firing. But now that the complaint was been settled by the state, Hughes said he was happy to defend his reputation on the record.

Hughes said the incident has not changed him as an administrator. He doesn't feel the need to turn into a recluse or change procedures at the office. He added City Hall didn't "miss a beat" through the turmoil.

"This didn't derail any of the good work that's going on in the city," Hughes said.

Hughes also addressed a lingering rumor Cross filed a complaint against him at a previous job. In fact, he said, an employee resigned because of a medical issue and Cross represented her in working out a benefits package. There were no charges of harassment, Hughes said.

The City Council is in the process of sorting out the future of Tingle's position. Becker asked the council to fund the full-time administrative assistant position. A retired city employee is working the job now for 32 hours a week.


Original post:

We'll have the full story shortly, but for now:

The state has "unequivocably rejected" the claims of sexual harassment filed in July by Sandra Tingle, who was fired as the mayor and city administrator's assistant at City Hall, according to Ben Hughes, city administrator.

The state's rejection came Wednesday, in a seven-page report that was just received at City Hall today.

More coming...

Our earlier story about her complaint is here.

18 comments:

  1. More BS being released by the city, interesting how Mr. Hughes remained silent until now, but now he can't stop talking. I somehow doubt this is over yet.

    What ever became of the complaint filed by the health department director? There was a blip in the paper and then it was over.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think Hughes is the one that owes a lot of people apologies.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The city did not release this, the State Equal Rights Division - tasked with enforcing these things - did. They ruled there was NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO PROCEED. That means they felt there wasn't even enough evidence to make it worth their time to look into the situation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anon 5:46 - this is a statement from the JT: The city attorney’s office received the determination Monday and provided a copy for The Journal Times.

    By reading the articles, sounds like the real evidence comes out later on in the process.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What does wearing a suit have to do with harassment charges? So what this article means is any man who wears a suit is not capable of such a thing?

    I can tell you, Hughes is known by many things around City Hall, but the "guy who wears a suit" is by far the kindest I've heard.

    I've been hoping the RacinePost would do some real investigating on this issue. No such luck

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anon 7:20 -

    Yes, the city gave the report to the JT, but the report was issued by the state ERD. They are the ones who determined there is no probable cause - not the city.

    This determination means there is no cause to believe there is "real" evidence that will come out later.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anon, you said the ERD released this info when in fact it was the city that released it to the press. You are back peddling now.

    I wouldn't be so quick to make other assumptions you know nothing about.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Colt-

    I deleted your last comment because of what you said about Hughes. You're free to question the Post, but I had to delete the whole thing. Here's the part I remember you writing:

    I can't believe The Post is carrying water for the city.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Proves my point.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You don't HAVE a point, you ignorant twit. All they're doing is reporting the damn news. Newspapers do that. Websites do that. Now slither back under your rock.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What could Colt have possibly said to cause his entire comment to be deleted? I will agree with the one comment left behind about "carrying water" for the city. A proper news article should not contain opinionated remarks, that should be left for the bloggers.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anon 9:20 -

    Are you dumb or something? I am not back peddling. It does not matter who released this to the press. Your post makes it sound like the determination of no probable cause came from the city. It came from the ERD. The State of Wisconsin says there is no probable cause here.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I have never met Mr Hughes but I have not heard a good word about him. Ms Tingle may have lost the lawsuit, but the stain remains on Hughes. In that picture he looks like a man that just got away with something. My last comment is that when there is smoke there is fire. Soon, someone may sound the alarm.

    ReplyDelete
  15. That's usually referred to as a s*** eating grin.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Actually this story is incorrect, Tingle filed her original complaint while still employed - not several weeks after being terminiated. If you're going to write the story get it right folks.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Actually this story is incorrect, Tingle filed her original complaint while still employed - not several weeks after being terminiated. If you're going to write the story get it right folks.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Michael Kroes12/04/2008 10:10 PM

    The report states that the complaint was filed with the State on August 1, 2008. I assume that is the articles's author was using that date as a basis for his statement.

    ReplyDelete