Update On Complaints

March 15, 2019
Kelly Kuenstler Sent via Email: k.kuenstler@leonvalleytexas.gov

City Manager, City of Leon Valley
6400 El Verde Road
Leon Valley, Texas 78238
RE: Update Report on Complaints Against Martinez and Proffitt
Dear Ms. Kuenstler,
Please allow this to serve as an investigative report to you and the City Council regarding the
complaints filed against Councilmember Martinez and Commissioner Proffitt.
I. Complaint Status
A. Accused: Benny Martinez
a. Filed by Denise Frederick, City Attorney

b. Filed on December 18, 2018
c. Accusation: Hostile Work Environment
B. Accused: Benny Martinez
a. Filed by Dr. Catherine Rodriguez, City Council,

c. Accusation: a) Sexual Harassment/Hostile Work Environment
b) Charter Violation
C. Accused: Benny Martinez
a. Filed by Brandon Melland, City Planner

c. Accusation: a) Hostile Work Environment
b) Charter violation
///
Leon Valley – Complaints against

Martinez and Proffitt Page 1 of 23
D. Accused: Benny Martinez
a. Filed by Jo Ann Azar, City Police Officer

b. Filed on January 2, 2019
E. Accused: Benny Martinez
a. Filed by Jorge Breton, City Police Officer

F. Accused: Benny Martinez
a. Filed by Yvonne Acuna, Public Works Utility Billing Clerk

G. Accused: Larry Proffitt, Zoning Commissioner
a. Filed by Denise Frederick, City Attorney

c. Accusation: Hostile Work Environment/Race Discrimination/Gender
Discrimination/Retaliation
II. Scope of Investigation and Assignment
On December 12, 2018, your office received an official complaint from Dr. Catherine Rodriguez
(hereinafter, “Rodriguez”), a sitting council member for the City of Leon Valley City Council, place 2.
Rodriguez’s complaint is against another sitting council member, Benny Martinez (hereinafter,
“Martinez”). As Councilwoman Rodriguez is not technically an “employee” for complaint purposes, you
attempted to consult with the City Attorney, Ms. Denise Frederick (hereinafter, “Frederick”). However,
on December 18, 2018, Ms. Frederick filed a formal complaint of her own against Councilman Martinez.
You informed us that the Texas Municipal League (“TML”) advised that you retain independent
investigative counsel. I provided you an authority memo dated February 4, 2019 regarding your abilities,
under the City’s Charter and ordinances, to appoint an investigator.
Since that time, additional complaints have been filed against Councilman Martinez by other City
employees. The current Planning and Zoning Director, Brandon Melland (hereinafter, “Melland”), Officer
Jo Ann Azar (hereinafter, “Azar”), Officer Jorge Breton (hereinafter, “Breton”), and the Utility Billing

Clerk for the Public Works Dept. Yvonne Acuna (hereinafter, “Acuna”). Additionally, Ms. Frederick filed
an additional complaint against Zoning Commissioner Larry Proffitt (hereinafter, “Proffitt”). Copies of
all complaints are attached to this report as Exhibit A.
This firm was assigned to investigate all complaints and to provide a report and recommendation.
It was also retained to help provide legal advice to the City Council on the impact of the report and what
legal options are available to the City. Because we were retained for these two (2) separate aspects, we
will provide two separate reports. This report contains the factual results of the investigation and any
recommendations from an HR standpoint. This report may not be protected by the attorney/client
privilege. However, the legal report on available options to the Council is intended to be an attorney/client
privileged report and will be provided under separate cover.
My role in conducting the investigations was to collect factual information. This role does not
include a determination of any disputed facts. If facts are undisputed, then such facts can be used to make
a recommendation. However, if facts are disputed between the complainants and the accused, then the
only body which can decide the facts is the City Council.
III. Executive Summary
A. General Authority
As listed in the February 4, 2019 memo on your authority as the City Manager, you are required
to appoint an investigator to examine complaints filed by any City employee, regardless of whether the
alleged harasser is also a City employee, a member of the public, a City official, a vendor, or anyone else.
You have the authority, but are not necessarily required, to appoint an investigator to collect information
relating to a complaint by a sitting council member against another council member. You appointed this
office to be the investigator for all complaints by entering into a retention agreement on December 19,
2018. After appointment, this office has worked directly with witnesses and employees, only involving
your office when necessary to collect information.
B. Complaints by Frederick, Melland, Azar and Breton Against Martinez for Hostile
Environment
Legal claims for hostile work environment only exist if the environment is created “because of” a
protected classification, such as gender, age, race, etc. The complaints by Frederick, Melland, Azar and
Breton against Martinez did not include any such classification. Instead, their claims stem from perceived
aggressive, hostile, and disrespectful behavior towards them from Councilmember Martinez. While their
factual assertions appear to be supported regarding how Councilmember Martinez treats them, such action
does not qualify as an illegally hostile work environment under labor laws. As a result, such claims are
not sustained and your office nor the City Council need not proceed further from this point.

C. Complaint by Acuna against Martinez
Employee Acuna did allege behavior based on the protected classification, i.e. gender. Essentially,
in summary form, Ms. Acuna alleged Councilmember Martinez attempted to look down her shirt, kept
leering at her at times she encountered him, and kept “undressing her with his eyes” during the encounters.
However, such activity was infrequent (twice within the past two years). To constitute a hostile work
environment, courts usually balance the frequency of conduct with the offensive level of conduct.
Infrequent behavior can constitute harassment if the individual acts are severe enough. Less severe acts
can constitute harassment if they are frequent enough. Martinez disputes the factual allegations by Acuna.
He admits to meeting with her on both occasions but denies any improper behavior. Only the City Council
can determine if the activities occurred and, if so, if they rise to the level of creating a sexually hostile
work environment. Acuna’s complaint can either be 1) placed on the agenda of the City Council for a
§3.12 hearing or 2) listed as lacking the support of frequency.
D. Complaint by Frederick Against Proffitt
Frederick did allege behavior encompassing protected classifications against Proffitt, i.e. gender
and race discrimination. Essentially, she asserted Proffitt told her, at a single meeting, that she did not
belong on the dais at the Commission meetings. However, Frederick admitted Proffitt’s actions did not
come from a place of gender or racial animus. Further, a single incident is typically not sufficient to qualify
for a hostile work environment, even if a gender or racial motive were present. As a result, Frederick’s
complaint against Proffitt is not sustained.
E. Charter Provision §3.09 Complaints
The information submitted during the investigation demonstrated potential violations of the City’s
Charter wherein Martinez gave directives to the employees they interpreted as orders. Martinez disputes
he ever gave orders to City staff but admits he does request information from them pursuant to the City
Charter. It is within the discretion of the City Council as to whether it wishes to hold a §3.12 hearing on
§3.09 alleged violations.
IV. Complaints and Individual Investigation
A. Documents Reviewed
Numerous documents and videos were reviewed during the investigation. I have attached a
separate file which contains the relevant documents to this report. Some documents are labeled throughout
this report as exhibits and others will be provided in the separate file. For the documents and videos in the
separate file, I have not provided an index of documents but can upon request.

B. Rodriguez Complaint Against Martinez
a. Interview with Rodriguez

On February 4, 2019, I met with Councilwoman Rodriguez in my office, located at 1380 Pantheon
Way, Suite 110, San Antonio, Texas. She appeared without anyone else attending. She was elected on
May 4, 2018 and ran in the same race as Martinez. She appeared well poised, polite, but direct. She
appeared intelligent, well-spoken and remained even tempered throughout the interview.
When asked what prompted her complaint, Rodriguez stated that Martinez began treating her in a
way which was sexually suggestive, and she did not appreciate it. Rodriguez stated Martinez started out
being very friendly to her. However, she felt he was being too friendly too fast. As soon as she was elected,
he asked her to lunch several times, which she either declined or said she would attend but never followed
up to make it happen. She stated it did not appear to her Martinez was asking any of the other council
members to lunch, but that initial behavior did not raise any red flags immediately.
Rodriguez started to get the impression Martinez was treating her differently than the other council
members about a few months after she took office, but in a way that made her uncomfortable. She stated
Martinez would invade her personal space about a foot and a half apart whenever he approached her. She
stated she usually would step away from him in order to protect her personal space but admitted she never
informed Martinez he was invading. Rodriguez stated Martinez seemed to invade her space more than he
would other council members.
On October 2, 2018, the City celebrated National Night Out. The City organized vehicles to take
council members property-to-property. It was the first time Rodriguez had attended the organized tours of
the City. She did not ride in the same car as Martinez, but they both ended up making some of the same
stops. When she stopped at “Tail Waggerz” (which is a business for dog groomers), the business was
demonstrating its dog washing facilities. Martinez, Rodriguez and the yourself, in your role as the City
Manager, were in attendance. While observing the wash tubs, Rodriguez states Martinez moved in close
to her, but she did not see his approach until he was just suddenly beside her, inside her “personal space”
again. On this occasion, he got close to her and asked in a deep luring voice if she “wanted to take a bath”
while he gestured to the wash tub for the dogs. Rodriguez immediately felt like the statement had a sexual
undertone and she interpreted it as “dripping” with sexual inuendo. She stated his body language was
subtle but was suggestive in nature and the statement was not a joke or stated in a joking tone. Rodriguez
believes Martinez was sending out a “feeler” to see how she would respond but stated she simply smiled
and shook her head but did not respond further. Rodriguez stated stepped away from Martinez and avoided
him for the remainder of the night.
Rodriguez stated she started to notice more and more ways Martinez would make subtle inuendoes
over the following weeks. When Martinez would shake people’s hands, she noticed he would grasp the

and of the other person with both of his, but that she did not find that unusual. However, whenever he
would shake her hand, he would grasp her hand, then stroke it in a soft manner and commented, on more
than one occasion how her hands were very soft and smooth. When asked how many times, Rodriguez
said she could not remember but after a while, she stopped wanting to shake his hand because he would
always try to caress it. She felt the caressing was intentional and was done in a sexually suggestive manner
and specifically listed the hand caressing behavior occurred at the November 20, 2018 meeting.
Rodriguez also stated that Martinez would use different voice inflections with her than he did with
other people. When a person says the same phrase to two different people, but uses different voice
inflections, different meanings are conveyed. She stated Martinez would always attempt to put some sort
of underlying sexual meaning into his statements to her when no one else was around or when he could
control the situation. He also started to leer at her, stare at her, and projected a “perverted” aura. She had
difficulty putting the explanation into words when asked, but she did convey the body language was
suggestive in nature.
In between the dates of October 2, 2018 and November 20, 2018, Rodriguez “caught” Martinez
several times “undressing” her with his eyes from across the room. However, Martinez would only try
and touch her when he felt he could control the scene. Rodriguez does not want to make a public scene
and believes Martinez picks specific situations in order to control her in front of the public’s eye. However,
when asked if Rodriguez ever confronted Martinez about the way he was projecting or his behavior, she
stated “no.”
On December 3, 2018, the City had a tree lighting event. During the event, several City officials
were asked to pose for a picture with Santa Clause. The picture is attached to this report as Exhibit B.
According to Rodriguez, Martinez appeared behind her for the photo and again stood in her personal
space, intentionally getting “too close.” Rodriguez stated that, while behind her, he “thrust his crotch
forward,” casing his penis to rub against her posterior and that she did not believe she could move as
everyone was trying to hold still for the photo. Rodriguez utilized this as an example of how Martinez
tries to pick situations which limit her ability to respond or move away from him.
Rodriguez stated she has not personally observed Martinez behaving the same way with others but
would not put it past him. When asked is she ever confronted Martinez, Rodriguez stated she was
concerned about doing so as she sees the rude, unprofessional, aggressive, and abusive way he treats staff
and citizens who disagree with him. While Rodriguez states she is not afraid of him physically, she
believes he can be unpredictable and, as a result, she would simply “give him the bitch face” hoping he
would take the hint.
Rodriguez stated she believes Martinez eventually did “get the hint” but that, after she started
utilizing the facial expression, it caused him to increase his behavior as a taunt and increase the sexually
suggestive ways he would make statements to her which occurred on a constant basis. Rodriguez also
stated she used to get along with Martinez’s wife, but she believes his wife started to hate Rodriguez.

While she is unsure exactly why, she believes it may have to do with Mrs. Martinez’s observations of her
husband’s behavior towards Rodriguez.
Rodriguez does not believe Martinez cares how she votes on matters and his behavior was not
based on political alignments and believes his behavior is centered on physical desire and attraction.
Rodriguez stated that when the “bitch face” did not prevent Martinez’s behavior (and actually increased
it), she felt she had no choice but to file a complaint against him. When asked why she filed a complaint
with the City Manager, Rodriguez stated she was not aware of any procedures to follow, so it made sense
to file with the City Manager. Rodriguez confided in you that she was feeling alone and without recourse
as she feels Mayor Riley already disliked her since before she was even on council due to her dance classes
at City facilities. So, she did not feel she could go to the Mayor for help and felt stuck in a corner and,
while she did not want to file a complaint, she did not have a choice. However, since the complaint was
filed, Rodriguez has stated that Martinez’s behavior has changed some. He no longer “undresses” her with
his eyes but attempts to shoot daggers from his eyes into her chest.
Rodriguez stated she wants Martinez to be professional and to “keep his penis to himself.” They
do not have to agree on matters on the dais, but his behavior is affecting her ability to perform her council
member duties. While she would be fine if Martinez would simply change his behavior, she does not
believe he will as she believes poor behavior is too imbedded in his personality. As a result, Rodriguez
believes the only way she will get relief is to have him removed from the City Council.
b. Interview with Martinez
Martinez provided a written response to the allegations raised by Rodriguez. Please see attached
Exhibit C. Martinez also, eventually, appeared for an interview on February 27, 2019. He brought his wife
with him along with the former chair of the Zoning Commission, Mr. Olan Yarnell. Contrary to the tone
taken in his prior emails, Councilmember Martinez was polite, well presented, and even-tempered. During
the interview, his wife interjected several times as well as Mr. Yarnell. Both appeared to complain mainly
about staff and how the staff are “taking over” or “usurping power” and wanting to provide their
perspective on the history behind why they believe the complaints were brought against Martinez.
Martinez started out his interview stating his believe all complaints filed against him are nothing
more than an elaborate conspiracy with the City Manager at the center. His written response starts out the
same way. Martinez consistently referred to you as the “puppet master” and believes all issues with him
start with the you in your position as the City Manager.
Martinez stated you have some very strong and good traits and that your organizational skills are
exceptional. He made it a point to express he does not think you are a bad employee of the City or that
you are unintelligent. However, he informed me that he hears one explanation of events from you but a
completely different rendition of events from members of the public. He tends to believe what an
individual of the public tells him and immediately discounts what you as the City Manager tells him about

the same events. He stated he does not trust you and believes you are power hungry. He also believes you
improperly treat employees you do not like and try to get them to quit.
Martinez then asserted he should not have to respond to the complaints as he has legislative
immunity from any claims. He also believes all complainants are violating his First Amendment rights by
filing complaints against him. Martinez is confusing the immunities which apply to civil claims against
an individual (when legislative immunity applies) and when claims are brought against the employer
because of the actions of an individual (when legislative immunity does not apply). No lawsuit has been
filed, but the employees are filing complaints regarding their employment environment. Martinez is not
insulated by legislative immunity from such claims as the claims are against the City. Further, Rodriguez
is bringing a complaint under the City Charter. The City Charter’s provisions on complaints against any
member of the City Council is not obstructed by legislative immunity, but is, in fact, part of the legislative
process of managing its members.
Regarding the specific complaint by Rodriguez, Councilman Martinez informed me he offers to

take other council members to lunch once they are first elected but does not do it with everyone. He is not
attracted to Rodriguez and, most of the time, does not like to interact with her. He stated much of the time
he interprets her body language as being “stand-offish.” Martinez admitted to grasping Rodriguez’s hands
on multiple occasions but denies caressing them. Martinez stated he grasps men’s hands the same way.
According to Martinez, some women like a hug in greeting, which he does when he believes it is
appropriate and he does not take such physical communication as being sexual in nature. Martinez further
denies making sexual voice inflections when speaking with Rodriguez. When asked about the “take a
bath” comment during National Night Out, Martinez stated he only remembered touring the facility and
that Rodriguez was there. Martinez states does not remember making any comments, but believes if he
did, he would have only commented on the dogs being bathed as he made it a point to state that that
particular dog grooming facility is “top of the line” and “impressive”. When asked about the Christmas
picture at the light-up ceremony, Martinez believes the entire comment is ridiculous. He does not believe
he was too close to Rodriguez in the picture and denies he ever made contact with her body during the
taking of the picture.
When asked why Rodriguez would interpret his actions in the manner alleged, he stated the only
thing he can think of is that Rodriguez and Councilman Jordon are aligned politically and friends. Martinez
agreed that he and Jordon have very different philosophical views of the way the City should be run and
the way to go about fulfilling their respective roles as council members. He believes the actions are
politically motivated. However, Martinez also believes Councilmember’s Jordon, Alcocer and Rodriguez
give you in your role as the City Manager whatever you want. As a result, he believes you are actually the
one behind all of the complaints.
///

C. Frederick Complaint Against Martinez
a. Interview with Frederick
On January 14, 2019, I met with Denise Frederick in my office. She came alone. Frederick
provided her work history, noting she previously worked at the San Antonio City Attorney’s Office and
that she was hired as the City Attorney for Leon Valley in 2016.
When asked what prompted her complaint, Frederick stated that Councilmember Martinez is a
bully who does not respect the staff or her professional judgment. She does not have a problem with
Martinez or any member of the City Council asking questions or wanting a second legal opinion on an
issue but felt his actions in the way he goes about interacting with her is unprofessional and hostile.
Specifically, he yells at her, intentionally tries to publicly humiliate her, attempts to act like a lawyer
questioning her legal opinions openly, makes aggressive motions with his arms and fingers, and acts
physically hostile from the dais overall.
When Martinez first started treating Frederick in a disrespectful manner, she had a discussion with
him in private and requested they have their conversations on the side before a City Council meeting
instead of disagreeing in open session. Frederick said she does not like having to disagree or “call out”
members of the council in open session on issues and if he would speak with her before the meeting, they
could be on the same page during the meeting. Martinez initially agreed, but his behavior continued.
Frederick stated Martinez’s behavior has become worse over the past year. She states Martinez
constantly is threatened by staff doing their jobs, tries to do favors for citizens and when the staff pushes
back, he becomes upset. Frederick stated she is having difficulty dealing with the constant hostility and
berating. Martinez challenges everything she says, making her physically uncomfortable when interacting
with him on the dais. She believes it makes it difficult for her to do her job. When asked how Martinez’s
behavior makes things difficult, Frederick stated he is constantly asking for information to be created and
taking time away from her doing the jobs needed for other members of the City. In short, Martinez
monopolizes the time of staff for his own benefit. Staff, including herself, feel they have to justify every
little thing, to a ridiculous degree, in order to avoid being yelled at by Martinez. Frederick stated she just
had in September and the stress of dealing with Martinez and his
mannerisms is causing physical pain as she is more susceptible to it.
However, Frederick agreed Martinez speaks and acts that way towards many people, regardless of
gender, race, or age. Frederick feels Martinez does not acknowledge her as a human. She does not know
why Martinez treats her in this manner and the only thing she can think of is that she is trying to do her
job and, since Martinez disagrees on the authority staff should possess, he opposes the staff which includes

her office. Frederick believes Martinez is intentionally trying to make their jobs difficult because of this
belief. When asked if Martinez ever treated her differently because she is female, she stated “no, not that
she was aware of.” When asked if Martinez ever treated her differently because of her race she stated
“no.” However, Frederick did state that, as an African-American female who has previously had to deal
with stereotypes, she has had to go through “a lot” to get to where she is today and when she is
disrespected, it is hurtful. Because of her race, Frederick feels Martinez’s treatment of her makes her feel
isolated, but she was unable to describe how his treatment of her is connected with her race. Frederick
also admitted that Martinez treats many individuals the same way if he disagrees with them. When asked
if Martinez ever sexually harassed her by asking her out or commenting on her physical appearance,
Frederick stated “no.”
Realistically, Frederick just wants Martinez to stop acting in a threatening and hostile manner
which means no more pounding his fist or yelling at her or the other staff members. Frederick wants
Martinez to let her do her job and she will support him equally with all the other council members. She
also wants Martinez to stop giving legal advice from the dais.
Frederick believes Martinez violates the City Charter by giving orders to her and the staff instead
of going through your office. When asked for a specific example, she referenced the City Council meeting
on December 18, 2018 and how Martinez treated Brandon Melland, Director of Planning and Zoning.
After Frederick filed the complaint, she stated the Mayor sent out a change to the seating
arrangements so that she is now right next to Martinez. Frederick believes this was done in retaliation for
her filing the complaint.
During the interview with Martinez, he stated he took great offense to Frederick using the phrase
“as an African-American female” in her complaint as he stated their issues have nothing to do with her
race or her gender and he stated he was offended at the accusation of him being racist. Please find attached
as Exhibit D, Martinez’s response to Frederick complaint. He believes Frederick is usurping power and
trying to interject as an additional council member. He in fact has made statements in the past that
Frederick “acts as the 6th council member”. According to Martinez, Frederick’s job is to sit down and be
quiet until she is asked a legal question, otherwise, the City Council does not need to hear from the City
Attorney. He believes Frederick is not a very good City Attorney and often gets the law incorrect. As a
result, he does not trust her legal opinion. When asked for an example, he stated last year the City Council
held an “illegal workshop” because the posting for such a workshop must be posted on the City’s website.
Since that workshop was not posted on the website, he believes it was an illegal meeting.1 Martinez
1
This is not entirely correct. While the Texas Open Meetings Act does require posting on a city’s website, as long as the City
has substantially complied and advised the public, via a notice posted outside the City’s administrative offices, then the City

informed me he objected at a public meeting, but Frederick shut him down. He stated she later she
privately told him she was wrong and that it should have been posted. Martinez believes it is his obligation
to challenge Frederick’s legal opinions which he believes are incorrect. Martinez admitted he is not a
lawyer but did provide me with an explanation of how he defended himself against a lawsuit in New
Mexico.
Martinez disputes he treats Frederick any differently than other employees he does not trust, and
he took offense to any indication his actions towards Frederick are associated with her gender or race.
Martinez informed me his office manager at his private business is a female over the age of forty and he
trusts her more than he trusts Frederick. Martinez agreed he can come across as emotional and stated he
gets excited when discussing issues, he is passionate about and many times raises his voice without
realizing it. However, he denied being a bully or attempting to intimidate the City Attorney (or any other
employee). According to Martinez, his intent is to challenge them and “support the citizens…. with the
truth.” Martinez also disputes he ever gave the City Attorney a direct order or violated the City Charter.
Martinez believes the City Attorney is hired and works for the City Manager under the Charter.
He does not believe she works for the City Council and thinks that should change. He believes the City
Council is getting only one side of any given issue. Martinez may not be aware of the ethical issues
involved or that the City Attorney’s obligation and duty is to the entity, not to any one individual. See
Tex. R. Prof. R 1.12.
Martinez believes the citizens are his boss and he answers only to them. He states you, as the City
Manager, are an employee of the City Council and by conducting this investigation, you have flipped the
accountability.
D. Melland Complaint Against Martinez
a. Interview with Melland
I interviewed Brandon Melland on February 7, 2019 in my office. Mr. Melland came alone.
According to Mr. Melland, he noticed the hostility from Councilmember Martinez increase dramatically
after a dispute Melland had with a local businessman, Mr. Anderson. According to Melland, he informed
Anderson, at multiple times, what was needed for a specific property, including obtaining a SUP. Despite
what Mr. Anderson has told Martinez, Melland asserts he explained what was required to Anderson, but
Anderson wanted to see about exceptions to the regulations. According to Melland, Martinez rarely
has not conducted an illegal meeting. See Rebecca Terrell and Chandrashekhar Thanedar v. Pampa Independent School
District, -- S.W. 3d. --, 07-17-00189-CV, 2019 WL 150884, (Tex. App. – Amarillo, January 9, 2019). The error in posting on
the website must have been made due to mistake, inattention, technical difficulties or misunderstanding.

believes anything the staff says and always takes what a citizen says as fact. In that type of situation, staff
cannot function. Melland stated that staff can do everything they are supposed to do, but if a disgruntled
citizen misrepresents the facts to Martinez, Councilman Martinez will utilize it to humiliate the staff in a
public meeting. Melland believes this makes it difficult for him to do his job.
Melland did not have a problem with members of the City Council asking him questions or even
challenging the grounds for his recommendations. However, he stated he reports to the Council as a body
and is not supposed to respond to directives from individual council members.
Melland stated Martinez’s behavior towards him and his staff is that of a bully. Melland stated
Martinez routinely yells at him from the dais and he does not know if Martinez behaves this way
intentionally or if it is merely part of his personality. Either way, he does not feel it is professional for a
member of the City Council to berate staff routinely on the dais. Melland feels this behavior has created a
hostile work environment for him, making it difficult to complete his assigned functions.
When asked for any additional examples, Melland mentioned a council meeting of November 20,
2018. Melland stated that, while at the podium presenting to the City Council possible changes to criteria
for the Board of Adjustment, Martinez kept complaining the City was giving staff too much power and
not following state law regarding the BOA. Martinez was very hostile towards staff, kept aggressively
pointing his finger at Melland and raising his voice. Melland stated Martinez had a concern staff is not
telling businesses what they are really supposed to do before they appear before the Zoning Commission.
However, as Melland noted, City staff can do everything correctly and Martinez will not believe them.
Melland noted the issues involving the re-zoning around the St. John’s Church are a large political
issue right now. Under state law, the City is to mail a notice letter to any property owner within two
hundred (200) feet of the proposed change. Martinez requested that notices be sent to additional property
owners outside the two hundred (200) foot boundary. Melland asserts the City Council, as a body,
instructed him to send the additional notices, which he did. However, Martinez became upset at a later
meeting in February that Melland did not calculate the opposition numbers from those extra property
owners outside of the two hundred (200) foot boundary. Melland stated his instructions were to give out
the additional notices, but state law requires the calculations for only those within two hundred (200) feet.
Since he was not instructed to incorporate that information into his report by a majority of the Council, he
did not perform those calculations. Additionally, Martinez was upset Melland did not provide a matrix of
comparable cities when he requested. However, after reviewing the meeting tapes and minutes myself, I
was unable to find any mention from the City Council instructing Melland to do a matrix. Only Martinez
demanded that City staff prepare a matrix of other cities. You, in your position as the City Manager, sent
a series of emails to Martinez noting staff did not have time to prepare the matrix given the other work
which needed to be complete before a particular meeting, but that a matrix would be provided at a later
date. Also, you requested Martinez abstain from giving staff direction like this.

Melland believes Martinez’s actions are accusing him of not doing his job and are presented in a
hostile manner intentionally designed to publicly humiliate him. He states it is very stressful when
Martinez publicly undercuts his authority and makes it difficult for him to do his job when interacting
with the public.
However, Melland stated Martinez treats other staff the same way. He believes it comes from a
misunderstanding of the role of staff, the public, and the City Council which results in Martinez having a
public contempt for staff. Martinez displays it outwardly. When asked if Martinez is treating Melland in
a hostile manner because of Melland’s gender or race (or any other protected classification), Melland
stated “no.”
Directly after the December 18, 2018 City Council meeting, Melland approached the City Attorney
about how to file a complaint. She advised Melland to speak with you, the City Manager. When Melland
approached you, he states you told him to put his complaint in writing
As stated above, Martinez openly admitted he does not trust many City employees and Brandon
Melland is no exception. Please find attached as Exhibit E, Martinez’s response to Melland complaint.
Martinez believes Melland evades his questions, “talks in circles”, and does not answer honestly. As a
result, Martinez stated he wants to support the citizens against Melland. Martinez believes he has the duty
and responsibility to question staff and support the citizens. Martinez also believes the City must be
“business friendly” and admitted to having several conversations with the you, in your role as the City
Manager, Melland, and his predecessor (as well as staff) regarding how and when they are supposed to be
business friendly.
Martinez admitted one reason he does not trust Melland is because of information provide to him
by “Bobby” Anderson and some issues involving Mr. Morehouse and an industrial park. Martinez believes
Melland provided Anderson the wrong information which prevented the certificate of occupancy from
being timely issued for the business. Martinez believes if Melland was business friendly, Melland should
have told Anderson or Morehouse and walked them step-by-step through the process. Martinez was not
shy about the fact he does not like the way Melland operates the Planning Department and admitted to
telling Melland that his staff were wrong for not being “business friendly” as Martinez believes the term
to mean.
According to Martinez, Melland is evasive, difficult to understand sometimes, just rambles and
does not answer the questions asked. Martinez states that if a council member asks him something,
Melland should answer it, straightforward, period.

Martinez believes Melland defied the City Council’s directive by posting notices of the zoning
change to the St. John’s Church beyond the two hundred (200) foot boundary, but not calculating
opposition in the extended boundary. Martinez insists Melland was instructed to run the calculations.
Martinez admitted to requesting information on a matrix of other cities and RLUIPA2 and was dismayed
when you told him staff was too busy. However, he denied the request was an order. Martinez stated he
only sought information but also admitted he did not know if the City staff had a matrix of other cities
already. He did not think it would be difficult to get or create.
E. Azar Complaint Against Martinez
a. Interview with Officer Azar
I interviewed Officer Jo Ann Azar on February 5, 2019 in my office. She brought Officer Breton
with her. However, since Breton also has a complaint against Martinez, the two were separated and not
allowed to sit in on each other’s interviews. Azar informed me the only reason they came together was to
save on gas.
During the interview, Officer Azar stated it was her understanding that certain City staff and City
Council members had received some threats from a group of First and Second Amendment protestors
known as the “Auditors.” The City received information some members of the group were going to attend
different City Council meetings and would attempt to disrupt the proceedings. The Chief of Police, who
is in charge of security for City Hall, directed that all those who enter City Hall should be “wanded” using
a handheld metal detector on days the City Council meets. Officer Azar was given the responsibility.
Officer Azar stated her orders were clear - wand EVEYRONE, including employees and council members.
So, she did.
Officer Azar stated that the only council member who complained about being wanded was
Councilman Martinez. He would complain every single time in front of other citizens and people she was
having to wand. Officer Azar stated she caught him a couple of times trying to sneak past her to avoid
being wanded and his constant grumblings form the basis of her complaint against him. She believes
Martinez’s actions towards being wanded undercuts her authority in front of the very public she has to
interact with. Upon request, Officer Azar provided me bodycam footage of Martinez complaining about
being wanded when entering City Hall.
However, while Martinez complained every time, according to Officer Azar, he never refused to
go through the wanding (unless he snuck past her and she did not see him). The video shows Martinez
complaining, but following Azar’s orders. He may have grumbled but complied and Officer Azar stated
she never discovered any weapons on him during the wanding. Martinez did order her to take down the
signs advising the public of the wanding. but she refused, noting her orders came down the chain of
2
RLUIPA stands for the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1, et sub.

command from the Chief and Martinez would have to take it up with him. Martinez’s public grumbling
did result in citizens who witnessed the actions asking Officer Azar about the wanding and why, if a
council member disagreed it should be done, she was continuing to wand the public. Officer Azar stated
she kept it very professional and merely responded that those are her orders and continued to wand those
entering City Hall. Officer Azar stated not too many people questioned the wanding overall.
Officer Azar stated she had a medical leave of absence for a few months in 2018. During that time,
her partner, Officer Breton, took over the duty of wanding individuals entering City Hall before council
meetings. According to Officer Azar, Martinez complained to Officer Breton when being wanded as well.
However, as far as she knew, Martinez still complied with the orders and was wanded.
When asked if Martinez treated her differently or was hostile because she was female, she stated
“no” and pointed out Martinez grumbled when Officer Breton (a male) wanded him. When asked why she
believes Martinez complains, she said she does not know but that she believes Martinez may have some
issue with the Chief of Police, though she is not familiar with the details. When asked how Martinez’s
behavior has negatively impacted her job, Officer Azar stated it undercuts her authority in front of other
members of the public, making her job more difficult but agreed she could still perform her job duties.
Martinez stated he has nothing against Officer Azar. Please find attached as Exhibit F, Martinez’s
response to Azar complaint. He states he knows she was just following orders when wanding people.
However, he disagrees the Chief of Police should have the ability to make policy by implementing
wanding. He believes if the Chief feels wanding is required, he should have come to the City Council and
asked for a policy.
Martinez made it a point to emphasis that he is not opposed to safety policies or procedures. And,
if he fully understood why the wanding was necessary, he may have even voted in favor of it at a council
meeting. However, the Chief never requested a policy and believes this is just another example of the staff
taking over the City. Martinez believes it is important to insist on the City Council being the one to
implement policy but agreed Officer Azar had no ability to disobey the Chief’s orders to wand. He denied
ever giving Officer Azar any direct orders in regard to the sign posting about the wanding protocol and
reiterated that he always complied with the request to wand. He stated he never tried to sneak past the
officers to avoid being wanded.
///
///

F. Breton Complaint Against Martinez
a. Interview with Officer Breton
Immediately after speaking with Officer Azar on February 5, 2019, I met with Officer Breton in
my office. During the interview, Officer Breton went into some background history between him and
Martinez, specifically and incident that occurred 2017. Officer Breton stated he was responding to
domestic disturbance along with various other officers at a specific house within Leon Valley. A stand-
off occurred wherein police were concerned about the violent nature of an individual listed as having a
gun inside the home and threatening others. Officer Breton was assigned to assist in sectioning off the
road to prevent pedestrian access when he stated a single man came walking up the road from around one
of the corners. Officer Breton stated he was not certain if the individual had exited the suspect house or
was a citizen about to walk into the line of potential fire. He stated he instructed the individual to stop, but
the individual did not stop, but rather ran from the police. Eventually, Officer Breton stated he got close
enough to the individual and put him onto the ground. After securing the individual, Breton was informed
it was Councilmember Martinez. After helping Martinez off the ground, Officer Breton and another officer
removed him from the scene.
Police internal affairs performed an investigation into the incident and cleared the officers of any
wrongdoing. However, from that time forward, Officer Breton got the impression Martinez was against
the police no matter what the issue or interaction. When asked if the incident was part of his complaint,
Officer Breton responded it is for context to understand why Martinez does not like the police and is part
of the complaint, even though the incident itself does not show Martinez being hostile. One interpretation
is that Martinez ignored the police commands at the scene. However, Martinez explained in his interview
that he did not initially hear the commands and when he did, he did not understand they were directed at
him.
Officer Breton was not able to list any other incidents until he took over wanding duty at City Hall
while Officer Azar was on leave. Officer Breton stated Martinez made similar statements to him as those
he made to Officer Azar and routinely complained in front of other members of the public that wanding
should not be required. Officer Breton also agreed Martinez complied with the wanding requirements
when asked but was caught several times trying to walk around him to avoid being wanded.
When asked if Martinez was hostile towards him any other time, Officer Breton stated “no.” When
asked if Martinez was hostile because of Officer Breton’s gender or race, he stated he did not think so.
According to Officer Breton, Martinez would try to walk through security without being wanded, even
though he knew the procedure. Officer Breton believes Martinez’s actions are hostile because they are a
blatant disregard for the Chief’s orders on security. By ignoring them, Martinez is undercutting the Chief.
///

Martinez provided his explanation of the events in 2017. Please find attached as Exhibit G,
Martinez’s response to Breton’s complaint. He stated he did not hear any commands for him to stop
walking. In hindsight, he believes the police improperly secured the area and should have sectioned off
one of the streets better. He stated he had just had surgery very recent to the event and it was difficult for
him to get on the ground in a fast manner. So, by the time he realized he was being commanded to “get
down”, he was slow to respond. Martinez believes the officers involved were overzealous and forced him
to the ground. He provided pictures of the scrapes and bruises he asserts were sustained. However, he does
not know which officer put him to the ground and believes Officer Breton was one of the officers several
hundred feet away from where he was attempting to get on the ground.
The 2017 incident was described in further detail by both Martinez and Officer Breton. However,
the incident is largely irrelevant to the rest of this investigation. As a result, the higher details are not
included in this report.
Martinez stated he complained about the wanding regardless of which officer was stationed to
perform the duty. Again, he stated he complained but complied, that he understands the officers must
follow the Chief’s orders, but he believes the Chief should have asked for the policy first from City
Council and justified it.
G. Acuna Complaint Against Martinez
a. Interview with Acuna
I had a phone conversation with Ms. Acuna regarding her complaint. Unlike the others, an in-
person interview could not be scheduled. Acuna’s entire complaint is based on gender-based harassment.
She alleges leering by Councilmember Martinez and notes at least two attempts to look down her shirt on
different days. Acuna stated she approached her supervisor and stated she thought it was inappropriate for
someone in Martinez’s position to behave this way and was told to put the complaint in writing. Acuna’s
written email listed two (2) incidents of Mr. Martinez looking down her shirt, in a rather obvious manner.
The first instance occurred at a meeting in early 2018 when the City Council was considering a water rate
change. Acuna was alone in a conference room with Martinez and she states he kept staring at her breasts
and attempting to look down her shirt. She stated that because she is “curvy” or “well endowed” she does
not wear shirts which cause cleavage in the workplace. However, at this time, her shirt was “snug” and
Acuna states Martinez kept looking whenever she bent over or forward, like he was “hoping to catch a
glimpse of something.”
The second incident was in December of 2018 when Martinez visited the public works building to
view and judge the decorations staff put up for the holidays. When she was alone with him, Acuna states

he kept trying to look down her shirt. Again, Acuna asserts her shirt was not low cut so it would have been
difficult. However, she states Martinez kept trying and thinking she did not notice. Acuna also commented
that Martinez always looks at her breasts when speaking with her and does not try to hide the visual
attention. However, Acuna admitted Martinez never propositioned her, made improper jokes of a sexual
nature or attempted to make physical contact in an improper way.
Acuna’s complaint seems to stem solely from a constant visual inspection of her body in an
obvious manner whenever Martinez sees her which makes her uncomfortable. Acuna believes it is
inappropriate for someone in Councilmember Martinez’s position to blatantly visually observe female
employees in this manner. While Acuna commented she was used to men staring at her at different times,
it does not bother her as long as they do not impact her work. However, someone in Martinez’s position
is viewed differently by her and she stated she currently can work and perform her job as long as Martinez
is not there. Since Martinez rarely appears at the Public Works building, Acuna is largely unhindered at
the moment. However, she is concerned his presence and constant visual attention could distract her fellow
female co-workers if he is doing the same thing to them. Acuna also stated she believes Martinez’s visual
attention comes from a place of general desire of a man for a woman but, coupled with Councilman
Martinez’s behavior towards other members of the staff in an aggressive manner, she is not certain of how
to interpret his attention. Acuna stated the intent of her complaint was so that it can be counted along with
any other female employees who may complain, now or in the future, about the same thing.
When asked about the Acuna complaint, Councilman Martinez stated he has no idea what she is
talking about. Please find attached as Exhibit H, Martinez’s response to Acuna’s complaint. Martinez
stated he recalled the time he went to discuss the water rates with her but disputed ever attempting to look
down her shirt. He also recalled going to judge door decorations over the Christmas holiday in 2018, but
once again denies he ever leered at her or tried to look down her shirt. When asked why he believes Acuna
would file a complaint, Martinez stated he suspects the you, as the City Manager, put her up to it. Martinez
could not add anything further on the subject.
H. Frederick Complaint Against Proffitt
a. Interview with Frederick
During the same interview conducted with Denise Frederick on January 4, 2019 regarding her
complaint against Martinez, we also discussed her complaint against Larry Proffitt. Frederick stated
Proffitt used to be her friend and they worked well together but when asked what brought on the complaint,
she stated it was only one incident which occurred on December 11, 2018. Frederick stated that it was at
a public meeting and asserts Proffitt “got in her face” and stated she did not belong on the dais. Frederick
felt he was trying to get rid of her and again noted that as an African-American female who has previously

had to deal with stereotypes, she went through “a lot” to get where she is. Frederick stated that when she
is told she “does not belong”, she takes it very personal.
When asked why she felt Proffitt would say something like that, Frederick stated she did not know.
When asked if she believed it was “because of” her race or gender, Frederick stated she does not believe
Proffitt even thought of it that day. She admitted Proffitt had recently lost his wife and was acting more
hostile on that day because it would have been at or near her birthday. However, she does not know what
is in his heart.
Frederick admitted Proffitt apologized after the meeting but believes he did not recognize what he
said; he simply realized she was upset. Frederick believes her “people” have been told “you don’t belong
here” for a long time but knowing Proffitt as she does, she does not believe it was racial. Frederick believes
Proffitt thinks the City Attorney, regardless of who it is, their gender, race, etc., does not belong on the
dais during Zoning Commission meetings. However, Frederick believes the City Attorney does belong
there and her presence was in response to a request from the chair of the Commission.
b. Interview with Proffitt
On February 7, 2019, I interviewed Larry Profitt in my office. When asked to come in, Proffitt
was very cooperative and professional. He stated he was surprised at the complaint and wanted to tell his
side of the story. When he arrived, he requested his co-worker, Mr. Pierre Scott, be allowed to attend the
interview. I advised that as long as Proffitt did not mind Mr. Scott hearing his statements, it was
permissible, but Mr. Scott is not permitted to discuss the matter with anyone after the meeting. Both agreed
and Mr. Scott sat in on the interview. However, Mr. Scott said very little.
Proffitt stated December 11, 2019 was his late wife’s birthday. It was the first birthday after she
had passed away early in the year and he admitted he was “out of sorts” and emotional. He agreed he was
probably short tempered.
Proffitt admitted he told Denise Frederick she did not belong on the dais. However, he produced
an email exchange between him and the chair of the Commission where he was inquiring about the need
for the presence of the City Attorney at the Commission meetings and the location at which the attorney
is to sit. Copies of the emails are attached to this report as Exhibit I. According to Proffitt, the City
Attorney, when attending Commission meetings, never sat at the dais and thought it was odd Frederick
chose to sit there. Proffitt stated he was unaware the Chair had requested her presence and he agreed it
was at the Chair’s discretion where the attorney is to sit. However, since the City Attorney never
previously sat at the dais, he questioned the reasoning for the change. The reason the Chair had requested
the City Attorney’s presence at a series of Commission meetings, apparently, was due to the St. John’s
Church issues being discussed. Given the legalities involved, the Chair wanted Frederick present and
sitting on the dais for easy access.

According to Proffitt, this issue was already in the works when Proffitt told Frederick she did not
belong on the dais. However, the emails were dated after the complaint. According to Proffitt, he was not
referring to Frederick individually, but to any attorney attending the Commission meeting as the
Commission’s attorney. From Proffitt’s mindset, as soon as the Chair informed him of the request, that
resolved the issue.
Proffitt has sent several subsequent emails to the Chair requesting the removal of the City Attorney
from the dais during Commission meetings, so the issue is obviously not completely resolved. However,
the placement of the City Attorney at a Commission meeting is not the issue in the complaint filed by
Frederick. The issue for the Frederick’s complaint against Proffitt is the motivation and impact of his
statements to Frederick’s presence at the meeting.
V. Recommendations
A. General Perspective on Complaints
It is important to keep in mind when reviewing this report, that each complaint must be reviewed
on its own merits. Martinez is an elected council member. As a result, he is not subject to personnel
policies. By that same token, neither is Rodriguez. Only the City Council can take any action against
Martinez directly, if any is warranted. Rodriguez’s complaint can only be evaluated as to whether or not
a violation of the City Charter occurred. However, the employees are required to follow the City’s
personnel policy manual, which dictates how they must file a complaint. For a full explanation of the legal
procedures, please consult the legal report submitted separately as well as the authority memo issued on
February 4, 2019.
The City Council must consider any complaints first under §3.08 of the City Charter, then for any
potential violations of §3.09. Any hearings held by the City Council for investigation must be conducted
under §3.12 of the City Charter. Please find attached as Exhibit J, relevant Charter sections to this report.
B. Frederick, Melland, Azar and Breton Complaints Against Martinez
As to the hostile work environment claims, the complaints by Frederick, Melland, Officer Azar
and Officer Breton against Martinez did not include any protected classifications. Frederick did list gender
and race within the complaint but not as a motivating factor. While, factually, it is clear Martinez can be
aggressive, loud, and forceful, his actions apply equally across all classifications. It is certainly within the
realm of reason for Frederick, Melland, Officer Azar and Officer Breton to interpret Martinez’s actions as
hostile. Martinez’s behavior, especially that observed on video during the council meetings, can be
interpreted as verbally abusive at times. However, such cannot form the basis of a hostile work
environment claim under labor laws. No protected classifications were listed as the cause or form the basis
of the complaints; therefore, the complaints are not sustained.

C. Frederick Against Proffitt
Frederick’s claims against Proffitt do allege protected classifications, but she admitted Proffitt’s
single incident behavior in the complaint was not motivated by animus against her gender or race. As a
result, Frederick’s complaint against Proffitt is not sustained as to creating a hostile environment.
However, I must caution that no retaliatory action should be taken against Frederick (or any of the
complainants for that matter) because they chose to file a complaint. Changes in duties, while typically
fine within the normal realm of changes which would have occurred regardless of the complaint, should
be reviewed cautiously to ensure any changes are not as a result of the complaints.
D. Acuna against Martinez
Acuna’s complaint against Martinez is in a limbo state as certain facts and actions can only be
determined by the City Council. Acuna’s complaint does list one of the protected classifications (i.e.
gender) as the motivation behind the behavior. However, asserting a protected classification is not enough
for a hostile work environment claim and Acuna must establish that the frequency or severity rose to a
level which impacted her ability to work. As a result, the decision to hold a public hearing under §3.12 of
the Charter to consider Acuna’s complaint rests with the City Council.
E. Rodriguez Against Martinez
Rodriguez is not an employee and her complaint is only actionable if it constitutes a violation of
the City Charter. Federal and state labor codes protect employees and not elected officials, at least not in
the same way. However, Charter §7.02 states no “person” shall, in any way, be discriminated against with
respect to any City position “because of race, national origin, sex, political or religious opinions or
affiliations.” See Exhibit J. This is the provision which imposed an obligation on all Council members to
refrain from discriminatory conduct. As a result, Rodriguez’s complaint does allege a Charter violation.
Depending on the City Council’s findings, some evidence exists to support a violation, should the City
Council make certain determinations. However, the complaint cannot be sustained or listed as
unsubstantiated factually by the investigation. It must be presented to the City Council for a factual
determination on 1) whether the allegations occurred, 2) whether the actions found, if any, constitute a
violation of §3.08 or §3.09, and 3) if a violation occurred, what remedy the City Council wishes to employ.
See Exhibit J.
F. Other Charter Violations
Those filing the complaints asserted that at different times, factually, Martinez gave them direct
orders (or what they interpreted as orders) and violated §3.09 of the City Charter. Specifically, Martinez:
1. Ordered Melland to create a matrix and collect documents which did not exist in
the City records. Such was outside the scope of the City Council directive for
extended notice;

2. Instructed Crystal Caldera to perform certain tasks regarding AV Equipment when
Martinez was complaining about BARCOM as the IT support. This stems from an
audio problem and apparent skype failure at a council meeting. Various emails
indicate Martinez was attempting to get involved on the ground-level and giving
direction directly to City staff. In an email dated October 29, 2018, City Manager
Kuenstler requested he not give direction to City staff. Please find attached as
Exhibit K, email from Kuenstler to Martinez. Martinez stated that BARCOM had
not done the proper tests and that he was trying to be helpful by inquiring into the
tests;
3. Intentionally undercutting police authority in front of the public in order to disrupt

policy operations when wanding individuals entering City Hall for meetings; and
4. Intentionally undercutting Melland’s authority in public in order to disrupt the

Community Development Department, at an operational level.
It is up to the City Council if it wishes to hold a §3.12 hearing for any of these factually asserted
violations. Again, Martinez denies any of his communications were intended to be orders or directives.
Her asserted his actions are those of policy.
G. Active Cooperation by City Manager and Mayor
You received all complaints by the complaining individuals because of your position as City
Manager. No procedures exist for Rodriguez to file a complaint for a Charter violation. So, submission to
the City Manager is not unreasonable. However, the policies and procedures applicable to employees
cannot be enforced against Rodriguez.
All employees submitted complaints pursuant to adopted City policies. The City Manager is
charged with promulgating all policies and procedures pertaining to the administration of personnel not
otherwise set by ordinance. See Leon Valley Code of Ordinances §1.05.032(4). Please find attached as
Exhibit L, all relevant ordinances and adopted procedures for this report. The City Manager adopted
procedures for submitting complaints under policy A5. See Exhibit L. The HR policy specifically charges
the City Manager with the responsibility for “[a]ppointing an investigating Officer when a claim is
generated.” See Exhibit L, A5 Section (C)(3). This is a mandatory requirement. The policy also states that
if a harassment complaint is filed against the City Manager or any member of the City Council, the Mayor
must be provided a copy of the “report.” See Exhibit L, A5 Section (D)(2).
You appointed this office as the investigating officer. However, from that point forward, this office
took the lead in all investigation efforts. The City Manager’s office was not involved, except for
responding to general City organizational questions and submitting documents requested. You were
cooperative and provided all information requested. However, we must note, you did not direct this

L.EeN-i»<t I EY
DEEP ROOTS. BIG IDEAS.
GRIEVANCE: HARASSMENT/HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT

STATEMENT OF GRIEVANCE:
On several occasions during City Council meetings, and Town Hall meetings I have had to
endure Councilman Benny Martmez argµing the raw with me when I have attempted to
provide legal counsel on the dais. He raises ms voice and P.Ounds his fists on the table as if
to bully ancl intimidate me into submission. His manner is hostile and seems to have some
sort ofaversion to me personally. I have not ever disrespected him personally or as a
councilman yet he seems constantly irritated and annoyed by anvthing I say as the City
Attorney. He greets everyone else but me in a civil manner and aoes not acknowled_ge my
presence. As an African American female, it makes me feel singled out and isolated:
As the City Attorney? I expect to be treated with respect as a professional. I also expect that
my legal opinions, aavice and counsel are of value. Councilman Martinez not only does not
resP.ect me on a personal level, he also does not respect me on a professional level. In fact,
he cioes not seem to have any respect for the rule of law. He is especially hostile and
demanding when my legal opinions negatively affect citizens witfi whom he has a _personal
relationship. In these instances, he has a total ctisregard for the law and demands tfiat the
City not enforce the law against certain citizens. Again, showing a total disregard for the
law and my legal advice.
He has gone behind my back to the Texas Municipal League for legal advice in order to try
to use my legal advice against me on the dais. However, because lie has no legal
background to make a le~al analysis or argument, he usually fails at his attempt. He
constantly tries to provide legal advice ano quote laws on tlie dais in an antagonistic manner
tq~ard me. H~ has also tri~d, a_gainst_ my legal advice, to provide legal advice to certain
citizens appearmg before City Council.
I constantly feel stressed intimidated and bullied on the dais by: Councilman Martinez and
in order to do my job effectively as the City Attorney_for Leon Valley, I must be able to do
my duties in a hostile free worlcplace, this mcludes all meetings held by City Council.
I do not have a problem with Council members guestioning my legal opinions or even
obtaining second opinions when they do not understand ornave a aifferent idea when it
comes to the law, out to be constantly harassed and intentionally undermined during Citr.
Council and other meetings by a City Councilman who renders me ineffective in the pu6lic
eye is embarrassing and intimidating. I need the citizens of Leon Valley to trust that 1 am a
professional who nas been practicing municipal law for 25 years. That I have never
rendered any legal advice adverse to the interests of the city. That I am more than
competent in IDY. field, and that I only act in the best interest of the City of Leon Valley.
However, Mr. Martinez seems to be trying to ruin the reputation that Inave built up all of
these years as a government lawyer.
SETTLEMENT DESIRED:
I desire him to be removed from his seat on City Council and at the very least, publicly
~ haTior
- ~
ue se re enc
City Attorney
/d--/~/?
Date
EXHIBIT A
TO FACT REPORT
LaJN"\,,41 l EV
DEEP ROOTS. BIG IDEAS.
HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT/HARASSMENT
STATEMENT OF EMPLOYEE' S GRIEVANCE:

On December 11 , 2018 durin_g the Zoning Commission Meeting in the Leon Valley City
Council Chambers, at 6400 EI Verde Road, Leon ValleyJexas 78238 at approximately
7:18 P..m., seated next to board com.missioner, Larry Promtt on the dais, I was about to turn
my micrQPhone on to make a point of order to the Chairman about the amount of time the
speaker, Paul Fletcher, was at podium. Before I could proceed, Mr. Proffitt stopped me and
told me to " let him speak" in a very llf.Uff manner. Rather than make a scene on the dais, I
got up to approach tlie Chairman to advise him on the time and how to handle the situation.
r adV1sed the Chairman that I did not want to set a precedent with the amount oftime Mr.
Fletcher was at the podium. I let the Chairman know that other speakers may desire to take
the same amount of time. The Chair advised me that he wanted to give him thirty minutes
to speak, since that is how long he had been given in the past. I advised the Chau to put it
on the record that the time given Mr. Fletcher was a special exception. The Chairman then
Q_Ut it on the record. How long the speaker at the podium speaks is at the discretion of the
Chairman. I merely advise the Chair, to make sure the proceedings are managed in an
orderly and fair manner.
Upon returning to my chair on the dais, I whispered to Mr. Proffitt to allow me to do my
job. He then slowly turned to me beat red witfl rage and said to me, "You don't belong up
here. You don't belong on the dais. We are the commissioners, and you don't belong
here." !_proceeded to tell him that I am the City Attorney, and under state law and the Leon
Valley Code of Ordinances, I am the attorney for the Zonmg Com.mission, and I certainly
do belong on the dais. He told me/'You have no authority and you need to stop trying to
take over." At this point, I waved nim off, because again,l did not want to mal<.e a scene on
the dais arguing with him.
As an African American female, I was horrendously offended by his suggestion that I don' t
belong,, and with the amount of rage, hostility and aggression he displayeo, I felt bullied and
intirrnaated. I have to be able to cfo my job as the City Attorney in a hostile free work
environment, including providing legal counsel to City Council and its respective
committees that I have oeen statutonly appointed to counsel and advise.
When the Chairman called intermission of the meeting, Mr. Proffitt did apologize.
However, the damage had already been done.
SETTLEMENT DESIRED:
I desire him to be removed from his seat on the Zoning Commission and at the very least,
publicly censured for his behavior.
~~
esereerfck
City Attorney
/f-/!-Jtf
Date
December 20, 2018
RE: Grievance of Actions by City Councilor Benny Martinez
Dear Ms. Kuenstler,

Please accept this letter as a formal grievance against City of Leon Valley City Councilor Benny Martinez.
My grievance is based on events that occurred between Councilor Martinez and myself on three
separate occasions; 1) at a meeting at City Hall on November 7, 2018, that included other City Staff
regarding a zoning matter; 2) at the November 20, 2018 City Council meeting; and 3) at the December
18, 2018, City Council meeting. These events are described in more detail in the following paragraphs.
Taken on its own, I consider Councilor Martinez’s behavior toward me on December 18th, to be hostile
and unethical. When considered with the events of November 7th and November 20th; I consider his
behavior toward me on December 18th to be retaliatory. Additionally, Councilor Martinez’s behavior
toward me on both November 7th, November 20th, and December 18th, has left me concerned about
future interactions with him in a public setting.
November 7th, 2018 Meeting:

The purpose of this meeting with Councilor Martinez was to discuss a recent zoning disagreement
between myself and a Mr. Bobby Anderson, a local property manager, that involved a potential
tenant of Mr. Anderson’s – an animal cage assembler named George Morehouse. Also, attending
was Mayor Riley, Mayor Pro-Tem Alcocer, City Manager Kuenstler, Police Chief Salvagio, and
Assistant Community Development Director Antu. Councilor Martinez brought Mr. Morehouse’s
animal cages with him for presentation, which I thought was unusual. At the meeting, Councilor
Martinez accused me of not telling Mr. Anderson and Mr. Morehouse, upon first visit to my office
on October 16th, 2018, that they would need a Specific Use Permit to legally conduct the assembly
use. Councilor Martinez also stated that Mr. Anderson and Mr. Morehouse told him that “I will tell
them one thing and then another.” I informed Councilor Martinez that I had told Mr. Anderson and
Mr. Morehouse on October 16th, 2018 that they might need an SUP, but that I would need to
research the matter and get back with them - which I did on October 23rd.
November 20th, 2018 City Council Meeting:

During public discussion at this meeting regarding unrelated zoning code amendments, Councilor
Martinez expressed concern that zoning applicants were not being informed of procedural
requirements upon first visit to the Community Development office. The statement was not
specifically on topic and the City Attorney asked Councilor Martinez if he was referring to a specific
incident. He did not state a specific incident however. I was disturbed by this comment, as he was
specifically restating in public, a previous accusation.
December 18th, 2018 City Council Meeting:

At this meeting, during my presentation regarding public noticing for a separate zoning matter,
Councilor Martinez scoffed and leaned and whispered something to Mayor Pro-Tem Alcocer. I
found this action to be an attempt to intimidate me. The gesture distracted me and caused me to
lose focus in my presentation. Also during my presentation, Councilor Martinez exchanged a small
piece of paper with Mayor Pro-Tem Alcocer, under the level of the top of the dias. This action
further distracted me during my presentation. Upon concluding my presentation, discussion at the
Dias began.
When it was Councilor Martinez’s turn to speak, he stated that my “oration was all over the place”
and that “I say one thing and then another.” When taken in the context of Councilor Martinez’s
previous behavior that evening, I felt this statement to be hostile and an attempt to bully me. When
taken in the context of the November 7th meeting, I found this statement to be retaliatory, as he was
again specifically restating in public, a previous accusation.
Also during discussion regarding this zoning item, Councilor Martinez requested in a hostile and
interrogatory manner that I answer a “yes or no” question. I was disturbed by this hostility, both
personally, and with regard to the image of the City that was being portrayed to the public; as I have
recently had two separate local business owners tell me that they don’t know why I am treated the
way that I am at City Council meetings.
Finally, during subsequent discussion regarding this zoning item, during which I was clarifying legal
requirements of the zoning code regarding calculating opposition to zoning requests, Councilor
Martinez argued with my opinion of the code in a hostile manner, and stated that “we are the City
Council and we have the authority to do whatever we want.” I find this statement to be unethical
and to be a public statement of disregard for the laws and procedures of the City of Leon Valley.
Based on this statement and the concerns generally described in this letter, I also have concerns of
additional hostile and retaliatory actions by Councilor Martinez regarding my intent to continue
implementing the laws and procedures of the City of Leon Valley.
Thank you in advance for your attention and investigation into this matter and please let me know if you
have any questions.
Respectfully,
Brandon Melland
From: Yvonne Acuna
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2019 2:59 PM
To: Kelly Kuenstler
Subject: Council Member Martinez
Good afternoon Ms. Kuenstler,
Per our phone conversation earlier regarding Council Member Martinez, I have personally experienced
an inordinate amount of attention given to my chest area on two separate occasions. When speaking
with Council Member Martinez in person, his eyes are focused solely on my chest area and not my face.
The first time this happened, I believe Mr. Martinez was trying to look down my shirt as his head
continually rotated back and forth with his gaze on my chest/shirt area. I do not wear low cut blouses or
shirts, so his trying to look down my shirt was obvious and disgusted me.
If I can provide additional information, please let me know.
Yvonne Acuna
EXHIBIT B
TO FACT REPORT
Answer to complaint from Catherine R. Rodriguez.
Catherine Rodriguez has exhibited a standoff and rude appearance toward
me since she got elected. I called her to congratulate her on winning the
election and asked if we could meet for lunch to discuss the city. She never
acknowledged my call. I have always been respectful to her and several
months later when we were at an event, I suggested we should meet to
discuss the city. She agreed but this never happened.
On October 2, 2018, while council was participating in National Night

Out events, the individual in question made explicit inappropriate
comments to me. While at one of our initial stops (Tail Waggers), the
owner was giving myself and City Manager Kuenstler a tour of the
facility. While Ms. Kuenstler was playing with a dog to be adopted,
Councilor Martinez appeared behind me (as we stood next to one of
the kennels and a wash tub) and motioned to the was tub area and
proceeded to ask me "if I cared to take a bath".
I have no recollection of this incident. The only comment I can foresee is this
establishment is a well designed facility. I possibly made a statement about
the dog washing facility, but never inferred that I wanted to take a bath with
her.
On November 20, 2018, prior to the City Council meeting, I was
trying to make my way to the dais, when Council Martinez and another
individual were in the path of where I was walking. As I tried to move
past, I shook the individual's hand and Mr. Martinez's hand when Mr.
Martinez grabbed my hand and began stroking it. He commented "your
hands are so much warmer this time than the last time"
I remember this event. I did shake her hand. I made a comment about her
hand. We had a brief discussion where she stated that her hands were
normally cold. How could someone take offense to shaking hands?
On December 3, 2018, while participating in the Tree Lighting event at
Veterans Park, we were asked to get together as a council for a picture
with Santa. We took several pictures with Santa that were taken by
both city employees and citizens. During the initial pictures that were
taken, Mr. Martinez was standing beside me as I stood to the right of
Santa. In between the first and second picture I felt Mr. Martinez get
inordinately close to my backside.
EXHIBIT C
TO FACT REPORT
I feel I did not wrong in taking this picture. There were no sexual
connotations made. If there were any sexual connotations made it was
purely on Catherine Rodrigues side and not mine. If you look Councilor
Alcocer is standing next to Santa Clause. David Edwards is standing behind
me. I was just standing like most group pictures where the photographer
says, "move together", so I can get everyone in the picture.
If Councilor Rodrigues has an issue with me, she should have informed me
not to talk with or be around her. She has failed to do this.
My wife attends most City Council meetings and events. I do not have any
attraction to or be around her.
The following are my responses to allegations made
against me by Denise Frederick.
This excerpt is from Denise Frederick complaint
GRIEVANCE: HARASSMENT/HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT
STATEMENT OF GRIEVANCE:
On several occasions during City Council meetings. and Town Hall meetings
I have had to endure Councilman Benny Martmez arguing the law with me
when I have attempted to provide legal counsel on the dais.
On three separate occasions Denise has "shut me down" when I am in
debate. She has told me that I cannot say something. After the City
Council meeting ended she has come up to me and apologized stating she
was wrong in cutting me off. Make a statement in public putting me down
and privately apologizing.
We held an illegal City Council workshop. When the work shop was
convened, I asked the mayor for the floor. I stated that this was an illegal
meeting according to the Texas Open Meeting Act. Denise Fredericks
challenged and argued with me. I stated according to the "Open Meeting
Act" that if a city has a web site notification of a meeting had to be posted at
City Hall and on the cities web site.
§ 551.056. Additional Posting Requirements for Certain
Municipalities, Counties, School Districts, Junior College
Districts, Development Corporations, Authorities, and Joint
Boards
Section 551.056 requires certain governmental bodies and economic
development corporations to post notice on their Internet websites, in
addition to other postings required by the Act. This provision applies to
the following entities, if the entity maintains an Internet website or has
a website maintained for it:
(1) a municipality;
A few months later after a City Council meeting while walking in the parking
lot, Denise apologized to me stating that I was right about the illegal
meeting. Her comment was what are you going to do about it File suit.
During a special City Council meeting to discuss Olen Yarnel,, Chairman of
the Zoning Commission, After the Mayor convened the meeting I asked for
the floor. I stated a fact: Mr. Yarnel you have the right to have this matter
EXHIBIT D
TO FACT REPORT
discussed in open session. Denise jumped in stating "you cannot say that,
you're giving legal advise". We argued for several minutes on the dias and
continued into executive session. We agreed to disagree. I asked the TMI
attorneys about this and at the next TMI conference. Additionally, asked the
question at the legal Q&A session. I was informed as long as I quoted FACT,
I was not giving legal advise.
Denise Frederick routinely gets involved in City Council debate. She acts like
she is the 6 th Council member. Please review any city council meeting to
determine the facts on this matter. Prior to Denise, the City Attorney would
remain quiet and not interrupt debate unless someone asked for a legal
opinion.
He greets everyone else but me in a civil manner and aoes not

acknowled ge my presence. As an African American female, it makes me
feel singled out and isolated:
I take great offense that Denise Frederick is insinuating that I am racist. At
every City Council meeting I routinely greet attendees, shake their hand and
welcome them to the meeting. I do acknowledge her presence and say "HI".
I read the City Council packet and if I have questions, I do my research.
Denise does not like it that I research the issue and/or state findings from
other cities. I feel that Denise provides justification to back staff's
recommendation only. She does not provide the City Council the full facts
so we can make an informed decision. I am not a staff "rubber stamp".
It is my understanding that Denise prior position was with the City of San
Antonio as a lawyer in Economic Development. She has not been a
municipal attorney and is learning on the job.
Additionally, I believe my actions and comments with regard to Denise
Frederick are protected by Legislative Privilege. Re: Perry, 60 S.W. 3d 857
(2001) Quoted below:
II. Discussion
[1] Texas and federal courts have recognized that individuals acting in a
legislative capacity are immune from liability for those actions. See, e.g.,
Bogan v. Scott-Harris, 523 U.S. 44, 46, 118 S.Ct. 966, 140 L.Ed.2d 79
(1998); Camacho v. Samaniego, 954 S.W.2d 811, 823-24 (Tex.App.-EI
Paso 1997, pet. denied). The legislative immunity doctrine is deeply
embedded in Anglo American law, serving to encourage free and open
debate. See Bogan, 523 U.S. at 52, 118 S.Ct. 966. The doctrine is not
intended to protect individual legislators, but instead serves the public's
interests. Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U.S. 367, 373-74, 71 S.Ct. 783, 95
L.Ed. 1019 (1951). The United States Supreme Court has articulated the
critical concerns that underlie the doctrine:
[T]he threats of liability can create perverse incentives that operate to
inhibit officials in the proper performance of their duties. In many
contexts, government officials are expected to make
decisions that are impartial or imaginative; and that above all are
informed by considerations other than the personal interests of the
decisionmaker. Because government officials are engaged by definition
in governing, their decisions will often have adverse effects on other
persons. When officials are threatened with personal liability for acts
taken pursuant to their official duties, they may well be induced to act
with an excess of caution or otherwise to skew their decisions in ways
that result in less than full fidelity to the objective and independent
criteria that ought to guide their conduct.
Forrester v. White, 484 U.S. 219, 223, 108 S. Ct. 538, 98 L.Ed.2d 555
(1988) (emphasis in original)
Brandon Melland RE: Grievance of Actions by City
Councilor Benny Martinez
First and foremost, Brandon Melland is a city employee and as the Director
of Community Affairs, needs to answer questions faithfully and correct.
Brandon like to evade the question and talk in circles.
Part of being a City Council member is constituent services.
I received a call from Bobby Anderson, Property manager of the business
center behind HEB on Bandera. I met with Mr. Morehouse. He told me he
was upset with the city and Brandon. He claims Brandon did not tell him
initially that he needed a SUP. Mr Morehouse filled out the forms, returned
to city hall to drop off the forms. Brandon accepted his application and
scheduled the 3 inspections. After the inspections were completed
successfully, he returned to city hall to pick up his COA. He was informed at
this time he needed a SUP. Brandon is the professional. He has the zoning
matrix and should have looked the requirements informing him he needed a
SUP during the first meeting. I believe when a person wishes to start a
business in Leon Valley, someone from Community Development needs to
spend a few minutes to discuss the process. Ask questions and inform the
applicant of the proper procedure and the requirements necessary. When a
person brings the forms filled out, someone should spend a few minutes to
review the application for "red flags" or missing information. I believe this is
being business friendly.
I scheduled a meeting with the City Manager and the Mayor to discuss an
upset constituent. The story Brandon told and what Mr. Morehouse told me
were completely different.
November 20th, 2018 City Council Meeting: During public discussion at this
meeting regarding unrelated zoning code amendments, Councilor Martinez
expressed concern that zoning applicants were not being informed of
procedural requirements upon first visit to the Community Development
office. The statement was not specifically on topic and the City Attorney
asked Councilor Martinez if he was referring to a specific incident. He did
not state a specific incident however. I was disturbed by this comment, as
he was specifically restating in public, a previous accusation.
EXHIBIT E
TO FACT REPORT
Open and transparent government should prevail here. Brandon was
disturbed by the truth coming out. This is another example of the City
Attorney injecting herself in council debate.
December 18th, 2018 City Council Meeting: At this meeting, during my
presentation regarding public noticing for a separate zoning matter,
Councilor Martinez scoffed and leaned and whispered something to Mayor
Pro-Tem Alcocer. I found this action to be an attempt to intimidate me. The
gesture distracted me and caused me to lose focus in my presentation. Also
during my presentation, Councilor Martinez exchanged a small piece of
paper with Mayor Pro-Tem Alcocer, under the level of the top of the dias.
This action further distracted me during my presentation. Upon concluding
my presentation, discussion at the Dias began.
First and foremost, Councilor Alcocer whispered to me. The subject was
Brandon wishing to radically change the Board of Adjustment. She also
passed me a not requesting I be her second to have the issue come up at a
future City Council meeting.
When it was Councilor Martinez;s turn to speak, he stated that my "oration
was all over the place" and that 11/ say one thing and then another. ✓,
Brandon will speak in circles and often repeats himself. Sometimes it is hard
to follow his statements.
Also during discussion regarding this zoning item, Councilor
Martinez requested in a hostile and interrogatory manner that I
answer a "yes or no" question.
I expect staff to answer questions truthfully. When asked a question,
Brandon did not want to answer, he talked but did not answer the question.
I restated my question and he continued to dodge the answer. Finally, I
asked him "yes or no" At this time he had to truthfully answer the question.
This is another example of staff only telling City Council items to support
their recommendations and not presenting the full facts. I believe staff
should present truthful facts and answer. If Staff obfuscates City Councils
questions and refuses to answer, this should construe a punishable action.
Finally, during subsequent discussion regarding this zoning item,
during which I was clarifying legal requirements of the zoning code
regarding calculating opposition to zoning requests, Councilor
Martinez argued with my opinion of the code in a hostile manner,
and stated that "we are the City Council and we have the authority
to do whatever we want."
Discussion was in regard to St John Baptist Church, During the public
hearing, citizens wanted an expanded notification area. The requirements
are notifications will be sent to residents and business within 200 feet of the
subject property. We had discussion about extending the requirement.
Brandon kept stating we could only consider residents within the 200-foot
radius. I made a statement "We are City Council and if we wish to have an
expanded notification area we could". We ended up expanding the
notification area greater than the 200 feet. In the next City Council meeting
Brandon failed to report the findings of the expanded area and only reported
the results for the 200-foot radius. I asked Brandon what the percentages
were from our expanded area and he refused to answer. I believe his actions
are contrary to City Council wishes and staff does not have to pay attention
to Council wishes. In previous zoning issues where citizens requested an
expanded notification area we have done this. We have a precedent on this
issue. This is another example of staff trying to control City Council. Again
Brandon Melland actions clearly defy City Council wishes and he should be
repremended for his actions.
Additionally, I believe my actions and comments with regard to Brandon
Melland are protected by Legislative Privilege. Re: Perry, 60 S.W. 3d 857
(2001) See quote listed in answer to Denise Frederick's complaint.
Answer to Azar complaint.
The only exception was Counselor Benny Martinez, I was following

orders to be where I was at (checking everyone who entered the
building). There were signs on the windows when you first come into
the building explaining you were not allowed to bring in a weapon.
Counselor Benny Martinez walked in demanding to remove the signs
off window and then was upset that he had to get checked with a
wand.
Counselor Benny Martinez made my job difficult and unpleasant to
deal with every time.
It to be a hostile work environment from a City Council Member to
towards a city employee.
Counselor Martinez made me feel uncomfortable every time I saw him
because of how he felt about getting wand. Counselor Martinez made
my job difficult, due to do the action taken by Martinez and the
unwanted verbal tone and due to him not wanting us wand him.
First and foremost, I believe I have my first amendment right to question
and comment on any item.
I believe City Council is responsible for Policy. Staff should not be in the
position to make policy decisions. If there is a valid reason to have increased
police protection for an event I do not have a problem with it. If Staff
decides without City Council approval, then enhanced security should stop.
In the Februsry 5, 2019 City Council meeting the subject was brought up. I
made a statement stating that "I do not have an issue with increased
security at City Council meetings. What I object to is staff making a policy
decision". If the Chief of Police wanted increased security, he should have
requested this item placed on the City Council agenda in May.
City Council is charged with making policy not Staff. Every City Council
member should be concerned when staff attempts to do our elected jobs.
Police obtain their police powers from the citizens. If officer Azar cannot
take criticism, possibly she is the wrong job.
EXHIBIT F
TO FACT REPORT
Answer to Jorge C. Breton Complaint
On 07/29/2017 at 11:55 hours, while attending a family

disturbance/aggravated assault with a gun
(6303 Rue Sophie, LVPD case# 201706324) and a suspect barricading
in his residence, Officer J. Vasquez (552) and I were wearing tactical
gear and tactical weapons (AR-15 duty rifle) standing by at secured
point (across the street from the suspect's house). While watching the
suspect's residence, Officer Vasquez and I observed a male subject
walking by the front yard of the suspect's house. Due to the situation,
we believed subject came from the suspect's residence. We
commanded male subject to show his hands on the air. Subject
stopped walking, looked at us and then turned around and walking
away disregarding our commands. Repeatedly me and Officer Vasquez
were commanding subject to show his hands while we were
approaching him, with negative response from subject. Officer Bell
who was on the west side of suspect's residence, noticed the situation
and started walking towards subject. Subject was reluctant at all times
in show his hands. Subject attempted to leave the area. Officer Bell
stopped subject at gun point. Subject stopped. Officer Vasquez and
carefully approached subject and Officer Bell. Subject was commanded
to go to the ground, subject refused. Subject was assisted to the
ground and handcuffed placing handcuffs behind his back. Subject
stated: "I am Benny Martinez, city's council member!" After positive
identification as Leon Valley council member, Martinez was released at
location under corporal Guerra's approval.
This incident shows the failure of our police department to contain an
incident. I later learned that a fire truck and ambulance were staged at a
nearby shopping center. I feel that the fire truck could have come down
hansome lane, turn on Red Jacket and stop down the block form the
incident. This would have set up a proper perimeter,
Below is a copy of my answer provided to Leon Valley police. Pictures are a
result of the excessive use of force by police. The diagram is a view of the
scene as provided to police.
EXHIBIT G
TO FACT REPORT
From: Yvonne Acuna Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2019 2:59 PM
To: Kelly Kuenstler Subject: Council Member Martinez
Good afternoon Ms. Kuenstler,
Per our phone conversation earlier regarding Council Member Martinez,
I have personally experienced an inordinate amount of attention given
to my chest area on two separate occasions. When speaking with
Council Member Martinez in person, his eyes are focused solely on my
chest area and not my face.
The first time this happened, I believe Mr. Martinez was trying to look
down my shirt as his head continually rotated back and forth with his
gaze on my chest/shirt area. I do not wear low cut blouses or shirts,
so his trying to look down my shirt was obvious and disgusted me.
This complaint strength my contention that Kelly Kuenstler is behind all
these complaints. I believe Kelly Kuenstler contacted staff looking for
anything that could be used against me. The first line in Mrs. Acuna
statement backs my befiefs.
About 2 years ago after we raised water rates, we had a lot of residents
complaining. As a City Council member who values constituent service, I
requested a meeting to review water bills. Mrs. Acuna met with me in the
conference room. We were sitting where we could both see each water bill
and compare current bills with year old bills. I had to look at her to discuss
the water bills but did not look or steer at her chest. Last Christmas I went
to public works to judge their decorated door. Yvonne showed me the door
and went back to her desk. Upon leaving I stopped in the hallway and had a
brief talk with her. She was at her desk across the room from the hallway.
This was my last encounter with her.
EXHIBIT H
TO FACT REPORT
2/6/2019 AT&T Yahoo Mail- Re: Tonight's Meeting
Re: Tonight's Meeting
From: Larry Proffitt (larry.proffitt@att.net)
To: k.kuenstler@leonvalleytexas.gov
Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019, 4:50 PM CST
Good Afternoon,
I appreciate your responses and time spent trying to help me.
I regret that I may not have known about the Chairman's request. As far as I am concerned, the dais
issue has now been addressed. I respectfully agree to disagree with the Chairman's decision.
I do not intend to file any complaint against any LV city employee, even though I have not been afforded
the same consideration. I prefer you not forward my correspondence to Mr. Henry at this time. He and I
have talked about what I have shared with you, and he has asked me to share the correspondence with
him at the time of my interview. I would like to honor that request.
I always ask to speak to you being respectful of your time and as a responsible citizen. I was never
taught to do anything else. Honestly, I feel like I did when Manny Longoria, Art Reyna, and Art's "Tres
Amigos" were coming to power. What we have now can easily slip away, as it did then, through an
increasing disregard for our committees and residents.
I'll close with: "When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and Jove has
always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the
end they always fall, always. " -- Mahatma Gandhi
With hope,
Larry Proffitt
On Tuesday, February 5, 2019, 2:58:15 PM CST, Kelly Kuenstler <k.kuenstler@leonvalleytexas.gov> wrote:
Good Afternoon Mr. Proffitt,
By state law, the City Attorney is the attorney for the Zoning Commission. Until the Chairman asks that she be
removed from dais, that is where she will remain. This is not my decision but the Chair's. Per your telephone call
last week, you did not feel that the city attorney had any place at the dais. I'm assuming that this concern has now
been addressed via Chairman Smith's e mail?
Would you like me to consider the remainder of your comments below as a formal complaint against the city
attorney? If so, please advise. When you called to complain about her and the city last week, I asked that you put
your complaints in writing. Is this what you are attempting to do below? I am asking so that I may have your
permission to forward to the investigator. Please advise.
EXHIBIT I
TO FACT REPORT 1/5
2/6/2019 AT&T Yahoo Mail - Re: Tonight's Meeting
I did not realize that December 11th was Peggy's first birthday since her death. My favorite thing about Peggy (other
than her calm demeanor) was when she smiled, her eyes squinted so cute! Fond memories.
Respectfully,
Kelly
Kelly Kuenstler, MPA
Leon Valley City Manager
6400 El Verde Road
Leon Valley, TX 78238
(210) 684-1391 ext. 219
From: Larry Proffitt [mailto:larry.proffitt@att.net]

Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 12:56 PM
To: Kelly Kuenstler
Subject: Re: Tonight's Meeting
Dear City Manager,
Thanks for affirming that the City Attorney cannot be seated on the dais without permission of the chairman. It is
certainly not "by right," nor by "state law or the Leon Valley Code of Ordinances," as stated in the complaint. Even
though the chairman may have invited her to be at a meeting to help resolve the "institutions" issue, this does not
guarantee her a seat on the dais in perpetuity.
My experience is that the City Attorney has become progressively more condescending, unnecessarily
authoritative, intimidating, and rude to City Council members and Zoning Commissioners that disagree with her. In
my opinion, her increasingly aggressive behavior stems from some imaginary power granted her by the Home
Rule Charter.
Or, it could be pressure as the result of dealing with existing lawsuits against the city, threats against staff from the
"1st Amendment" crowd, fear of NEW lawsuits, or cognitive dissonance issues with her job. I don't know. I like
her as a person, and I would never knowingly disrespect her. I just feel for some reason(s) her behavior has
become incongruent with her normally agreeable nature and her attitude is becoming problematic. As always, I
will continue to do the best I can to help the city I've lived in for 41 years.
2/5
BlW, the 11th of December 2018 was the celebration of my wife's first birthday since here death. I may have
been a little off my game that night.
Respectfully,
Larry Proffitt
From: David T. Smith [mailto:dts234@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2019 4:18 PM
To: Kelly Kuenstler; Mayor Riley; Denise Frederick; Brandon Melland

All
For a bit on context I asked the City Attorney to attend a Zoning meeting when we were getting into the thick of it
with the zoning requests pertaining to institutional uses.
After that I asked her to attend the meetings moving forward and she agreed.
If any member of the zoning commission, city council, or public at large has any objection to her being there I
invite them to come speak to me directly or come speak at a zoning meeting. I am always happy to discuss the
pro's and con's of any action taken by myself or the zoning commission
Cheers.
David
On Monday, February 4, 2019, 4:12:11 PM CST, Kelly Kuenstler <k.kuenstler@leonvalleytexas.gov> wrote:
Thank you sir - just making certain. One of your members stated that she "did not belong there" so I wanted to
verify that you as the Chairperson still wanted her there.
Appreciate your input.
Kelly
6400 El Verde Road
3/5
(210) 684-1391 ext. 219
The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be
reviewed only by the City Council. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative
of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email
and its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this
email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your
system. The City asks all City Council Members in receipt of this message, please do not reply all or
include all the City Council members in an email, this is to protect you from violating the Open Meetings
Act. If you get a request for the information included in this e-mail please forward the request to the City
Secretary to ensure full compliance with the Public Information Act.
From: David T. Smith [mailto:dts234@yahoo.com)

To: Brandon Melland; Mayor Riley; Denise Frederick; Kelly Kuenstler
Yes
Denise is a very helpful resource to us and would like her to continue to be there.
David
On Monday, February 4, 2019, 3:50:08 PM CST, Kelly Kuenstler <k.kuenstler@leonvalleytexas.gov> wrote:
Thank you for letting us know Mr. Smith. Question - do you still want the City Attorney to sit at the dais during the
Zoning Commission meetings (when she attends}? Please advise.
Many thanks,
4/5
Respectfully,
Kelly
6400 El Verde Road
(210) 684-1391 ext. 219
From: David T. Smith [mailto:dts234@yahoo.com]

To: Brandon Melland; Kelly Kuenstler; Mayor Riley; Denise Frederick
Subject: Tonight's Meeting
Afternoon all
I am very sorry for the short notice but I am going to have to work late tonight and it appears I will not make the
workshop.
Mayor perhaps you and I can get together separately and discuss any concerns regarding zoning that you may
have.
Brandon I will call you later
5/5
performance of official duties shall be determined by the City Council.
Section 3.06 Mayor
A. The Mayor shall be the presiding officer of the City Council and shall be
recognized as the head of the City government for all ceremonial purposes, for
emergency management purposes, and by the governor for purposes of military
law.
B. The Mayor may debate and discuss any matters before the City Council and shall
only vote in the event of a tie.
Section 3.07 Mayor Pro-Tem
A. The Mayor Pro-Tem shall be a Council Member elected by the City Council at the
first regular City Council meeting following each regular City election.
B. The Mayor Pro-Tem shall act as Mayor during the absence or disability of the
Mayor and when acting as Mayor, retain their right to vote as a Council Member.
Section 3.08 Vacancies; Forfeiture of Office; Filling of Vacancies
A. Vacancies. The Office of a Council Member or Office of the Mayor shall become
vacant upon death, resignation, removal from office by recall, or forfeiture of
his/her office.
B. Forfeiture of Office. A Council Member or the Mayor shall forfeit his/her office
if he/she:
1. Fails to maintain at any time during the term of office any qualification for
the office prescribed by this Charter or by law;
2. Is convicted of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude, a violation of

any state laws regulating conflicts of interest of municipal officers, a
felony, or is assessed a deferred adjudication or probation for a felony or
any state laws regulating conflicts of interest of municipal officers;
3. Fails to regularly attend City Council meetings without an approved

absence obtained by the Mayor either before or after the absence. There
shall be a presumption of failure to regularly attend when three (3) regular
meetings are missed during a term year without obtaining an approved
Page 4
EXHIBIT J
TO FACT REPORT
absence from the Mayor.
4. If a member of City Council violates any provision of this section and

does not immediately resign, the City Council may conduct an
investigation and hearing pursuant to Section 3.12 of this Charter to
determine if the office holder is in violation of this section. The hearing
shall be held within 60 days of the City Council, as a body, learning of the
alleged forfeiture.
C. Filling of Vacancies. All vacancies with unexpired terms of more than 12 month
shall be filled by special election pursuant to State law. All vacancies with
unexpired terms of 12 months or less may be filled, at the discretion of City
Council, by appointment of the City Council upon a majority vote, may be left
vacant for the remainder of the unexpired term or filled by a special election
pursuant to state law.
Section 3.09 Prohibitions
A. No member of City Council shall accept or admit liability or pay any claim for
damages asserted against the City. City Council shall not accept or admit liability
without first obtaining a written opinion from the City Attorney regarding the
City's liability therein and only then upon a majority vote of the City Council.
B. No member of City Council shall be employed in or appointed to the positions of

City Manager, City Attorney, or Department Head until three (3) years after the
expiration of the term for which he/she was elected to the City Council and for
any other compensated City position until one (1) year after the expiration of the
term for which he/she was elected to the City Council unless approved by the City
Council. This subsection shall not apply to a volunteer who receives a stipend
that is the same as the stipend received by other similarly situated volunteers.
C. Except for the purpose of inquiries and investigations, unless otherwise provided
in this Charter, the City Council as a whole and its individual members shall deal
with City officers and employees who are subject to the direction and supervision
of the City Manager solely through the City Manager, and neither the City
Council nor its individual members shall give orders to any such officer or
employee, either publicly or privately.
D. Neither the City Council nor any of its members shall dictate to the City Manager
the appointment of any person to office or employment. No member of City
Page 5
Council shall interfere with the City Manager in the performance of the duties of
that office or prevent the City Manager from exercising the City Manager’s own
judgment in the appointment of officers and employees whose employment,
appointment, and supervision are reserved by this Charter for the City Manager.
Except for the purpose of inquiry and investigations, the City Council and its
members shall deal with the City Staff solely through the City Manager, and
neither the City Council, as a body or any individual member, nor any individual
not having administrative or executive functions under this Charter shall give
orders to any of the subordinates of the City Manager, either publicly or privately.
E. It shall be unlawful for the Mayor or a Council Member to release any attorney-
client privileged communication. The City Council as the governing body of the
City solely holds and is entitled to the attorney client-privilege and it may only be
waived by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the City Council.
Section 3.10 Meetings; Agendas; Procedures
A. A member of City Council may place an item on an agenda by agreement of one

additional member of City Council. The member of City Council desiring to
place an item on an agenda shall submit in writing the request to place the item on
an agenda to the City Secretary who shall inquire with members of City Council
as to their agreement. The item shall be placed on the next City Council meeting
occurring on or after the 8th calendar day after obtaining the agreement of the
other member of City Council.
At a meeting of City Council a member of City Council may place an item on an agenda
by making a motion to place the item on a future agenda and receiving a second. No discussion
shall occur at the meeting regarding the placement of the item on a future agenda.
The Mayor or the City Manager may place any item on any City Council agenda.
B. Procedures. City Council shall, except as otherwise provided for in this Charter,
create rules of procedure for all City Council workshops, regular and special
meetings and public hearings by ordinance.
Section 3.11 Ordinances
A. Passage. Except as may otherwise be prescribed in this Charter or other law, all
ordinances shall be read in open meeting of the City Council on two (2) separate
days provided that all readings of any ordinance may be by descriptive caption
Page 6
only. Any ordinance necessary to protect the public's peace, health, safety and
general welfare, may be passed as an emergency and become effective at once
upon one (1) reading of the City Council, upon the approval of a majority vote of
the City Council members that it is an emergency at said reading and the finding
of an emergency shall be stated within the ordinance.
B. Enacting Clauses; Signature and Authentication. The enacting clause of all

ordinances shall be "BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LEON VALLEY, TEXAS;" and every ordinance shall be signed by the
Mayor or the Mayor Pro-Tem and authenticated by seal and signature of the City
Secretary.
C. Publication. The caption or title and penalties of every ordinance imposing any
penalty, fine, or forfeiture shall, as soon as practical after passage thereof, be
published one (1) time in the official newspaper(s) of the City of Leon Valley.
An ordinance required to be published under this section shall take effect the day
after publication unless otherwise provided in the ordinance.
D. Codification of Ordinances.
1. The City Council shall have the power to cause the ordinances of the City
to be corrected, amended, revised, codified and printed in code form as
often as the City Council deems advisable, and such printed code, when
adopted by the Council, shall have full force and effect without the
necessity of publishing the same or any part thereof in a newspaper;
2. All printed ordinances or codes of ordinances shall be admitted as

evidence in all courts without proof and shall have the same force and
effect as did the original ordinance.
Section 3.12 Council Investigations; Hearings; Process
A. General. In addition to any other specific authority of investigation and hearing

provided for in this Charter, the City Council shall have the power to inquire into
the official conduct of any department, agency, appointed boards, office, officers,
employees or appointed board members of the City. For the purpose of
investigations and hearings, the City Council shall have the power to administer
oaths, subpoena witnesses, compel the production of books, papers, and other
evidence material to the inquiry. The City Council shall provide, by ordinance,
penalties for contempt in failing or refusing to obey any such subpoena or to
Page 7
produce any such books, papers or other evidence. The City Council shall have
the power to punish any such contempt in the manner provided by such ordinance.
B. Hearings Process for Forfeitures of Office and Prohibitions.
1. All hearings held under this subsection shall be conducted in open session,
except that the City Council may conduct a closed session to get advice
from its attorney pursuant to the Texas Open Meetings Act;
2. The office holder subject to any investigation and/or hearing under this
section shall be entitled to written notice of the allegations of forfeiture
and/or the alleged violation of this Charter as applicable;
3. A special meeting shall be called to hold the hearing;
4. A member of City Council who initiated or is the subject of the

investigation or hearing shall not sit at the dais and shall not participate in
deliberation or vote;
5. The City Council shall adopt by ordinance rules of procedures to be

followed;
6. The City Council shall state the nature of the hearing and the allegations to
be considered, shall be provided the results of any investigation and a
presentation of the evidence against the office holder including, but not
limited to testimony from individuals;
7. The individual who is subject to the hearing shall be provided an

opportunity to respond to the allegations and present any relevant
evidence including, but not limited to, testimony from individuals;
8. The City Council may ask questions of any individual;
9. No public comment shall be allowed unless agreed to by a majority vote

of the members of City Council present. Rules for public comment shall
be set by City Council;
10. In the case of a violation of Section 3.08 of this Charter, City Council shall
vote on the forfeiture and on the affirmative vote of two-thirds of City
Council declare the office of said office holder to be forfeited and vacant;
Page 8
11. In the case of a violation of Section 3.09 of this Charter, City Council
may on the affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council take any
action it determines to be appropriate including, but not limited to,
directing further investigation, requesting further information, vote to
enforce a penalty pursuant to section 7.13 of this Charter, vote to bring an
action in municipal court, take a vote of censure; or, upon the affirmative
vote of two-thirds (2/3’s) of City Council, declare the office of said office
holder to be forfeited and vacant.
Page 9
ARTICLE VII. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 7.01 Conflicts of Interest Prohibition
For purposes of this Section, the term “City Official” means any individual subject to the
requirements of Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 171.
It is hereby prohibited for City Council members or a City Official to violate the rules
and regulations regarding conflicts of interests as set out in the Texas Local Government Code,
Chapter 171, as may be amended hereafter.
Section 7.02 General Prohibitions
A. No person shall be appointed to or removed from or in any way favored or

discriminated against with respect to any City position or appointive City
administrative office because of race, national origin, sex, political or religious
opinions or affiliations.
B. No person who seeks appointment or promotion with respect to any City position or
appointive City administrative office shall directly or indirectly give, render or pay
any money, service or other valuable thing to any person for or in connection with
his or her test, appointment, proposed appointment, promotion or proposed
promotion.
C. No employee of the city shall continue in such position after becoming a candidate
for City Council.
Section 7.03 Regulation of Alcohol
The City Council may enact any and all other regulations regarding the sale,
consumption, distribution, etc. of alcoholic beverages, as permitted by law, including but not
limited to the regulation of the sale of liquor in residential sections or areas of the City.
Section 7.04 Disaster Clause
In case of disaster when a legal quorum of the City Council cannot otherwise be
assembled due to multiple deaths or injuries, the surviving persons of the City Council, or
highest surviving City official, if no elected official remains, shall, within twenty-four (24) hours
of such disaster, request the highest surviving officers of the Bexar County Commissioners Court
to appoint a number of residents of Leon Valley equal to the number necessary to make a
Page 22
Brenna Green
From: Kelly Kuenstler <k.kuenstler@leonvalleytexas.gov>

Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 12:54 PM
To: Ryan Henry
Subject: FW: Conference center

From: Kelly Kuenstler
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 3:31 PM
To: Benny Martinez
Cc: Chris Riley

Councilor Martinez,
I already have an item on the agenda for updating at the conference center. Councilor Alcocer e mailed Saundra and me
sometime after the coffee and Councilor Jordan seconded her request via e mail. As far as the remainder of your
comments, I forwarded your e mail to Crystal and below is what I received.
I am again respectfully asking that you not give staff direction. There have been too many staff now with the same
complaint. We have discussed this at retreats and our responsibilities are clearly outlined in our city charter.
Thank you,
Kelly

6400 El Verde Road
(210) 684‐1391 ext. 219

From: Crystal Caldera
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 3:01 PM
To: Kelly Kuenstler
Cc: Adrian Valdez | Barcom (adrian@barcoment.com); Phillip Garza | Barcom (pgarza@barcoment.com); Nicole Escalada
| Barcom (nescalada@barcoment.com)
Subject: RE: Conference center

Ms. Kuenstler,

Council Martinez did approach me at the end of the Coffee. To give me direction on the AV Equipment I told him we
knew there was issues and BARCOM came and hard wired the projector into the laptop and assisted us with the turning
point software. Councilman Martinez wanted to know why I did not reach out to him because he was able to reconcile
the sound system failure (which we have had some issues with for quite some time). I explained to him that he was not
our IT provider and that I receive direction from the City Manager. He told me that next time I need to call him, I told
him he needed to call you. Which he stated that he has already spoken to you about these issues and that I needed to go
1
EXHIBIT K
TO FACT REPORT
against your direction and call him. I explained to him I was not going to do that, because I like my job. The issue with
the sound has been issue for over five years I know Kristi got a quote at one point but they did not want to spend the
funds to upgrade at the time.

BARCOM is coming today at 3:30p.m. to give us a quote on the network update at the conference center. It will be up to
City Council to see if they want to expend the funds since this item is not currently budgeted. BARCOM is doing the
network portion because I am trying to keep all facilities consistent with our network. Maribel and I are getting quotes
for the sound system and AV equipment for the Council agenda item for Nov 6, 2018. So for she has Electralink and
mimi’s and I am getting BARCOM and Artcom.

Further, I am not sure one person can judge performance when they are not working with the provider. BARCOM did get
Dr. Edwards to successfully videoconference into the Council meeting, not sure how you can count that as a failure. A
failure would have been him not being video conferenced into the meeting. Also I was not involved directly with library
cabling, but it is my understanding the no testing on the cameras was because BARCOM did not install those cameras.
My questioning would be, why is the testing of the camera cabling is coming up now and did not during install?

I also want to clarify the “expert” statement. They have the people on staff that are knowledgeable about AV
equipment, but their business model is not AV equipment. All the cities they do business with have an AV component
and they work and purchase equipment for them all the time. They can provide us with what we need and be a third
party neutral.

Crystal Caldera, MPA, PhD
Assistant City Manager/HR Director
6400 El Verde Rd
Leon Valley, Texas 78238
Tele:210‐684‐1391 Ext. 212
Fax: 210‐684‐1515

The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by only the
individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments,
if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately
notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system.

From: Kelly Kuenstler
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 11:00 AM
To: Crystal Caldera

From: Benny Martinez [mailto:b.martinez@leonvalleytexas.gov]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 1:23 AM
To: Kelly Kuenstler; Mayor Riley
Subject: Conference center

2
Please have the data networking updated at the conference center.
It was a disgrace that it did not perform properly at the coffee with the Mayor.
We need to have 2 wired connections to the Crystals positon during the coffee’s with the mayor.
Add at least 1 wireless AP in in the main room

I am requesting that the city contact 3 other companies for quotes to do this work.

I believe the poor performance from our present IT company exemplifies this request.
1. Failure to come up with a simple solution to the September city council meeting. Dr. Edwards trying to skype
into the meeting.
2. Failure to properly test the library cabling until I requested the test data. Requested info on a Thursday and they
tested the drops the following Monday.
I believe if I had not requested the test information, it would not have been completed. Test results were
incomplete, 3 data drops missed.
No testing done on Wireless AP’s or cameras.
After complaining about the poor test results, Barcom returned and tested the cabling. All data drops were
tested and the wireless AP’s tested good. 3 camera data drops failed testing and no plans to correct the failed
tests.

Barcom admitted at the last city council meeting that they were not experts in video conferencing, but will be used as
“experts” to provide the requirements for future upgrades??

Benny Martinez
City of Leon Valley
City Council Place 4
b.martinez@leonvalleytexas.gov
210‐269‐1402

3
Sec. 1.05.032 Powers and duties
The powers and duties of the city manager shall be as follows:
(1) To devote all of his working time and attention to the affairs of the city, and be responsible to the
council for the efficient administration of its affairs;
(2) To see that all laws and ordinances are enforced;
(3) To receive all bid proposals on contract work to be done in the city, bids to be opened on
instruction from the council;
(4) To promulgate all policies and procedures pertaining to the administration of personnel not
otherwise set by ordinance;
(5) To exercise supervision and control over all departments created by the council or that may
hereafter be created;
(6) To attend all meetings of the council with the right to take part in the discussion, but having no
vote, and he shall be notified of all special meetings of the council;
(7) To see that all terms and conditions imposed in favor of the city, or its inhabitants, in any utility
franchise, are faithfully kept and performed, and upon knowledge of any violation thereof to call the
same to the attention of the council;
(8) To act as budget officer and as such to prepare and submit to the council, prior to the beginning of
each fiscal year, a budget of proposed expenditures for the ensuing year, showing in as much detail as
practicable the estimated amounts required for the efficient operation of each department of the city and
the reasons for such estimated expenditures;
(9) The city manager, in addition to the foregoing, shall make and file a budget as required by state
law;
(10) To make a full written report to the council as soon after the close of each month’s accounts as
possible, showing the operation and expenditures of each department of the preceding month, with the
monthly allowances made for such departments in the annual budget, and to keep the council fully
advised at all times as to the financial condition and needs of the city;
(11) To act as, or designate, a purchasing agent for the city to purchase all needed merchandise,
material and supplies, and to establish, if needed, a suitable storehouse where such supplies may be
kept and from which same may be issued as needed; and to adopt such rules and regulations
governing requisitions and transaction of business between himself as such purchasing agent and the
heads of the departments, officers and employees of the city as the council may approve.
(1972 Code, sec. 2.202; 2008 Code, sec. 1.05.032)
EXHIBIT L
TO FACT REPORT
LE@~IEY
DEEP ROOTS BIG IDEAS
AS
SUBJECT: EX UAL ANO OTHER LAWFUL KFFECTJVE DATE:
HARASSMENT 09/01/2018
LAST REVISJO DATE:
03/10/2010
A. PURPOSE
I . To aid in the creation of a work en ironment free from hara sment.
2. To maintain high tandards of conduct among City employee .
3. To a oid conduct that underm ine merit principle in employment decisions.
B.
All City employee are entitled to a workplace free of unlawful harassment by

management, upervi ors. co-, orkers. citizen . and vendors. Thi mean that each
employee mu t be re pectful of other and act profe ionall . City employees are also
prohibited from engaging in unlawful hara ment of other employees, citizens.
vendor . and all other third parties. Hara ment of any t pe i forbidden and will not
be tolerated in any circum ranees.
I. exual Harassment - nwelcome exual ad ance , request for exual favors,

and other verbal or physical conduct of a ex ual nature. exual haras ment on the
jo b is unbw ful w he ther it in o l es an immediate s upe rvisor, s uperviso r from
another work area. co-worker. someone who i not an employee of the city such
as a vendor cu tomer. unpaid intern. male/female or ame ex.
Sexual hara ment become unlawful when:
a. Hostile Work En ironment - overall perva i e atmo phere of ho tility or

inappropriatene , including hara sing a per on becau e of that person' s
ex.
1. uch conduct ha the purpo e or effect of unrea onably interfering
with an indi idual · work performance or creating an intimidating,
ho tile. or offensive \Vorki ng environment.
b. Quid Pro Quo - Thi i a .. this for that'' type of hara smenr where one
emplo er or emplo ee attempt lo exchange, ork benefits for favors of a
sexual nature from the ictim .
i. An employee infiuence . offer to influence. or threatens the
career, pay, and/or the job of another per on, male or female, in
Sexual And Other Unlawful Harassment PD AS
e change for exual favor . It will al o be con idered sexual
hara sment if an emplo ee engages in deliberate or repeared
offen ive comment . ge ture or physical contact of a exual nature
in a work or work related en ironment.
11. ubmission to such conduct i made either openly or indirectly a

term or condition or an individual' employment.
111. ubmi ion to or rejection of uch conduct by an individual is used

as the basis for employment decision affecting uch individual.
exual hara ment may include a range of ubtle and not o ubtle behaviors and may
involve indi idual of the ame or different gender. exual haras ment does not require
exual attraction or interest. Thi policy prohibits e ual advance and reque ts for
se, ual favor , exual joke and innuendo: comment about bodies, exual prowes , sexual
preferences. sexual experience or exual deficiencie ; leering. -v.histling, or touching;
verbal abu e of a exual nature, including in ulting or ob ene comment or gestures;
display in the workplace of exually ugge tive object or picture , including nudity and
pornography; and all inappropriate conduct of a exual nature. whether it be physical,
verbal or visual conduct.
2. Harassme nt - In addition to the City" prohibition against se ual haras ment,

hara mem on the ba i of an other legall y protected characteristic is also strictly
prohibited. Thi mean that erbal or phy ical conduct that si ngle out,
denigrate , or hows ho ti lit or aver ion to\: ard someone becau e of race, sexual
orientation, religion. color. national origin. age. di ability, genetic . veteran status,
citizenship. or any other characteri tic protected by law i also prohibited.
Hara ment become unlawful , hen:
a. The oflensi, e conduct cau e intimidation. an antagonistic en ironment

and/or i offen i e to a rea onable per on. The conduct can include but i
not limi ted to epithet . slurs and negati e tereot ping; threatening,
intimidating. or ho tile conduct; denigrating joke and comments; and
writing or picture . that single out. denigrate. or ho, ho tility or
aver ion toward omeone on the ba i of a protected characteristic and
interference "'ith work performance. Conduct. comment , or innuendoes
that may be percei ed b other a offen ive are wholly inappropriate and
are trictly prohibited.
b. This polic al o prohibit ending. hov.ing. haring, or distributing in any

fo nn, inappropriate joke . picture . comic . torie . etc .. including but not
limited to ia fac imi le. e-mail. cell phone or other electronic de ices,
social media. and/or the Internet, uch as YouTube and facebook.
Hara ment of any nature. when ba ed on race. religion. color. sex. sexual
orientation. national origin, age or di ability, genetic . eteran tatu .
citizen hip or an) olher characteri tic protected by law i prohibited and
will not be tolerated.

c. Enduring the offen i,e conduct become a ondition of continued
employment.
C. RESPO IBILITIE
I . Employees are re pon ible for:
a. Reporting a haras ment complaint to the I luman Re ourccs Director a

outlined in ection E belo,, "ithout fear of repri ·al.
b. ooperating fu lly \\ ith an) inq uiry or in e tigation of \\ orkplace hara sment.
Willful fail ure to cooperate, or interfering ,,.,ith an inqui ry or in e tigation in
anywa). ma ubjeet the employee to di ciplinary action. up to and including
termination.
2. upervi or /Department Head are re pon ible for:
a. rearing and maintaining a po iti,e and producti, e ,..,_orl-. environment.
b. Elim inating any hara ment the) become a, are of and immediate!)
in e tigating and taking appropriate di ciplinary action for any complaint of
hara ment b1 one of their employee .
c. upporti ng training to their employee on this directi e.
d. Reporting immediately all complaint or report of exual harassment or

hara ment to the I luman Re our e Director.
3. The ity Manager i re pon ible for:
a. In forming cmplO)CC of thi polic). through di lribution of thi directive, a

,,ell a through group training pre entation .
b. ppointing an inve ligating Officer when a claim i generated.
4. The rluman Re ource Director is respon ible for:
a. En uring that each emplo~ee acknO\ ledge in ,Hi ting receipt of thi
pro edure directive ( ttachrnent ) and a cop) of thi acknowledgment will
be mai ntained in the emplo_ ee' official per onnel file.
b. Provide upport to the Cit Manager in conducting training pre entations to

cit) employee on thi directi, e.
c. Accepting and reviewing complaint of alleged e, ual hara ment.
d. Provide as i tance, if needed. to the Ciry Manager and Department I lead m

inve rigating complai nt or report of exual hara ment or hara ment.

D.
I. nti-discrimination la\, prohibit hara ment again t individual in retaliation for

fi ling a di crimination charge. testif~ ing. or participating in any way in an
in e tigation, proceeding . or la,\ uit under the e law : or oppo ing employment
practice that the) rea onabl) belie, e di criminate against indi iduals, in
vio lation of the e law..
2. If a hara ment complaint i again t the Cit Manager or member of the Council,
the report hall go direct I to the tla or. If the complaint i again t the Mayor,
the complaint will go to the ity Manager.
E.
I. Emplo) ee "'ho believe the ha e been hara ed b_ a member of the pub Iic, an
employee. and or a representative of the City of Leon alle) on the job. or any
super i or who i aware of the hara ment of other mu t report the complaint
directly to the I 1Lm1an Re ource Dire tor a oon a po ible.
a. If a hara ment complaint i again t the lluman Re ource Dir ctor then
the complaint will go to the Cir. Manager.
b. ff a hara ment complaint i again t the Cit) Manager then the complaint
goes to the Mayor.
2. All form of hara sment complaint . ,Hillen or ,erbal, reported b an indi idual
or a group will include the following information:
a. 1 ame(s) of the indi, idual( ) in olved.
b. Name of any ,, itne e .
c. When the e, ent( ) took place.
d. A de cription of the hara ing conduct.
3. All hara ment complaint ,,ill be made direct!) to the Human Re ources
Director. unle the complainant feel uncomfortable going to the Human
Re ource Director, then the complainant wi ll go to the Cit_ Manager, becau e of
the nature of the e charge : the normal chain of command" ill not be utilized.
a. pon receipt of the complaint by the Human Re ource Director he/ he

,..,;11 notify the City t1anager immediatel y. Th City Manager may appoint
an inve tigating officer who e dutie "ill be to immediately undertake an
effective. thorough, and objecti, e im e tigation of the exual hara sment
or haras ment allegation . The in, e ti gating officer will ubmit a
completed \\ ritten report on hi 'her finding to the ity anager within I 0
(ten) working day of the initial appointment.
b. pon completion of the inve tigarion. a determination regarding the

alleged exual hara ment or hara ment ,, ill be made and communicated
to the emplo ec(s) who complained and the accu ed hara er( ). The City
Managen, ill determine the appropriate remedial action, if an , to be
taken again t an employee if a complaint of exual hara ment i
ub tantiated. ppropriate di ciplinary action will be in accordance with
c tabli hed procedure and could include tennination of employment ,, ith
the Cit .
F. TTACH M E T
A - Harassment Free\ orkplace Policy CenHicatc of ckno,, lcdgcmcnt

ATTACH MENT A
CITY OF LEOr VA LLEY
HARA ME T FREE WORKPLACE PO LICY CERT IFI CATE OF ACKNOWL EDGF.ME T
I, _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. hereb) acknO\\ ledge rhal I ha e received and

under tand the Ciry· policy regarding hara rnent. Thi policy and definition de cribed below pertain to
all officers and employee of the Cit of Leon alley, including. but not limited to elected officials.
regular and temporary employee and full and part time emplO)Ce . Haras ment of an type i forbidden
and will not be tolerated in an} circum tance~.
I under tand sexual hara rnent i defined b) the Equal Employment Opportun it Commis ion a follow :
·'U nwelcome exual advance , reque t for exual fa or~. and other verbal or phy ical conduct of a sexual
nature con titute exual hara ment ,~hen : One ( I) ubmi ion to uch conduct is made either explicitly
or impl icit!) a term or condition of an individual" emplO) menr. T " o (2) ubmission to or rejection of
such conduct b, an individual i u ed a the ba i for emplorment deci ion affecting uch individual.
Three (3) such conducts ha the purpo e or effect of unrea onably interfering with an individual"s work
performance or creating an intimidating. ho tile. or offen ive \\ Orking en ironment .
The City of Leon Valle) al o con ider exual hara ment ,, hen the emplo)ee influence , offer to
influence, or threaten the career. pay or job o f another per on - ma le or female in exchange for exual
favors. It ,. ill al o be con idered exual hara ment if an emplo)ee engage in deliberate or repeated
offen ive comments, ge ture or phy ical omact o f a e:-.ual nature in a worJ.. or \\ Ork-related
environment or cau e a ho tile or offen ·i e ,, ork ing environment.
I under tand hara ment i defined b) the Equal Emplo~ment Opportun ity ommi ion a follow :
'·Unwelcome conduct that i ba ed on race. colo r, religion. e~. ( including pregnancy). exual orientation,
national origin. age, di abilit or genetic information haras ment become unlawful "hen: One ( I)
enduring the offen ive conduct become a condition of continued emplo) ment. T,vo (2) the conquct is
severe or perva ive enough to create a work en ironment that a rea onable per on would con ider
intimidating, ho tile, or abu ive.
The City of Leon alle) al o on ider hara ment, if the offen ive onduct cau e intimidation, an
antagoni tic environment and or i offensive to area onable person. T he onduct can include, but i not
limited. to offen ive and interference, ith \\.Ork performance. Hara ment on the job i unlawful whether
it involve co-worker hara ment or hara ment b) a upervi or or manager.
I al o under tand that all hara ment complaint . ,, hether erbal or\\ ritten. hould include the fo llowing
information: The name of the accu ed indi idual( ) and an) "itne e : when thee ent( ) took place, and
the nature of the hara ment. Becau e of the nature of exual hara ment or hara ment charges. the e
complaint will be made directly to the Human Re ource Director or as de cribed in ection E o f the
attached Po licy. The a ti on ,viii be in accordance ,vith e tablished pro edure and could include
termination of employment with the Cit) .
Employee's ignature Date Departmem

JS
BJECT: WORKPL I OLENCE A.
POLICY
FROM: KELLY K
A.
The City strive to provide a afc and ccure working en"ironment for it employee .
This policy is de igned to help prevent incident of violence from occurring in the
workplace and to provide for the appropriate re pon e "' hen and if uch inc idem do
occur.
B. RESPO . IBILI T I E
I. Each Department Head i re pon ible fo r en uring that all employee within thei r
department (to include temporar). part-time employee and olunteer ) are
briefed on this poli ) .
2. Employee are re ponsible for compl)' ing "' ith the tem1 of thi procedural
direct ive.
POLICI E
I. Employee (except licen ed peace officer in performance or their official duties)
are prohibited from po e ing a handgun or other" eapon v;hile on dut) or
performing ervices for the City, regard le of \\ hether the employee i on City
propert_ or not. ··Weapon.. i defined in Chapter I and 46 of the Texa Penal
Code.
2. Employee ,, ith a Texa concealed handgun licen e are authorized under tate
law to tore their handgun in the emplo) ee · private I) o,vned vehicle in City
parking lot. Carrying a ,,eapon onto Cit1 propcrt, in , iolation of thi polic will
be con idered gTound for immediate remo,al from Cit) property. di ciplinary
action up to and including termination. and ma re ult in criminal pro ·ecution.
1
" Thi polic) prohibit all \\Orkplace \ iolen e 10 includ haras ment, intimidation,
threat , and\ iolent beha\ ior b} or toward anyone in the \\Orkplace (direct or
indirect). that i in an) "ay job- or Cit~ -related. tha1 i or might be ca1Tied out on
City-propert}. or that is in any wa) connected to the employee· emplo ment
with the Cit) . whether the conduct occur on-duty or otT-duty. rhe it ha a zero
tolerance policy for 1hi t) pe of mi conduct.
D.
I. : abour to happen or occ ur: 10 take place ver., oon: an
immediate threat of harm: rea onabl) be expected to cau e death or erious
ph ieal harm to any \\Orker. When reporting imminent 1hreat and/or act of
violence. the employee hall:
I. orify the lo al police by dialing "911" for 1hreat or inciden1 in
progre . Careful() de cribe the cir um tan e . such a \\eapon im olved.
name of the per on mah.ing the threat · or performing act of .,,iolence.
location of incident. la> out of lacilit~. and phy ical de cription .
1
01ify 1he immediate upen i or. If the immediate uperd or i the
alleged offender. employee hould repon incident directl) 10 a higher
level upcn i or. if po ible.
3. fhe Direc1or of Human Re ·ource hall be notified of all incident of
workplace violence a oon a afet) permit and hall inform the ity
Ntanager of the ituat ion.
4. Employee \\ho are threatened. a aulted or altacked while on official
dut) off City premi e or \\Ork ite . a defined in thi poli ) . hall
immediately report . uch incident 10 lo al la\\ enforcement authoritie ,
their immediate upen i or. and the Director of Human Re ource . A
timel) report of the incident hall en ure that appropriate im e tigation and
folio\ -up procedure are implemented.
1
0 , -l MM I L T T HREAT : not expected 10 happen or occur \'er 0011, not
immediate. rea onabl> be expected 10 cau e death or eriou phy ical harm 10 an_
worker. If the threat i nor imminent. !he emplo)ee ·hall immediate!) inform their
immediate upervi or. If that upen isor is the alleged offender. the en1plo ee
hould report the incident direct!) to a higher le\ el upen·i or. The upen i or to
\,\,horn 1he incident i reported will immediately notif) the Director of Human
Re ource of the threat.
E. IBILI T I E
Department Director and upen i or) taIT hall take the initiative in pre\enting \-\Orkplace
violence.
2
I. All employee hall be required to attend periodic rraining programs to
learn to id mif) and respond to indicmor of a potential, iolent outbur tin
the workplace and the early" aming ign of emotional turmoil and/or
d) function .
' All emp!O)CC mu t not ignore. condone. or di regard any, iolent or
phy icall threatening beha, ior exhibited or threatened b) an emplo) ee.
3. All emplo)ee hall be: ad, i ·ed of the name. addre ·. and phone number of
the a igned Human Re ources repre emathe and Emplo)ec A istancc
Program pro, idcr and be kno,, ledgcable regarding the ef\,ice available
through the I [uman Re ource Department and the Employee As istance
Program.
4. All employees including an)one \\ho ha been threatened are required by
thi polic) 10 be reported. Di ciplinar:-, action hall be appropriate for not
reporting.
Employee hall take the initiative in preventing workplace, iolence.
I. Coworker . upen i or . and managers hall not excu c. co, er for. or protect an employee
,, ho threaten or commit a , iolent act again t another per on or property.
2. o cmplo)eC at an, le,el hall engage in threat of, iolence (direct or indirect),
violence. or other ph) icall; threatening behavior again t City of Leon Valley
employee • citizen . or propert).
3. All threat of violence (direct or ind ire t). including tho e ex pre ed joking I), hall be
taken criou. ly. and cmplo) ee engaging in thi t: pe of beha, ior hall be subject to
di ciplinary action up to and including termination.
4. Emplo)ee who are concerned 1ha1 the) ma) exhibit, iol 111 o r physically threatening
beha, ior may, olumaril y participate in coun eling en ice available through the
Employee A i tance Program and or reque t leave to eek pri,·at coun eli ng or medical
assi tance.
5. Employee are en ouraged to bring their di pu1e or differences " ith other employee, to
Lhe a\lention of their supen i or or the Human Re ource Department before the ituation
escalates into potential viol en e. The Cit) i eager to a i tin the re olution of employee
di pute .
6. T hi policy hall not, in an) \\a). enlarge the legal respon ibilit) or liabilit) of the Ciry or
of an) emplo) ee or the Cit) ci,·illy or criminally. to out ide partie , thi policy doe
not create any higher tandard or duty of afet) or care, for liabilit). l!videntiar) or other
purpo es. than ifthi polic) did not exit. iolation of thi pol ic~. if pro,en. invohe
onl the employer/employee relation~hip bet\\een the it) and the employee, and can
on ly be the ba i of an action by the iry in an internal di ciplinary or admini trati\ e
context, and may not be the basi or an action b~ an out ide part).
3
7. on Retaliation -The ci ty prohibits any retal imion agai n L any per on for maki ng report
of workplace violence. di crimination. hara ment. inappropriate behavior. or ex ual
hara menl. The City emphatically urge that all violations of rhi procedure be reported
immediately. I[ an employee feels retal iated again t fo r reponing \ orkplace violence,
he/she should immediately repon lhi co the I Iurnan Re ources Director or the City
Manager.

Update On Complaints

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Update On Complaints

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

March 15, 2019

Kelly Kuenstler Sent via Email: k.kuenstler@leonvalleytexas.gov

RE: Update Report on Complaints Against Martinez and Proffitt

Dear Ms. Kuenstler,

A. Accused: Benny Martinez

a. Filed by Denise Frederick, City Attorney

B. Accused: Benny Martinez

a. Filed by Dr. Catherine Rodriguez, City Council,

C. Accused: Benny Martinez

a. Filed by Brandon Melland, City Planner

Leon Valley – Complaints against

a. Filed by Jo Ann Azar, City Police Officer

E. Accused: Benny Martinez

a. Filed by Jorge Breton, City Police Officer

F. Accused: Benny Martinez

a. Filed by Yvonne Acuna, Public Works Utility Billing Clerk

G. Accused: Larry Proffitt, Zoning Commissioner

a. Filed by Denise Frederick, City Attorney

II. Scope of Investigation and Assignment

Leon Valley – Complaints against

III. Executive Summary

Leon Valley – Complaints against

D. Complaint by Frederick Against Proffitt

E. Charter Provision §3.09 Complaints

IV. Complaints and Individual Investigation

Leon Valley – Complaints against

a. Interview with Rodriguez

Leon Valley – Complaints against

Leon Valley – Complaints against

b. Interview with Martinez

Leon Valley – Complaints against

Regarding the specific complaint by Rodriguez, Councilman Martinez informed me he offers to

Leon Valley – Complaints against

a. Interview with Frederick

Leon Valley – Complaints against

b. Interview with Martinez

Leon Valley – Complaints against

D. Melland Complaint Against Martinez

a. Interview with Melland

Leon Valley – Complaints against

Leon Valley – Complaints against

b. Interview with Martinez

Leon Valley – Complaints against

E. Azar Complaint Against Martinez

a. Interview with Officer Azar

Leon Valley – Complaints against

b. Interview with Martinez

Leon Valley – Complaints against

a. Interview with Officer Breton

Leon Valley – Complaints against

G. Acuna Complaint Against Martinez

a. Interview with Acuna

Leon Valley – Complaints against

b. Interview with Martinez

H. Frederick Complaint Against Proffitt

a. Interview with Frederick

Leon Valley – Complaints against

b. Interview with Proffitt

Leon Valley – Complaints against

A. General Perspective on Complaints

B. Frederick, Melland, Azar and Breton Complaints Against Martinez

Leon Valley – Complaints against

D. Acuna against Martinez