Opinion ID: 202423
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Carlos Gabriel Santiago

Text: 54 Before being appointed as head of the CDA, Santiago was appointed the executive president of COFEC, a corporation of economic development for the capital city [of Puerto Rico]. It is a development company which gives loans to small businesses in San Juan and also other municipalities in the island. He was appointed by COFEC's board of twelve directors. He became administrator of the CDA on January 7, 2001, and he stopped being the director in January 2002. 55
56 While Santiago acknowledged that Hernández made the final decision on Pérez's retention of her position following her probationary period, he stated that Hernández had consulted with him. Hernández told him that she wasn't satisfied with the inefficient way that Pérez was performing the task of her job, and [Hernández] understood that [Pérez] wasn't going to fulfill the expectations of the position. Santiago ultimately endorsed Hernández's dismissal of Pérez. 57 On cross-examination by Plaintiff's counsel, Santiago conceded that prior to Pérez's termination, Santiago did not speak to her to discuss his intentions to terminate her. He admitted that he did not remember if Hernández had told him about Pérez's educational qualifications or the fact that Pérez's position had been vacant for six months prior to her filling that position. 58
59 Santiago stated that he got to know Negrón and that her performance was low, very low ... more than poor. It was just bad. He testified that he gave her instructions to move furniture and file cabinets, change locks, and repair air conditioners. As to the moving of furniture and file cabinets, he stated that he gave Negrón the instruction personally, but she did not comply. Moreover, Santiago stated that Negrón misplaced the file cabinets because it was more than an issue of instructions or permission. It was more of [Negrón] started establishing territory in the agency.... So it was more of hostility to me. He stated that the file cabinets were misplaced and Negrón's reaction was simply [t]hat there was no space anywhere else except in my office. On another occasion involving the moving of files, according to Santiago, it took a few days, three or four days, because the argument was the same: There was no space, so those had to remain there. 60 As to the counter/desk, Santiago stated that Negrón counterordered the moving of the counter from a location preferred by Santiago. He felt concerned and even pressured psychologically because the situation was more than just me saying things one way and things happening another. And it was more of a controversy. As to the air conditioning duct, Santiago confirmed that the air conditioning in his office was never repaired. He also confirmed that the reason was that the order had to be in writing. However, Santiago testified that he thought this was unreasonable. [Negrón] insisted that every task that she was ordered to do, even if it was the simplest of tasks, had to be in writing ... it wasn't enough that it had to be [in] a memorandum for [Negrón], but it also had to be—the requisition had to be signed .... the process was done twice for whatever was needed. According to him, he asked Negrón three times to fix the air conditioning duct, and it was never done. 61 As to the installation of a new lock on his office door, Santiago recalled that he was in his office when it was installed. After the installation, when he went to leave, the lock [was] installed inside out, meaning that the lock that has the key is on the inside, and on the outside is the part where you can do it manually.... And so I am locked in my office. I am trapped. His specific complaint was that Negrón did not remain to supervise the installation of the lock. In his opinion, with the lock incident as an exemplar, it was impossible to articulate a particular operational plan with [Negrón] because, if things this simple could not be solved and saying that this was simply a mistake ... it was something that would concern any supervisor .... it even got to the point in my mind that I concluded that, if ever there was a person that was not going to cooperate . . . it was [Negrón]. 62 On his final evaluation of Negrón, regarding the performance factor, Santiago stated that Negrón did not meet the goals and objectives, be them small as they could be, and also the effective solutions of unforeseen situations like the one regarding the lock.... It shouldn't be the duty of a director to constantly be in controversy with the head of an agency. It [was her duty] to keep in operational conditions the physical facilities of the agency, which [Negrón] did not perform, did not do. As to the cooperation factor, [Negrón] didn't have the appropriate attitude. It was more of a serious problem in terms of personality in terms of trying to be in controversy all the time. And also to collaborate ... that never happened.... And to obtain the maximum effort from the personnel. [Negrón] never complied with this. On the contrary, she prevented things from happening. According to Santiago, the period from January 9 to January 31 was more than enough time to observe Negrón's performance. He treated this stretch of time as 20 days. 63 On cross-examination, Santiago revised this number of days for observing Negrón to 16. He also admitted that his office was isolated from Negrón's (a floor away) such that he only observed her when the two had direct interaction. Santiago conceded that one of the pieces of furniture that he requested be moved, a counter, was something that Negrón could not move on her own. As to the lock, Plaintiffs' counsel asked, among other things, why Santiago did not prevent the incorrect installation of the lock since he was in his office when it was installed. Santiago stated that he was occupied with work and that the door was actually some distance from his desk. As to the air conditioning problem, Plaintiffs' counsel asked Santiago whether it was in fact reasonable policy for Negrón to have written authorization for work done in order to keep a record for accounting purposes, and because checks were issued by a separate department of the CDA. Santiago replied that Negrón's paperwork was additional, meaning redundant. Plaintiffs' counsel also questioned Santiago as to the difficulty of completing Negrón's paperwork (essentially, writing Approved). Santiago responded that it would set a problematic precedent, requiring signatures for everything.