Opinion ID: 1922946
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Contributing factor

Text: Even if appellant could establish that his belief was objectively reasonable, we would still be unpersuaded that appellant has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of his WPA suit. The WPA requires an employee to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that an activity proscribed by § 1-615.53 was a contributing factor in the alleged prohibited personnel action against [the] employee. D.C.Code § 1-615.54(b). The trial court found that appellant's termination did not result from his disclosure to the OIG, but was in response to a willful act of insubordination preceded by complaints from the public and administrative officials about plaintiff's unprofessional conduct. The record amply supports this finding. At the hearing below, DCFO Huff testified that he placed appellant on administrative leave after learning of his insubordination because he was at his wits' end in dealing with appellant. Mr. Huff stated that on five previous occasions appellant had been counseled for behaving in an intimidating and condescending manner toward members of the BRPAA and taxpayer representatives. Two of those incidents are described in detail in paragraphs 28 and 29 of the court's findings of fact. [14] In addition, the evidence showed that appellant admitted to Mr. Branham on August 31 that he had sent out notices to nineteen taxpayers that their assessments were being increased. The trial court found this to be a knowing violation of Mr. Branham's directive on August 15to which appellant had agreedto confer with him and get his approval before issuing any such notices. Finally, and perhaps more seriously, appellant failed to adhere to OTR's Code of Conduct insofar as it required compliance with the local tax laws. The trial court noted in its findings that in 1994 appellant purchased a house on First Street, N.W. He applied for, and was granted, a homestead exemption which entitled him to a reduction in his tax obligation for that property. [15] Under the terms of the homestead exemption program, residential taxpayers are entitled to its benefits for only one residential property. However, on September 28, 2000, appellant and his then-fiancée (who later became his wife) jointly purchased another house on N Street, N.W., for which the previous owner had obtained a homestead exemption. The exemption for that house remained in effect after the sale, even though appellant and his wife continued to live in the First Street house. It was only when it came to the attention of an OTR employee in May 2001 that appellant was receiving two exemptions that appellant asked to have the exemption removed from the N Street property. This incident resulted in appellant's being investigated by the Internal Audit Unit at OTR, an investigation which became the subject of a Washington Post article in August 2001 that caused great embarrassment to OTR. [16] A few days later, Mr. Huff sent a memorandum to all OTR managers alluding to this incident and reminding all managers to set an example of excellence in regard to meeting their tax obligations. The next day appellant confronted Mr. Huff in his office about the memorandum. The court in its findings described the confrontation: Huff testified that [appellant] pointed his finger in Huff's face and exclaimed: Don't you know what you are doing? I know what you are trying to do. You have embarrassed me. Don't you know what's going on in this agency? Huff testified that he felt threatened and intimidated by [appellant's] conduct. The record thus fully supports the trial court's finding that Mr. Branham's decision to place appellant on administrative leave, pending his termination, was a proper exercise of legitimate supervisory authority over an employee for cumulative acts of poor judgment that reached the stage of willful insubordination. The court concluded, and we agree, that appellant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was entitled to a preliminary injunction. [17]