The Northern Wasco County Parks and Recreation District sent two demand letters to former Executive Director Scott Green to get him to return a parks-owned lawn mower, which he said he’d taken home to work on.
The parks district first sent a letter to Green’s attorney, Kerry M. L. Smith of Gresham, on Nov. 24, both by first class mail and email. It demanded the return of the Club Cadet riding lawn mower, which the district bought for $3,349 in March 2006 and which it said Green had taken to his house a year and a half earlier.
The letter, from the park district’s attorney, Tom Peachey, stated, “I have been advised by a district employee that this mower was delivered to your client’s home … approximately a year and a half ago where it has been used to mow Mr. Green’s residential lawn.”
The letter gave a 10-day deadline for submission of proof that Green considered the mower his, or in the alternative, demanded the mower’s immediate return. No response was given.
On Thursday, Dec. 11, Interim Director Karl Cozad sent a second letter, via certified mail, again asking for the mower’s return. The letter said if Green failed to return the mower, the district would file a police report.
The mower was returned that weekend, said Tom Peachey, attorney for the district.
The Chronicle received copies of the letters Wednesday after filing a public records request in December with the parks district.
Green said he’d told Cozad in early September 2014 that he had the mower. The occasion was after Green had been terminated and he was turning in district property.
Cozad said, “When Mr. Green returned keys, credit cards and other district property I certainly asked him if that was all the property that he was in possession of that belonged to the district and he indicated yes. And when I presented a form for him to sign, indicating such, he refused to sign it on the advice of his attorney not to sign anything.”
Green said, “I told Karl Cozad I had it, that I’d already made arrangements more than once with another employee to come and get it because I didn’t have a trailer,” but the district “decided to make a big deal out of it.”
He said he looked at the letters “as a form of petty harassment.”
Green’s contract was terminated by the district board in late August. He said it was because of a sexual harassment claim made against him. The board said it wasn’t connected to that.
Green filed a claim with the state Bureau of Labor and Industries claiming he was terminated because of a medical condition and his civil rights were violated. The state has not made a ruling in that matter yet.
Green said of the mower, “I did a lot of work on it; fluids, blades and new belts and things like that.” He said he’d repaired all of it except the battery, which needed to be replaced, “because I didn’t want to spend the money on it.”
Peachey said in his letter to Green’s attorney that the district paid for replacement parts for the mower in February 2013, “but that it remained at your client’s residence.”
Green said he had two mowers of his own – an electric push mower and a riding lawn mower. He said he only drove the district mower to test if it was working. “I’d work on it, test it out, fix the next problem. He said he only mowed “to try it out after I replaced a belt. So technically, did I mow with it? Yes. Did I mow the whole thing? No.”
Cozad said in his letter that a district employee “coincidentally had a conversation with your wife recently about the mower, and your wife stated that someone from the district should come to your house and retrieve the mower. The district is not comfortable having an employee of the district come to your property and remove the mower. Furthermore, the district should not have to incur that liability or cost, considering that you were the executive director at the time the mower was delivered to you.”
Green said the district “decided to make it my responsibility to get it back so I rented a U-Haul trailer and gave it back.”
Commented
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.