Tactics in GM investigation: 'standard practice' claims Metropolitan Chair

Metropolitan Water District's weak commitment to witness confidentiality and due process is highlighted in EEO investigation mishandlings. Part 1.

Previously, I exposed the alarming due process issues tainting the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's investigation of its general manager, Adel Hagekhalil, following allegations of harassment and discrimination.

This ongoing investigation was triggered by a 14-page complaint filed by Assistant General Manager and CFO, Katano Kasaine, on May 27. She delivered it to 11 selected members of Metropolitan’s Board of Directors, including Chair Adán Ortega.

In my earlier articles, I laid out the procedures—according to Metropolitan’s Administrative Code—for processing alleged Equal Employment Opportunities (EEO) violations by department heads. These code sections are designed to protect confidentiality and due process.

Photo by SoCal Water Wars

Unjustified breaches of confidentiality trample due process rights, leading to retaliation against witnesses and creating a biased court of public opinion. In this scenario, preconceived biases and political pressures, rather than carefully vetted facts, determine the ultimate verdict.

In this case, there were three glaring breaches of confidentiality before June 13, when the full Board of Directors, in a closed session, voted to place GM Hagekhalil on administrative leave.