EVALUATION OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE MAINE

TURNPIKE AUTHORITY THE PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS OF THE

HEADQUARTERS STAFF
FINAL REPORT

Introduction
This evaluation was set in motion as a result of the dysfunctional relationship that
was revealed following the resignation of the Maine Turnpike Authority’s (“Turnpike”)
Treasurer / Chief Financial Officer (“Former CFO”) with the Headquarters employees
and the Board of Directors (“Board”). The Board through the Executive Director, Peter
Mills, authorized the Undersigned to conduct the evaluation and issue this Report.
There are few restrictions placed on the Undersigned with respect to the evaluation, the
findings, and any recommendations.1 This Report is intended to identify problems
created by the behavior of the Former CFO and identify the problems he caused and
recommend methods to correct them to redevelop trust between and among the Board
and the employees to move the Turnpike forward successfully into its next 75 years.

Metholdology
The Undersigned conducted one-on-one interviews with employees primarily
from the Director Level and higher and other employees suggested by the Directors.
Members of the Board of Directors were interviewed after the employee interviews were
nearly completed. The majority of the interviews were conducted electronically from
January 31 to February 23; however, interviews are continuing while this Report is
being written. All interviewees were advised that the interviews are voluntary, they may
terminate the interview at any time, their information will be entered anonymously in the
Report, and the information will be used to assess relationships and identify and repair
any damage. All interviewees were forthcoming and frank. They were advised that this
assessment is ongoing. The Report’s focus is toward the future while information from
the past gives us direction for change. It is undecided at this time whether interviews
other Headquarters staff will take place.

1
Based on the evidence I can only recommend areas that need to be re-evaluated and how they may be
changed. Only the Board has the authority to determine if and what major changes may be made.
 This Report will provide the Turnpike and the employees with a roadmap to
reevaluate the structural makeup and repair and improve employee relationships
between and among the employees, supervisors, managers, and the Board.

The preliminary Report was presented on May 1, 2024 at 9:00 a.m. to the Board
in executive session with approximately 25 employees in attendance. The employees
reconvened when the Board meeting ended to discuss the implementation of Report’s
recommendations. Those updated items are presented in Appendix B for the Board’s
authorization for employees to develop implementation plans that will be submitted later
for final approval and implementation.

Issues
The purpose of the evaluation and Report is to answer the following three general
questions:
1. What is the extent of the damage to the relationships between and among
Directors and employees?
2. What changes will help repair the damage and ensure that it is not repeated?
3. What structural / organizational changes should be evaluated by the Board?

Interviews
Interviews of the Executive Director, Directors, Board Members, and employees
were conducted virtually and by phone. Additional employees recommended by the
interviewees also were interviewed.2 Interviews were limited to Headquarters staff as
the data appears to indicate that this matter is confined to that location primarily. More
than twenty-two (22) employees with over three hundred (350) years total experience
with the Turnpike were interviewed. At this writing, three (3) Board members have been
interviewed and the interviews will continue.

Background
The Turnpike was authorized by the Maine Legislature in 1941 by the passage of
An Act to Create the Maine Turnpike Authority which created an independent state
agency to construct a highway from the southern border with New Hampshire in Kittery

2
See Maine Turnpike Authority’s Organizational Chart dated July 27, 2023.
John C. Alfano, NAA
Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 2.
to the northern border with Canada at or near Fort Kent in Aroostook County. Because it
is the primary and most efficient means for moving people and products to and from
cities in Maine and to and from other states to the south and Canada to the north, it
must be able to adopt new methods to function reliably and efficiently as times and
needs change. In its over 75 year history, it has met those challenges effectively.3 The
Turnpike was designated "The Gold Star Memorial Highway" in 1965 to commemorate
those who died in service to the country. That honor was re-dedicated in 2001.
The Headquarters, located at 2360 Congress Street, Portland, houses general
operations, including Legal, Finance, Operations, Maintenance, Environmental, Public
Outreach, Toll Collections, Computer Services, and Human Resources. Highway
maintenance facilities, sometimes referred to as camps, are located in York,
Kennebunk, South Portland, Gray, Auburn, Litchfield and Gardiner to do regular road
maintenance and repairs and clear snow during the winter. All functions are integrated
so that it functions uniformly and efficiently to provide the only limited access high speed
highway through the most populated parts of the State.

The problems revealed in this evaluation originated primarily with the resignation
over eleven (11) years ago of the long-time Executive Director who had consolidated his
power and information by developing trust with the Board and employees. Upon his
abrupt resignation, he took most of the institutional knowledge with him. His leaving also
triggered a change in the membership of the Board and, later, the hiring of Peter Mills,
the current Executive Director.4 Soon after, the retirement of the second person in
charge who functioned as the Assistant Executive Director took with him much of the
remaining institutional knowledge.5 The person designated the Chief Financial Officer
(“CFO”) probably was the remaining employee with the most knowledge of the full
operation although others may have had such information primarily related to their own

3
The Turnpike celebrated 75 years of service from 2022.
4
At the time, most of the Board members were newly appointed as was the Chairperson and the
Executive Director, all of whom were appointed for their public service reputations and trust that they will
keep the Turnpike functioning reliably to serve the economy of Maine although they had been dropped
into their positions with little experience with how it all functions.
5
Memories of employees are unclear whether he was officially the Assistant although he functioned in
that role.
John C. Alfano, NAA
Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 3.
assignments however. The bulk of the institutional knowledge for the full operation
however was taken by the former Executive Director, and later by the employee who
functioned as the assistant.
That combination of events caused a vacuum that the Former CFO stepped up to
fill. He gained support and trust by supplying the Board and the organization with
answers that the new members and Mills needed to understand the depth and breadth
of Turnpike’s total operation.6 The Former CFO had broad knowledge of how the parts
of the Turnpike functioned because he approved and paid the bills for all the
departments. He always had the answers for the Board and Mills, especially in the early
days which should have been healthy and productive for the Turnpike. However, he had
his own agenda that with his behavior caused the events that initiated this Evaluation.

The Former CFO, sensing the vacuum, worked diligently to fill it primarily to
consolidate his power and control. He already had considerable knowledge of general
operational and general employee personal information. He worked diligently to collect
more of that information to threaten, intimidate, and humiliate employees primarily to
control and force them to do his bidding. No one was immune. He gathered information
by any means necessary to use for his advantage. Employees were threatened with
firing, subtly and not so subtly, to produce information and do what he told them. He
protected himself by convincing employees that they had nowhere to go to complain. He
used his close relationship with the Board to convince employees that he would know
their complaints, who complained, and who received their complaints. He also
convinced them that the ‘whistle-blower’ line was not secure and that he would know
who complained because of his position as Board Treasurer and his having the Board’s
trust.7 He told employees that because he had the Board in his ‘pocket, who would they
believe, you or me?’ Over time, victimized employees believed they had to suffer his
abuse because there was no safe place to complain. He derived power over individuals

6
Although the Turnpike functions efficiently because of the commitment, knowledge, and skills of all
staff, like ships, however, it needs a captain and first mate to coordinate the various and diverse functions
and to provide direction.
7
It appears that his position with the Board was more bluster than reality. The complaint line is secure
and operated by an outside agency that withholds complaints from authorized employees when they are
the subject of a complaint.
John C. Alfano, NAA
Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 4.
because he had access to information which he used for his personal benefit. The
extent that he would use any information against individuals sometimes was vicious.
In the meantime, many female employees believe they were marginalized
because it appeared that male employees with less experience and talent than similarly
situated females received the promotions, higher wages, and were treated more
favorably. They believe that job descriptions and competency meant less than being a
male or someone he could control in order to receive promotions and wage increases.
While he was working on controlling employees, he also consolidated operational
information by ‘discouraging’ discussion within and across departments. He made it
known that he did not want them to meet unless he attended. When he did attend, he
would focus the meeting on himself and make inappropriate comments, including
criticizing employees personally or professionally, discussing their personal information
and private family information, all of which caused employees not to share information
with each other and not complain about his behavior. Eventually, he caused the
Turnpike to become organized vertically in ‘silos’, that terminated at his office making
him privy to information that employees in the other silos did not have. There is no way
to determine that had that information been shared properly may have increased
efficiency, improved service to the public, and how much of a financial loss it may have
been to the Turnpike. He derived power from operational information and employees’
personal information, much of it for his benefit.
New and different ideas were discouraged unless they were his. Too often
Directors’ ideas and suggestions were rejected out of hand. They had to develop ‘work
arounds’ by making him think their ideas were his. Highly paid and talented employees
had to waste time catering to his ego; time that could have been spent more
productively.
It appears that the Board was not aware of this behavior although too many
employees believe that the Board knew or should have known but did not care.
Similarly, the Executive Director appears not to have been fully aware of his behavior
although employees believe he knew or should have known especially since the Former
CFO methodically took over most of the Turnpike’s daily operations. Consequently,
employees lost trust in the Executive Director and the Board and were too fearful to go
John C. Alfano, NAA
Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 5.
to either with their complaints. In this way they became the Former CFO’s victims also.
Yet, with this dysfunction, the Turnpike functioned well which is testimony to the
employees’ commitment and dedication to their jobs.

Analysis and Conclusions

The Former CFO used a variety of unacceptable behavior and methods to gain
power and control over the Directors and other Headquarters staff. See Summary of
Information from Interviews, attached as Exhibit A. There clearly are structural and
organizational factors that have enabled his misbehavior that have contributed to
personnel and personal employee problems or as a few employees referred to as
having PTSD. No one escaped unharmed from the behavior that resulted in employees
to distrust for each other, the Directors, the Executive Director, and the Board.
The information on Exhibit A, discussed below, is divided into three (3) general
categories: I. Structural and Organization. II. Personnel/Personal. III. Miscellaneous.

I. Structure and Organization

Although all of the items on the list are important, I have emphasized the
following:
A. Board and Employee Relationships
Should employees also be appointed to ‘positions on the Board’, specifically as
Secretary and Treasurer?
The Board Secretary and Treasurer are appointed by the Board and are also
employees who report to the Executive Director and Treasurer. The Former CFO used
his Treasurer position to intimidate employees citing his ‘close relationship and trust’
with the Board. That same system continues today with the current CFO. Although there
is no evidence that the current CFO and Secretary would abuse their positions as the
Former CFO did, it was a vulnerability then that an employee so inclined could replicate
in the future.8
Is there a better way to obtain the same results without the vulnerability? The
Board should review and reassess those relationships to determine if there is a different

8
There absolutely is no evidence that the current Secretary and Treasurer have or will have abused their
positions. Their integrity is not in question in this Report.
John C. Alfano, NAA
Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 6.
structure or whether there are protections that may be built into the current structural
relationships. The Former CFO used the appearance of power with the Board his
position as Treasurer gave him to intimidate employees. The current structure should be
reviewed to determine if these relationships affect the Board’s independence.

B. Succession Plans
Does the Board have plans to permanently replace key employees?
There is a substantial number of long term employees in key positions eligible for
retirement now or in the near future. Not any employee interviewed was able to identify
plans to replace these employees and how important operational and procedural
information will be passed on to their successors. The Board should avoid having an
informational and operational vacuum when these employees leave the Turnpike
expectedly or unexpectedly. There should be a transition plan to transfer institutional
knowledge and make the transition to new employees smoothly with minimal
interruption to normal everyday operations. Key employees should also be trained to
develop a culture of sharing institutional knowledge with other employees in their
Divisions so that information is not dependent on one employee.
The Turnpike should develop a plan that identifies key employees to determine
when they will be leaving to hire and train their replacements within a reasonable time
ahead of their date of termination.

C. Upper Level Management

Has the Turnpike management and operations grown too large for one person?
The Board and operations rely heavily on the Executive Director to meet with the
public, to oversee planning and implementing major construction and other initiatives,
keep the Board and staff informed, manage the staff, and collect and disseminate
information to and from employees and the Board. There may be too many duties and
responsibilities for one person to manage as the Turnpike has grown and operations
have gotten more complex. Many organizations this size have an Executive Director
and a Managing Director. Executive Directors generally oversee the total operation and
deal directly with the Board to make and implement policy, while Managing Directors
manage staff and day-to-day operations. The current structure forces the Executive

John C. Alfano, NAA

Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 7.
Director to choose between policy and day-to-day operations for his immediate
attention. Executive Director and Managing Director positions should be selected from
candidates seeking a career willing to stay for the long term to provide stability to the
Turnpike because the jobs are complex, require different skillsets, and have steep
learning curves. In particular, the Managing Director’s position should not be a position
to groom the next Executive Director because that position will take time to master, the
person will be overseeing and coordinating many diverse complex operations and
managing employees who are skilled in their jobs.
The Former CFO ‘assisted’ with day-to-day operations by assuming more and
more duties. His assistance would have been a positive attribute had he not used it for
his own purposes. A Managing Director or a similar position with official responsibility to
manage staff, attend to general operations, and be available when the Executive
Director is unavailable may increase efficiency while freeing the Executive Director to
represent the Turnpike to the public, oversee major projects and initiatives, deal with the
legislature, and assist the Board to make and implement policy.
A Managing Director may help avoid another vacuum in institutional knowledge
and power during a transition to enable the Turnpike to continue running smoothly in the
absence of or the replacement of the key employees. Finally, by having two top level
positions, the replacement of either one and key employees, will help the new
employees learn their jobs more quickly and most importantly, make it more unlikely for
someone to assume their duties to fill a vacuum.

II. Personnel and Personnel

D. Personal Employee Information
Securing personal employee information.

The Former CFO, as part of his consolidation of power and control, required the
Human Resources Director to report to him, which, in combination with his overseeing
the Information Technology Department, in theory, provided him unlimited access to the
information without oversight except from resistance from staff. Many employees
interviewed could only speculate how he obtained confidential information except he

John C. Alfano, NAA

Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 8.
had access to all parts of Headquarters, including offices and electronic and paper
files.9
He didn’t use much of the information he may have had for the benefit of the
Turnpike. Employees said he mentioned personal information in meetings and one-on-
one conversation to demean and threaten. Many employees did not use medical
reimbursement funds because they were processed in-house and they did not want him
to know their personal and family medical information for fear that he would use it
against them somehow.
Confidential information should be available only to those on a limited as needed
basis. There needs to be a policy developed and distributed to all employees so they
know and trust that their personal information is available only to certain employees and
only for specific, designated, job related purposes. The policy should specify what is
confidential, how it’s secured, who has access, and how, when, and why it may be
accessed. That information should be under the control and distribution of an employee
responsible for its security who answers directly to the Executive Director or designee.
Privacy policies should be adopted to protect access to employees’ personal
information including outsourcing the administration of the medical reimbursement fund
to protect employee privacy and the Turnpike from legal claims.

E. Lines of Communication
The flow of information throughout the organization needs to be re-evaluated.
The Former CFO managed through threats and intimidation to discourage open
communications between and among the various divisions. Division meetings were
discouraged unless he attended, and when he did, he used the meeting as his forum to
criticize employees not in attendance, berate employees in attendance, and control the
meetings, all for his personal gain. As a result, substantial amounts of information
flowed upward to him and only information he chose to share moved downward and
laterally.

9
The former CFO was involved in the development of the current IT Department. He may have
understood the technology well enough to be able to access some information from the servers.
However, his ability may have been more bluster than reality.
John C. Alfano, NAA
Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 9.
 The operation of the Turnpike is a series of multiple, integrated departments.
Each department will function more effectively and efficiently when all employees know
what and how each department contributes to their operation. Information is power and
the Former CFO collected it to distribute for his benefit and possibly at the expense of
the Turnpike. Sharing information will limit anyone’s ability to collect that information for
uses not related to the Turnpike.
Changing the flow of information so that it is exchanged between and among
departments will make stronger teams that will increase morale, introduce new ideas,
and improve efficiency and reduce the possibility that it can be used for power and
control.

F. Periodic Interdepartmental Meetings

Interdepartmental meetings build teams that understand total operational
relationships.
Inter-department meetings were discouraged by the Former CFO. They are
important because they eliminate the departmental silos to permit and encourage
employees to exchange ideas and anticipate and solve problems. Directors will have a
better understanding of the Turnpike’s larger overall operation to relate their
department’s specific contributions to the full operation and suggest and make changes
if necessary to increase service and efficiency. The meetings also are important to pass
information to and from the Board and top management to directors and employees. As
employees stated, most of us are an island unto ourselves. The Former CFO preferred
employees to be isolated to control them and share information as needed for his own
purposes instead of encouraging the free exchange of ideas.
Regular, periodic, well-organized interdepartmental meetings to exchange ideas
and information should be implemented to help build a management team and benefit
the overall operation of the Turnpike.

G. Policy / Operations Manuals / Job Descriptions

The policy manual specifying benefits, rules, standard operational policies including
job descriptions needs to be updated and made readily available to employees.
A substantial number of employees said they have not seen a policy manual or, if
one exists, it is not readily available. The Human Resources Department was
John C. Alfano, NAA
Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 10.
developing one when the Former CFO blocked it probably because it would have made
it more difficult for him reward and control select employees and punish others. Policy
manuals are important to make employees aware of benefits they are entitled, specify
expected behavior, procedures for providing and appealing discipline, to memorialize
important institutional information, to clarify appropriate lines of communication for all
positions, and what employee information is appropriate and inappropriate to share. A
policy manual can avoid claims of unequal and discriminatory treatment and may be a
strong defense when there are claims of disparate treatment.
Employees believe the Former CFO ignored job descriptions when hiring,
promoting, and assigning work to select employees. One employee was disciplined for
attempting to inform another employee of his proper benefits that he was not receiving.
A policy manual with up to date job descriptions should reflect the true
parameters of each job to ensure employees are assigned proper tasks and wages are
paid equitably among all similarly situated employees.10

III. Miscellaneous
H. Long Term Employees
A substantial number of employees are long term, some of whom have not
worked for another employer throughout their adult lives. Long term employees can be
both a positive and negative benefit. Long term employees know their jobs and the
operations intimately which is useful to detect inefficiencies and offer ideas for
improvement. They have institutional memory which is important for the continued
operations as new employees are hired and current employees retire. On the other
hand, those employees can be negative influencers. Humans generally are resistant to
change reminiscent of the too often quoted Maine comment, ‘Why fix it if it ain’t broke’.
As we age and become familiar with our jobs, we tend to become comfortable with the
status quo and resist change. This tendency can be reversed when employers value
and seek out their knowledge and advice. When ideas from all employees, especially
long term employees, are not valued, they tend to ‘just do their jobs’. They generally will
remain silent when problems surface even though they may know how to solve them.

10
Currently, a consultant has been updating job descriptions.
John C. Alfano, NAA
Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 11.
 The Former CFO, whether by design or accident, exploited human nature by
developing a culture that discouraged employees to suggest ideas and change and
disparaged employees who suggested them. They were ignored and openly criticized.
His control over information and his treatment caused employees to isolate themselves
and avoid him.
A proper team environment that encourages employees to speak out will benefit
morale and help the Turnpike to develop vision, inspiration, and vehicles for change as
it moves toward its 100th Year. Oddly, no one interviewed mentioned or identified the
Turnpike’s short term and long term plans.

I. Blame
A substantial number of employees believe the Board knew of his behavior and
did nothing to stop him. Some have asked, ‘how did they not know?’ He ingratiated
himself with the Board, while he slowly and methodically threatened and intimidated
anyone he believed was a threat, while he slowly and methodically isolated departments
and individuals. There is no information that indicates that Board members knew or
suspected this behavior. Similarly, employees believe the Executive Director knew or
should have known of his behavior. However, he relieved the Executive Director of
many of the day-to-day duties that were either less appealing to him or those he did not
have the time. Normally, an employee who helps reduce the burden on his boss is
welcomed except in this case. Others blame their managers for not acting. They were
victims also. Some managers assumed dual roles, to protect themselves from his anger
while deflecting it from the employees to themselves.
There may be vulnerabilities in the organizational structure. There were far too
many people who knew about his behavior who did not act. However, only one person
is at fault – the Former CFO. He used everyone. He was patient, methodical, and
relentless to implement his vision for the Turnpike. In doing so, he hurt everyone.
Although he has not been employed for almost ten months, employees have said little
has changed. The damage he caused is extensive. It may not go away merely by his

John C. Alfano, NAA

Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 12.
absence.11 The responsibility lies with the Board, Executive Director, Directors, and
employees to fix the personnel and personal problems that remain.

Recommendations
J. Management Training
Managers should be trained to do their jobs in an open organizational structure.
Many have worked only in the closed structure forced upon them by the Former CFO.
Proper management training will increase efficiency.

K. FLSA Evaluation
The Turnpike should determine whether it is in compliance with the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

L. Hourly vs. Salary Pay Standards

As part of the FLSA evaluation, employees in the various departments
responsible for approving payroll should be trained in FLSA rules, especially for
expected hours of work, overtime eligibility, and pay rates for hourly and salaried
employees.

K. Working with Headquarters Employees

There should be a series of meetings with Headquarters staff. On May 2, 2024
the preliminary Report was delivered and discussed with the Board, employees who
were interviewed and other invited employees in positions designated on the existing
organizational chart. After the Board ended the meeting, the employees in attendance
remained to further discuss the Report and exchange their personal experiences.
Employees discussed their own experiences demonstrating to all everyone has been
victimized in some manner.
These meetings should be followed up with at additional employee meetings, the
first of which to establish subcommittees to discuss and develop plans to implement the
recommendations. See Exhibit B, Summary of Recommendations. The
recommendations requiring Board approval will be sent to the Board, while the

11
Too often organizations believe that by removing the person or persons causing problems, normality
will also be restored. However, problems will resurface later when the damage has not been addressed.
John C. Alfano, NAA
Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 13.
remainin
ng will be discussed fo
or implemen
ntation betw
ween the Executive Diirector and the
Directors.
Although
A the
e employee
es had a pro
oductive me
eeting on M
May 2, 2024
4, by relatin
ng
experien
nces they had
h with the
e Former CF
FO, the dep
pth and bre
eadth of the
eir anger an
nd
frustratio
on they exp
perienced before
b July 2023
2 contin
nues to the present. I urge the Bo
oard
and the Executive Director to encourage employeess to develop the imple
ementation
dopt them when
suggestions and ad w comp
pleted.

Most
M importa
antly, the re
ecommendations for th
he Employe
ees listed o
on Exhibit B will
have gre
eater impac
ct, meaning
g, and acceptability wh
hen they are
e researche
ed and
developed into policy recomm
mendations by the emp
ployees, subject to app
propriate
administtrative or Board appro
oval, rather than develo
oped and isssued from the Board,, the
Executiv
ve Director, an Assista
ant Executiv
ve Director or consulta
ants.

Summary
I want to tha
ank the Boa
ard for trusting me to w
with this tassk, the Execcutive Direcctor
with prov
viding me with
w genera
al organizational inform
mation, and
d the Directo
or and othe
er
employe
ees for sharring difficultt personal incidents an
nd other infformation th
hat employe
ees
usually don’t
d feel co
omfortable discussing, especiallyy with a stra
anger. I am
m confident tthe
informattion is accurate as the majority off it was repe
eated from multiple so
ources. The
e
h little value unless the informa
Report has ation and re
ecommenda
ations are tthe basis fo
or all
involved
d to actively
y and diligen
ntly make this workpla
ace less toxxic. Since employees
spend about a third
d of their wa
aking hours
s at work in teracting w
with and dep
pending on
their cow
workers, the
ey should be
b encourag
ged to deve
elop positivve working rrelationship
ps
and worrk places fre
ee from ma
anufactured stress and
d unnecessary tension
n.

Respecttfully submiitted,

_______ _________________
John C. Alfano, NAAA
Arbitrato
or & Mediattor

May 17, 2024

John C. Alfano, NAA
N
Arbitrator & Meddiator
arbitratoralfano@
@gmail.com
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 14.
 EXHIBIT A
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION FROM INTERVIEWS
(with minimal editing)

Structure/Organization
1. Employees are not aware of a policy manual or it is not readily accessible. They are necessary
to inform employees when they are being asked to comply with inappropriate and prohibited
requests, provide lists of benefits, and memorialize some of the institutional information for new
and seasoned employees.
2. Lines of communication for all positions are not clear.
3. Job descriptions should reflect the true parameters of each job so employees know what may
and may not be required of them.
4. No designated management team. Departments and employees are islands. Few to no
management / department meetings and almost no meetings across operational lines
5. There should be a plan for a smooth transition since there are many long term employees in key
positions who might be retiring within the next five years.
6. No formal management succession when Exec. Director and other leadership are unavailable or
on long term leave / retire. People who report to Exec. Dir. don’t have anyone formally
designated to report to in his absence.
7. No COO (or Assistant Executive Director) to deal with the day-to-day functions / pass
information up to the Executive Director and down from Executive Director to ensure anyone
including the Directors are not abusing their authority.
8. Personal employee information should not be available to anyone except HR who may distribute
only such information as necessary for payroll and other employment matters. CFO should not
have access to personal information except the minimum needed for payroll calculations.
9. Medical reimbursements are distributed in house rather than by an outside third party.
10. Should the CFO and the Corporation Counsel continue to be appointed Board Treasurer and
Secretary, respectively?
11. Is Director of IT reporting to the CFO appropriate especially to protect personnel and confidential
information? Perhaps reporting to a COO (operations manager) might be more appropriate?
12. Wages / wage increases are not related to the job descriptions / responsibilities. Wages are not
in line with job descriptions’ responsibilities and skills.
13. Information travels upward in silos to the CFO; collaboration laterally between departments was
actively discouraged except as required by individual projects.
14. Directors do not meet as a team to review general operational procedures / exchange ideas /
only meet on specific projects.
15. Employees have not been assessed for additional skills and abilities that may be of value to the
Turnpike.
16. Former CFO had access to / possessed files he should not have had which he may have used
for power and personal gain.

Personnel/Personal
17. There are residual bad feelings – referred to as PTSD – in aftermath of Former CFO.
a) Employees were intimidated to control them.
b) Women held back – males with fewer skills and ability seemed to get promotions.
c) Difficult place for women to work.
d) Employees groomed to mistrust one another.
e) Employees kept off balance by design – never knew when they would be reprimanded or
demeaned.
f) Employees don’t believe there is anyone in higher positions who will listen to them.
g) CFO would criticize the Exec. Director and anyone else who was targeted at formal and
informal meetings with employees.

John C. Alfano, NAA

Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 15.
 h) Threatened employees’ jobs and careers to gain control over them. In one instance, he
contacted a potential employer with negative comments, specifically to demonstrate his
reach and control over this key employee.
i) He made cruel and hurtful comments to employees who were in personal distress.
j) He made comments to an employee that another employee was oversexed because he
had “too many kids.”
k) Employees believe that people who appeared to have the power to stop his behavior did
nothing, enabled him, and therefore were complicit.
l) The Former CFO compromised everyone by threatening their jobs and careers; no one
was out of his reach.
m) Many believe that people were promoted not by qualifications but to serve his purposes.
n) He could sense fear as dogs do; employees who were not fearful were spared much of his
wrath.
o) The culture he forced needs to be changed.
p) An employee’s daughter was not hired because the employee is not a Director, and, “We
don’t hire girls because they cause more problems.”
q) If the environment that permitted his behavior is not changed, another like him will move in
to fill the void.
r) His attendance at meetings resulted in power plays to control the meetings for his needs
and purposes.
s) Some employees commiserated with each other for comfort and protection because there
was nowhere for them to go to complain without losing their jobs.
t) No changes / innovations except if they fulfilled his vision or purpose.
u) Some employees continue to manipulate their schedules and time off. (This comment was
made by more than one employee but there was no hard data provided in support.)
v) Too much unnecessary upper level decision-making approval continues to be required
before action may be taken, especially on budgeted inexpensive items.

Miscellaneous
18. A substantial number of employees are long term which is both a plus and a negative. He
exploited by design or accident people’s innate resistance to change for his purposes at a cost
to the Authority.
Little structural / operational change that could have benefitted the Authority. Long tenure can be
advantage when combined with cross department interaction for developing new ideas and
change.
19. Turnpike lacks of vision, inspiration, and a vehicle for change.
20. At least one job description was modified for hiring certain employee to the exclusion of the
experienced person. The hired person had almost unlimited overtime and was immune from
Former CFO’s degrading behavior. An employee was ‘called out’ for disciplining this employee.
21. A substantial number of employees believe the Board and Executive Director knew or should
have known of his behavior and did not act. (Believing does not make it fact, but their believing
has the same consequences as if were fact.)
22. Employees learned to manipulate Former CFO so that he believed their ideas were his to get
them approved.
23. He made himself the default decision maker for all departments.
24. He was a ‘maestro’ by the way he played the Board.
25. There is little to no downward communications.
26. In at least one department, the top employees who worked well together were pitted against
each other.
27. Not sure managers know how to manage in a properly functioning workplace because they had
not been allowed to manage and make decisions without higher level approval.

John C. Alfano, NAA

Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 16.
 EXHIBIT B
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Employees:
The employees should coordinate implementing the following recommendations by
appointing subcommittees to develop plans to:
1) Provide general management training program for Directors and other managers
after identifying areas where training is needed.
2) Initiate monthly meetings for Directors to exchange information across
departments.
3) Initiate monthly departmental meetings to exchange information internally.
4) Develop a code of ethics for employees.
5) Develop a Policy Manual.
6) Develop a Standard Operations Manuals for departments
7) Develop a Policy for Confidential Information
8) Develop a guide for department payroll people for hourly vs. salaried employees
to guide employees who approve payroll before it is submitted to the finance
office.
Board and Executive Director:
The Board and Administration (possibly with the assistance of a committee of
employees) should coordinate implementing the following recommendations:
9) Develop key person succession policies for each department subject to Board or
Administration approval.
10) Develop a key person succession policy for administration.
11) Conduct a wage and benefit audit to determine if employees are being paid
properly in compliance with Fair Labor Standards, especially hours of work and
overtime including proper pay calculations for hourly and salaried employees.
12) Complete the job description study.
13) Develop Board / employees informal social occasions, such as employee
recognition program, cookout, etc.

NOTES: The above Recommendations should be pursued by the Board and Executive Director to
maximize their benefit to the Board, employees, and the Turnpike in general.
The recommendations for the Employees will have greater impact, meaning, and acceptability when they
are researched and developed into policy recommendations by the employees, subject to appropriate
administrative or Board approval, rather than developed and issued from the Board, the Executive
Director, an Assistant Executive Director or consultants.

John C. Alfano, NAA

Arbitrator & Mediator
[email protected]
207-229-2227
May 17, 2024 Page 17.