According to informed sources:
When the “Happy Penis Massage Cream” incident occurred March 28, 2011 it was the only allegation that Sieg made against Klosterkemper. There was no mention of any other incidents of sexual harassment or misconduct by Klosterkemper.
When the Mayor issued a written warning to Klosterkemper immediately after the incident occurred (as confirmed by Klosterkemper himself), Sieg had not mentioned any other incidents of sexual harassment or misconduct by Klosterkemper so it was treated as a first time single gender-based incident. And yes the Mayor did let Klosterkemper know if any additional incidents occurred he would be terminated.
When the Mayor conducted an additional investigation, Sieg did not mention any other incidents of sexual harassment or misconduct by Klosterkemper.
When the BOW reviewed the action of the Mayor, which ended in a tie vote (Simmons, Oldham yea, King, Cain nay) to suspend Klosterkemper for one day without pay, there was no mention of any other incidents of sexual harassment or misconduct by Klosterkemper. If I were the Mayor I would not have voted to break the tie, I would have just left the vote tied in a “hung jury” so to speak. That might have satisfied some malcontents like Jean (but most likely not).
It was not until Sieg filed the EEOC complaint on or about August 22 that Sieg ALLEGED additional incidents of sexual harassment had occurred beginning in 2009. It should be noted that Sieg never filed a formal or informal complaint for any of the other ALLEGED incidents with her boss June Ryle or with Mayor Herbert during the period 2009 – March 2011.
Once of the allegations on the EEOC complaint is that Klosterkemper showed her pictures of nude college women on his IPHONE. Klosterkemper does not have and never has had a IPHONE. The devil is in the details.
Klosterkemper admitted to placing the “Happy Penis Massage Cream” on Sieg’s computer tower and was disciplined for it. He has not admitted to ANY of the other allegations, and at this point they are just allegations and he, like everyone else, is innocent until proven guilty.
Ryle and Sieg were apparently not satisfied with the Mayor’s decision to give Klosterkemper a written warning. Apparently they felt he minimally should of been suspended (and “not just for a week or two”). But people who say the Mayor did not take action, and that he did not discipline Klosterkemper according to city policy simply don’t know what they are talking about. People can debate forever if the discipline was severe enough, the same way people debate the death penalty versus life in prison, but the fact Klosterkemper was disciplined cannot be debated.
In my singular opinion Sieg is a victim of sexual harassment for the “Happy Penis Massage Cream” incident, and as I mentioned earlier I would have suspended Klosterkemper for a week without pay. None of the other allegations in the EEOC complaint have been proven. To prove them, other than he said she said, there would need to be a witnesses or documented formal complaints on file. So where are they? If the ALLEGATIONS are proven, then based on the additional information additional action could be taken against Klosterkemper.