Gettysburg Park superintendent reassigned

[Amish John]

http://www.eveningsun.com/ci_13613398

I think probably the majority of his detractors over the years are those who are hurt financially by the closing of the old visitor center or those who don't understand the difference between a military park and a nature park (regarding the tree removal). Personally, I feel he was a great asset to the park, despite some mis-steps along the way as evidenced by some of the "Sickles Award" nominations at the Gettysburg Daily website.

[estabu2]

That's a shame.

[Kerflumoxed]

For what it's worth department:

The GB Park Super has been under investigation for some time. Here is the site for the official report: http://www.doioig.gov/upload/Latscha...eb%20site1.pdf

Here is the newspaper site reporting his reassignment and the reasons: http://ydr.inyork.com/ci_13616417

On Tuesday, the Gettysburg Times ran a story that over "3,400 sexually explicit images" had been discovered on his work-site computer during the investigation.

[Ephrum]

If the man didn't have any more sense than that, I have no sympathy for him at all. The more I read of his excuses, the more I think he's full of it.

I think he's only sorry, because he got caught.

I do feel bad for his family though.

[Kerflumoxed]

For those interested, here is the latest "skinny" on GNMP:

NPS ends silence on Latschar
Search for new battlefield superintendent could take six to eight months.
By ERIN JAMES - The Evening Sun

The National Park Service ended its weeklong silence Friday regarding management changes at Gettysburg National Military Park with its official announcement that John Latschar has been reassigned to a position in Frederick, Md., and that the park's current chief ranger will serve as superintendent for the time being.

Another announcement will be made early next week about who will serve as interim superintendent while the National Park Service conducts a nationwide search to replace Latschar, who lost his 15-year post as steward of the Gettysburg Battlefield having admitted to viewing sexually explicit material at work.

Latschar will report Monday to the Historic Preservation Training Center as a special assistant to the Park Service's associate director for cultural resources. He will continue to make $145,000 annually in his new position, said NPS spokesman David Barna.

Barna said the search for Latschar's replacement is expected to take between six and eight months. The Park Service will work with Civil War history and preservation organizations to "try to get as broad and diverse an applicant pool as we can," Barna said.

"We're going to take our time," he said.

As for why Latschar has been reassigned, Barna said that government privacy policies prohibit him from commenting.

"I can't talk about anything about him as individual," he said.

Asked why this is the best decision for Gettysburg National Military Park and the National Park

Service, Barna said he is still prohibited from commenting. He said he's not sure the Park Service will ever be able to address those questions publicly.
But, Barna added, Latschar is "free to say whatever - as an individual - whatever he wants to."

In an interview with The Evening Sun this week, the former superintendent said it is his understanding that the decision to demote him was that of Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, though the official letter came Thursday afternoon from the office of Latschar's immediate supervisor, NPS Director for the Northeast Region Dennis Reidenbach.

Latschar lost his position after a government memo detailing the superintendent's use of his office computer to view sexually explicit material was leaked to the media.

The memo - which The Evening Sun has since obtained - from the Department of the Interior's Office of the Inspector General stated that federal investigators had found evidence on Latschar's computer hard drive that he had searched for and viewed significant amounts of sexually explicit material.

Latschar said Thursday night that he thinks the demotion and reassignment to Frederick is "fair" given the circumstances.

"I think that's in the best interest of me and my family and Gettysburg National Military Park," he said.

On Friday - his last working for the National Park Service in Gettysburg - Latschar e-mailed his former employees to "offer you my heartfelt apologies for what has happened."

"My greatest prayer is that you will not let the circumstances of my departure tarnish the magnificent accomplishments you have achieved," he wrote.

Until the Park Service names an interim superintendent, Chief Ranger Brion FitzGerald - now Gettysburg's most senior official - will assume the duties, Barna said.

FitzGerald is a 31-year veteran of the National Park Service who came to Gettysburg in 1995 as chief of interpretation, protection and museum services. He has also had oversight over protection and museum services at the Eisenhower National Historic Site. He holds a bachelor's degree in park management from East Carolina University.

Barna said the interim superintendent will most likely be someone within the National Park Service who does not currently work in Gettysburg.

"Typically, people who are on the staff in the park aren't interested in being considered for the interim job if they're going to apply for the permanent job," Barna said. "We tend to not want someone in the interim job who actually might be considered for the permanent job. We don't want to give them sort of a head start."
:woohoo:

[Armchair General]

There are so many directions this thing is going in I'm not sure which way is up. So the old superintendent got caught, slapped on the wrist, and just kinda moved out of the picture, out of sight, out of memory. Something doesn't seem right...

[Amish John]

I'm kind of surprised he gets to keep his former salary. Of course, I don't know how his new position will compare to his position at GBNMP.

[norb]

If all he did was view porn on his computer, I don't agree with the decision. I know a ton of people that have viewed porn at work. Every time you go to any site, it saves the images on your computer if you have not set up the options correctly. So it would not take much to get 3400 images on a computer. Could be done in a week very easily. As long as those images were not anything illegal, then I think it's very hypocritical to fire someone for having porn. They should be harshly disciplined, but I do not think that the crime is evidence of not performing the job or not performing it well. There may be other reasons, but if this is the excuse then I don't agree.

[Little Powell]

norb wrote:

If all he did was view porn on his computer, I don't agree with the decision. I know a ton of people that have viewed porn at work. Every time you go to any site, it saves the images on your computer if you have not set up the options correctly. So it would not take much to get 3400 images on a computer. Could be done in a week very easily. As long as those images were not anything illegal, then I think it's very hypocritical to fire someone for having porn. They should be harshly disciplined, but I do not think that the crime is evidence of not performing the job or not performing it well. There may be other reasons, but if this is the excuse then I don't agree.

Agreed. He should definitely get reprimanded, and his internet activity closely monitored or taken away completely.. But as long as it wasn't illegal porn, he shouldn't have been canned. Working in IT, I've had to investigate suspected porn PC's.. If I found it, I'd tell their manager and they'd usually just get their internet access removed.

[Ephrum]

Maybe he wasn't supposed to view things like that while he was on the clock. I mean from an employer standpoint, he's not doing his job if he's looking at porn while at work.
Some employer's are that way. I've known a few people who lost their jobs just for having Solitare on their work computer, or were paying bills online, while on the clock.
Point being, people lose their jobs for a lot less than what he did.

And let's be honest, porn is a lighting-rod kind of subject, like politics and religion.

How many mothers are going to read about this and want their children to go visit Gettysburg National Park? Or be anywhere near the man.

It's probably a matter of public perception.

I still think he was stupid to do that at work. He should've done that in the privacy of his home.