What Local Leadership Is Teaching Our Youth

Transparency is the foundation for trust, for growth, for citizen retention. And that transparency is what local leadership has been found to be lacking.An anonymous staff survey was conducted for employees for the pool department under the City of Sullivan. The goal was to collect direct testimony to highlight what’s happening inside the Sullivan City Pool and how it reflects current city leadership. These responses come from current employees, most of them teenagers, all of them under 21 years of age. Their answers show patterns of retaliation, mismanagement by leadership, and unethical behavior.When a system is this scrutinized, when even the youngest and most removed employees are asking for change, we have to ask: where are the issues that are affecting the very foundation of employment?These issues are clear, they begin at the top of our city and trickle downward. The trickle has become a stream since Mayor JD Wilson took office in 2024 and all of Sullivan has felt it.I am unable access security footage or retroactively record conversations, but I can share the voices of those working inside the current culture now in a way that protects their paychecks. And none of this information is about what happened, it’s about what’s happening.

I composed a survey for 20 randomly selected current staff members (roughly 50% of the roster) at the pool after excluding the five with obvious bias (any staff with a relationship to current or prior leadership). The point of this survey was only to check in on their work satisfaction and their opinions on the future of the pool. I promised them that it would be anonymous, and I meant it.

Text sent by author to 20 randomly selected Sullivan City Pool staff members.

Not all 20 staff filled it out, but I did receive 14/20 responses (which, for anonymous feedback, is a decent response rate). Every survey submitted did not have every question answered, as every aspect of this was fully voluntary as well as completely anonymous.These are not just numbers on a screen. Each response represents a teenager in our community who shows up to work unsure whether they’ll be supported, punished, or ignored.

All in all? Is this a wild survey? No. You could argue the percentages on the top result per question were high due to the low number of staff sent the survey. Some may even question the survey pool itself. But even with potential bias, the consistency of the responses is worth paying attention to.I think the ones that the community of Sullivan should be most concerned with are 4, 7, 8, and 10. These are the ones that not only highlight the youthful view on the present - but indicate the trends that will impact the future.As a whole, Sullivan’s population has remained steady since 2000. There is a very slight downtrend, nothing major, just enough to show that consistently - people don’t stay in Sullivan.Which is bad, right? If we imagine Sullivan as a business, would we be concerned if we’re never getting more customers beyond our ‘usuals’ and that even the usuals tend to slowly drop off eventually?I would be.

My question is: how can we hope to grow as a city if the city can’t so much as make our youngest workers feel supported, secure, and loyal to their position?Sure, this was the pool staff and you can argue that they’re teenagers, it’s a small survey, etc. but if they were allowed/felt secure enough to share: what would employees in other departments say? Would they share that they feel valued, secure, and loyal to their position in the city?Again: picture the City of Sullivan like a business. What’s one of the first lessons taught in business management?Customer retention. It’s not just a phrase - it’s a goal, one of the top goals and most valuable for growth. And as far as I can see (and as much as I heard from employees when I worked for the city)?The toxic environment within the city leadership will continue to drive more people away than it will ever bring in.

Now, while I do enjoy dissecting city leadership like I’m breaking down a business case study, I didn’t expect these survey responses to be shocking. They weren’t. The numbers speak for themselves: clear, consistent, but not surprising.What made this an article worth holding on to and sharing was the conversation that followed with one of the staff members. I didn’t share this right away because I needed to be sure I wasn’t reacting from a place of emotion or bitterness.I’m not here to be dramatic. I’m not here to make this personal. I am someone who overshares because I believe transparency and honesty should be practiced in leadership, in business, and in our community.I have never been a closed book. As an avid reader and not so secret bookworm, closed books have never made sense to me.With that said, and with their permission, here is the conversation:

Note: I’ve rewritten for clarity and privacy. The staff member is still employed and I won’t put their paycheck at risk when their text form is distinct.
I have also, after much consideration, redacted the name of the leader who is referenced in this message. I will not be pulled into a mudslinging battle once again, I’m hoping by redacting this information readers can focus on this much larger issue of the environment leadership cultivated.
To be clear, the person referenced in this message is not the current pool manager. Please do not make assumptions that harm the wrong people.

Them (transcribed and lightly revised for spelling and tone):
Hey, I wasn’t going to say anything because I really need this job, but I’ll probably leave soon anyway. My hours got cut right after I said you weren’t irresponsible during the 21+ Swim. I was asked if I’d lie and say you let us drink, and I said no.
Please don’t say anything until I find a new job. I’m really sorry this happened. You loved that place more than anyone, and now it just sucks.

Author/Jess:

Them:
Yeah, it was - and now ‘they’re’ basically the one running the pool. I’m pretty sure that’s why I’m getting less than 10 hours a week. ‘They’ said it was because you hired too many people, but XXX, XXX, and XXX getting almost 40 hours.I don’t really care if you tell anyone, but please don’t say I was the one who said anything. Please. I know ‘Unnamed Leader’ asked at least two other people, because XXX told me ‘they’ asked ‘them’ and ‘they’ said ‘they’ would - which is probably why ‘they’ didn’t lose hours.‘Unnamed Leadership’ asked XXX too. XXX told me ‘they’ were asked and almost quit, ‘they’ were so mad.

At least three staff members, all 20 years old or younger, shared they were asked if they’d lie and claim they broke the law to support the City’s agenda. Those who agreed seemed to keep their hours. Those who didn’t seemed to lose them.That isn’t just unethical. It’s manipulative and retaliatory behavior. And for anyone who has worked under current leadership, it isn’t surprising.This isn’t about revenge or reputation. It’s about accountability. It’s about building a workplace that supports people instead of scaring them into silence. This isn’t a me problem. It’s a leadership problem.And when that kind of leadership sits over our hometown, over our youngest workers and future leaders, it becomes an us problem.

- Jessalyn Norris, June 2025

• View Your Rights
• Download Your Rights