“We’ve been committed to equipping our firefighters with the best tools and facilities to modernize our fire department and to keep our citizens safe,” Abramson said in a news release. “This new boat is part of that commitment.”

The state-of-the art vessel is equipped to handle dive rescue, firefighting and water rescue operations in the river.

The boat cost $400,000 with most of the funding coming from a federal homeland security grant money through Port Security and the Urban Area Security Initiative. The rest was made through matching funds from the Louisville Fire Department’s fleet depreciation fund, according to the Mayor’s Office.

It features a removable side panel for easy access for water rescues, electronic pump and valve controls for easy operation, LED lighting in cabin, on deck and at water level to provide light for divers and firefighters. It also has the capacity to pump water to shore-based units to fight fires along the river. It can pump as much as 2000 gallons per minute, powered by an independent V-8 engine.

“Increasing activity on the Ohio River creates a greater need for emergency response to rescues, fires, and hazardous materials incidents,” Frederick said. “The new Fire & Rescue Boat provides us with the speed for quick response, the convenience of modern control systems, and the water pumping capabilities to handle those emergencies.”

The boat has been on the water for about two weeks for training sessions. It already proved valuable the weekend of the Ford Ironman competition. During a practice swim, crews were on-hand to assist a distressed swimmer. The vessel was custom built for fire department just across the river at Kentuckiana Yacht Sales in Jeffersonville, Indiana and has become a model for other fire departments across the state.

Responding to the judge’s verdict, Shane Sidebottom, Garrett’s attorney, said a decision on whether to appeal the ruling hasn’t been made or whether his client will submit to the psych test.

“Obviously, there is fear in taking this examination because the person the city has assigned to provide the examiner with information about Mr. Garrett — Public Works supervisor Betty Younis — is the one of the people he named in the whistleblower suit,” says Sidebottom. “It’s bias on its face and we see it as playing with someone’s health records. If he applies for another job in the future this will be on his record. That’s a real problem.”

Earlier this year, Garrett, who has been employed by the city since 2004, filed a retaliation lawsuit against Metro government alleging he was suspended for complaining about supposed mismanagement and financial waste in the department.

In July, LEO Weekly learned Garrett received a notice from the city ordering him to take a mental health evaluation or face termination almost a week after filing the suit.

Last Friday, a hearing was held on the motion and the court heard witness testimony from city officials and union representatives involved. Sidebottom argued that Garrett would face “mental and emotional distress, and humiliation” as a result of the evaluation and that his health insurance could be affected by the exam.

During last week’s court proceedings, Jennifer Maupin, a legal administrative liaison with the Human Resources Department, testified that any records with the results of Garrett’s mental health exam would be segregated from his personnel file and kept in a “vault”, which the court viewed as a reason to not interfere.

However, Maupin was unable to say if the the evaluation would have any effect on Garrett’s ability to get and maintain insurance coverage.

The “whistleblower” case stems from a pledge to save millions of dollars by taking steps to make city buildings more energy efficient. Last year, Garrett, who works on maintenance in the public works department, generated work orders on hundreds of pieces of equipment to help the city go green, but claims that work never occurred.

In August 2009, he complained to his boss, Public Works Director Ted Pullen, claiming the city wasn’t properly maintaining those mechanical systems. After not hearing back from Pullen, he called the city’s anonymous tip line to make a report about financial mismanagement.

Garrett met with Metro government officials, including the city’s auditor and Councilman Hal Heiner, R-19, who is running for mayor, with the hopes of seeing the work begin. But in April 2010, Garrett was suspended indefinitely and without pay after another Metro employee filed a complaint against him.

Last month, however, the state division of unemployment insurance ruled that suspension was not backed up by sufficient evidence. The state has since awarded Garrett his unemployment benefits.

“They’re trying to get my client to go a psychiatrist who specializes in criminal forensics to determine if he’s criminally insane. And if he doesn’t go, they’re going to charge him with insubordination so they can fire him.” says Sidebottom. “I’ve never seen anything like this.”

In a letter sent to Garrett’s attorney on July 19, Assistant Jefferson County Attorney Mark Miller says the city retains the discretion to determine when and under what circumstances an employee can be required to appear for a fitness for duty evaluation and that no justification is required for such referrals.

“Mr. Garrett controls when, and if, he will return to work by deciding whether or not he will appear for the fitness for duty evaluation, which has been previously scheduled twice but your client has not appeared,” Miller wrote. “Continued failure to appear for the evaluation may be deemed insubordination.”

A spokesman for the county attorney’s office was unavailable for comment.

Garrett’s whistleblower case stems from the city’s pledge to save millions of dollars by taking steps to make city structures more energy efficient. Last year, Garrett, who works on maintenance in the public works department, generated work orders on hundreds of pieces of equipment to help the city go green, but claims that work never occurred.

In August 2009, he complained to his boss, Public Works Director Ted Pullen, claiming the city wasn’t properly maintaining mechanical systems on city-owned buildings.

In February 2010, after having no luck with Pullen, he called the city’s anonymous 24/7 ethics tip line to make a report. Eventually, Garrett met with Metro government officials, including Councilman Hal Heiner, R-19, who is running for mayor, hoping to see the work begin.

After meeting with city officials, however, Garrett was suspended indefinitely and without pay after another Metro employee filed a complaint against him. At the time, no further information about that complaint was given to Garrett or his attorney, other than he was “being mean” to a colleague.

However, in a letter from a public works supervisor that was provided to LEO Weekly, an investigation conducted by the city alleged Garrett threatened violence against another employee. But Sidebottom says his client had filed a complaint against that employee first, yet only Garrett was suspended even after co-workers provided statements saying Garrett was the one being harrassed

Among other things, the psychiatric test evaluation would require Garrett to take a Rorschach test with a criminal investigator present, which is an invasion of his privacy, says Sidebottom, adding his client has never had mental health issues in his life.

“They didn’t request this evaluation until four day after the initial lawsuit was filed,” he says. “It basically says they as the government have the right to order any employee to see a psychiatrist. And that’s what struck me. If the government were to win on that it would be unlimited power to order someone to see a psychiatrist against their will.”

Interestingly, this isn’t the first time Garrett, who has been a Metro employee since 2004, has spoken up about screw-ups in a city department. In January 2006, while working as a kennel attendant with Louisville Metro Animal Services, he wrote an open letter to former Director Gilles Meloche, who resigned last year amid a number of controversies and is the subject of two sexual harassment lawsuits.

In e-mails to Meloche, Garrett complains about substandard facilities, low morale among employees and inhumane treatment of animals.

“Appeals for you to soberly assess and deal with our incapacity to support these animals are met by indifference, incompetence and occasionally the farcical pretense of superiority,” Garrett wrote in a follow-up e-mail addressed to “The Masters of Disaster.”

“It’s clear to me that management has no clue what effort and skills and resources are involved in trying to support such a dense concentration of animals, even to keep things reasonably decent,” he wrote.

About six months later, Garrett was transferred to Public Works for an unknown reason.

“Our union members have long been impressed with Councilman King’s efforts to provide a quality workplace and a fair and equitable wage for Metro employees,” says Greg Frazier, president of AFSCME Local 2629. “Jim’s willingness to provide an environment where all employees have an equal voice will go far toward ensuring a better work environment.”

In the crowded Democratic field, support from labor unions is considered critical and nabbing AFSCME local certainly boosts King among area workers. The fight over which of the eight Democratic candidates has a better labor record and key endorsements has thus far been between King and primary opponent, Louisville businessman Greg Fischer, who has led the pack among union endorsements.

Earlier this year we reported that the two candidates had been vying for AFSCME’s nod, but members withheld their seal of approval until they had a chance to review all the candidates despite pressure from state lawmakers who are supporting Fischer. And though the Fischer campaign still holds a small lead with the number of total union endorsements, the King campaign has gained significant ground in that category over the past month with notable nods, including the Jefferson County Teachers Association.