10-28-13 Common Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING OCTOBERT 28, 2013 who is unfit to serve as Chief. So, yes the Mayor’s decision with regards to Chief Teachman was definitely based on politics. I suspect that every member of our council would expect the Chief of the South Bend Police Department to lead the department by example and then expect the men and women who serve to follow right? Well believe my you need to investigate not only what happened that night in April at the King Center but also Chief Teachman’s answers to the questions about what happened that night. When you do then you will agree with the two Board of Safety members who asked for his resignation. There was a third Board of Safety member who pointed out those things Chief Teachman did wrong but didn’t recommend any punishment to the Mayor. He did say the chief should address the members of the South Bend Police Department with regards to his actions in the Center incident though. So yes there were three Board of Safety members who pointed out those things the Chief did wrong with regards to the King Center incident and subsequent ISP investigation and not what the Mayor said was a majority backing his position the Chief did nothing wrong. Councilmembers you should also ask the Mayor what witnesses told him the Chief was in the restroom when Lt. Newton was told about the fight outside the King Center. Ask him for the names of those witnesses who told him th that because he was quoted saying that in the newspaper on September 26. Did the Mayor talk with witnesses personally or did he give the public information through the newspaper from the ISP report? Please ask the Mayor for the names of those witnesses he talked with about the matter who told him Chief Teachman was in the restroom when Lt. Newton responded to the fight. Mayor you can’t have it both ways. You can’t refuse to give the public answers to all the questions and facts of what happened that night and subsequent ISP investigation but then tell the public part of the information to justify your bad decision. If you are going to release part of the facts then release all the facts because the public needs to know what kind of mayor we have and chief he hired. Councilmembers please conduct an investigatory hearing to learn the facts of what happened the night in question at the King Center and what the Chief’s responses were to questions asked by the ISP investigator. Our citizens need to know so they will know the Mayor isn’t what he appears to be on the surface and the man he hired to be Chief is not the leader of the South Bend Police we all expect but especially the brave men and women who serve the department most definitely deserve. Thank you for your time and consideration in my request. Rev. Greg Brown, 1238 Diamond, South Bend, Indiana: I am the gentleman that made the complaint against Chief Teachman. Before that to the City Council Board, I went to Mayor’s night out to talk to the Mayor about the situation. The Mayor had no answers and did not want to hear what I asked or had to say. That’s why I got to the City Council Board because he spoke about transparency, talked about someone who brought in an investigation on his administration, wouldn’t be a leader under his administration. So my thing is there here you got transparency and everybody makes mistakes but when I went to the Mayor on two different nights out we could not get any answers. Still today, we don’t have any answers. Thank you. Jesse Davis, P. O. Box 10205, South Bend, Indiana: I have a couple of things that are redundant from past meetings and past privileges of the floor. Such as the double billing? Has there been any answers give about the contractor supplied to homeowners who was double billing (the city forced homeowners to use this contractor.) I talked to the Chief about that and he basically told me that the city could handle that as a civil matter instead of a criminal matter. That this contractor was out billing the homeowner and the city for the same work. He told him the reason why basically that the city ordinance for the sewer insurance program stated that the homeowners were obligated to pay for second opinion drain cleaning, the city should not be paying for that. This is what the Chief gave me as an excuse. I’ve got a question that I would really like the Council to look into. If that’s the case and I have read the ordinance and it does state that the homeowners are obligated to pay, but this contractor also billed the city and got paid. Someone within the city set up a specific fund that is put there to pay for second opinion drain cleaning. So if you ordinance says we don’t pay for that, who within the city set up a fund specifically to allow this contractor to milk the city out of thousands of dollars. I also would like to know if there has been any forward movement that’s on the Council on gaining access to or getting any questions answered by the ISP report that Mr. Cottrell had talked about. 39