|
REGULAR MEETING JUNE 11, 2012
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />is concerned about the possible content on those tapes, our community was concerned,
<br />and so they told them they are an outside authority and believe that they have the power
<br />to do this, and are asking to help our community to review this material, report back to
<br />us, so we can decide what to do.
<br />
<br />Councilmember Oliver Davis stated that he has a series of questions for the Mayor to
<br />address. Which is in the letter, and we have talked about. He has shared publicly that he
<br />has a new standard that says that if any of his administration, basically any employee, has
<br />an investigation brought against them, that they would no longer be a part of the
<br />administration. He stated in his personal opinion, is saying that if somebody in the city
<br />has a state or federal investigation against them, that you are automatically charge guilty
<br />and removed from office without giving themselves any kind of defense. He stated that
<br />one of things that we have in the Board of Public Safety, which when people ask him
<br />how this thing should have been handled, he thinks when an investigation was out here,
<br />before anybody was fired, demoted or whatever, they should have been put on
<br />administrative leave with or without pay, doesn’t really matter to him on that piece, but
<br />then an investigation could have taken place. Then if has been found like it was found
<br />that there was nothing that was determined to move forward with any of the investigation
<br />that they could have been brought back to the position or if there was something that was
<br />found they could have been move. He stated that is what we do with our public safety
<br />officers, okay, and it is amazing to him that the Chief who is over these public safety
<br />wasn’t given the same kind of respect. So, therefore, he really thinks that it sets such a
<br />very dangerous precedent in the City of South Bend, that if somebody, or if he launches
<br />an investigation against you, or anybody on the staff, you automatically are removed
<br />tomorrow. He stated that he thinks that this is wrong; he stated that the administration
<br />would not let this happen to them, so why would you do it to any of the employees that
<br />work with us. He stated that if somebody lost their investigation against him, he has a
<br />right to defend himself and why are we taking that away from our city employees? He
<br />would like for the Mayor to respond to that and the next meeting, so he can publicly go
<br />on record to say that is his new hire standard. He asked to see the new city policy that
<br />addresses that matter. How does it relate? He thought that they had a situation and when
<br />it came down to city employees whether they have a chance to what you call “progressive
<br />discipline” and now this administration has taken a stance that one investigation removes,
<br />please show me how that works with the current and has been traditionally put in place
<br />by progressive discipline and what the new Mayor’s stand is on that. Not only his
<br />administrative staff, because the Mayor has the right to put in his staff, where he has felt
<br />that this whole thing brought the Council is when he said that the Chief was demoted
<br />because of this investigation, if he just said we need to get a new chief “whooped doo”
<br />we would have moved on. But when he ties his reputation, his career, to this
<br />investigation, that’s when he brought us in. So that what he wants to understand, how
<br />does his practice deal with progressive discipline and investigations? He stated that he
<br />needs to know that.
<br />
<br />Mr. Schumhl stated that he will be sure that he brings that topic up on June 25, 2012.
<br />
<br />NEW BUSINESS
<br />There was no new business to come before the Council at this time.
<br />
<br />PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
<br />
<br />Greg Brown, 1238 Diamond, South Bend, Indiana, stated that his concern is that South
<br />Bend, Indiana has rules and policies and guidelines. This taping issue has been treated
<br />like we are a commonwealth state like Kentucky; we are making the rules as we go. If
<br />we are asking for an investigation of the tapes, investigating the alleged people, anybody
<br />can be accused; they are asking for an investigation, our city is paying for this, who’s
<br />investigating, our city? It’s going to cost us money. Even if they were to play the tapes
<br />in the room tonight, not one of us who voice it is. So that is going to have to take some
<br />money to say who’s voice, cause the first person is going to say “I didn’t do it” “I didn’t
<br />say it” Nobody is going to stand up because if we were men, men do things when we
<br />were a child, we act as one. In this area there have been some heavy things that were
<br />supposedly said, he hasn’t heard the tapes, and he is not so sure he wants to hear the tapes
<br /> 20
<br />
<br />
|