Spokane7
59°
February 23, 2012 in City
Fired officer’s settlement unleashes outcry, review
City officials weigh public backlash against financial risk
A controversial plan to rehire an alcoholic police officer fired after an off-duty drunken driving crash, and to give him back pay, has officials scrambling to explain the decision and dampen public backlash.
Mayor David Condon said Wednesday the proposed settlement with former Spokane police Sgt. Brad Thoma sends the wrong message, but Condon added he nevertheless supports the settlement because it avoids the risk of losing a costly lawsuit. Meanwhile, Sharon Ortiz, state Human Rights Commission director, said she isn’t ready to give the settlement her stamp of approval, despite her agency playing a role in crafting the settlement.
“The City’s settlement with Mr. Thoma sends the wrong message to our community,” Condon said in a news release. “It does not represent our values. This settlement is an example of seemingly special treatment enjoyed by a police officer to the frustration of the citizens who employ him.”
But, he said, “This settlement is a legal solution to a problem of financial risk for the City. We are proposing this settlement to protect taxpayer dollars. Within the state legal constraints we operate under, this is a good legal and financial decision for the City.”
Thoma was fired in December 2009 following an arrest for driving under the influence and leaving the scene of an accident he caused when he struck a pickup truck with his vehicle. Thoma’s lawyer, Bob Dunn, argued that his client has a disability – alcoholism – that the police department knew about but did not help Thoma get help with. The city said it did not know Thoma was an alcoholic until after the accident.
The settlement before the council seeks to resolve three pending issues, city spokeswoman Marlene Feist said in the news release: a grievance by the Spokane Police Guild, a civil claim by Thoma and a complaint by the state Human Rights Commission asserting the city failed to accommodate a disability.
However, Ortiz, the commission’s executive director, said although a local investigator signed off on the settlement of the commission’s complaint, she isn’t prepared to do so yet.
“They have a settlement agreement, but it’s not signed by me,” Ortiz said. “So it’s not a settlement agreement. All parties have to sign for it to be an agreement.”
Because the case has not been settled, she declined to comment further.
“It’s being assigned to a senior investigator for further investigation,” she said. “Based on the facts of the case, I want further investigation.”
The council is scheduled to vote on the deal Monday. If they approve the proposed settlement, Thoma will be rehired March 1 in the demoted position of detective and be paid about $275,000 for more than two years back pay and benefits. He was a sergeant when he was fired. The city would also have to pay Dunn $15,000.
“Citizens are rightly upset by this settlement, and I fear that their frustration could impede our ability to help rebuild confidence in our police department,” Condon said. “Our citizens’ perceptions of our officers are tainted by situations like this.”
The city was unaware of Ortiz’s decision Wednesday to withhold signing off on the settlement, and Feist said it was unclear whether that would have bearing on the proposal going to the council for a vote.
“We honestly don’t know what it means yet,” Feist said. “We had been working with the (commission’s) local investigator. Our understanding was that it was going to a vote with the commission tomorrow, and we were unaware that it may need another layer of approval.”
The settlement in part addresses a recent change in law, Feist said. Under a deferred prosecution agreement, Thoma was required to use an ignition interlock device to drive, but then-Chief Anne Kirkpatrick declined to allow him to install such a device in his patrol car. The city offered to place him on “layoff status” to see if he qualified for another civil service job that did not require a driver’s license, but Thoma rejected that offer and was fired.
However, the law requiring the interlock device changed retroactively in January 2011, making it unnecessary. Thoma’s full driving privileges were restored as a result.
Some City Council members expressed concern about the proposed settlement Wednesday.
“I think this council has been united in rebuilding the trust in our police department,” said Council President Ben Stuckart. “I think this goes against that.”
However, he said he saw a need to balance building trust between the community and law enforcement with the need to do what’s best with taxpayer dollars.
“That has to be weighed in our decision-making, and I think each council member is doing that right now.”
Recent stories by Chelsea Bannach
Civil War re-enactment reverberates with camaraderie, cannons May 27, 2012 6- Nightmare rerun: Family’s second child diagnosed with cancer first child had just beaten May 25, 2012 7
- Torchlight Parade honors military, challenges youth May 20, 2012
- A new place for helping kids, families May 17, 2012
- Spokane seniors shine at Bring Your Talent competition May 16, 2012
SMARTGUY on February 23 at 12:35 a.m.
This situation stinks so bad, no one wants to take the responsibility for it. First they will run and hide, then the blame game will start. Doug Clark will be the only winner, unless Spokane makes the Leno show again. Everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves.
greenlibertarian2nd on February 23 at 1:00 a.m.
So it’s NOT a done deal, as far as all primary parties signing on to it?
Spokane City Government, thy name is EPIC FAIL!
brianth on February 23 at 5:30 a.m.
So the message here, “if you want to be a failure and make loads of Cash, become a Cop”, That will probably be their new recruitment slogan!
gotcha on February 23 at 5:41 a.m.
Just another great reason to End Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector…. Unions do not belong in goverment.
larry_b on February 23 at 5:53 a.m.
I say we take a chance in court. This guy is putting it right into our faces. Council should vote no and go from there. Then this Dunn character needs to leave town.
monkeyman on February 23 at 5:56 a.m.
There are other possible “disabilities” that can be concluded by this case - that some people suffer from stupidity, and that the legal system is impotent.
SpokaneLiberal on February 23 at 5:59 a.m.
Write every member of the council, the human rights commission head (sortiz@hum.wa.gov), and Condon (mayor@spokanecity.org). Let them know how you feel about paying 300K and rehiring someone that if they applied today would not meet the criteria for hire. Someone I know also suggested that we let them know that we will sue the city if Thoma ever works a case we are involved in (victim or perp) or issue a ticket. The more stink that is raised the better.
I also think maybe we should start contacting legislators to weaken employment protections for police.
slednek509 on February 23 at 6:18 a.m.
Hahahaha…what a joke our City and SPD are. Once again it takes an agency outside of Spokompton to make the right call. Hey Condon…grow some freakin balls already. Your first opportunity to do the right thing and u talk out both sides of your a$$.
Shazamm on February 23 at 6:37 a.m.
The real “disease” in this case is the so-called “human rights” council.
riverlaw on February 23 at 6:41 a.m.
I wonder if this deserves a salute?
nosheet on February 23 at 6:47 a.m.
Once again you people are missing the point….this is another one of Kirkpatrick’s follies….Condon is inheriting her mistakes and now having to clean it up. It is sadly funny when the law, used in the favor or repeat criminals is never critisized…but when the law, written by legislatiors YOU voted in office, benefits an officer, it is condemned. I am sure the ‘bloogers’ picnic at Doug Clark’s house this summer will be chock full of intelligent nirvana….
Diana on February 23 at 6:59 a.m.
Someone needs to tell the Human Rights Commission that the people in Spokane have a Human Right to not be subjected to a known drunken cop who breaks the law he was sworn to uphold.
brianrbreen on February 23 at 7:27 a.m.
Why not just come out and tell the truth. The termination was handled improperly from the beginning because there was no interaction between the county prosecutors office so they wouldn’t plea bargain away the hit and run for which he could have been terminated.
Then in order to get rid of him the City uses the DUI by refusing to sign the IID waiver so Kirkpatrick and the City look tough on cops.
Why try to sell that the settlement is because of the new law that went into effect on 1/1/12, regarding no longer needing an IID for work vehicles, that is BS. I don’t know maybe they figure they can sell that…you can sell almost anything here in Spokane. All Kirkpatrick had to do was sign the waiver like the Sheriff has, why didn’t someone tell her to sign the damn thing or we are going to get hung out to dry, when it became obvious the Hit and Run was out of play, or tell her to provide some other type of accommodation until Thoma’s time ran. The change in the law was in the works back during that time.
I know…I know…not the same but the SPD has provided accommodation in the past for ADA issues with cops, MS, Parkinson’s, etc. So why not have him count paper clips until his time ran out it is not like it hasn’t happened before. You have Deputies that received DUIs and were back on the job after a couple of weeks because the County knew they would be hanging out if they tried to fire the guy…just like the City is now.
Why not just tell the bloody truth, why try and be PC about it just say:
“Look citizens the case was handled improperly from the beginning by the previous administration, unfortunately we are in a position that we have to deal with it. Our choices were to reach a settlement that would limit the community’s financial exposure or allow the case to go to litigation where it is very likely the City would end up in a situation similar to Detective Mehring’s case, having to pay considerably more money and still be required to reinstate Mr. Thoma, so we opted for a settlement.”
Whether the HRC signs off or not doesn’t amount to a hill of beans, there is still a pre-litigation settlement.
Don’t bother …I agree…there is a big difference between MS, Parkinson’s, and Alcoholism, but we are not the ones that got to make the ADA decision.
lewis8457 on February 23 at 7:30 a.m.
ironic isn’t it? every time there is a movement to improve the perception of the police something worse then before shows its ugly head.
how can Thoma be a cop he could never take a stand at a trial.
he is a drunk.
philipgregory on February 23 at 7:31 a.m.
Despite the opinion of the bleeding-heart liberals who would excuse all society-abherrant behaviour as beyond their control - alcoholism is NOT a disease or disability.
Alcoholism is a condition in the brain that makes a person susceptible to excessive release of endorphins upon rapid consumption of substantial amounts of alcohol.
This man was aware of his alcoholism therefor must be held accountable for his actions when he consumed alcohol.
wcougars on February 23 at 7:31 a.m.
If they vote for it / vote them out. I think that stupid idiot would lose in court!
Spudbob on February 23 at 7:31 a.m.
This story just doesn’t make any sense. The guy just seems so obviously wrong and the city is considering reinstating him‽
The general public must not be privy to some important elements of the case.
DickAdams on February 23 at 7:32 a.m.
“I think this council has been united in rebuilding the trust in our police department,” said Council President Ben Stuckart. “I think this goes against that.”
Ben, you gotta be kidding, rebuilding trust? When did the rebuilding start? Its time to get your head out of the sand and use it.
PlanB on February 23 at 7:34 a.m.
Seems to me that Kirkpatrick tried to make accommodations for his “disability” (even though there was no diagnoses) and the drunken ass refused so he was fired. I don’t see any problem with her actions.
How about considering the safety of citizens when making decisions? That never happens. The “Human Rights Commission” is a total joke.
brianrbreen on February 23 at 7:50 a.m.
@PlanB
No sense in arguing about…it’s just my opinion…we will have to see what happens.
“(even though there was no diagnoses)”
Oh I guarantee there is a diagnosis. One of the first things Dunn would have done was send Thoma to get one.
horse_feathers on February 23 at 8:06 a.m.
Spokane citizens “Assume the position” again.
brianrbreen on February 23 at 8:13 a.m.
@horse_feathers
Might as well work it in to the Yoga positions…so everyone is ready for the next one.
Ron_the_Cop on February 23 at 8:26 a.m.
@Brian,
You provided an excellent summary of the critical facts/issues in this case. First and foremost this was a screw up of major proportions by the previous administration based on inept and incompetent legal counsel from the City Attorney’s Office. Is there a clear pattern and practice here?
This case should have focused on the moral turpitude issue of the HR and not the DUI. MISTAKE!
FIRE IMMEDIATELY - Delaney and Treppiedi
They are and will continue to cost WE TAXPAYERS multiple millions in damage awards.
Mayor Condon is between a rock and a hard place on this one and Dunn has them cornered with no good outcome other than taking Thoma back. The City is at risk if they can’t negotiate a settlement without taking Thoma back Dunn will immediately sue for wrongful termination and likely win another judgement of several millions of dollars.
So taking Thoma back, disciplining him severely (busted to detective or worse), required rehab/counseling, drug testing and a last chance letter may be the cheapest way to go.
Also restatement of policy for SPD is in order. All supervisor must be instructed that anyone suspected of having a drug/addiction problem must be dealt with. Training given on how to do this and how offer assistance to those that are addicted while at the same time documenting this occurred.
As I said in an earlier thread I wouldn’t blame the ADA either. It’s not at fault here but others are trying to make it so. Thoma DIDN’T FIRST request help for his “addiction” before the crash. There are not facts yet to say Thoma did make such a request. The ADA unlike Dunn is inferring is normally not retroactive. HOWEVER the SPD could be in a bind for negligent retention should his condition be known and nothing was done about it. Gee pilots are grounded and sometimes arrested if they have been drinking during a period of hours before they fly. COPS should be not different.
I linked to an excellent source that is government funded for ADA advice for both employers and employees alike that is FREE. And can be used as a defense in future litigation if their advice is followed. I would encourage all to read the comments in the previous related article threads too:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2012/feb/22/settlement-awards-officer-job-back-pay/?comments#c415165
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2012/feb/22/mayor-defends-thoma-settlement/
Connect with JAN
(800)526-7234 (Voice) (877)781-9403 (TTY)
lewis8457 on February 23 at 8:29 a.m.
another point missed, Thoma was on his way to pick up his teen age daughter from school. It was reported she said he picked her up drunk a lot of the time.
I think that is the most blaring case of irresponsibility in this story, he not only got in his truck knowing he was drunk. and did not care thinking he was superior, ran into another truck, did not stop to render aid, left scene had to be stopped by a citizen,only to be driven home by a cop. But he was on his way to pick his daughter up from school.
“Oh here comes Tammy’s drunk cop dad again watch out he will run right over you”.
i really think a man who can put their own child in danger through pure arrogance is just too dangerous to have employed by the city in any duty even counting paper clips.
this arrogance i refer to was also very apparent in the Harvey wild life case, this arrogance seems to be the attitude at the SPD and I think it is the cancer of the SPD.
One of the causes of this is the reluctance for the county prosecutor to hold them responsible, and the other having a union that see, hears and does nothing. The only thing they are sure of is the time to be at Karls for the weekly poker game a chicken fry.
And they take it to comical proportions because they have us by the wallet, and they know it.
Look at the recent banking and bail out fiasco? We just let them do it to us over and over because the law says they can. And the morale code no longer has any meaning.
It was recently ruled by the Supreme court religious law trumps public law, maybe we all need to join a church and march on the courts in our monk robes. Ridiculous, but…….. ridiculous seems to be working for them.
bearlakenana on February 23 at 8:49 a.m.
I was always under the impression that the police were here to uphold the law, not to break it. Our society has become much too liberal in what is allowed by people that we are supposed to look up too. He should be fired - end of story. Our “wonderful” athletes that misbehave with drugs, alcohol, brawls and our children want to be just like ~ fire them ~ end of story. You can’t have a functioning society with responsible people when they are constantly rewarded for poor behavior. Everybody has to make decisions in how they manage their life. An addict can quit using, a drunk can quit drinking. Why not give the jobs to the deserving people who will do the job correctly.
cougs4ever on February 23 at 9:06 a.m.
Don’t pay the moron!!
horse_feathers on February 23 at 9:07 a.m.
Human rights were never meant to be the right of government to to wrong and completely disgusting things to the citizens of our communities.
Human right were susppose to protect the citizens from government using their overzealous powers to do injustice to the citizens.
Make no miistake about it SPD, the mayor, city hall and “The Human Rights Commisson” are government and they are taking our rights away by turning REAL HUMAN RIGHTS upside down, using a false human rights doctrine against the innocent citizens of our community.
gmorton on February 23 at 9:11 a.m.
A lot of handwringing here, and lamentations that city officials misplayed their hand, but no scrutiny of the underlying causes of this fiasco – the presumption that the State may dictate to employers whom they must hire and whom they may fire, and for what reasons, and the nonsensical meme that alcohol abuse is a “disease.”
Begin with an asinine worldview and you’re sure to enact asinine policies which produce abominable results.
brianrbreen on February 23 at 9:11 a.m.
@Ron_the_Cop
They don’t have to take him back if they don’t want to. The City can reach a settlement with Dunn that doesn’t involve reinstatement. The problem is, if you factor in back pay, projected income, retirement benefits, and attorney fees you are looking at somewhere around 2.8 million or more. Since that is over the 1 million self-insurance the City has that means you have to convince the insurance carrier to cough up the other 1.8 million.
No big deal… you don’t want him back…just pay him off.
Ron_the_Cop on February 23 at 9:17 a.m.
@Brian,
Agreed. The question is how to proceed to minimize costs to the City. I’m inclined to agree Thoma should not get his job back for the ethical, moral, PR reasons because of the HR and the wrong message that is sent to the police rank and file.
NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW!
liveinfearoftheSPD on February 23 at 9:44 a.m.
@Ron
It is my firm belief that police consider themselves to be “The Law” thus putting them far above any and all laws citizens are forced to live by.
That is proven time and time again when an officer is on the receiving end of a law.
How many citizens have had a H&R dropped to opt for a DUI?
How many citizens have beat someone to death and skated on murder charges?
The list of crimes that police commit and are exonerated for is endless.
If alcoholism is a disease, it is a self inflicted disease.
That seems to me that they should no longer be able to hand out tickets for DUI.
Since the police are “supposed” to uphold the laws they enforce, they should be given stiffer penalties for breaking those laws.
But in Spokane they roll out the red carpet for them and throw a hand slapping party!
It is time to change the laws that protect these slime balls!
de3 on February 23 at 9:45 a.m.
The state declaration that hit and run drunk driving is a disease is going to have a lot of ramifications down the road - bad pun!
Thoma’s lawyer Dunn said Thoma’s hit and run drunk driving is the same as epilepsy. The HRC’s says an employer should comply with ADA by having “someone to drive to meetings and other work-related events” for the person with epilepsy.
But since hit and run drunk driving is the same as epilepsy, says Dunn, SPD will soon have PD officers chauffeured to calls! The whole force will soon arrive at the scene in chauffeured limos!
Ron_the_Cop on February 23 at 9:56 a.m.
@de3,
LOL:-) If this wasn’t so serious.
brianrbreen on February 23 at 9:57 a.m.
@Live
Not that I disagree…I just think it is important to understand that ADA is a Federal Act…not a State Law.
ridgewood on February 23 at 10:05 a.m.
I hope that this officer has medical clearance to return to his job. He would not be a responsible person if he did not get the proper treatment for his “disability” when he had the time to do so. He now feels that stress does not affect him as it did in the past, so would the citizens want to see when and where he must have received either inpatient or outpatient alcohol treatment? Maybe he is even seeing a professional counselor to be able to handle the high stress that is caused by the job? And his attorney said treat it like epilepsy, so hope he is taking prescription medicines, and not be behind the wheel of a car in case he has a seizure. He needs to be taking STA buses to and from work every day.
brianrbreen on February 23 at 10:07 a.m.
This is what you DO NOT DO if you have an officer on the job with a DUI conviction. You don’t assign them to any Special Investigative Unit. You do not provide them with a City owned vehicle to take home. You require supervisory monitoring for any signs that the officer is off the wagon. You have the police physician monitor signs of abuse and report those signs. You discuss the problem with his/her peers and demand that they report anything that may be a problem.
http://www.king5.com/news/Seattle-police-officer-132805548.html?commentPage=1
paddleboard9 on February 23 at 10:09 a.m.
Spokane has the most dirty police department I have ever seen. It’s laughable now.
Ron_the_Cop on February 23 at 10:12 a.m.
Ok here’s the gold standard from JAN for employers who must deal withe employees with drug and or alcohol issues. Here’s some key excerpts but read the entire section:
http://askjan.org/links/ADAtam1.html#VIII
VIII. DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE
8.1 Introduction
The ADA specifically permits employers to ensure that the workplace is free from the illegal use of drugs and the use of alcohol, and to comply with other Federal laws and regulations regarding alcohol and drug use. At the same time, the ADA provides limited protection from discrimination for recovering drug addicts and for alcoholics.
8.2 Overview of Legal Obligations
An individual who is currently engaging in the illegal use of drugs is not an “individual with a disability” when the employer acts on the basis of such use.
An employer may prohibit the illegal use of drugs and the use of alcohol at the workplace.
It is not a violation of the ADA for an employer to give tests for the illegal use of drugs.
An employer may discharge or deny employment to persons who currently engage in the illegal use of drugs.
An employer may not discriminate against a drug addict who is not currently using drugs and who has been rehabilitated, because of a history of drug addiction.
A person who is an alcoholic is an “individual with a disability” under the ADA.
An employer may discipline, discharge or deny employment to an alcoholic whose use of alcohol impairs job performance or conduct to the extent that s/he is not a “qualified individual with a disability.”
Employees who use drugs or alcohol may be required to meet the same standards of performance and conduct that are set for other employees.
Employees may be required to follow the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 and rules set by Federal agencies pertaining to drug and alcohol use in the workplace.
. . .
8.4 Alcoholism
While a current illegal user of drugs has no protection under the ADA if the employer acts on the basis of such use, a person who currently uses alcohol is not automatically denied protection simply because of the alcohol use. An alcoholic is a person with a disability under the ADA and may be entitled to consideration of accommodation, if s/he is qualified to perform the essential functions of a job. However, an employer may discipline, discharge or deny employment to an alcoholic whose use of alcohol adversely affects job performance or conduct to the extent that s/he is not “qualified.”
For example: If an individual who has alcoholism often is late to work or is unable to perform the responsibilities of his/her job, an employer can take disciplinary action on the basis of the poor job performance and conduct. However, an employer may not discipline an alcoholic employee more severely than it does other employees for the same performance or conduct.
brianrbreen on February 23 at 10:21 a.m.
http://www.ada.gov/copsq7a.htm
Shelala on February 23 at 10:59 a.m.
Alcoholsim can be a disability. The ADA law recognizes that, pure and simple. However, it is NOT an automatic accommodation under the ADA. The ADA also recognizes that some accomodations simply can’t be done because of the essential functions of the position. The key wording is the essential functions. A disability, any disability whether alcoholism or otherwsie, does NOT necessarily mean the person can successfully return to the position they held if the position can not be successfully accommodated. They can be offred a suitable position within the company or organization that is suitable. Thoma was offered other positions within the city, but refused them. The ADA’s intent and application does not mean employers are simply forced to return a disabled person to their former position under all circumstances. The fact that other LE agencies have offered accommodations is a matter of policy and not law. Thoma could have accepted employment in a city position where the job function is suited to his disability. The mere fact that he was involved in a hit and run situation, even if not prosecuted, merely would reinforce the inability to offer up reasonable accomdations.
liveinfearoftheSPD on February 23 at 11:11 a.m.
Was he diagnosed with the disease of alcoholism before the H&R DUI?
Or was it a month ago?
If and when he was diagnosed should also be brought into play.
He probably became an alcoholic of diseased proportions after he lost his job.
SMARTGUY on February 23 at 11:19 a.m.
Our justice system is broken, because the crimminals lawyers, are smarter then the morons who write our laws. Cut lawyers compensation to 5 %, of any settlement, instead of 50%. When it is no longer more profitable to help people break the law, then enforce it, maybe smart people will start working for us, instead of against us.
Shelala on February 23 at 11:51 a.m.
IMO. what is disappointing is that Thoma could have accepted a city job outside the SPD, but within city government in which he would have a better chance of succeeded at given his history of alcoholism and stress. It was a golden opportunity and his ticket out to maybe a better life. The loss of a law enforcement position may have been a blow to his ego and he would have been forced to develop or retrain in another field, but many “regular” citizens would have jumped at the chance. I wonder how much better off he is once the dust settles and everything he does on the job is put under a microscope, he suffers a tainted reputation among his peers and the stress beckons him to relapse. Did he really “win” anything? All that happened was that he cost taxpayers a ton of money, got a job in which he is set up to eventually fail at back and a lot of stress that may exasperate a lifelong battle with alcoholism.Thoma should have done everyone a favor including himself and his family and hung his ego at the door. Treatment does not mean the battle is over with alcoholism and it is one of those “diseases” that is fought throughout a lifetime with possible relapses and temptations. That is why the ADA has included it as a disability.
gmorton on February 23 at 12:16 p.m.
Shelala wrote,
“Treatment does not mean the battle is over with alcoholism and it is one of those ‘diseases’ that is fought throughout a lifetime with possible relapses and temptations. That is why the ADA has included it as a disability.”
“Treatment” does not work because alcohol abuse is not a disease.
It is a disability, of course – in the same way that a penchant for rape, child molestation, or thievery are disabilities. They all might land you in jail.
The_Seer on February 23 at 12:34 p.m.
Don’t most people who drink do so because of job stress?
I think city legal and the various defense lawyers in Spokane like Dunn, Orescovic, Cossey, et.al. are in collusion to bilk Spokane taxpayers. Delaney and Treppiedi can’t be this stupid, right?
brianrbreen on February 23 at 12:39 p.m.
As long as the Mayor continues to take his advice from the current City Attorney and his staff there is no change.
Try and sell the retroactive BS regarding the IID to the community see if it works in the long run, sure it may protect the City Attorney…and if you want that…your call.
Why not be just upfront and honest…or is that too much to ask.
Shelala on February 23 at 12:49 p.m.
@Gmorton
I understand your opinion and tend to agree, but the reality is that the medical and legal communities have determined it is a disease. I am not prone to making excuses for criminal or bad behavior regardless of the cause and I don’t see the reasoning to try to accommodate anyone in a position that can’t reasonably be accommodated. The ADA has undue hardship and direct threat clauses available to the employer as an exception to accommodation attempts. Why not use them? I recognize blindness is a disability, but that doesn’t mean that a newly diagnosed blind person could return to his job as a city bus driver does it? For a lot less than the price of this setllement, the city could have sought out the advice of an expert ADA consultant instead of relying on whatever the city calls its legal and risk department these days.
mkries2 on February 23 at 1:00 p.m.
I don’t really know anything about Thoma or his background with alcohol to make a definitive statement either way on this, but if the Police Department really didn’t know he was an alcoholic, then I don’t see how the city could lose if they went to court. And while lawyer fees, court fees etc are expensive, they are still significantly less than what they settled at with Thoma.
However, it is possible that someone in the police department knew that this guy was an alcoholic and upon realizing this, the city decided to settle. The question is, what defines “knowing” about a person’s disability? If a few of the other officers that spent a lot of time with him knew he drank a lot and exhibited signs of alcoholism, is that enough? Or does he have to make some kind of formal declaration to the police department? Either way, it looks like that threshold was crossed, as the settlement seems like it was agreed to by the city to prevent an unfavorable outcome in court.
You could say that the rules are stupid, but it’s still the responsibility of the people and entities subject to them to know the rules and prevent exposing themselves to a substantial liability, as the SPD/city was exposed to on this occasion.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on February 23 at 1:09 p.m.
Why was he not taken to jail the night of the hit and run? You or I would likely have gone right down to the pokey.
Ron_the_Cop on February 23 at 1:10 p.m.
Here’ some research on WA DUI Interlocking Ignition Devices (IID).
Here’s the law as it is now:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.20.720
Looks like employer owned vehs became exempt by this change.
Interesting point does the City get caught up in a Catch-22 situation by having to make a decision before the law was subsequently changed? I gather it required a waiver at the time for an IID and Kirkpatrick wouldn’t give one. BAD MOVE. Again if she wanted to fire him she should have done it for the HR:-)
BTW judging by the effective date of this section the City still didn’t get it right. Thoma’s violation was in late 2009. The section doesn’t require employer vehicles to have an IID only that the employer provide a statement that driving is a condition of employment. I guess this is what Kirkpatrick refused to do?
It looks like anyone currently on a suspension order as of 01-01-2009 the following section became effective as to IIDs:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.20.385
Here’s some commentary by a law firm:
http://www.washingtondui.com/wa-ignition-interlock-lawyer/ignition-interlock-laws
AH AH I found the new bill that may have caused the problem click on this link. Click on Chapter 293 in this table. I haven’t digested the text of the bill yet - I’m reviewing this to see how any retroactivity of this Bill as chaptered into law (Chap 293) has any effect on the Thoma case.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/crossref.aspx?year=2011
Ron_the_Cop on February 23 at 1:11 p.m.
@Brian at 12:30PM
AMEN Brother! Are you listening Mayor Condon?
Ron_the_Cop on February 23 at 1:20 p.m.
@Shelala,
Shelala perhaps you could be hired as a consultant:-)
By the way I do know one that is a national expert, member of the human factors association, erogonomist with many years of clinical experience dealing with the ADA.
This expert help me when I was union president to save the job of a young cop that was involved in a solo DUI crash where he lost an eye. The department/ H&R were willing to take him back subject to the usual last chance et al provisions but they were balking at the lack of sight in one eye as a disqualifying factor. We were able to demonstrate he was able to still do the critical physical demands of the job still with one eye. The kid learned his lesson and was later promoted to a detective and had a successful career.
SMARTGUY on February 23 at 2:00 p.m.
Why can’t we find out who changed this law, fire, or recall them, and change it back. Alcoholics should not be allowed to drive without a breath control on their car, even if they are police.
brianrbreen on February 23 at 2:11 p.m.
Thanks for reading;
You will find Mayor Condon backing off the Thoma case, and going outside the box and getting input from people who actually know what they are doing. If he doesn’t he is toast.
As far as Thoma is concerned there is a lot there to reach a successful conclusion if you do it right. As far as the next one up there has been so much there that if he gets some help he can demonstrate exactly how it should end up. The problem is if he does that he has to bypass Delaney and embarrass the City Attorney’s office and the SPD’s ability to handle their own cases.
slednek509 on February 23 at 2:20 p.m.
Mayor Condom, hope your reading all of this. Damn auto correct!
brianrbreen on February 23 at 2:31 p.m.
http://www.cdapress.com/news/local_news/article_597e2bca-5e50-11e1-96db-0019bb2963f4.html
slednek509 on February 23 at 2:42 p.m.
What a joke. These crooked cops and all of their bs jus boils my blood because we are paying for all this. Get rid of the SPD and let the County handle policing.
Shelala on February 23 at 2:46 p.m.
It should be obvious by now that there are good attorneys who specialize specific areas of practice and can offer solid legal advice in that specialty. I don’t think most people would seek the advice of a lawyer who specializes in estate planning to try to evict a bad tenant. Why does the city legal department believe they are specialists in every field of practice when so much is at stake when giving legal advice? Maybe it is about time for city legal to realize they are not super attorneys, admit their advice may not be the best there is to offer when confronted with issues they have little knowledge or experience in and seek counsel from those experts who make a career of those specialized areas. If the city were to farm out their legal problems to the experts, Delany and his staff could concentrate their efforts in whatever it is they do well, although I haven’t figured out what that is yet.
brianrbreen on February 23 at 2:54 p.m.
Told you so!
arliacne on February 23 at 3:29 p.m.
“Present arms!”
flyerd1 on February 23 at 3:46 p.m.
Take the alcohol out of the equation and you still have running into another vehicle and speeding away to flee the scene. Officer qualities…? Why isn’t that enough to warrant the loss of his job… Also, if the “stress” of being a police officer caused the alcohol problem how does it make sense to hire him back, even in a different position, into that same stress?…
So as a “detective” will he “investigate” DUI’s and hit and run’s……? LOL (in disgust)
This continues a trend of bad decisions/advice coming from the prosecutor’s office irt the deals worked out and advice they provided to the city in this regard..
This is yet another reason many people are getting tired of “collective bargaining” agreements that create “huge loopholes” like this for their members. It’s practically impossible to fire someone anymore and when you do, even when “justified”, you end up having to provide back pay and attorney costs…
This contract needs to be “renegotiated” such that any officer who commits a felony worthy crime will be subject to termination “no matter what” plea bargain is arranged for his/her personal record. Speeding and parking tickets are one thing, but this type of behavior “cannot” be tolerated by a “law enforcement officer”.
liveinfearoftheSPD on February 23 at 4:49 p.m.
The city should still be able to fire him even though the DUI charges were dropped.
Everyone knows he did the H&R while drunk. Plenty of witnesses.
The city should be able to fire, just as a civil suit can be brought against someone who was found not guilty as in O.J. He still lost the civil suit.
Just because the prosecutor didn’t want to do his job should in no means color the fact of what really happened or to the departments firing policies.
spokaneresident on February 23 at 6:32 p.m.
Let’s see…if I had a DUI on my record, and applied for a job as a Spokane Police Officer, would I even be considered for the position? I rather doubt it. So why would we allow those who are already on the force that commit these crimes, continue their employment? They are sworn in to obey and uphold the law…aren’t they? My real estate taxes went up by $200 this year, over last year…so I guess that will go to pay Mr. Thoma?
I hope not. The Spokane Police Department needs to get their act together and raise their values and morals to a level that can and will be respected by the citizens of this city.
DickAdams on February 23 at 6:54 p.m.
Ron,
I can`t agree with one of the things you said, i. e. “Mayor Condon is between a rock and a hard place on this one”.
Condon should show the citizens he is running Spokane and representing the taxpayers for a needed change, instead of following the dictates of Delaney and Treppiedi. Just once the Mayor should do what the voters expected, and are paying him for, and show some integrity and HONESTY. In his first couple of months as Spokane`s new mayor, the number of comments posted to the SR website, show most of the citizens think he is doing a rotten job. I`d be embarrassed if I were him, but guys like the mayor have no shame. I hope I am wrong.
repogirl911 on February 23 at 7:29 p.m.
So lets see - we have a police officer who has admitted to being an alcoholic being rehired. He will be allowed to not only drive but carry a gun. That just makes me feel so much safer - NOT !! Will the rest of the idiots out there get to scream “disability” when they get a DUI too. What a bunch of crap. And the Mayor wonders why we have no faith ……