HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/19/1988, COMM.1 - DISCIPLINARY ACTION REGARDING FORMER POLICE OFFICER SIDNEY BARTHOLOW _ MFI-TING AGENDA
D1%.- JUL 19 -89 ITEM # L /wtn.
RESOLUTION NO. 6459 (1988 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN LUIS OBISPO IN THE MATTER OF THE
DISCIPLINARY ACTION REGARDING FORMER
POLICE OFFICER SIDNEY BARTHOLOW
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Personnel Regulations of the City
(Chap. 2.36, San Luis Obispo Municipal Code) , the Personnel Board has
conducted a hearing, completed deliberations and .made a recommendation in
the disciplinary matter of former police officer, Sidney Bartholow; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bartholow has requested an opportunity to present
further argument to Council; and
WHEREAS, this Council is satisfied that adequate opportunity to
present all reasonable and relevant evidence and arguments exist in the
normal operation and exercise of the Personnel Regulations: and
WHEREAS, this Council has reviewed and considered the Board's
recommendation and findings, as well as the record of the hearing; and
NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
SECTION 1. The request by Mr. Bartholow for further argument is
denied.
SECTION 2. The termination of former police officer Sidney
Bartholow, effective July 2, 1981 , is appropriate and proper.
SECTION 3. The findings of the Personnel Board in this matter,
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference as
though fully set forth are adopted as the findings of Council in support
of its determination that termination is appropriate and proper.
On motion of Councilmember Settle, seconded by Councilmember Pinard,
and on the following vote:
CO/yI/yI• �-/
R 6459
Resolution No. 6459 8 Series) Page 2
AYES: Settle, Pinard, Dunin, Rappa, Reiss
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing resolution has passed and adopted this 5th day of July.
Iy88.
v MAYOR IZMrITUNIN
ATTEST:
V
Ci Y CLERK PAM OGES
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
CITY ATTO EY
PERSONNEL DIRECTOR
- l -
BEFORE THE PERSONNEL BOARD
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO
OF SIDNEY BARTHOLOW FROM ) CITY COUNCIL
TERMINATION. )
The Personnel Board has considered the appeal of -SIDNEY BARTHOLOW from
termination from his position as a police officer on July 2, 1981. In
reaching its decision, the Board has fully considered all relevant
evidence, oral and written, made available to it. Specifically, the
evidence before the Board consisted of Exhibits marked "A" through "R" , as
stipulated by the Attorneys for the appellant and the City, and the oral
testimony from witnesses given February 18-20, 1988. Their testimony was
reported and transcribed. All exhibits and transcripts are designated as
part of the administrative record.
The Board held an open hearing at the request of appellant. At the
conclusion of oral testimony, the attorneys requested and were granted
time within which to submit additional written arguments. On April 16 and
June 21 , 1988, the Board met in closed session to deliberate and make
appropriate findings and a recommendation. The latter meeting was held to
review and adopt written findings which were consistent with the earlier
discussion, deliberations and decisions. Due to a scheduling conflict,
Commissioner Sorensen was unable to attend the June 21 , 1988, meeting.
The Board agreed that he could review the written findings at a later
date. The Board's recommendation and supporting findings are attached
hereto as Exhibit "1" .
In summary, the Board finds by a 4-1 vote (Commissioner Wheeler
dissenting) , on a preponderance of evidence, that the City has
EXHIBIT "A"
substantiated the charges in support of termination. The findings
attached are applicable to each and every charge. The Board recommends to
the City,-Xounail that.the imposed disciplinary action (termination
effective .July 2, 1901 ) be carried out.
These findings and recommendation shall be filed as a permanent record
with the Personnel Director and she shall deliver a copy to the City
Council , City Clerk, the City Administrative Officer, Sidney Ba•rtholow and
the current Police Chief.
(Signed) (0 Y/<
a es Buttery, Chairma Date
Marti Reed, Commissioner ate
d OD_y i1
Ted Wheeler, Commissioner Dat" e*
Iia ry Whelchel . Commissioner Date
Robert Sorensen. Commissioner Date
- 2-
EXHIBIT "1"
RE: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE APPEAL OF
SIDNEY BARTHOLOW
Procedural Rulings
1. The stipulated version of Exhibit "L" consisting of fourteen (14)
pages is accepted and admitted into evidence.
2. Exhibits "E" and "H" are admitted into evidence over the objection of
appellant.
Findings
1. Officer Bartholow's performance as a police officer prior to the dates
of the incidents in question in this matter was satisfactory.
2. Between January and May, 1981 , Officer Young was planning a series of
criminal offenses.
3. Officer Young's plans were made known to Bartholow during a period of
approximately five (5) months (January - May 1981 ) . At some point
during that period-Bartholow should have known that Young was serious
about carrying out his criminal plans.
4. On May 2, 1981 , Officer Berrett told Bartholow that he had been
solicited by Young to join Young and Bartholow in committing crimes.
By this date, Bartholow had a duty and obligation to take affirmative
steps and action to report what had occurred to superiors in the
chain-of-command, or other responsible individuals or agencies.
Bartholow failed to meet this duty and obligation, by failing to make
such report or otherwise disclose the plans of Officer Young.
5. For example, on a number of occasions. Bartholow had the opportunity
to report Young's plans to Sgt. Downey and he failed to do so.
6. Chief Neuman's management style and personality was irrelevant to the
situation faced by Bartholow and in no way acted as a valid excuse for
Officer Bartholow's failure to report Officer Young's planned criminal
activities.
7. Officer Bartholow's failure to report Officer Young's plans for
criminal activity posed a potential serious threat to the public
safety and unnecessarily created a possible risk of harm to his fellow
police officers.
8. Officer Bartholow's failure to report was in direct conflict with the
standards and requirements of the City's Personnel Rules and
Regulations. the Police Department's Manual of Rules and Regulations.
and Che Law Enforcement Code of Ethics.
-3-
9. Officer Bartholow's friendship with Officer Young influenced the
former's decision to not report the latter's planned criminal
activities to superior officers.
30. Officer Bartholow's failure to report constituted conduct unbecoming
an officer and was a serious breach of the public trust.
11. Officer Bartholow's termination from public employment as a police
officer is warranted in view of the following factors, and each of
them:
A. The extreme seriousness of the offenses being planned by Officer
Young.
B. His total failure to take any steps towards fulfilling his duty
to report Officer Young's plans.
C. His apparent unwillingness to recognize that the failure to
report such planned criminal activities is a serious breach of
the public trust and confidence bestowed upon a police officer.
D. The high standard of trust and confidence implicit in the job of
police officer requires that the public be assured that major
violations of the City's Personnel Rules and Regulations, the
Police Department's Manual of Rules and Regulations and the Law
Enforcement Code of Ethics will result in severe disciplinary
action.
-4-