By Jim Cline and Peter Haller
In City of Kent v. Kent Police Officers Association, the PERC arbitrator ruled that the City of Kent had just cause to terminate an officer alleged to engaged in conduct unbecoming of an officer. The Arbitrator reasoned that termination was justified given the officer’s lengthy disciplinary history coupled with the egregious nature of his conduct.
The disciplined officer [name redacted], a 21-year veteran of the Kent Police Department, was accused of violating Department policy following his response to a trespass call. The owners of a vacant apartment complex had continuously called for law enforcement over a several month period and had become fed up with the Department’s inability to prevent trespassing. One of the property’s owners secretly recorded via cell phone the disciplined officer comments to them following a response to one of the calls.
The recording captured the disciplined officer telling the property owners that “street justice is a lot better than actual justice.” The disciplined officer was referring to the fact that department policy prohibited executing arrests for the trespassers in this context. The disciplined officer further stated, “if this were my home and somebody was in my house and they were on my property and not leaving, I would be whoopin’ some fucking ass.”
Because the property owners continued to be frustrated by the Department’s inability to prevent trespassing, the property owners reached out to the Chief and disclosed the cell phone recording. The disciplined officer was put on administrative leave, and eventually he was terminated. The city cited the code of conduct and the disciplined officer’s lengthy disciplinary record.
The Union argued that termination was not warranted because the Department mischaracterized the facts to escalate the severity of the incident. Further, that termination was excessive because the disciplined officer took accountability for his conduct at his Loudermill hearing, is well-respected by his peers, and has been a dedicated public servant in the Kent community for over 20 years.
The Arbitrator did not find the Union’s arguments to be persuasive. The Arbitrator first noted that the City firmly established evidence of the discipline officer’s wrongdoing that was clearly contrary to the well understand written policy that prohibited conduct unbecoming. The Arbitrator reasoned,
“Officer [REDACTED] attempts to excuse his behavior by describing his comments to Ms. [REDACTED] as a temporary lapse in judgment. Unfortunately, KPD Policy 13.10 does not carve out an exception for a temporary lapse in judgment.”
The Arbitrator also considered the disciplined officer’s lengthy disciplinary record, which included a past oral reprimand, written reprimands on three occasions, and a past suspension. The Arbitrator reasoned that this showed a pattern of misconduct and poor judgement. Thus, the Arbitrator concluded that termination was not excessive and therefore, the city had just cause to respond to the incident by discharging the officer.
**Visit our Premium Website for more information on Elements of Just Cause**
