SERGEANT
REINSTATED TO POSITION
On
February 5, 2003, after a full evidentiary administrative hearing, the
submission of extensive closing briefs, and further arguments to the
Board of Education, the board voted to reinstate Fontana School Police
Sergeant Paula Girt, a 14-year veteran with the department.
Girt was represented by Saku Ethir of Lackie & Dammeier.
In May 2001, the district placed Girt on paid administrative
leave, pending the outcome of two ongoing investigations.
In August 2001, the district proposed that Girt, who had no prior
discipline, be terminated from the department for allegations of failure
to supervise and dishonesty. The
allegations stemmed from two separate incidents, which, during the
appeal process, became known as the “OC incident” and the “Desist
incident”. The OC
incident, which occurred on October 13, 2000, did not play a significant
role in the appeal process due to the fact that the district originally
proposed a three-day suspension without pay against Girt for the
incident, alleging she failed to properly perform her duties as a
supervisor. The primary
focus of the appeal process was the dishonesty allegation.
OC
Incident: On October
13, 2000, Girt was the on duty supervisor when some of her officers were
involved in a multi-agency incident in which a member of one of the
agencies involved dispersed OC spray.
Girt asked all of her officers present if they were responsible
and all denied using OC spray during the incident.
Girt asked all of her officers a second time before the end of
the shift, and again all of her officers denied using OC spray.
One of the officers, who had earlier denied use, pulled out his
OC spray and stated to Girt something to the effect of, “Sounds full
to me, what do you think”. Taking
that statement in conjunction with the officer’s previous outright
denial, Girt believed none of her officers had deployed OC spray that
night. The department later
learned from the other agency that the aforementioned officer had in
fact deployed OC spray. The
district proposed the three-day suspension without pay against Girt,
claiming that she should have conducted a more thorough investigation by
continuing to interrogate the officer, regardless of his denials and
despite the fact that the district also found that the officer in
question had been less than truthful with Girt.
Desist
Incident: The other
more serious allegation, that of dishonesty, stemmed from an incident
which occurred on April 25, 2001, while the district was serving Girt
with the “Notice of Proposed Suspension” for the OC Incident.
Girt was escorted to District Administrator Steve Desist’s
office by Assistant Chief of Police Pierre Galvez.
Girt was served the papers and asked to sign, acknowledging
receipt. When Desist left
to make a correction to the document, he leaned over Girt to grab the
documents. When Desist did
this, Girt “thought” she smelled the scent of alcohol on Desist’s
breath. After the meeting
concluded, Girt advised Galvez that she “thought” she smelled
alcohol on Desist’s breath. Galvez
and Chief of Police Pat McCurry pressured Girt to file an official
complaint with the district about her beliefs.
She advised them she had met her obligations of reporting her
belief to her supervisors, and it was their obligation to take the
appropriate action. During
the evidentiary hearing, McCurry testified that he later observed Desist
and saw no objective signs of intoxication.
An internal affairs investigation was initiated against Girt for
making a false and malicious statement against a district official.
In May
2001, Girt was interrogated regarding the incident.
During the interrogation, Girt reiterated to the internal affairs
investigator that she made the statement to Galvez that she
“thought” she smelled alcohol on Desist’s breath.
During his interrogation, Galvez claimed Girt told him she
smelled alcohol on Desist’s breath.
As a result of the minor discrepancy, the district brought
forward an allegation of dishonesty against Girt stating that she was
dishonest during the interrogation, in that she claimed she told Galvez
she “thought” she smelled alcohol.
Evidence
presented at the hearing demonstrated that Galvez’ and others
statements about what Girt had allegedly said about Desist were
inconsistent. Only Girt
remained consistent about the comment she made.
Evidence was also presented which demonstrated that the district
and department’s own policies required Girt to report her good faith
belief of misconduct to her supervisors, which she did.
Additional evidence was also presented which proved that officers
in the past had reported good faith beliefs of misconduct to their
supervisors, which were subsequently investigated and determined to be
unfounded. Yet those
officers were never disciplined.
In
August 2001, the district also proposed that Girt be placed on
administrative leave without pay because she was a “danger to the
students, staff and property of the district”.
Because Girt is a member of a School District Police Department,
she fell under the protection of not only the Public Safety Officers
Procedural Bill of Rights Act, but also the California Education Code.
Under the Education Code, the employee remains a member of the
district until the conclusion of his or her administrative evidentiary
hearing. However, if the
district believes, and can factually support, that the employee is a
danger to the staff, students or property of the district, the district
can place the employee on administrative leave without pay, pending the
outcome of the evidentiary hearing.
The district, after her Skelly hearing, found that Girt
was a danger to students, staff and property of the district, and placed
her on administrative leave without pay pending the outcome of her
hearing.
Following
a four-day evidentiary hearing, the board found that the allegations of
dishonesty and failure to properly supervise were unfounded, and that
Girt was not a danger to the staff, children or property of the
district. The board voted
to reinstate Girt to her position of sergeant at the department, with
full back pay (which amounted to approximately 17 months of back pay).
Today, Girt is back to work as a sergeant at the Fontana Unified
School District Police Department.
Girt
was very thankful to the Legal Defense Fund and her attorneys at Lackie
& Dammeier for the effort and dedication demonstrated in her case.
LDF Home Page | News
Article Index
