Fired East Ridge Police Department Chief James Reed has sued the city for what he claims was a violation of his right to due process under the United States Constitution.
Reed, a nearly 30-year veteran who was appointed chief in 2014, was fired in early 2019 after a monthslong investigation into several allegations, including:
- Non-compliance with the city's financial reporting policy.
- Mishandling an internal investigation.
- Lack of leadership and control.
Reed appealed his firing over the course of three closed-door hearings between July and August 2019. The board then recommended he be reinstated, though demoted to "acting traffic sergeant."
City Manager Chris Dorsey, however, disagreed and Reed did not get his job back.
Now, Reed has filed a lawsuit in Hamilton County Chancery Court. He claims that, because he was never subjected to any formal disciplinary action or received any notice of alleged wrongdoings, his firing was unlawful.
His attorney, John Harrison, points to East Ridge city laws that outline the process by which city employees must be evaluated and disciplined.
All employees are to be evaluated at least once per year and, if the employee doesn't meet acceptable standards, a supervisor is to establish a plan to improve the employee's performance, city code states. And when it comes to discipline, there are different types of action: oral reprimand, written reprimand, suspension or dismissal. However, the policy doesn't specify that the discipline is progressive. Instead, it states the action taken depends on the severity of the incident and the employee's overall pattern of performance.
That's something Dorsey addresses in a Nov. 25 letter upholding Reed's firing.
"... it was not just one issue which ... led to Mr. Reed's termination. Some issues were more serious than others, but the pattern of all of these led to the decision to terminate," he wrote.
Additionally, Dorsey noted that former City Manager Scott Miller testified during Reed's appeal hearing, saying he "kept encouraging [Reed]" to update department policies and manuals.
"That is a form of counseling and assistance," Dorsey wrote.
Nonetheless, Harrison argues that Reed was never made aware of any shortcomings in his performance and was never given any form of progressive discipline before being placed on administrative leave. And that, he claims, is in violation of Reed's right to due process because the city of East Ridge gives its employees "property interest" in their employment.
Having a "property right to employment" simply means that a government employee's job is akin to actual property - their earned money, for example - which gives it constitutional protection.
And because the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that the government cannot deprive a citizen of their property or liberty without first giving them due process - or the opportunity to be heard and defend themselves - public employees can sue the government for monetary relief if said government doesn't follow those due process protections.
The investigation into Reed's alleged wrongdoings came on the heels of a series of incidents involving Reed. Thirty-five of his roughly 45-officer department unionized in early 2018 and raised several concerns over outdated and expired basic policing equipment or not having any at all.
Unionized officers claimed they didn't have access to rubber gloves; didn't have enough stun gun cartridges to fire as part of their yearly certification process; didn't have enough patrol cars to all ride separately; and didn't have a chief willing to listen to their requests or advocate for them.
Reed, on the other hand, said officers hadn't brought those specific concerns to him.
The investigation upheld several of those claims, according to Dorsey's November letter. It also found that Reed failed to discipline an employee who refused to properly report $24,000 in collected funds; that he failed to fully evaluate an internal investigation; that he failed to maintain department policies; and that there was a lack of confidence in his leadership.
Harrison, however, argues the investigation found "nothing more than subjective" assessments, "none of which rose to the level of a 'substantial violation of any [city code].'"
Harrison also claims the city's appeals process is unlawful. That's because the board has no real authority since it's only able to recommend that a decision be changed, "and the recommendation is made to the very office that made the decision in the first place."
The lawsuit asks for a judge to review Reed's firing and for Reed to be reinstated as police chief or as traffic sergeant. It also asks for an unspecified amount in damages in the form of lost income and benefits.
Contact Rosana Hughes at rhughes@timesfreepress.com or 423-757-6327 with tips or story ideas. Follow her on Twitter @HughesRosana.