Posted: 3/5/03

Police Chief Temte faces 60-day suspension

Alice Pickering
Wyoming Area Reporter

A 60-calendar day suspension without pay and a letter describing the disciplinary action to be placed in his personnel file was the discipline meted out to Wyoming Police Chief Mike Temte, for insubordination, by council members at the meeting Monday.

The vote was 4-1 in favor of the suspension, with Councilman Ted Phillips voting against it.

The decision came after a brief closed session to discuss personnel issues and potential litigation. Mayor Vern Haag told those attending that any possible action to terminate employment had been withdrawn because of possible litigation. He invited a motion from council about disciplinary action.

Councilwoman Sandy Standridge prefaced her motion for the 60-day suspension without pay, with the comment that the council has been ìdiligently striving to do what is best for the community and its residents.î

Councilwoman Lynn Koalska amended the motion to include the letter in the personnel file and the stipulation of calendar days. Attorney Tom Miller agreed the amendments were specific so as to avoid confusion.

At the meeting February 3, Standridge, who is also on the personnel committee, read the proposed disciplinary action that she, Temte, and Koalska had negotiated together.

Basically, this was probation for one year; a letter of reprimand to be placed in his personnel file during the probation; a 30-day unpaid suspension, stayed; his agreement not to file for arbitration on the incident; and to obey the cityís chain of command.

In turn, the city was to give up its right to terminate Temteís employment for the insubordination.
In addition, the city would rename the forfeiture fund the Police Department Supplemental Fund, thus recognizing source of funds; make a best effort to work with the police department to spend these funds wisely as a supplement to the police budget; and seriously consider all objections to orders as long as they were obeyed first and questioned later.

The police department would present proposed purchases to the council and/or operate within the cityís purchase policy, as well as continue to give an accounting of money in the supplemental account.

Contacted later, Temte said he felt that the negotiation meeting was a fair one. According to Standridge and Koalska, Temte was in agreement that the negotiated terms be reviewed by City Attorney Tom Miller for appropriate legal language. Included in the proposed agreement was standard legal language, with which the union attorney agreed, a provision that Temte ìwaive any right to sue the city for this complaint.î

On the 3rd, Miller identified the waiver as the primary point of disagreement between the city and Temte. Union representative Dean Tharp claimed the city had changed the language of the negotiated agreement and was forcing Temte to give up his civil rights. At that meeting, the council was split 3-2 in deleting the waiver clause from the agreement; Haag and Phillips voting to remove it.

Even then, residents voiced opinions that sitting down together to work out the problems should be possible until Koalska pointed out that the latest session only happened because Sgt. Scott Dexter urged Temte to meet with council members. She said initially, there were no proposed terms, only possibilities and alternatives offered in good faith during the three-way discussion.

Temteís supporters claim the city has prolonged the public display, but postponements have been at Temteís request. A decision originally was scheduled for Jan. 6, continued to Jan. 13; a possible decision on the 21st was postponed at Temteís request. Proposed resolution was not concluded because of the waiver clause on Feb. 3 and on the 18th because council received information from Temteís attorney just before the meeting, with not enough time for them to consider the proposals. The matter was tabled again until March 3.

This has been a long journey for all those involved. For Temteís part he has consistently taken the position that he followed the law in maintaining control of the forfeiture fund, relying solely on his opinion about control of money earmarked as a supplement to the police department budget. He believes the money was to be in an account for and administered by, the police department.

The cityís auditor Steve McDonald had repeatedly warned the city that such accounts outside of the councilís control are unacceptable and must not be allowed. Continued failure of the council to be accountable for the funds in the account could mean eventual referral to the state auditor, which could result in financial penalties to the city.

According to the Personnel Committee Preliminary Findings and Recommendations, read at the council meeting Jan. 6, Temte ìreceived and read City Council minutes and two letters from the Mayor warning him to turn over control of the account to the City Council and City Administration.î Including one letter directed to all department heads in July 1, ìnot a penny is to be spent without council approval.î He also ìreceived and understood a direct order from the Administrator/CFO to surrender control of the account at a July 11, 2002 meeting of the Administrator, the City Auditor, and Chief Temte.î

However, from about May of 2002 until a December 5 meeting with city administrator Dennis Coryell in which he was ordered to turn over the account passbook, AFSME union representative Dean Tharp in attendance, he never told council why he had not complied.
Although never threatened with loss of the funds for the departmentís use, he surrendered the passbook when verbally ordered to do so then, once he had assurances that the money would be used for police purchases. Of his failure to turn over control of the passbook, Temte said he had an ìunderstanding, but not a direct orderî to do so until Coryellís verbal request, Dec. 5. Coryell acts at the direction of the council.

Changes in state law in 2002 allowed departments to keep these funds to supplement police budgets. Once an account of several hundred dollars, a repository of small fines and designated donations, the account grew to about $9,200 in a short period during the summer of 2002, due to sales of a number of forfeited vehicles.

Never asking Temte to give up the account book, council asked Temte to report the account balance each month and present proposed purchases to Coryell and/or the council, standard purchase policy for the city. From that time, Temte provided copies of the account balance and expenditures, but did not seek approval for purchases.

Speaking of his actions regarding the passbook, Temte told the meeting, Jan. 6, ìI did what I was asked to do,î giving reports to Sandy Berry, council, with photocopies of the passbook with notations about vehicle sales and deposits. All along he has maintained, ìMy belief was that the police department was to control the money, as long as it was law- enforcement related.î

In October 2002, Sergeant Scott Dexter, approached Temte with a request for a newer car for investigations was because the one he was using very unreliable and did not contribute to a professional image. He and Temte sought the best vehicle at the best price before making the purchase of the Dodge, at a cost of $6,000. The purchase was made without checking first with Coryell or the council.

At a time when funds were being cut back in the city, council members had to field the question about the source of funds for the new car, when they did not know a purchase had been made. Closed meetings about this personnel matter began after the car purchase was made without going through proper channels.

On Jan. 6, Koalska told those attending that the city got legal opinions and financial advice about account oversight. She did not understand why Temte did not come to a council meeting to sort out the problem if he had questions. Council members wanted to bring the forfeiture account under council control, not take the money away from the police department.

At the same meeting, Standridge insisted the complaint ìisnít about the forfeiture fund, but about insubordination.î An order to turn over the account was given more than once and not followed.

Attorney Chris Johnson said even if the funds are to supplement the police department budget, they are still ìrequired to be under control of the city council.î

After the Monday meeting, Miller confirmed that personnel meetings remain closed if there is reason to keep information private. However, once a decision has been reached that disciplinary action is required; by law the meetings must be open unless there is a compelling reason to keep information confidential. In his legal opinion there were no reasons for these sessions to remain closed.

It has been repeated many times that all departments within the city operate through the established purchase policy. Investigations of surrounding communities and even information received as recently as the past weekendís conference of the League of Minnesota Cities reveal that all cities ask employees to follow purchase policy, without exception, just as Temte was asked to by the city.

At every meeting, residents have spoken urging council to try to work this out with Temte. His supporters claim he has been publicly destroyed on a wrongful charge of misuse of funds and accuse the council of dragging out the proceedings in a public forum. Others have repeatedly accused council members of trying to gag public comment. Yet, their comments after the disciplinary hearing, followed council members back into chambers, with Lee Casto accusing them of ìdoing the wrong thing,î and attempting to tie action to retaliation for campaigning in the last city election.

Haag focused on the labor problem aspect of the issue restating the councilís position that all along this has been an issue related to insubordination, refusal to follow chain of command within city government. He concluded, ìNo other community allows what he did.î

Top of Page