But what if the chief’s videos CREATE a matter of public concern, for instance, “Crikeys, this guy is NUTS! He shouldn’t be a police chief.”
Not sufficient. But I think the videos in this case would easily meet the public concern test.
I don’t think there’s much question that it’s a matter of public concern. The real question is whether he was speaking as a citizen. The fact that he trumpets his chieftancy on his personal website is probably going to be a factor.
Yeah, that and the fact that the content of the speech might be sufficient to fire him even if he was speaking as a private citizen on a matter of public concern.
His videos are clearly appropriate grounds for termination. If you go to to youtube, you’ll find that he is NOT speaking as a citizen, he is speaking as the chief of police. His youtube account is “Chief Kessler”, not “Mark Kessler”. And his diatribes, IMO, have the potential to disrupt or impede the daily operations of the enterprise of the police department, as well as potentially having a detrimental impact on harmony among co-workers and close working relationships.
What makes you think those are adequate bases for termination of a municipal employee?
If this was directed at me, well, I’m just going by the information that Richard Parker provided. Did I misunderstand the quoted text?
No. I just didn’t read all of it. :smack:
I’m confused, aren’t we talking about removing an elected official? My comments were based on that premise. If he’s not elected, then I retract them
Chief of police is very rarely an elected position.
What’s the difference between that and a sheriff? My experience with this is the Arpaio situation, who keeps getting reelected despite being a criminal
A sherrif is usually a county-wide elected position. A police chief is generally hired by a city. I couldn’t tell you why these historical differences exist.
Sometimes they have different duties as well. In Philadelphia the Sheriff’s job is prisoner transportation, handling judicial court security and property & tax issues (seizures, mostly).
In other counties sheriffs also serve warrants, in Philly that is the job of the police.
Although government entities must allow employees to “participate in public affairs”, I think Richard Parker has identified the case law that would apply to these particular videos. I also think that trying to fire him based on the videos would be a big ol’ can of worms and that the City is wise to fire him for more easily proven and less controvercial things if they can. Don’t think of it as an end run, think of it as saving taxpayer dollars.
Apart from Louisiana, which has a civil law as opposed to common law tradition, I don’t believe that any place in the United States elects police chiefs. The chief of police is typically a municipal employee, hired by the municipal government.
Missouri apparently elects some or all of its municipal police chiefs.
I may be wrong, then, but I recall that in Missouri! the title was “City Marshal.” Elected, admittedly, but not the top law enforcement officer.
It seems the title varies by town.
Pa. police chief’s public hearing halted after supporter’s gun falls from holster onto floor
[QUOTE=AP via Washington Post]
A hearing for a Pennsylvania police chief who made profanity-laced Internet videos about liberals and the Second Amendment was halted suddenly Thursday night after a handgun belonging to one of his supporters slid out of its holster and crashed onto the concrete floor.
…
Nahas had been cross-examining the mayor when the gun clattered to the floor behind him.
Surprised and then irritated, Nahas turned to the weapon’s bearded owner and said, “You gotta go!” The man left.
[/QUOTE]
Just for illustration of atmosphere.
Come on now! You’re yanking our chains. I’m pretty sure that was a scene from Blazing Saddles.