Disciplinary Action attachments

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to RCW Ch. 42.56 (Public Records Act), I hereby request the following records:

On January 11, 2017 Sgt. Main (#729) wrote an Employee Incident Report and issued a written warning to Officer Nathan Lynch #734. The violations listed on the warning included:

-Use of department information for their own or another's personal benefit or interest,

-Unauthorized personal use of Police Vehicle.

-Police issued vehicle driven to a private residence.

These violations by Officer Lynch were indicated on the written warning to have occurred between date range of December 2016 and January 2017.
Please provide all complaints, inter office emails, photos, video recordings, citizen complaints, anonymous tips, memos including any attachments, gps data, MCT data, logs, documents and/or any information used, accessed or that the POPD became aware of to identify and support this disciplinary action.

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 5 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Penny Allen

Ms. Circelli,
Regarding the no responsive documents return of your search # DOC102617-009 requesting all information relating to the disciplinary action, including complaints, inter office emails, photos, video recordings, citizen complaints, anonymous tips, memos including any attachments, gps data, MCT data, logs, documents and/or any information used, accessed or that the POPD became aware of to identify and support the disciplinary action taken against Officer Nathan Lynch Badge #734.
The list of suggested documents and records was not intended to be all inclusive, but provide a general idea of what documents are anticipated to exist.

On January 11, 2017 Sgt. Main (#729) wrote an Employee Incident Report and issued a written warning to Officer Nathan Lynch #734. The violations listed on the warning included:
-Use of department information for their own or another's personal benefit or interest,
-Unauthorized personal use of Police Vehicle.
-Police issued vehicle driven to a private residence.
These violations by Officer Lynch were indicated on the written warning to have occurred between date range of December 2016 and January 2017.

The violations were not specific. However, there was certainly a conclusion that probable cause existed to discipline Officer Lynch with a written reprimand. Generally, when such disciplinary action is taken, the employee and their (representing Guild) would be provided with the following prior to the administration of discipline:
a. The nature of the allegation(s) or charge(s) against the employee;
b. A copy of the complaint against the employee;
c. A copy of all materials a part of or related to the investigation upon which the allegation(s) or charge(s) are based;
d. The directives, policies, procedures, work rules, regulations or other order of the City that allegedly was violated;
e. What disciplinary action is being considered.

Additionally, the affected employee and the Guild is generally provided with an opportunity to respond to the charges.

Record of the disciplinary action would be placed in the employees file where it would be held for a contractually agreed and specific amount of time, generally 3 years. In order to help you locate any related documents, I have included below a few case citings that show your search can and should include Officer Lynch’s personnel file:

Washington State holds that Disciplinary records of a police officer working in a civil service city which are maintained in the police officer's civil service file are not exempt when there is a disciplinary action substantiating misconduct. Officer Lynch was the subject of disciplinary action, he was written up for specific misconduct related to the information that is being requested which substantiates misconduct is of concern to the public.

Misconduct on the job and off-duty actions that “bear on ability to perform” public office are “not private, intimate, personal details” of a state patrol officer’s life, but are of public concern. See Cowles Publ’g Co. v. State Patrol (1988).

http://www.atg.wa.gov/open-government-resource-manual/chapter-2d. Personnel Complaints and Investigations:

Multiple court opinions have addressed the disclosure of personnel investigations. If the misconduct is substantiated or disciplinary action has been taken, these records are to be disclosed because they are of legitimate interest to the public, even if embarrassing to the employee. See Brouillet v. Cowles Publishing Co (1990)

Sincerely,
Penny Allen

I will do that. Thank you so much for your help!
Sincerely,
Penny Allen