Under the provisions of Ohio Revised Code §505.491, the Sylvania Township Board of Trustees took action to suspend a police officer for three days, without pay. This was a decision which was made after all proper steps were taken, including the filing of charges on October 7, 2008 against Officer Ron Dicus followed by a hearing held during our regular township trustee meeting October 21, 2008. While having a disciplinary hearing during a public meeting may seem inappropriate, it is in fact required under the Ohio Revised Code unless waived by the police officer.
This discipline process was started because an officer refused to follow a direct and lawful order. After 11 days elapsed and the officer remained in violation of the order, he was notified that he was insubordinate and the discipline process was started. The officer was given the opportunity to waive the public hearing in front of the trustees by having the Chief of Police hear the discipline charges but the officer chose not to.
Insubordination, the failure to follow a direct order, is a serious offense in a police department. The safety of our residents, visitors and employees depend upon police officers following orders. Our officers need to know without a doubt that their fellow officer will follow lawful orders given to them. We cannot have individual officers determining which orders they choose to follow and which orders they will ignore.
If an officer disagrees with an order, for example if they believe it is in violation of the union contract, proper procedure would be to follow the order and then file a grievance and allow the grievance procedure to work in determining if it was a lawful order under the contract. But this did not happen in this case, the officer chose instead to ignore the order until discipline procedures were started.
Given the totality of the situation, I believe the township trustees had to act unanimously in disciplining Officer Dicus for insubordination when he failed to follow a direct order. We cannot have the uncertainty that would be created if our police officers do not know which order a fellow officer will follow; their very lives could depend on having confidence that orders will be followed.
Now I come to the part which will trigger questions: the order Officer Dicus was given and failed to follow was to trim his mustache. The obvious question is "should he really be suspended just because he didn't trim his mustache?" While that may be an obvious question, it is not the issue. Bottom line is that the officer failed to follow an order. Period. As was laid out at the hearing, the Sylvania Township Police Department has a policy on personal appearance and grooming, including the appropriate grooming of mustaches. Officer Dicus received and acknowledged the policy yet he chose to ignore the direct order. He never raised concerns or objections to the policy prior to his discipline.
As mentioned earlier, the officer could have waived his right to a hearing before the trustees, as other police officers at the township have done when discipline was necessary in other cases. But I believe this was a calculated decision by the union to not waive the trustee hearing, and set up a situation which had the potential to make the trustees either 1) cave in light of the potential bad publicity of disciplining a police officer over a mustache or 2) look bad for being so petty as to discipline a police officer over a mustache.
Ohio law requires that trustees hold a hearing in order to discipline a police officer with time off. If the trustees do not follow through on such hearings and subsequent discipline (i.e., we cave), we would potentially be in the position of never being able to discipline a police officer. If we fail to support our Chief of Police in implementing and enforcing policies that we have directed and supported him in developing in order to improve and enhance our police department, we would be creating chaos and encouraging an atmosphere which would jeopardize the safety and protection of our residents, visitors and employees. That is not something that I am willing to do.
Some might say it was wrong to discipline a police officer over a mustache. But this was not just a mustache - this was willful disregard of a direct lawful order. I will not encourage an atmosphere in our police department where our Chief is powerless and the union is running the department. Officer Dicus was given a lawful order and he chose not to follow it. That is insubordination and the trustees acted appropriately.
