Another California Fire Chief Sues City
In what seems to be a disturbing trend, the third California fire chief in the past 2 weeks has filed suit against his employer. Fire Chief Ron Hittle filed suit last Thursday against the city of Stockton, seeking to challenge the city’s right to fire him. He joins Alameda Fire Chief Dave Kapler and Monterey Park Fire Chief Cathleen Orchard in having filed suit since April 14, 2011.
The complicated background to the Stockton case begins with Chief Hittle, who was appointed fire chief in 2006. At the time, the city charter stated that the fire chief could only be suspended or removed from office for cause, and gave the chief the option to return to his previously held position in the department. Chief Hittle was a Deputy Chief at the time he was promoted.
Last November, Stockton voters approved a charter change that made the fire chief an “at will” employee. Accordingly, the city contends that Chief Hittle has no protection and can be fired at the pleasure of the city. He was placed on leave in March of this year while the city investigates the fact that he attended a Christian leadership conference in August, 2010 at taxpayer expense.
Chief Hittle contends that the new charter provisions do not apply to him, and that in any event they cannot be applied retroactively for something that occurred prior to the charter being amended. He also denies any wrongdoing in connection with the conference.
The city has hired an outside attorney to conduct the investigation. Hittle’s attorneys are quoted as saying “The allegations of professional misconduct or deficient performance … are baseless and, even if they were all true, do not rise to the level to demote, suspend or remove the fire chief from his office.”
Why is this disturbing?
It seems that if the city is applying an ex post facto rule, that it should be expected that they’d expect to have to defend it in the courts.
Its disturbing because IMHO the fire chief is the one person in a fire department who should be the “least likely” to be in an adversarial relationship with the city administration. The union, yes – it is to be expected that the city officials and the union will be at odds. Individual firefighters from time to time will be at odds with the city administration, but there is no expectation of loyalty, no need for a close and trusting relationship, so its less of a concern. But for 3 fire chiefs in the same state in a 2 week span to make headlines by suing their employer is disturbing. Is it a trend? Is there something else going on (ie. fueds between chiefs and city officials over cut backs – that are surfacing in this way)? Maybe it is a coincidence… maybe not.