Public deserves details of Gurnee police chief buyout
Gurnee Police Chief Robert Jones abruptly retired a couple of weeks ago, leaving amid an investigation into employee complaints filed against him. With that decision, the village board quickly ended the probe and approved a retirement/separation package worth nearly $140,000.
But the public and village trustees were never told — and still don’t know — what the complaints involved. And that’s a problem.
We echo the demand by trustees Greg Garner and Kirk Morris that village board members and residents be given a real explanation about the allegations against Jones.
Trustees of all people ought to have details about why a village official is being investigated, and the public is entitled to know at least the general nature of the complaints.
Garner and Morris — political opponents of Mayor Kristina Kovarik — expressed their dissatisfaction with the lack of details when they were the only trustees to vote against the severance package. They argued they should have been able to consider the complaints in their vote.
The package was approved, but the discussion on this matter shouldn’t end there.
Not when the focus is the highest ranking law enforcement officer in the village.
And not given the significant outlay of taxpayer money in the village-approved package.
Still to come for the village is the final legal bill from the unfinished probe — expected to be about $15,000.
“All of this is taxpayer money, and the public doesn’t know anything. The mayor holds all the secrets,” Garner said.
To date, the trustees and the public have received only general information from Kovarik and Village Administrator James Hayner.
Kovarik, who has seen the complaints, has said the village followed proper procedure regarding personnel matters for any employee.
She has said only that the complaints against Jones were filed by male and female police department employees, none go back more than 12 months, and the allegations “never, ever, ever, ever” had the potential to be criminal charges. Kovarik called them “core employee handbook violations.”
When you’re talking about the chief of police, that isn’t good enough.
We understand there are risks to releasing details to the public. Future whistle-blowers might be reluctant to come forward, or the village could be the target of a lawsuit if a complaint turns out to be false.
Both are legitimate concerns to be weighed and addressed.
However, there is also a concern about shutting out the public that is paying for the severance and all but a handful of the leaders who are charged with watching out for the village’s interests.