City of Phoenix

From:

Integrity Committee.City of Phoenix City Manager's Office

Phillip Roberts, SergeantPhoenix Police Violent Crimes Bureau, Robbery Unit

Date: December 31,2009To:

Subject: RESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEE'S LEITER

I want to start off by thanking the Integrity Committee for responding to my request forthe status of my "Whistleblower Protection" in writing. This request was based off of myoriginal Integrity Memorandum dated October 19, 2009. I was unaware that a responsehad been drafted by the committee on December 16,2009, and sent to my homeaddress. A combination of being on vacation for a week and a Christmas post officerush may have contributed to the delay in receiving the response.

In my memorandum dated December 30, 2009, I had made some references to notreceiving a response from the Integrity Committee. It was not until I dropped thememorandum off at the City Manager's Office on December 30,2009, that I was given acopy of the response from the Integrity Committee.

Please disregard any question or mention of a lack of "non-response" to amemorandum I sent to the committee dated December 30,2009. This response datedDecember 16, 2009, from Mr. Spenla of the Integrity will suffice, thank you again.

With that being said, Iwould like to address several issues pertaining to the responseitself. It is not my intention to "argue or debate" decisions made by the IntegrityCommittee. Quite the contrary, the experience level within the committee at handlinggovernmental operations far and exceeds anything I could hope to come remotely closeto.

I.would however like bring up several issues that the Integrity Committee has decidedupon that I do not fully understand. Perhaps someone within the Integrity Committeecould contact me and explain these questions to me?

In the second paragraph it is stated '~s indicated, the role of the Integrity Committeedoes not include dictating work assignments or intervening in a department's decisionsfor such assignments. "

In the City of Phoenix Ethics handbook it states "It is frequently necessary to consultadministrative regulations, personnel rules and departmental directives to determinewhether a particular action is allowable. The Integritv Committee has the authority toclarifv policv ambiguities and to investigate allegations of improper conduct. II

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LETTERPage 2 of 12

When it is stated in the response letter that "the role of the Integrity Committee does notinclude dictating work assignments or lntervenmq in department decisions ... " yet theCity of Phoenix Ethics handbook states that the Integrity Committee has the authority to'"determine whether a particular action is allowable" I do not understand this?

My "forced transfer" is clearly and unmistakably against City of Phoenix AdministrativeRegulations 2.35 and Phoenix Police Operations Orders 3.14. Doesn't the IntegrityCommittee have the "authority" to decide if this is a policy violation? According to theCity of Phoenix Ethics Handbook, it would appear to others and myself that the IntegrityCommittee does in fact have this "authority."

Both of my unions, the Phoenix Police Law Enforcement Association (PLEA) and thePhoenix Police Sergeants and Lieutenants Association (PPSLA), have also stated thatthey do not understand this.

Again, the operating policy for the Integrity Committee, as defined in the City of PhoenixEthics Handbook, clearly states that the committee "has the authority to clarify policyambiguities and to investigate allegations of improper misconduct" yet the responseletter states that the role of the Integrity Committee does not include "lnterveninq indepartment decisions," apparently even if it involves "improper misconduct."

Mr. Spenla told me himself that the Integrity Committee is a "facilitator" and not aninvestigative' unit and does not investigate internal matters. However, the EthicsHandbook states the the committee does investigate matters and does so "frequently"to determine whether a certain action is allowable. .

If this is true, then what is the purpose for giving the Integrity Committee the "authority"to investigate these matters if it does not exercise that authority to stop abuse fromoccurring within City government? What if the Integrity Committee were to investigateand determine that a policy violation occurred? What would the committee do then?

The next section I have a question on pertaining to the response letter is immediatelybrought out in the fourth paragraph. In the response letter it is stated, "The PoliceDepartment has indicated to Mr. Zuercher that your transfer was not retaliation and yourother allegations of retaliation are still under investigation."

I am at a loss to understand on why the Integrity Committee would ask the actualalleged perpetrators of the EEO retaliation if retaliation is occurring in the first place?Did the Integrity Committee actually believe that the Phoenix Police Department mightsay, "yes the transfer of Sergeant Roberts is retaliation based?"

I would like to remind the Integrity Committee that In July of 2009, a PersonnelEmployee Relations Board (PERB) Hearing was held on the very subject of retaliationbeing committed by the Phoenix Police Department.

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LETTERPage 3 of 12

The Phoenix Police Department's Professional Standards Bureau did an internalinvestigation on acts of retaliation being committed by Lieutenant Steve Soha, againsthis own employees. The Professional Standards Bureau came back with an"unfounded" determination in the retaliation investigation, saying thatretaliation was notoccurring.

This was brought before a PERB Hearing Officer who came to the exact oppositeconclusion. The Hearing Officer did determine that retaliation was occurring within thePhoenix Police Department against it's own employees.

Furthermore, the City of Phoenix Personnel Department "ORDERED" that all retaliationand retaliation "like offenses" must cease and desist.

These events so infuriated former Assistant City Manager Alton Washington, who was achampion of employee's rights, that he ORDERED the City Of Phoenix PersonnelDepartment to re-investigate the matter and not the Phoenix Police Department.

As I understand it, this highly upset Public Safety Manager Jack Harris due to his closepersonnel relationship with Lieutenant Soha. This was not the first time that PublicSafety Manager Harris has interfered with an internal investigation.

I have information that In late 2008, Public Safety Manager Harris interfered in aninternal Investigation committed by the Phoenix Police Department's ProfessionalStandards Bureau. In this case, Mr. Harris's close relationship to former Phoenix PoliceSergeant Ron Snodgrass, caused him to "minimize" the discipline in another EEOInvestigation brought forth against Sergeant Snodgrass for having numerouspornographic pictures on his city computer.

Interestingly enough, it was the Integrity Committee of the City of Phoenix, led by formerAssistant City Manager Alton Washington, which "investigated" the situation. In the endPublic Safety Manager Harris's decision was overturned concerning the PoliceDepartment's planned "minimal" discipline of Sergeant Snodgrass, which was facilitatedby Public Safety Manager Jack Harris in the first place. Sergeant Snodgrass wasscheduled to attend a Disciplinary Review Board as a result of the Integrity Committeesactions, but he retired before he could receive the discipline.

Here is a perfect example of the Integrity Committee exercising its right and "authority"to "investigate" matters as granted in the City of Phoenix Ethics handbook and "rightinga wrong." Now a year later, the Integrity Committee states in my response letter that itdoes not "intervene in a department's decision."

If this is true, then why did the Integrity Committee do exactly that in 2008 concerningSergeant Snodgrass's discipline? The committee clearly "intervened" in the "decision"for discipline against Sergeant Snodgrass being protected by the Phoenix PoliceDepartment and Public Safety Manager Harris.

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LEITERPage 4 of 12

How can the Integrity Committee come to the aide of a victimized employee in thatcase, yet when I try to defend an African American Detective from discrimination andabuse the Integrity Committee states it does not have the power to do so? In additionwith full knowledge by the Integrity Committee, the retaliation continues against the bothof us.

I do not understand this nor do I think the men and women employed with the City ofPhoenix will understand this either. I also believe the residents who reside in the City ofPhoenix will understand it as well.

Does the Integrity Committee not know that Detective Yahweh is the President of theAmerican Black Law Enforcement (ABLE) Chapter in Arizona, a national organizationwith thousands of members?

, In addition to the above-mentioned facts, it is no secret that my attorney Michael Napier,has filed a Notice of Claim letter against the City of Phoenix.

Because of this, does anyone actually believe that the Phoenix Police Departmentwould admit to retaliation? Whether it is or is not occurring, the only logical answer forthe Phoenix Police Department to say to this question is "no, it is not retaliation based."Would anyone honestly expect anything else to be said from the alleged EEOperpetrators?

I would like 10 remind the Integrity Committee that there are indisputable facts thatsupport the statement that retaliation is already occurring within the Phoenix PoliceDepartment in this matter. -

It is a fact that that Ms Marquita Beene, the lead Equal Opportunity DepartmentInvestigator in this case, discussed my transfer with the Phoenix Police Department onNovember 5,2009, and recommended that they not move me because it would bedeemed "retaliation." I also understand that Ms Elaine Cardwell, the Chief LegalAdvisor to the City of Phoenix Personnel Department gave the same advice.

The Phoenix Police Department however ignored that advice and went forward with thetransfer, and "forced" my removal from my office the following day on November 6,2009. Incredibly enough, this "forced" removal was orchestrated to cause me maximumembarrassment by having it completed in the presence of my own detectives.

If my transfer is not retaliation, according to the Phoenix Police Department, then whywas my temporary transfer made into a "permanent" transfer to begin with? Why have Ibeen "trespassed" from the Violent Crimes Bureau if not for bringing forth EEOallegations against several of my supervisors, all to protect the Robbery Units onlyAfrican American male Detective?

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LETTERPage 5 of 12

It cannot be for poor performance or leadership. Every year, for the past 24 years, that Ihave been a Phoenix Police Officer and the 10 years I have been a Police Supervisor,every single one of my Performance Management Guides have been "meetsstandards."

It cannot be for having excess discipline in my file. I have no discipline in my file.

It cannot be for having three internal investigations currently on going against me, beinginvestigated by the Professional Standards Bureau (all 3 launched against me after Ifiled an EEO Complaint against me supervisor). This is because the two EEOPerpetrators, Lieutenants Burgett and Messina, are under several internal investigationsthemselves and to this day remain in there original positions, only I am being ordered tomove.

So if this is not retaliation, then why am I being transferred in the first place? What wasthe rush in "forcing" me out of my office on November 6, 2009? My temporary transferwas not due to expire until January 4, 2010. My position was not "posted" in theTransfer Opportunity Bulletin and even if had been, there would have been at least athree-week delay before my position could have been filled

Again, I ask the question why was there a rush to force my removal from my office onNovember 6,2009, in the presence of my own detectives? Does the IntegrityCommittee realize that to this very day my office sits vacant, almost two months later?

City of Phoenix Administrative Regulations 2.35 dictates that EEO retaliation disciplinecan be up to and including "termination." My transfer has been orchestrated at thehighest levels of the Phoenix Police Department and anyone involved in the transfer,could be potentially demoted or terminated.

Who would jeopardize their own career by saying "Yes, Sergeant Roberts transfer isretaliation based?" Did anyone from the Integrity Committee honestly expect any otheranswer? .

Isn't that why in the operating policy of the City of Phoenix Ethics Handbook for theIntegrity Committee gives the committee the "authority" to investigate these matters?understand that the City of Phoenix Equal Opportunity Department investigates EEOand EEO Retaliation issues however, doesn't the Integrity Committee have the"authority" to at least do a preliminary investigation and stop on-going retaliation?

A simple call to Ms Marquita Beene, the City EOD Investigator for this case, could haveenlighten the Integrity Committee- if she thought my transfer was retaliation based,which she already stated it was.

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LEDERPage 6 of 12

The next section of the response letter that I do not understand is also in the fourthparagraph. It states that the "proper agency/entity" is investigating my claims, includingthe Phoenix Equal Opportunity Department, Professional Standards Bureau and theArizona Attorney General's Office.

I have shown already that the Phoenix Police Department's Professional StandardsBureau is incapable of fairly investigating these matters. For that matter, formerAssistant City Manager Alton Washington felt the same way, by directing the City ofPhoenix Personnel Department to "re-investigate" the Lieutenant Soha's retaliation caseand not the Professional Standards Bureau.

How can the Professional Standards Bureau fairly investigate these matters anddetermine if retaliation is being committed if a PERB Hearing Officer came to the exactopposite conclusion on retaliation just months ago? .

I would like to quote my exact memorandum that I sent to the Integrity Committee onOctober 19, .2009 on this matter:

"Although I know that there are hard working dedicated personnel assigned tothe Professional Standards Bureau, I also know that corruption exists there as .well and have witnessed it myself firsthand. Command Staff of the PhoenixPolice Department have so entrenched themselves into down playing theallegations I have brought forward that I feel a fair investigation is nowimpossible. "

It is true that the Equal Opportunity Department is going forward with their investigationinto the matter; However, does the Integrity Committee realize that Ms Beene alreadydiscovered retaliation in this case? I would like to remind the Integrity Committee that inSeptember of 2009, I received my monthly performance notes from Lieutenant Burgett .for the months of June and July 2009. Not only were these the worst monthly notes I .had ever received in my careerthey were the first notes that I had received fromLieutenant Burgett since October 2008.

These notes were in fact deemed to be not just retaliatory in nature by Ms Beene buther supervisor as well. These notes were then removed (I have not verified this) frommy unit binder due to their retaliatory statements. . ..

What is important to remember is that before the notes were issued to me, a PhoenixPolice Commander initialed the notes and authorized their distribution. This occurredeven after I cautioned the Phoenix Police Department that they were retaliation.

In a memorandum entitled "MISCONDUCT" sent to Sergeant Tad Cline of theProfessional Standards Bureau (PSB) of the Phoenix Police Department and "cc'd" tothe Integrity Committee, it is clearly laid out that the PSB itself is involved in EEORetaliation.

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LETTERPage 7 of 12

I have now been brought up on 3 internal investigations, all three having been initiatedsince filing an EEO Complaint against my supervisor. The latest investigationconcerned a 10 minute test-drive of a car, over 8 months ago, on my lunch hour, whereI was not identifiable as a Police Officer nor did I state I was an officer.

I actually knew that this investigation was forth coming before I was even issued aNotice of Investigation from PSB. I knew this because I had heard that LieutenantBurgett was attempting to conger-up any and all misconduct against me since filing anEEO Complaint against her in August of 2009.

In October of 2009, Sergeant Ortiz complained that Lieutenant Burgett was "pressuring"him to author a retaliatory memorandum to have me investigated. In fact it was aretaliatory memorandum, because I discussed this very situation with Ms Beene in lateNovember of 2009, and she said that if an investigation were launched in this matterbrought forth by Lieutenant Burgett, it would be deemed retaliation.

PSB then violated its own protocols and entertained the accusation brought forth byLieutenant Burgett and had me investigated without contactinq Ms Beene.

All of this was done by the same City Department that told the Integrity Committee thatmy transfer is not retaliation and the same department that the Integrity Committeestates is the "proper agency/entity" to investigate my claims. I do not Understand this?

Does the Integrity Committee recall in my first memorandum dated October 19, 2009,that Assistant Phoenix Police Chief James Pina threatened my position as a RobberySergeant on August 17, 2009, when he said "you're digging yourself a hole" by bringingforth EEO policy violations?

In the sameconversation, Assistant Chief Pina said that "if any more memos comeacross my desk" alleging policy violations, I would be removed from my position.

Coincidentally enough, the next memorandum to cross his desk was on September 22,2009, was the same memorandum that Phoenix City Attorney Gary Verburg, said he didnot believe I was entitled to Whistleblower Protection for.

This memorandum "crossed" Assistant Chief Pina's desk and was concerning a botchedhand grenade investigation that had EEO retaliation imprints on it. Not two days later, 1-was transferred to Squaw Peak Precinct and later told I could never return to my unit.

. All of this is fact, yet the Integrity Committee took the word of the Phoenix PoliceDepartment, when the Police Departmentsaid that my transfer was not retaliation.Apparently both the City of Phoenix Personnel Department and the City of PhoenixEqual Opportunity Department do not agree with the City of Phoenix Police Department. .

Does the Integrity Committee realize that I am being transferred to a 3rd shift patrolsquad with Wednesday, Thursday, Friday off with work hours of 2100-0700?

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LETTERPage 8 of 12

How did I go from winning the Phoenix Police Department's "Police Chief's UnitAward" in May of 2009 to a "forced" transfer to a 3rd shift patrol squad justmonths later after filing an EEO Complaint? If this is not EEO retaliation, I wouldlike to see an example of what EEO retaliation is.

The next section I would like to discuss is paragraph 5, where the committee discusses .information I have on sexual harassment occurring in the Phoenix Police Department. Itstates that City of Phoenix Administrative Regulations 2.35 (A) "outlines the reportingalleged acts of sexual harassment."

I would like to refresh the committee's memory on my exact quote in my IntegrityMemorandum dated October 19, 2009:

"In yet another case, I have indirect knowledge that a VCB Lieutenant sexuallyharassed a female Assault Detective to such a point that she had to report theincident to her sergeant. My source indicated to me that Violent Crimes BureauCommand staff was made aware of the incident but nothing was done, partiallybecause the female detective was planning on taking the up coming SergeantsPromotional Examine. "

If true, City of Phoenix Administrative Regulations 2.35(A) was followed ... and the casewas covered up by the Police Department. What more can any employee do thanreport the incident; perhaps go to the Integrity Committee?

Per the Integrity Committee's own response letter' it states in paragraph two that the roleof the Integrity Committee does not include "intervening in a department's decisions ... "What about a decision not to investigate EEO allegations or report them to the EqualOpportunity Department for the City of Phoenix? I know for a fact that the City EqualOpportunity Department was never made aware of this allegation until I brought itforward, .

In my October 19,2009, memorandum I clearly state that "nothing was done" with thesexual harassment claim by the command staff of the Phoenix Police Department.

Nothing may have been done because Public Safety Manager Jack Harris personallyvouched for the offending lieutenant, allowing the lieutenant to attend training at theFederal Bureau of Investigations National Training Academy in Quantico, Virginia.

Is not the Integrity Committee aware that a civil judgment of $600,000 was recentlyawarded to a complainant against the Phoenix Police Department during a sexualharassment lawsuit for their failure to investigate and Public Safety Manager Harristestified in behalf of the City of Phoenix? A juror would later tell the news media that ifthe jury would have been told the entire story and not sanitized versions by cityattorney's, the award would have been between 3 - 4 million dollars.

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LEDERPage 9 of 12

The next section that I do not understand is in paragraph six, where my safety isconcerned. The Integrity Committee's response is that I should call "911" if I feelthreatened. .

I do not understand this? Below is my exact quote on the subject in a datedmemorandum of October 19, 2009:

"As amazing as this seems, since filing the allegations I have been approachedby two detectives and a supervisor who have all warned me to "watch mv back. "This was said to me as a warning because the allegations and evidence I haveagainst Command Staff of the Phoenix Police Department is so damning thatpotentially my own safety maybe in jeopardy. If investigated properly, demotionsor terminations could result, even at the command staff level. "

I did not make this up nor have I made any aspect up of my allegations to the committeeor any other entity. Two officers and a high-ranking supervisor within the PhoenixPolice Department made these statements to me. So, if I feel threatened by physicalharm, I am to notify the actual agency that maybe involved in this per the IntegrityCommittee? .

Here the Integrity Committee quotes specific policy but does not quote specific policy onits own operating procedures. I do not understand any if this?

I have already made the determination that if I receive physical reprisals in bringing forththe allegations or sustain damage to my home or property, it will be the MaricopaCounty Sheriff's Office investigating these crimes not the Phoenix Police Department.

With all do respect to the Integrity Committee, the last time I took the advice of theIntegrity Committee, and hired civil council, I was retaliated for doing so by the PhoenixPolice Department.

Since following Mr. Spenla's advice I have had a 3rd internal investigation launchedagainst me, a planned meeting involving my transfer back to the Robbery Unit wascancelled and I was told that I am now being permanently assigned to a s= shift patrol.squad with Wednesday, Thursday, Friday off and hours of 2100-0700.

This is what I am being assigned to after 24 years of faithful service to the Citizens ofPhoenix and protecting one of my own detectives, the Robbery Units only AfricanAmerican male.

This is apparently what occurs when you follow the advise of the Integrity Committee totry and stop retaliation from occurring.

All this occurred after I took Mr. Spenla's advice and hired an attorney to get theretaliation to stop. I do not understand this?

Integrity Committee ,RESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LETTERPage 10 of 12

, The next section I do not understand is paragraph seven where it states that Mr. GaryVerburg, the City of Phoenix Attorney and an Integrity Committee member "does notthink it applies" as far as Whistleblower Protection being granted to me.

I think that is interesting since Arizona State Senator Russell Pierce, who voted on theactual bill for ARS 38-532 in the Arizona State Senate, had told Phoenix Police LawEnforcement Association President Mark Spencer, that the law was intended forsituations "exactly" like mine. I

I carefully reviewed ARS Title 38 and although I am not an attorney, I would like to knowspecifically how this law does not apply to my situation.

I would like to remind the Integrity Committee of statements made just before I wastransferred out of the Robbery Unit made by Commander Rob Handy of the PhoenixPolice Department:

In a discussion about a hand grenade me~orandumsent to the City of Phoenix CityCouncil by PLEA Personnel, Commander Handy said "Sending that memorandum tothe City Council was a mistake."

When I told Commander Handy that I had nothing to do with releasing thememorandum to the Phoenix City Council, Commander Handy said" It doesn't matter,there are people up here that think you did anyway."

Commander Handy then went on to say th~t I had "burned my bridges" in the ViolentCrimes Bureau and that I was "anti-management" for joining PLEA. This was allbased off of the Hand Grenade Memorandum that I authored, which causedembarrassment to the command staff of the Phoenix Police Department.

The same memorandum that prompted Commander Chuck Miiller to release false andmisleading news statements to the news nill edia aboutmy background and theinvestigation itself. I • ,

I clearly based the request or Whistleblower Protection off of the release of the handgrenade memorandum. Two days after the release of the memorandum I wastransferred to Squaw Peak Precinct. The transfer was a voluntary temporaryassignment, yet just two weeks later when I indicated that ,Iwished to return, I was toldI could not, despite being against Phoenix Police Department Policy.

Again, I do not understand how Mr. Gary Verburg, "does not think it applies" for me toobtain Whistleblower protection? In order for it to apply, does someone actually have tosay the word "retaliation" to make it retaliation?

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO-TH!= INTEGRITY COMMITTEf=S LETTERPage 11 of 12

, ILastly, I am at a loss to understand why Public Safety Manager Jack Harris, was givena copy of this response letter. As stated in my previous memorandum, it was myunderstanding that inquiries to the Integrity Committee were to remain confidential. Inthe City of Phoenix Ethics Handbook, it clearly states the following:

"The information gathered from the call is reported directly to the Integrity LineCommittee, comprised of the City Auditor, the City Attorney and the AssistantCity Manager. The Committee maintains strict standards of confidentiality andwill not voluntarily release information about an inquiry. " -

Doesn't it make sense that if Public Safety Manager Jack Harris is informed aboutinformation pertaining to "Whistleblower Protection" being requested by one of his ownemployees pertaining to misconduct within his own department he would want details asto what was occurring?

In closing, I would like to discuss one additional disturbing matter that has arisen fromthese investigations. If the committee has not had a opportunity to review mymemorandum I "CC'd" to the committee on December 30, 2009, entitled"MISCONDUCT" addressed to Sergeant Tad Cline of the Phoenix Police Department'sProfessional Standards Bureau, I would highly suggest that you do.

Although this is only speculation on my part, my strong belief is that Sergeant Ortiz was"coerced" by members of the Professional Standards Bureau to author a clearlyretaliatory memorandum to have me investigated. I believe that Sergeant Ortiz knewthis was retaliation, but was ordered by the Professional Standards Bureau to author itanyway. In essence, ordering him to commit an "extreme" policy violation for retaliation.

I believe all this was done while the Professional Standards BUreau held his career overhis head like a pendulum. Sergeant Ortiz I feel was more or less "blackmailed" to writethe memorandum to have me investigated with his own Disciplinary Review BoardHearing on a previous and separate domestic violence investigation pending.

The attached e-mail was originally sent out by Detective Terry Yahweh, and was alighthearted attempt at humor and good will. It shows several photographs for a "goingaway" luncheon for Detective Joe Liska who was being reassigned.

Sergeant Ortiz was obviously not amused by the e-rnail. However, what is disturbing isclearly the frustration in Sergeant Ortiz's words over these investigations and how they

- are being handled by the Phoenix Police Department.

Sergeant Ortiz describes being interviewed by the Professional Standards Bureau as awaste of time and that the Professional Standards Bureau is issuing investigations "onthis entire situation."

Integrity CommitteeRESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMITTEES LEDERPage ,12 of 12

Serqeant Ortiz goes on to say that these investigations have "affected numerous peopleemotionally, physically and hurt friendships."

I could not agree with Sergeant' Ortiz more. This entire situation is completely out ofcontrol. Even Executive Assistant Police Chief Joe Yahner attempted to get a handleon the now "nine" internal investigations. However in my opinion within a matter ofweeks, the police department will be inundated with as many as 20 internalinvestigations, all surrounding these incidents.

Outside law enforcement agencies are now involved along with the City of Phoenix CityCouncil. Even Mr. Spenla himself, representing the Integrity Committee, recommended,

.that I contact the United States Department of Justice to have a felony probe launchedagainst the Phoenix.Pofice Professional Standards Bureau.

PLEA is intending (if they have not already) to launch an Unfair Labor Practice in thismatter and lawsuits are in the' works by multiple people. What should have started outas a single EEO complaint has morphed into a quagmire of almost unbelievable'proportions. My own PPSLA Representative Lieutenant Larry Jacobs, has saidrepeatedly that he has never seen anything like the current on-going situation in hisover 30 year police career.

While all of this is occurring the Integrity Committee believes that it should remain onthe sidelines and observe? '

These events are taking a toll on everyone. Even Sergeant Ortiz describes this in his"frustrated" e-mail. I have no doubt this will cause Sergeant Ortiz to be placed under yetanother internal investigation by an out of control Professional Standards Bureau of thePhoenix Police Department (refer to my pervious MISCONDUCT memorandum).

All of this is occurring while I am being transferred and the EEO Perpetrators remain intheir positions. I do not under stand this?

Thank you for your time.

- ~Grl~L\5dc). Phil Roberts .

Copy: Lt. Larry Jacobs, PPSLA RepresentativeOff. Dave Kothe, PLEA RepresentativeMarquita Beene, City of Phoenix EOD InvestigatorAndrew Thomas, Maricopa County AttorneyArizona Attorney Generals Office, EOD Investigations