Watt v. City of Crystal

Alan Watt, Plaintiff, v. City of Crystal, and Stephanie Revering, Chief of the Crystal Police Department,and Anne Norris, City Manager (individually and in their official capacities), Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-3167 (JNE/JJK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

December 2, 2015

ORDER

This matter is a disability discrimination and retaliation suit brought by Plaintiff Alan Watt, a former police officer in the Crystal Police Department, against the City of Crystal, Crystal Police Chief Stephanie Revering, and Crystal City Manager Anne Norris. The matter is before the Court on Defendants' motion for summary judgment. For the reasons provided below, Defendants' motion is granted and Watt's claims are dismissed.

BACKGROUND

Watt was hired as a police officer for the City of Crystal in 1996. He typically received somewhat favorable reviews that included criticisms of his work performance. However, in early 2012, Watt had marital problems and his conduct at work suffered. In February 2012, the City received a complaint from an individual who alleged that Watt used police intelligence to track down his address, where Watt knocked on the door and asked for the whereabouts of Watt's wife. An investigation by the City concluded that Watt accessed the Department of Vehicle Services (DVS) database on four occasions to obtain information about the individual, who during the investigation admitted to having an intimate relationship with Watt's wife. Watt claimed he looked up the individual's information because he was concerned for the safety of his family. However, the City concluded that the DVS accesses were unlawful because they lacked a specific law enforcement purpose and, in April 2012, then-Chief John Banick suspended Watt for 12 hours without pay.

In June and July, Watt complained about the suspension to Kim Therres, the assistant city manager and human resources manager. On October 7, 2012, Watt sent Therres an email, which it seems he later forwarded to Norris. The email states in full:

I have had a chance to review the council meeting regarding the Ramirez family's situation with former Chief Banick. This is the same type of behavior I expressed to you regarding my suspension for violating city policy while others who committed the same offense were left alone. The fact that you only seemed interested in finding out what info I had was discouraging, adding proof that as a council member stated that "we have to protect the city". You're not interested in doing the right thing only protecting yourselves from obvious wrong doing at the very least looking bias[ed] against minorities. So, I ask yet again what steps if any have been taken regarding my complaint against Banick for his disgraceful conduct? Or will this incident be ignored / covered up further?

The Ramirez family situation mentioned in the email involves a complaint filed with the City on September 6, 2012 by a group known as Communities United Against Police Brutality (Communities United). The group alleged that the Crystal Police Department failed to investigate earlier complaints that the Metro Gang Strike Force unlawfully dispossessed the Ramirez family of its home and property following a search of the family's Crystal apartment. Watt had no formal involvement with the matter. He first learned of the Ramirez family situation when he reviewed the video of the public city council meeting on the matter, prior to sending the October 7 email.

On October 12, Norris replied to Watt, stating: "If you can give me specifics, I can take further action as appropriate." Watt replied to Norris on October 14. That email, in its entirety, states:

As I informed Kim Therres[,] former Chief Banick suspended me without pay for violation of policy. Prior to the suspension Banick stated he was aware of other officers who violated the same policy. It wasn't until after my suspension that I discovered that this was true, yet these individuals were not spoken to, written up or suspended as I was. When I informed Therres she seemed more interested in finding out what I knew instead of the obvious bias of Banick, not even asking him about it in a general inquiry. So, my questions once again are why [is] the only minority officer [Watt] suspended when other officers are allowed to commit the same offense left alone? Why was Lt. Gustafson sent to my home and interrogated my son regarding my whereabouts when my supervisor was advised that I was not coming in? Why former Chief Banick, Chief Fealy [now Revering],¹ Lt.Gustafon are allowed to commit acts which are morally, ethically and legally wrong allowed to continue without consequence? The first time I came to you for help the bulls eye on my back got bigger resulting in suspension, second time you didn't have time for me and I'm sure this time I'll be punished in some way. All I asked for was consistency from people who are in charge, consistency being fair and just to all not only fan favorites.

One or two days later, Revering called Watt into a meeting to discuss an incident in which Watt had left his sidearm disassembled in the squad room. The incident had occurred several months earlier. However, it is undisputed that Revering did not learn about the gun incident until shortly before she called the meeting with Watt. Watt admitted to Revering that he had removed, disassembled, and left his sidearm in the squad room. On October 19, Revering placed Watt on paid administrative leave. Watt was directed not to discuss his personnel issues with anyone other than his legal and union representatives, not to be present on city property or attend city events during his leave, and not to contact his coworkers while on leave, among other conditions. On October 23, Watt's union counsel emailed the City's attorney to ask why Watt was placed on leave. The City's attorney responded that the City was reviewing the matter to determine whether discipline was warranted.

The City conducted an investigation into whether the gun incident violated department policy. The investigation was completed on January 29, 2013. It found that, during the incident,Watt took his gun from his holster, removed the magazine and the bullet from the chamber, and left them on a desk or table in the squad room. Watt then left the room to meet with Banick and Revering. But before he left, the report found, "Watt made a statement intimating that he should not have his gun with him when he went upstairs to talk to people." The report concluded that Watt's removal of his sidearm violated department policy.

The City referred Watt for a psychological Fitness for Duty Evaluation (FFDE) performed by Dr. Robert Peterson. Peterson's psychological report, issued on March 29, 2013, determined that "Watt is able to safely perform his duties as a peace officer at this time." It found "no psychological impairment or condition at this time that would prevent him from safely performing those duties." However, it concluded that "it will be very important that he remain in therapy with his individual therapist in order for him to process anger, frustrations and suspicions."

By letter dated April 18, Revering suspended Watt for 30 days without pay for the gun incident and other personnel issues. Revering also directed Watt to "participate in private anger management therapy and therapy aimed at your issues of distrust of superiors" and to "provide periodic written reports to Human Resources from your private therapist about your progress in these areas every four months." Watt's union counsel objected to the therapy conditions, asserting that "the City does not have the authority to decide how long that therapy will continue, nor does the City have the authority to require periodic reports from Officer Watt's private therapist."

Later that month, Watt, who is African-American, filed a race discrimination charge against Crystal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR). The charges were later dismissed.²

On May 7, Watt emailed Lisa Lynn, a psychologist and consultant who had previously worked with the City, to say that he was "targeted" by Norris and Revering and to ask Lynn to call him. Lynn had a brief telephone conversation with Watt and also met in person with Revering, who told Lynn about Watt's gun incident. On June 1, Lynn wrote a letter to Revering, concluding: "In my professional opinion which is based on an email sent from Officer Watt, a telephone discussion with Officer Watt and a discussion with Chief Revering, Officer Watt is likely in need of professional counseling and/or stress management coaching to ensure he has control of his own mental, physical and emotional states in both personal and professional realms." Lynn suggested that Watt take part in stress management or counseling before returning to duty. Based on Lynn's memo and opinion, Revering placed Watt on home assignment, until further notice, effective June 3. On home assignment, Watt was expected to be available at his home telephone during the hours of 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Watt received no assignments while on home assignment.

On June 16, Watt signed a statement submitted to the city council that complained about the discipline he had received and concluded that "all of the things that have happened to me are retaliation for complaining about misconduct by police management, especially my complaint about the Ramirez cover up."

On July 1, the City requested that Watt authorize direct communication with his private therapist. Watt refused. On July 3, the City reiterated that Watt must participate in therapy and provide written status reports from his therapist. The next status report, the City stated, was due by the end of July. On July 15, the City wrote to Dr. Peterson to ask for clarification about the meaning of his report's statement that "it will be very important that [Watt] remain in therapy with his individual therapist in...