Westminster Officials Lose Civil Rights Suit

A U.S. District Court jury found Wednesday that six Westminster council members and top city officials conspired to violate the civil rights of four firefighters by firing or disciplining them after an investigation into suspected payroll fraud.

The jury concluded that city officials had tried to retaliate against the employees for “exercising protected First Amendment rights.” Some of the firefighters had publicly criticized city leaders and worked on a campaign to oust council members.

The verdicts are a milestone in the long-running feud between the city and its fire union, which dates to several years ago when the city began investigating large amounts of overtime pay claimed by firefighters--up to $900,000 in one year. City officials said they had uncovered evidence that firefighters falsified time cards and received overtime for hours they did not work.

The probe and its aftermath have come to dominate city affairs, prompting a recall election and charges of political retribution.

With the jury’s finding, attorney Alan C. Davis said, the firefighters he represents have “been totally vindicated” and the city’s charges “were totally outrageous.”

One firefighter involved in the case said he was gratified by the judgment.

“Finally, the truth surfaced,” said Hal Raphael, who was fired by the city after the payroll investigation. “We were saying all the time that we were innocent, and none of the firefighters would think of stealing money from the city. We were accused of being crooks and thieves, and it simply wasn’t the truth.”

Davis plans to seek monetary damages for the plaintiffs at a federal court hearing today. He declined to say how much he will ask the jury to award.

Westminster officials expressed disappointment at the verdicts but hinted that the city might appeal.

“The city and I very much thought we would prevail,” said City Atty. Richard D. Jones. “The city thought at all times that [it] was doing the right thing.”

Mayor Charles V. Smith, one of the defendants named in the suit, said he found the jury’s ruling inconsistent and that it leaves room for an appeal.

Another defendant, Councilman Tony Lam, said he was distressed by the finding but declined to comment further until the case is entirely settled.

The jury found that Smith, Lam, former Councilman Craig Schweisinger, former Fire Chief John T. DeMonaco Jr., Finance Director Brian Mayhew and city official Don Anderson violated the civil rights of four firefighters by conspiring to discipline them for speaking out. The four firefighters are Raphael, Don Herr, Joe Wilson and Dana Bowler. All four were either terminated or disciplined, and none still works for the city.

Mayor Smith said he didn’t understand how the jury could conclude that he conspired against two of the plaintiffs when he didn’t know who they were or what they were doing.

In addition, the jury found that Schweisinger slandered firefighter Paul Gilbrook by comparing him to former Teamsters Union boss Jimmy Hoffa after a council meeting, Davis said. Schweisinger declined to comment on the case until it is completely settled.

The city always has maintained that all disciplinary action against employees resulted from its investigation.

An audit commissioned by the city found that overtime costs at the Fire Department had increased from $342,000 in 1986 to $928,000 in 1990.

During one period, firefighters claimed $283,000 in overtime for the period of July 1 to Sept. 15, 1993, when $75,000 was reserved for such wages.

The fire union blamed the overtime charges on the City Council for refusing the hire more firefighters. It also maintained that the disciplinary action against the firefighters occurred because they clashed with city leaders and launched an unsuccessful recall campaign against four council members in 1994.

Beside considering monetary awards for the four plaintiffs, the jury still must rule on the civil rights cases of several other firefighters who have sued the city.

Raphael, one of the dismissed firefighters, said the jury’s ruling restores his faith in the system.

“I always felt we would get our day in court,” he said. “It took a long time, but the system is working. . . . It might take a long time, but justice did prevail.”