He's Not (fox)Worthy
Mari Margil
No doubt Portland Mayor Potter struggled with the decision to put our disgraced Chief of Police Derrick Foxworth on leave, though for the rest of us it was a bit of a no-brainer. Kudos to AFSCME for turning up the heat on Potter to do so.
This is another unfortunate example of a Police Department that has itself struggled, amid many blunders and poor decision making.
On the other hand, I just saw one of Portland's finest pull over an SUV...so they can't be that bad, right?
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Apr 12, '06
This is another example of why I didn't vote for Potter. Like with the supposed "downtown crime wave" Potter seems to be heavily responsive at times only to the whims of the times. If you're a leader, f-ing lead and don't let yourself be led. I support a strong major system but not with Potter as that mayor.
That being said, I think the decision made is, in fact, the right one.
1:50 p.m.
Apr 12, '06
I think the mayor has been doing quite a lot of leading.
In this case, he wanted to keep Foxworth on the job but he recognizes the reality that you can't be an effective Chief of Police if the public and the bureau aren't behind you. I'm glad to have a mayor who leads with his principles but not to the point where he's oblivious to reality.
He sent a message with the Sizer appointment, that's for sure.
Memo from the mayor: Be careful what you wish for, fellas.
Whatever opportunistic anti-Foxworth pressure was coming out of the police bureau because some of them think commmunity policing is for sissies and only white males are real police officers, those guys just got the thing they want to see even less than a black chief who promotes community policing--a woman who promotes community policing.
2:12 p.m.
Apr 12, '06
I don't think it was a no-brainer at all. From the initial tort claim, it was unclear what, if any, City or PPB policies he had clearly violated. Sending racy emails from home and demanding secrecy for an illicit affair aren't necessarily a professional problem. Giving up inside information is a bit murkier, but there again it's also unclear what info he clearly gave that was privileged.
However, if the distraction of the allegations becomes too great for the department, then it's a good idea to take away the distraction. Furthermore, according to The O new charges were made yesterday, which include Foxworth altering the shift schedule to accomodate her based on their personal relationship. Now that IS a clear no-no, as far as I can tell, and now it's an issue pertinent to his career rather than his social life.
I both the initial call and the revised call are correct in this case.
Apr 12, '06
http://www.kgw.com/news/pdf/FoxworthTort3.pdf
Above is the latest tort filing released yesterday. Carefully read the last paragraph on the last page and realize this is all about a "legal" attempt to extort taxpayer money from the City and providing job security for the claimant under "whistleblower" laws.
Apr 12, '06
Torridjoe -
Are you kidding me? OF COURSE it's a no-brainer to put him on paid leave.
If a person in position of authority is accused of having an affair with a subordinate, then it absolutely is a "professional problem", regardless of which computer he emailed from. In any sort of para-military organization, fraternization with subordinates CANNOT be tolerated.
So the moment he was accused of such, he should have been immediately removed from the situation. A good argument can be made for placing the subordinate on paid leave as well.
This is not the same situation as two contemporaries in your office hooking up. Or even the same as your boss tappin' the receptionist. This is an organization where sound judgement and discipline are essential to minimizing lose of life. It's an entirely different standard.
As one poster here hinted at, it may turn out that she's off her rocker. But that still doesn't excuse his extremely poor judgement for being involved with a subordinate in the first place.
So, regardless of his guilt or innocence, the first thing you do is to remove him from the work environment. A no-brainer.
Doretta - How exactly did Potter show leadership? He didn't actually DO anything. He didn't place anyone on leave, he didn't bring in outside investigators. And only after he was pressured by others, did he finally do the right thing and excuse Chief from duty, as well as bring in outsiders to "audit" the internal investigation. That's not leadership whatsoever. And by the way, reaching back to bring on an interim chief that leapfrogged several others (in my view likely because of the political gains for doing so) doesn't show leadership, either.
4:29 p.m.
Apr 12, '06
Larry, Foxworth didn't have supervisory control over Oswalt; he is a sworn employee, and she's non sworn. I'm also not exactly sure what "loss of life" threats were evident in his daily interactions with a desk clerk.
As for his judgement, the affair is not currently ongoing, so what's the point of putting him on leave?
Apr 12, '06
Beware of psycho-b's wrote:
"Carefully read the last paragraph on the last page and realize this is all about a "legal" attempt to extort taxpayer money from the City and providing job security for the claimant under "whistleblower" laws."
How did you come to that conclusion?
Torridjoe: How can you ignore the fact that Foxworthy obviously knew what he was doing was wrong? Foxworthy was quoted as saying:
"...I am a bit concerned due to our work relationship now. ...Now that you are at NE I feel as though I need to be careful because of the employee supervisor issue."
When a cop shoots someone, he is put on paid administrative leave until after the investigation is done. They aren't necessarily assumed to be guilty or wrong or in violation of city or PPB policies. Why should the chief (or Angela) be treated any differently?
Potter was wrong to originally leave him on the job. But I'm glad he's not so stubborn as to stick to his bad decision when the public clearly opposed it. At least he didn't compound his mistake further.
Apr 13, '06
Giving up inside information is a bit murkier,
More than a bit. I think Potter was correct to leave Foxworth in place based on the initial charges which seemed to be entirely personal and I think once there were claims that he had used his official position improperly, he was right to put him on leave.
I actually think Potter has handled this well. Both his initial decision not to throw Foxworth to the wolves and his ability to change his mind when the situation changed.
Apr 13, '06
Madam Hatter:
"If you don't settle this out of court soon, I will file a lawsuit and, through discovery, will release the names of many other bureau employees involved in sexual activities with my client. Also, keep in mind, as a whistleblower, my client cannot be terminated from her job."
2:29 p.m.
Apr 14, '06
Whoa. Check it out, but not at the public library!
http://wweek.com/editorial/3223/7436
<h2>Derek, Derek! Not on email!!</h2>