$122,658/yr for non-resident police chief?

I've known Police Chief Bill Brogan for many years; ever since we used to meet and talk on occasion at Saint Patrick's Church in McHenry. He was an is a lifelong resident of the City of McHenry and McHenry County and has spent 27 of his 31 years in law enforcement at that department. He worked his way up through the ranks and got to where he is the hard way: he earned it by living and working every day and night in the county. He stated according to the Northwest Herald in Sunday, July 26th edition that " I feel blessed to be able to be the chief in the town I grew up in," said Brogan whose salary is $109,422 and is within minutes of being available if needed by his community.

As a resident of McHenry Brogan "knows the culture of McHenry and what people expect of their police force". "He knows the nooks and crannies and niches." On top of all of this he has always been a nice guy and someone who always put the welfare of the city and his fellow police officers before his own.

In contrast we have the City of Woodstock who decided to hire a new police chief from outside the department from outside the county and from outside the city. Chief Robert Lowen Jr's salary is, according to the Northwest Herald, $122,658. According to the information I have he has still not moved into McHenry County, as previous chiefs had to, much less the City of Woodstock of which he is the chief of police. I wonder if he knows the culture of McHenry County? I wonder is he knows all the nooks and crannies and niches of his city like police chief Brogan does? Does not living where you are the Chief of Police tell you anything about the man?.....I don't know...do you?

Justices rule for whistle blowers

In a 9-0 decision, on Monday, January 26, 2009, the Supreme Court of the United States stated that employees, workers who cooperate with an investigation regarding uncouth behavior by a supervisor are protected from retaliation under the civil rights laws. So now not only is the person who filed the complaint protected but any witnesses who might corroborate the truthfulness of the complaint are also now protected against retaliation by the employer. Justice David Souter said that protection "extends to an employee who speaks out about discrimination not on her/his own initiative, but in answering questions during an internal investigation."

Another Continuance..in Woodstock IL

Will it ever end? Sgt. Gorski, almost 20 year veteran of the Woodstock PD, who was unanimously vindicated by the Woodstock Board of Fire and Police Commissioners almost a year ago of a complaint brought against him by Robert W. Lowen Jr., the current Chief of the Woodstock PD. Sgt. Gorski has been found guilty of nothing and has had absolutely no disciplinary action recommended by the Woodstock Board of Fire and Police Commissioners. Yet for the last year he has been punished by the City of Woodstock for being found vindicated by its own Board of Fire and Police Commissioners buy not paying him his back pay with statutory interest as demanded by the State statute. Likewise when he tried to go back to light duties as recommended by his spine surgeon he was told sorry we've got nothing for you, have a nice day. Now understand this, he is still a sworn police officer, an employee of the City of Woodstock, vindicated by the Board but they have decided unilaterally not to pay him even though he is still technically an employee with the city; you try to figure that one out if you can.

Could you have a nice day knowing that there is no income to support your family which includes three young daughters? I don't think so.

Today he was told that the Hearing in Judge McIntyre's Court was continued and will not take place tomorrow. He does not know why as of yet or who asked for it. I am looking forward to the reason for the continuance. I hope its not going to result in another several months of no pay or back pay for being found vindicated by Woodstock's own Board of Fire and Police Commissioners. Imagine that: being punished because you have been found innocent. Must be a new legal concept being allegedly promulgated by the City of Woodstock against its long term employees or could it be allegedly something more personal between Lowen and Sgt. Gorski that the city does not want aired in the arena of public opinion and its citizens' good judgement.

LINE OF DUTY PENSION BENEFITS FOR POLICE OFFICERS

About three weeks ago a telephone conversation between two attorneys representing Sgt. Steven R. Gorski, an employee of the Woodstock Police Department for the last 20 years and Mr. David W. McArdle, a partner in the firm of Zukowski, Rogers, Flood & McArdle, representing the Chief of Police and City of Woodstock took place. It was my understanding that Mr. McArdle wanted to have a meeting of the legal representatives of the Chief of Police, Robert W. Lowen Jr. and the City of Woodstock and the Police Pension Board and those of Sgt. Gorski to see if this litigation on the part of the Police Chief and the City and the Police Pension Board could be resolved in a more amicable and efficient manner. I presume since Mr. McArdle arranged this meeting he self-assumed the role of moderator. This meeting took place in the afternoon of October 8, 2008 in the City Council Chambers.

After about two hours of talking and the usual "posturing" that attorneys are known for, the position of Sgt. Gorski was finalized to the understanding of Mr. McArdle and he said he would get back to Sgt. Gorski's attorneys after discussing this with the City Council as soon as possible. To date, Oct. 18, 2008, Sgt. Gorski's attorneys have not heard a word back from Mr. McArdle; so much for amicability and efficiency.

Also during this meeting one of the attorneys for either Workman's Comp or the Pension Board allegedly said that they were not sure that the injury ever happened during line of duty even though the appropriate form (Form 45) was filed and investigated an verified by a deputy chief of police. According to "Municipal Matters" dated July 2007, Vol. 2, Issue 3, a news letter produced by the firm of Zukowski, Rogers, Flood and McArdle a police officer is entitled to Line of Duty Pension Benefits and I quote:

"Any act of police duty inherently involving a special risk, not ordinarily assumed by a citizen in the ordinary walks of life, imposed on a policeman by the statutes of this State, or by ordinances or police regulations of the city in which this Article is in effect or by special assignment, or by any act of heroism performed in the city having for its direct purpose the saving of the life or property of a person other than the policeman."

Sgt. Gorski was at 3:30 am trying to do what he could for a man who was gravely injured in a single car accident on the side of Route 14 in Woodstock Illinois. The man expired and later it was found that his blood alcohol was in excess of the legal limit. It was at this scene during the course of his assisting in the later investigation that he incurred his injuries. Now that does not sound like an act "ordinarily assumed by a citizen in the ordinary walks of life " to me. How about you?

This gives you just a little feeling of what Sgt. Gorski has been dealing with in connection with the Chief of Police, the City of Woodstock and its hired and well paid attorneys.

To all the citizens of Woodstock Illinois don't forget that your elected officials are allegedly condoning this by setting policy and allowing their subordinates to proceed in this matter as regards Sgt. Gorski. Last but not least it is your tax money being used to pay the legal fees of these attorneys to pursue this course of action. That tax money could be used in a much better way in these troubled times.

POLICE CHIEF ROBERT W LOWEN JR QUERIED BY RESIDENTS OF WOODSTOCK ILLINOIS AND THE PRESS

In a Editorial printed by the Northwest Herald on Sept. 12, 2008 the paper stated that Police Chief Lowen "needs to understand that dealing with the public and releasing information on crime that occurs in Woodstock (Illinois) is an important part of his job." They also stated "Woodstock residents deserve better."
Read the entire Editorial entitled "Information was lacking" on line at NWHerald.com for Sept. 12, 2008

WOODSTOCK ILLINOIS..MAN WITH GUN..NO PROBLEM?

Finally some 60 or more citizens of Woodstock Illinois are not only going to "Coffee with the Chief, Robert W. Lowen Jr, Program" on Monday nights just to drink some free coffee and chat with the Chief but according to the Northwest Herald article by Northwest Herald reporter Tim Kane "to vent their frustrations" to him in regards to how a report of a man with a gun report was handled. The report was telephoned into the Woodstock Police Department by a lady in the 200 block of Fremont Street at about 9:15 am last Thursday. The lady went into her yard to fetch some wood from a wood pile and found a man hiding behind it with a handgun in his hand; now how often has that happened to you? The man told the lady that he was going to use the gun for his cat....sure! So what was he going to do...discharge a firearm within the city limits? Some officers were sent out to patrol the area and look for the suspect and when they found someone who matched the description the lady could not identify him for certain. So far so good it appears that they did what they, the police, could up to this point.

From this point on however I question the judgment of whomever made the final decision. Common sense would dictate that most Patrol Sergeants would have contacted a superior, either a Deputy Chief or the Chief and filled him in on the situation. That and armed man has been reported and that the police had not been able to apprehend or find and contain him and that all of this was happening not very far from Dean Street School. As a prudent Sergeant he should have called and let someone who was in a "higher pay grade" make the decision as to whether we notify and secure the Dean Street School and post a patrol officer there for the day just to be on the safe side or walk away and do none of the above.

The principal of the school did not find out about all of this until the following Monday. Some example of community policing and communicating potential threats to the civilian community. Ultimately the Chief is responsible for the Police Department and the buck and responsibility and final decisions should end in his lap.

Thank God nothing happened and maybe the only injury was to that cat....hmmmm. But this could have also turned into a real nightmare.

WOODSTOCK ILLINOIS TAX PAYERS...BEWARE?..THE SAGA CONTINUES

It has been about a year or more since the City of Woodstock Police Chief, Robert W. Lowen Jr., who I believe still lives in Carpentersville after more that three years on the job as Chief, filed a complaint with the Woodstock Fire and Police Commissioners, who are considered officers of the City of Woodstock. He, the Police Chief, Robert W. Lowen Jr. alleged that Sergeant Steven R. Gorski, a 19 now 20 year veteran of the force be fired because of alleged abuse of prescription medications that he used to control pain that had been caused by two in the line of duty injuries that he sustained to his lower back and his neck. At an "open" meeting the attorney for the City of Woodstock, at that time, made sure that all the alleged details that she, Anne Brophy, an attorney of the firm of Zukowski, Rogers, Flood & McArdle, and the Chief wanted to be publicly disseminated was done so to the media which was present. It did not appear to me that they were allegedly too concerned about private personnel or private health issues whatsoever. They accomplished what they set out to do; to allegedly air private personnel and health issues to the public via newspapers, Internet, etc.

I have served on many boards of directors over the last thirty plus years and I cannot recall once when a board discussed personnel or health matters of an employee in a public, open forum; to me the manner in which this initial complaint of the Chief that was presented to the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners was allegedly done to injure and defame Sergeant Gorski before he even had the chance to defend himself. It was, I allege, unscrupulous behavior at best.

It then took Ms. Brophy about four and one-half months, (all in closed session to the public) to present the evidence that was to prove the Chief's complaint. In January of 2008 the prosecution (Ms. Brophy) rested it's case; it had presented all the evidence it had. Why it took four and one-half months to do so I do not know and why all of a sudden it had to be in "closed session" after the supposed complaint was announced in detail in public is beyond my understanding. I allege a murder trial might have been resolved sooner and this whole matter I allege has a certain distinct smell to it.

Sergeant Gorski's attorney, Tom Loizzo then asked the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners to consider a directed decision since to his perspective the Chief and the City did not prove their case. The Board of Fire and Police Commissioners in February of 2008 then granted the motion for a directed decision and deliberated in private for several minutes to arrive at a decision. The decision of the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners was unanimous, 3 to 0 in favor of Sergeant Gorski with absolutely no disciplinary action recommended. The City was directed to pay him all his back pay and interest that he had not been receiving and to reinstate him when he had recovered from surgery on his lower back which had incurred in the interim. None of the directives of the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners were obeyed by the Chief or corporate city authorities. The Chief, Robert W. Lowen Jr. filed for Administrative Review with the Circuit Court. Two scheduling hearings have already happened in the hope that this could be resolved but so far it has not. Each time a junior member of the law firm of Zukowski, Rogers, Flood & McArdle appeared (musical lawyers) who could not and did not have the authority to act for the law firm. A hearing before Judge M. McIntyre is finally set for October 15, 2008.

You have to understand one thing, the Chief has named the Fire and Police Commissioners as Defendants in his action for an Administrative Review...the City in a sense suing the City. Sergeant Gorski was also named as a Defendant although he had absolutely nothing to do with the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners' decision to accept the motion for a directed decision and with the final decision of the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners, 3 to 0 in his favor.

This whole misadventure has only one winner at this time, I allege it is the law firm of Zukowski, Rogers, Flood and McArdle who will collect their legal fees for over the last year of continued litigation on their part. The losers will be Sergeant Gorski who has not been paid in almost one year and the tax paying citizens of Woodstock who are going to pick up the legal tab. What are the City of Woodstock leaders thinking? The hole is just getting deeper and deeper.

Coffee with Chief Lowen...an expensive blend!

Well, the chief, the city attorneys and the city of Woodstock managed to stretch it out for another two months....until October 15, 2008...that is 14 months since this began. At that time Judge Maureen McIntyre will have a hearing on this matter. He, that is Sergeant Gorski has been found exonerated of the complaint filed by chief Lowen in Aug. of 2007 to the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners by a 3 to 0 decision in February 2008. They,the Board directed the city and the chief to pay him all pay due him with interest as mandated by the State. He will not have been paid in over a year by the time of the hearing. How many of you could stick it out under those kinds of alleged strategic legal financial tactics employed by the alleged triumvirate of chief, city attorneys, and city? Not many I assure you; your pockets and checkbooks would be empty and you would be going down the "you know what". But help was available and is available and Sergeant Gorski will be around a long, long time...in fact as long as it takes to get justice...I assure you of that fact. What goes around, comes around. This has gone beyond process and could be presumed and alleged by some as an alleged vend eta towards the Sergeant.

I hope the tax payers of Woodstock Illinois are keeping track of how many hundreds of thousands of dollars each ounce in that cup of coffee with chief is costing them. I am surprised that not one of them has asked yet.

RETURN TO WORK AGREEMENTS

According to the U.S. Department of Labor (www.dol.gov/elaws) Sept. 16, 2007 "a Return-to-Work Agreement (RTWA) is a written document that sets forth the expectations that the employer and the employee assistance/medical professional have of an employee who has completed mandated treatment for alcohol and/or drug problems." This agreement is to be used if an individual has a primary alcohol and/or drug problem. Primary meaning that his/her alcohol and/or drug problems are the basis of the work related problems that are occurring. It is not designed to be used on an individual whose primary problem is a work related injury or injuries or disease who is under the care of a licensed physician who prescribes the drugs for either cure or mitigation of symptoms such as pain or any of a myriad of others. One example of the misuse of this type of RTWA would be to force a employee, lets say who has cancer, to sign the RTWA because the drug the employee's physician has prescribed might at times cause nausea and or vomiting and interfere with workplace routine. The RTWA to be used must be for an underlying primary alcohol and/or drug problem and not used to impede the treatment of an underlying disease or injury or injuries, especially if said injury or injuries were sustained in the workplace. It, the RTWA is not meant to be a "one size fits all" agreement; that should be obvious to all rational and sensible people. It should not be used to "get rid" of or discard employees that are becoming a logistical or financial problem for the employer...to use it for this reason would be amoral and allegedly illegal.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor "Developing a RTWA requires:

• Coordination between the employee, employer, union, Employee Assistance Program and/ or treatment professionals.
• Compliance with the organization's policies and legal obligations, as well as medical recommendations.
• Prior notification through company policy that an RTWA would be expected as a condition of continued employment.

I hope all people of honor and conscience in positions of authority use a RTWA for the benefit of the employee and not as an illicit tool to solve their self motivated problems with that employee. In the end we all will have to answer for our actions especially when they affect the welfare of other individuals and their families.

NEVER ENDING EGO?

Over one year ago Robert "coffee with the chief" Lowen of the Woodstock Illinois Police Department filed a complaint against Sgt. Steven R. Gorski with the Woodstock Illinois Board of Fire and Police Commissioners asking that the Sergeant be fired from the department for misconduct according to Lowen. Lowen's tax payer paid City of Woodstock Illinois attorneys presented 4 1/2 months of supposed evidence ending prosecution of the Sergeant on January 4, 2008....or did they....yes you heard me correctly...4 1/2 months. The Sergeant's attorney asked the Woodstock Illinois Board of Fire and Police Commissioners to consider a Motion for Directed Decision. What this meant is that Lowen and his cadre of tax payer paid attorneys did not prove their case in the 4 1/2 months they were trying to. On February 14, 2008 the Woodstock Illinois Board of Fire and Police Commissioners granted the Sergeant's Motion for a Directed Decision and also decided the complaint which was filed against him. The decision was 3 to 0 in the Sergeant's favor. The Woodstock Illinois Board of Fire and Police Commissioners ordered that "the charges against (the Sergeant) be dismissed" and that the Sergeant "be reimbursed for any wages withheld"...now almost a year's amount of pay. The Board stated that the "Chief" and "appropriate corporate authorities are directed to implement this order forthwith." To date only further litigation has been implemented forthwith by Lowen and the appropriate corporate authorities. This further litigation against the City's own Board of Fire and Police Commissioners and the Sergeant is counterproductive and is only costing the tax payers a whole lot of legal fees to the firm of Zukowski, Rogers, Flood & McArdle of 50 Virginia Street in Crystal Lake Illinois. In the end I suspect the only real winners in this episode will be the law firms bottom line....more money out of Woodstock tax payers pockets and into the law firms pockets.

I wonder if you still want to have "coffee with the chief" next month? Very, very expensive coffee.

Intimidation by...Deep Taxpayers Pockets in Woodstock Ill.

When the process initiated by Chief of Police, Robert W. Lowen, Jr. of Woodstock Illinois began by him filing a formal complaint against Sergeant Gorski with the City of Woodstock's Fire and Police Commission seeking his termination from the force that he served in for over 19 years I must confess I was somewhat depressed and angry that a single relatively new individual backed by a City (at least allegedly a few persons in high level positions) could allegedly con volute and change the true circumstances of a situation to serve their own self serving and financial interests respectively. The Sergeant understood that his oath of office was to the U.S. Constitution, the State, the County of McHenry and intimately with the people of Woodstock Illinois; he understood that his sworn duty was to the citizens and not to be a "team player of the Chief" and not to do things that he felt may have not been in the best interest of the citizens or his fellow officers. I guess he was just not viewed as one of "the good ol boys" that would go along with someone elses personal agenda.

My faith in the intrinsic goodness of most people was restored on February 4, 2008 when, after months of the Chief's and City's unilateral prosecution of Sergeant Gorski they, the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners, after several minutes of deliberation, found in favor of Sergeant Gorski after they were asked to consider a directed verdict (which means that Sergeant Gorski did not even present his side of the case or defend himself). They found in his favor 3 to 0 and ordered he be reinstated and all back pay with interest due him by State statute be paid immediately as possible. To date he and his family which includes three young daughters have not received a penny from the City....so much for 19 years of loyalty to the people. I've learned one thing from this fiasco and that is one individual and his backers may take the wrong path and they cannot give up because they will loose face and might fracture delicate egos. What reinforces that direction they take is that it costs them nothing....they don't pay the tab...you do the taxpayer. You pay the tab to the lawyers who think they have nothing to loose and the other individuals involved. Eventually the tab will be paid and it is usually the taxpayer who winds up paying that also...all this for something that need never have occurred.

The Chief could not accept the fact that the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners found in Sergeant Gorski's favor and filed for an Administrative Review with the 22 Judicial Circuit Court...more taxpayer dollars being spent. And the Saga of Sergeant Gorski goes on and his family and children must suffer because someone cannot accept the decision of his superiors.

The question remains: why even bother to have and fund a Board of Fire of Police Commissioners if their decision can be disobeyed by one alleged individual with someones alleged political backing? I hope that the tax payers of Woodstock get angry and upset and look into this matter that is draining their pockets and inappropriately causing severe hardship on a hard working cop's family. Someone other than me has to realize that it may be them in the cross hairs next time.