Jennifer Rachu Human Resources Manager/ City of Marshfield City Hall Plaza Assistant to the City Administrator 630 S. Central Avenue (7 l5) 387-6597 Suite 721 Fax (715) 384-9310 Marshfield, Wisconsin 54449 E?mail: April 23, 2016 Sent via Hand Delivery by Rick Gramza Jonathan Anderson Reporter Marsh?eld News-Herald 144 Central Avenue Marsh?eld, WI 54449 Facsimile: (715) 3 87-4175 RE: Noti?cation of Public Records Request Dear Mr. Anderson: This letter is to inform you that enclosed documents are provided in response to your request for records under the Wisconsin Public Records Law. As required under the Public Records Law the appropriate individual(s) of whom these records pertain have been noti?ed, and were provided with the appropriate timeline to respond, prior to disclosing this record. Enclosed you will ?nd the information per your emailed request dated 3/22/2016 including: any and all photographs of Scott Schlei; any and all records of complaints, claims, investigations, and/or discipline concerning Mr. Schlei; any and all records regarding changes to the nature of Mr. Schlei?s employment and/or job duties, including but not limited to records about all former, - current and future instances of leave paid administrative leave); records about all former, current, and future changes in position, records about all former, current and future suspensions of employment, and/or records about all former, current, and future terminations of employment letter of resignation, letter of discharge/dismissal). Your request included the above noted records created or obtained since December 1, 2015. I have redacted pertinent information including home addresses, home e?mail addresses, home telephone numbers and social security numbers and any other information redacted under Wis. (10) from the requested record pursuant to the provisions of Wis. Stat. ?19.36 (10). Based upon the review of the provisions of Wis. Stat. ?l9.36 (10), I have determined that the following subset of the above listed record are withheld: Emails dated 2/19/16; 2/22/16; 2/23/ 16; 2/26/16; 2/28/16; 2/29/16; 3/1/16; 3/3/16; 3/7/16; 3/8/16; and 3/10/16. The dated emails are not provided on the basis that they are direct communications intended to be con?dential and only between the City staff and the attorney for the City for purposes of rendering legal services including legal advice based on confidential statements ?om the client. Upon your receipt of this letter and enclosures, we consider your request complete. Very truly yours, Eleflnifer Rachu Enclosures Meeting with Scott Schlei Present: Rick Gramza, Jen Rachu, Scott Schlei Location: Human Resources Date: 215I2016 at 3:50 PM I thanked Scott for coming in. As Rick had shared with you a concern was brought to the attention of Rick and l. We brought you in because we wanted to understand the c_rm and hear your side of the story. The concern is regarding a recent meeting you had - a concern of inappropriate language while you were at a meeting in - office. Rick you will need to clarify the location. Rick indicated it was at -- SS: We were going to do a home visitr?gis the He was drug seeking and this coe was brought to our attention so we were meeting wit He had his finger amputatedhave a-what wod call a ?looser relationship?. 'The guy had Inder amputated (Sco demonstated which finger was missing [ring finger]). I made a comment about a ?shocker? She laughed and that was all I said. Did she indicate it was inappropriate? 83: I didn?t know she thought it was inappropriate until she brought it to-attention. -said she told him it wasn?t a big deal. I thought it was done with. Did you was offended? No. You?d need to understand the relationship. You indicated that'you referred to ?the shocker? once, did the conversationggo further? No. Did you use it more than once? ?No? How did the conversation go after that? Conversation went ?ne. Did you continue to banter back and forth? No, but you can?t really offend them. I had a lapse of judgement. Did she ask you to stop? If she had asked, i would. didn?t. if someone told me they were uncomfortable then i would stop. Do you think as uncomfortable? No. If she would have, she would have said so. Have you ever had coaching, formal or informal, regarding the use of inappropriate language? No. Are you aware of our anti-harassment policy? Yes. I haven?t read it for a while, butl know it. Are you aware of our rules of conduct? Yes. We are in process of revising it. We have a City policy and the police department has a policy. Yes. Is there anything else you want us to know? You need to know that If I would have known I offended her, I would have apologized. lf.l make a mistake I own up to it, you know that Rick. Whe ad talked to me about the concern, I was going to call her and apologize. ldidn?t mean to offend her, when I knew I did Itried to call her about three times. I didn?t get ahold of her. She didn?t answer.? Rick: Did you try to call her from work or from your cell. Scott: I tried to call from work. I even tried to call her today from my of?ce where it was quiet. She didn?t answer and I didn't want to send herjust a text or an email. I think it is something that I should call on. JR: I think it is good that you want to apologize for offending'her now that you are aware. Scott: I just want to tell her that I didn?t mean to offend her and about why I said it and the circumstances. Rick: If you call her, I don?t think that you need to try to justify the cause and circumstances. I think that an apology can be short and sweet, simply indicating that you are sorry that you offended her. Scott agreed. Rick: I would recommend that wait until we have this resolved before you call her. Is there anything else you think we need to know? No, but I will tell you that ifl did something, I would admit it. I didn?t intend to offend anyone. Rick, is there anything additional you wanted to ask? No. Scott, Do you have any additional questions? 4 Scott: Will I get to know who shareithis. a-Jen: That is not something we typically share, however I would be able to provide you with some additional information, typically not who shared. What I can tell you is that it was brought to Rick?s attention by multiple sources. Scott: I am guessing it is?since he told?git We may have some additional questions for you. We will need to validate what you have shared with us. I would hope to wrap this up sooner rather than later. Scott: What are the possible outcomes, what is the worst that will happen? Jen: That hasn't been determined yet. We will need to discuss it further to validate the circumstances. Worst is corrective action. Best in coaching regarding the use of inappropriate behavior. We will try to resolve this as soon as possible. I am sorry that we had to meet with you on a Friday afternoon, but I didn?t want to wait any longer since the situation occurred last Friday. We will likely be back in touch with you early next week. Rick stated that he is out of the of?ce until next Friday at a conference so he will not be available. shared with Scott that we will need to work out the details but we will get back in touch with him as soon as possible. Retaliation ?Retaliation: Absolutely no retaliation against the employee(s) filing the complaint or providing information regarding the complaint will be tolerated in any manner whatsoever. That means the employee accused of a policy violation may not engage in any negative actions in relation to the employee accusing him or her of a policy violation because of the employee's report of an alleged policy violation. See Human Resources with questions. 6?3? {-33 Meeting witwocial Worker-Wood County) 2/5/2016 4:20 PM Present: Rick GraszJen Rachu Re: Scott Schlei I We thanke'for coming in to meet with us. JR: I understand that last Friday, you had a meeting with Scott Schlei and that you had shared information with Rick. Yes. JR: As this has been brought to the attention or HR, I also wanted to meet with you regarding some additional questions that I had. Can you?sha re the details of the interaction? We had a collarborative meeting. We wanted to meet with the agent about the individual before meeting. We actually had two meetingsdifferent parole of?cer am. who is the Dad? There were some concerns about the referral. The Dad had surgery on his hand and had a ?nger removed. Based on the ?nger removed Scott had made a comment about the ?shocker.? . was uncomfortable. She interjected and told Scott that she had hear things like that at the jail and that this was an of?ce and it wasn?t appropriatejust referred to once or did the conversation continue? I. No he used it two or three times after that. R: Can you give me an example of how it was used following her telling him it was not appropriate? I don?t remember speci?cally, but he said that the Dad was seeking drugs and continued to refer to him as the shocker. IR: Did you was offended by the comment? JR: Do you think Scott recognized she was offended? No I think he missed it. I wanted to tell him,? Be aware of who you are talking to.? I hadn?t worked much with before and don?t know her. At ?rst I thought they must know each other if he is talking but it was clear by her reaction that they didn?t. JR: How did she respond? ?She really just closed the meeting off. She had no time for Scott after that. 3R: . How long was the meeting? We were ?lmeza-setatefa for?both meetings so not very long. tit RG: When?said-that sheawas said, ?No, I wasn?t. It was very clear Yes, he said, ?Oh-come on, you know you were thinking it.? that it was inappropriate and that she was offended. IR: Were you o?z?e'saded hyatheeomrneiit? - i No, but stu?f like that doesn?t bother me. JR: Is there anything else that you feelvit is important that we. know? ?No. Ithinkthat?s it. We thankeon meeting with We shared Wi? that we keep these discussions con?dential to the best of our ability and that would not share her narneWi Scott as we address this issue, however if she feels that she is treated of retaliation by Scott following our discussion, that she need to inform Rick or I right away. 21101201 :01 AM ?a:09 AM . Please explain the events that occurred what, when, where and how)? We were in my office talking -- 733' I believe that was the name of the person. . Where did it happen? We were in my office talking about I believe that was the name of the person. 3. Describe the circumstances? ?had recently-had his finger amputated. Scott made a comment about the shocker. The comment was a sexual term. He gestured it towards me. . How did you react? What was your response? What did you say or do? I told him it was very inappropriate. His response was ?Whatever, you were thinking it anyway.? Rick told me tha.had told him that Scott said it more than once. He may have said one more time after that, I don?t remember. What upset me was he was going to ge awed up and then call me for the hold. I telt uncomfortable. Before that, we were laughing and joking. After that?cott continued to laugh?l don?t know if he just didn?t take me serious or what. . Do you work with Scott regularly? Not since he has he has been a detective. . Has Scott make inappropriate comments to you in the past? He has made some comments that I didn?t acknowledge. We were at a booking and he made a I can?t recall. I have 5 kids. In the past he had made can?t remember the speci?cs. I don?t know. . Do you have a personal relationship/friendship with Scott? We are Facebook friends. . Rick had shared with me mines also in the room with you, correct? Yes . Was anyone else present? (If yes, please provide their names) No. 10. Would anyone else have overheard the conversation? No. 11. Did you tell anyone about it? tol -. - told my I 12. Do you have any notes or other documentation regarding the incident(s)? No. 13. What would be your desired outcome as a result of the investigation? No. I didn?t expect it to blow up into this. I feel really shitty that this is'all happening. I shared with?that we appreciate her sharing the information. Our goal is to ensure a good working relatio ship with City staff and if we are not aware then we can?t remedy the situation. 14. ls there anything else you want to tell me related to what we talked about? No. 15. Inform the complaining employee: Confidentiality Retaliation m. I thanked I or taking the time to discuss the situation with me. Ref: Officer Scott Schlei On 02?09?16 at approximately 1630 hours I spoke to Officer Scott Schlei in reference to his attendance at basic drug investigator training, which was scheduled to begin on 02?15-16 and last for two weeks. I?d previously spoken to Chief Gramza and was informed that the decision to send Scott to the training had been postponed due to an ongoing internai investigation that Scott was involved in. The decision to postpone the training was not punitive and was made under the necessity to compiete the investigation in a timely manner. Scott?s attendance at the currently scheduled training would delay that process by two weeks. Prior to our conversation, I?d spoken to Scott on the phone at which time I asked him to meet with me. Scott asked me if this was about what he talked about Rick with, and if he needed a union representative. i told Scott that was up to him but that I was not investigating the incident, but had some information to relay to him; Scott elected not to have a representative with him. I told Scott that his training was being postponed out of a necessity to complete the investigation that he was involved in. I told Scott this was not punitive and asked him no questions as it related to the investigation. I told him that the training may be rescheduled in the future. I also told him that we wanted to relay this message to him in person instead of Rick or Darren (Lt. Larson) speaking to him on the phone from a conference they were attending. Upon being told this, Scott stated this whole thing was being blown out of proportion over a ?35? comment. He then stated ?the comment wasn?t 35 but how it?s being handled is?. He then stated ?I?ll make my decision on whether I want to stay in this position or go back to the road? and "i?m being penalized because they?re not here to tell me?. I then restated to him that this was not a penalty and that we did not want to wait two weeks for his return to complete the investigation. Scott told me he thought a decision was going to be made by Friday (02-12-16). I told Scott that I was not aware of that. Scott then said thanks and left my office. Lt. Patrick Zeps 02?09?16 From: Gramza, Rick Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 8:40 AM To: Rachu, Jennifer . Subject: questions and other info . Attachments: questions for scott at pd.docx,' Wisconsin Legislature? 946.46.htm ; trash pull email.docx; Code of conduct concernsdocx; Facebook Postdocx; code of conduct signaturedocx; larson conversationpdf; zeps conversationdocx; Eli-cocx; gchlei care"? amt Meesaafi?a epuca i Meeseere?m sesame)an 7i5=305=64 ea awa?mueesa?em camee 7013632 age NOTICE: This e-mail may contain confidential information and is intended only forthe individual named. Ifyou are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e?mail; please notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your system. Also, please be aware that email correspondence to and from "The City of Marshfield" may be subject to open record requests. To: ChiefGramza From: Lt. Dar're - Re: Schiei Internal Date: 02?15-16 On Tuesday February 9th at approximately 1800 hrs. I contacted Scott Schiei on the phone about a comp day that he had requested for Friday February Scott and i then spoke briefly on the phone while I was returning to Ma rshfield from a conference in Wisconsin Dells. During our conversation it was apparent that Scott was upset about a couple issues including recent news that he would not be attending the Department of Justice Drug Investigation training the following week as well as the current investigation into sexual comments he had allegedly made in the presence of two females. Scott had expressed his frustration and commented that he had some decisions to make and seemed to imply that he was no longer interested in being a drug officer. instead of talking on the phone about his concerns we agreed to speak in person at the police department as soon as I returned. i met with Scott in his of?ce at approximately 1845 hours and we then spoke privately. I did close his office door as a courtesy as there was an Auxiliary training session taking place in an adjacent room in the basement. During our conversation i made certain not to ask Scott any specific questions related to the open investigation, but rather I allowed Scott to speak about his Concerns in an effort to better understand his current emotional state. Scott seemed frustrated but spoke respectfully but candidly. Scott indicated that he regretted what he had said to the females, but felt that the situation was blown out of proportion. Scott accepted his responsibility and added that he had not lied. I had not mentioned anything about the implication that he may have lied and I felt that it was unusual that he would mention it. I simply asked Scott at that time if that was also an issue in the investigation and he responded Scott and spoke extensively about his response to these concerns and I encouraged him to be open minded and not make any rash emotional decisions. Scott also expressed concern about how Chief Gramza might "hold it against him? if he left on Thursday night for a weekend snowmobile trip with a neighbor that he had already committed to. Scott expressed his frustration on the timeline of this investigation and indicated that he wanted to just get through with it. I assured Scott that any perceived delays in the process were not intentional. Our conversation was brief and ended at approximately 1900 hours at which time i suggested that he decompress and take the trip with friends and that I would confirm with Chief Gramza that a meeting the following week was acceptable. later con?rmed with Chief Gramza that he had no issues with Scott using a comp day on Friday and that the meeting could be scheduled for the following week. I then relayed that information to Scott. Wisconsin Legislature: 946.46 Ski}; navigation Wisconsin State Legislature ISearch statutes: '13.92' 0? Search Home Documents Senate Assembly Committees Service Agencies Docs Ogtions Help PDF lg Feed for tstatutesfstatutest946 20 1 5 Biennium Statutes Administrative Code Indices Miscellaneous Archives Bill, Rule, and Appointment Histories Senators Representatives Committees Text of Introduced Proposals Amendment Text Veto Messages Enrolled Bills Drafting Files Votes Assembly and Senate Floor Calendars Schedule of Committee Activities Assembly and Senate Journals Committee Records (ROCPs) Legislative Rules All Session-Related Documents Table of Contents Subi ect Index to the Statutes Sections Affected by Acts Statute Cross-References Wisconsin Constitution Page 1 of '3 I: - Wisconsin Legislature: 946.46 Table of Contents Administrative Register Subiect Index to Administrative Code Administrative Code Cross~References Administrative Code Citations Active Clearinghouse Rules All Clearinghouse Rules Final Filed Rule Orders Subi ect Index to Clearinghouse Rules Emergency Rules Subi ect Index to Acts Subiect Index to Legislation Subi ect Index to Journals Author Index to Legislation Subj ect Index to Clearinghouse Rules Mscellaneous Budget Documents Executive Orders Rulings of the Chair Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules Opinions of the Attornev General Town Law Forms Law Districts Session Drafting Files Feeds Preferences Show tree Hide tree Feedback Help_ Senate Home Senators Conunittees Session Chief Clerk Sergeant at Arms Assembly Home Representatives Session Chief Clerk Sergeant at Arms Page 2 of 3 A Wisconsin Legislature: 946.46 Page 3 of 3 Schedule J0_i11t 0 Senate Assembly Study - Legislative Audit Bureau Legislative Council Legislative Fiscal Bureau Legislative Reference Bureau Legislative Technology Services Bureau 0 ISearch statutes: '13.92' Search I Menu >>Statutes Related >>Statutes >>Chapter 946 946.46 946.46 Encouraging violation of probation, extended supervision or parole. Whoever intentionally aids or encourages a parolee, probationer or person on extended supervision or any person committed to the custody or supervision of the department of corrections or a county departrnent under 3. 46.215, 46.22 or 46.23 by reason of crime or delinquency to abscond or violate a term or condition of parole, extended supervision or probation is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. History: 1971 c. 164 s. 1977 c. 173; 1989 a. 31, 107; 1993 a. 385; 1995 a. 27; 1997 a. 283. 1? statutes/statutes/946 true statutes /statutes/statutes/946/IV/46 statutes/ 946.46 statutes/946.46 section IE Menu - ?Statutes Related - >>Statutes >>Chapter 946 2013-14 Wisconsin Statutes updated through 2015 Wis. Act 149 and all Supreme Court Orders entered before February 16, 2016. Published and certi?ed under 3. 35.18. Changes effective after February 16, 2016 are designated by NOTES. (Published 2-16-16) 01nternet%20File. .. 3/29/20 1'6 Think Mice before {Dosing your aid 3; dedicated Employees Li?ge?ammeni??'zam 16 geonie like this. Ref: Officer Scott Schlei On 02-09-16 at approximately 1630 hours 1 spoke to Officer Scott Schlei in reference to his attendance at basic drug investigator training, which was scheduled to begin on 02?15?16 and last for two weeks. i?d previously spoken to Chief Gramza and was informed that the decision to send Scott to the training had been postponed due to an ongoing internal investigation that Scott was involved in. The decision to postpone the training was not punitive and was made under the necessity to complete the investigation in a timely manner. Scott?s attendance at the currently scheduled training would delay that process by two weeks. Prior to our conversation, I?d spoken to Scott on the phone at which time I asked him to meet with me. Scott asked me if this was about what he talked about Rick with, and if he needed a union representative. i told Scott that was up to him but that was not investigating the incident, but had some information to relay to him. Scott eiected not to have a representative with him. I told Scott that his training was being postponedlout of a necessity to complete the investigation that he was involved in. Itoid Scott this was not punitive and asked him no questions as it related to the investigation. i told him that the training may be rescheduled in the future. i also told him that we wanted to relay this message to him in person instead of Rick or Darren (Lt. Larson) speaking to him on the phone from a conference they were attending. Upon being told this, Scott stated this whole thing was being blown out of proportion over a comment. He then stated ?the comment wasn?t BS but how it?s being handled is?. He then stated "I?ll make my decision on whether I want to stay in this position or go back to the road? and ?I?m being penalized because they?re not here to tell me?. I then restated to him that this was not a penalty and that we did not want to wait two weeks for his return to complete the investigation. Scott told me he thought a decision was going to be made by Friday (02?12?16). i told Scott that I was not aware of that. Scott then said thanks and left my of?ce. Lt. Patrick Zeps 02?09-16 .3- "Rateseques?cn~Message?HiMLj ?iessage ?1 v. I . II 1 lanor= '3 33 Mnting 2?31": Isfahan surf-r a inhlanager 19 ?55 J4 at?) 33 '1 Team Ema? Bone enema Reiated Junk . Delete Rem: F?s?3.3m Mgr; I. Mark Cate-game FoEch loam .3 Rap]; .a mate at:- Ike-1 . Lame Unread . JP . saw . Edits 3.53:1? 343.: 349:5 Tags '63. :1 3-3131?. 3 fora-email message an 1,25z201? R57 0&1. mm: acme? Em: Sari. TL: 126;:315 PM Ta: Rama. Cc Eur-jam Re. G53 question 5 dome severai trash pu?s arid struck at?? ?id pal! the gmerramrds bu? need to do it again for Daember and January aiso Derek has 5 cf t?at i3 waiving a :1 getting mars 5515: as we could get a warrant. Sca?SchIei Sam my iPhene l'liil 0n ja a 26, 2016, sf L208 91?, Gramza, Rick .mii?ih??ik?ii?is?? aerate: ?n View uh; Jesst curious Wi?ere ?ing; are with than ?lm-?Fag; 522E mm? Hi? V. *3 563mm about Sime? WESHFIELD MEMORANDUM TO: Scott Schlei FROM: Rick Gramza, Chief of Police Jen Rachu, Human Resources Manager/Assistant to the City Administrator DATE: 02/16/2016 SUBJECT: Results of Investigation This memo summarizes the results of the City of Marsh?eld?s investigation into inappropriate language/ gestures and potential harassment. As we discussed, the City takes such allegations seriously and will not tolerate such behavior in our workplace that is in violation of our policies. We interviewed individuals with knowledge of the situation, including you, and reviewed related information and documents. The investigation revealed a violation the Rules of Conduct Policy. Improvement is needed in reSpectful communication, professionalism and use of good judgement when communicating with colleagues (intemal or external). The comments made by you to your colleagues are both inappropriate and offensive. Further conduct (inappropriate language, comments, jokes, gestures of sexual nature) may result in a violation of the City?s Anti-Harassment policy. As noted in the Rules of Conduct policy, ?High quality performance, honesty, respect, reliability, professionalism and good judgment are fundamentally required of each employee. Other standards of conduct exist in order to maintain an orderly and efficient working environment and for preservation of the public?s trust in its public servants. As a result, you will be receiving a verbal warning with the expectation that there will be no ?irther use of inappropriate language, comments, jokes, or gestures of a sexual nature with internal or external colleagues or others. Absolutely no negative action may be taken against an employee or individual for reporting or opposing a potential violation the City?s policies or for participating in an investigation of such a report. Therefore, you may not take any negative action against the individuals involved or any other employee involved for participating in the investigation. 'If you have any questions, please let me know. Investigation into inappropriate comments, untruthfulness, and conduct of Officer Scott Schlei Rick Gramza-Police Chief-Marshfield PD 2/18/2016 2/2/2016 Initial interview with - - - On 2/2/2016 at 1000 hrs, I was speaking with - - from - and - at. I - - in Marshfieid. - stated ?that Scott Schlei does not have to come into my office When asked why, i was informed by - of some inappropriate comments made by Marshfield Drug Officer Scott Schlei. The comments were sexual in nature. When asked what was said, - informed of the Scottwere meeting to discuss a client of This client was on probation for methamphetamine and a discussion was centered on whether an Act 79 search could be performed during a home visit with the subject. The client was suspect in some drug seeking behavior which had drug endangered child components. It was also discussed that the subject had recently had his right ring finger amputated. With that, Scott stated bet he is good at giving his girlfriend the shocker? and proceeded to display his index, middle finger,_and pinky finger while holding back his ring finger with his thumb. This is slang for a sexual act on a female. Wikipedia states "The shocker, also known colloquially as "two in the pink, one in the Stink", is a hand gesture with a sexual connotation. The ring finger and thumb are curled or bent down while the other fingers are extended. The index and middle fingers are kept together (touching) and the back of the hand faces outwards (away from the gesturer). The gesture refers to the act of inserting the index and middle fingers into a vagina and the little finger into the receiver?s anus, hence the "shock".? Once Scott made this comment, - told Scott that the comment neither appropriate nor appreciated. Scott responded by stating ?You were thinking the same thing? to which - states she said that she was not thinking that, that she had to hear that type of language in the jail when she worked there, and in her office that language was not allowed. - went on to tell me that after she rejected Scott?s language, he began talking about ?Riling?up? the subject on probation so - would put a probation hold on him and he could go to jail. This concerned - and she worried about how she would substantiate a probation violation if it was incited by an . officer. - stated she began to tune Scott out. Scott and - left a short time later. - told me she wasn?t trying to make a big deal out of the concern and asked if she had to get ?thicker skin? when dealing with Scott in the future as she was comfortable with the conversation. I apologized for the comments made and I assured - that it would be addressed with Scott so it did not happen again. . 2/2/2016 Conversation with Lt Darren Larson On 2/2/2016 at roughly 1100 hrs, I spoke to Darren in reference to the information I received from Darren stated that this frustrates him as he is Scott?s supervisor and that Scott has a tendency to say things he shouldn?t. Darren stated he had talked to Scott about yelling ?Fuck You" to a peer while bantering on 1/28/16 while inside the police department and reminded that visitors may be present and may hearthis foul language to which Scott acknowledged. 2/ 3/2016 interview with - - On 2/3/2016 at 1100 hrs. I made phone contact with and asked her if she was aware of an incident that occurred at- and - on 1/29/2016 which may be construed as inappropriate. She stated she stated the While at probation, Scott had been discussing ?the shocker? to to which - thought Scott must know - well to feel confident discussing something of a sexual. nature with her. According to -, once - told Scott he was being inappropriate and to stop, - recognized that this made - uncomfortable. - stated that over the next 10 minutes, Scott mentioned ?the Shocker? on at least 3-4 more occasions. - thought after . being asked to stop by - that Scott should have apologized or minimally stopped his inappropriate comments, but chose to continue the conversation. thanked - for her time and apologized for her exposure to these comments. 2/3/2016 Conversation with Human Resources Jen Rachu On 2/3/2016 I spoke with Jen from City of Ma rshfield Human Resources in regards to a possible sexual harassment investigation and shared the details with her. The plan was to advise Scott of a meeting with HR once some more information was gathered. The decision to re?interview- about the frequency of the ?shocker? statement was planned. I informed Jen I would keep in touch with about this issue. 2/ 4/ 2016 Conversation with - - On 2/4/2016 1 spoke to of the Marshfield Police Department and he advised me that he spoke to Scott about the inappropriate comments made in front of When asked how he knew, he stated that late in the day on Friday 1/29/2016 he was messaged by- asking if Scott has issues with sexual comments or perversion. This motivated - to call. and was informed of the concern with Scott?s comments and - offered to address it with Scott. - stated he had a conversation with Scott on Monday 2/1/2016 about the comments, their inappropriateness and offensiveness, and how he should apologize to 2/4/2016 2nd Conversation with - - On 2/4/2016 asked to meet with - and went to her office. I asked - to repeat her concern with me and she stated again she was disappointed we needed to discuss this as she was feeling guilty for being too sensitive to Scott and his language. - relayed the same version that she had originally. When I asked if the comment was repeated after she addressed Scott, - stated she was not sure as again she was concerned over Scott?s comments about ?riling-up? her probationer and was concerned where that may lead. - was explained that. had heard the comment 2-4 more times after he was initially corrected and re?corrected. - said she could not say if it was said more than once as she began to tune Scott out. I thanked - for her time and-again apologized for the comments. 2/ 5/ 2016 Conversation with Scott Schlei On Friday, February 5th I asked Scott to my office and requested he meet me in Human resources around 1500 to discuss come inappropriate comments made in public by him. Scott asked if i could be more specific and informed him it was related to comments of a sexual nature, to which he stated OK. i offered that Scott may bring a union representative if he chose to and Scott asked if he was looking at days off of work for this. I told Scott it was too early to know anything and we were merely fact finding and we were not sure ifthe allegations were accurate. Scott stated he had court until about 1500 so we move the meeting to 1600 hrs. 2/5/2016 Meeting in HR with Jen Rachu, Scott Schlei, and Rick Gramza On 2/5/2016 at 1550 we met with Scott in human resources on 7th floor of City Hall. Scott elected to not have a union representative with him. Scott was told we were looking into him using inappropriate language while at probation and parole on 1/29/2016 and asked him to share his version of the story. Scott stated the Scott said he was with - - and they were going to do a home visit and met with The probationer was drug seeking and the concern was brought to - attention. The probationer had a finger amputated and Scott said he mentioned a comment about the ?shocker? and they thought it was funny and laughed. When asked by Jen if. thought the comment was inappropriate, Scott stated ?No, i didn?t know it was taken that way until - mentioned something to me about it. When asked if anyone seemed offended, Scott stated When asked how many times the comment was made, Scott stated once. When asked if he said it more than once, Scott stated Scott stated the conversation was fine after that, and that it is difficult to offend them, although he admitted to having a lapse in judgment. When asked by Jen if- asked Scott to stop, Scott stated ?No, if she would have said that, I would have stopped?. 'When asked if. was uncomfortable, Scott stated ?No, she would have said something if she was?. When asked if Scott has ever had formal coaching on inappropriate language, Scott stated Scott admitted he was aware of the harassment policy on both the city and PD level. Scott stated he tried to cail - multiple times on his office phone to apologize but was unable to reach her. recommended to Scott that he wait until this matter was resolved before calling Scott asked if he could know who had shared the concern with us and was informed that this usually is not shared. Scott asked of the possible outcome of the investigation and he was informed it was too early to tell and nothing had been determined. Scott was also warned of any potential retaliation regarding what was being investigated. Scott stated he understood. After this was discussed with Scott, he left the office. Jen and I briefly discussed the discrepancies between what we were being told. 2/5/2016 2nd Interview with - - On 2/5/2016 at 1615 we met with I- in Human Resources. We informed I that we had spoken to Scott and wished to clarify a couple things and have her share the interaction once again. - stated the We were collaborating with Probation about a drug seeking case. - probationer had recently had surgery and had a finger amputated. With this information, Scott made a comment about the ?shocker?. - was uncomfortable and interjected and told Scott that she used to hear things like that in jail when she worked there, but told Scott it was inappropriate and to stop. Jen asked - if it was said once or multiple times, to which - replied that Scott repeated it 2-3 more times after the initial comment. When asked how it was used repeatedly, - stated she was not certain but she thought Scott kept calling him, the probationer, "the shocker" instead of using his name When asked if she though - was offended, - stated ?Yes?. When asked if she thought Scott had recognized he had offended -, - said no, that he must have missed it. - stated that she thought at first. and Scott knew each other based on the comment made, but based on - reaction, if was evident by her reaction that it was not that kind of relationship. When asked how - was after the Comment, - stated she was very closed off and had no time for Scott after that. When asked if Scott responded once - was offended, - stated that Scott stated to -, ?Come?on, you were thinking it too?, to which - responded ?No, I wasn?t? and according to -, - made it clear that the comment was inappropriate and that she was offended. - stated she was not offended by the comment, but felt bad for. being subjected to it. The conversation ended after about 10 minutes and - was thanked for her time and I again apologized for her being in this awkward situation. - was asked to share any concerns of retaliation with me, to which she agreed. Jen and I spoke of the concerns of the inconsistency with what Scott was stating and what - and - had said. I felt there was no motivation for - and - to target Scott, yet Scott would have an interest in minimizing or potentially lying about what was said and how it was perceived. This caused me great concern based on the extreme differences in the participants version of what had occurred. We planned on meeting with Scott when returned from a conference on Friday, 2/12/2016 to discuss and additional information if necessary. Scott ended up take off on the 12?1 so no plan had been made for further discussion. 2/6/2016 Facebook Posting On 2/6/2016 at approximately 1431 Scott made a post to his personal Facebook page. I was made aware of this posting va--l I--, I--, and II: - -. See Facebook attachment in packet. The posting depicts a ?Manager? on a blank off cliff pointing a gun at the "best employee? who is on the blank, on the cliff. This depiction gave me the perception that managers treat their best employees poorly and when the best employee is damaged, the management fails. i viewed this as detrimental to the organization as Scott is friends with many employees on Facebook as well as many of his ?Friends? on Facebook know where he is employed. 2/8-11/2016 Conversation with .Ien Rachu On 2/8/2016 through 2/11/2016 I spoke with Human Resources Jen to discuss the status of the case. Due to my absence at a conference and Scott?s day off on Friday, the intentions were to speak to him on either Monday the 15th or Tuesday the 16th of February. Jen attempted to reach out to and hear from her specifically about her version of the investigation. Jen was successful in talking to - on 2/10/2016. Jen informed me that - account of the situation was the same as I had reported. 2/9/2016 Conversation with Lt Pat Zeps Based on the ongoing investigation and the fact that Scott was taking a day off on Friday and was at a conference, I was reminded that Scott was scheduled to attend a two week basic drug investigator training February 15-26. i made the decision that Scott would not attend this training as we would need to complete this investigation and sending him to such a training would make it difficult to do so in a timely fashion. On 2/9/2016, i asked Lt Pat Zeps to reiay this information to Scott as he was the only administrator in Marshfield at the time. In a memo, Pat informed me that Scott did not take it well, was upset that the situation was being blown out of proportion and this whole thing was Scott then stated he'may have to make a decision as to if he wants to stay in the drug investigator position or go back to the road. See Lt Zeps statement in the packet. 2/9/2016 Conversation with Lt Darren Larson Darren was phoned by Scott on 2/9/2016 and wanted to talk of his removal from the two week training. Darren stated he did not want to discuss this on the phone and wished to talk in person. Darren was driving back from Wisconsin Dells at the time of the call. Upon his arrival at about Darren met with Scott and Scott reiterated to Darren that this was blown out of proportion and he had not lied at all. Darren told me this was odd to him as he had not accused Scott of lying and neither had i. I requested Darren not ask Scott any questions related to the investigation and he agreed. Please see Lt Larson?s statement in the'packet. 2/ 9/ 2016 Conversation with - - On 2/9/2016 I contacted - to see if Scott had reached out to her. - stated Scott had not, but she said she wanted to inform me that if Scott has a history or issue with saying inappropriate things, that an additional statement was made to her on 1/29/2016 that she had previously not divulged. When asked what was said, - went on to state that when they were in - office at - - - that there was only one chair so Scott sat in the empty chair and - sat on the floor. While she was sitting on the floor and they were talking to -, Scott said "You can sit on my lap?. - stated she didn?t take Scott serious nor did she take him up on his offer, but thought there may be value in sharing the information. I thanked - for her time, again apologizing for Scott?s comments, and ended the phone call. 2/ 12/ 2016 Conversation with - - On 2/12/2016 upon arrival back to Marshfield from Wisconsin Dells, I met with to discuss how Scott was acting and how his level of motivation has been as he had been struggling with this in the past. - stated is has been better since the information about - was addressed with him. He followed with the fact that he is noticeably shaken that this matter has grown to what it has and has expressed his displeasure with PD administration. - went on to state that Scott has made numerous comments regarding holding everyone to task and if he is going to be held accountable and punished for a comment that everyone in the department better ?watch their back? as he intends to report anyone who makes an off-color or inappropriate comment. - also stated that Scott mentioned carrying a recorder around with him to protect himself and keep book on people. These comment come after Scott was told that retaliation would not be condoned and Scott stated he understood this. - felt Scott was on a ?war?path? to find out who had informed administration about his initial comments. 2/ 15/ 2016 Phone Conversation with - I - On 2/15/2016 1 received a phone call from She is the direct supervisor to from - - - - stated she had a conversation with - and there was concern that Scott may retaliate against. and is caused her to reach out to When asked for details, - said she would recommend I speak to - but - had told her that Scott had said to her on 2/10/2016 that if anyone says anything to him that could be taken negatively that he would "make them pay?. - said she would have - reach out to me. 2/ 15/2016 Conversation with - - I met with - in her officer and asked her for details about the conversation she had with Scott. - said that she was at the PD working on a case with and Scott called - into his office and told her that he was sorry for what had happened but was wondering if she had reported him. - told Scott she accepted his apology but preferred not to discuss the matter. Scott asked her how offended she was by his statements and she told him ?not very, but I?d rather not talk about it?. Scott then told her that he is going to be monitoring what people say around him because so he won?t be the only one held accountable. - took this in a threatening manner stating that she does occasionally swear when in private and if she would do so in front of Scott, that she wanted her supervisor - to know about the investigation and the retaliation potential. 1 thanked - for her time and once again apologized for Scott?s behavior. This ended our conversation. 2/16/2016 interview with Scott Schlei, Jen Rachu, Jason Parks, and Rick Gramza in the morning on 2/16 I spoke with Scott and asked him to meet with me and HR at the PD around 1400 hrs. i informed him that HR would address their concerns and then I needed to talk with him after HR was done if he was willing. Scott agreed to meet. Scott brought Detective Jason Parks as union representation. Also present was myself and Jen from HR. Jen began the conversation and informed Scott that he was receiving a "Level 1? discipline which is a verbal warning that is documented in the HR personnel file. Jen stated this did not rise to the level of sexual harassment but did violate the city and PD conduct policy and progressive discipline would follow if this type of language was reported again. Scott stated he understood and then Jen left the meeting. I began talking with Scott and asked him to once more explain to me what had occurred at probation and parole on 1/29. Scott said the I went there with - to talk with - about a home visit we were heading to. - is missing his ring finger, I mentioned he is probably good at giving his girlfriend the shocker then they was it.? I explained to Scott that this was different than what i had been told by others present. I told Scotti would be told that his statements were not appropriate and not appreciated and to stop. Scott asked if I thought he was which i replied, I did not know, I?m searching for the truth. I said that we were far apart with what he was saying occurred and what they were saying had occurred. asked him if the other present were lying and trying to get him into trouble as I wanted to protect him if he was being set up. I told Scott that if they were lying, I would protect him and go to bat for him in regards to these false accusations. Scott then was asked again, if he was told to stop and that he was being inappropriate to which he don?t recall?. When asked if they laughed, Scott ?i don?t recall?. I asked Scott how many times he mentioned the ?Shocker? and he said-just once. I told him that I was told he had said it between 2-4 times after that. Scott said ?No, i wouldn?t have repeated that.? I asked him why not, and he said he just wouldn?t have and asked me why he would have said it multiple times, to which I explained because he thought it was funny and according to him, the girls laughed. Scott said, ?No, I only said it once". i again told Scott it was my intention to not have him falsely accused of something that asked Scott if the comment had been made more than once or just the once like he had initially stated, to which he don?t recall?. I asked Scott if there was anything else said when he met with - and - that was inappropriate, to which Scott replied asked Scott what the seating arrangements were like in - office and Scott said that. was sitting at her desk, and he was on a chair, while - knelt and then sat on the floor. i asked Scott if he had offered his iap to . at all such as "you can sit on my lap? to which Scott replied "Absolutely not, i know better, that is crossing a line?. informed Scott that I did not understand why that would be crossing a line when his ?Shocker? comment was not crossing a line and Scott said, 7 just wouldn?t say that, i think I offered her my chair, but not my lap?. When I asked Scott if. was lying by saying that you offered her your lap and if i should look into these fabrications, Scott don?t remember saying that?. Scott began to get angry over the line of questioning and threatened to leave the interview, saying that he felt I was accusing him of lying and that he was ?done?. i informed Scott I had a few more questions for him that i would like to ask, so Scott chose to stay. Scott asked how long I had known him and I stated 17 years. He asked I ever knew him to lie to me, and I said i would hope I didn?t know. Scott than said early in his career he had shot his TV while at home and immediately called the PD to notify them of asked me if that sounds like a liar? We did not discuss this further but I do recall this incident when Scott shot his TV and I recall him calling dispatch and telling them that he had heard sirens and decided to call, assuming the sirens were coming to his house and wanted them to stand down as he was ok. i asked Scott if he had talked of riling up the probationer so that probation and parole would be forced to put a hold on the subject, to this Scott replied that he may have but he wasjust joking. i informed Scott of how inappropriate it would be to mention that because - had taken him seriously and it ca used her to talk to her supervisor about it. I told Scott there was statute against encouraging a probationer to violate probation (946.46). Scott said that it never happened and in a sarcastic tone, Scott then stated that he will watch what he says because people don?t know how to read him. I brought to Scott?s attention the Facebook posting and asked to discuss the timing and meaning behind it. Initially Scott stated it was freedom of speech and no different than a political sign. placed in his yard. I told Scott that I felt it was detrimental to the organization and the message he was relaying was inappropriate. Scott again defended it stating that he felt he could share some things on Facebook at his discretion. I asked Scott what the posting meant to him and he ?Some organizations are management heavy, lack good leadership, and don?t value good em ployees?. 1 expressed my concern to Scott about this stance he was taking, read to him the department values and vision statement andasked him where any of what he was saying or doing was aligning with the mission, vision, and core values of the department, to which Scott did not have a response. I told Scott that in my opinion the posting was inappropriate and demeaning to the organization and ordered it removed by the end ofthe day. Scott did remove the picture at the end of our meeting. The topic of retaliation was asked of Scott and if he recalled the conversation we had about retaliation when we initially met with HR on 2/5/2016. Scott replied that he recalled the conversation and further stated that he had not done anything that would constitute retaliation. I informed Scott that I had heard that he was making threatening comments that people better watch their back, if he is being held accountable so will everyone, and if off-color or inappropriate comments are around him that he will report that person to HR. Scott mentioned that he did not feel like he was being treated fairly and was being made an example of, and wanted to know who had reported that to me. Scott did not deny making those comments and he was warned that he needs to stop and think before he speaks. Scott was warned again against retaliation or what could be perceived as threats of retaliation. Lastly we discussed a case he was assigned which involved possible marijuana grows at a residence. This information was given to Scott in September and then a suggestion was made to perform some trash pulls at the residence. was told by both I - and - - that Scott does not believe in the value of trash pulls and that he ?did not get in this job to pick through someone else?s trash?. asked Scott in an email on 1/26/2016 and verbally in December of 2015 how the investigation was going. Scott stated he had performed "a few? trash pulls at the residence but has come up empty. I informed Scott that I had information that he had done this once, possibly twice in the over two months he has had this case. Scott said that he feels like he had done this more than that. When asked exactly how many times and if these trash pulls were documented, Scott said ?at least two and no, there was nothing found so i didn?t do a report, no one told me i had to do a report on I told Scott the importance of documenting, in the event of the information helping the defendant as exculpatory evidence and we needed to document not only what he felt was important but everything we did in a case. When asked the exact dates he looked through the trash, he stated he didn?t know. 1 used this as an opportunity to coach and counsel Scott on the importance of performing timely reports, regardless of the information garnished for the case. Scott stated he would start doing this. I told Scott that I didn?t have any more questions at this time. asked Scott if he had any questions for me and he asked about the timeline for this matter to be ?nished as he was tired of not getting sleep. I informed him we wciuld work through everything as as possible. 2/ 17/ 2016 Conversation with - - about trash pulls and retaliation On 2/17/2016 spoke with about trash pulls and any direction he may have given Scott. - has been a - - for over two years and had informally trained and mentored Scott. - stated that he has explained to Scott on more than one occasion the necessity for documenting cases regardless of findings, which contradicts what Scott said about never been given direction on doing reports on garbage pulls. - showed me a text from Scott asking if he needed to keep anything from a trash pull if nothing of evidentiary value was found, to which - stated no, but he never told Scott not to document the search. - also informed me that after the meeting with Scott yesterday (the 16th of February) that Scott was angry and confronted -, asking if he had been telling me (Rick) things, to which - stated he didn?t know what Scott was talking about. Scott stated he was talking about his plans to report items to HR and hold others accountable for improper language. - asked Scott who else he had mentioned this to, which Scott stated he had told - (-), - (-), and - responded to Scott that he would have to figure it out then. This was concerning due to just having talked to Scott about retaliation and he was not searching for who had shared information with me. - said Scott seemed angry that someone had crossed him. i thanked - for the information and asked for him to let me know if there were further conversations that were ofa concerning nature. 110 W. Fir-st Street Marsh?eld, WI. 54449 PHONE (?315) 384-3113 FAX (715) 384-0323 Rick Grams. Police Chief (715) 384-0800 February 23, 2016 By Heed Delivery Scott Schlei Re: Amative Leave Dear Schlei; The City of Marsh?eld Police Deparunent is conductin an internal investigation into Gond?lict that you allegedly eaged in related to ess. Based on my review of incident to point, I have decided that your presence in the Department and in is cometary to the interests of this Departmeent, and th - . I havestigation could potentially he I .y Until farther notice, you age he]: .1. - a ediately amender' all I identi?cation card, keys; and;; any nonwpuh?c aeea-s- of the are to perfo no duties or - me. Any actions by 2: la considered as insuhordinati compensation policy, and 7 purposes. .. a prior pee-517011. You ent further notice from etter fr me Will he . 2-: '1 under the City?s worker?s 1?35 You are to remehl available shifts. This requires that you Dep'arhnent 30 minutes c1 . your regularly scheduled and available to report to the; you are to remahl available hy a I telephone for routine questions as equired to do as of your normal job responnb?mes. I well contact you -- 2. a . a hers on file. In the event that you are away from that teleiahone during your directed to- pro?de me edth a number Where I may reach you during that time. the numers on ?le have changed, then you are directed to provide to me With the new telephone numbers. Your failure to respond to calls will result in disciplinary action. Should you have a need to inquire about your status or have any questions related to your employment, including bene?ts or payroll, then you are to contact me with any such questions or concerns. You dirt to not contact discuss any of the contents of the City?s investigation wi: I I I If you have any questions about the scope of permissible disclo - ersons, then you are to contact me ?rst. You 110 W. First Street - . - Marsh?eld, WI. 54449 Rlcgogcreaghiz?; POLICE DEPARTMENT (715)384?0800 are also directed to not engage in any retaliatory or intimidating conduct against any person who participates in this investigation. Any actions by you in violation of the directives issued to you will be considered as insubordination in addition to other rule violations warranting serious discipline up to and including liker discharge. Further, any action by you designed to compromise or that may compromise this internal investigation will subject you to disciplinary action up to and including liker discharge. If you hate any questions concerning this administrative leave, then please contact main Sincerely, zazuoasa__1.ooc I, ?do hereby swear or affirm that the following statements are true and correct to the best of my knowledge: I am a- employed by the Stat of January 29, 2016, I was in a meeting in my of?ce, also attended if? i and Of?cer Scott Schlei of the Marsh?eld Police Department. hre a probationer for whom I am responsible. During the meeting, Officer Schlei used the term ?shocker? and made a gesture with his hand demonstrating the term. The term and the gesture are highly vulgar and offensive. I irnrnediately informed Officer Schlei his comment and behavior was inappropriate and not appreciated. My demeanor and facial expressions communicated extreme displeasure with his comments and behavior. In response, Of?cer Schlei stated ?Come on, you were thinking the same thing.? I immediately replied to him that I was not doing so, and that such language is not allowed in my of?ce. I was very upset by his comment, so I did not focus on his next few statements. 9 later informed me that Of?cer Schlei referred to the probationer a ocker? 0 or ee additional times. At no time during the meeting did I or? laugh at Of?cer Schlei?s comment, or otherwise communicate that his statement or gesture were acceptable to us in any way. Later that day, I was so disturbed by Officer Schlei?s behavior that I contacted Of?cer Derek Iverson to discuss the incident. Then, on February 2, 2016, I spoke with Police Chief Rick Gramza about these events. I later related the events again to Jen Rachu of the City of Marsh?eld Human Rec'ourses Department. Each time, I reported the same facts as those described above. Date . Witness Date hereby do hereby swear or af?rm that the following statements are true and correct 0 est of my knowledge: - I am meeting ?in .. - loed the State of Wisconsin. On January 29, 2016, I attended a Department. the cuss a pro (1 Of?ce Scott Schlei of the Marshfield Police ationer. During the meeting, Of?cer Schlei used the term ?shocker? and made a gestur demonstrating that term. The term and the gesture are highly vulgar and immediately informed Of?cer Schlei the comment was inappropriate and not 'ated. Her demeanor and facial expressions communicated extreme displeasure with his and behavior. In reSponse, Officer Schlei stated ?Come on, you were thinking the same thing? or words to that effect. immediately replied that she was not thinking the same thing, and that such language 1 no owed in her of?ce. It was very apparent that Of?cer Schlei?s comments were very upsetting t? Yet, Of?cer Schlei' repeated his use of the term ?shocker? by referring to the pro ationer as ?the Shocker? two or three additional times aha? had informed him that such comments were not appropriate in her of?ce. At no time did I or augh at Of?cer Schlei?s comment, or otherwise communicate in any way that his comment was acceptable. Since these events, I have Spoken to Police Chief Rick Gramza, and to Jen Rachu. Each time I have related these events,_I have reported the same facts as those described above. In addition, I also reported an event on January 29, 2016, where Of?cer Schlei invited meeting office. I declined. In addition, I reported a conversation which occurred on February 10, 2016 between me and Of?cer Schlei. Officer Schlei indicated to me at that time that if anyone says anything to him that could be taken negatively, that he would ?make them pay.? I was intimidated and upset by I?his comments, and perceive them as a threat in retaliation for the investigation being conducted into his comments of January 29, 2016. X7145 [g Date Witness I Date Echu, Jennifer From: Rachu, Jennifer Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:26 AM To: Gramza, Rick Subject: Discipline Notice Attachments: Discipline Notice .doc Hi Rick, This is the form we discussed. Let me know if you need assistance completing it for S. Schlei?s oral warning. Thanks, Jen Jennifer Raehu, SPHR, Human Resources Manager/Assistant to the City Administrator City of Marsh?eld 630 S. Central Avenue Marsh?eid, WI 54449 Phone: 71521862004L Email: CITY OF MARSHFIELD EMPLOYEE DISCIPLINARY NOTICE NAME OF EMPLOYEE: JOB TITLE DEPARTMENT ORAL WRITTEN REPRIMAND SUSPENSION DISCHARGE IF ORAL REPRIMAND, GIVE DATE, TIME, AND PLACE OF REPRIMAND The above disciplinary action was taken against you today for: (check one or more} Tardiness Leaving post without permission Absenteeism Slow down, or refusal to work Assault or ?ghting Drinking on job Loafing or laxness on job, failure to perform Insubordination assigned tasks Use of profane or Inability to perform job abusive language Dishonesty Poor performance Violation of Rules of Conduct Damage to, or loss of property Negligence Unprofessional or negative Other [state reason) GIVE A STATEMENT OF THE FACTS USING THIS ACTION, INCLUDING THE TIME AND PLACE, ACTS AND NAMES OF PERSONS INVOLVED. I DELIVERED A COPY OF THIS FORM TO THE SUBJECT EMPLOYEE ON Date Supervisor From: Berg, Steve Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 2:29 PM To: Rachu, Jennifer Subject: RE: Scott Schlei Settlement Offer HiJen, Sure how about in a few minutes, say about 2:45? Steve From: Rachu, Jennifer I Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 2:14 PM To: Barg, Steve Subject: Scott Schlei Settlement Offer Hi Steve, If you have a moment, can you stop in. Rick and i had a discussion with Jim Korum regarding potential settlement. I would like to ensure that you are supportive before we notify Jim of our decision. Thanks, Jen Jennifer Rachu, SPHR, Human Resources Manager/Assistant t0 the City Administrator City of Marsh?eld 630 S. Central Avenue Marsh?eld, WI 54449 Phone: 715.486.2004 Email: Rachu, Jennifer From: James R. Korom Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 4:21 PM To: Andrew Schauer Subject: Marshfield Attachments: 2016?02?29 Marshfield Severance Agt Scott Schleidocx Here is the counter?offer from the City. You have seen the language before many times. On the economics, it is pay and health/dental through June 30, plus payout of his 229 hours of leave. Pretty simple and straightforward. i didn?t say anything about the dog, but if you think we should, let me know. The Chief will take a stab at the Letter of Reference, but if Scott has an idea of what it should say, we can use yours instead. Get back to me tomorrow with his response. Thanks. James R. Korom von Briesen Roper, 5.0. 411 East Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Direct: 41 4?287?1 231 Fax: 414-238-6588 jkorom@vonbriesen.corn vcard I bio vonbriesencom This emair? is from a iaw firm and is intended oniy for the use of those to whom it is addressed. it may contain information that is priviieged, confidentiar? or protected by iaw. if you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, dupiication or distribution of this emaii, its contents or any attachments is strictty prohibited. if you have received this emaii in error, please notify us immediateiy by repiying to the message and then delete ati instances of the message and attachments. internet communications are not assured to be secure or ciear of inaccuracies as information couid be intercepted, corrupted, iost, destroyed, arrive iate or incompiete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore, we do not accept for any errors or omissions that are present in this emaii, or any attachment, that have arisen as a resuit of e-maii transmission. .. From: James R. Korom Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 12:29 PM To: Rachu, Jennifer; Gramza, Rick Subject: Fwd: Marshfield Counterproposal Attachments: imageOOljpg;ATT00001.htm; imageOOang; Marshfield - Schlei - Severance Agt v2.1.docx; ATT00003.htm; Marshfield Schlei Severance Agt redline 2.1 to 1.docx; ATT00004.htm Please review. I haven't look at this yet. Can we talk later this afternoon? 3:00 or so? Sent from my mobile phone. Begin forwarded message: From: Andrew Schauer Date: March 7, 2016 at 12:42:47 PM EST To: "James R. Korom" Cc: Gary Wisbro cker Subject: Marshfild Counterprosa 'Jim, Attached please find the Association?s written counterproposal. It is in line with what we discussed on Friday: Health insurance only through April, pay through August, and a payout of the additional vacation time he receives on June 8. I have made some additional tweaks to the language, but none of which are meant to be economic or substantive. The proposed letter of reference is attached as Appendix A. I have had to tweak the reference language in Section 4 to deal with the possibility of requests for employment references received before the Separation Date, who should not be told of the pending separation. Please review this with your client, and feel free to discuss with me whenever you like this week. Thanks, Andy WISCONSIN PROFESSIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION Andrew D. Schauer, Staff Attorney 660 John Nolen Drive, Suite 300 Madison, Wisconsin 537134469 This email is from a law tinn and is intended only for the use of those to whom it is addressed. it may contain information that is privileged con?dential or protected by law. if you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, duplication or distribution of this email, its contents or any attachments is strictly prohibited. if you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and then delete all instances of the message and attachments. lntemet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arr?re late or incomplete, or contain unintended malware. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission. SEVERANCE AGREEMENT, WAIVER AND RELEASE BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARSHFIELD, THE RIARSHFIELD POLICE OFFICER BARGAINING UNIT AND SCOTT SCHLEI THIS AGREEMENT is made and is effective as of the date of execution (the ?Effective Date?) by and between the City of Marshfield (the ?City?), the Marshiield Police Officer Bargaining Unit, represented by the Wisconsin Professional Police Association (collectively the ?Association?) and Scott Schlei (?Employee?). WHEREAS, Employee is employed by the City as a Patrol Of?cer; WHEREAS, the parties wish to resolve all matters amicably by entering into this full and final settlement agreement wherein Employee resigns based upon the conditions set forth herein; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises herein contained and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Separation Date, Payments and Bene?ts. The Employee and the City agree the Employee's voluntary and irrevocable resignation is effective on August 31, 2016 (the ?Separation Date?). Employee shall remain on paid administrative leave until his Separation Date, and shall receive pay and bene?ts through this date (except as provided in paragraph 2, below) as provided in the collective bargaining agreement between the City and the Association. In consideration for the Employee's promises and obligations under this Agreement, Employee's employment shall terminate on the Separation Date and the City shall pay Employee his accrued but unused vacation, compensatory time off, and personal leave that was accrued on date of execution of this Agreement (a total of 389 hours, including 160 hours of vacation to be awarded on his June 8, 20.16 anniversary date), within 10 business days of the Effective Date of this Agreement. Health Insnrance. Employee understands and agrees that, in consideration of his promises and obligations under this Ageement, the City shall continue to cover the Employee and his family under, and pay the Employer?s share of the premiums of Employee?s current health and dental insurance to the extent provided in the applicable City policies and collective bargaining agreement and paid in accordance as if he was on active duty through April 30, 2016. As of May 1, 2016, the parties recognize that Employee and his family will be removed from such coverage. This obligation shall cease if Employee obtains alternate employment offering employer?paid health insurance benefits comparable to those Offered by the City. Employee understands and agrees the City has no obligation to continue Employee?s benefits or pay Employee?s premiums for other bene?ts beyond his Separation Date. For purposes of state and federal insurance continuation laws, including COBRA, May 1, 2016 shall be considered the ?Qualifying Event.? Employee acknowledges stated in this Agreement, and hereby waives any other rights to compensation or bene?ts ?onr the City. 3. Waiver and Release. lnlconsideration of the City?s obligations and promises under this Agreement, Employee does hereby fully and forever discharge and release the City, which includes all departments and agencies, and all of the fore going's past and present employees, officials, agents, representatives, insurers, and attorneys, from any and all actions, causes of action, claims, demands, damages (including but not limited to punitive damages), costs, eXpenses, attorney fees, and compensation on account of, or in any way growing out of any and all known and unknown damage resulting to or to result from any action by the City which arose before the date of the execution of this Agreement. By way of example only and without in any way limiting the generality of the foregoing language, Employee's release shall include all claims for relief or causes of action under the collective bargaining agreement, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. ?2000e, et seq., the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. ?12101, et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. ??791, 793 and 794; the Civil Rights Enforcement Statutes, 42 U.S.C. 1981 through 1988; Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. ?1001, et seq; the National Labor Relations Act; 29 11.8.0 ?151, et seq.; the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. ?651 et seq.; the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 U.S.C. ?2601 et seq.; the Wisconsin Fair Employment Laws, 111.33 et seq, Wis. Stats; the Wisconsin Family and Medical Leave Act, ?103.10 Wis. Stats; and any other federal, state or local statute, ordinance, or regulation dealing in any respect with discrimination or termination of employment, and, in addition, ?om all claims, demands, or actions brought on the basis of alleged wrongful or retaliatory discharge, breach of an oral or written contract, misrepresentation, defamation, interference with contract or intentional or negligent in?iction of emotional distress, damage to business or professional reputation, conspiracy, negligence, invasion of privacy, or any intentional tort or negligence claim or contract claim of any sort under the common law of any state or other jurisdiction. The parties understand and agree this Agreement does not waive Employee?s right or ability to ?le charges or participate in an investigation with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor and the State of Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. The parties understand and agree Employee waives any right to and shall not accept or recover any monetary damages or any other damages or anything of value from the City as a result of filing such charges?, participating in any investigation or proceeding, or for any related claim, action or judgment against the City. Employee agrees that in the event he or another person on his behalf, receives any money or benefit as a result of such investigation, charge or proceeding or related claim, action or judgment, that is paid by the City, then Employee shall indemnify and fully reimburse the City for any amounts paid to employee or on his behalf within ten days of the receipt of such payment. The parties also understand and agree that this Agreement does not waive or release any Worker?s Compensation claim. 4. Employment References. The City?s Chief of Police agrees to provide Employee with a letterof Reference substantially similar to that contained in Appendix A, attached to this Agreement. Employee agrees to direct all requests for references and other employment? related information to the Chief of Police, and the City agrees to direct all requests for background checks of the Employee to the Chief of Police. For all employment 2 25217730__1.nocx references after August 31, 2016, the Chief of Police will provide information consistent with that letter, the agreed to personnel ?le, and no other information unless Employee authorizes release of further information in writing. For all employment references before August 31, 2016, the Chief of Police will not provide the letter attached as Appendix A itself, but will provide the same information, either verbally or in writing, except that he shall refer not refer to the Employee as having resigned, but as still employed by the Department. . 5. K9 Ownership. The parties recognize that ownership of the K9 named Arco has already I been relinquished by the City to the Employee, and complete ownership and responsibility for Arco shall remain with the Employee. 6. Personnel File. The City has agreed to expunge any and all documents and/or references to the current investigation of disciplinary action or the events surrounding said incident, ?om Employee?s personnel ?le as it was not used in actually determining Employee?s quali?cations for employment, promotion, transfer, additional compensation, termination or other disciplinary action. In addition, it is understood that there will-be no reference made by the Police Chief about the current investigation of disciplinary action or the events surrounding said incident to any individual inquiring about Employee unless Employee authorizes release of further information in writing. It is further understood that the City will place those documents in an investigative ?le kept by the Chief of Police. If any open records request is made that relates to the release of that file, the City shall comply with the requirements set forth in ?19.356 Wis. Stats. prior to the release of any such record. Additionally, this Agreement is not to be placed in Employee's personnel ?le. 7. Unemployment Insurance. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, above, for unemployment insurance purposes only, the parties agree that the Employee?s separation ?om'the City will he considered a resignation in lieu of termination, and therefore does not constitute a ?voluntary termination of work? under Wis. Stats. The parties agree that this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of employee?s rights to pursue or receive unemployment insurance bene?ts after the Separation Date, nor does this Agreement guarantee Employee the receipt of such unemployment insurance bene?ts. The City agrees it will not appear at any Hearing to determine eligibility for unemployment insurance bene?ts after the Separation Date, unless it receives a subpoena to do so. 8. LEOSAJHR. 218 Certification. Upon Employee?s separation from Employer, Employer agrees to fully cooperate in issuing Employee his 218 Certi?cation card as set forth under Wisconsin Statute Employer hereby agrees that, upon his separation from employment with Employer, Employee will qualify as a ?former law enforcement of?cer?, as de?ned by Wisconsin Statute and further agrees that Employee meets all of the requirements as set forth in Wisconsin Statute 9. Property Exchange. At the time Employee presents this Agreement to the Police Chief for execution, all of Employee?s personal property currently in the possession of the Police Department will be returned to Employee, if otherwise allowed by law. In 3 2521ireo?mocx 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. l6. addition, any Department equipment still in the possession of the Employee will be returned to the Department at that same time. No'Reemployment. Employee acknowledges and agrees that the City will not reemploy him as a law enforcement of?cer. If Employee does seek such employment, Employee understands and agrees that the City will be under no obligation to process Employee?s application. Nonprecedent Setting and Waiver of Association Claims. The parties agree this Agreement is the product and result of unique facts and circumstances. This Agreement shall not serve as a precedent for any party with regard to any other circumstances or claims. The Association agrees that it waives any right to ?le any grievance, prohibited practice claim or any other claim related to Employee?s employment or the separation thereof. Association Acknowledgement. The Association signs this agreement only as to the extent this agreement discusses rights covered under the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City and the Association, and any related state or federal laws enforcing the same. The Association's signature does not indicate any opinion by its representatives, agents, or employees regarding the rights Association member may have under any state, federal or local law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of any protected class, or which prohibit retaliation in any way related to the ?ling of such a claim. Neither the Association, nor its representatives, agents, nor employees make any representation by their signature of Employee? 5 rights under any such claim. Duty of Fair Representation. Employee acknowledges that the Association has met its Duty of Fair Representation to him and has represented his interests fairly, impartially and without discrimination. - Acceptance. Employee acknowledges that he had suf?cient time to read this Agreement and consider acceptance of it and voluntarily enters into this Agreement with full knowledge of its meaning and with the speci?c intention of resolving all outstanding matters with the City. In entering into this Agreement, Employee is relying on his own judgment and knowledge and not on representations or statements made by the City, its employees or agents. No Admission of Liability. The parties? participation in this Agreement is not an admission of wrongdoing or liability by either party; Choice of Law and Entire Agreement. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties as to issues provided in this Agreement. Headings are for convenience of the parties and shall not affect the interpretation or application of this Agreement. .. Severabili?. If a court of competent jurisdiction ?nds any provision of this Agreement illegal or unenforceable, the offending provision will be deemed amended or deleted to the extent necessary to con?rm to the applicable law. 4 I 18. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and shall be as effective as if executed on one document. Facsimile signatures shall be as effective and valid as original signatures. IN WITNESS THEREFORE, the undersigned further state that they have carefully read the foregoing Agreement, know and understand its contents and sign the same under their own free will, being duly authorized to do so. Date City of Marsh?eld Date Marsh?eld Police Of?cer Bargaining Unit Date Scott schlei 5 26217780H1.DOCX . APPENDIX A DEPARTNIENT Dear Officer Scott Schlei has been employed as a Police Of?cer with the Marsh?eld Police Department ?om June 8, 1998. His last wage at was $28.11 per hour. While employed at the Marsh?eld Police Department, Of?cer Schlei held positions of Patrol Officer, Canine Handler, Field Training Of?cer, Drug Investigator, Firearms Instructor, EVOC Instructor, and Vehicle Contacts Distructor. He has received appropriate certi?cations and additional training through the Department for all of these positions. Of?cer Schlei was a main force in starting the Canine Program at the Department, and has been recognized by the Wisconsin Law Enforcement Canine Handlers Association on three occasions. He was awarded three awards: Rookie Handler of the Year, Meritorious Canine Apprehension and Meritorious Article Find. Of?cer Schlei has resigned ?om the Department on August 31, 2016 to pursue other job opportunities. The Department wishes him the best with his ?iture endeavors. Sincerely, Chief Rick Gramza From: Rachu, Jennifer Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 2:50 PM To: James R. Korom; Gramza, Rick Subject: RE: Marshfield Hi Jim. Monday is ?ne for me. I am free between 8-9; 10:30-2:30 and after 3:30. Thanks, Jen Sent ??om my Verizon Wireless 4.6 LTE smartphone Original message From: "James R. Korom" Date: 03/04/2016 14:23 To: "Gramza, Rick" "Rachu, Jennifer" Subject: FW: Marsh?eld got this from Andy Schauer a few minutes ago. While I don't like to drag things out any longer than necessary, I trust that he is not dragging his feet. I believe this case is still headed for settlement, so an extra day or two shouldn?t matter. Are you both UK waiting until Monday? James R. Korom von Briesen Roper, s.c. 411 East Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Direct: 414-287-1231 Fax: 414?238-6588 jkorom@vonbriesen.com vcard bio vonbriesencom From: Andrew Schauer Sent: Friday, March 4, 2016 2:10 PM To: James R. Korom Subject: RE: Marsh?eld have gotten sidetracked today by other pressing matters. i was hoping the day, but i do not think be able to turn it around yet today. At worst, I?il be able to finish the changes and send them to Scott for review, and get you the revised agreement on Monday. i hope that works for you. Thanks, Andy Andrew D. Schauer Staff Attorney Wisconsin Professional Poiice Association 880 John Nolen Drive, Suite 300 Madison, Wisconsin 53713?1469 Office: 808.273.3840 Fax: 808.273.3904 aschauer@wppa.com From: James R. Korom Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 1:44 PM To: Andrew Schauer Subject: Marsh?eld What is the timing on your written proposal? I?d like to schedule a time to discuss it with the client. James R. Korom yon Briesen 8 Roper, 3.0. 411 East Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Direct: 414-287?1231 Fax: 414-238-6588 jkorom@vonbriesen.com vcard bio vonbriesencom .. m- Jr 3.. 1, .. an NATL-A . . own?; M. . - This emaii is from a iaw ?rm and is intended oniy for the use of those to whom it is addressed. it may contain infonnation that is pnviieged, confidentiai or protected by iaw. if you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, dupiication or distribution of this emaii, its contents or any attachments is strictiy prohibited. if you have received this emaii in error, piease notify us immediateiy by repiying to the message and then deiete instances of the message and attachments. internet communications are not assured to be secure or ciear of inaccuracies as infonnation could be intercepted, corrupted, iost, destroyed, arrive iate or incompiete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore. we do not accept for any errors or omissions that are present in this emaii, or any attachment, that have arisen as a resuit of e-maii transmissionup: .1. Gramza, Rick From: James R. Korom Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 5:32 PM To: Andrew Schauer Subject: RE: Marshfield Counterproposal Attachments: Marshfield Schlei - Severance Agt v2.1 Dear Andy, First, thanks for your proposal, and the way you showed the marked revisions. i must apologize that I am not as technologically advanced, so the attached includes some changes that are not marked. i will summarize them in this email. I worked off of your version, thereby accepting most of your proposed changes. i think there was a misunderstanding about the leave banks. in our proposal, we already included a prorated amount of the 160 hours of vacation he would get on June 8, prorated as of February. Our proposal of 229 hours included 70 hours of comp time, 16 hours of Holiday time, 36 hours of unused vacation time from last year, and 107 hours of prorated vacation of the 160 hours from this year. In your counter proposal, you increased the amount by 160 hours, but that overlapped the 107 hours of the 160 hours we already included. Thus, this new proposal increases the payout to 290 hours. This consists of the same 70 hours of comp time, 24 hours of Holiday (adding Memorial Day), 36 hours of unused vacation from last year, and 160 hours of vacation he is currently accruing. In short, we have said ?yes? to your request for-the full payout of the 160 hours of vacation. This proposal then provides for that payout to occur in late June. Since the full accruals won?t be on the books until his anniversary date, and since he is otherwise receiving full pay through then anyway, we felt he would be fine with the later payout date. The resignation date is a compromise date ofiuly 30, 2016. The new date appears in several places in the document, so lhOpe I caught them all. laiso added language requiring the submission of a separate letter of resignation for inclusion in the personnel file. I think this is in both parties? best interest. The City will have closure on their personnel file, as the Agreement itself will not be there. A prospective empioyer seeing only the personnel file might wonder what happened if there is no resignation letterin there. i assume this is not a problem. We do have a problem with the Concealed Carry paragraph, so i have deleted it. This is the first time you and have deait with this language, so i needed to check the statutory language. Chapter 175.49 requires the Chief to certify the officer left the Department ?in good standing?. He is having some discomfort with that language, and I couldn?t tell him the term was well-defined bylaw or statute. But more importantly, the federal law, Section 9268, defines someone subject to the law as an of?cer ?not the subject of any disciplinary action which couid result in suspension or loss of police powers? or words to that effect. Again, there is little or no guidance to help me know exactly what that means. So, i tried to figure out why this is important, and couldn?t come up with a good answer. it only seems to matter if he wants to carry concealed outside of the State of Wisconsin, at least as understand it. And once Scott starts at another poiice agency, it is all moot anyway. So, unless for missing something, I?d ask that that paragraph remain out of the Agreement. Another issue i didn?t understand was the reference to the hourly rate in the Agreement, specifically the Letter of Reference. it seems unnecessary. But it also caused the client to look at the appiicable hourly rate being used. This is what we learned. A senior patrol officer is currently paid at $27.23 per hour, and will be increased to $27.50 on 1 7/1/16. Scott, in his current assignment as an investigator, is paid at $28.43 per hour, also with an hourly rate increase due 7/1/16. My client would like to pay him at the senior patrol rate while on paid leave under this agreement, and not at his current rate as an investigator (since he is not performing investigator duties while on paid leave). After discussion, they are OK keeping him at his current rate, but without the pay increase that would come on 7/1/16. i have included language to that effect. In the letter of reference, we could not figure out where the $28.11 figure came from in your proposal, so ljust deleted that sentence entirely. Finally, in the letter of reference, i made 2 minor changes, to the effect that the resignation is ?effective? on 7/31/16, and wishing Scott ?well? rather than ?the best?. Shouldn?t be a big deal. This is the final version, I hope. I don?t think the client has any more movement, so i hope your client will accept it. if you need anything further, let me know. Otherwise, let?s look at how and when to get it signed. Thanks. James R. Korom von Briesen 8: Roper, ac. 411 East Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Direct: 414-287?1231 Fax: 414~238-6588 jkororn@vonbriesen.oom vcard bio vonbriesencom From: Andrew Schauer Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 11:43 AM To: James R. Korom Cc: Gary Wisbrocker. Subject: Marsh?eld Counterproposal Jim, Attached please find the Association?s written counterproposal. It is in line with what we discussed on Friday: Health insurance only through April, pay through August, and a payout of the additional vacation time he receives on June 8. have made some additional tweaks to the language, but none of which are meant to be economic or substantive. The proposed letter of reference is attached as Appendix A. I have had to tweak the reference language in Section 4 to deal with the possibility of requests for employment references received before the Separation Date, who should not be told of the pending separation. Please review this with your client, and feel free to discuss with me whenever you like this week. Thanks, Andy POUCE Andrew D. Schauer, Staff Attorney 660 John Nolen Drive, Suite 300 Madison, Wisconsin 537134469 Jen-? i w? Of?ce: 6082733840 Fax: 608.273.3904 aschauer@wppa.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disciosore or distribution is prohibited. if you are not the intended recipient, piease contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you-.-.-.. .- .-- This emaii is from a iaw ?rm and is intended oniy for the use of those to whom it is addressed. it may contain information that is priviieged, con?dentiai or protected bylaw. it you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, dupiication or distribution of this emaii, its contents or any attachments is strictiy prohibited. if you have received this emaii in error, piease notiij/ us immediateiy by repiying to the message and then deiete instances of the message and attachments. internet communications are not assured to be secureI or ciear oi inaccuracies as information coutd be intercepted, corrupted, iost, destroyed, arrive iate or incompiete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore, we do not accept for any errors or emissions that are present in this emaii, or any attachment, that have arisen as a resuit of e-maii tranSmission. . mg'-v%emaeinm? CONFIDENTIAL SEVERANCE AGREEMENT, WAIVER AND RELEASE BETWEEN: CITY OF MARSHFIELD. THE WISCONSIN PROFESSIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION LEER DIVISION AND SCOTT SCHLEI THIS AGREEMENT is made and is effective as of the date of execution (the ?Effective Date?) by and between the City of Marshfield (the ?City?), the Wisconsin Professional Police Association LEER Division (the ?Association?) and Scott Schlei (?Employee?). WHEREAS, Employee is employed by the City as a Patrol Of?cer; WHEREAS, the parties wish to resolve all matters amicably by entering into this full and ?nal settlement agreement wherein Employee voluntarily resigns based upon the conditions set forth herein; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises herein contained and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Separation Date and Payments. The Employee and the City agree the Employee's voluntary and irrevocable resignation is effective on June 30, 2016 (the ?Separation Date?). In consideration for the Employee's promises and obligations under this Agreement, Employee's employment shall terminate on the Separation Date and the City shall then pay Employee his accrued but unused vacation, compensatory time off, and personal leave that was accrued on date of execution of this Agreement, (a total of 229 hours). Benefits. Employee understands and agrees that, in consideration of his promises and obligations under this Agreement, the City shall pay the Employer?s share of Employee?s current health and dental insurance premiums to the extent provided in the applicable City policies and collective bargaining agreement and paid in accordance as if he was on active duty through June 30, 2016. This obligation shall cease if Employee obtains alternate employment offering employer-paid health insurance benefits comparable to those offered bythe City. Employee understands and agrees the City has no obligation to continue Employee?s benefits or pay EmplOyee?s premiums for other bene?ts beyond his Separation Date. For purposes of state and federal insurance continuation laws, including COBRA, the Separation Date shall be considered the ?Qualifying Even.? Employee acknowledges stated in this Agreement, and hereby waives any other rights to compensation or bene?ts from the City. Waiver and Release. 'In consideration of the City?s obligations and promises under this Agreement, Employee does hereby fully and forever discharge and release the City, which includes all departments and agencies, and all?of the fore going's past and present employees, officials, agents, representatives, insurers, and attorneys, from any and all actions, causes of action, claims, demands, damages (including but not limited to punitive damages), costs, expenses, attorney fees, and compensation on account of, or in any way growing out of any and all known and unknown damage resulting to or to result ?om any action by the City which arose before the date of the execution of this Agreement. By way of example only and without in any way limiting the generality of the foregoing language, Employee?s release shall include all claims for relief or causes of action under the collective bargaining agreement, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. ?2000e, et Seq., the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. ?12101, et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. ??791, 793 and 794; the Civil Rights Enforcement Statutes, 42 U.S.C. 1981 through 1988; Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. ?1001, et seq.; the National Labor Relations Act; 29 U.S.O. ?151, et seq.; the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. ?651 et seq.; the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 U.S.C. ?2601 et seq. the Wisconsin Fair Employment Laws, 111.33 et seq., Wis. Stats. the Wisconsin Family and Medical Leave Act, ?103.10 Wis. Stats; and any other federal, state or local statute, ordinance, or regulation dealing in any respect with discrimination or termination of employment, and, in addition, ?om all claims, demands, or actions brought on the basis of alleged wrongful or retaliatory discharge, breach of an oral or written contract, misrepresentation, defamation, interference with contract or intentional or negligent in?iction of emotional distress, damage to business or professional reputation, conspiracy, negligence, invasion of privacy, or any intentional tort or negligence claim or contract claim of any sort under the common law of any state or other jurisdiction. The parties understand and agree this Agreement does not waive Employee?s right or ability to ?le charges or participate in an investigation with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor and the State of Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. The parties understand and agree Employee waives any right to and shall not accept or recover any monetary damages or any other damages or anything of value from the City as a result of filing such charges, participating in any investigation or proceeding, or for any related claim, action or judgment against the City. Employee agrees that in the event he or another person on his behalf, receives any money or bene?t as a result of such investigation, charge or proceeding or related claim, action or judgment, that is paid by the City, then Employee shall indemnify and fully reimburse the City for any amounts paid to employee or on his behalf within ten days of the receipt of such payment. 4. Employment References. The Chief of Police agrees to provide a letter of Reference substantially similar to that contained in Appendix A, attached to this Agreement. Employee agrees to direct all requests for references and other employment?related information to the Chief of Police, and the City agrees to direct all requests for background checks of the Employee to the Chief of Police who will provide information not inconsistent with that letter, the agreed to personnel file, and no other information unless Employee authorizes release of further information in writing. 5. Personnel File. The City has agreed to expunge any and all documents and/or references to thecurrent investigation of disciplinary action or the events surrounding said incident, from Employee?s personnel file as it was not used in actually determining Employee?s quali?cations for employment, promotion, transfer, additional compensation, termination 10. or other disciplinary action. In addition, it is understood that there will be no reference made by the Police Chief about the current investigation of disciplinary action or the events surrounding said incident to any individual inquiring about Employee unless Employee authorizes release of further information in writing. It is further understood that the City cannot destroy such documents pertaining to the current investigation of discipline or the events surrounding said incident, but will place those documents in a file kept by the Chief of Police. If any open records request is made that relates to the release of that file, the City shall comply with the requirements set forth in ?l9.3 5 6 Wis. Stats. prior to the release of any such record. Additionally, this Agreement is not to be placed in Employee's personnel File. Unemployment Compensation. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, above, for unemployment insurance purposes only, the parties agree that the Employee?s separation from the City will be considered a resignation in lieu of termination, and therefore does not constitute a ?voluntary termination of wor under Wis. Stats. The parties agree that this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of employee?s rights to pursue or receive unemployment benefits after the Separation Date, nor does this Agreement guarantee Employee the receipt of such unemployment benefits. The City agrees it will not appear at any Hearing to determine eligibility for Unemployment Benefits after the Separation Date, unless it receives a subpoena to do so. Property Exchange. At the time Employee presents this Agreement to the Police Chief for execution, all of Employee?s personal property currently in the possession of the Police Department will be returned to Employee, if otherwise allowed by law. In addition, any Department equipment still in the possession of the Employee will be returned to the Department at that same time. No Reemployment. Employee acknowledges and agrees that the City will not reemploy him as a law enforcement of?cer. If Employee does seek such employment, Employee understands and agrees that the City will be under no obligation to process Employee?s application. Nonprecedent Setting and Waiver of Association Claims. The parties agree this Agreement is the product and result of unique facts and Circumstances. This Ageement shall not serve as a precedent for any party with regard to any other circumstances or claims. The Association agrees that it waives any right to file any grievance, prohibited practice claim or any other claim related to Employee?s employment or the separation thereof. Association Acknowledgement. The Association signs this agreement only as to the extent this agreement discusses rights covered under the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City and the Association, and any related state or federal laws enforcing the same. The Association's signature does not indicate any Opinion by its representatives, agents, or employees regarding the rights Association member may have under any state, federal or local law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of age, ancestry, sex, race, religion, disability, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, handicap, or other protected class, or which prohibit retaliation in any way 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. related to the ?ling of such a claim. Neither the Association, nor its representatives, agents, nor employees make any representation by their signature of Employee?s rights under any such claim. . Duty of Fair Representation. Employee acknowledges that the Association has met its Duty of Fair Representation to him and has represented his interests fairly, impartially and without discrimination. - Acceptance. Employee acknowledges that he had sufficient time to read this Agreement and consider acceptance of it and voluntarily enters into this Agreement with full knowledge of its meaning and with the specific intention of resolving all outstanding matters with the City. In entering into this Agreement, Employee is relying on his own judgment and knowledge and not on representations or statements made by the City, its employees or agents. No Admission of Liability. The parties? participation in this Agreement is not an admission of wrongdoing or liability by either party. Choice of Law and Entire Agreement. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties as to issues provided in this Agreement. Headings are for convenience of the parties and shall not affect the interpretation or application of this Agreement. Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction ?nds any provision of this Agreement illegal or unenforceable, the offending provision will be deemed amended or deleted to the extent necessary to confirm to the applicable law. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and shall be as effective as if executed on one document. Facsimile signatures shall be as effective and valid as original signatures. IN WITNESS THEREFORE, the undersigned further state that they have carefully read the foregoing Agreement, know and understand its contents and sign the same under their own free will, being duly authorized to do so. Date City of Marsh?eld Date Wisconsin Professional Police Association/ LEER Division Date Scott Schlei 4 .DOCX From: James R. Korom Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 4:54 PM To: Gramza, Rick; Rachu, Jennifer Subject: Fwd: Final Agreement Attachments: Marshfield Schlei Signed Sev Agr and Letterpdf; ATT00001.htm The deal is done. Please sign and send copies to me and to Andy Schauer. Make arrangements for the property exchange as described in Andy's email. I will confirm that we are not going to make any affirmative public comments except to comply with the Open Records Law. This is a good result in my world. I know this was your first rodeo, but you held the Department to a high standard with little emotional cost to the City. The financial terms are likely cheaper than the cost of litigation, and with a certain outcome. Good work. Sent from my mobile phone. Begin forwarded message: From: Andrew Schauer Date: March 9, 2016 at 5:40:30 PM EST To: "James R. Korom" Gary Wisbrocker Subject: RE: Final Agreement James, Attached please find in one the Agreement signed by Scott and myself on behalf of the local - Association, as well as a resignation letter dated July 30, 2016 for his personnel file. I have been given specific authority to sign the Agreement on behalf of the local Association by its local president, Jason Parks. With Gary Wisbrocker on vacation, I would ask that you ask the Chief to set up a time with Scott through Jason to schedule an exchange of department and personal property. I have confirmed with Jason that he can be present to help Scott through that process. Please send me a copy of the fuily?executed Agreement upon your receipt of the same. Finally, piease also confirm our understanding from our earlier discussion with regard to the Chief not making any press release or affirmative statement to the press regarding this matter. This went a long way to reassure us that this Chief is not looking to keep him from being employed in another department, and that assurance helped get us to this resolution. if you have any questions about the above or the attached, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best, Andy Andrew D. Schauer Staff Attorney Wisconsin Professional Police Association 660 John Nolen Drive, Suite 300 Madison, Wisconsin 53713-1469 Office: 608.273.3840 Fax: 608.273.3904 aschauer@wooa.com From: James R. Korom Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 4:37 To: Andrew Schauer - Cc: Gramza, Rick; Rachu, Jennifer Subject: Final Agreement Dear Andy, Attached is the final agreement. i have added 16 hours to the payout of his leave banks. also added a sentence in paragraph 2 indicating the City will issue the necessary COBRA letter we discussed. If his wife?s carrier needs any specific language, just have Scott work with HR to get him what they need. I asked the Chiefabout the Concealed Carry issue again, but we decided not to add the language back in. I hope that is not a deal?breaker in light of the movement we?ve shown on the other issues. if this is acceptable, please have Scott and the Local contact the Chief directly to schedule a time and place for the property exchange and signature of the Agreement. Thanks for all your hard work in resolving this. l" i I- 411 East Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Direct: 414-287-1231 Fax: 414-238?6588 jkorom@vonbriesen.com vcard bio vonbriesencom This emaii is from a few firm and is intended oniy for the use of those to whom it is addressed. it may contain information that is priviieged, conh'dentiai or protected by iaw. if you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, dupiication or distribution of this emaii, its contents or any attachments is strictiy prohibited. if you have received this emaii in error, piease noti?/ us immediateiy by repiying to the message and then deiete instances of the message and attachments. internet communications are not assured to be secure or ciear of inaccuracies as information coutd be intercepted, con'upted, iost, destroyed, arrive iate or incompiete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore, we do not accept for any errors or omissions that are present in this emaii, or any attachment, that have arisen as a resuit of e-maii transmission. This emaii is from a taw ?rm and is intendednonIy for the use of those to whom it is addressed. it may contain information that is priviieged, con?dentiai or protected by tart. if you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, dupiication or distribution of this emait, its contents or any attachments is strictiy prohibited. if you have received this emaii in error, piease notify us immediateiy by repiying to the message and then deiete instances of the message and attachments. tnternet communications are not assured to be secure or ciear of inaccuracies as information couid be intercepted, corrupted, tost, destroyed, arrive iate or incompiete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore, we do not accept for any errors or omissions that are present in this emaii, or any attachment, that have arisen as a resuit of e~maii transmission. From: James R. Korom Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 4:37 PM To: Andrew Schauer Cc: Gramza, Rick; Rachu, Jennifer Subject: Final Agreement Attachments: Marshfield Schiei Severance Agt v2.1 (2).docx Dear Andy, Attached is the final agreement. I have added 16 hours to the payout of his leave banks. I aiso added a sentence in paragraph 2 indicating the City will issue the necessary COBRA letter we discussed. If his wife?s carrier needs any specific language, just have Scott work with HR to get him what they need. I asked the Chiefabout the Concealed Carry issue again, but we decided not to add the language back in. i hope that is not a deal?breaker in light of the movement we?ve shown on the other issues. I If this is acceptable, please have Scott and the Local contact the Chief directly to schedule a time and place for the property exchange and signature of the Agreement. Thanks for all your hard work in resolving this. James R. Korom von Briesen Roper, 5.0. 411 East Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, Wi 53202 Direct: 414-287-1231 Fax: 414?238-6588 jkorom@vonbriesen.com vcard bio vonbriesencom This email is from a taw firm and is intended oniy for the use of those to whom it is addressed. it may contain information that is priviieged, con?dentiat or protected by taw. it you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, duptication or distribution of this emait, its centents or any attachments is strictiy prohibited. if you have received this emaii in error, piease notify us immediateiy by repiying to the message and then deiete instances of the message and attachments. internet communications are not assured to be secure or ctear of inaccuracies as information couid be intercepted, corrupted, iost, destroyed, arrive iate or incompiete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore, we do not accept for any errors or omissions that are present in this emaii, or any attachment, that have arisen as a resuit of e?maii transmission. SEWERANCE AGREEMENT, WAIVER AND RELEASE BETWEEN THE CIT OF THE MARSHFIELD POLICE - OFFICER BARGAINING UNIT AND SCOTT SCHLEI THIS AGREEMENT is made and is effective as of the date of execution (the ?Effective Date?) by and between the City of Marsh?eld (the ?City?), the Marsh?eld Police Officer Bargaining Unit, represented by the Wisconsin Professional Police Association (collectively the ?Association?) and Scott Schlei (?Employee?). WHEREAS, Employee is employed by the City as a Patrol Officer; WHEREAS, the parties wish to resolve all matters amicably by entering into this full? and final settlement agreement wherein Employee resigns based open the conditions set forth herein; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mumal promises herein contained and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: . 1. Separation Date, Payments and Bene?ts. The Employee and the City agree the Employee's voluntary and irrevocable resignation is effective on July 30, 2016 (the ?Separation Date?). Employee shall submit, at the time this Agreement is executed by him, a separate letter of resignation effective on July 30, 2016, for inclusion in his personnel ?le. Employee shall remain on paid administrative leave until his Separation Date, and shall receive pay and bene?ts through this date (except as provided in paragraph 2, below) as provided in the collective bargaining agreement between the City and the Association, except his current hourly rate shall not increase on July 1, 2016. In consideration for the Employee?s promises and obligations under this Agreement, Employee?s employment shall terminate on the Separation Date and the City shall pay Employee his accrued but unused vacation, compensatory time off, and personal leave that was accrued on date of execution of this Agreement (a total of 306 hours, including 160 hours of vacation to be awarded on his June 8, 2016 anniversary date), within 10 business days of June 8, 2016. i Health Insurance. Employee understands and agrees that, in consideration of his promises and obligations under this Agreement, the City shall continue to cover the Employee and his family under, and pay the Employer?s share of the premiums of Employee?s current health and dental insurance to the extent provided in the applicable City policies and collective bargaining agreement and paid in accordance as if he was on active duty through April 30, 2016. As of May 1, 2016, the parties recognize that Employee and his family will be removed from such coverage. This obligation shall cease if Employee obtains alternate employment offering employer?paid health insurance bene?ts comparable to those o??ered by the City. Employee understands and agrees the City has no obligation to continue Employee?s bene?ts or pay Employee?s premiums for other bene?ts beyond his Separation Date. For purposes of state and federal insurance continuation laws, including COBRA, May 1, 2016 shall be considered the ?Qualifying -.J Event.? The City agrees to issue a separate letter to the Employee verifying there has been a change of circumstances affecting Employees health insurance coverage as that term is understood under COBRA, and to cooperate to the extent necessary to ensure his eligibility for coverage under his spouse?s health insurance plan. Employee acknowledges stated in this Agreement, and hereby waives any other rights to compensation or bene?ts from the City. 3. . Waiver and Release. In consideration of the City?s obligations and promises under this Agreement, Employee dees hereby fully and forever discharge and release the City, which includes all departments and agencies, and all of the fore going's past and present employees, o??cials, agents, representatiVes, insurers, and attorneys, from any and all actions, causes of action, claims, demands, damages (including but not limited to punitive damages), costs, expenses, attorney fees, and compensation on account of, or in any way growing out of any and all known and unknown damage resulting to or to result from any action by the City which arose before the date of the execution of this Agreement. By way of example only and without in any way limithig the generality of the foregoing language, Employee's release shall include all claims for relief or causes of action under the collective bargaining agreement, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. ?2000e, et seq.', the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. ?12101, et' seq; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. ??791, 793 and 794; the Civil Rights Enforcement Statutes, 42 U.S.C. 1981 through 1938; Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. ?1001, et seq.; the National Labor Relations Act; 29 ?151, et seq.; the Fair Labor Standards Act of 193 8, 29 U.S.C. ?651 et seq. the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 U.S.C. ?2601 et seq; the Wisconsin Fair Employment Laws, 111.33 et_seq., Wis. State; the Wisconsin Family and Medical Leave Act, ?103.10 Wis. Stats; and any other federal, state or local statute, ordinance, or regulation dealing in any respect with discrimination or termination of employment, and, in addition, from 'all claims, demands, or actions brought on the - basis of alleged mongful or retaliamry discharge, breach of an oral or written contract, misrepresentation, defamation, interference with contract or intentional or negligent in?iction of emotional distress, damage to business or professional reputation, conspiracy, negligence, invasion of privacy, or any intentional tort or negligence claim or contract claim of any sort under the common law of any state or other jurisdiction. The parties understand and agree this Agreement does not waive Employee?s right or ability to'?ie charges or participate in an investigation with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Deparmient of Labor- and the State of Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. The parties understand and agree Employee WaiVes any right to and shall not accept or recover any monetary damages or any other" damages or anything of value from the City as a result of ?ling such charges, . participating in any investigation or proceeding, or for any related claim, action or judgment against the City. Employee agrees that in the eyent he or another person on his behalf, receives any money or bene?t as a result of such hivestigation, charge or proceeding or related claim, action or judgment, that is paid by the City, then Employee shall indenmify and hilly reimburse the City for any amounts paid to employee or on his behalf within ten days of the receipt of such payment. The parties also understand and agree that this Agreement does not waive or release any Worker?s Compensation claim. Emploment References. The City?s Chief of Police agrees to provide Employee with a letter of Reference substantially similar to that contained in Appendix A, attached to this Agreement. Employee agrees to direct all requests for references and o?ier employment? related information to the Chief of Police, and the City agrees to direct all requests for background checks of the Employee to the Chief of Police. For all employment references after July 30, 2016, the Chief of Police will provide information consistent with that letter, the agreed to personnel file, and no other information unless Employee authorizes release of further infonnation in writing. For. all employment references before July 30, 2016, the Chief of Police will not provide the letter attached as Appendix A itself, but will provide the same information, either verbally or in writing, except that he shall refer not refer to the Employee as having resigned, but as still employed by the Department. K9 Ownership. The parties recognize that ownership of the K9 named Arco has already been relinquished by the City to the Employee, and complete ownership and, responsibility for Arco shall remain with the Employee. Personnel File. The City has agreed to expunge any and all documents and/or references to the current investigation of disciplinary action or the eventssurrounding said incident, from Employee?s personnel file as it was not used in actually determining Employee?s quali?cations for employment, promotion, transfer, additional compensation, tennination or other disciplinary action. In addition, it is understood that therewill he no reference made by the Police Chief about the current investigation of disciplinary action or the events surrounding said incident to any individual inquiring about Employee unless Employee authorizes release of further information in writmg. It is further understood I that the City will place those documents in an investigative file kept by the Chief of Police. If any open records request is made that relates to the release of that ?le, the City shall comply with the requirements set forth in ?19.356 Wis. Stats. prior to the release of any such record. Additionally, this Agreement is not to be placed in Employee?s personnel ?le. Unemployment Insurance. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, above, for unemployment insurance purposes only, the parties agree that the Employee?s separation hem the City will be considered a resignation in lieu of termination, and therefore does net constitute a ?voluntary termination of work? under Wis. Stats. The parties agree that this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of employee?s rights to pursue or receive unemployment insurance benefits after the Separation Date, nor does this Agreement guarantee Employee the receipt of such unemployment insurance bene?ts. The City agrees it will not appear at any Hearing .to determine eligibility for unemployment insurance bene?ts after the Separation Date, unless it receives a subpoena to do so. Property Exchange. ?At the time Employee presents this Agreement to the Police Chief for execution, all of Employee?s personal property currently in the possession of the Police Department will be returned to Employee, if otherwise allowed by law. in 3 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 16. addition, any Department equipment still in the possession of the Employee will be returned to the Department at that same time. No Reemployment. Employee aclmowledges and agrees that the City will not reernploy him as a law enforcement of?cer. If Employee does seek such employment, Employee understands and agrees that the City will be under no obligation to process Employee?s application. Nonprescrith Setting and Waiver of Association Claims. The parties agree this Agreement is the product and result of unique facts and circumstances. This Agreement shall not serve as a precedent for any party with regard to any other circumstances or claims. The Association agrees that it waives any right to file any grievance, prohibited practice claim or any other claim related to Employee?s employment or the separation thereof. Association Acknowledgement. The Association signs this agreement only as to the extent this agreement discusses rights covered under the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City and the Association, and any related state'or federal laws enforcing the same. The Association's signature does not indicate any opinion by its representatives, agents, or employees regarding the rights Association member may have under any state, federal or local law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of any protected class, or which prohibit retaliation in any way related to the ?ling of such a claim. Neither the Association, nor its representatives, agents, nor employees make any representation by their signature of Employee?s rights under any such claim. Duty of Fair Representation. Employee acknowledges that the Association has met its Duty of Fair Representation to him and has represented his interests fairly, impartially and without discrimination. Acceptance. Employee acknowledges that he had suf?cient time to read this Agreement and consider acceptance of it and voluntarily enters into this Agreement with full knowledge of its meaning and with the speci?c intention of resolving all outstanding matters with the City. In entering into this Agreement, Employee is relying on his own judgment and knowledge and not on representations or statements made by the City, its employees or agents. No Admission ?Of Liability. The parties? participation in this Agreement is not an admission of wrongdoing or liability by either party. Choice of Law and Entire Agreement. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties as to issues provided in this Agreement. Headings are for convenience of the parties and shall not affect the interpretation or application of this Agreement. Sayerahility. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds any provision of this Agreement illegal or unenforceable, the offending provision be deemed amended or deleted to I the extent necessary to con?rm to the applicable law. 4 . . 17. Counteggarts. This Agreement may be eXecuted in counterparts and shall be as effective as if executed on one document. Facsimile signatures shall be as effective and valid as original signatures. IN WITNESS THEREFORE, the undersigned ?rrtber state that they have carefully read the foregoing Agreement, know and understand its contents and sign the same under their own free will, being duly authorized to do so. Date E/e/aere 'Date 5:5 9 7% Date City of Marsh?eld gang, i were sagas-a efb?avarsb?eld Police Of?cer Bargaining Unit Sbott Schlei Mg? . .ww . APPENDDE A DEPARTMENT Dear Of?cer Scott Schlei has been employed as a Police Of?cer with the Marsh?eld Police Department from June 8, 1998. While employed at the Marsh?eld Police Department, Of?cer Schlei held positions of Patrol Of?cer, Canine Handler, Field Training Of?cer, Drug Investigator, Firearms Instructor, EVOC Instructor, and Vehicle Contacts Instructor. He has received appropriate certi?cations and additional training through the Department for all of these positions. Of?cer Schlei was a main force in starting the Canine Program at the Department, and has been recognized by the Wisconsin Law Enforcement Canine Handlers Association on three occasions. He received three awards: Rookie Handler of the Year, Meritorious Canine Apprehension and Meritorious Article Find. Of?cer Schlei has resigned from the Department effective July 30, 2016 to pursue other job opportunities. The Department wishes him well in his ?lture endeavors. Sincerely, Chief Rick Gramza Scott Schlei July 30, 2016 Chief Rick Gramza Marsh?eld Police Department 110 West Street Marsh?eld, WI 54449 Dear Chief Gramza: E?eetive the end of business on this date, I hereby resign from my position with the City of Marsh?eid Police Depmtment. I have appreciated this opportunity to serve this Department and the people of the City of Marsh?eld. . Sincerely, fe. 'Scotl; Schlei From: Rac'hu, Jennifer Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 4:55 PM To: Berg, Steve - Subject: FW: Final Agreement Attachments: Marshfield Schlei Signed Sev Agr and Letter.pdf;ATT00001.htm From: James R. Korom Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 4:54 PM To: Gramza, Rick;r Rachu, Jennifer Subject: Fwd: Final Agreement The deal is done. Please sign andvsend copies to me and to Andy Schauer. Make arrangements for the property exchange as described in Andy's email. I will confirm that we are not going to make any affirmative public comments except to comply with the Open Records Law. This is a good result in my world. i know this was your ?rst rodeo, but you held the Department to a high standard with little emotional cost to the City. The financial terms are likely cheaper than the cost of litigation, and with a certain outcome. Good work. Sent from my mobile phone. Begin forwarded message: From: Andrew Schauer Date: March 9, 2016 at 5:40:30 PM EST To: "James R. Korom" Gary Wisbrocker Subject: RE: Final Agreement James, Attached please find in one the Agreement signed by Scott and myself on behalf of the local Association, as well as a resignation letter dated July 30, 2016 for his personnel file. i have been given speci?c authority to sign the Agreement on behalf of the local Association by its local president, Jason Parks. With Gary Wisbrocker on vacation, 1 would ask that you ask the Chief to set up a time with Scott through Jason to schedule an exchange of department and personal property. have confirmed with Jason that he can be present to help Scott through that process. Please send me a copy of the fully?executed Agreement upon your receipt of the same. Finally, please also confirm our understanding from our earlier discussion with regard to the Chief not making any press release or affirmative statement to the press regarding this matter. This went a long way to reassure us that this Chief is not looking to keep him from being employed in another department, and that assurance helped get us to this resolution; If you have any questions about the above orthe attached, please do not hesitate to contact me. 1 . Best, Andy Andrew D. Schauer Staff Attorney Wisconsin Professional Police Association 660 John Nolen Drive, Suite 300 Madison, Wisconsin 53713-1469 Office: 608.273.3840 Fax: 608.273.3904 From: James R. Korom Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 4:37 PM To: Andrew Schauer Cc: Gramza, Rick; Rachu, Jennifer Subject: Final Agreement Dear Andy, Attached is the final agreement. I have added 16 hours to the payout of his leave banks. I also added a sentence in paragraph 2 indicating the City will issue the necessary COBRA letter we discussed. If his wife?s carrier needs any specific language, just have Scott work with HR to get him what they need. I asked the Chief about the Concealed Carry issue again, but we decided not to add the language back in. I hope that is not a deai?brea ker in light of the movement we?ve shown on the other issues. If this is acceptable, please have Scott and the Local contact the Chief directly to schedule a time and place for the property exchange and signature of the Agreement. Thanks for all your hard work in resolving this. - James R. Korom. von Briesen Roper, s.c. 411 East Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Direct: 414?287-1231 Fax: 414-238?6588 jkorom@vonbriesen.com vcard bio vonbriesencom This emaii is from a tayv ?rm and is intended oniy for the use of those to whom it is addressed. it may contain information that is privileged, confidentiai or protected by iaw. if you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, dupiication or distribution of this emaii, its centents or any attachments is strictiy prohibited if you have received this emaii in error; piease notify us immediateiy by repiying to the message and then deiete instances of the message and attachments. intemet communications are not assured to be secure or ciear oi inaccuracies as information couid be intercepted, corrupted, iost, destroyed, arrive iate or incompiete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore, we do not accept for any errors or omissions that are present in this emaii, or any attachment, that have arisen as a resuit of e?mait transmission. This emaii is from a iaw ?rm and is intended oniy for the use of those to whom it is addressed it may contain. information that is priviieged, confidentiai or protected by iaw. it you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, dupiication or distribution of this emaii, its contents or any attachments is strictiy prohibited. if you have reCeived this emaii in error, piease notify us immediateiy by repiying to the message and then deiete instances of the message and attachments. tnternet communications are not assured to be secure or ciear of inaccuracies as information couid be intercepted, corrupted, iost, destroyed, arrive iate or incompiete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore, we do not accept for any errors or omissions that are present in this emaii, or any attachment, that have arisen as a resuit of e?maii transmission. Rachu, Jennifer From: James R. Korom Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 4:57 PM To: Andrew Schauer Cc: Gary Wisbrocker; Rachu, Jennifer; Gramza, Rick Subject: Re: Final Agreement Thank you. i can confirm the Chief will not be making any public comments or press releases about this matter. We will reply to Open Records requests as they come in. As the Agreement specifies, you will get notices of any contemplated document releases before they occur. Sent from my mobile phone. On Mar 9, 2016, at 5:40 PM, Andrew Schauer wrote: James, Attached please find in one the Agreement signed by Scott and myself on behalf ofthe local Association, as well as a resignation letter dated July 30, 2016 for his personnel file. have been given specific authority to sign the Agreement on behalf of the local Association by its local president, Jason Parks. With Gary Wisbrocker on vacation, I would ask that you ask the Chief to set up a time with Scott through Jason to schedule an exchange of department and personal property. have confirmed with Jason that he can be present to help Scott through that process. Please send me a copy of the fully-executed Agreement upon your receipt of the same. Finally, please also confirm our understanding from our earlier discussion with regard to the Chief not making any press release or af?rmative statement to the press regarding this matter. This went a long way to reassure us that this Chief is not looking to keep him from being employed in another department, and that assurance helped get us to this resolution. If you have any questions about the above or the attached, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best, Andy Andrew D. Schauer Staff Attorney Wisconsin Professional Police Association 860 John Nolen Drive, Suite 300 Madison, Wisconsin 53713-1489 Office: 808.273.3840 Fax: 808.273.3904 aschauer@wppa.com From: James R. Korom Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 4:37 PM To: Andrew Schauer Cc: Gramza, Rick; Rachu, Jennifer Subject: Final Agreement Dear Andy, Attached is the final agreement. i have added 16 hours to the payout of his leave banks. 1 also added a sentence in paragraph 2 indicati we discussed. If his wife?s carrier needs any specific language, justuhave?usdcott work with HR to get him what they need. I asked the Chief about the Concealed Carry issue again, but we decided not to add the language back in. i hope that is not a deal-breaker in light ofthe movement we?ve shown on the other issues. . rush?..- If this is acceptable, please have Scott and the Local contact theChief directly to schedule a time and place for the property exchange and signature of the Agreement. Thanks for ali your hard work in resolving this. James R. Korom von Briesen Roper, s.c. 411 East Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Direct: 414?287-1231 Fax: 414-238-6588 jkorom@vonbriesen.com lvcard bio vonbriesencom This emaii is from a iaw ?rm and is intended oniy for the use of those to whom it is addressed it may contain information that is priviieged confidentiai or protected by iaw. if you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, dupiication or distribution of this emaii, its contents or any attachments is strictiy prohibited. if you have receii'red this emaii in error, piease notiij/ us immediater'y by repiying to the message and then deiete instances of the message and attachments. internet communications are not assured to be secure or ciear of inaccuracies as information couid be intercepted corrupted, iost, destroyed, arrive iate or incompiete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore, we do not accept for any errors or omissions that are present in this emaii, or any attachment, that have arisen as a resuit of e-maii transmission. wrote: James, Attached please find in one Agreement signed by Scott and myself on behalf of the local Association, as well as a resignation letter dated July 30, 2016 for his personnel file. I have been given specific authority to sign the Agreement on behalf of the local Association by its local president, Jason Parks. With Gary Wisbrocker on vacation, I would ask that you ask the Chief to set up a time with Scott through Jason to schedule an exchange of department and personal property. have confirmed with Jason that he can be present to help Scott through that process. Please send me a copy of the fully?executed Agreement upon your receipt of the same. Finally, please also confirm our understanding from our earlier discussion with regard to the Chief not making any press release or affirmative statement to the press regarding this matter. This went a long way to reassure us that this Chief is not looking to keep him from being employed in another department, and that assurance helped get us to this resolution. If you have any questions about the above or the attached, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best, Andy Andrew D. Schauer Staff Attorney Wisconsin Professional Police Association 660 John Nolen Drive, Suite 300 Madison, Wisconsin 53713-1469 Office: 808.273.8840 Fax: 608.273.3904 From: James R. Korom Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 4:37 PM To: Andrew Schauer Cc: Gramza, Rick; Rachu, Jennifer Subject: Final Agreement Dear Andy, Attached is the final agreement. have added 16 hours to the payout of his leave banks. I also added a sentence in paragraph 2 indicating the City will issue the necessary COBRA letter we discussed. If his wife?s carrier needs any specific language, just have Scott work with HR to get him what they need. I asked the Chief about the Concealed Carry issue again, but we decided not to add the language back in. I hope that is not a deal-breaker in light of the movement we?ve shown on the other issues. if this is acceptable, please have Scott and the Local contact the Chief directly to schedule a time and place for the property exchange and signature of the Agreement. Thanks for all your hard work in resolving this. James R. Korom von Briesen 8: Reper, s.c. 41?] East Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Direct: 414?287?1231 Fax: 414-238-6588 [voard bio \ronbriesencom This email is from a law tirm and is intended only for the use of those to whom it is addressed. lt may contain information that is con?dential or protected by law. it you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, duplication or distribution of this email, its contents or any attachments is strictly prohibited. it you have received this email in error, please notin us immediateiy by repiying to the message and then delete all instances of the message and attachments. intemet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information couid be intercepted corrupted, lost, destroyed, am've late or incomplete, or contain unintended maiware. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e?mail transmission. This email is from a law firm and is intended only for the use of those to whom it is addressed. it may contain information that is privileged, confidential or protected by law. if you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, duplication or distribution of this emaii, its contents or any attachments is strictly prohibited. if you have received this email in error, piease notify us immediately by replying to the message and then delete ail instances of the message and attachments. lntemet communications are not assured to be secure or ciear of inaccuracies as infonnation could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arn'ire late or incomplete, or contain unintended malware. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission. any on MARSHEIELD THE WSHFIELB mum cartons BARGAINING Inns? nun scan sense: THIS AGREEMENT is made and is effective as of the date of execution (the ?Effective Date?) by and between the City of Marsh?eld (the ?City?), the Marsh?eld Police Of?cer Bargaining Unit, represented by the Wisconsin Professional Police Association. (collectively the ?Association?) and Scott Schlei (?Employee?). WHEREAS, Employee is employed by the City as a Patrol Of?cer; WHEREAS, the parties Wish to resolve all matters amicably by entering into this full and ?nal settlement agreement wherein Employee resigns based Upon the conditions set forth herein; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mama] promises herein contained and other valuable consideration, the receipt and suf?ciency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: -1. Benetton hated-fa nitrate-and Bane'fiis, The Employee and the City agree the Employee's voluntary and irrevocable resignation is effective on July 30, 2016 (the ?Separation Date?). Employee shall submit, at the time this Agreement is executed by him, a separate lettet of resignation effective on July 30, 2016, for inclusion in his personnel ?le. Employee shall remain on paid administrative leave until his Separation Date, and shall receive pay and bene?ts through this date (except as provided in paragraph 2, below) as provided in the collective bargaining agreement between the City and the Association, except his current hourly rate shall not increase on July 1, 2016. In consideration for the Employee's promises and obligations under this Agreement, Employee's employment shall terminate on the Separation Date and the City shall pay Employee his accrued but unused vacation, compensatory time off, and personal leave that was accrued on date of execution of this Agreement (a total of 306 hours, including 160 hours of vacation to be awarded on his June 8, 2016 aimiversary date), udthin 10 business days of June 8, 2016. Health Insurance. Employee understands and agrees that, in consideration of his promises and obligations under this Agreement, the City shall continue to cover the Employee and his family under, and pay the Employer?s share of the premiums of Employee?s current health and dental insurance to the extent provided in the applicable City policies and collective bargaining agreement and paid in accordance as if he was on active duty through April 30, 2016. As of May 1, 2016, the parties recognize that Employee and his family will be removed from such coverage. This obligation shall cease if Employee obtains alternate employment offering employer-paid health insurance bene?ts comparable to those offered by the City. Employee understands and agrees the City has no obligation to continue Employee?s bene?ts or pay Employee?s premiums for other bene?ts beyond his Separation Date. For purposes of state and federal insurance continuation laws, including COBRA, May 1, 2016 shall be considered the ?Qualifying Event.? The City agrees to issue a separate letter to the Employee verifying there has been a change of circumstances affecting Employees health insurance coverage as that tennis understood under COBRA, and to cooperate to the extent necessary to ensure his eligibility for coverage under his spouse?s health insurance plan. Employee acknowledges stated in this Agreement, and hereby waives any other rights to compensation or bene?ts from the City. 3. ?Waiver andReleas-e. In consideration of the City?s obligations and promises under this Kgreement, Employee doos hereby fully and forever discharge and release the City, which includes all departments and agencies, and all of the fore going's past and present employees, of?cials, agents, representatives, insurers, and attorneys, from any and all actions, causes of action, claims, demands, damages (including but not limited to punitive damages), costs, expenses, attorney fees, and compensation on account of, or in any way growing out of any and all kno an and damage resulting to or to result from any action bythe City which arose before the date of the execution of this Agreement. By way of example only and without in any way limiting the generality of the foregoing language, Employee?s release shall include all claims for relief or causes of action under the collective bargaining agreement, Title V11 of the Civil Rights Act. of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. ?2000e, et seq., the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. ?121'01, et seq; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. ??791, 793 and 794; the Civil Rights Enforcement Statutes, 42 U.S.C. 1931 through 1988; Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 ESE. ?1001, et seq.; the National Labor Relations Act; 29 U.S.0 ?151, et seq; the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. ?651 et seq.; the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 U.S.C. ?2601 et seq.; the Wisconsin Fair Employment Laws, 111.33 et seq., Wis. State; the Wisconsin Family and Medical Leave Act, ?103.10 Wis. Stats; and any other federal, state or local statute, ordinance, or regulation dealing in any respect with discrimination or termination of employment, and, in addition, from all claims, demands, or actions brought on the basis of alleged mongful or retaliatory discharge, breach of an oral or written contract, misrepresentation, defamation, interference with contract or intentional or negligent in?iction of emotional distress, damage to business or professional reputation, conspiracy, negligence, invasion of privacy, or any intentional tort or negligence claim or contract claim of any sort under the common law of any state or other jurisdiction. The parties Understand and agree this Agreement does not waive Employee?s right or ability to ?le charges or participate in an investigation with the Equal Employment Opportunity the Department of Labor and the State of Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. The parties understand and agree Employee waives any right to and shall not accept or recover any monetary damages or any other=-' damages or anything of value from the City as a result of ?ling such charges, participating in any investigation or proceeding, or for any related claim, action or judgment against the City. Employee agrees that in the event he or another person on his behalf, receives any money or bene?t as a result of such investigation, charge or proceeding or related claim, action or judgment, that is paid by the City, then Employee shall indemnify and fully reimburse the City for any amounts paid to employee or on his behalf within ten days of the receiptof such payment. The parties also understand and agree that this Agreement does not waive or release any Worker?s Compensation claim. Emp'loment?eferences. The City?s Chief of Police agrees to provide Employee with a letter of Reference substantially similar to that contained in Appendix A, attached to this Agreement. Employee agrees to direct all requests for references and other employment! related information to the Chief of Police, and the City agrees to direct all requests for background checks of the Employee to the Chief of Police. For all employment references after July 30, 2016, the Chief of Police will provide information consistent with that letter, the agreed to personnel ?le, and no other information unless Employee authorizes release of further information in writing. For all employment references before July 30, 2016, the Chief of Police will not provide the letter attached as Appendix A itself, but will provide the same information, either verbally or in 1visiting, except that he shall refer not refer to the Employee as having resigned, but as still employed by the Deparmdent. j??a?iihi?erstlig. The parties recognize that ownership of the K9 named Arco has already been relinquished by the City to the Employee, and complete ownership and responsibility for Arco shall remain with the Employee. The City has agreed to expunge any and all documents andfor references to'the current investigation of disciplinary action or the events surrounding said incident, horn Employee?s personnel tile as it was not used in actually determining Employee?s quali?cations for employment, promotion, transfer, additional compensation, tennination or other disciplinary action. In addition, it is understood that there will be no reference made by the Police Chief about the current investigation of disciplinary action or the events surrounding said incident to any individual inquiring about Employee unless Employee authorizes release of further information in writing. It is further understood that the City will place those docmnents in an investigative tile kept by the Chief of Police. Ifany open records request is made that relates to the releaso of that ?le, the City shall comply with the requirements set forth in 56 Wis. Stats. prior to the release of any such record. Additionally, this Agreement is not to be placed in Employee's personnel file. "insurance. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, above, for unemployment insurance purposes only, the parties agree that the Employee?s separation from the City will be considered a resignation in lieu of termination, and therefore does not constitute a - ?voluntary tennination of work" under Wis. Stats. The parties agree that this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of employee?s rights to pursue or receive unemployment insurance bene?ts aiter the Separation Date, nor does this Agreement guarantee Employee the receipt of such unemployment insurance bene?ts. The City agrees it will not appear at any Hearing to determine eligibility for unemployment insurance bene?ts after the Separation Date, unless it receives a subpoena to do so. Etc er At the time Employee presents this Agreement to the Police Chief for eXecution, all of Employee?s personal property currently in the possession of the Police Department will be returned to Employee, if otherwise allowed by law. In 3 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. is, 16;r addition, any Department equipment still in the possession of the Employee will be retomed to the Department at that seine time. sneeze referrer. Employee acknowledges and agrees that the City will not reemploy him as a law enforcement of?cer. IfEmploye-e does seek such employment, Employee understands and agrees that the City will be under no obligation to process Employee?s application. ?ennre?ce?tlent "Eating: and ?inherent Association Claims. The parties agree this Agreement is the product and result of unique facts and circumstances. This Agreement shall not serve as a precedent for any party with regard to any other circumstances or claims. The Association agrees that it waives any right to ?le any grievance, prohibited practice claim or any other claim related to Employee?s employment or the separation thereof. .?lssociatica Acknowledgement. The Association signs this agreement only as to the extent this agreement discusses rights covered under the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City and the Association, and any related state or federal laws enforcing the same. The Association?s signature does not indicate any opinion by its representatives, agents, or employees regarding the rights Association member may have under any state, federal or local law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of any protected class, or which prohibit retaliation in any way related to the ?ling of such a claim. Neither the Association, nor its representatiVes, agents, nor employees make any representation by their signature ofEmployee?s rights under any such claim. Duty?sitsli?air Representation. Employee acknowledges that the Association has met its Duty of Fair Representation to him and has represented his interests fairly, impartially and without discrimination. Ease; Employee acknowledges that he had sufficient time to read this Agreement and consider acceptance of it and voluntarily enters into this Agreement with full knowledge of its meaning and with the speci?c intention of resolving all outstanding matters with the City. In entering into this Agreement, Employee is relying on his own judgment and knowledge and not on representations or statements made by the City, its employees or agents. 3% arithin?ssion of t" The parties? participation in this Agreement is not an admission of wrongdoing or liability by either party. Entire Agreement. This Agreems?t Shall b3 con?rmed and enforced under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties as to issues provided in this Agreement. Headings are for convenience of the parties and shall not affect the interpretation or application of this Agreement. If a court of competent jurisdiction ?nds any provision of this Agreement illegal or unenforceable, the offending provision will be deemed amended or deleted to the extent necessary to con?rm to the applicable law. 4 2521rzsg?r?cocx 41nd? nn- ammo?seam?. v- m-i. nun?n- 17. ??izilf?g This Agreement may be executed in .counte1parts and shall be as e??ee?ve as if executed on one document. Facsimile signatures shall be as effective and valid as original signatures. IN WITNESS THEREFORE, the undersigned ?Lr?'ler state that they have carefully read the foregoing Agreement, know and understand its contents and Sign the same under their own free will, being duly authorized to do so.: a . - . geese Data I ?i?ga axsh?eld Police Of?cer Bargaining Unit - Date ?Soott Selilei 5 2321735041300)? APPENDIX A Deer. . Of?cer Scott Sehlei has been employed as a Police Of?cer with the Marsh?-eld Poh'ce Deparhnent from June 8, 1998. While employed at the Marsh?eld Police Department, Of?cer Schiei held positions of Patrol Of?cer, Canine Handler, Field Training Of?cer, Drug' Investigator, Firearms Instructor, EVOC Instructor, and Vehicle Contacts Instructor. He has received certi?cations and additional training through the Department for all of these positions. Officer Schlei was a main force in starting the Canine Program at the Department, and has been recognized by the Wisconsin Law Enforcement Canine Handlers Associationcn three occasions. He received. three aWards: Rookie Handler of the Year, Meritorious Canine Apprehension and Meritorious Article Find. I Of?cer Schlei has resigned from the Department e?'ective July 30, 2016 to pursue other job opportunities. .The Department wiShes him well in his ?tture endeavors. Sincerely, Chief Rich Gramza . ?Han?Humb- Scott Sehlei Ju1y30, 2016 Chief Rick Gramza Marsh?eld Police Department 110 West 1 st Street Marsh?eld, WI 54449 Dear Chief Gramza: E??eotive the end of business on this date: I hereby resign ?om my position with the City of Marsh?eld Police Department. I have appreciated this op?ortunity to serve this Department and the people of the City of Marsh?eld. Sincerely, I fe. Scott Schlei .. Hih?'m? .. ..