Town Council President Ken Sicard’s response to Bieker

I, along with the rest of the Town Council and Town Manager listened quietly at the May 14th meeting of the Ferdinand Town Council as then Chief Bieker presented his four-page statement.

Out of respect for his years of service with the Town of Ferdinand, we chose not to argue or contradict anything he said.

It was felt that, even though we all knew this would be difficult, it would be an issue and then pass. The continued attack upon the Town Council and the Town Manager now demands a response.

It is time to correct the inaccurate statements and innuendos that are being editorially-printed and, ultimately, perceived as real news.

First, I feel it is important to defend Marc Steczyk, our Town Manager. In my opinion, there is a focused attempt to lay blame at his feet so as to pull attention away from that which is the simple truth-the Ferdinand Town Council replaced the former Chief. My vote was due to specifically management issues.

Marc reports and interacts with Town Council members on a daily basis and provides us with a summary of each week’s activities every Friday afternoon. He is held accountable by the Ferdinand Town Council, specifically, me as the Town Council president.

Concerning the statement that Marc Steczyk has not been trained in Indiana law, my response is NOT TRUE. He has received instruction and training on municipal law through IACT and IMMA workshops, conferences, seminars and online training. Granted, he and I have not been trained in the laws that pertain to the operation of a police force. It would be absurd to think that he or I would try and dictate actual police procedure-that is why we have trained officers.

The comment that “I cannot even purchase items that are approved by the board, over $500.00, unless I receive the written consent of the manager on an approved purchase order” -this is absolutely true for ALL department supervisors in the Town of Ferdinand. It is per Town Ordinance and the manager’s written signature is required on the purchase order form.

Concerning overtime: it was stated that the Town Manager verbally told the Police Department to do whatever we had to work it out but not exceed 84 hours (per officer) per pay period. This is absolutely true. What is not mentioned is that Marc fought extremely hard on behalf of the Police Department to add the sixth officer to the force in 2009-and his main selling point, one that the former chief agreed upon at the time, was that, even though it was adding a man to the force, it would actually save the Town money by cutting excessive and unwieldy overtime costs. Council approved the hiring and it was well understood by all parties-Marc, Ted, and the other officers-that overtime had to be kept to a minimum to make the sixth officer position work. The attempt to limit overtime where possible was a complete Council initiative and continues to be so to this day.

The comments about Marc dictating police procedures are NOT TRUE. At the request of Council members and, in some circumstances, to address specific complaints made by officers, Marc has pushed to get gear ordered out of concern for officer safety, officer verification requests pushed through, letters written, and has attempted to follow-up to lack of response on Council member requests (a vehicle replacement plan, Department inventory, updates in the Police Department’s out of date set of Standard Operating Procedures and their General Orders).

The only time Marc asked an officer to do something that would relate to police procedures dealt with a situation that occurred during a recent Town Wide Yard Sale. This request fell within the responsibilities of a Town Manager ‘(as defined by the State of Indiana and the Town of Ferdinand). The situation was handled by the officer as directed. The Chief, who was not available at the time, was upset because he wasn’t contacted first.

The claim that Marc is disrespectful to Town employees has been particularly disheartening to him. In speaking to Marc, he feels that he does his best on a weekly and monthly basis to point out the positives that each department has accomplished-privately to Council members and publicly through the Town Manager Notes section in the Ferdinand News, a monthly radio show on WITZ, and through press releases touting individual and departmental accomplishments.

He, admittedly, is critical of employee actions if they are not constructive to Ferdinand’s goals, mission, and vision-and, most importantly, if they differ from policy that Council has directed staff to adhere by. In most cases, that criticism comes from behind a closed door and is based upon confidential and frank conversations with a supervisor that he assumes is portraying actions, comments, etc., to the most accurate of his or her ability. In these cases, this discussion has never been about how someone is as a person, but, rather, how their actions are being portrayed and the effect it has on our organization as a whole.

In looking into these claims further, I met with all the remaining department supervisors to gather their opinions and feedback. The result of these meetings revealed that no other supervisor has any complaints that mirror the former Chief’s.

Now, on to other statements of fact: Concerning budget statements made in the statement and in the letters to the Editor; these were:

• “When officers don’t get the money, it stays in the General Fund to be spent on other projects.”

• “If for some reason the funds go unspent the money is removed before the next year and the new budget begins. It remains unclear as to where the money is reallocated to because it is not spent on things for the police.”

• “Then I wonder … when the police budget is not allowed to be used for the police budget, as though there is no money in the account … ”

My response is that, for someone who was chief for over nine years, he still does not comprehend how the Police Department budget works. Monies not spent remain in the police department budget at the end of the fiscal year. Our new budget each year reflects only the monies that can be spent from the taxes that we expect to receive in that fiscal year. Our Clerk Treasurer gives the Chief (and all department supervisors) updated figures on a monthly basis.

We have NEVER removed money from the Police budget for other purposes. If we would ever want to do that, we would meet with the department to explain the what, where, and when and get their buy-in.

The statement that was read at the last meeting and the letters to the Editor lead one to believe that the former Chief had no idea his position was in doubt. Nothing could be further from the truth-the proverbial rug was in no way pulled from this man’s feet. I have records of meeting with the former Chief to discuss ongoing managerial issues and concerns on the following dates (I think it is important to note that these meetings began two years prior to the Town Manager’s arrival and only two years into Ted’s tenure as Chief):

• November 22, 2005
• December 11, 2005
• January 4, 2006
• July 11, 2006
• March 12, 2008
• January 24, 2012
• May 7, 2012
• February 14, 2013
• March 9, 2013
• March 20, 2013
• May 6, 2013

We had other meetings but I didn’t document those dates.

In most meetings, we discussed challenges and recommended changes. After some meetings, I could see improvement, but, gradually, that improvement declined and, in some cases, became worse. In February of this year and after eight years-worth of meetings to try and “right the ship”, I decided it was, finally, time to make a change that would take the department in a more positive direction and improve morale of the officers.

On February 14, I met with him and told him I wanted him to resign and I gave my reasons. I asked him to think about it and get back to me.

On March 9, we met. Ted asked me to talk to all his full time officers. Once done, he asked me to reconsider his position. I agreed.

Over the next two weeks, I met personally with three of the officers. I had a phone conversation with the fourth officer. Each was at least one hour in length. These discussions brought new facts, issues, and concerns to light.

At the April 9 Town Council meeting, I asked for an executive session with the Council. The executive session was held on April 16, with legal counsel present to make sure we complied with all Open Door laws. Chief Bieker’s job performance as chief was thoroughly reviewed.

On May 6, I held a meeting with then Chief Bieker. I advised him that I was requesting a letter of resignation from him to be presented at the next Council meeting.

My last contact with the former Chief was on May 14. I called him, as I was in Indianapolis all day, at noon. We spoke for about 25 minutes.

So, as you can see this final decision did not happen overnight. With the above in mind, there were additional reasons that drove me to ask him to step down as Chief. At this time, the ones that I will make public are as follows.

1. There were management issues within the department. We have a split police force that is divided due to inadequate management practices. This became very evident in my interviews with the officers.

2. Lack of immediate disciplinary actions that needed to be timely.

3. Personnel issues were very evident. A relevant example is where he took personal issues of one reserve officer and shared them with another reserve officer. When this was brought up by the reserve officer that he had heard this, Chief Bieker blamed another full time officer. The reserve then advised him it was not the full time officer but his fellow reserve officer.

4. He was constantly behind in paperwork: SOP update, General Orders update, letters for certifications, and signing officers up for training sessions are some examples.

5. Allowing a reserve officer who was in uniform to attend a community event while carrying a firearm and had yet to attend the pre-basic training; this is a violation of State law.

6. Equipment issues were numerous. As examples:

A. On more than one occasion and with more than one officer, officers were forced to wear outdated/expired bulletproof vests for up to four months simply because they weren’t ordered. This is an officer safety issue.

B. It should be noted that our reserves finally got their badges after two years of being on the force.

C. An officer wrecked a cruiser and, while taking full responsibility for the accident, claimed that heavy window tinting was partly to blame. The officer made a request to the Chief for the tinting to be removed; yet, it took a second accident before the tinting was actually removed.

D. Not getting officers the federal ID that they need to be able to carry their weapons across state lines (we have one officer that still does not have this).

I asked the former Chief to quietly resign, which would have allowed him to step down with honor and be given proper and deserved accolades. He chose not to do this.

I stand by my decision and that decision has the full support of the Town Council.