Small town mayor against small town police chief. Are we surprised that politics and grudges are involved? Hell, the town I grew up in (about 3800 people) was rife with this kind of stuff. A lot of it was probalby illegal, but it really wasn't a good idea to stir the waters, if you know what I mean.

In fact, we had one private detective who was investigating the police department and he was found shot in the back of the head, behind the ear on a country road and it was ruled a suicide.

Barney Fife?

/however you spell it

"I can do anything. I'm the chief of police."

I'm curious about what the mayor did that supposedly demonstrated signs of intoxication.

The article indicates that the police chief could "smell an odor of alcohol on the mayor." This was conveniently discovered during what sounds like the mayor arguing with this guy, who works as both the police chief and the fire chief. Without having any other information on the subject, and reading between the lines, it sounds like the police/fire chief tried to be an asshole while arguing with the mayor and he got his ass kicked for it.

Now, he's fishing for a settlement from the town - especially as the asshole chief is now trying to invoke the Whistleblower Act. There was no illegal activity on the part of the mayor, so I'm hard-pressed to see how that has any friggin' relevance.

The mayor needs to kick his ass again, in court.

HideAndGoFarkYourself: Your thinking is backwards.

Exactly what I thought. I don't see how anyone could take the mayor's side based on the information given. It is possible (since the mayor won't comment) that there is more to the story.

But based on a few of the authority figures I have encountered in my time, I have no trouble believing the cop's story. It was proved that the mayor was drinking, just not enough to be illegal. But you couldn't know that unless you checked.

While I can easily see this happening I can not see why. I could see the mayor going up the the cop and saying "That was a dick move having me tested". But what makes him think he has the right to fire someone just because they do something you personally don't like? Being mayor is not like owning your own business.

possibly the mayor and the cop/police and fire chief have been butting heads for a while. It was claimed that the mayor drove to the firehouse and was belligerent. Sounds like he was already mad at the chief for something.

Weaver95: HideAndGoFarkYourself:
You'd rather have an officer who disregards signs of intoxication on someone just because its an elected official and allows them to do whatever they please, including drive to and from the place they're making a scene?

Your thinking is backwards.

He couldn't be trusted if he'd done nothing about it. He did his job, the mayor is a farkwit and should be forced to resign or impeached.

Did you read the part of the article where it said the Mayor wasn't drunk?

the cop tried to bully the mayor and got fired for it. done deal - next time the cop won't try to be a dick.

If he smelled alcohol, he was duty-bound to check the drivers BAC was below the legal limit. Not to mention that if the mayor was acting in his capacity as fire cheif he should not have been drinking at all. The cop was acting well within his authority.

As far as the "continually disregarding city policy" charge, well that sounds an awful lot like giving someone you dont like a poor performance review and firing them. I'd very much like to hear what (if any) the previous instances of "disregard for policy" were. I mean sure cops can be power tripping assholes, but this seems pretty transparent.

Weaver95: the cop tried to bully the mayor and got fired for it. done deal - next time the cop won't try to be a dick.

Even if all your assumptions are true. Why would a mayor have the right to fire someone who bullied them? Public servants work for the public, not the mayor. To fire them you have to show just cause. If they were abusive, prove it and they're gone. But you can't just decide to fire anyone you want.

Crocodilly_Pontifex: If he smelled alcohol, he was duty-bound to check the drivers BAC was below the legal limit. Not to mention that if the mayor was acting in his capacity as fire cheif he should not have been drinking at all. The cop was acting well within his authority.

Sure, but it was the chief of police (Gipson) who was also the fire chief, so that "if" is irrelevant.

FormlessOne: The article indicates that the police chief could "smell an odor of alcohol on the mayor." This was conveniently discovered during what sounds like the mayor arguing with this guy, who works as both the police chief and the fire chief. Without having any other information on the subject, and reading between the lines, it sounds like the police/fire chief tried to be an asshole while arguing with the mayor and he got his ass kicked for it.

The mayor was drinking. That was proven. He was not legally drunk, but he did have booze in his system. How could a trained cop not notice that?

Sound to me like the mayor has a bad case of "the laws don't apply to me".

Weaver95: small town. the mayor pretty much CAN do whatever the f*ck he wants.

You have never worked for any government, have you?

No Catchy Nickname: Sure, but it was the chief of police (Gipson) who was also the fire chief, so that "if" is irrelevant.

Oops. Comprehension fail. My bad.

And if the police chief had smelled alcohol and done nothing and that mayor had wrecked a city owned vehicle and hurt someone he would have been run out of town on a rail. If he blew even a .04, he should not have been driving a city vehicle.

Crocodilly_Pontifex: Oops. Comprehension fail. My bad.

I had to read it twice to check.
It's funny how we don't really pay attention to the names, unless it's someone we know.

Does anyone even know what .04 BAC looks like? There is a reason the level is .08 and that is MADD. A BAC of .04 can almost be reached by thinking of alcohol. The mayor's alcohol level was LEGAL, even to operate a vehicle with. So, the police chief/fire chief/general farktard can smell all he wants, but by law, the mayor was SOBER. You can think that the chief was "just doing his job", but if he had been doing it for so many years, he knew the guy wasn't impaired when he started the "I'm a cop, you must submit to my authority" routine.

Doing his duty? They were both being dicks, and the biggest dick won. The cop though, answers to the mayor, not the public, as the cop wasn't elected.

/hate small town cops
//never pulled over by a small town mayor
///sounds like they both are weeners

Town police for 2200 residents? The town where I grew up had 8000 residents and no local police.

Crocodilly_Pontifex: Weaver95: HideAndGoFarkYourself:
You'd rather have an officer who disregards signs of intoxication on someone just because its an elected official and allows them to do whatever they please, including drive to and from the place they're making a scene?

Your thinking is backwards.

He couldn't be trusted if he'd done nothing about it. He did his job, the mayor is a farkwit and should be forced to resign or impeached.

Did you read the part of the article where it said the Mayor wasn't drunk?

the cop tried to bully the mayor and got fired for it. done deal - next time the cop won't try to be a dick.

If he smelled alcohol, he was duty-bound to check the drivers BAC was below the legal limit. Not to mention that if the mayor was acting in his capacity as fire cheif he should not have been drinking at all. The cop was acting well within his authority.

As far as the "continually disregarding city policy" charge, well that sounds an awful lot like giving someone you dont like a poor performance review and firing them. I'd very much like to hear what (if any) the previous instances of "disregard for policy" were. I mean sure cops can be power tripping assholes, but this seems pretty transparent.

Not only that, but the article says he called the state police to come do the test. It's not like he abused power and threw the mayor in the drunk tank. He followed procedure.

Junction City has a Police Chief?

That implies that they have more than one police officer. Not bad for what's pretty much a wide spot on 127.

Stone: You can't tell me what to do.

Town Council: But we can fire you.

Stone: Yes. But you can't tell me what to do.

I have a friend that got pulled over by the cop in the small town I grew up in (for 10 years anyway) and she still lives in. The cop said to her, ~"now (her name), if I pull you over again and you still have that beer in your lap I might have to put you in handcuffs and take you to jail", followed by laughter. That's a good timing small town, IF you are a local. That was a couple years ago, and it has gotten stricter since. My parents still live there and my Mom was talking to the new chief a few months ago. Currently, if you come from one of the two bars or a party a little buzzed, your OK as long as you park it at home. If you try to drunk drive out of town they will stop you.

You just don't fark with your neighbors in a small town. The small town cop's job is to keep things somewhat orderly and sorta safe, but just don't stick your nose too far into everyone's business. A cop that is a stiff-shirt complete dork need not apply.

Police/Fire Chief???? How can that be? 2 really different things...

HideAndGoFarkYourself: You'd rather have an officer who disregards signs of intoxication

Half the people at or above the driving limit don't show any obvious "signs of intoxication", or at least not enough to make you suspect they're a particularly large danger to other drivers/etc. Do you really expect me to believe that someone under the limit showed enough "signs of intoxication" to justify calling the cops and having him tested after the fact?

Weaver95: HideAndGoFarkYourself:
You'd rather have an officer who disregards signs of intoxication on someone just because its an elected official and allows them to do whatever they please, including drive to and from the place they're making a scene?

Your thinking is backwards.

He couldn't be trusted if he'd done nothing about it. He did his job, the mayor is a farkwit and should be forced to resign or impeached.

Did you read the part of the article where it said the Mayor wasn't drunk?

the cop tried to bully the mayor and got fired for it. done deal - next time the cop won't try to be a dick.

The cop suspected that the mayor was intoxicated and smelled an alcoholic beverage on his breath. The state police breathalyzer him and found his BAC was .04. So the chief did have a good reason to call the cops. You obviously failed to read the article.

Much as I loathe and despise most cops, the Chief was in the right in this case.

The Mayor was driving a city vehicle, showed up acting like an ass, and smelled like booze. I'd have had him blow into the machine, too.

It pains me to say this, but... give... the... man... (choke)... his... job... (gasp)... back.