TPD chief opts not to fire officer who tested positive for drugs over City Hall advice

Tallahassee Police Chief Lawrence Revell decided not to fire an officer who tested positive for a controlled substance while on duty despite the objections from city human resources officials and concerns he may not be fit for duty.

The officer failed an initial drug screen June 3, testing positive for amphetamines, and was placed on leave, according to city documents obtained through a public records request. A second test from the same sample came up positive for the same substance July 7.

However, the officer, whose name was redacted from city records, explained to higher-ups that he tested positive because he had mistakenly taken Adderall belonging to a family member. An outside medical review officer consulting with TPD told Revell that the positive drug test could have been from one-time accidental use of the drug.

The officer himself is an anomaly among city employees — of the 22 who tested positive for a controlled substance over the past two fiscal years, he was the only one who wasn’t terminated.

Revell, who reinstated the officer on July 11, defended the move in a statement to the Tallahassee Democrat.

"Positive tests are taken seriously," Revell said. "In this instance, after careful consideration of all the information and consultation with the medical review officer that included a review of factors related to a prescription medication known to treat ADHD, an employee who tested positive last July was not terminated."

Last month, the officer’s case went before a panel of the Florida Criminal Justice Standards & Training Commission, which has the power to revoke certification for police misconduct. However, the panel, which convened during the commission’s meeting in Lake Mary, found no probable cause for a moral character violation.

Not everyone at City Hall concurred with Revell’s decision. On July 13, Jennifer Hill, city safety administrator, emailed Ellen Blair, director of human resources and workforce development, saying city policy “clearly outlines dismissal” when a “safety sensitive employee” tests positive for a controlled substance. Hill said she spoke with Revell about it on July 8.

“I shared my concern with the chief for retaining the employee as it impacts the integrity of the program, sends the wrong message to the workforce and holds our sworn law enforcement to a lesser standard than general employees in drug testing programs,” Hill wrote.

Blair forwarded Hill’s email July 14 to Assistant City Manager Abena Ojetayo, who oversees HR, saying she agreed with Hill’s assessment. She said confirmation of illegal use of a controlled substance was “a big deal” and could place fellow employees or the public “in harm’s way.” She also wrote that city policy is designed to send a strong message that drug use is not tolerated in the workplace.

“This policy is effective only because employees understand that their employment with the city is conditional upon no drug use,” Blair wrote. “If employees come to understand that drug use is not a cause for termination or is negotiable, the policy is stripped (of) its purpose and effectiveness.”

City Commissioner Jeremy Matlow also expressed concerns about the handling of the officer's case in emails last year with City Manager Reese Goad. Matlow and Goad clashed over whether any information could be given to the commissioner, prompting City Attorney Cassandra Jackson to play referee between the two.

Goad also defended the city's handling of the situation in an email to the Democrat.

"The city’s administrative policies and processes are sound and support our employees who deserve to have all relevant information considered when it comes to personnel matters," he said. "I am proud of our organization’s culture and the way this situation was handled.”

City safety administrator: Appropriate action to take under policy 'is dismissal'

City policy states that employees in safety sensitive jobs, including police officers, who test positive for drugs “will be immediately removed from safety-sensitive duty, dismissed from city employment and referred to a substance abuse professional.”

The city’s collective bargaining agreement with the Police Benevolent Association also has a provision stating that upon confirmation of a positive test result for an illegal substance, the employee “shall be removed from duty, placed on leave without pay status and terminated from city employment.”

However, another provision in the contract, Article 8, offers apparent wiggle room when an officer illegally uses a controlled substance that is not itself illegal. In those cases, employees who test positive are supposed to be removed from duty, placed on leave without pay and “subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination.”

Adderall is a legal prescription drug used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and narcolepsy. A stimulant with euphoric effects, Adderall is known as a "study drug" among some students and can be abused as a party drug. The drug has a "high potential for abuse," according to the DEA.

In her email to Blair, Hill said that when she discussed the matter with Revell, he noted that Article 8 provides “the latitude for the chief of police to use discretion.” She said she and Revell discussed the possibility that the contract language was “an inadvertent mistake” but that it was nevertheless part of the agreement. She also asserted that the contract provision was “not consistent” with city policy.

The officer, after testing positive, asked for another “split specimen” test, in which the same sample that yielded a positive result is tested again. Once the second positive was confirmed, Hill wrote that policy should dictate what happens next.

“After receiving a final confirmed positive status of a split specimen, the appropriate and final actions to take according to policy is dismissal ... and removal of previously applied leave,” Hill wrote. “Different from many personnel policies, the Alcohol and Drugs Policy ... does not provide for departmental discretion.”

Blair, in her July memo, wrote that over the preceding year, 14 city employees tested positive for drugs, including more than a third for amphetamines. All were terminated. She worried that the handling of the officer's case could create a "past practice" that could bind the city under collective bargaining in how it handles similar situations in the future.

Hill listed a number of concerns about how the officer’s case was handled, including retaining an employee who “may not be fit for duty and need professional assessment and assistance.” She noted the city’s Safety Office was not aware of any other time that a safety sensitive employee who tested positive was retained. She also said the case could result in “negative publicity” and quoted from city ethics materials.

“If the situation and my actions are in the newspaper,” Hill asked, “how will I feel about the publicity?”

Chief Revell reinstates officer, says he didn't want to 'rush to judgment'

Revell, in a June 29 memo, told the officer, who was on leave without pay, that he should have been placed on leave with pay pending the results of his second test. The chief told him he was prohibited from taking any police action while on leave and told him to turn in his badge, gun and take-home vehicle.

On July 8, the day after the second positive was confirmed, Revell wrote the officer again, telling him he would be placed on administrative leave without pay. That same day, Dione Grimes, TPD’s director of employee resources, emailed the city’s drug-testing firm saying the chief wished to speak with the person who conducted the officer’s screen “as absolutely soon as possible.”

TPD in the headlines:What internal emails reveal about controversial TPD training with ex-Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher

"Chief Revell must make a decision about (the officer's) job and ultimately his career in law enforcement by the first of next week," Grimes wrote. "It is very important that he speak with you as soon as possible."

Later that afternoon, Revell spoke with the medical review officer, identified only as "Dr. Cheng" in city records.

The chief asked about "spikes" and "high levels" in the sample that could indicate abuse, according to a memo he wrote. However, Cheng said he wouldn't comment on that because "there are simply too many variables that come into play," including the officer's size, metabolism and the time between taking the drug and testing. Cheng also said one-time use of Adderall “was an absolutely viable explanation” for the positive result.

"I again asked Dr. Cheng if he is clearly saying a one-time accidental consumption of (Adderall) medication could account for the results," Revell wrote. "Dr. Cheng said that was what he was saying and added that he did not know him but if he was a 'good employee' he would give him the benefit of the doubt and not fire him."

However, Blair, in her July 14 email to Assistant City Manager Ojetayo, said she didn’t think it was “prudent” for the city to rely on the medical review officer’s view because he wasn’t responsible for making employment decisions and wasn’t held accountable for them.

“I am quite surprised that an MRO would take such a mild stance to a twice positive-tested employee as represented by the chief, given the potential risk to the city and employees,” Blair wrote.

Revell, when he reinstated the officer, told him in a memo that to avoid a “rush to judgment,” he reached out to the medical review officer to discuss findings.

"It was his opinion that the positive test could be the result of a one-time mistake,” Revell wrote. “As a result ... it has been determined you will maintain employment with the Tallahassee Police Department."

Revell told the officer that he would be subject to special conditions to maintain his job, including random and unannounced drug tests through 2023. The chief added that if he were to test positive or refuse a test, he would be terminated with no rights to appeal.

As Matlow and City Manager Goad spar, City Attorney Jackson weighs in

But final action from the chief didn’t put to rest questions at City Hall. On Sept. 9, Matlow asked Goad in an email about whether an officer had tested positive for meth, a street drug with similarities to amphetamine.

“Members of the department have expressed concern about an officer that allegedly tested positive for methamphetamines,” Matlow wrote. “Can you provide details on this instance, any follow up, disciplinary action, if any, and any policies that direct a course of action. Thank you.”

Goad initially balked at discussing it with Matlow, saying that sharing health information, including drug tests results, is “a violation of law and policy.” Matlow wrote back, saying his question was “in regard to drug test policy and whether the policy was followed.”

But Goad said there would be no more follow-up on the matter.

“You have no role or authority in employee oversight,” Goad said.

Jackson, who was copied on some of the emails, weighed in Sept. 12, saying “a city elected official should be able to get sufficient information to confirm that any applicable policies and procedures were followed when faced with an inquiry in this regard.” She said that could be accomplished without releasing confidential information.

Goad responded later that night, insisting that a commissioner “has no role in evaluating confidential employee records or any personnel action.” Doing so, he said, could be an “attempt to influence the appointed official’s judgment regarding an employee, which is prohibited.” Jackson wrote back the next day: “My legal opinion has been provided.”

On Sept. 14, Goad sent Matlow a short email about the city’s drug testing program, which screens for marijuana, amphetamines, cocaine, opioids and PCP. He said that since October 2020, some 2,000 drug tests were administered, with an estimated 20% involving TPD employees. The tests resulted in 22 positive results, including two within TPD, and 21 terminations.

“The city has a robust drug testing program,” Goad wrote. “Of course, in each case, the applicable policies and processes are followed.”

Matlow, who has long been at odds with Revell and Goad, both of whom he’d like to replace, and critical of police department operations and policy, still has doubts. In January, he cited the matter as a reason he decided to drop his bid for chairman of the Florida Democratic Party.

"When I hear from the public alleging an officer tested positive for illicit substances, and I can't get a straight answer from the city manager or police chief, that is very concerning," he said in a text to the Democrat. "City policy is very clear on its prohibition of illegal drug use, and it doesn't seem like city policy is being followed."

Contact Jeff Burlew at jburlew@tallahassee.com and follow @JeffBurlew on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: 'Fit for duty': Tallahassee Police chief opts not to fire officer who tested positive for drugs over City Hall advice