5 Oceanside Officers File $11.8-Million Suit Against Chief

Five Oceanside police officers have filed an $11.8-million suit against Chief Oliver (Lee) Drummond, charging him with vengeful disciplinary action and intimidation against members of the police officers association.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court, claims that Drummond, who has been the head of the department for a year and a half, punished members of the Oceanside Police Officers Assn. who complained about department policies.

“They were essentially retaliated against because they had an association and they used it,” said Peter Friesen, an attorney representing the officers. “And they spoke up in public in regards to matters that Chief Drummond was pursuing. They spoke their minds and got burned for it.”

Also named in the suit were the city, former City Manager Ron Bradley and Police Capt. Gene Berry, who Friesen described as one of Drummond’s “facilitators” in imposing “intolerable working conditions” on the officers.

One of the disputes between the officer group and police management concerned the lengthening of working hours, Friesen said.

“The management would try to scare them into working harder, and that never works,” Friesen said. “Drummond was sort of the ultimate on that tactic.”

Friesen claimed that Drummond, Bradley and Berry were “operating under a mandate to restrict the effectiveness of the police officers association.”

The five officers named as plaintiffs in the case, Richard De Rouen, William Cramer, Edward Selby, James Wood and Olen Bradshaw, used the police association as a forum to make complaints against Drummond, the suit said.

One of the defendants in the suit, Berry, said there is a history of tension between the association and the Police Department’s management, and that the case will offer ample opportunity to clarify the dispute between the two.

“I’m kind of glad they did file suit because, over the past year and a half or so, there have been a lot of innuendoes and allegations expressed by members of the OPOA,” Berry said. “The judicial process is the fair and proper way to resolve these issues.”

Berry characterized the police jassociation as being at “loggerheads” with the department management.

“When issues are presented to them in discussion, their position has been, ‘Tell us what to do, and we’ll tell you if it’s right,’ ” Berry said. “The association hasn’t been very participative, especially when it comes to change.

“They certainly have a different point of view as to the direction of where the Police Department should go. Unfortunately, it’s not the same direction that the city and management feel that it should go, or how it should be run.”

Friesen said the suit is unlikely to be resolved soon or without a fight and that Berry’s reaction “was not true to life.”

“There’s a tremendous amount of bitterness here,” Friesen said. “It’s going to be a very emotional case. I doubt that it will be a clean airing of grievances just because of the nature of the conduct. It’s the good guys against the bad guys.”

Neither Drummond nor Bradley could be reached for comment.

The suit claims that:

* De Rouen was denied the opportunity to apply for lieutenant in February, 1989, and was told that “he need not bother apply” for the position of special enforcement sergeant in June, 1989.

After he went to the police association to register his complaints, the suit says, Drummond told the group’s board members that he was “going to fix De Rouen” by putting a negative letter in his personnel file.

Late last year, De Rouen, who is black, filed a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing accusing Drummond of discrimination in handling his application for lieutenant.

The lieutenant position was later given to a white officer that the suit claims “did not meet the criteria necessary to even apply for the position.”

* Cramer, chairman of the OPOA board, was demoted from the Internal Affairs Division to patrol duty after he reported Drummond’s statements to “fix” De Rouen to a city official investigating the incident.

That investigation is incomplete.

At the time, Drummond contended the transfer took place after he received legal advice that Cramer’s role as internal investigator and OPOA chairman were in conflict. Cramer countered that Drummond knew he was the chairman of the association when he appointed Cramer to the internal investigations department in July, 1989.

In May, 1990, Cramer filed a complaint with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing regarding his transfer.

In May, 1989, Cramer had also filed a grievance against Drummond concerning the method used to test for promotion. That complaint was settled earlier this year with the city acknowledging that it had violated contractual procedures.

* Drummond reassigned Selby, then a member of the board of the OPOA, from the Investigations Division to patrol duty after eight years of “unblemished” performance in the division as retaliation for his participation in the police association leadership.

* Bradshaw was harassed in November, 1989, as a result of a disciplinary investigation in retaliation for registering complaints about department policies.

* Both Wood and Bradshaw were further harassed and threatened in May, 1990, when they were given poor performance appraisals and subjected to supplemental appraisals in violation of police department regulations.

Both Wood and Bradshaw had filed claims with the city of Oceanside regarding Drummond’s allegedly retaliatory conduct.

Selby and Wood have left the department; the rest remain.