EAST TAYLOR TOWNSHIP SUPERVISORS SPECIAL MEETING for Personnel Issues 
September 23rd, 2009 at 3:00 P.M. 
                                                                                  
EAST TAYLOR TOWNSHIP SUPERVISORS SPECIAL MEETING for Personnel Issues September 23rd, 2009 at 3:00 P.M. 
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Mary Woznak. All stood and pledged allegiance to the flag and observed a moment of silence for our Troops overseas.
ROLL CALL: JOSEPH PERUSO-Present, ROBERT SPANKO-Present, ART THOMSON-Present, RANDY VOJTOWICZ-Absent, MARY WOZNAK-Present. ALSO: RUSS HEIPLE AND SHANNAN KESTER
Chairperson Mary Woznak called on Executive Session at 3:01 P.M.
At 3:05 P.M. the meeting was opened to the public.
Woznak stated at 3:01 PM I called in executive session and explained to Cathy the difference between having an executive session and having an open meeting. And she requested to have an open meeting and for us to proceed.
Heiple: the subject of the hearing is the because of the subject of the conversation that occurred back on September 18 while you and other officers were being fitted for new Kevlar vests.  The company representative who was doing the fittings seemingly had a conversation with you in which you indicated when you had the vest you indicated to him that you had shot the vest on several occasions while it was in your possession and he noticed four bullet holes in the vest and it is in his opinion that would compromise the vest. Now it seems that the vest is made of a fiber and in between the fibers there are metal plates put in there in the metal plates or to prevent stabbing. The Kevlar is what seemingly sucks up the impact of the bullet, I am sure the metal plate helps that also, but the Kevlar is what sucks up the impact of the bullet and the intentional firing of bullets into the vest for whatever reason compromises the quality of that vest, if it penetrated by bullets or weaken by bullets that certainly compromises the safety of the bullets. It is on our regulations that say an officer should not abuse or mistreat the Township equipment and certainly where there may be potential for bodily injury or death in such misuse of Township equipment. The vests like the firearms are owned by the Township, the vest are owned by the Township, after they are replaced after so many years I am not certain how they are recycled, whether we recycle them or the company recycles them or we dispose of them or give them to another Township.
 Cathy Foust: They are given to the officer. As the representative said once we get our new one, we can shoot the hell out of it if we want to. The years I have worked as a police officer when our vests were renewed every 2 years. Heiple: well the rep. doesn’t control how the Supervisors determine this; he may say I don’t care what you do with it. Foust: well this is my 2nd vest here and they just give them to you and we can throw them out and we use them for target practice. Woznak: but that would be up to the Township Supervisors. Foust: unless they changed their mind from 10 or 11 years ago. Jack Foust: I am sure they did. Cathy: I am sure they did. Heiple: well that is the subject of this meeting that has why a meeting has been called, after the report from the vest rep, the supervisors are concerned with the safety of the officers and the conduct of an officer in misusing such an important piece of equipment. Foust: Then they should have these replaced 6 years ago, if they cared so much about the safety of an officer then they should have had them replaced them 3 years ago when I was telling them they need replaced, need replaced, needs replaced. Heiple: If that was the case 3 years ago. Foust It never happened, other officers were asking, we need new vests and that never happened. Heiple: but is there some reason for shooting up the present vest if you do not have a replacement vest? Jack Foust: She is not going back to work for awhile so the new vest should be in by then so what’s the point. Woznak: That is regardless. Foust: The vest is not shot up. Woznak: show me the bullet holes. Foust : to prove to you that the vests were no longer good enough and on top of that ok, this is my shot vest, he told me this vest if I went back to work that would be good enough until I came back to work. Heiple: good enough? Cathy: Yes that is what he said. Jack Foust: I was right there. Foust: Also what else he showed me, I was unaware and I guess you guys would be to; that there is a zipper compartment in here in this vest and I was unaware there is a zipper compartment here also. Heiple: Wouldn’t that be where the metal plate is? Foust: no this is the only metal plate. Smith: That is where the Kevlar is. Foust: And here is what he told me. He inspected all the vests there was a big pile of them here right Shannan? Shannan: I missed all that I got here late. Foust: he opened my vest up like this, because he inspected all the vests, and he pulled out this and this side was out. Jack Foust: he said that was in backwards. Foust: he said this was inspected by 7 different inspectors. And also in the back part, because he said did you ever wash your vest, I said no I didn't know you had to plus I’m not a big sweater, so when he showed me that it was amazing to me. I didn't know the zippers or here for all the years I've had this vest. He pulled out both compartment and he said your compartments, as you can see, are not all shot up like they said shot up crazily. Peruso: which end is supposed to stick out? Foust: the bawdy side was when he took them out it was facing outwards and he said he guarantees his inspectors didn't do that. In the alley hands this vest was in between their hands in my hands was Chief Price or whoever gave me the vest and that's a while back and getting older my memories faded so I don't know who, but I was shocked to even know you could take them out. But if you want to look at the internal damage this vest is not all shot up, if I was coming back to work, which at change, he said that this would have been perfectly fine. Jack Foust: I was right there when he said it. Heiple: it may be in backwards upside down maybe hankered in appearance. Foust: maybe seven years ago if I was shot it would have been over with. Heiple: the substance here is whether the equipment was misused or intentionally damaged by yourself. Foust: damaged on one occasion and not damaged that I can't use it, to prove the point that we are not safe with these vests any longer and since I have been shot already okay I'm going to want a new vest you just, you want safety. Peruso: were you here for the fitting? Foust: yes I was. Peruso: then you know you have a new vest coming. Foust: yes and now since I am delayed. Jack Foust: so what is the point of this? Woznak: the point is we were informed by this gentleman that he and former chief of police, Jack Foust: there's your problem there. Woznak: actually it was a different police officer that a piece of Township property was damaged. Heiple: intentional damage not accidental. Woznak: intentional damage that you took it upon yourself to shoot it. Foust: yes I did. Jack Foust: to make sure her life was safe. Foust: to make sure my life is safe when I come back considering you implemented at safety device back there for guns since my accident so we can unload, excellent that something I can do. So if you're looking at safety then why not the vests they are no good and these are scheduled to vests these are lower grade best to begin with. Peruso: you made a comment about replacing them every two years and I thought it was every five. Foust: no not this department. There recommended that they are good for two years not five. They are good for two. This stuff in here breaks down because you're wearing at the material is a breakdown material when we get the new vests you'll be able to tell they will be so stiff. Woznak: were you instructed by anyone to go do this to Township property? Foust: no just like I was instructed to accidentally wreck the vehicle it was an accident. Woznak: that was an accident this was intentional. Foust: this was to prove to you the safety. Woznak: this is where I am getting at one was an accident and one was intentional. Foust: one time. I am not going to say I didn't do it yes I did one time to prove a point. Heiple: when did you do it? Foust: sometime in July, July 9 I think. Heiple: July 9 of 2009? Foust: yes. Heiple: did you then bring forward your comments to the chief or. Foust: I think I told Shannan about the vests. Shannan: I found out about it sometime in August, it was right before I went on vacation. Foust: I called her and told what happened and what I did and that were really going to need new vests because my 40 caliber my own personal weapon not to Township weapon because I was just given that 12 weeks ago to qualify with, I use the 40 caliber so you can imagine what the 45 hollow point would have done to the vest because I know what it did to my leg. It would have torn the vest completely apart and whoever would have been in that vest wouldn't be here today. Spanko: but this vest was outdated years ago then? Heiple: I don't know bar him that would be subject to an expert's testimony from the manufacturer. Foust: here you go the manufacture date is 2004 so yes it was outdated years ago. Heiple: says who? Foust: the manufacture said he thought it was good for five years but it is only good for two. Woznak: says who because I have researched and how many vest so far and they all are coming up with five years. Foust: why don't you talk to the guy that was here he stood here and told me? Heiple: that's what we are going to do. Foust: he stood here and told me and he also told me that this vest if I was coming back to work which I was going to but now I am not because the doctor changed the date I would have been fine until I got my new vest. What he said is after that his exact words were you can shoot it up all you want. Peruso that's not his call for Foust I know it's not but let me put it this way he deals with several different departments and he knows what they'd do with their vests. I worked for Indian Lake and they gave us our old vests and we shot them for target practice. Heiple: let me mention something on one occasion he use a debt you quote the fellow as saying the vest would be adequate until you put a new one then on the other side of the coin you then say this vest is no good back in July and I shot it back in July and proved it was no good, so it either good on September 18 or not good on September 18. Foust: he said it takes 4 to 6 weeks until we get a new vest. Heiple: okay I believe you. Foust: he said it will do until you get your new vest. Heiple: ok then why do you tell us it is no good back in July? Foust: because I am proving the breakdown of the vest. If someone came to stab me maybe it would catch it maybe it wouldn't, if someone was such a good shot and hit me center mass I am sure this plate would save my life okay but the body of the vest the is Kevlar and is breaking down. Heiple: how does shooting it up in July improve the safety of the vest? Jack Foust: because she wasn't getting a new vest she told him about getting a new vest she wanted to prove to you people they needed a new vest. Foust: I wasn't working at a time. Heiple: but you are quoting the guy on saying the vest is adequate. Foust: he said it will do until I get my new vest, he knows when I was going to be on the schedule. Thomson: how old is this vest? Woznak: it was manufactured in 2004 it is five years old. If it was manufactured in 2004 she would have had to have gotten it in 2004. Spanko: I hate to say it but that is a piece of junk. Heiple: how do you know that? Spanko: I am going to read something to you. Peruso: I know what he's going to read, there is a warning on here, this armor is not guaranteed to protect you from knives or sharp edge or pointed objects this armor will not stop center fire rifle projectiles or rounds that achieve standard than higher velocity. Woznak: here's the reason for this meeting, this is Township property, Cathy didn't purchase this, and we use Township taxpayer money to purchase this. Jack Foust: they got a bug hunt here let them do what they want. Woznak: no this is what we have to discuss. Jack Foust: no please just give me a break. Spanko: what are you trying to say? Jack Foust: they want to do something this is a bunch of bullshit. Heiple: well you might want to choose your attitude little differently. Foust: he doesn't work here he can swear till the cows come home. Officer Smith: no you can't do that it is disorderly conduct. Jack Foust: then write me up. Officer Smith: you really do not want me to have to do that. Jack Foust: you're looking for problems. Woznak: no we don't want problems. Jack Foust: don't tell me that that's a why you're a liar, you're a liar. Woznak: I am not lying. Jack Foust: you are back behind all the rest of them. Heiple: if any officer went out and punched out a window on the cruiser. Jack Foust: certain people can just lie and not think anything about it and don't have a guilty feeling about it. Heiple: we would still have the same hearing to see who is at fault. Jack Foust: just do what you want get it over with. Woznak: we don't understand, Jack Foust: hey just do what you want I am tired of listening to this crap. Heiple: well you don't have to sit here. Jack Foust: well this is my wife I am going to sit here. Heiple then sit here and be. Jack Foust: then get it over with. Heiple: okay, officer you don't deny that you shot this vest? Jack Foust: no she doesn't we've already been over this. Heiple: Sir I'm going to have to ask you to be removed. I need to talk to the officer. Officer, do you deny that you shot this vest four times? Foust: no I do not deny it. Heiple: and this was about July of 2009? Foust: it was July 9, 2009 to be exact. Heiple: and at that time you discharged your own firearm at the vest & it was done at your sole intention & no one from the township asked you to test it and you did it because you thought you should do it? Foust: yes I thought I should do it. Jack Foust: for the safety of her own life. Foust: you get a little gun shy and you think of every possible thing and I've been worried about that since I knew it needed replaced, and isn't it interesting that actually really see what happens to it does in a pique your interest to see what happens to these and you know your officers are wearing them and this can happen to them. Doesn't that peak your interest what I did, isn't that a good thing for the rest of the department, to see what they are actually wearing? Woznak: I understand and I am learning more and more the company we hired to get these wouldn't be selling these things if, Shannan: these are the ones that are approved from the Department of Justice and is approved for the grant money. Heiple: prior to July of 2009 what occurred to you or another officer that you thought justified in firing on the vest? Foust: I'm off work I was thinking about it. I'm thinking about coming back to work. Heiple: did you bring your concern to anyone in the township or Markle Supply? Jack Foust: you told Randy before you were shot; he is a liar so he won't say. Foust: a couple of years ago I went to Randy. Randy did a lot of stuff for here for the department no doubt about that here you are brought up about the vests. I think Risko went to him and Daggy went to him and I am not sure if Jim went to him. He said okay and we started talking about it. And Risko was trying to get the ones that you forgot to put in your pocket so I don't know that put a stop to it or what. Heiple: so this was several years before July of 2009 that you brought this to anyone's attention? Foust: yes. Heiple: then not until July of 2009 you haven't brought this to anyone's attention, the supervisors or Markle? Foust: no not since my accident. Heiple: were the union? Foust: no I am trying to get it through the township. Heiple: since the time you fired on the vest how long until you complain to someone about your perception of the vest? Foust I called Shannan. Heiple when? Foust: had to have done it shortly after, I am not sure if July 9 was on a Thursday or Friday but as soon as possible I called her and told her I shot through the vest and we need new vests because it is really broken down and that proves the age of the vest. Heiple: wasn't August of 2009? Foust: I don't believe I would have waited. Shannan: I think it was because I had to get all that arranged before I went on vacation. And I took vacation 31 August. Foust: I don't believe I would have waited that long, I doubt it, I know why you are asking but I know I wouldn't have shot the vest and waited a month because I was shocked by the vest, I told you right away about it I told Risko right away about the vest. Woznak: Capt. Risko knew about this? Foust: yes I told him about the vest and said we need new vests. I don't want to come back here with what happened and not have a new vest. Heiple: after the shooting incident did you report your perceptions to Markle? Foust: no I didn't know who we got them from. Heiple: did you report it to the union, Mr. Keller? Foust: I told Risko if he told Keller that would have been up to him. I know he's been on someone about the vests. Heiple: did you ever put this in writing at all, it was orally to Capt. Risko? Foust: it was orally to Capt. Risko, orally to Shannan and all orally the past few years that we've been talking about it. To Randy it was orally I think I was back at his house about it when he first took over as police supervisor. Peruso: did Risko give you anything Mary? Woznak: no, he's never mentioned it. Foust: all these years that we really haven't and I guess we should start doing we haven't been putting anything in writing we just go to that person and say hey this is what we think we need and going to Randy and saying this is what we think we need and we did get what we needed, but the vests went by the wayside I think because it is for a good many officers and they are an expensive purchase. But officer safety is important. Peruso: so are the cruisers they are an expensive item and we supply them and this is a safety item I think these are more important than a cruiser. Foust: in all it is to give you guys I mean like, I told him you could put them in a corner for two years in a box and they are going to be broke down. They are not going to be the same. Just like you cover a brand-new car for two years and let it sit when you open it out there is going to be problems just like everything else. I am bringing to light to you guys this is what could happen and that was a lower caliber weapon I shot her with. Peruso: Ken, you just got a vest did it come with any kind of instructions on proper care? Ofc. Smith: it did. I am not sure what it said I can’t recall. Spanko: one thing I don't understand is that when it was shot and it was proven that it wasn’t up to snuff the man said to wear it until the new one came in. She might as well wear a petticoat. Foust: he was guessing with a schedule that it would be maybe two days I had it on. Spanko: I don't care if it's two minutes what if someone does attack you? Woznak: did you read the e-mail from the gentleman? Number four states that, when I questioned officer about the back panel she stated to me that she had never had the back panel out of the carrier. She stated to me she shot the front panel. I noticed there were three holes in the front carrier and several layers of Kevlar were penetrated. I told her she should have never shot her vest while using it for service. It appeared to me that she had four bullet holes in the vest which would influence the performance of the vest if she was shot while on duty. it does not say on here, now he's saying and writing that she could wear it. Jack Foust: I was right here. Foust: he even joked about it, told me to duck under a fence or something as a joke. Heiple: what I don't see and hear is a fellow saying I told officer because of the condition of the vest she should immediately surrender it and not wear it. You are saying he said the opposite, you can wear it? Jack Foust: he did not say that. Foust: he did not say that. Heiple: I know that what you're saying lifespan and that's it? Foust: it has less than a five-year lifespan what I am showing you is the breakdown of the vest over time without the bullets, all that did was compromise the vest in a 2 to 3 inch radius. Heiple: at one point does that become a risk? Foust: three years ago. I wore it for three years not counting my time off. These people test these all the time they know. Heiple: that's what I'm saying the vest people will know. Peruso: they would have to be a spec sheet in there with them giving you the longevity of it. Heiple: do we consider having the guy, up and inspect them every year and say yes this is good for another year? Peruso: no they have to have some kind of projected longevity. Foust: the way I receive my vest is it was just lying on my desk. Thomson: Ken did yours come with anything? Ofc. Smith: yes there were some papers with that. Woznak: it would have had to have come with some kind of wash instructions and care instructions. Foust: I didn't get that or I would have known. I was surprised with the pockets and he asked me if I ever washed it and I said no and he said it was in backwards then he said it went through seven inspectors in his guys wouldn't have done that. Peruso: he can't guarantee that. Foust: another reason why other officers don't like them because of the big gap on the sides there is no protection there. There is a big gap for a lot of us on the sides but that's why they're not the best you can get but those ones cost a lot of money and this isn't Pittsburgh or New York. But if you are hit here you're in a die but with what protection it can help with broke down over the years. It's like a lot of things certain things need to be taken care of. Spanko: so what this comes down to is when you shot the vest you were making a point that the vest is faulty? Foust: yes, yes it is faulty. It’s gone way past the expiration date and everyone here doesn't have the same expiration date they all got them at different times. Woznak: five of them need to get new ones now. Foust: that needs to be documented somewhere so you know who got while when because what I was working night shift and  what if I get shot who knows the fatal shot might have been caught by the vest if it would not have been broke it down so badly. Woznak: did you read on the vest that it won't catch anything? Foust: no if someone hits you center mass it will stop it but that's about it, see it did catch it; no one's going to wear a vest that's heavy around their whole body. It caught the bullet it and smashed it. This is a 40 caliber bullet but the whole vest isn't that way you can see where caught it otherwise it wouldn't have caught it. Heiple: the crux of our inquiry is how can  you take it upon yourself to test or make an example without asking the supervisors whether you can blast away at Township property. Foust: I didn't blast away at it. Heiple: if you felt it was unsafe I would presume you wouldn't want to wear it, the same way the brakes on your police car were bad would you still drive it or would you park it and say hey supervisors I can’t  drive it because it's unsafe or would you blast the police car to test the brakes. There is a certain chain of command in the township and I don't think that chain of command allows officer files to take it upon herself to test or some folks may say destroy township equipment. Foust: I shot the vest I'm not denying it maybe I should've called someone and asked if I could, but being what I've been through and how many times I've asked for this vest I just got it in my head to do it. You just get things in your head it happens to everyone. I didn't hurt anyone. The vest still can be worn. I won't be wearing that vest because I won't be back at that point. I'm sure the new ones will be here by then if there is some recycling I will donate at it if you don't want to give it to me, but yes maybe I should have called and asked but all in all its proving a point to everyone in the township to you guys that you wouldn't have seen maybe you would've read about it but you wouldn't have seen it firsthand what could happen in this was without a person in it. I know it hurts to get shot. Heiple: does any training require you to wear a vest and get shot? Foust: I think higher up like the military might. Heiple: any other questions for the officer? Heiple: Officer Foust and the other questions or comments? Foust: no.
Spanko: I think it was an oversight on Cathy's part on not calling us. Heiple: that is executive session stuff. Peruso: I think we should talk to Mark all supply and get more information on these vests before we do anything. Heiple: we will go into executive session to discuss this; we could continue this meeting until we get more information. Peruso: I would prefer it.
Motion made by Peruso to table this matter and to receive more information. Motion died due to no second. 
Peruso: I really have to go I can't make it to executive session. Spanko: well there are three of us I don't think we need to wait this involves the shooting not the manufacturing of the vest. That can be later. There are three of us I think we need to square this away now.
Motion made by Spanko to go into executive session second and by Thomson. All Ayes. 
Executive session at 3:50 PM
The meeting was called back to order by Chairperson Mary Woznak. Woznak stated during executive session personnel issues were discussed as previously stated. No decisions were made.
Motion made by Thomson that no disciplinary action will be taken concerning this matter and that a letter be given to all employees to instruct them on the proper care of township equipment and property. Seconded by Spanko. All Ayes. Motion carried.
Spanko: don't do it again hun.
Motion to adjourn made by Spanko. Seconded by Thomson. All Ayes. Motion carried
Adjournment at 4:10 PM
Respectfully submitted,
Shannan Kester                          

 
Brought to you as a public service by
East Taylor Township
2009