Tulsa, Okla. (KTUL) – It was filed on Monday, an emergency application for temporary restraining order filed by the Tulsa Fraternal Order of Police against the city of Tulsa to “prevent the release of certain records which would cause certain and irreparable harm to Lodge members.” The document explains that the city and the Lodge have certain contractual agreements in place that require certain personnel records to be “purged and expunged” after relevant time periods. And alleges that the city of Tulsa has “failed to’ purge and expunge’ the relevant records as required by contract.”
News Channel 8 reached out to the FOP seeking comment on the nature of the personnel records. The response? No comment.
We also reached out to the city of Tulsa who told us, “Due to pending litigation, the City has no further comment at this time.”
Silence from both sides of the dispute. But speaking volumes, the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the city of Tulsa and the FOP.
A search for the phrase “purged and expunged” takes you to section 11.5 – “Division Letters of Reprimand shall be purged and expunged after the passage of one year. Department Letters of Reprimand and Vacation Reductions shall be purged and expunged after the passage of three years. Suspensions and Orders of Demotion shall be purged and expunged after the passage of five years.”
Dirty laundry that the city has allegedly failed to get rid of. What’s more the complaint says the records were anticipated to be released on April 28th, hence the urgency of the restraining order.
The vacuum of silence surrounding the ordeal raises numerous questions; Police officers are bestowed enormous trust by the community, so why would the public benefit by having a reprimand erased? Couldn’t that type of policy open the door to repeat offenders? As to the city’s role, why haven’t they destroyed the records? And who were they going to release them to?
News Channel 8 has submitted an Open Records Request to the city asking for any information regarding the near release of the records, in addition to all records pertaining to reprimands, suspensions and demotions with the names of the individuals redacted to protect their privacy while at the same time letting the public know what types of transgressions officers have committed and how many.
A judge has granted the restraining order. The next hearing on the matter is May 14th.
