Montana Chief Sues for Wrongful Discharge

A former assistant chief in Montana has filed suit claiming he was wrongfully terminated in part because he cooperated with an investigation that led to the arrest and conviction of his former boss.

Assistant Chief Brian Crandell of the Central Valley Fire District was terminated on February 12, 2013 following two months of efforts by district officials said to be friends of former fire chief Brett M. Waters to force him to resign.

According to the complaint:

In the summer of 2010, the former Fire Chief of the Central Valley Fire District, Brett M. Waters, was investigated for theft of thousands of dollars from CVFD and official misconduct by the Montana Department of Justice Division of Criminal Investigation.

Plaintiff, along with at least two other employees of CVFD, reported pubIic policy violations and crimes by Waters to State investigators, and cooperated with the investigation of Waters. Waters later resigned from his position as Fire Chief with CVFD. Waters was charged with felony theft and official misconduct and ultimately pleaded guilty to official misconduct. He admitted that he had taken nearly $50,000 and agreed to pay it back.

During his tenure, Waters selected people to apply for appointment or run for election to the Board of Trustees for CVFD. Many of them continue a friendship with Waters. Mike Wachter, Gil Moore, and Ken Walker are members of the Board of Trustees whom Waters selected.

During the period of the investigation of Waters' criminal activity in 2010, CYFD Trustee Walker referred to the concerns raised about Waters' theft as “BS," and Trustee Moore referred to Plaintiff and other employees who reported the crimes as "chaff' at Board meetings.

In December, 2012, Fire Chief Ron Lindroth and Fire District board chairman Mike Wachter met with Chief Crandell to seek his resignation.

Wachter began this meeting by stating, "we are brother firefighters, and friends and instructors, and this is really hard." Wachter stated that Lindroth recommended "downsizing" and "eliminating [Crandell’s] position" and "it's the consensus of the Board to follow the Chiefs recommendations."

Lindroth then presented Plaintiff with a "severance agreement" which included a provision that he would give up his rights to sue for full legal redress. The agreement did not provide for anything but payment of wages and benefits he had already earned. Lindroth called it a "safety net" and told Plaintiff he should "find some other employment."

Lindroth told Plaintiff he wanted the agreement signed before the December Board meeting, and said that the "consideration" in the agreement would be better for Plaintiff jf he signed before the meeting. Plaintiff did not sign.

On December 13, 2012, Lindroth held a staff meeting and described his proposed "reorganization." The reorganization included eliminating Plaintiffs position and adding new positions, including company officer positions. Plaintiff is qualified to do company officer work. CVFD never offered him such a position.

On February 12, 2013, the CVFD held its monthly Board meeting. Plaintiff was in attendance, as he always was. Without notice to Plaintiff for to the public, as required bylaw, and without closing the meeting to protect his privacy, the Board voted to fire Plaintiff. Wachter publicly handed Plaintiff another unsigned "Severance Agreement." After the meeting, Wachter approached Plaintiff, took the "agreement" back and signed it. Plaintiff has never signed it, and never negotiated for it.

The complaint characterizes the reorganization plan as a pretext for Chief Crandell’s termination, and alleges that the fire district acted with actual malice in violating Montana's Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act. The complaint also alleges that Chief Crandell was wrongfully denied overtime compensation

Besides the two counts mentioned above, it would also appear that Chief Crandell’s legal team have at least three additional charges teed up and ready to drive if they need them, including:

1. Whistleblower retaliation
2. Due process violation (lack of notice and opportunity to be heard)
3. Open meetings violation (lack of notice)

I am thinking they won’t need them!

Here is a copy of the complaint.  Crandell v Central Valley