During the public forum at the Aug. 18 City Council meeting, Sarah Pose, who identified herself as a law-enforcement professional who has worked in multiple Bay Area departments and currently holds a position in Piedmont, told the council she had faced retaliation after filing a bullying complaint and that Human Resources labeled the complaint unfounded.

Pose described a multi-decade law-enforcement career and said she took a lower-paid position in Piedmont so her son could attend local schools. She said the role she accepted lacked manuals, systems and compliance and that she built those systems for the city. "Piedmont's compliance exists today because of the systems I created," she told the council. She said requests for additional staffing and compensation were denied and described being placed in an unsafe, noisy construction area she documented for a year.

Pose told the council a new commander had targeted her after that commander arrived and that “I filed a complaint for bullying and retaliation against the new commander. HR labeled it unfounded.” She said being labeled unfounded sent a clear message she would not be protected and that she felt she was being pushed out despite carrying institutional knowledge. Pose urged the city to better monitor positions, recognize who carries workload and ensure leaders are culturally competent and qualified.

The mayor and council did not take action on the comment; it was part of the meeting’s public forum. No staff response or investigation outcome was recorded on the public record during the meeting.

Pose also criticized city compensation policy she said keeps pay about "3% below the medium compensation" and warned of the cost and knowledge loss if she leaves: "If I leave, you will likely have to hire 3 people, purchase a new system, and face the transition and loss of knowledge I carry," she said.

The statement was delivered as public comment; the council did not discuss or respond substantively during the allotted comment time, consistent with state law limitations on council discussion during public forum.

The employee’s remarks are on the record and were not linked to any immediate council action at the meeting.