Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Government Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lakewood resident criticizes council over possible police settlement; mayor explains consent‑agenda practice
Summary
Julius Brown praised the police chief's work and urged the council to avoid approving a confidential payout by consent; the mayor responded that settlements and personnel separations sometimes appear on consent and that details may be handled in executive session or as part of litigation procedures.
During the Aug. 4 public comment period, Julius Brown — chair of the Lakewood African American Police Advisory Committee — praised Chief Patrick Smith for community engagement and crime reductions, then raised concerns about a report that the council would approve a payout by consent without public discussion.
Brown said the Lakewood Police Department under Chief Smith achieved measurable crime reductions and that he was concerned the city might be preparing a confidentiality agreement or payout "without public discussion for someone not deserving." "Now the news tribune is running a report that the city council is set to authorize approval of a payout by way of a consent agreement without public discussion for someone not deserving," Brown said. "That's not a good look for Lakewood. Citizens of Lakewood have a say in how the money is spent. Doing under‑table deals with people under investigation seems unscrupulous."
The council's adopted consent agenda included motion 2025-52, described in the packet as "authorizing the execution of an agreement between the city of Lakewood and John Unfred, prescribing the terms of separation from employment with the city of Lakewood." The consent agenda (minus an item later removed for separate discussion) passed earlier in the meeting.
Mayor Whelan responded by describing the routine public‑government practice: "Matters of pending litigation, often come before a city like Lakewood, and the details are provided often in executive session," he said, adding that some separation agreements resolve disputed claims without litigation being filed. The mayor acknowledged that those circumstances can be frustrating for the public because the formal claims may not be part of the public record when no complaint has been filed.
Outcome and next steps: The consent agenda that contained the personnel separation agreement was adopted earlier in the meeting. The mayor said councils frequently use resolution or settlement mechanisms to resolve claims and that the council makes decisions it believes are in the public interest; he invited public understanding that details of personnel matters sometimes remain confidential due to legal advice or privacy.
Discussion-only points: Public comment contrasted praise for police-community work with concern over transparency for settlement or separation agreements. The mayor framed the city's use of consent items and executive session as legally standard.
Actions: Motion 2025-52 (authorize execution of separation agreement with John Unfred) was on the consent agenda and adopted as part of the consent package; no further details were discussed in open session.
