Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council votes to reject termination recommended for Assistant Chief Ivy after public comment
Summary
The Central City Council voted in favor of a motion finding that disciplinary recommendations from Chief Roger Corcoran did not warrant termination of Assistant Chief Ivy after public comment criticizing Corcoran's supervision.
Counsel moved and the Central City Council voted to find that disciplinary recommendations from Chief Roger Corcoran against Assistant Chief Ivy did not warrant termination.
The motion was introduced during a regular council meeting when an unnamed counsel said, "I'm recommending that this counsel find any and all disciplinary actions recommended by chief Corcoran against assistant chief Ivy not to warrant termination. Assistant chief Ivy has provided detailed documentation and the evidence countering each of the claims levied against him." Council member Wells seconded the motion. Before the roll call the council heard public comment from a former Central Police Department employee who criticized Chief Corcoran's leadership and defended Ivy.
The former employee, identified in the record as a "Former CPD employee," told the council she had worked at the Central Police Department through March 2023 and described a "hostile work environment and perpetual mental abuse" she attributed to Chief Roger Corcoran. She said Corcoran "supervises in a reactionary manner with very little forethought or investigation before taking action against a CPD employee" and that his actions had caused "irreparable damage to personnel, their careers, their health, and their future." She also said turnover at the department increased during Corcoran's tenure and described Ivy as having "kept the PD afloat since his hiring." These remarks occurred during the public-comment portion of the agenda.
Council member McKinney clarified the effect of the motion before the vote: "So the motion that was made was that, the disciplinary recommendations, not warrant termination. So a yes vote would be no termination. A yes vote, no termination." The roll call recorded affirmative votes by Council members Laverne, Lazaro, McKinney, Meyer, Roy and Wells. The transcript records six recorded "yes" votes; other members' votes were not specified in the transcript excerpt.
The action on the motion is recorded as a formal council vote to find the disciplinary recommendations did not warrant termination of Assistant Chief Ivy. The record does not show any additional formal directions to staff, administrative consequences beyond the vote, or details of subsequent personnel steps. The council then moved on to other agenda items.
