Charlotte County majority rebukes commissioner after investigation finds offensive conduct; training required

The Charlotte County Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously Feb. 11 to accept an outside investigative report that found Commissioner Stephen R. Deutsch violated county policy 3.45 by using an offensive racial term during a work meeting.

Chairman read the investigator’s conclusion in public and said the report and his own review led him to the same finding: the remarks constituted offensive workplace behavior under county rules. The board adopted the investigator’s recommendation that the commission issue a public rebuke and require Deutsch to complete two management training courses administered on‑site by the county’s human resources department before the board’s Feb. 25 meeting. The training completion certificates will be posted on a future consent agenda.

The matter began after an employee raised the incident; the county retained the law firm DSK Law to conduct a neutral, third‑party investigation. The investigator interviewed witnesses and reviewed testimony before issuing a written report dated Jan. 29, 2025. The chair said he coordinated with the county attorney and human resources before placing the report on the public agenda.

Several residents and community groups addressed the commission during the meeting. Speakers called for accountability and, in some cases, called for the commissioner’s resignation; others urged caution and noted the absence of malice in the exchange with the employee named in the complaint. The chair emphasized county rules requiring elected officials to follow the same anti‑discrimination and workplace conduct standards that apply to staff.

Commissioner Deutsch apologized on the record and said he regretted using the word, described the remark as a mistake in the context of a private conversation with the employee, and told the board the comment would not recur. The board’s action accepted the investigation’s findings and imposed the remedial training the report recommended. The board did not take employment action beyond the public rebuke and training requirement.

The employee identified in the investigation, who serves as the director of the Punta Gorda‑Charlotte County Metropolitan Planning Organization, was not present; commissioners praised that director’s professional record and asked the public to avoid conflating the incident with his body of work.