news-record.com

Now, apparently after learning that the SBI investigation requested by the City of Greensboro has resulted in no charges against former Greensboro police Chief David Wray, Mayor Keith Holliday claims that City Manager Mitchell Johnson did not force Wray to resign by locking him out of his office.

In a Second Opinion column published by the News & Record on Sept. 15, the mayor makes this claim and notes his "regret" that David chose to resign rather than go out on administrative leave. In fact, as discussed below, David had no other choice if he wished to retain the ability to speak out on his own behalf.

On Friday, Jan. 6, 2006, after having refused offers by Wray to meet and discuss the racial allegations being made in the News & Record, Johnson called Wray into a tape-recorded meeting, advised Wray that Johnson was suspending Wray from his position as chief; that Wray would be required to turn in his badge and gun; and that Wray was being locked out of his office.

Johnson ultimately suggested that he hoped Wray would "do the right thing."

Previously, Johnson had stripped Chief Wray of his personnel duties. Chief Wray, without notice, had also been subjected to a four hour interrogation by an RMA investigator. Although Johnson handed David a list of findings from the RMA report, Johnson declined to provide him with a copy of the report.

David contacted me for employment advice. In light of the fact that:

• the chief serves at the pleasure of the city;

• Johnson had stripped David of his personnel duties and locked David out of his office;

• and both of these actions had immediately been published in the News & Record, I felt David would not be allowed to continue as chief, and certainly not in any effective way.

Therefore, on Saturday, Jan, 7, 2006, I contacted Greensboro City Attorney Linda Miles, advised her that I represented David, and asked to meet with her. She agreed and David and I met with her that Saturday in the Municipal Office Building. She stated that Johnson was in his office to consult with her, but he never appeared.

I asked for clarification on what effect termination as opposed to resignation would have on David's benefits. She advised that, if David were terminated, he would forfeit all accumulated sick leave (which was then more than one year) and would not be able to apply this sick leave toward years of service for retirement purposes.

Miles presented me with a typed statement she had prepared for signature by David. The statement contained an admission of fault by David in connection with the racial allegations and exonerated the city attorney's office and City Council.

She explained that if David would resign and sign the agreement as drafted, he would receive substantial benefits in that the effective date of his resignation could be extended by use of his annual leave to his early retirement date (two months later, to March 7, 2006, when he turned 50), during which time he would continue to receive his regular pay.

By being able to reach his early retirement date, David also would receive health benefits under the city's retirement plan.

Finally, David would also be able to apply his accumulated sick leave toward years of service for retirement and would be able to receive his longevity bonus. The longevity bonus would be a twofold benefit, cash plus an increase in his compensation on which his retirement would be computed.

David objected to the language contained in the statement as inaccurate, and offered to resign with a statement similar to the statement he eventually sent to the press with his resignation. Ms. Miles rejected this language, and proposed alternate language, which also was not acceptable to David. Ms. Miles then proposed that David simply resign and make no statements. Given the misinformation being spread about him, this option was not acceptable to David.

David resigned as a matter of principle. By refusing to resign under the conditions presented by the city, David was taken off the payroll on Jan. 6, did not receive health benefits, did not receive his longevity bonus, and did not receive the augmented retirement he would have received had he been able to retire two months later.

David had to purchase his own insurance and went without any payments for six months, when his retirement was finally processed.

Material published recently in the Rhinoceros Times from a letter written by an attorney then representing a black officer refers to a vendetta by certain city personnel against David.

I would hope that this is not the case— or if this is the case, that it will stop.

Greensboro and David Wray deserve better.

The writer is an attorney who represents David Wray.