With a federal discrimination trial looming at the end of the month, there are ongoing indications that both sides in the upcoming federal River Forest police discrimination trial are looking for ways to come to terms which each other. Some are also saying publicly that the decisions made in the wake of any resolution should also address alleged systemic tensions in the police department.

Lt. Craig Rutz and Sgt. Thomas Ludvik currently have two suits against the village, alleging age discrimination and retaliation. In addition, Rutz filed a separate lawsuit in December, 2004 under the Federal False Claims Act, accusing former police chief Michael Holub of fraudulent use of $52,000 in federal BADGE grant funds in 2000.

The three cases, joined together before a single judge last year, are scheduled to go to trial Oct. 29.

Village President Frank Paris said Tuesday, “The village is considering a settlement, and I think probably the other side is too.”

The operative word, Paris said, is “reasonable.” Paris and the six village trustees met in closed session twice last week for three hours to discuss the trial and possible legal strategies.

“If a reasonable settlement can be reached, I’d be strongly behind it,” said Paris, who noted he supported a settlement with a third plaintiff last year, former Lt. Bruce Higgins.

Trustee Steve Hoke, a lawyer, cautioned that the village should avoid taking a win-at-all-costs approach.

“What we need to remember is that the police department is our family,” said Hoke. “Trials are gut-wrenching, unpredictable affairs in which usually no one wins despite what the ultimate verdict might suggest. Speaking for myself, I would like to find a mutually satisfactory resolution that would enable the village to move forward and start repairing the relationships and building a cooperative, productive environment that we can all be proud of.”

Trustee Russ Nummer agreed, saying, “Both parties would be better off settling this thing than going to trial.”

If a settlement is reached, it will likely all come down to money, and who will pay the bill-the village or its insurer, the Illinois Risk Management Association.

“It comes down to whether we can reach agreement as to settlement value, as it always does,” said Hoke.

Tensions may trigger exodus

Officials from the local Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) lodge, who are watching events closely, expressed some satisfaction with recent developments.

“It’s nice to know there are people out there with a recognition that there’s ramifications beyond the next 30 days,” said FOP President Michael Thornley.

While he largely agreed with Hoke’s views, Thornley said there are arguments to be made for going through a trial.

“I agree with [Hoke], but sometimes cases need to be tried,” Thornley said. “Sometimes things need to come out to the light of day.”

Thornley also said that the issue for many rank-and-file officers is not simply whether Rutz and Ludvik prevail in court. The issues raised in a no-confidence vote against police management last June, he said, are both related to and separate from the issues at trial.

“I think if there’s no substantial change in the police department, regardless of what goes on with the trial, people will leave,” said Thornley.

Nummer said whatever the resolution of the three suits, there are clear issues that need to be dealt with.

“I sure hope we don’t just stop the train and continue the status quo,” Nummer said. “I think there are some issues that need to be looked at and dealt with.”

“We can’t let these problems fester forever,” said Hoke.

One police source estimated that 4-6 officers would leave within a year if the village won the case. Thornley said he’s aware of officers who are currently looking for alternative employment.

“Several people are actively seeking employment elsewhere, either in or out of police work,” he said.

Paris, however, said he viewed officers leaving as a positive sign. River Forest, he said, works hard to hire the most qualified candidates for police openings, and the fact that the department has a small number of officers makes promotions tough to come by.

“I expect people to leave the department from time to time,” he said. “It would be a failure if some weren’t moving on to other departments.”

Hoke said resignations from the department were evidence of management failures, not successes.

“[Resignations] can happen, but they shouldn’t be a common occurrence,” he said.

Judge rules on pre-trial motions

The village and two police officers suing the village each won three motions filed in federal court last Thursday before Judge Joan Gottschall.

Tomorrow, lawyers for the village will file a motion seeking to have Gottschall rule summarily on dismissal of Rutz’s False Claims suit.

As a result of Gottschall’s ruling, evidence and testimony from the Rutz False Claims Act case will be allowed at the two joined trials for age and sex discrimination and retaliation.

Details of Rutz’s and co-plaintiff Thomas Ludvik’s filings with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) will also be allowed at trial, as will testimony and evidence related to Village President Frank Paris’ alleged “dinosaur” remark about older River Forest officers.

In a victory for the village, former police chief Michael Holub’s employment history at the Stickney Police Department will not be allowed at trial, nor will details of a June, 2006 court settlement by a third plaintiff, Lt. Bruce Higgins be allowed. The disclosure of a no-confidence vote by police patrol officers in June of this year will also be barred.

Gottschall deferred a decision on the admissibility of a letter by testing firm founder Steven Stanard critical of the defendants that was published in the Wednesday Journal in November, 2002. The judge formally warned Rutz and Ludvik’s lawyers not to raise the Stanard letter in opening statements at trial.

Join the discussion on social media!