Four deputies say sheriff retaliated against their political activities

Deputies say sheriff retaliated for political activities

By Chad Selweski

Sunday, September 22, 2013

Four Macomb County deputies have filed a federal lawsuit claiming Sheriff Anthony Wickersham demoted them in retaliation for their 2012 election support for Wickersham’s political opponent.

In this constitutional law case accusing Wickersham of violating the deputies’ First Amendment right to speak out in favor of their preferred candidate, retired Sheriff’s Office Lt. Greg Stone, the plaintiffs are all decorated officers. They are: Jared Baker, Bret Likins, Jason Tabor and Dann Justin Burbuela, son of former Chesterfield Township police chief Dan Burbuela.

“I believe there are more. In situations like this, there are some people who are not willing to stick their neck out, especially when they’re working for people with a history of retaliating,” said Deborah Gordon, the Bloomfield Hills-based attorney representing the four plaintiffs.

The suit filed in U.S. District Court claims Wickersham downgraded the status of the four officers to “field deputy” after they openly backed Stone in the August 2012 Democratic primary.

That meant they were removed from their duties as officers working out of a specific Sheriff’s Office substation and instead spent many hours on generic road patrols or in a hospital watching over an injured criminal suspect or tackling menial duties in the county jail.

The county has denied the sheriff targeted the deputies for punishment or deliberately encroached on their First Amendment rights. The defense is that the actions are related to the professional duties and responsibilities of running the department.

Wickersham declined to comment.

The court case marks the second time that the sheriff has faced allegations of retaliating against Stone supporters. In December, Sheriff’s Office Reserves -- volunteer officers who serve on an occasional basis – claimed that about 50 of their members were abruptly dismissed by Wickersham.

Wickersham insisted the dismissals – doled out in terse form-letters – were not about politics or loyalty but reflected the results of an annual review that singled out reserve officers who had failed to put in enough hours of service or otherwise failed to make the grade.

The sheriff’s explanation was bitterly challenged by some of the reserves who were bounced, most of whom would not speak publicly. Stone, like Wickersham, a Macomb Township Democrat, called the actions a “purge” and said all who were cast aside supported his campaign.

In the federal lawsuit that was filed July 31, the 2012 off-duty political activities of the four deputies varied, but it consisted of: displaying Stone campaign signs on personal vehicles or on their lawns; canvassing and distributing flyers for the candidate; and working the polls on Election Day.

The attorney hired by the county to defend Wickersham, Karen Berkery of the downtown Detroit law firm of Kitch Drutchas Wagner, could not be reached for comment. In her response to the suit, she argued that Wickersham, as a high-ranking public official, deserves at least partial immunity from the unspecified damages the deputies are seeking.

The 2012 election marked the first time in his long career that Wickersham faced the voters. He was appointed interim sheriff in January 2011 to succeed Mark Hackel, Macomb’s first county executive.

Wickersham easily survived an aggressive Democratic primary election challenge from Stone, who retired from the Sheriff’s Department in 2011 after a 35-year career. That race, at times, took on a nasty tone. In contrast, Wickersham breezed through the fall general election, defeating a Republican, Steve Thomas, who was making his third run for sheriff.

The change in assignments for the four allegedly aggrieved deputies, which occurred in approximately January, did not involve a reduction in pay. Their suit claims that it was a setback that could result in the loss of future wages and pension benefits.

Their attorney, Gordon, alleges that their chances of receiving a future promotion are “next to zero.” The county denies that assertion.

In the court documents she filed, Gordon claims a poisonous atmosphere developed within the Sheriff’s Office during the 2012 campaign and that her clients were warned by Wickersham supporters that they were “sh----- in the sheriff’s back yard.”

Though the deputies have minimal money claims, their suit emphasizes the alleged damage to their reputations.

Collectively, the four have 43 years of experience on the job and they have received awards for life-saving and other exemplary service. One received the Award for Professional Excellence from Wickersham last year. Two graduated from the police academy at or near the top of their class.

According to the accusations in the suit, after the sheriff cleared the hurdle of winning the primary he bided his time for a few months and then switched the four supposedly disloyal officers to “field deputy” status. In the interim, they claim that they were never reprimanded or scolded for their job performance.

“It’s rather clear what happened here,” Gordon said. “The handwriting is on the wall.”