Surfside Beach council eliminates its police oversight

The Facts
By KENT HOLLE kent.holle@thefacts.com
March 18, 2023

SURFSIDE BEACH — Councilman Jon Gerber stated multiple times he was troubled by the dueling ordinances on Tuesday’s agenda, which removed the City Council completely from the hiring, firing and disciplinary process of the police department.

If the rest of the council had concerns, they ultimately did not let it stop them from passing the ordinance changes in a 4-1 vote to rely solely on a state regulatory body for oversight in the matters.

“We’ve been scrapping ordinances, scrapping civilian oversight, putting lines through it and taking it out of code that involves us, one after another. I’m going to be honest with you, we’ve been negligent in our duties,” Gerber said.

Gerber and Mayor Greg Bisso both had items related to the subject on the agenda, with Gerber’s being a tweak of the then-current code which had the chief of police, an office currently held by William Moncier, and the City Council to possibly be engaged in hiring and firing officers and non-officer employees, as well as the doling out of disciplinary actions.

“Under the one that Mr. Gerber is going through, in a nutshell it basically goes into if an officer is terminated with cause, they have a grievance process which is in our policies and procedures, which allows that individual to file with the City Council that they want to be heard on their behalf,” Moncier said.

“The other ordinance that our lawyer brought up is that we take City Council completely out of that, which we would change in our policies and procedures and the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement has a system already put in place if an officer is terminated.”

The 30-day appeal process with TCOLE that was available to personnel, regardless of the city’s ordinances, he said.

Previously, officers had been appointed jointly by the chief and the City Council, while non-officer roles were hired by the chief. The presented ordinance amendment struck through the City Council’s role, now reading, “All officers and non-officer employees are appointed to their office by the Chief of Police. All employees serve at the will of the village and may be discharged from employment and/or removed from office with the village, with or without cause.”

In the next clause, it clarifies, “Officers and non-officer employees may be discharged with or without cause by the Chief, which requires no notice to the employee, nor opportunity to be heard.”

The entirety of the remaining clauses under the section regarding hiring and discipline were struck, including those which deal with the removal from office by the council, public hearings on disciplinary actions and the addressing of complaints by officers with regards to the chief before the council, suspensions and the ability of the council to override any decisions.

Gerber moved for acceptance of his modifications, which died for a lack of second among the council.

The second proposal, brought up a few items later, was the sweeping change which removes the City Council from that process entirely. Councilman Bob Petty spoke in favor of the resolution, saying the department should be outside the council’s influence.

“My personal opinion is, if they already have law enforcement and experts that do this on a daily basis, why are us council members even getting involved in that business?” Petty said. “I don’t even know why we’re even having this discussion when it’s already in place. Most police departments do it exactly that way.”

Gerber said he objected to the item’s inclusion on the agenda in the first place, saying it should not have been included due to the lack of instruction from the council after he had spoken to both Moncier and City Attorney Patton Ritter to craft his alternate proposal from earlier in the meeting.

Bisso disclosed that Ritter and Moncier had written the ordinance taking the council out of the appeals process.

“That is what I’m objecting to — that is against our ordinance. The entire thing is against our ordinance,” he said.

That the ordinance had not been prepared under the direction of council, Gerber said before his objection was denied.

It was after this that Councilman Sean Robertson told Gerber he had been in contact with both Moncier and Ritter and he had directed them toward the second option, something that seemed to take Gerber by surprise. Robertson had spoken earlier about a desire to avoid being a “flat organization” in which all problems were centralized with the council instead of city officials.

“Just for clarity’s sake — for context — I did talk with the mayor and the chief of police. This started, I guess, about two and a half months ago and as recently as last week,” Robertson said. “There were elected officials for clarity and facts’ sake, on what is presented here, so I would like to commend the work that was done by the lawyer, as well as our chief of police, as well as council in our previous conversation and the mayor.”

Gerber continued to object to the ordinance, calling it an “abdication of the authority of council.” When the question was called, however, the ordinance carried easily.

In other business, Gerber also brought possible action regarding outdoor lighting standards before the council, comparing them to the noise ordinance adopted by the city. While there were statements for and against the measure, the main sticking point for some members of the council and the city attorney was the lack of a clear path for enforcement. The motion to adopt failed 3-2, but there were indications the subject could return in the future.

The council also adopted an ordinance change which adds UTVs to the city’s bylaws, putting them under the same regulations in place for golf carts. Residents were reminded that while the recreational vehicles could drive both directions on the city’s beach, that they could not do so beyond the city limit and the county was enforcing one-way traffic with fines.