Officials comment on audit charges

When looking at the audit notes as a whole, there are allegations and conspiracy claims on both sides of the issue, with some making specific complaints and others pointing toward specific officers who are the problem.

Officers in the audit also made specific claims about public figures in the nature of which required responses from those figures, ranging f rom Sheriff Johnny Moats using this as a power play to take over the Police Department, to a clandestine meeting between commissioners, police officers and Moats.

Three of those people claimed to have been involved in that meeting 'at the middle school' all deny the charge as rumor, and potential political motivations behind why Moats sent his note in early May to the board.

Commissioners Jennifer Hulsey and Scotty Tillery both denied the meeting ever happened along with Moats when s ought f or r esponse about the specific charges.

Specifically, Moats said that he's never met with one of the officers alleged to have been at that meeting, but that he had spoken with him by telephone at the time.

That officer - who also said he was one of the 18 to go to Moats - did later meet the Sheriff, he said.

"I've met with him since the letter came out, but

not to discuss this," Moats said. "We met at a party, but we didn't even discuss it."

Hulsey and Tillery had more specific comments on the meeting.

They provided written responses to questions posed to them about the allegations made within the audit notes. Hulsey said that "this meeting that was referenced never happened. That's just not true."

"Facts were twisted and instead of asking me if there was a meeting, someone has embellished a story. In fact, one officer in particular indicated that they could confirm that there was a meeting between myself, Commissioner Tillery, and an officer," her statement read.

It went on: "This is absolutely not true. I have asked for evidence of that confirmation, and so has county administration and there is none. What concerns me about this statement is that someone is spreading false slanderous allegations in the department about an officer and Commissioners. And let me just add that if I did have this so called meeting with the officer and Commission- er Tillery there is nothing wrong with that. As a commissioner I have every right to speak to an employee. Furthermore, the tax payers need to know that these lies are being spread and that we need an external investigation of this department which I have asked for on May 22 and was denied by the majority of the board. And as of today (July 20) another officer left the county police department."

Tillery also added a written response to the charge that a meeting happened.

He wrote: "There is no truth what so ever in this allegation. When I read this allegation, I went directly to our Manager and directed him to speak with this officer about the allegation and that I wanted proof that this meeting took place. When this officer was asked to provide proof of their all egation, t he officer could not provide any such proof other than they heard it several times within the department. In the Audit, this meeting was referenced by three additional officers as well, leading me to believe the originator took something that they heard and manufactured this rumor, why I do not know yet."

It went on to say that "I ask if anyone has any proof that I attend the referenced meeting, please come forward as soon as possible and provide your proof. My comment also goes back to the answers I provided in question number 2 and 5. I do hope that an apology will come soon to me and all names involved, plus to our Police Officers that were led to believe this meeting happened."

Dodd also said that he had been presented no evidence by any of his officers that a meeting took place. County Manager Matt Denton responded that he also has been presented no evidence to prove the meeting happened either.

Both Tillery and Hulsey say they are reserving the right to take further action on the specific claims made about them.

Further claims were also made about Tillery's motivations behind a desire to merge the police departments, which he denies.

"The only intention I have is to help our Tax Payers receive the best Public Safety in the State," Tillery said in written remarks to questions posed about claims made against him in the audit notes. "It does not matter if we have one public safety department or ten, as long as the tax- payers are receiving the service they deserve."

Tillery did admit to a meeting happening between himself and command staff in a specific complaint made during one of the officer's interviews (see this week's story on the audits online to read more about it.)

He wrote that "I requested a meeting with the Chief and the Assistant Chief several months ago. I was working on a plan to help increase the pay for the PCPD and to retain our existing Patrol Officers. I asked if they would join me to help provide additional ideas and the data that will be needed to present to the Board of Commissioners. They were very excited and they both agreed to help."

"As far as clearing the air, yes we had what I thought was a great conversation about rumors floating around from each side. I left that day excited for our PCPD because, I knew we were about to climb the long awaited mountain addressing the funding for our PCPD," his statement continued. " This was a two hour meeting filled with a lot of ideas for this plan. Unfortunately, I never received a response from them in reference to this plan."

All of the claims stem from a statement in several officer's interview summaries in the audit that their chief has political aspirations of his own.

Dodd said he is considering a run for office in 2020 f or Sheriff, but hasn't yet made up his mind. It didn't stop him from telling at least one commissioner of his plan, and then word spreading from there.

Dodd and Hulsey both confirmed their conversation they had at a late April County Commission session held in place of early May meetings, but neither could remember if it was the April 24 or 25 session.

"She and I were having a conversation about an ongoing criminal case, and she asked me how it was going," Dodd said. "I told her and I said it would be easier if the Sheriff would stop interfering and pass out false information to victims. She said that according to the Sheriff that you can't do anything about it, and I said I could always run and become the Sheriff."

"The Sheriff who wasn't at t he meeting t hen showed up in five minutes," Dodd said. "And he never comes to meetings. I'm not insinuating anything by that. But he did come in, and he sat down and wouldn't talk to me. Even when executive session started he wouldn't speak to me at all."

Hulsey said in her comments about the conversation that she had later been confronted by Dodd.

"I remember this conversation, because I remember that Chief Dodd came up right in front of me, I think before a meeting. There were other people there. He informed me that he was going to run for Sheriff, and I said OK. The next morning around 7 a.m. I got a phone call from Chief Dodd asking if I had told the Sheriff if he was running for sheriff himself, and I was kind of surprised. I didn't tell the Sheriff, but if I did what would that matter? Later, I was told that it was shared with other officers that I called or texted the Sheriff during the commissioner meeting and that's why the Sheriff came i n and stared the Chief down. This was so ridiculous I didn't believe it, but now it's in the notes. Honestly, I have more to worry about than to call the Sheriff in the middle of a meeting. Most ridiculous thing I've ever heard."

Dodd said that he's had no communication with the Sheriff since that meeting and then the letter being sent to the County Commission following that.

"I've tried twice to talk to him," he said, and approached him after the May 15 decision by commissioners to begin the audit process with McFall in the lead, and the Sheriff said at the time he would do so when his schedule permitted.

Dodd added that "he has yet to take me up on that offer."

On the other side of the letter is Moats, who had a number of comments to make after he got to read the notes for himself.

He continues to contend that he had not once prompted any officer to come to him with complaints, and that he has no intentions of trying to take over the Polk County Police Department, as he has made in several statements in the past.

Moats also said that he felt betrayed by those who had come to him with complaints, and he believe he might be the one being setup politically. He added he was upset by the remarks of officers as much as they were upset by his letter.

"Either they didn't tell the truth in the audit, or it was a setup to make me look bad," Moats said. "If anyone should be outraged, it ought to be me."

He did admit to some of the claims made in the audit being true as well. For instance, one officer claimed that he had been banned from the Polk County Jail for alleged comments he made dis-