Birch appeals firing

WAMPSVILLE >> An appeal of the May 14 firing of county probation direction Karen Birch was filed in state Supreme Court.

The filing was logged at the Madison County Court Clerks office on Wednesday.

Birch was suspended Nov. 29, 2011 after an internal investigation was launched into complaints about her mismanagement of the Probation Department. Since then Civil Service Law- required Section 75 hearings have been conducted.

Hearing Officer John Trela issued a determination as a result of those hearings, finding Birch guilty of failing to remove a probation officer from a case in which her life had been threatened by a probationer, for allowing that probation officer to continue to work on the case – and more specifically to write a pre- sentence investigation report on that probationer – and creating an environment in which that probation officer violated regulations that require impartiality and fairness in the investigative and reporting process.

Trela found that the seriousness of those charges warranted a termination from employment.

In his written findings, Trela validated his recommendation by saying Birch failed to, “accept respon-

sibility, and to show remorse, for your actions, which implicated officer safety and further reflected your mismanagement of a situation, giving rise to an actual or apparent conflict of interest.”

In January, during the disciplinary hearings, then- senior probation officer Joanne Miller ( who later was promoted to deputy probation director) was asked to testify for the county.

Miller said that in early 2011, Birch asked her to help a fellow probation officer complete a pre- sentence report of an individual who allegedly threatened that officer.

During testimony, Miller said Birch made arrangements for a Madison County corrections officer to be present at Miller’s interview with the probationer, even though the man was incarcerated at the time, and that he was not rude to Miller during the interview.

Miller also said the probation officer co- wrote the pre- sentence report for the specific probationer. Miller stated she had never before heard of a situation where two probation officers worked on a report together.

The court papers filed this week request a hearing for the appeal in state Supreme Court on the basis that the accusations and final opinion rendered against Birch by the hearing officer were, “illegal, arbitrary, capricious and lacking substantial evidence...”

Further the papers say that the “final administrative determination rendered finding Birch guilty of the charges and ordering termination of employment were only after due process had not been met and that the counties actions through the entire process were “unlawful.”

The papers ask for a judgement seeking a transfer for the case to the appellate court for reversal of her termination and retroactive pay from May 14.

Madison County officials heeded Trela’s determination and ending her employment Tuesday.

On March 25, final briefings -- similar to closing arguments -- were submitted by attorneys for both Birch and Madison County.

Birch has been on paid leave since Nov. 29, 2011, when an internal investigation was launched into complaints claiming department mismanagement. She has continued to receive her $ 66,926 annual salary.

In April 2012, the county filed formal disciplinary charges against Birch. The five accusations centered around the time period of February to May 2011, claiming Birch:

• Failed to remove a probation officer from supervising a person on probation who had allegedly made threats against the officer;

• Promised but failed to remove the officer from the duty of conducting pre- sentencing report for the same probationer;

• Failed to follow safety procedures within the department;

• Allowed a probation officer to be present in the workplace while intoxicated.

The county also initially claimed she caused high employee turnover because of mismanagement. However, the accusation was later dropped. County officials explained that dropping the charge would speed up the hearing process.

Disciplinary hearings wrapped up in late January this year.