Tommy Washbush
Cop cars parked at the Midtown police department on Mineral Poin
The Madison police department releases quarterly summaries of disciplinary cases.
In the only case that led to discipline against a member of the Madison Police Department during the second and third quarters of 2024, from April 1 through Sept. 30, an officer was found to have violated department policy for what he contended was an accidental use of the word “gay.”
The officer, Rene Gonzalez, was eating lunch this past May at the MPD’s training center with his supervisor, Sgt. Theresa Magyera, when the discussion turned to a retreat that another officer was planning to attend. Gonzalez asked, “Is this one of [the officer’s] naked retreats?” Magyera, in her incident report, said she tried to ignore the query and change the subject, but Gonzalez, a member of the department’s training team, persisted, asking “Is this a naked, gay retreat?”
According to the MPD’s 23-page investigative file on the case, produced by its Professional Standards and Internal Affairs unit and released to Isthmus last month in response to an open records request, Gonzalez immediately sought to take the comment back, saying he meant to ask, “Is this a naked, silent retreat?” but misspoke. Apparently, the term “naked” has been jokingly applied to retreats in which participants are for some reason expected to remain silent and not make eye contact, and thus would not know whether others are wearing clothes.
Magyera, in a transcribed interview, rejected Gonzalez’s explanation: “I truly think he meant gay and not silent. And I think silent was meant as a cover-up.” The investigator, Sgt. Ryan Gibson, related that Gonzalez denied “using the term gay in a derogatory meaning towards someone’s sexual orientation, nor did he use the word gay to refer to the retreat being lame or anything like that.” But the officer conceded his comment was inappropriate and apologized for making it.
At a determination hearing on Sept. 30, Gonzalez was found to have violated the department’s “Prohibited Harassment and/or Discrimination policy” and received a one-day suspension, held in abeyance for a year from the incident date. If he stays out of trouble between now and next May 9, no suspension will be imposed.
Each quarter since January 2016, the MPD has been releasing and archiving summaries of disciplinary cases involving officers and civilian staff, along with lengthy lists of positive recognition. The summary for the second quarter of 2024, April through June, said there were no concluded cases that led to discipline; the one for the third quarter, July through September, said there was only one. It was the case involving Gonzalez.
The MPD’s bare-bones summary for that case, 2024PSIA-52, did not name Gonzalez. It simply said that an MPD officer had received a one-day suspension for making “an offensive remark when speaking about another officer amongst peers.” The summary did not note that the suspension would be held in abeyance.
Could it be that this seemingly minor incident was the only serious infraction by a member of the Madison Police Department during an entire six-month period? As it happens, there were many more complaints that were investigated during this time that did not lead to discipline.
A spreadsheet prepared last month at Isthmus’ request by Lt. Eric Vosburg, head of the Professional Standards and Internal Affairs unit, shows that a total of 50 investigations into alleged police misconduct, including the Gonzalez case, were concluded during the third quarter. Among them are seven complaints alleging improper “use of force,” all of which led to a finding of “Exonerated.” In 13 other cases, allegations regarding professional conduct and other rules were “sustained” but, Vosburg confirms, led only to “documented counseling,” which is not considered discipline.
What was the alleged misconduct in these cases, exactly? Were they investigated as thoroughly as officer Gonzalez’s verbal infraction? Were legitimate concerns about the use of force and the way that officers treated people with whom they interacted brushed aside when the investigators concluded there was not enough evidence to merit disciplinary charges that would be subject to strenuous challenge?
Further open records requests could shed light on these matters. But so could a review by an independent agency charged not with imposing discipline but with finding ways to improve performance. And that, it so happens, is now part of the picture in Madison, in the form of a newly operational Police Civilian Oversight Board and Office of the Independent Monitor.
Though Mayor Satya Rhodes-
Conway had proposed cuts to the office if the $22 million budget referendum did not pass, the city council restored most of the funding after taxpayers approved the measure on Nov. 5.
While the office lacks the authority to impose discipline, it can recommend policy changes based on the complaints it receives and provide legal assistance to citizens seeking disciplinary action through the Madison Police and Fire Commission, which does have this authority.
But questions remain about whether the office will be providing greater transparency to complaints now being filed with either the MPD or the Police and Fire Commission. At a Nov. 11 press conference, the independent monitor, Robin Copley, said she did not know whether citizens filing complaints with the MPD or PFC would be informed that they can also lodge a complaint through her office.
“We’re not actually going to be doing a lot of disciplinary investigations into active incidents,” Copley said. Instead, the office will be looking to see “where there is friction between the community and the police department, and how we can bridge that gap.”
The focus, she said, will be on “analyzing how those open and critical incidents are investigated.” This will include a review of complaints filed directly with the MPD.
For instance, Copley said the fact, previously reported in Isthmus, that during the first quarter of 2023 just one of 71 complaints filed led to discipline might merit further investigation. “That shows there might be something to look into here, because if there’s 70 non-sustained complaints, that still means that 70 people complained about something.” She said the office will also want to know “what the public is actually complaining about…in order to find a policy solution that would eliminate the source of those complaints.”
Greg Gelembiuk, the office’s data analyst, added that “under the memorandum of understanding that Robin negotiated with MPD, we would have access to all those records, even if it was not a sustained complaint.”
