OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY

To:
From:
Subject:
Date:

Mayor Sylvester Sly James and Members of the City Council

William D. Geary, City Attorney / Ethics Compliance Officer
Consideration of discipline of Councilman Michael Brooks
December 16, 2014

On November 4, 2014, Ms. Tonia Titus contacted Phillip Yelder, Director of Human Relations,
concerning an alleged act of violence against her by Councilman Michael Brooks. Later that
evening, Ms. Titus contacted City Manager Troy Schulte by email asking to speak about a
personal matter. That conversation happened the morning of November 5, 2015. In that
discussion, Ms. Titus alleged that Councilman Brooks assaulted her in the workplace on the 22nd
Floor of City Hall on November 4, 2014.
The City Manager removed Ms. Titus from her position as Councilman Brooks assistant and
placed her in an open position in another department in another building. Also that morning, I
was given the allegation in my capacity as City Attorney and Ethics Compliance Officer. An
independent fact-finding investigation was done for me after securing the services of Mr. Donald
S. Prophete. I have received the result of his interviews.
The City Charter leaves the discipline of Council members to the Council. Section 211(b)(2) of
the Charter reads:
The Council may punish its members for disorderly conduct or violation of the
Councils rules, or for misconduct in office. By an affirmative vote of nine
members of the Council, the Council may expel a member for disorderly conduct
or violation of the Councils rules, or for misconduct in office. No member shall
be expelled unless notified in writing of the charge or charges and given an
opportunity to be heard in a public hearing.
The Standing Rules of the City Council do not address how the Council conducts itself when
considering a complaint made against a Council member. Roberts Rules of Order, Newly
Revised, provides procedures that are not consistent with the requirements of federal and state
law. Consequently, you must establish rules to consider a complaint.
An elected official facing the potential of removal from office is entitled to know the allegations
against him in sufficient detail to mount a defense to clear his name of the allegations. Ms. Titus
alleges a pattern of unwanted touching, in some instances amounting to violence against her
person during her employment as Councilman Brooks assistant. Specific incidents alleged by
Ms. Titus address violence occurring in March 2012, and on November 4, 2014. Alleging a
pattern of violent acts in the workplace, Ms. Titus alleges being punched (initially playfully, but
it becoming more aggressive) and slapped by Councilman Brooks during her tenure as his
assistant.

Mayor and Members of the Council

December 16, 2014
Page 2

However, the first inquiry is whether a complaint should be brought before the City Council.
Although I have reviewed the allegations and statements, my role is not to determine who is
telling the truth. Rather, it is to determine if the complaint and other statements or evidence, if
true, could constitute disorderly conduct or misconduct in office. To draw an imperfect analogy,
just as a grand jurys obligation is not to find guilt or innocence, but to determine if probable
cause exists that a crime was committed, my obligation is not to find that disorderly conduct or
misconduct in office was committed, but to determine if there exists evidence from which an
unbiased reviewer could find the existence of that behavior.
Without doubt, there are discrepancies between the statements of Ms. Titus and Councilman
Brooks. He refutes each of the allegations made against him; he suggests a reason for Ms. Titus
behavior. Nevertheless, it is at a public hearing you must determine whom to believe; you will
judge the demeanor and credibility of the people involved and the witnesses presented, as well as
the conflicts or consistencies found in other evidence.
I am attaching a draft resolution that sets out my recommended procedural steps. They provide
the necessary due process of law to which Councilman Brooks is entitled, and reflect the
requirements of the Missouri Administrative Procedure Act.
It is my intention to place this resolution on the City Councils docket for first reading at its
December 18, 2014, meeting. This is the last meeting before the holiday break. I recommend this
resolution be placed on that days Business Session so I may answer any questions about the
terms it contains and that it be adopted on December 18, 2014. That action will require nine
persons voting in favor of the resolution. If the resolution gains less than nine votes on that day,
among the Councils options are: (1) send to a Committee for a hearing; or (2) hold on the
Councils legislative docket for consideration on January 8, 2015.

William Geary
City Attorney
cc: Marilyn Sanders, City Clerk
Troy Schulte, City Manager