Chief of Police Brian Manley determined that Officer Goodman's actions violated Civil Service Commission Rule 10.03(L), and suspended him from duty for 30 days, from December 13, 2019 through January 11, 2020. Internal Affairs' investigation revealed that Officer Goodman failed to spend enough time with a resident to evaluate his mental health status during a Crisis Intervention Team call.
Disclaimer: The following text was extracted from the PDF file to make this document more accessible. This machine-generated content may contain styling errors due to redactions. In some instances, text may not load if the original file is a scanned image or has not been made searchable. For the full version of the document, please view the PDF.
Civil Service Office
Austin Police Department
Office ofthe ChiefofPolice
Joya Hayes, Director of Civil Service
Brian Manley, Chief of Police
December 12, 2019
Agreed Temporary Suspension of Police Officer Jason Goodman #4042
Internal Affairs Control Number 2019-0906
Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code, Section
143.052, and Rule 10, Rules of Procedure for the Firefighters’, Police Officers’ and
Emergency Medical Service Personnel’s Civil Service Commission, I have agreed to
temporarily suspended Police Officer Jason Goodman #4042 from duty as a police officer
for a period of thirty (30) days. The agreed temporary suspension is effective beginning on
December 13, 2019 and continuing through January 11,2020.
I took this action because violated Civil Service Commission Rule 10.03, which sets forth
the grounds for disciplinary suspensions of employees in the classified service, and states:
No employee of the classified service of the City of Austin shall engage in,
or be involved in, any of the following acts or conduct, and the same shall
constitute cause for suspension of an employee from the classified service of
Violation of any of the rules and regulations of the Fire
Department or Police Department or of special orders, as
The following are specific acts committed by Officer Goodman in violation of Rule 10:
On May 22, 2019, Officer Jason Goodman responded to a Check Welfare call as a Crisis
Intervention Team (CIT) officer. Upon arrival, Officer Goodman was advised by the
property manager that a resident was displaying erratic behavior, including putting a belt
around his neck and saying to other residents, “Bye.” Officer Goodman then spoke to the
resident at the front door of his unit for 42 seconds and detemfined he did not meet the
criteria for an Emergency Detention. Officer Goodman’s supervisors reviewed this minimal
interaction and ensuing events and referred this matter to Internal Affairs for investigation.
Internal Affairs asked Officer Goodman if he believed he spent enough time speaking to the
identified resident to evaluate his mental health status like he was trained. Officer Goodman
took full responsibility for his inactions and acknowledged he did not. Officer Goodman
went on to say his inadequate evaluation was a violation of APD’s Mental Health Response
General Order. Moreover, Officer Goodman elaborated that he also violated APD’s Neglect
of Duty General Order for his “/FJailure to take appropriate action on the occasion of
crime, disorder [sicJ, investigation or other condition deserving police attention.”
By these actions, Officer Goodman violated Rule 10.03(L) by violating the following rules
and regulations of the Austin Police Department:
Responsibilities: Neglect of Duty
Neglect of Duty
Employees will satisfactorily perform their duties. Examples of unsatisfactory
performance include, but are not limited to:
Failure to take appropriate action on the occasion of a crime, disorder,
investigation or other condition deserving police attention.
Austin Police Department Policy 445.4.2: Mental Health Response: Peace
Officer Emergency Detention
Peace Officer Emergency Detention
The authority to apprehend a person by using the Peace Officer’s Emergency
Detention (POED) is granted under the Tex. Health and Safety Code §
573.001. This type of custody is protective rather than criminal in nature and
does not constitute an arrest. A POED may be used when:
The officer has reason to believe, and does believe, that the person is
mentally ill; and
Because of that mental illness there is a substantial risk of serious harm
to the person or to others unless the person is immediately restrained;
The officer believes that there is not sufficient time to obtain a warrant
before taking the person into custody.
An employee encountering a person who needs to be assessed for a possible
POED shall contact an on-duty CIT officer.
The responding CIT officer shall be responsible for:
Conducting an assessment to determine whether the person
should be handled as an Emergency Detention;
the appropriate mental health
facility or furnishing referral infonnation;
The CIT officer may transport the Emergency Detention
or have a non CIT officer transport the Emergency
Detention afier completing all paperwork and advising
where the subject is to be taken.
Preparing all required documentation.
If it is determined that the person does not meet the criteria for a POED,
the initial officer may:
Request a response from the Expanded Mobile Crisis Outreach
Team (EMCOT), (refer to 445.6)
Release the person, ifno criminal violation has been corniTlitted;
Use other available referral services or release options; or
Place the person in jail, provided the officer has legal authority
to do so.
In addition to this agreed temporary suspension, Officer Goodman agrees to the following
terms and conditions:
Officer Goodman shall attend any and all training specified by his chain of
Officer Goodman shall be evaluated by one of APDs Staff Psychologists and
the contents of that evaluation will be shared with his chain of command.
If the APD Staff Psychologist recommends a program of counseling, Officer
Goodman must successfully complete that program of counseling (it is
expected that any program of counseling will last for at least twelve months
but that is for the qualified professional to determine).
The program of counseling will be completed on Officer Goodman’s off duty
time, unless the Chief approves the use of accrued vacation leave.
Officer Goodman shall be responsible for paying all costs of the program of
counseling that are not covered by his health insurance plan.
If Officer Goodman fails to successfully complete the program of counseling,
the Chief may, at his sole discretion, indefinitely suspend him without right
of appeal to the Civil Service Commission, to an Independent Third Party
Hearing Examiner, to District Court, and Officer Goodman may not file a
grievance under Article 20 of the Meet and Confer Agreement.
If this evaluation and/or the program of counseling raises a question whether
Officer Goodman is sufficiently mentally or physically fit to continue his
duties as a police officer, it could trigger the fitness for duty process set forth
in Texas Local Government Code Chapter 143.081.
Officer Goodman agrees to a probationary period of one (1) year, with the
additional requirement that if, during the probationary period, he commits the
same or a similar act of misconduct for which he is being suspended (the
determination whether an act is the same or similar is solely within the
purview of the Chief of Police and is not subject to review by the Civil
Service Commission, an Independent Third Party Hearing Examiner, or
District Court), he will be indefinitely suspended without the right to appeal
that suspension to the Civil Service Commission, an Independent Third Party
Hearing Examiner, to District Court, and he may not file a grievance under
Article 20 of the Meet and Confer Agreement. The one (1) year period begins
on the day Officer Goodman returns to duty after completing his agreed
suspension. Should Officer Goodman commit the same or similar violation
outside the one (1) year period, he will be indefinitely suspended but retains
the right to appeal that suspension.
Officer Goodman understands that this temporary suspension may be taken
into consideration in the Chief’s determination whether a valid reason exists
to bypass him for a future promotion in accordance with APD Policy
Officer Goodman acknowledges that he had the opportunity to discuss this
agreed suspension and additional terms and conditions set forth herein with
a representative of his choosing prior to signing his acceptance where
By signing this Agreed Discipline, Officer Goodman understands and agrees that I am
forgoing my right to indefinitely suspend him for the conduct described above and that by
agreeing to the suspension, Officer Goodman waives all right to appeal to this agreed
suspension and the additional terms and conditions to the Civil Service Commission, to an
Independent Third Party Hearing Examiner, to District Court, and he may not file a
grievance under Article 20 of the Meet and Confer Agreement.
BRIAN r1~V’Chief of
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I acknowledge receipt of the above and foregoing memorandum of agreed temporary
suspension and I understand that by entering into this disciplinary agreement the Chief
forgoes his right to indefinitely suspend me for the conduct described above and that by
agreeing to the suspension, I have no right to appeal this disciplinary action to the Civil
Service Commission, to an Independent Third Party Hearing Examiner, to District Court,
and I may not file a grievance under Article 20 of the Meet and Confer Agreement.
cer Jason Goodman # 4042