Questions remain about whether an alleged settlement with CMPD Chief Johnny Jennings is valid and what would happen to the person who leaked the details.
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Amid allegations of corruption within the Charlotte City Council and an alleged settlement with the police chief, WCNC Charlotte is looking into viewer questions about what’s true and what comes next.
Background
Charlotte City Council recently reached a reported settlement with CMPD Chief Johnny Jennings during a closed-door session over former Council member Tariq Bokhari’s public and private war against the police chief.
Bokhari, who recently resigned to take a role with the Trump Administration, spent weeks in the aftermath of the deadliest police shooting in Charlotte history trying to convince the chief that he should let patrol officers wear outer carrier vests. Over text message, Bokhari told the chief, “You’ve made a terrible error in judgment” and “I hate what comes next.”
At a press conference last week, responding to allegations of corruption, Mayor Vi Lyles said Bokhari’s intent was to damage the chief’s reputation and end his career.
RELATED: Krista Bokhari calls for Charlotte police chief resignation
However, the chief never filed an actual lawsuit before the city allegedly came to this settlement. The city still has not confirmed this settlement.
WCNC Charlotte consulted local attorney Gary Mauney about whether that is allowed and what will happen to the person who leaked the closed-door info.
Is the alleged settlement valid?
In short, yes. Mauney says the council is fully within its right to come to a settlement without a formal lawsuit filed.
“People often settle legal matters without the necessity of having to file a lawsuit, and they do so for lots of reasons,” Mauney explained. “Perhaps they know they are liable, perhaps they want to avoid litigation. Perhaps they want to avoid publicity. There’s nothing inherently improper about that.”
Will the whistleblower face criminal sanctions?
According to Mauney, this question is a bit more nuanced.
At last week’s press conference, interim City Attorney Anthony Fox wouldn’t confirm the settlement, but said there will be an investigation and that whoever leaked the details could face criminal sanctions.
“We’re not going to confirm or deny,” Fox said. “The law provides certain confidentiality of closed session as well as personnel privacy matters, and we’re going to respect the law.”
Fox originally cited the Meetings of Public Bodies Act, which does not say anything about charges, but later corrected that to the Personnel Privacy Act. The state statute does say a violation would mean a misdemeanor and a $500 fine. However, Mauney says this may compete with the First Amendment.
“The First Amendment encourages speaking by public officials,” Mauney said. “It limits the nature of restrictions that can be put on them, and so the First Amendment is in tension with this statute where perhaps there’s a legitimate need in order to settle cases and talk about employment matters to be able to have confidentiality.”
Some, including Krista Bokhari, have argued this statute would not apply at all since it did not include the sharing of a physical file. However, Mauney says whoever did leak the information should assume it does apply.
What’s next?
At their meeting Monday night, multiple council members said they wanted to move past this and do better in the future. Lyles said she and Council member Reneé Johnson will lead the charge on turning the public disagreements into action.
“It’s been a tough week,” Lyles said. “This council has an opportunity to really stop and think to do some things that we may do differently.”
Johnson noted she and Council member Victoria Watlington had both expressed frustration about the way this was handled and said, “I think we need to do things differently.”
Mayor Lyles said a formal conversation about that will have to wait until after the council adopts a budget, which is currently scheduled for June 9.
In terms of the investigations, Mauney says it’s not up to Fox.
“It’s important to know that the city attorney is not prosecutor, so it would be up to the prosecutor in Mecklenburg County to make decisions about that sort of thing,” Mauney said.
There’s still no word on whether the prosecutor will move forward with the case.
Contact Julie Kay at [email protected] and follow her on Facebook, X and Instagram.
