Half-day hearing leads to firing of Mantua Village Police Chief Joe Urso

In a marathon 12-hour hearing that stretched from 6 p.m. Oct. 21 to just short of 6 a.m. Oct. 22, Mantua Village Council ousted Police Chief Joe Urso, citing a smorgasbord of charges.

This article summarizes the allegations raised by Mayor Tammy Meyer and what the council members heard from witnesses ahead of their vote. 

The allegations

Meyer’s allegations were not criminal charges and have no bearing in court. They relate to alleged violations of the village’s employee policies. In an Oct. 7 letter to council, Mayor Tammy Meyer alleged that:

Charge 1: Urso was guilty of neglect of duty, insubordination, malfeasance, misfeasance, inefficiency or incompetency for continuing to violate the village’s nepotism policy and to favor Officer Miranda Brothers, with whom he has a relationship. Urso and Brothers have repeatedly declined to define the nature of their relationship, but neither objected when others characterized it as romantic or dating.

The nepotism charge is rooted in a 2021-2022 investigation council, then headed by Meyer, initiated into Urso, who even then was involved with Brothers. Far from favoring Brothers, independent investigator Dean DePiero concluded that Urso had actually been more stringent with her.

DePiero did find that Urso violated MPD policy when he was part of a 2021 panel that recommended Brothers for promotion from part-time to full-time employment and when he was involved in a disciplinary action against Brothers. Urso, he said, should have no supervisory authority over Brothers.

Then-Mayor Linda Clark assumed those duties, which were later handed off to department sergeants, especially Sgt. Alfred Gilbert.

Charge 2: Urso was guilty of insubordination, nonfeasance, neglect of duty or incompetency for failing to follow and adhere to an improvement plan the mayor issued.

Charge 3: Urso was guilty of incompetency, misfeasance, inefficiency or insubordination for disregarding the mayor’s directive not to allow on-duty employees to bring their children and pet dogs with them to work, where actively engaged dispatchers were sometimes pulled in as babysitters. In a related charge, she alleged that Urso was guilty of dishonesty for telling Meyer there was only one instance of such happening when in fact there were several, not all of them involving Brothers.

Charge 4: Urso was guilty of inefficiency, incompetence, neglect of duty or misfeasance for taking vacation at the same time as Brothers, the only other full-time officer on the force besides the school resource officer. That allegedly left the department so understaffed that at one point there was no officer available to respond to village needs.

Charge 5: Urso was guilty of insubordination, inefficiency, neglect of duty, incompetency, malfeasance, misfeasance or nonfeasance for failing to bring MPD staffing levels to 24/7 coverage as promised to village residents in May of 2022, when Mantua voters approved a half-percent municipal income tax for that purpose.

Urso countered that he’d received no viable candidates, but Brad Bennett, the village’s counsel, said advertising online and notifying local universities the MPD is hiring was inadequate.

Charge 6: Urso was guilty of incompetency, inefficiency, misfeasance or nonfeasance for failing to provide former school resource officer Anthony Vicich with adequate training, support or guidance.

In two additional charges related to the MPD’s relationship with Crestwood Local Schools, Meyer alleged that Urso was guilty of incompetency, inefficiency, malfeasance or misfeasance for continuing to push for Brothers to assume the SRO role after the superintendent stated she was not a suitable candidate.

And Meyer alleged that Urso was also guilty of insubordination, incompetency, inefficiency, neglect of duty, misfeasance or nonfeasance for failing to follow Meyer’s directive to follow up with the superintendent after the school’s alarms were triggered twice in June 2025.

Urso’s response

Alleging the charges were retaliatory in nature, Urso referenced a Sept. 23 letter he’d sent to council President Steve Thorn, in which he laid a number of his own accusations at Meyer’s feet. He did not detail the charges, which he said date back to early 2024, during the hearing, but The Portager obtained a copy of the letter he sent to the council president.

Urso alleged Meyer was guilty of:

• Disciplinary inconsistencies because she’d disciplined him for insubordination when he raised his voice during a meeting. A department head who did the same thing and used profanity was not disciplined, he said.
• Repeatedly making false and misleading statements that “create confusion, mislead council members, and risk influencing decisions based on incorrect information.”
• Mishandling false allegations, as Meyer did not notify him of Vicich’s accusations or the potential impact of those allegedly false claims on his professional reputation.
• Breach of agreed process when Meyer did not follow the protocol he and she had hammered out for handling a complaint received from the Crestwood schools superintendent.
• Undermining of department head authority for repeatedly involving herself in day-to-day operations of the Mantua PD.
• Fostering a hostile work environment. Citing one example and referencing others, Urso alleged he was targeted for the same behavior other employees displayed.
• Having a negative impact on other leadership and departments. Urso noted that the village fiscal officer had publicly stated, including to council members, that “there is unequal and biased treatment between departments and department heads.”

“It appears that the mayor has continued to carry forward bias stemming from an investigation she initiated in 2022 while serving as council president,” Urso wrote, concluding his letter. “That investigation concluded with no ethical or criminal violations on my part. Yet, her ongoing conduct toward me has been harassing, discriminatory, and disrespectful.”

The Portager also obtained email records confirming that Thorn received Urso’s complaint. The council president informed Urso that the complaint did not comply with Mantua’s accepted procedure because the events either occurred outside the required time period and/or Urso had not pursued an informal resolution.

Urso also specifically defended himself against each of the six charges. He denied trying to pressure Superintendent Aireane Curtis to accept Brothers as a school resource officer, to have influenced or ordered MPD sergeants to schedule Brothers in any way, or to favor her above others in the MPD.

He recalled that he and Meyer had agreed to meet with Curtis about two alarm calls that went unanswered at the high school, but Meyer met with Curtis herself. Urso said Curtis crafted a report about the matter and did not respond to his concerns that the report contained inaccuracies.

He said his last performance review was neither fair nor accurate and that he had offered to help Vicich, not set him up for failure. Urso also underscored Gilbert’s role in the MPD’s night-shift staffing shortage by preventing hires.

“For every person we interview, Sgt. Gilbert finds a roadblock with this person,” Urso said.

He also denied placing his own and Brothers’ interests above those of the village when the pair scheduled their vacations for the same time. He noted that Meyer had signed off on his vacation request, and that Brothers’ request for the same vacation days had been properly approved.

Characterizing MPD as a family that looks out for its members, he said it is standard for department employees to step in when their co-workers are on vacation. He dismissed Bennett’s suggestion that it makes no sense for the department’s only full-time officers to be out at the same time.

Council votes

Mantua Village Council voted on whether they agreed with each of Meyer’s charges. 

The only charge the village council did not agree with was Charge 4, that he was guilty of inefficiency, incompetence, neglect of duty or misfeasance for taking vacation at the same time as Brothers.

Supporting Urso against this charge were council members Dawn King, Kevin Maloney and Thorn. Tallying votes in favor of a guilty opinion were council members Chris Novotny, Denise DiLellio and David Sluka. Four votes were needed to render Urso guilty.

Maloney cast “no” votes on the charges that Urso had neither followed or adhered to the mayor’s improvement plan, that he’d failed to fulfill the promise to staff the MPD 24/7 and that he’d failed to respond properly to the two alarm situations at the school.

Maloney also supported Urso against the dishonesty charge associated with allowing employees to bring their children and dogs to work with them.

King supported Urso against the charge that he’d allowed employees’ children and dogs on station and that he’d failed to adequately train, support or guide Vicich. Thorn cast a no vote against the charge that Urso continued to push for Brothers as SRO despite the superintendent’s wishes to the contrary.

Maloney also cast the sole vote against removing Urso from office.

Sworn testimony

Testifying on his own behalf, Urso declared his innocence of all charges. He said Meyer never got over the allegations proffered when she was a council member, the investigation that ensued and the fallout from it.

Placing him on paid administrative leave two weeks after he submitted a list of his own complaints against Meyer was retaliation, he said.

Testifying on the village’s behalf were Crestwood Local Schools Superintendent Curtis and former School Resource/Road Officer Vicich, who both repeated and expanded upon allegations they had made in sworn affidavits.

Vicich’s testimony focused on Urso’s alleged shortcomings, but his memory seemed to repeatedly fail him upon cross-examination, when he frequently answered “I don’t know,” “I don’t recall” and “I don’t remember.”

Reached after the hearing, Vicich’s wife said he is receiving death threats as a result of news and social media reports of the contents of his affidavit and testimony. Vicich did not respond by press time.

Curtis’ affidavit and testimony partially centered on Urso’s allegedly having pushed Brothers as a school resource officer. She referenced having received correspondence from parents and the community expressing concerns about Brothers, stating that she “is not safe around kids and they did not want her around their kids.” 

Urso said the correspondence was with one parent, Elena Feather-Faber of Hiram, and that the matter had since been resolved to the point that Brothers and her young son had been invited to Feather-Faber’s child’s birthday party.

Reached after the hearing, Feather-Faber said her single email, sent in September 2024, was rooted in concerns district parents had shared with her about Brothers’ interactions with older students. She declined to specify what those concerns were.

Feather-Faber said she had never raised safety concerns, had never stated that Brothers should not be around children and confirmed that her young daughter and Brothers’ son are friends.

Alerted by Brothers that the email was to be used against Urso, Feather-Faber said she did not contact Curtis “because I didn’t know I could.” She said she did not attend the hearing because she was busy with her campaign for Hiram Village Council.

The Portager asked Crestwood Local Schools for all correspondence related to Brothers being “not safe around kids” or to parents not wanting her around their kids, and received a single email, dated Sept 19, 2024, that read:

“I am emailing this as a concerned parent in regard to one of the applicants for the SRO position. I left an email on the superintendent’s secretary’s answering machine thinking it was yours. If you could please reach out to me I would really appreciate it. A good number to reach me at is [redacted]. Thank you for your time, and I look forward to speaking with you.”

The Portager reached out to Feather-Faber to confirm that this was her email, but did not hear back by press time.

Also speaking for the village and against Urso was Meyer, who reiterated that she believed the police chief was guilty of the entire list of charges she’d outlined.

Meyer stated that she and the council members had tried to accommodate Brothers and Urso, but “the chief steps over the line every time.” For his part, Urso agreed with Bennett that workplace relationships carry the inherent risk of at least a perception of favoritism. However, that perception only holds “unless certain steps were put in place,” which they were, Urso said.

Bennett produced several email threads and referenced multiple incidents he said proved otherwise, but Urso countered that it is easy to misconstrue another person’s words and actions.

Bennett insisted on his interpretations, prompting Urso to say Michele Stuck, the village’s former village solicitor, had issued a decision that it would be allowable for him to call Brothers back from her administrative leave to work in the MPD’s dispatch center. (Brothers had been charged with child endangerment, a criminal charge that was later dropped.)

“If the village solicitor didn’t see an issue with it, then I wouldn’t see an issue with it,” Urso said. “That’s what we pay a village solicitor for.”

Former MPD part-time dispatcher Stephanie Morhidge stated she had personally seen some of the infractions being committed. She also alleged that Urso had “jumped her shit” after she complained that Brothers had violated her HIPPA rights — a charge Brothers later denied.

Over the objections of Kent Assistant Law Director Eric Fink, who was serving as Urso’s counsel, because the pair were not present, Bennett read two additional sworn affidavits from Gilbert and former MPD dispatcher Jennifer Lintz into the record. Their affidavits centered on ongoing staffing and scheduling issues that Urso allegedly made more difficult, and on Urso allegedly intervening in disciplinary and scheduling matters involving Brothers.

A repeated theme in many of Bennett’s witness’s testimony was that the village handbook requires employees in positions of authority to avoid even the perception of favoritism when a supervisor is related to or involved with an employee. Actually favoring the employee is immaterial, he said.

Testifying on Urso’s behalf was Clark, who lost her position to Meyer in November 2023. She said council, which then had Meyer as its president, initiated the investigation into Urso while she was on vacation. The legislative body had done so, she said, because people felt her own and Urso’s integrity was in question. Brothers and the chief weren’t “a thing” until after Brothers was hired, she said.

Clark stated that she and Urso had agreed he should not wield supervisory authority over Brothers before council passed any legislation regarding the pair. She stated she reviewed Brothers’ scheduling with Urso and meted out her own discipline.

She testified Urso violated the village’s nepotism policy, but never “willfully” did so. To that, Bennett said willful violation is irrelevant: The violation is all that matters.

Also speaking on Urso’s behalf was Brothers, who defended his actions on all fronts. Acting on Meyer’s directives, Urso had disciplined her four times, she said.

The aftermath

The audience, so numerous at the beginning of the hearing that people were waiting to be permitted in council chambers, had dwindled to about 25 by the next morning. Many of them MPD employees, they spoke their support of Urso into the record. Clark, meanwhile, urged council to vote wisely without falling victim to biases or half-truths.

Upon leaving, Clark stopped next to Meyer’s seat and said, “Well, Tammy, you got what you wanted. You wanted him fired two years ago, and you finally got it.”

Meyer did not respond. 

Neither Urso nor Fink provided immediate comment after the Village Solicitor Bill Mason’s gavel fell.

Urso later directed all requests for comment to Fink, who did not reply to The Portager’s request for comment. Meyer likewise did not respond to an email or phone call requesting comment.

Urso started his career with the MPD in 2012, when he joined the force as an auxiliary officer. He rose through the ranks, becoming a part-time officer in 2012 and chief in November 2017.

Urso’s first job as a peace officer was in 2009, when he served for ten months as a special officer with the Trumbull County Sheriff’s Office. He moved onto the Hiram Police Department as a reserve officer in 2010, then served as a part-time officer there from January 2011 to March 2014.

He served as a reserve officer with the Mahoning County Sheriff’s Office from April 2011 to November 2015. He joined the Mantua Police Department while he was employed with the MCSO. 

Council approved Hiram Police Chief James Clemens as Mantua’s acting police chief retroactive to Oct. 6.