Letter to the editor: Rebuttal to letter on Mantua Police Chief Urso’s firing

Editor’s note: The Portager publishes letters to the editor from the community. The opinions expressed are published not because they necessarily reflect those of the publication but because we feel they contribute meaningfully to the local discourse on matters of public interest.

This letter is a response to another letter published on Nov. 17.

After reviewing a recent public statement, I believe it is necessary to correct several inaccuracies and clarify factual information.

1. Overtime and Staffing Coverage

Chief Urso and the officer Miranda Brothers voluntarily worked shifts that other personnel declined. Their decision was not motivated by overtime pay, especially considering the Village’s overtime rate is lower than surrounding departments’ standard hourly wages. Their commitment came at personal cost, including time away from their families. The issue of 24/7 staffing should be evaluated in context: the staffing loss occurred after the Chief’s departure, and was directly related to concerns involving the Mayor and Sergeant Gilbert. When an effort was made to discuss those concerns, the scheduled exit interview was cancelled.

2. Firearms Requalification Timeline

The department historically completed firearms requalification at the end of October. This year, a date was still being finalized that worked for the entire staff, which is why only two officers attended on October 25th. A Sergeant was subsequently advised that they must cease all law enforcement duties until they requalified, citing ORC 109:2-13-02, Section (A)(D), which states that all required personnel must complete requalification once per calendar year. Miscommunication regarding this timeline has contributed to unnecessary confusion within the community.

3. Hiring and Resume Review

The claim that the Chief did not submit “several” résumés is inaccurate. Each applicant was documented and vetted, including notation for internal reference. Additional concerns arose regarding candidate comparisons. Furthermore, communication with the Superintendent included specific requests for applicants with consecutive years of service. It is also relevant that the applicant whose résumé was immediately accepted is scheduled for a refresher course in January due to a break in service. At the time, the applicant did not meet the requirements set forth by the superintendent. Since then the school had lowered their expectations. A full review of available records would provide clarity and prevent misunderstandings.

4. Professional Conduct and Personal Relationships

While relationships within professional environments may raise policy considerations, they are not inherently unprofessional when boundaries, conduct, and policies are followed. Comparable examples exist within other professional institutions. Allegations or insinuations related to harassment should be based on documented complaints or findings; in this case, no formal sexual harassment complaints have been filed against the Chief.

Final Concern

It is concerning that these statements were shared publicly, particularly given that the President of DMRC communicated them to The Portager, while two council members serve on DMRC and another council member is married to an individual affiliated with the organization. DMRC plays an important role in the community, and public statements issued from leadership positions should remain factual, neutral, and professional to avoid potential conflicts of interest or misinterpretation.

Chief Urso consistently demonstrated professionalism, ethical conduct, and community respect. Based on available public records, concerns regarding ethical conflicts originate from actions taken within the Village government itself.

— Sandy Hershberger, Mantua