102°F
weather icon Windy

Ex-Boulder City police officer alleges discrimination in lawsuit

A former Boulder City police officer filed suit last week alleging that city officials turned a blind eye following his complaints that a supervisor used derogatory remarks toward him on several occasions.

The suit, filed in District Court on Sept. 18 by Kang &Associates, states that Anil Sharma started as a police officer with the Boulder City Police Department on Jan. 14, 2020. It states that throughout his employment, his supervisor, Sgt. Jeanette Woolsey, “made inappropriate and discriminatory comments regarding Plaintiff’s race (Asian) and national origin (Indian).”

It goes on to state, “Additionally, Plaintiff was continually treated differently and more harshly than his co-workers.”

An email from the city on Monday, Sept. 25, states, “The City has not been served with this lawsuit. While it appears one has been filed, the action cannot be commenced until the other party has been served. Moreover, it is Boulder City policy not to comment on personnel matters.”

The suit states that in July 2021, Sharma reported this alleged misconduct but that, “Defendant took no steps to investigate or address Plaintiff’s complaints.” It alleges that Woolsey began retaliating against Sharma because of his complaints.

According to the lawsuit, Sharma reported these actions again in September 2021 and, again, “Defendant took no steps to investigate or address Plaintiff’s complaints.” It goes on to state that on Jan. 7, 2022, Sharma reported the comments and actions for a third time to Boulder City police officials.

“However, instead of investigating Plaintiff’s complaints or Sergeant Woolsey’s behavior, Plaintiff was placed on investigation on or about January 8, 2022,” the lawsuit states.

Sharma remained under investigation until June 2022 and was ultimately terminated. The suit alleges that the termination was retaliation for filing the complaints and that the city took no action to investigate, prevent or correct the alleged actions.

“The harassment and disparate treatment Plaintiff was subjected to caused him to suffer from substantial and severe emotional distress,” the lawsuit claims. “Further, Plaintiff incurred lost wages due to his discriminatory, retaliatory, and wrongful termination.”

The lawsuit does not specify a dollar amount that Sharma is seeking against the city other that stating that the “Plaintiff has suffered damages, in the form of grievous mental and emotional distress, and lost wages, and will continue to be damaged in an amount in excess of $15,000.”

MOST READ
LISTEN TO THE TOP FIVE HERE
THE LATEST
Council confusion: The leash law saga continues

Three statements — notably, none of them from members of the city council — best illustrated the difficulties residents (both dog-loving and not) have had for at least four years when it comes to the issue of off-leash dogs in public parks.

Breeding in BC? Probably not

Unlike the discussion later in the meeting Tuesday night in which the city council appeared determined to make sure no one was angry at them about the issue of off-leash dogs, they directed staff to take very strong action on the issue of pet breeding.

Lifejacket donations aim to save lives

Greg Bell’s memory lives on by way of a generous donation that may saves lives.

Huge crowd turns out to honor Patton

It was brought up during Saturday’s unveiling of the Shane Patton Memorial Monument as to why Shane’s statue stands 11 feet tall.

Disaster in China affects Damboree fireworks show

As the city prepares for Damboree, one of our biggest celebrations of the year, a tragedy in China is having an impact on the annual fireworks show.

City Celebrates First Responders

Photos courtesy City of Boulder City

Toll Brothers gets split decision

The development of the area near Boulder Creek Golf Course known as Tract 350 (the sale of which is slated to pay for the majority of the planned replacement for the aging municipal pool) may have hit a snag last week as the planning commission voted 5-1 to deny the developers’ request to build houses closer to the street than is allowed under current law.