U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Enpleymen Ligation Secon PAB p IMG:JBD:TMI:lv ao ate ae HO DI 170-54M-130 Bonen 90 180 vo pong APR 22 20 ECEIVE APR 27 2008 Via United States Mail A. Terry Wood, Esquire City Attorney City of Greensboro P.O. Box 3136 Greensboro, North Carolina 27402 Investigation into the Employment Practices of the Police Department and Fire Department of the City of Greensboro, North Carolina Pursuant to Section 707 of Title Vilof the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as Amended Re Deer Mr. Wood, Its the responsibility of the Attomey General, and of this Division of the Department of Justice in particular, to enforce the provisions of Title VIL ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 US.C. § 2000e, et seg. (“Title VI” or “Act”) with respect to state and local government employers. Title VIE prohibits an employer from discriminating against an individual on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Title VIE also prohibits an ‘employer from discriminating against an individual because he or she has opposed any practice made unlawful by Title VIL, or because he or she has made a charge, testified, assisted or participated in an investigation, proceeding or hearing under the Act. When the Attomey General believes that a state or local government employer is engaged in a pattem or practice of discrimination in violation of the Act, he may apply to the appropriate court for an order that will ensure compliance with the Act and remedy the effects of past discrimination, See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-6(a). The Department of Justice has information indicating that the percentage of blacks employed in the Greensboro Police Department in entry-level positions, and the percentage of blacks and Hispanics employed in entry-level positions in the Greensboro Fire Department are significantly lower than their percentages in the City's relevant civilian labor force. Accordingly, Loretta King, Acting Assistant Attomey General of the Department’s Civil Rights Division, has authorized a full investigation to determine whether the City is engaged ina pattem or practice of discrimination against blacks in hiring for entry-level swom police officer positions, and against blacks and Hispanics in hiring for entry-level firefighter positions, in violation of Title VILThe Employment Litigation Section of the Civil Rights Division is responsible for conducting this investigation. I have assigned Deputy Chief Jodi B. Danis and Senior Trial Attorney Toni Michelle Jackson to this investigation. Ms. Jackson will contact you shortly to discuss the parameters of the investigation. We would appreciate your cooperation with our investigation Sincerely, Loretta King ‘Acting Assistant Attomey General Civil Rights Division By ndaood M. Gadzichowski Chief Employment Litigation Section Civil Rights Division ce: Anna Mills S. Wagoner United States Attorney for the Middle District of North CarolinaA, | SMITHMOORE SY LEATHERWOOD May 5, 2009 Via Fax Transmittal 202-514-1005 and US: Mait Ms. Toni Michelle Jackson Senior Trial Attorney United Stetes Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, PHB 4027 Washington, DC 20530 Re: Lawrence Alexander, Ir etal v. City of Greensboro, Dear Ms, Jackson: This letter is in response to your correspondence faxed on May 1, 2009. We do not agree with your characterization of the City’s voluntary efforts to meet your various requests. To the contrary, the City has engaged in significant efforts to respond to your requests on. your time frame. Likewise, a response to your latest request that we arrange for the interviews of 26 people (some of whom are no longer employed and others who no longer live in this area) was undertaken promptly and in good faith, and the schedules of many people were adjusted to accommodate your visit. While it is true that the City has complied with the Guilford County Superior Court's Order and, absent releases permitting the disclosure of personnel records, has limited disclosure of the RMA report to the portions previously determined by the Court to be public record, we do not agree with your assertion that the City has “hindered” your investigation or limited your ability to conduct “productive” interviews. From the outset, we have expressed to you the fact that the City has a statutory obligation to maintain the confidentiality of personnel records absent another determination from the Court or a release by the employee(s) involved. Your response has been to discount our responsibility to comply with the state statute and to threaten the City that its “refusal” to comply “voluntarily” will be construed “as an indication that the information [requested] would be favorable to the charging parties.” In addition, at several points in the last two weeks, you have stated that it was your intention to “build a case against the City.” Consequently, we have concern about whether an unbiased assessment of this matter is occurring, If the Department of Justice is asssessing the facts and law relevant to this matter with a predisposition against the City at this time, it seems ill-advised to spend the City’s resources to comply voluntarily with your requests. If, on the uct 363785056 | Fax 3364327478 | je theal@mithmooretay am Smith Moore Letheewond LLP + Anneye sts" 20) 300 Noath Greene Sucet Suite 1400 Greensboro, NC 22401 + 3563785200 + warwsmitnncorlae com Adana, GA + Chats, NC * Grcensbono, NC * Greenvile, SC + Rakigh, NC * Witmington, NC PO Bor 2