Town Agrees to Pay $104,689 to End Cop's Lawsuit [Updated]

Editor's Note: The use of the word "settlement" throughout an earlier draft of this story was potentially misleading and has been corrected.

It should be noted that legal proceedings related to this lawsuit were ended after both parties came to an agreement. The compensation awarded to Officer Sparks was strictly limited to his back pay, time off owed, a uniform allowance and an eyeglass reimbursement credit. We apologize for any misunderstanding caused. 

This story has also been revised to include additional material from the agreement document signed by Sparks and the township.

Two months ago, Lawrence Township officials agreed to pay $104,689.22 to Police Officer Todd Sparks to put an end to a lawsuit that Sparks filed against the township seeking back pay and related compensation following the township’s failed attempt to fire him from the police force in connection with a criminal charge that was ultimately dismissed in Superior Court.

Sparks, a member of the township police force for more than 15 years, was charged with theft and falsification of records in January 2010 after Lawrence Township officials accused him of fraudulently trying to obtain a reimbursement of $250 from the township for prescription eyeglasses. Two months later, a grand jury indicted Sparks on those charges and he was officially suspended from his job

Those on April 26, 2011, by Mercer County Superior Court Judge Edward Neafsey, acting upon a recommendation from the county prosecutor’s office.

“We believed our client was innocent, that he did absolutely nothing wrong, and that these charges were specious,” Sparks’ attorney, Stuart Alterman, said at that time. “I think there is a pattern of retaliation [in the Lawrence Township Police Department] that permeates through different matters including but not limited to their last attempt to indict and convict my client.”

Later in 2011, Sparks , seeking back pay, attorney’s fees and other compensation for the 13 months he was suspended from the police department.

Earlier this year, an agreement was worked out to give Sparks a "consideration" of $104,689.22 in back pay and his 2011 uniform allowance, and return to him 25 vacation days, 14 holidays and 120 hours of sick time owed from when he was suspended.

He will also be "eligible for $250 towards 2010 eyeglass reimbursement, upon receipt of valid documentation verifying eligibility for the eyeglass reimbursement pursuant to the parties' collective negotiations agreement," according to the agreement.

That document, bearing the title of "Settlement Agreement and General Release," was signed on May 24 by Sparks and on June 7 by Lawrence Township Manager Richard Krawczun.

Attorney fees were not part of the amount paid to Sparks.

"Plaintiff and the township desire to settle fully, permanently and finally all differences between them, and to terminate any and all claims made or that could have been made against the township and its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and representatives, in the civil action, which settlement constitutes the good faith settlement of the civil action," that document reads.

In agreeing to the payment to Sparks, the township admits no wrongdoing. The agreement reads, in part:

“This agreement shall not in any way be construed as an admission by the township or the released parties of any liability to plaintiff, and this agreement shall not be offered, used or considered as evidence in any proceeding except to the extent necessary to enforce the terms of this agreement. The parties have entered into this agreement for the sole purpose of resolving the various potential claims, both asserted and unasserted, in the civil action and otherwise, in order to avoid the burden, expense, delay and uncertainties of litigation. No findings of any kind have been made or issued by any court or administrative agency. Therefore, plaintiff expressly acknowledges and agrees that he is not the prevailing party in the civil action or any pending or threatened litigation against the township related to the potential claims, both asserted and unasserted, in the civil action or otherwise.

The agreement also preserves the township's right to pursue outstanding internal administrative charges against Sparks.

It was actually the second time that a lawsuit filed by Sparks against the township ended in a  payment for back pay.

According to attorney Christopher Gray of Alterman & Associates LLC, on May 12, 2010, Lawrence Township paid Sparks $65,284.36 after the two parties agreed to end a suit that Sparks filed after the township’s first bid to fire him proved unsuccessful.

In that matter, the township brought criminal charges against Sparks in October 2008 alleging that, while acting in his capacity as a delegate for Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association Local 119, he stole as much as $8,000 from the union. He was indicted and remained suspended until October 2009 when the charges against him were dismissed once bookkeeping records surfaced that exonerated him.

The township’s most recent agreement with Sparks became public within the last week as a result of the New Jersey Libertarian Party's Open Government Advocacy Project which, as part of its effort to “increase governmental transparency and accountability,” routinely reviews civil court cases where at least one of the parties involved is a government agency or official.

On Aug. 18, the Libertarian Party posted a news item online about Lawrence Township’s settlement with Sparks, with a copy of the agreement attached.

Reached at his office on Monday, Alterman said this of the recent agreement: “The town attempted to go after Todd the second time for none of the right reasons at all, in fact for all the wrong reasons, and they attempted to trump up a case against him and they tried to use other state agencies to assist. And they failed because, in my opinion, they acted in bad faith.

“They were targeting an individual who was acting in the capacity of a union leader, acting in the capacity of just an everyday kind of guy, and because Todd doesn’t kiss anybody’s [expletive] they wanted to jerk him around,” Alterman said. “It wasn’t right what they started, it wasn’t right what they were doing, but it certainly was the right result.”

Krawczun, meanwhile, on Monday declined comment, saying only that the agreement document “speaks for itself.”

Follow Lawrenceville Patch on Facebook, Twitter and sign up for the daily newsletter.