VERO BEACH — The Vero Beach City Council is scheduled to meet behind closed doors May 12 to discuss a lawsuit filed by Vero Beach Police Lt. Daniel Cook, who alleges he faced retaliation and a hostile work environment within the police department.
Cook filed the lawsuit against the City of Vero Beach in Indian River County Circuit Court under the Florida Public Sector Whistleblower Act.
According to the complaint, Cook, a 35-year veteran of the Vero Beach Police Department, alleged he experienced retaliatory and adverse workplace conditions after raising concerns in March 2024 about what he described as a hostile work environment involving Police Chief David Currey.
The lawsuit states Cook sent text messages and an email to City Manager Monte Falls on March 10 and March 15, 2024, alleging Currey believed Cook was sharing internal department information with people outside the agency.
“I feel truly hopeless and that I have do something other than look to you for help,” Cook wrote in a March 15, 2024 email included in the filing.
Cook alleged Falls never responded to his concerns.
The complaint states Human Resources Director Gabrielle Manus later conducted an internal investigation into allegations involving hostile work conditions, retaliation concerns, favoritism and conduct within the department. Cook alleged the investigation included interviews with employees he described as directly responsible for the alleged hostile environment and claimed statements supporting his concerns were omitted from the final report.
A memo from Manus dated April 16, 2024, attached to the lawsuit, stated she interviewed command staff, sergeants, corporals and other department employees and found no evidence of a hostile work environment, retaliation or favoritism within the department. The memo stated the “overwhelming consensus” among employees interviewed was that Currey maintained an open-door policy and welcomed differing opinions from staff.
The memo also stated morale within the department had been negatively affected by “constant scrutiny” and public records requests.
Cook’s lawsuit alleges that after he raised his concerns and participated in the internal investigation, he became the subject of multiple internal investigations.
One investigation, launched April 8, 2024, alleged Cook failed to report another employee’s violation of department policy. Records attached to the complaint show Cook received a verbal warning following that inquiry.
The lawsuit also states Cook received his first substandard annual performance review in May 2024 after more than three decades with the department. Cook argued in a rebuttal included in the filing that department policy required written notice of substandard performance before such ratings could be issued.
Documents attached to the complaint show Deputy Chief Matthew Monaco later acknowledged Cook had not received prior written notice regarding two categories in the evaluation and removed those ratings from the review.
Cook was later issued a written reprimand and suspended June 14, 2024, according to the complaint. The lawsuit alleges the suspension followed an email Cook sent to Manus and members of the City Council disputing his performance evaluation and citing department policy.
In a motion for summary judgment filed Feb. 27, attorneys for the city argued Cook’s lawsuit should be dismissed, contending he did not engage in protected whistleblower activity under Florida law and did not suffer legally recognized adverse employment actions.
The city argued Cook’s complaints to Falls were too vague to qualify for whistleblower protections because they allegedly did not identify specific violations of law, gross mismanagement or threats to public safety. The filing also contended that many of the workplace issues Cook described either predated his complaints or amounted to routine workplace disputes and “petty slights.”
City attorneys further argued there was no evidence Monaco, who issued the verbal counseling, evaluations and discipline, knew the contents of Cook’s complaints or retaliated against him because of them.
The filing states the disciplinary actions and evaluation were based on documented policy violations and legitimate business reasons, including allegations Cook failed to report policy violations, improperly accused Monaco of lying during a performance review meeting, and failed to promptly elevate another employee’s workplace complaint through the chain of command.
The city also argued Cook remains employed as a lieutenant with the department and cannot show the city’s stated reasons for the disciplinary actions were pretext for retaliation.
Cook is seeking damages including lost wages and benefits, compensatory damages, attorney’s fees and either reinstatement or front pay.