FAIRHOPE, Ala. - Next Wednesday in Montgomery, the Alabama Ethics Commission will hear a case against Police Chief Bill Press involving the legality of how a private bank account has been used to pay officers for off-duty work.

The ethics complaint was filed by Mayor Tim Kant after the issue was brought to his attention last year, he said, by the city treasurer and city clerk, and following advice from local attorney David Whetstone, a former district attorney in Baldwin County.

“(Whetstone) told me that as mayor, once it reached my desk, I needed to write a letter (to the ethics commission) and say there was a possible violation, and then turn it over to them,” Kant said. “He said that was needed to protect me and the city, and that’s what I did.”

The ethics charge against Press involves the alleged use of public office for private gain through the Friends of Fairhope Police Department bank account, according to officials and staff.

“We haven’t taken, nor has one person taken one penny, of anyone’s money,” Press said. “My books are open to anybody and everyone.”

When the complaint first came to light in March this year, Press stated in a letter to City Council President Lonnie Mixon that his department was cooperating with the ethics commission and county district attorney’s office. He also stated that information regarding past practices of an earlier police administration, including the use of a prior and similarly named bank account, had been sent to the FBI.

Several city officials and staff are expected to appear at the June 1 hearing, including Press, his assistant Tyron Hoskins and Kant, as well as the city attorney, city treasurer and city clerk, according to officials and staff.

“We saw a definite problem with the way business had been conducted in the past, and we wanted total transparency, which I promised everybody when I was first appointed to this police department (in June 2009),” Press said. “The way the account is set up right now is not ideal and hasn’t been the best way that off-duty employment should work. Ideally what we want to do is get the city totally involved in this.”

Press outlined such “past problems” with departmental policies and procedures at his first appearance before the council in July 2009. The issue of off-duty work was one of several he told the council needed immediate attention, including issues at the jail, in internal affairs investigations, and involving patrol aässignments.

“There is no regulation to speak of regarding off-duty work,” Press told the council, according to the July 13 minutes. “Payments are made directly to those participating (officers). No taxes, Social Security, or FICA, are taken out. There is no assurance that everyone has an equal opportunity to work all available jobs. The city is paying for insurance, uniforms, fuel, vehicle usage, etc., and getting nothing in terms of finance, in return.”

The chief also made several recommendations for addressing off-duty work at that first meeting before the council, which have now become the subject of an ethics case against him.

“Look at standardizing the amount paid to the employee and the city,” Press stated at the July 13 council meeting, as well as standardizing “payment through the city’s payroll versus direct payment to the employee, and rotational assignments and standardized postings through a coordinator.”

According to a review of ethics cases, the June 1 case is apparently one of first impression before the agency, which is expected to decide whether a city can use a private bank account to accept payments from private employers for off-duty employment and then disburse checks to those officers for the work done.

The case against Press will be presented by the legal and investigative staff of the ethics commission in a private executive session next Wednesday morning at 10 a.m., according to city staff. The commission will then reconvene in public and vote in an open session on whether probable cause exists to refer the case to the local district attorney or state attorney general.

As it does in all such cases, ethics commission staff would neither confirm nor deny the existence of a case against Press, nor that any case was scheduled for a June 1 hearing before the five-person agency.

The agency’s legal staff did confirm that hearings before the agency, while not following strict rules of evidence, are governed by due process rights, meaning that a person charged has the right to present evidence and call witnesses on his own behalf.

Press said he has retained legal counsel for the June 1 hearing but declined to state the attorney’s name.

Kant’s ethics complaint against Press is the latest in a series of confrontations between the two officials since Press won the police chief job over the mayor’s preferred candidate.

Press’ appointment by the council in June 2009 followed a very public and contentious campaign for the job by a then-police captain who retired a few days short of a disciplinary hearing against him, which could have ended his retirement and other benefits had he been terminated, according to staff.

The political battle between the mayor and chief reached a crescendo last year when Kant threatened to fire Press for his successful efforts to end free police escorts of local funeral processions.

Since that time, local funeral home owner Gary Wolfe has attended most council meetings and stated in a Fairhope Courier article last week that he was might run for council in 2012.

A new majority on the council could replace the current police chief. Currently, one council member who often sides with Kant on issues facing the the five-person body also opposed the hiring of the current chief.

For his part, Press was asked by WABF radio host Lori DuBose last month whether he had filed an ethics complaint against any local officials, as had been rumored.

“Not yet,” he told DuBose.

When asked the same question this month by the Courier, Press answered, “No comment at this time.”