Gartland Misled City on Harassment Case, Report Finds

A new internal city report details how a sexual harassment complaint from 2023 was mishandled and closed prematurely due to misleading information from top leadership. The findings, released in September 2026, name former Lifeguard Chief James Gartland and two sergeants as violators of the city’s Equal Employment Opportunity policy.

The incident began in June 2023 when a lifeguard reported receiving unsolicited explicit photos and messages from a former romantic partner. The employee told investigators the coworker offered money for sex and continued sending messages after receiving no response. On June 28, 2023, the employee reported the issue to Sergeant Dana Vanos. The next day, Vanos requested a written statement and scheduled a meeting with Sergeant Eric Care.

The meeting on June 30, 2023, lasted between two and three hours. The employee stated that the sergeants presented two options: resign or face an investigation that would lead to termination. Care admitted to drawing a diagram on paper that connected the investigation path to termination. While Care disputed that the employee was forced to stay, he acknowledged that a decision was expected before the meeting ended. The employee eventually resigned.

Gartland’s handling of the matter after the resignation proved problematic. In a July 3, 2023, email to city officials, Gartland described the situation as a dispute between two former partners who had both resigned. He omitted the allegation of a monetary offer for sex and the reporting employee’s written statement. Based on this description, officials in the Professional Standards Unit and Equal Employment Investigations Office decided no further investigation was needed. One official wrote that if the photos were only exchanged between the two, there was no need to investigate.

Gartland replied that he would consider the matter closed and thanked the sergeants for their work. Care responded the following day, calling it great news. City investigators concluded in their September 16, 2026, report that Gartland’s inaccurate description prevented a proper investigation into the original complaint. The report also found that Vanos and Care created an environment where the employee felt unable to leave the meeting without resigning.

The consequences for the employees extended beyond their resignations. Gartland recommended that both lifeguards not be rehired by the city. For the reporting employee, the reason listed was to contact the Lifeguard Chief. The employee later participated in a tryout in September 2023 but was designated an alternate in December 2023. The city’s investigative office has since recommended that the Personnel Department review and remove these no-rehire designations.

Gartland left city employment in late September 2026, ending a career of approximately 30 years. The city has not confirmed if the investigation findings influenced his departure. The report noted that similar meetings had been conducted by the Lifeguard Division since Gartland was a sergeant. Employment attorney Brennan Kahn suggested these practices may indicate a larger issue with how the department handles complaints.

The city sent letters to Gartland, Vanos, and Care on September 18, 2026, notifying them of the policy violations. The Fire-Rescue Department is responsible for determining any further disciplinary action. The report did not establish that other employees were similarly pressured to resign, but it highlighted the specific failures in handling this case.