The Gladstone City Commission made an offensive decision on Sept. 22 when it allowed K-9 Officer Dylan Nadeau-Enright to bail on his contract 16 months early and threw out the previously agreed-upon stipulation that he would pay back the money for the dog that had been donated by citizens.

Knowing full well that he had agreed to stay in Gladstone until four years after his training with the dog was completed, Enright went seeking employment elsewhere. He knew that doing so meant that he would have to pay back $20,000.

Enright remarked that he had entered the agreement “in good faith.” Frankly, that language seems inappropriate. To be “in good faith” would be to honor the contract, not argue until it is thrown out.

It was kind for City Manager Eric Buckman to suggest only making Enright pay back one-quarter of what he was supposed to. When Commissioner Brad Mantela made a motion to let the contract be severed and have the officer only pay $2,500, the young man said (paraphrased), “and what are you going to do if I turn down that offer? You’ll be stuck with a dog that’s useless to you …”

Why was this treated as an “offer”? If a lawyer had been consulted, or if the commission had been interested in sticking to the legally binding document, Enright should have had to pay the city back. Citizens donated those funds with the understanding that they would have a K-9 and handler for AT LEAST four years. Whether it was reimbursed should NOT have been up to the contract-breaking officer.

The commission spoke as if Enright only had one year left of his contract as of October — untrue. The contract was signed in October, but it said that Enright had to stay in Gladstone for 48 months after coursework was completed. The dog wasn’t certified until February 2023, meaning there’s still 1.3 years left.

Enright offered to buy the dog for $300, with his “reasoning” being that that’s what it would cost to adopt a shelter pet. As if Gladstone donors hadn’t poured $20,000 into making that dog so much more than just a pet. Talk about an insult.

Another option the city manager and commission mentioned was keeping the $4,000-$5,000 the officer had stored up in sick time.

“I have no intention of giving up my sick or comp time with my offer,” Enright said, as if the discussion was a negotiation in which he held all the cards.

The entitlement was shocking. This should have been an instance for a young professional to learn that actions have consequences. Kid wants to leave — fine. But there was supposed to be a cost, not the $500 nonsense they ended up on. Do you realize that’s less than 3% of what he agreed to pay only three years ago? He SIGNED PAPERWORK saying he would give back $20,000 if he left early. His empty words saying he had signed in “good faith” are false. He meant that he thought he would stay, not that he would hold up his end of the bargain if he didn’t.

This young man felt that he should not have consequences for his actions — even consequences he had previously agreed to — and the commission let him weasel out of the agreement.

Gladstone’s K-9 officer has turned his back on the city he swore to help, without making it up to them the way he said he would. Community dollars have been wasted, and the commission allowed it.