Commission Poised To Select A Police Chief

By Andrew Gorosko

The Police Commission is preparing to select a person as the town’s police chief.

The town has not had a permanent police chief since July 1999, when the commission placed former police chief James E. Lysaght, Jr, on administrative leave for inadequate job performance.

Police Commission members Tuesday night agreed to hold a special meeting May 16 to discuss filling the police chief vacancy. Three of the five Police Commission members said they expect that a new chief will be chosen from among the ranks of the police department. The police chief post has an annual $72,500 salary.

After commission members placed Mr Lysaght on administrative leave in July 1999, they immediately named Captain Michael Kehoe to run the police department. Commission members fired Mr Lysaght, 51, in March 2000 for unsatisfactory job performance and named Mr Kehoe acting police chief in April 2000. To fill the captain’s post vacated when Mr Kehoe became the acting chief, commission members named Sergeant Joe Rios acting captain in May 2000.

Police Commission Chairman James Reilly said Tuesday, “Now that the [Lysaght] appeal process is over, the [commission] can discuss how we want to fill the acting positions we’ve been running with.”

Mr Reilly noted, though, that May 12 is the deadline for Mr Lysaght to file a Connecticut Appellate Court appeal over his losing his Danbury Superior Court administrative appeal, which had sought to overturn his March 2000 firing by the Police Commission. Through that appeal, Mr Lysaght had sought reinstatement as chief, back pay, and legal expenses.

Although Mr Lysaght has publicly stated that he will not appeal the matter to the Connecticut Appellate Court, the town’s attorneys have advised the Police Commission to wait until the appeal period expires on May 12 before acting to fill the police chief’s post, Mr Reilly said.

The attorneys explained that considering the length of time that the town has been without a permanent police chief, it would not pose any real problem to wait a bit longer to act, according to Mr Reilly.

Mr Reilly noted that in hiring a new police chief, the commission would not be bound by the terms of the work contract that the town had with Mr Lysaght, or by other previous police chiefs. Each police chief contract is individually negotiated, Mr Reilly said.

The Police Commission appoints a police chief. The terms of the police chief’s work contract are negotiated between the first selectman and the person hired as police chief.

Police Commission member Robert Connor, Jr, said that simply because someone has been working in an “acting” position, it does not necessarily follow that the person should be named to the permanent post.

A police chief’s hiring process should be created so that other interested persons could apply for the job, he said.

Commission member Carol Mattegat, however, disagreed with Mr Connor’s viewpoint.

Commission member Richard Simon said that Mr Kehoe and Mr Rios have done outstanding jobs in their respective capacities as acting chief and acting captain.

Mrs Mattegat agreed, saying that both men have done excellent jobs.

Mr Simon said he understands Mr Connor’s viewpoint that a hiring process should be created to broaden the job candidate pool, but Mr Simon added that any such hiring process should take into account the very good work which Mr Kehoe and Mr Rios have done in their acting positions.

Mr Reilly noted that the town’s hiring of Mr Lysaght in July 1996 was an expensive process. The town conducted a nationwide search for a new police chief after former police chief Michael DeJoseph announced he would retire. It was five months between the time Mr DeJoseph announced his retirement and Mr Lysaght started work as police chief.

Mr Reilly said he does not believe the commission needs to look outside the police department to hire a police chief, a viewpoint which was endorsed by Mr Connor and Mrs Mattegat.

Both Mr Kehoe and Mr Rios have done very good jobs in their acting positions, Mr Reilly said.

Mr Reilly said Wednesday that the full Police Commission will decide whether Mr Kehoe and Mr Rios are selected as permanent police chief and police captain, respectively.

Mr Reilly said he expects that people for both posts will be chosen from among the police department’s current membership.

During the public participation portion of Tuesday’s Police Commission meeting, William Meyer, a former commission member, urged commission members to make Mr Kehoe the permanent chief and name Mr Rios the permanent captain.

“I think they’ve demonstrated their capabilities,” Mr Meyer said, adding that the two men have been doing a good job.

On April 16, a Danbury Superior Court judge rejected Mr Lysaght’s administrative appeal of his March 2000 firing by the Police Commission, endorsing the Police Commission’s decision to terminate Mr Lysaght for inadequate job performance.

In a 17-page decision, Judge William Holden ruled, “The court has considered all of the claims advanced by [Lysaght] and they are not persuasive. The decision by the [commission] was fully supported by the evidence, and the [commission] did not act illegally, arbitrarily, in abuse of its discretion, or with bad faith or malice. The [commission] had just cause, based on the record, to dismiss Lysaght from his position of chief of police of Newtown in accordance with the provisions” of applicable state law.

In a prepared statement issued the following day, Mr Lysaght said he would not pursue further legal action against the town.

In his ruling, Judge Holden wrote, “In reviewing the record, there can be no doubt that [Lysaght] violated a number of the [police] department’s rules and regulations and the [commission] was dissatisfied with the plaintiff’s performance as police chief… It is important to note that this is not a case where the plaintiff was charged with committing criminal or illegal acts. Indeed, the arbitrator, calling the plaintiff ‘a competent, energetic and enthusiastic police officer,’ only reluctantly recommended that just cause existed to terminate the plaintiff. Nevertheless, it was the [commission’s] responsibility to decide whether termination was justified on the record and ‘wide discretion must be lodged in the [commission] in determining what conduct on the part of members of the [police] force is injurious to the efficiency of the department.”