CAPE MAY – Just days after some residents used the public hearing on the 2015 budget to show concern about large amounts budgeted for legal fees, more funds may be needed in that line item. The city is now faced with a new lawsuit.
Robert Sheehan, who on March 3 was removed from the position of chief of police and returned to his previous role as captain, has filed suit against the city under the Conscientious Employee Protection Act, or CEPA, and the Chief’s Bill of Rights.
City Solicitor Anthony Monzo said that the city is “confident in its position and certain it will prevail” in any litigation.
Sheehan’s complaint states that the city “created a continuous pattern of tortuous conduct against the plaintiff in retaliation for his whistle-blowing activities.” A recent 26-page press release from the city laid out its narrative of events surrounding the investigation of another senior officer in the police department, Lt. Chuck Lear, who allegedly recorded overtime hours as compensatory time for which he would later take paid leave.
The practice, in place under previous chief Diane Sorantino, is one the city maintains is in violation of city policy and Lear’s contract. At issue is an estimated $11,000 in compensatory time, which Lear improperly used, according to the city’s press releases.
The complaint lays out a version of the timeline and events related to the investigation which is, at times, at odds with the city’s narrative as presented in its releases.
In the complaint, Sheehan consistently maintains that since he was not a target of the investigation, he had jurisdiction over it by statute and that the city improperly tried to conduct the investigation without his having oversight.
It states that the city was aware that the county prosecutor had found no basis for a criminal investigation. It also states that the city was then to conduct its own internal affairs administrative investigation.
The complaint maintains that the prosecutor’s office agreed with Sheehan that he, as chief, had direction of the investigation.
Sheehan states that on Oct. 28, 2014, he received an email from James Fallon, a retired major with the New Jersey State Police, which informed him he was a target of an internal affairs investigation that was going to be conducted by Fallon. The complaint later quotes Fallon as saying he was “an objective fact finder under city appointment.”
The first city release states, “Sheehan objected to any review of his conduct and would not participate in the interviews.” The complaint states that Sheehan had “questioned whether the city had authority to conduct an internal affairs investigation without oversight from the Cape May County Prosecutor’s Office.”
By Nov. 18, Monzo wrote that the city had been instructed by the prosecutor’s office “to disengage from any further investigation of the chief of police at this time.” Christopher Gray, attorney for Sheehan said, “The city was aware that Sheehan was not a target of the investigation.” Gray places great emphasis on a Dec. 23 meeting held at the Cape May County Prosecutor’s Office and involving City Manager Bruce MacLeod, Monzo, First Assistant Prosecutor Robert Johnson, Chief of Detectives for the Prosecutor’s Office Ken Super, Sheehan and Gray.
At that meeting, Johnson informed the city, according to the complaint, that “Attorney General Guidelines for handling of internal affairs” meant, “Chief Sheehan was to be placed in charge of the Internal Affairs Investigation regarding Lt. Lear.”
It further states that Fallon was to conduct his investigation “under the direction of Chief Sheehan.” According to the complaint, MacLeod and Monzo “repeatedly argued” that the city should be able to discipline Lear “without involving Chief Sheehan.”
The complaint also claims, “MacLeod and Monzo stormed out of the Dec. 23 meeting abruptly.” In this narrative, it is the city that then refuses to cooperate with the directions from the Prosecutor’s Office. The city “refused to abide by the A.G.’s Guidelines and the orders of the Cape May County Prosecutor’s Office,” the complaint maintains.
Monzo said that MacLeod and he stayed until the end of the meeting and then left, candidly disagreeing with the Prosecutor’s Office as to how the investigation should proceed. “No one stormed out,” Monzo said.
Fallon’s report has been completed but not released. Monzo states that a copy of the report was sent to the Prosecutor’s Office. He says he cannot discuss it because it is not clear what the Prosecutor’s Office is doing about the report.
It is not clear who had oversight as Fallon completed his investigation and report. Monzo, in a letter on Feb. 19, quoted in the complaint, sent the report to Johnson and asked, “If your office needs to conduct an administrative review of the chief’s conduct pertaining to this matter?”
On Feb. 26, Sheehan wrote Johnson expressing “his view of the investigation conducted by James Fallon” and stating that the report “appears to make assumptions and perpetuate innuendo that is, both, grossly erroneous and defamatory.”
Johnson wrote back March 2 citing credibility issues and stating that the Prosecutor’s Office “is assuming responsibility for the investigation.” In that letter, Johnson cautioned all parties “about the release of any information that would be contrary to the Attorney General Guidelines.” This brings the events to the March 3 council meeting.
The complaint accuses “either the city manager or the city solicitor” of providing “deliberately false information to the city council in order to illegally remove Chief Sheehan from his position as chief of police.” Monzo said, “I would like to know what that false information is.”
The complaint claims that the demotion resulted in a “loss of compensation and benefits, loss of earning power, physical injury, mental injury, the loss of opportunities for prospective employment, the loss of fringe benefits, and is incurring legal expenses and other expenses as a result of defendant’s actions.” In addition to seeking damages, the complaint demands that Sheehan be reinstated as chief.
Monzo claims there was no demotion, even though that term has been used repeatedly in discussions about the Sheehan controversy. As Monzo explains it, Sheehan, with legal representation, agreed to a one-year probationary period. “He was not the permanent chief,” Monzo said. Monzo also stated that Sheehan was provisionally made chief with respect to Civil Service regulations. Sheehan needed to take the exam and send in the results. He took the exam but, according to Monzo, the results have not been sent in.
In effect, Monzo is asserting that Sheehan was provisionally in the role of chief under Civil Service and under a probationary period in his contract with the city. Sheehan was not demoted. “The contract gave the council, not the city manager, one year to decide if he should continue as chief of police.” Monzo’s statements support the city’s position that council had to act on March 3.
According to Monzo, a number of the statutes and protections outlined in the complaint would only come into play if council did not act and allowed the appointment to move out of the probationary period.
The complaint also states that Sheehan questioned Monzo’s continued involvement, given that Cape May Police arrested his son for burglary Jan. 10. The complaint further alleges that MacLeod suggested to Sheehan “that he may have overstepped in arresting him.”
Monzo claims that he never had an issue with the police department concerning the arrest of his son and that certainly Sheehan had no involvement in it. He also maintains that he was never a decision maker in the question of the Sheehan appointment.
It is not clear how much each of the council members knew or had been briefed concerning the intertwined series of events leading up to the March 3 meeting. Monzo says they were fully aware of the issues and events. The city’s press releases and public comments since that meeting, consistently present the case that the council had to act.
In a split vote, the council rescinded Sheehan’s appointment as chief and the result of that action was to move him back to the rank of captain. As the senior officer in the department, Sheehan still performs the same oversight duties as he did in the role as chief.
Lear continues to serve as the next most senior officer in the department. The Prosecutor’s Office, citing what it claims are numerous violations of Attorney General Guidelines, has established a monitor as essentially a middleman between Sheehan and city officials.
Gray argues that all of this could have been avoided. He said that with no charges filed against Sheehan “the city should have made the appointment permanent.” In Gray’s view, the city could have taken action at a later date if charges were filed. Monzo said that the council had to act to prevent a situation where it would have been encumbered if it had to react to charges that were later filed. According to Monzo, the council had the information and elected not to go forward with Sheehan as chief of police.
A basis of the suit is that the city acted in violation of statutes when it demoted Sheehan without charges being filed or any other form of due process. The complaint also maintains that the city, with full knowledge to the contrary, knowingly accused Sheehan of being the target of a criminal investigation. Monzo maintains there was no demotion and that the city is confident it can successfully defend its actions.
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.
Cape May – Caryn Elaine Johnson AKA Whoopi Goldberg did what she always does lies. She lied that a bakery wouldn' t serve her because of her race. This was a complete fabrication damaged their reputation…
