Cape May Will Pay for Legal Counsel If City Employees Face Co. Prosecutor

CAPE MAY – With the tourist season quickly approaching, Cape May’s embattled city council tried to move briskly through a list of seemingly routine actions when Resolution 94 represented the beginning of the end of routine for the meeting.
The resolution, entitled Authorizing Legal Defense for City Officials and Employees, allows the city to supply legal assistance to employees asked to talk with the County Prosecutor’s Office concerning the ongoing controversy in the police department.
The controversy began March 3 when council voted to rescind the appointment of Robert Sheehan as police chief over what were, at the time, allusions to an investigation concerning improper use of compensatory time by the department’s second ranking officer, Lt. Chuck Lear.
The move had the effect of reducing Sheehan in rank back to his position as captain while leaving him in command of the department, and with Lear remaining as second in command.
Controversy has swirled around the move for the last month with the most recent event being Sheehan’s suit against the city in Superior Court.
The County Prosecutor’s Office, which has installed a monitor between city officials and the department, has been requesting a number of employees to be interviewed regarding the matter.
When questioned, city Solicitor Anthony Monzo spoke for council concerning the resolution. He said, “City employees asked for an attorney to accompany them to talk to the Prosecutor’s Office.”
A number of residents at the meeting went to the podium to urge council to quickly resolve the matter. What started as a probe into the alleged misuse of $11,000 in paid leave has grown into something that, in the words of Patricia Hendricks, “could cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars.”
Concern over the embarrassment to the city the controversy has generated, the damage to Sheehan’s reputation cited by his supporters in the controversy, and the potential for significant increase in legal expenses, budgeted at $750,000 before the actions on March 3, produced a heated and lengthy public comment period at the meeting.
Monzo made clear that the resolution, which eventually passed unanimously, does not indemnify any employee. Mahaney added that employees would still have “to answer for it” if they were found to have engaged in any wrongdoing.
Councilman Shaine Meier supported the resolution saying, “I believe in taking care of our own. These employees may have nothing to do with the legal issue. I owe it to them to give them legal representation.”
Monzo said the resolution authorizes the city to supply legal assistance and that “whatever costs are incurred will be approved at a future meeting.”
Such references to vague or unknown costs led Jerry Gaffney, ex-mayor of the city, to worry that “the legal budget could balloon to seven figures.”
Laura Decamillo, a resident, said, “If I was asked to speak to the prosecutor’s office, I wouldn’t take an attorney with me. I’d just speak the truth.”
The practice involving the use of compensatory time had been in use within the police department long before Sheehan became chief.
Diane Sorantino, the previous chief, had presided over the department for most of the time that Lear is alleged to have abused paid leave. Council heard from Sorantino’s predecessor retired Chief Robert Boyd. Boyd angrily chastised council and city Manager Bruce MacLeod, who was absent, for the actions taken against Sheehan.
Boyd asserted that MacLeod knew about the issue “well in advance” of the March 3 action when council seemed forced into action by the pending deadline for the conclusion of Sheehan’s probationary year as chief.
Boyd recited Sheehan’s background calling him “the best trained chief you could have.” He said “you have done enough damage to this department.”
According to Boyd, the entire controversy is a result “directly of the failure of the city administrator.” He added that the damage done “will not be fixed quickly.” Indicating that he had been out of the city when the council took its action March 3, Boyd fumed “I have no respect for any of you and the manner in which you have conducted yourself.”
The city, recently served with the complaint in Sheehan’s lawsuit, has 35 days from the day of service to file a reply. There was no indication at the meeting that the controversy will end any time soon despite the urging of many of the residents in attendance.
Boyd told council “you have a serious problem.”
The meeting ended when council adjourned into private session listed on the agenda as having to do with “Litigation, Police Department.”
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.