Date: Fri 16-Apr-1999

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

Lysaght-police-commission

Full Text:

Lysaght Prepares His Response To Police Commission's Criticisms

BY ANDREW GOROSKO

Police Chief James E. Lysaght, Jr, was busy this week composing a response to

his negative job evaluation performed by the Police Commission, which finds

him seriously lacking in the leadership and management of the police

department.

The chief had until late April 15 to submit his response to the commission,

after the deadline for this edition of The Bee.

"It's more important for me to comply with the order [to respond] by Thursday"

than to discuss the matter publicly, Chief Lysaght said this week.

"There are ... statements I have to respond to, and I have to provide adequate

documentation," he said.

"I'm trying to put together a complete and fair response ... that's

substantiated by the previous record," the chief added.

Chief Lysaght said he expects his response to the evaluation will be publicly

disclosed, just as his job evaluation was subject to public disclosure under

the state Freedom of Information Act.

In the evaluation, the Police Commission found that Chief Lysaght has not

corrected deficiencies in his performance which were listed in his job

evaluation last September and has not displayed the skills needed to

effectively lead and manage the police department. Police Commission members

provided their job evaluation to Chief Lysaght April 6 in a closed session,

which followed a tense open session.

According to the evaluation, "The chief has failed to provide plans when

requested and to address problems. His failure to plan and to focus on

problems has caused the department to lose direction. He has lost credibility

with the personnel of the department and with the Board of Police

Commissioners. His actions, and in some cases his inaction, has seriously

damaged department morale. The deficiencies noted above also demonstrate the

chief's failure to meet the goals set by the board and to which he agreed.

Chief Lysaght has not demonstrated the leadership nor management skills

necessary for the effective and efficient operation of the department."

In Chief Lysaght's last job evaluation in September, Police Commission members

stated that unless his performance improves to a satisfactory level and unless

he meets the goals he agreed to with the Police Commission, the commission

believes it will have just cause to fire him.

Commission members April 6 endorsed the chief's job evaluation in a 4-to-0

vote. Endorsing the evaluation were Chairman James Reilly and members Carol

Mattegat, William Meyer, and Charles Pilchard. Member Robert Connor, Jr,

didn't attend. Commission members directed the chief to respond to the

evaluation in writing by April 15.

Chairman

Mr Reilly said Tuesday, "Everything is on hold until we get the chief's

response."

After receiving that response, commission members probably will schedule a

meeting to address the matter, he said.

"I can't give you an exact timetable" on how long the commission's review of

the matter will last, Mr Reilly said.

"It's not good for the [police] department for this to drag out for a long

period of time," he added.

Police Commission members will decide what action to take based on the chief's

response to the evaluation, Mr Reilly said. The commission's options range

from "doing nothing" to "dismissal" of the chief, Mr Reilly said.

"There's a wide range of options...I can't really speak for the whole board,"

Mr Reilly said.

"What the commission has to do is act as one body," he said "There's a system

in place and we have to work through it."

Mr Reilly noted that in its evaluation of Chief Lysaght last September, the

commission provided the chief with "a very firm, emphatic warning" that if he

didn't meet the commission's goals, he could be terminated.

"We're awaiting his response. A lot is going to be dependent on what he tells

us," Mr Reilly said.

Mr Reilly said the chief didn't formally respond to its negative evaluation of

him last September, although he had the opportunity to do so. Mr Reilly said

that considering the seriousness of the September job evaluation, he expected

that the chief would have formally responded to it.

In a newspaper interview last fall, Chief Lysaght said he was disappointed

with his September job evaluation and would do his utmost to meet the Police

Commission's performance goals for him. The chief didn't respond to various

specific allegations listed in the September evaluation.

Mr Reilly said he expects the commission will meet to discuss the chief's

response to the evaluation in a closed session, unless Chief Lysaght wants the

matter discussed in open session.

On April 6, when the commission presented Chief Lysaght with his evaluation,

commission members gave him the option of discussing it in closed or open

session. Chief Lysaght didn't provide an answer. The commission then held the

discussion in closed session.

"We want to get the matter settled as quickly as possible, so the whole

[police] department can get back to work, so they can work effectively and

efficiently for the town," Mr Reilly said.

Following his review the various allegations listed in the job evaluation at

the April 6 session, Chief Lysaght wrote on the evaluation form "At the above

time and date, I was permitted to review this document for the first time. I

do not agree with the contents of this document. I was denied the right to

have appropriate legal counsel and I do not waive any of my legal rights. I do

not accept the opinions voiced in this document."