Find us on Facebook
Follow us on TwitterLynchburg City Council reaction mixed over police detective lawsuit
Listen to Detective John Romano’s 54-minute recording
At least three more City Council members have now heard the tape of City Manager Kimball Payne confronting a local police detective who criticized him during a public meeting.
Mayor Joan Foster and Councilman Jeff Helgeson offered starkly different takes on the 54-minute recording, which was made without the city manager’s knowledge and is now at the center of a $500,000 lawsuit against the city.
“It wasn’t good,” said Helgeson. “I think it needs to be clear to our employees that as citizens they have the freedom to speak without intimidation … This is a fundamental issue. They should not feel threatened if they come forward and speak.”
Mayor Foster said that while parts of the conversation were “intensified,” she felt by the end it was “very civil, almost friendly.”
“The whole thing that someone would tape someone else secretly is the biggest shocker to me,” she said. “Not that someone lost their temper. I’ve done that.”
Foster said she had been unaware prior to this that it was legal to secretly record a conversation.
Vice Mayor Bert Dodson also said he’s listened to the tape since last week, but declined to comment further, citing the pending litigation.
Detective John Romano has filed a federal suit against the city, alleging he was harassed and intimidated after appearing before City Council to express concern about the city manager’s handling of the budget.
Romano recorded a meeting during which Payne told him that such behavior is “gonna make a difference in your career, and you’ll never be able to prove it didn’t.”
Get the news in your e-mail
You can sign up for:
- our weekday newsletter, sent at 8 a.m. Monday through Friday,
- our weekly business newsletter, sent each Friday, and
- breaking news e-mail alerts, sent when major news events occur.
Payne later in the taped conversation apologized and said he did not plan to “do anything” to Romano. The city manager has also since publicly apologized and said he lost his temper.
Council was briefed on this situation behind closed doors nearly three months later. The description of the purpose of that session, held on June 23, said officials would be discussing “probable litigation concerning personnel matters involving constitutional issues.”
Several members say the report they heard at that time was not detailed. Council was told there was a recording, but it was not played for them and members say they did not ask to hear it.
“The appropriate thing in a situation like that is to let the city attorney manage the lawsuit,” said Councilman Michael Gillette. “We shouldn’t be managing lawsuits.”
Gillette said earlier this week he had not listened to the tape, but might do so now that council has received copies of the lawsuit.
The city attorney said his office received the court papers through the mail last Friday afternoon. Copies of the documents were distributed to council during their regular meeting the following Tuesday. The city has 30 days from its receipt of the papers to file a response.
Gillette said he had not wanted to listen to the tape prior to reading the allegations. “I didn’t want to do it piecemeal,” he said.
A total of four council members have confirmed hearing the recording at this point. Councilman Scott Garrett said he listened to it last week, but has declined to discuss his reaction, citing the lawsuit.
Garrett has said he feels the tape raises “personnel issues” that should be addressed by council. Officials discussed that point during their last meeting and decided to handle it during the city manager’s upcoming review on Sept. 8, which Garrett said he was satisfied with.
“We accomplished what I wanted and that was to make sure it was on the front burner,” he said. “We do need to discuss this.”
Garrett added he has not “prejudged” anyone and is looking forward to discussing the situation with the city manager and other council members in September.
Councilman Helgeson sought unsuccessfully to get the issue before council this week, rather than next month, and said he felt other members had shown a “lack of leadership” by delaying things.
“I think we need to get to the bottom of this,” he said. “The sooner the better.”
Councilmen Turner Perrow and Ceasor Johnson both said this week they had not yet heard the lawsuit recording. Perrow said he planned to listen to it before the city manager’s evaluation. Johnson said he expected he would listen to it at some point.
In response to a question, Johnson said he was uncertain how the contents of the tape might affect his evaluation of Payne. He said this was only one episode in a longer record of service and added he felt it was unfair to record someone without their knowledge, which he described as “underhanded and conniving.”
“Frankly, I don’t think much of someone who would do that,” he said. “If you’re a man, be a man. If you’ve got something to say, put it out on the table. I hate for one person to have an advantage over another.”
Helgeson, in a separate interview, said he had been impressed with Romano and his courage in speaking out against the city’s highest administrator.
“I thought, wow, that is character for somebody to come forward like that,” he said. “… I said, hey, you’re a man.”
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
It appears many posters are just not thinking. Payne is Romano’s boss. One does not criticize their boss in public forums or at government meetings without the expectation of consequences. City Council is an elected body. They work for taxpayers. Kim Payne works for Council, not taxpayers. If an employee has a complaint, he/she should take it to their supervisor. These are the rules. He can even take it to his City Council representative but he does so at his own peril. His speech is not impaired but he suffers consequences because he is NOT in charge at work. Can you imagine what would happen if every employee in the City of Lynchburg came to public government meetings and criticized those who supervise them? It would be a zoo and all discipline and order would break down. How about this-what if Kim Payne criticized the performance of individual city employees at a public meeting? Would that be OK? Kim Payne is an able, professional and conscientious administrator. The lawsuit in Spotsylvania was NOT won by the defendant. And, most important of all, Spotsylvania is NOT in northern Virginia. Thanks.
Officer Romano is also a citizen with a Constitutional right to participate in his local government. He was out of uniform and had every right to ask questions and voice his personal opinion.
Today, more than any time in our past, we’re teaching our children not to make threats—and not to ignore threats. Mr. Payne didn’t set a good example. As the Mayor said, we all lose our temper, but I doubt we all make threatening statements.
Let’s see if we can look ahead and see how this might unfold as all the facts emerge. Just imagining outloud mind you - A judge/jury looks at the situation and says - you know what the city manager made some comments that he probably shouldn’t have. He apologized. Turns out Officer Romano had already made a decision to leave Lynchburg PD before any of this happened and he stepped up to slam Payne and Council on his way out for not supporting them on salaries. No harm, no foul. The conversation with Payne was a gift horse - just the thing to keep it stirred up. Romano’s attorney turns out isn’t really his, but is one from Northern Virginia that represents an association and is being paid for by someone else. Turns out there really weren’t any negative consequences to the officer after all. Most of the people who are griping and groaning are either related to the PD or a couple of city council members who are throwing in their two cents just for the fun of it. No politics involved of course. My bet is the Judge/Jury says get over it people. Once again the drama wins the day and the general taxpayer pays for the few of you who can’t leave it alone. Why worry about real issues when we can all get worked up over something like this?
And, by the way, it seems to me that most people not employed by the city think Payne is doing a good job…my guess is most people working for the city feel the same way.
As pointed out earlier though every couple of years we get a chance to say whether we agree or not. Vote your conscience and see how many people really agree with you.
I dislike Helgeson because of his inability to work within a majority or to build a consensus. If you LU employees say it’s because he is LU and Falwell, Inc’s boy on the council then I will bow to your greater inside info. Thanks for confirming what I always suspected. It is your hate and hatred on display. You should pray to your god about it. Of course money talks, it does not listen.
Why the hate?
Jim cannot go 1 day without spreading his hate.
Yeah jimm, this is all about Helgeson and Liberty- it’s all their fault.
If Romano hadn’t taped his conversation with Payne then Payne, the paragon of integrity that he is, would have denied that he threatened Romano’s career. The city manager is calling employees to secret meetings and threatening their careers if they exercise their constitutional rights to free speech—and Foster and Johnson think the big problem is that Payne’s harassment was secretly taped! Foster is an idiot who will be voted out in 2010 and she knows it. And let’s face it, if Romano was black then Johnson would be leading the charge to fire Payne and probably calling for him to be prosecuted for a “hate crime”. Time is running out on these fools. The GOP will sweep the open seats in 2010 with help from LU students and Helgeson will be the Mayor. Maybe then we can fire Payne, and stop these idiots. They lost $400,000 from the school board budget, they made $750,000 in payments to the Bluffwalk bailout, they are building a traffic circle on 5th street that no one cares about, and they almost gave the police a pay cut! It’s time to vote out the touch-feely people and get grown ups with some integrity back in office and in city leadership. Your time is running out Mr. Payne. You better brush up that outstanding resume sir.
I did not call for anyone’s head and I know it’s a civil case. As I stated, it was illegal for the city manager to call Romano on the carpet on CITY TIME AND IN A CITY FACILITY to confront him for his private constitutionally protected speech..just like the posts here. How would you like Payne to get the news and advance to cough up all of your email addresses and log in names to find out who posted negative comments about him? There is a winner here…the Constitution and the court will shove that down Payne’s throat. As for taping, I am sure many of you wished Richard Nixon burned his tapes…and he never got any permission to tape anyone he called or had in the oval office. I agree, let this play out in the court…but Payne will not be able to control public opinion when he is sitting at the defendant’s table.
Payne can call any meeting with anyone working for the city. He is in charge. The question is whether he should and if he chooses to go outside the chain of command is it good management. In this case, as in most, it is the sign of an over-controlling poor manager and for that reason alone he should be called on the carpet. Perhaps it is in the city’s best interest to get him to behave and keep him on board. If Helgeson is after his scalp then I must line up with Payne and his supporters for Helgeson generally represents everything I am opposed to.
Advertisement