Find us on Facebook
Follow us on TwitterLynchburg officials: Too early for any action on officer allegations
Lynchburg City Council members say it is premature to consider taking action against the city manager in regard to allegations that he threatened and harassed a local police detective.
Two days after Detective John Romano filed suit in federal court asserting his constitutional rights were violated, a majority of council said it had not yet reviewed the allegations or heard the secret recording Romano made of an April 3 meeting he had with City Manager Kimball Payne and Police Chief Parks Snead.
Listen to Detective John Romano’s 54-minute recording
Click to view the lawsuit documents, including a copy of Detective Romano’s original March 10 statement to City Council.
Guide to tape
00:08 Police Chief Parks Snead and Detective John Romano discuss the city manager’s reaction to Romano’s public statement, made 24 days earlier, questioning the city manager’s handling of the budget. Snead tells Romano the city manager was upset early on, “but that was a long time ago. He’s fine now.“ He also offers words of support for the detective. “You work here and you’re in the years-long habit of doing the right thing. I know that. I’m not concerned about that.“
01:30 Awaiting the city manager’s arrival, Snead and Romano engage in small talk. Snead explains the history of a keepsake on his desk. Romano reports on some of the cases he is working on.
07:41 City Manager Kimball Payne arrives. The recording rustles for several seconds as the men exchange greetings.
08:15 The conversation at the center of Romano’s lawsuit begins. During this period, Payne tells Romano that his earlier statement contained inaccuracies and was personally insulting to him. He also criticizes Romano for failing to identify himself as a city employee at the time, saying the detective misrepresented himself and fell short of the level of integrity expected in city government. Romano responded he wanted to separate his professional and personal life in this matter and repeatedly requests that they discuss this at a time when he isn’t working. He also said he was observing the wishes of the police chief by not mentioning his place of employment. The chief, who remained quiet during most of the meeting, acknowledges that Romano was advised to omit the fact that he’s a city employee.
At one point, Payne tells Romano that if he continues to do these things it will affect his career and “you’ll never be able to prove it didn’t.“ Romano responds that he did not violate any city policy and says he’s feel the city manager may have crossed a line. “You’re basically threatening me that if I speak again that I’m going to be penalized in a way that may not be easily detectable. And I don’t think that’s appropriate.“
Payne later apologizes and says it was never his intent to threaten Romano. He also indicates he does not intend to hold a grudge. “As far as I’m concerned when this is over, this is over,“ he said. “Because I don’t live my life that way. And if you thought I was threatening you earlier, I apologize for that. I certainly didn’t mean to do that. Because I don’t intend to do anything, other than hopefully answer your (budget) questions some day when we have that chance.“
45:52 The conversation begins to digress into a form of friendly small talk. Topics include issues related to computer crime — a specialty of Romano’s — and a shooting simulation program operated at the Central Virginia Criminal Justice Academy.
Payne, Snead and the City of Lynchburg are all named as defendants in the civil suit filed Tuesday. Romano is seeking $500,000 in damages, claiming he was threatened and intimidated after publicly criticizing the city manager during a council meeting.
The city manager is one of three local government employees who answer directly to City Council. On Thursday, a majority of council said they feel it’s too early to consider pursuing any disciplinary action in this matter. Many of them said they did not want to rush to judgment, noting that council has not yet been briefed on the details of these allegations and there is still a legal process that must unfold.
“Right now, all I’ve heard is sound bites and pieces of things. I don’t know the whole conversation,” said Councilman Ceasor Johnson. “… Why should you punish somebody without knowing all the facts?”
Said Vice Mayor Bert Dodson, “This is a lawsuit, not a crucifixion.”
None of the council members interviewed Thursday commented on the actions at the center of the lawsuit, but all offered general words of praise for Payne’s performance as city manager.
“I’m in complete support of the city manager,” Councilman Turner Perrow said. “I think he’s a great executive and complete professional. I understand there are people out there screaming for his resignation. I think we’d be sorely pressed to find anyone to fill his shoes.”
Councilman Michael Gillette said he felt the city manager does a “fantastic job.” He declined to answer most other questions, including whether disciplinary action might be considered, citing his lack of familiarity with the details of the case and the pending litigation.
Dodson said Payne was one of the best city managers in Virginia.
Of the six council members reached — Councilman Jeff Helgeson did not return two calls for comment — only one said they had listened to the tape of the meeting that sparked this week’s lawsuit.
Councilman Scott Garrett declined to discuss his reaction to the recording but said he feels Payne does his job well and noted the city manager routinely gets positive performance reviews.
Asked the question about possible disciplinary measures, Garrett said, “I truly don’t know. I think it’s very premature to try to figure out anything like that at this point. I certainly don’t want to prejudge anyone.”
Garrett said he felt things would be more “fully explained” as the court case moves forward.
Mayor Joan Foster said she did not feel prepared to make any decisions at this point.
“I guess it’s kind of premature. I don’t know what to say,” she said. “… I guess I want a little more time to think it over and digest it.”
Foster did say she had the “highest regard” for the city manager.
Payne’s employment contract stipulates that he will receive six months severance if fired, unless he is being terminated for acts involving “moral turpitude, malfeasance or dishonesty,” in which case he is not entitled to any compensation.
The city manager is directly hired by and serves at the pleasure of City Council, as does the city attorney and the clerk of council.
The lawsuit filed by Detective Romano alleges he was threatened by the city manager after publicly criticizing how Payne was handling the budget. Romano secretly recorded an April 3 meeting he had with Payne and Chief Snead about those comments.
On the tape, Payne can be heard telling Romano that if he continues to speak out in such a manner it’s “gonna make a difference in your career, and you’ll never be able to prove it didn’t.” Payne later apologizes and said he does not plan to “do anything” to Romano.
In a public statement made the day after the lawsuit was filed, Payne apologized for his behavior. He said he spoke out of anger during that meeting, but no punitive action was ever taken against Romano.
Romano’s suit alleges Payne violated his right to free speech and claims he has suffered damage to his career and reputation within the Lynchburg Police Department.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
That Payne subsequently apologized indicates that he knew that he had used threatening language against a subordinate, Detective Romano. In police work, that’s called a confession
That’s a tremendous leap of logic you got going there grandpaw.
First leap of logic..What Mr Payne apologised for was speaking in anger after being goaded by a man, in my opinion, that wanted to get him to do just that while he secretly recorded him.
We all have spoken in anger and said things we apologise for. Show me a person who says they haven’t and I’ll show you a liar.
Second leap of logic… You are confused aren’t you? Hasn’t the whole arguement been that Romano was acting as a private citizen? So just when did this rise to the level of police work?
If Roamano did raise it to that level, acting as an officer and not a private citizen, then that is proof positive he is a deceiver and broke several laws in doing so. which is it?
Further, are you saying that every time one speaks out of anger that rises to the level of a police interrogation and a confession? That’s just plain silly.
Using your logic I’d say you’ve confessed to many actionable things, if you’re any kind of man at all and take ownership of your words when you speak out of turn. So when can we expect you to be sued under the auspices of your logic?
Third leap of logic…I don’t know what your personal agenda is, so that leaves me to wonder why you would call city council taking a slow deliberative process to assess this situation tap dancing. City council has a duty to determine the facts, let the process go farward in a fashion that does not reduce all Mr Payne has done in his tenor here, down to a snapshot moment of anger. Your rush to judge Mr Payne negatively says more about you, than council’s deliberative actions says about them.
Here’s the bottom line. Romano has to prove there has been something actionable against him directly linked to Mr Payne. An angry conversation and an apology for being angry does not rise to that level.
One last thing you’re ignoring. We live in a commonwealth state where any of us works or is replaced at the will of our employer. I remember when all the clamor about the civil rights law suits from minorities being fired was called frivolous and burdensome, and the cheers when the feds and state made these kinds of law suits nearly impossible to win. Romano will soon learn the difficulty he will face coming up against a law that was created to keep ‘those people’ out of court. Another case of being careful what you wish for.
Sic semper tyrannis!
I thought that City Manager Kimball Payne threatened Police Detective John Romano [with Police Chief Parks Snead standing aside]. The Courts will decide if the case has merit and should go to trial.
That Payne subsequently apologized indicates that he knew that he had used threatening language against a subordinate, Detective Romano. In police work, that’s called a confession. “I apologize for mugging you; I’m sorry.“
What I find entertaining is the tap dancing by City Council members.
Grandma, if I use your own logic, a city manager is more important than a low-level detective.
The “cowtow to the elite” comment by Grandma using Craddock and Bluffwalk is another example of outright misrepresentation. Certainly, Bluffwalk was controversial and certainly Kim Payne may have (I haven’t read the minutes) been supportive of Bluffwalk. What is wrong with that? The misrepresentation is this: that taxpayers did not approve of the Bluffwalk deal and that a private developer making money when public funds are used is wrong. We will not know what the majority of the taxpayers wanted at that time because the decision was a City Council decision after public hearings. Maybe many spoke against Bluffwalk and there was no citizen vote, period. Just because a mob screams against an issue at a town hall meeting does not mean the majority of the public is against the issue. It means that a bunch of people are screaming.
Regarding Bluffwalk and those who believe that taxpayers money should never be used for private enterprise to make money, let me suggest that public/private partnerships are necessary for any number of important projects everywhere. In fact, the public needs the private entrepreneur to carry out many planning actions. Example: The feds contract out many services, using taxpayer money to obtain necessary services. Guess what…the private provider makes a profit. And, why shouldn’t he/she? When a building needs renovation and its part of a city master plan as developed with input by the public, the city then helps with the funding provision in any of a number of ways in support of the master plan. Otherwise, the plan would never happen. Guess what again, the developer makes a profit. If he/she didn’t, they wouldn’t do the job. It is not wrong for public funds to result in profit for a private business. Yes, Bluffwalk is having financial problems no doubt helped along by a pretty bad recession. And, not a dime of City money is used in helping out interest payments. CDBG is not city money.
Using Bluffwalk to say that the city manager doesn’t know what he is doing is totally bogus. What has he done well? Why hold back on that. Misrepresenting the facts to bias the argument in any direction is lying.
Hopefully the N & A will post the bylaws of the New Towne property owners Association that gives this guy the authority to speak on issues totally unrelated to the New Towne properties. There were lots of “I” and “me” in his presentation, and I am of the impression he used his “position” of president to espouse his personal views rather than the views of the 150+ homeowners.
It is nice to know that the taxpayer money spent to train our police in the proper ways of hiding a tape recorder was money well spent. I wonder if the taxpayers paid for the batteries?
grandmaw, you are entitled to your opinion regardless of how empty it is.
As regards to your tip, you’ve made assumptions about me without the benefit of any knowlege at all. It’s a a match with the rest of your empty rhetoric though.
So let me give you a hint based on your own admission:
HINT: don’t have a brush with Mr Payne and you won’t have a reason to dislike him. Now, now, I don’t want to hear your crying about me saying that. Its your own advice.
Jomike6…no doubt at all where my head is located. Its squarely on my shoulders and not stuck up somebodies nether regions where your’s obviously is.
Boones, that’s some interesting contortions.
There’s a few things you need to do.
First, go back and read my post, relate it to the print of the tape, then deal with the reality of what I said as opposed to your emotional dribble.
Second, go learn the difference between free speech and protected speech.
Third, get a dictionary and look up the word deception. By Romano’s own addmission he decieved the city council. You even say he was instructed on how to do so. Now because one is instructed on how to be deceitful, it does not make him somehow less deceitful. In fact the instruction itself makes him intentionaly deceptive. You blew your own arguement out the water.
Fourth, you go talk to your boss stupidly, invoke your free speech rights as a private citizen, and lets see if your employer will take it kindly and not get angry. You will quickly learn you are not protected from that provocative speech. Let us know how it turns out.
Fifth, try to deal with the facts. Your obvious emotional disilke for Payne might be legitimate to you, but it has no legal basis.
Jedi…like I’ve said before, get back to me when you have a point, or grow up, which ever comes first.
Is there any doubt where Poet’s head is located?
Poet, I’m sorry, but police ARE special and should be held in higher regard and given higher pay. In any business, the office manager holds more importance than the file clerk. That is why their salary is higher. You take away levels of pay and you will have a defunct company.
The $500,000 will be covered by insurance. True, the rates might go up but just think of the money Lynchburg will save money with a manager that won’t cowtow to the elite. When Hal Craddock was “honored” by having the taxpayers backing his loan for his hotel, forget the taxpayers, Payne urged Council to approve it. He ignored the taxpayer’s disappoval of the traffic circle. It’s been one thing after another.
Ramono was not deliberately disceptive when he appeared before Council. He was instructed how to proceed and that is what he did.
Let me tell you, disagreeing with Mr. Payne is not a pleasant experience. I’ve been there. Many other people I know have tried but usually give up.
My hope is everyone learns a lesson from this.
Tip: Don’t have a brush with the law and you won’t have a reason to dislike them.
Advertisement