PORT ANGELES — The William Shore Memorial Pool’s manager remained on paid administrative leave Tuesday after the board members of the taxing district that owns the facility discussed her employment during a closed-door meeting.
Mike Chapman, president of the five-member William Shore Memorial Pool District board, placed Jayna Lafferty on leave effective last Thursday.
He said he has some concerns her employment contract was not being met but declined to elaborate in order to maintain confidentiality over personnel issues.
The full board met for the first time to discuss the matter in the closed-door, executive session.
Cherie Kidd, board member and Port Angeles City Council member, said no action was taken.
Lafferty, who is paid $60,000 a year to manage the pool, said she remains on paid leave but had no further comment.
She has been the pool’s administrator since July 2007.
Lafferty said last week she had been planning to leave the pool manager job at the end of the year because the position is being reduced to part time.
A pool manager search process is currently under way.
Craig Miller, the district’s attorney, said Tuesday that Chapman, who is also a county commissioner, had the authority to place Lafferty on leave under the “necessity doctrine” of common law.
But he said he will ask the board to ratify Chapman’s decision at its next meeting Tuesday to resolve any questions regarding whether he properly used his authority as the board’s president.
The district’s bylaws says the board president’s role is to preside over meetings, assure an agenda is provided, act as the board’s spokesperson and sign all resolutions and contracts approved by the board.
It makes no mention of employee supervision.
Miller argued that Chapman’s decision was still lawful because the bylaws are not intended to be “limiting,” meaning the president’s authority is not limited to the roles listed in the document.
He said the necessity doctrine applies when “there are times when somebody has to make a decision,” but no one is specifically delegated that authority.
The necessity doctrine generally claims an action cannot be considered unlawful if it prevented greater harm or there were no legal alternatives available, according to a University of Chicago Law Review article.
Asked if Chapman’s action meets that definition, Miller said it could fit the “no legal alternatives” criteria.
Kidd said the board may discuss the personnel issue again at its next meeting.
________
Reporter Tom Callis can be reached at 360-417-3532 or at tom.callis@peninsuladailynews.com.
