Saturday, August 16, 2008

Take home vehicles - Police Department

Based on my June 10 resolution, here's the CPD response:Tim White

Labels: , , , ,

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

So with all these take home vehicles, do we also pay the insurance coverage? If they get in an accident while driving the vehicle home who pays for the damages?

August 16, 2008 9:14 PM
Anonymous said...

Seems if we are worried about improper vehicle use it would be wasy enough to do what rent-a-car firms do and install GPS in these cars.

August 16, 2008 10:02 PM
Anonymous said...

We have it on DPW trucks.

I seem to recall the installation cost is $400/car and maybe $30/mo for the service??

Can anyone confirm that?

August 16, 2008 10:09 PM
Anonymous said...

I don't normally like comparing our town to other towns even though the majority on the council often does compare us to others, but I would like to know if other towns allow as many vehicles to be taken home by their workers as we do.

I think it's outrageous to have so many vehicles being gassed up, taken home and taken who knows where else.

What's the total cost of this? Maybe we could cut the numbers in half and save the taxpayers some money.

August 16, 2008 10:11 PM
Anonymous said...

Tim,

I believe we should do whatever it takes and costs to have the finest police force that this town needs. Keep in mind my beginnings and the town I grew up in and raised my children. We needed the finest and we created the finest.

We need to do the same things here in Cheshire. Back to the issue on take home vehicles. If take home vehicles are improving the response time to calls then they are a benefit to the town. If the take home vehicles prove to have no positive effect on response time, then they should be taken away.

This brings up a question on how well our police force measures up to other towns of our size on response time. It seems that in my meetings with other residents and neighbors, I'm getting a feeling of a negative attitude towards our police force response time. I don't know what the average time is but I believe a study should be done to see if we are responding as quick as we can and where we stand among other towns of similar area and population.

Would you please take this question on for the sake of the residents of Cheshire and get back to us with what you derive from your findings.

Thanks,

Mike Rocci

P.S. I believe if you get into an accident on the way to or on the way home from your vocation in your on vehicle it's categorized as a work related accident.

GPS should be a no-brainer, if we know which radio car is nearest the call that's the car and officer who should respond to the call.

If these vehicles are being used for personal use, that must be against policy and the employee should be disciplined and they should reimburse the town for the fuel and wear and tear of the vehicle at the standard rate, which I believe is in the area of $0.52 per mile.

August 17, 2008 1:29 AM
Anonymous said...

Some on the council just make demands on time and others do the real work
It is easy to stand on the outside and make negative comments
It is hard to do the real work
Seems like the majority which does all the real work gets bashed and the minority well all they do is bash and complain
Get involved or get out of the way

August 17, 2008 2:28 PM
Anonymous said...

Glad you can at least write in complete sentences.

It is interesting that each of these "reports" is clearly written in "defense mode" without any accounting whatsoever of actual vehicle use, in any type of measure. Obvioulsy the writers are displeased that this is even under scrutiny. It is that type of mentality that must go, followed by extraneous vehicle use ideas; that mentality costs us infinitely more money per cycle (cases in point: Norton School boiler, turf wars, software, etc.). How dare you do your job?

But: does anyone know what the ratio of "command staff" (with t/h vehicles) (chiefs) to officers (without t/h vehicles) (indians) is?

August 17, 2008 2:47 PM
Anonymous said...

Is asking a few questions forbidden?

August 17, 2008 6:52 PM
Anonymous said...

"just make demands on time and others do the real work"

Would it make the Cheshire Democrats lives easier if that pesky First Amendment (you know, that ("petition for redress of grievances" stuff) simply got repealed?

August 17, 2008 8:19 PM
Anonymous said...

"Seems like the majority which does all the real work gets bashed and the minority well all they do is bash and complain"
So, the "real" work is what??
Costing us 1 extra police officer, wasting time on an "acceptance of turf money" resolution that wasn't necessary, not addressing the pool needs,ot addressing energy needs, or the worst one is having a young, new council person who, while doing the "real work", felt it necessary to sit and chat with a friend while a meeting was taking place(as noted in the Cheshire Herald).
If this is the "real work" I am glad there are some people who will bash it!

August 18, 2008 12:38 AM
Anonymous said...

One thing to keep in mind is the overall compensation package given to each ee. This is of particular concern with the police... who (as I understand it) tend to get paid less in Cheshire than elsewhere. And when it comes to competition for talent... that's a reality for any organization to consider.

I like our PD, believe they do a good job and don't want to see anymore of them leave.

August 18, 2008 8:08 AM
Anonymous said...

Seems like the majority which does all the real work gets bashed and the minority well all they do ....

Ha, Ha, Ha..........

The Dems get told how to vote and do the heavy lifting of the rubber stamp. They are the sychronized rubber stamp team and their goal is to keep the special interests happy.

August 18, 2008 12:41 PM
Anonymous said...

Are they restricted to driving in Cheshire or can they drive all over hell & back? You know, Tim, I think YOU think you're a fiscal conservative but I see very little fiscal restraint from you. You justify seemingly every spending request.


Don't stand in AWE of our Police Dept. They are a necessary evil--nothing more & nothing less.

August 21, 2008 4:50 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)