Sunday, October 25, 2009

Personnel Committee - November 9

The Personnel Committee will be meeting on November 9. The PD 'no confidence' vote will be on the agenda.

The vote happened on October 2 - after nearly a year of management intervention.

As I said at the beginning of October, we need an immediate and impartial investigation. Waiting more than a month to simply sit down with some people to begin addressing this is unacceptable.

Tim White


Anonymous said...

It is easy for people to jump to conclusions that the chief is a problem and that the no vote is meant to point that out.

Their may be another reason for the no vote. Maybe the chief is doing too good of a job. I heard that the chirf has been trying to reduce overtime costs and that could be one of the items that the force doesn't like.

Anonymous said...

yes, a unanimous vote means the chief is doing "too good a job" - are you serious. It included officers of every rank. Even those charged with helping manage the budget. They don't think he can do the job, after trying for years. He had a shot and blew it, now we have 50 (or whatever) officers with ineffective leadership - not comforting.

Anonymous said...

It's hard to believe the CPD labor relations issue is so one sided. It is much more likely that a majority of the towns officers, if they really are unhappy just don't want to do what anyone in the private sector would do in such a situation - - FIND ANOTHER JOB where things are better. Then again, times are tough, maybe no one else wants them at their current pay and benefits either.

So has the town now become a place where unhappy municipal employees just whine and whine? Where town management, the chief and his boss the town manager, just play push back and work OT hiding the issues? Where an outside, national labor union can come in and spin everyone up just before a major local election? Where far too many citizens just seem to blindly admire the men in blue just because they wear a uniform?

This town has invested too much power in the town manager. It's past time for a town police commission AGAIN!

Anonymous said...

police commissions have more negative impact than "a national labor union" could ever have on one municipality. "national labor unions" affect change.on the national level throigh their reps. Southington has a commission - and a a no confidence vote. What about madison - no issues there. Commissions add politics to the one organization that must be apolitical. Hamden had a police commission,along with southington, and the old boy network manipilated hirings and promotions. Until the town heara what the issues are it would be unreasonable to climb in that limb. Be careful whay you ask for. Many in this tiwn are critical of the "local" networks, what if they were the commission where would you point the finger then

Anonymous said...

if they really are unhappy just don't want to do what anyone in the private sector would do in such a situation - - FIND ANOTHER JOB
Why should 40 plus officers look for other employment, it would reason that only one person need look for a new job to help the problem.....HHHMMMmmmmmmm

Anonymous said...

A police commission has already been a part of this town's history once before. It should have never been eliminated in the first place. Who should be in charge anyway, some outside union or some isolated town manager, or a group of disgruntled officers or maybe just elected/appointed officials of a police commission? A police commission accountable directly to the voters every election cycle is what the town needs.

Anonymous said...

The former police comission in this town was removed for political reasons. The comission was hiring people based on who they knew and were related to. Comissions do not work. They make local police political puppets. We would be no better than the states that allow the public election of a sheriff.

Anonymous said...

its pretty obvious thay the politicians are paying lip service and don't really care what's happening at the pd. Members of tc are just using the issue for a foothold. Just like the public safet comments made after the petits. Making public safety a "priority" they said. That obviously worked based on the vote

Anonymous said...

"...Comissions do not work. They make local police political puppets. We would be no better than the states that allow the public election of a sheriff. ..."

Wow! You gotta be kidding. Take the reasoning a step farther and maybe we shouldn't trust the electorate to elect anyone for anything any time? How about we just extend the reach of our current town manager by crowning him KING forever?

This town needs a police commission which is accountable to the voters. The present system has the police hiding under the umbrella of a town manager and if you've attended town council meetings associated with the current majority it sure appears that quite often the manager is basically telling the council what to do. It kind of gives voters the feeling that just maybe the power of their votes has been discounted over time by the current majority while the manager form of government took over.

OBTW, in the end the police are subservient to (the puppets of? your words) whichever group is really in charge, either the voters or the incumbent politicians.

Anonymous said...

CONGRATULATIONS TIM for pushing for an independent 3rd party to intervene in the police morale crisis. As usual, you were right on the mark.

According to today's Herald:

On Nov. 9, the Town Council’s Personnel Committee has scheduled a meeting to interview outside firms who specialize in conflict resolution within police departments.

Milone said...that the Council could ultimately hire one of the firms to serve as an “objective third party on some of these issues.”

Anonymous said...

WONDERFUL!!! Spend more money to solve an in house problem! Lets hire more people to screw things up. Spend more money we do not have to solve a personality conflict. Wonderful, simply wonderful.