The vote is now a Council issue. Management should not be involved.

The NHRs Luther Turmelle continues reporting on the Police Union's "no confidence" vote:

Town Manager Michael Milone said he has been trying to get both sides together with him at the same time to resolve an ongoing dispute that resulted in a nearly unanimous vote of no-confidence in Cruess by union members last week. Milone discussed the problems between the union and the chief during a meeting of the Town Council’s Personnel Committee Wednesday night.

But what if the union views the TM as part of the problem? Keep in mind, last Friday the police union came directly to the homes of all nine Council members. It seems to me that they're asking for more than the Council to be aware. It seems to me that they want the Council to intervene.

The story continues with the labor attorney's comments:

Dugas said the no-confidence vote “has no legal significance.”

“It has some political implications, though,” he said.

I'm glad we got independent confirmation of that. I mean, I knew it. But I'm uncertain if the voters knew it. And for the record, I have no problem with that. For as long as I've been alive, unions have been involved in the political process. Not so much in Cheshire... but I do recall hearing that Diane Visconti got a bunch of help in the 2005 election from unions across the state. So it's certainly not new to town.

And for the record, I oppose leaving town management involved in this issue. I've mentioned before that cops have quit - in part - because of this situation. And to permit the usual tactics of "deny, defer, delay" to continue is entirely unacceptable.

The police have followed the chain of command. They've tried to work with the Chief. And for the past year, they've tried to work with the TM. And that has gone nowhere. They've now come to the Council.

For the Council to punt this back to the TM is entirely unacceptable. As for me, I recommend an independent, impartial investigation.

25 days...

Tim White