Turmelle explains the Deegan suspension
Here's a great story apparently broken by the NHRs Luther Turmelle:
The suspended head of the town’s police union is being investigated because he used a key he had in his possession to look into the lockers of several other officers, sources told the New Haven Register.
Sources within the department say Lt. Kerry Deegan was never accused of taking anything from the lockers when the incident occurred more than a year ago. Deegan had the key in his possession for several years, having been given it during a previous supervisory assignment, the departmental sources said.
Based on everything I know, I don't question the legitimacy of the suspension and investigation. But assuming there was a significant delay between the incident and the suspension, I'm still wondering about the timing of the suspension. Specifically:
a) Who knew what?
b) And when did they know it?
I also want to know why the TM failed to inform the Council before the suspension was reported by the press?
I was hoping the days of control the information, control the agenda had ended. But I still haven't heard of any consequences for this all-too-typical misbehavior.
Tim White
Frankly, this situation reminds me of a funny little thought I had several years ago. I'd love it if I had the ability to bring former and current Council members (including me), several town staff and several other prominent town residents before a grand jury... place everyone under oath and let the questioning begin. I think shedding some daylight would work wonders for improving our town.
22 comments:
And what questions would you ask? Sounds like you are trying to make yourself more of a black sheep to the other council members, staff, and residents than you already are.
Keep digging yourself into that hole Tim. Maybe you will get some time off in 2011
The Republicans controlled the Town for how many more years than the Democrats??? Be careful what you wish for!
12:52... This post included the questions I would.
7am... hahaha... I know. But that's not my point. And I bet if it was voluntary attendance, you wouldn't have too many people showing up.
Tim, do you need a hanky? How many times do you need to cry the same thing?
"Mommy!!!"
"Yes Timothy"
"The mean town manager didn't tell me fist about Deegans suspension and I'm mad at him"
"Oh Timmy, it's ok. Maybe he didn't know how sad you would be"
"But Mooommmm, I'm the most important councilor. He needs to tell me."
"Ok Timmy, why don't you sit down and have some hot cocoa and I'll call Mikey's mom"
Coming soon, Mrs White calls Mrs Milone
The town manager needs to go. He's become ineffective and part of the problem, not part of the solution. The issues at the CPD didn't happen overnight but took years to fester and reach a boiling point. This happened under Milone's watch. Either Milone didn't know about the issues or he wasn't able to solve them...either way it wreaks of ineffective leadership.
As for communications, this seems to be a recurring theme in our town government. When the town manager cannot notify the council, in a timely, of personnel issue such as Deegan's suspension it only goes to show where the problem starts and where it ends. Then again, what can we expect from a town manager when he's reduced himself to braying at the town council meetings?
As for Deegan's suspension and communicating it to the TC: interesting how those defending the CPD initially clamoured to have Deegan work closely with the town council after the no confidence vote but are now saying the council didn't need to know about the suspension. LOL.
The CPD issue is just another "F" on Milone's report card. "F" for the pool bubble. "F" for the Norton boiler project fiasco. "F" for leadership.
Anon 8:03: Tim never said 'he' should have been informed; he said the council should have been informed. Several other councilors have agreed, saying they should not have first heard about it through the rumor mill. The TM failed to give a heads-up to his bosses (even though you don't like the fact that the council members are his bosses).
I’ve never believed in term limits, feeling that the voters have the power to impose term limits in each election. But the time for term limits has come for this unelected town executive.
The rationale for term limits, especially on executives who control bureaucracies, is that they begin to become insular, self-serving, and unresponsive after awhile. They build fiefdoms which take on lives of their own.
These tendencies are aggravated when the bureaucrat is unelected and only nominally accountable to elected authority. These tendencies are not unique to this TM, they’re just human nature.
So unless the Council is able to monitor him on a daily basis to ensure more direct accountability, it’s time to look for a new TM. And the new TM should be told from the outset that he’s probably looking at 8-10 years maximum.
The TM's comments in today's Herald show his supposed great concern for the rights of employees. Clearly the TM comes across as first the champion of town employees while all other stake holders come in a distant second. That includes elected TC members and let us not forget that other, somewhat ignored group, the tax payers.
Tax payers usually want to know the big picture concerning those whose salaries they pay. So, if one or 10 or 50 town employees are suspended for cause at work let us know, ASAP. Place a notice in the local newspaper. If there is no problem listing who the PD stopped for allegedly going 5 or 10 mph faster then the limit why shouldn’t the town list who has been sent home from a town job for cause?
We all have a right to know when a town employee was acting so poorly they were told not to come to work for some set period of time. And most of us probably believe that if you are sent home from work it should be without pay. After the investigation of the alleged malfeasance is complete if the worker is exonerated then restore the back pay but if not, no work should equal no pay.
The incumbent TM needs to remember the voters point of view.
Anonymous March 11, 2010 12:54 PM said...
"The TM's comments in today's Herald show his supposed great concern for the rights of employees. (Blah, Blah, Blah...)"
You can pontificate all you like about public employees and how they should have no rights, but it amounts to squat. Just because someone takes a job as a public employee, it doesn't mean that they automatically become 2nd class citizens. Confidential means CONFIDENTIAL. It doesn't mean that the Town Manager can whisper in one Council member's ear and they can pass it on. Try reading the Connecticut General Statues having to do with Labor Relations and Freedom of Information.
The police blotter is public record. Personel records are not.
The council, both past and present, is the real problem. They want to micro-manage Milone, causing him to micro-manage the department heads, causing them to mirco-manage their departments. The council (specificly certain members) need to understand where their power stops.
Tim, you cannot blame Milone for all the problems in the town. Did Milone negotiate contracts as accepted by the council? NO, the coucil did. Did Milone approve the town pool? NO the council did. Did Milone approve the Norton Boiler project? NO the council did. Do we see a trend?
If you were to set a "term limit" on a non elected position, maybe we should have the same limits on elected officials. If we have consistant problems for 10 years with the same council and manager, how do we know it is only the manager? If you set a term limit for 1 position, set it for all.
Also, if you are going to set a term limit, why not go back to a mayorial form of government? We can start the person at $30,000 per year and make it a full time, non union job with elections every 2 years. Who on the council would jump for that?
According to the Herald and Mr. Milone, there have been 5 or 6 officers suspended over the past couple years and others with disciplinary issues. That's nearly 15% of the total officers doing things apparently so wrong that a suspension is the only way to deal with the issues.
I always thought police officers were the ones who were supposed to set the good examples(especially for our youth) and follow the rules. Seems to me that the council and the public should be informed of these suspensions. If they can't follow rules, how comfortable should residents feel depending on these officers to protect them and their rights or to enforce rules with our youth in a school or other setting? What is is then - "Do as I say, not as I do?" I don't think so.
They expect the public to admit to their mistakes and have their names plastered all over the papers but they are exempt from the same treatment. If you only knew.
Turmelle stirs the pot and everybody gets fired up. His sources are vague. He never mentions names and gets everyone to wonder. I believe he has accomplished this many times in the past. Controversy sells papers. Without all the facts one should think before they comment.
Tim, you cannot blame Milone for all the problems in the town.
I never did.
But a large part of the problem is clearly his refusal to acknowledge and address problems (such as when I told him that he needed to begin addressing the PD two years ago or allowing the Town to be in a situation in which corruption is alleged in town - hotWatergate - and there are never any consequences except bigger government - new purchasing software - and higher taxes - to pay for the software, legal fees and everything else related to the Norton boiler.)
Town council Michael Milone's boss? Are you kidding? Is that how you see it Tim? Well, you chose to be a volunteer on the Town council and serve the town-this is not a forum to work your power and control issues. How horrble and nonproductive this issue has become, a notification issue. As someone previously stated in another post-rules and regulations can be proped for information sharing. This is a such a personal and sensitive issue, how horrible it must be for Mr. Deegan. His name is being used as a pawn for your personal issues and your agenda with our town manager. To use someone like this is really pathetic and YOU are using him, really sad. I used to be very proud to be living in Cheshire and to see that a member of the TC posess such manipualative behavior is concerning. I remember when the TC worked as a team to do better for the town.It is embaressing to see that this is what it is coming to. now it seems to be a boxing ring and all for your personal agenda, move on.
10:55, your mantras didn't work in Nov and are not working now.
We have some serious fiscal and management problems in town, and Tim is doing what we elected him to do.
The Town Manager is not an effective leader. Effective leaders wouldn't allow the issues at the CPD to fester for so long. Hopefully the town council will vote not to renew his contract when it comes up for renewal.
THANK YOU Tim for having the courage to help Cheshire. You're doing a fine job. Keep it up!
"Just because someone takes a job as a public employee, it doesn't mean that they automatically become 2nd class citizens. "
You got one point right, public employees are not automatically second class. You failed to state it correctly though. In this state they are always 1st Class and they are almost always overpaid and under-worked and almost always unionized.
Just take the case of the town's public employee teachers and their 15% pay raise during the worst economic down turn in almost a century. The true second class employees, those of us who work in private sector jobs just have to wonder. why are our names plastered in all the local papers if we so much as roll through a stop sign in the middle of nowhere?
However, if a public employee is performing so badly at their job that they are told to go home and stay out of work some believe that no one should know about it. Temporary for cause dismissals from a public job are confidential but traffic tickets not yet reviewed, approved or rejected by a court are?
Anonymous March 12, 2010 7:14 AM said...
"why are our names plastered in all the local papers if we so much as roll through a stop sign in the middle of nowhere?
However, if a public employee is performing so badly at their job that they are told to go home and stay out of work some believe that no one should know about it. Temporary for cause dismissals from a public job are confidential but traffic tickets not yet reviewed, approved or rejected by a court are?"
You need to complain about this to your state legislators. They wrote the state statutes that regulate what is public information and what is not. There is no local involvement in this at all!
"Tim, you cannot blame Milone for all the problems in the town. Did Milone negotiate contracts as accepted by the council? NO, the coucil did. Did Milone approve the town pool? NO the council did. Did Milone approve the Norton Boiler project? NO the council did. Do we see a trend?"
A good point, and one not well-replied to. On at least one of these issues, we were promised an investigation and correction of the processes that went awry and caused the mess. Nothing happened. Milone didn't promise these changes. The Council did.
Tim, I agree with you regarding the TM. But the issues facing our Town require courage to deal with, becuase there is going to be some finger-pointing, and it will end up on the Council's worktable. Even blaming it on the former Council won't work 100%-- you were part of that group too. Acknowledge and repair mistakes, and move on. You will enamor the voters, not alienate them. The BaitnSwitch is a Dem hallmark. Show us the difference.
The law only applies to the public. It does not apply to police.
Most of the time we only hear of cases when offenses occur out of town and when another police department is forced by one of their citizens to enforce the law, and even those cases end without any real punishment.
The worst cases are those where the town spends taxpayer money to defend unlawful actions of police and we have had at least two in Cheshire that were of a sexually inappropriate nature.
We have to start defending the public by making sure laws are obeyed by everyone and those in the public trust don't get off scott free, but they should incur higher penalties for breaking the law.
March 12, 2010 4:51 PM
Amen my brother from another mother!
Looks like Tim's bubble is getting ready to pop and I'm not talking about the pool.
Tim, you cannot blame Milone for all the problems in the town.
I already agreed.
Did Milone negotiate contracts as accepted by the council? NO, the coucil did.
This is too broad for me to address. To what contracts do you refer?
Did Milone approve the town pool? NO the council did.
Agreed.
Did Milone approve the Norton Boiler project? NO the council did.
From the voters' perspective, I agree 100%. I also would still like to see some accountability though for town staff.
On at least one of these issues, we were promised an investigation and correction of the processes that went awry and caused the mess. Nothing happened. Milone didn't promise these changes. The Council did.
What was the promise?
Tim, I agree with you regarding the TM. But the issues facing our Town require courage to deal with, becuase there is going to be some finger-pointing, and it will end up on the Council's worktable. Even blaming it on the former Council won't work 100%-- you were part of that group too. Acknowledge and repair mistakes, and move on. You will enamor the voters, not alienate them. The BaitnSwitch is a Dem hallmark. Show us the difference.
If I have the time, I'll try to answer all the questions. But questions need to be specific, if I'm to address them.
Post a Comment