.
Feedback

City Council Says More Time Needed To Review Police Complaints Procedure

Public Safety Committee to again consider questions regarding review of complaints against New London police officers in Police-Community Relations Committee

A proposed solution to a deadlock in the Police-Community Relations Committee was unanimously returned to a City Council committee for further review on Monday after the councilor who made the proposal said he had acted too quickly.

The PCR Committee has not acted on complaints against police officers at recent meetings due to concerns over the complaint procedure, including whether or not complaints should be heard in executive session. Their regular monthly meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. tonight at the Senior Center.

At a Public Safety Committee meeting last month, Councilor John Maynard said he did not support hearing the complaints in executive session after they had become public record. However, he proposed that the police chief should not sign off on complaints—making them public record—until the committee reviews them. He said this would allow the complaints to be heard in open session with the officers’ names redacted.

Let Patch save you time. Get great local stories like this delivered right to your inbox or smartphone every day with our free newsletter. Simple, fast sign-up here.

Maynard said Monday that he made the proposal in an effort to allow more productive meetings of the PCR Committee, but that he may have acted too hastily. He said the Public Safety Committee should look into various aspects of the issue, including how complaints against police are handled in other communities and the possibility of expanding the scope of the PCR Committee to all public safety departments.

“That was, for lack of better words, a rush job to at least get that committee functioning again,” said Maynard.

Supporters of the executive session method say complaints against other municipal employees are not discussed in public and that the method has the potential to unnecessarily embarrass officers. Opponents of the method say police are under more scrutiny due to their greater powers and responsibilities, such as the use of deadly force, and that public hearings are a way of ensuring accountability in reviewing complaints.

At its January meeting, the committee voted to table complaints until the procedural concerns were resolved. At its February meeting, the first one for three new members appointed to the committee, a 6-4 vote approved the hearing of complaints with the names of officers and complainants redacted. Mayor Daryl Finizio, who has supported the public hearing of complaints, responded by saying the names were public record and reading them into the record. Subsequent votes to hear the complaints publicly or table them failed in tie votes.

Councilor Adam Sprecace recommended that the PCR Committee not take any action on complaints until the issue is resolved. He said the committee will be able to do other business, such as planning for community events.

“There’s a lot to consider here, and that additional time is needed to get it right,” said Sprecace.

Council President Michael Passero also said he thought the proposed solution was acting too quickly on a complex matter.

“I have full faith that Mr. [PCR chairman Wayne] Vendetto will be able to operate in the interim while we’re working these issues out,” said Passero.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New London Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Kathleen Mitchell May 19, 2013 at 10:45 am
If I read this correctly and, if not, I'm sure someone will correct me, the highlights of this billRead More are (1) It's designed for workers "who do not have access to a retirement plan through their employer" (2) "workers can take their investment with them as they move from job to job." (3) "whatever administrative costs are associated with the plan are charged to the participants themselves, not Connecticut taxpayers." I haven't read the bill yet but I don't see anything in this article by Richard Waselik regarding an employer contribution or match so what is the problem?
Sue P. May 19, 2013 at 10:20 am
Richard, Are you the same Richard that sent a letter to the city council when you became concernedRead More that people that did not work for the city long enough were contributing to the pension plan? I think I have a copy of it somewhere. I think you were concerned that people were getting vested and they were not suppose to be yet.
Doc Halliday May 19, 2013 at 08:23 am
Should the general public be required to support the retirement of our elected/hired governmentRead More officials? Should those retirement checks be based on base salary and not base salary plus overtime/extra pay/bonuses etc? Should ALL government officials be on a 401 system instead of a government (public supported) retirement system? ie: government official retires at 95% pay, in a few years with cost of living increases that official is making more in retirement than when working. The public cannot afford to continue such high retirements. Social Security is being tapped by government officials to pay OTHER items rather than for what it was intended and future retirees who contributed to SS may be left out.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 07:44 am
Pretty funny Spencer. But you don't want a museum there. You need something that generates taxes.Read More Museums are mostly non-profit thereby not generating any taxes. I know you were being funny. I was disgusted to read the developer couldn't show financial backing.
Kathleen Mitchell May 17, 2013 at 05:47 pm
Who would haveever thought of Wasp Spray? When you get the case of spray, be sure and drop a can offRead More at my house;>)
Jeff Brown May 17, 2013 at 03:46 pm
Good article, gonna have to pick up a case of wasp spray!
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Barbara, I agree with you. But it is probably a lot easier to get an illegal social security numberRead More than we would know. There are two ways of looking at this issue, but my resentment is that I have to pay for them.
Barbara Crocker May 17, 2013 at 07:52 am
But for state aid they would have to have a Social Security number. Bending and breaking laws isRead More how they got here in the first place. The fact that elected officials condone and encourage these laws to be broken is the biggest problem that I have with this whole debacle. "Undocumented residents" place a burden on all of us, and take jobs that could be worked by legal residents. Employers hire illegals (yes I prefer calling them what they are, to hell with being politically correct) because it saves them money, not because "no one else would work these jobs". This is a slap in the face to all of our ancestors who came to this country and followed the rules to become citizens.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 06:51 am
The way things have been going in the eastern part of the United States, as long as the illegals areRead More not breaking the law criminally (motor vehicle is different), they are not arrested for being illegal. Its the illegal immigrants who break the law, such as the large drug bust recently in the papers. As long as they are minding their own business, they get a pass. The only problem I have with illegals is their rush to get on state aid, food stamps, etc. I don't think we should have to support those that choose to live in this country illegally. Becoming a US citizen is not cheap. It is expensive, but it is something that they must work for.
Spencer May 16, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Perhaps because people who vote continue to vote the same way they have for years--and expect to getRead More different results when they do so?
Carol Haley May 15, 2013 at 05:05 pm
Sounds like a bunch of goobledygook to me. And Sue, the Democrats being divided isn't anything newRead More as well as the backstabbing and bs. It's been going on for years. That is one of the reasons I changed to independent a long time ago. I'm presently a Democrat, but changing back to independent as soon as I can get down there.
Felicia Hendersen May 15, 2013 at 09:00 am
Bravo Sue P. And Kathleen I changed the word from "her" to "his". Why shouldRead More people not question the motives of the city council president?
Sue P. May 15, 2013 at 08:53 am
Glad to here that Felicia, I sure hope that you are who you are and not the HE I was told you are.Read More Now is the time to work together and not pick each other apart like the Administration is doing to the Democrat Town Committee.You should see how divided they are and all the back stabbing and bickering that goes on. I say stay clear of that group.
William Desmond May 14, 2013 at 12:47 pm
I must say this has created quite a stir!
Luis Smart May 14, 2013 at 07:04 am
I agree Richard argyle sweaters would have really made it. It is really sad Michael Passero has goneRead More to the dark side and has aligned himself with the administration rather than the people of the city. The one time high vote getter will be all done in November.
Richard Cranium May 13, 2013 at 10:26 pm
I think it is pretty funny although they should be wearing argyle vest sweaters!