The Jan. 16 letter by W.J. Brown, “Schenectady officials picked wrong incident to serve for an example,” in response to the Dec. 7 arrest of Donald Rudolph, has inspired me to join the club. The Schenectady Police Department needs to know that regardless of the mayor’s apparent rush to judgment and recent comments, the general taxpaying public appreciates the challenges they face every day. These police officers put their lives on the line to protect us, and our quality of life. My hope is that citizens who read this and support the daily efforts of our local police force will speak up as well. Anyone who has watched reality shows like “Most Shocking” and “Cops” can see the dangers police officers face today, primarily due to lack of respect for the officer’s role in society. The position the mayor has taken only serves to erode confidence in the law-abiding citizen and strengthen the resolve of the criminal element. In particular, the mayor’s Inaugural comments and remarks during the last two swearing-in ceremonies at the Zone 5 Police Academy are that of a man who has already convicted the officers who were suspended pending investigation. The mayor does not use “if” statements that would show he gives the officers the benefit of the doubt. You know, innocent until proven guilty. Instead, he uses heavy-handed terms like “rogues, cowboys and thugs,” and states that “they will be fired ... they will be replaced” [Jan. 2 Gazette]. I do not understand why the mayor would take such an aggressive stance while the claims are still being reviewed. I don’t know what happened on the night of Dec. 7 — nor does the mayor — as neither of us was there. A more appropriate response would have been to acknowledge the incident and promise to resolve it in an appropriate manner. I would like to believe that when the claims have been fully investigated and resolved, the mayor will make the same effort with an equaled passion to exonerate these officers and restore their good names. Instead, they will probably just be handed their badges and told to go back to work. When that day comes, I want these officers to know that while they may not have the support of the mayor, they have my support — as well as the support of many other community residents that I have spoken with regarding this incident. WAYNE H. FITZGERALD Rotterdam The writer’s stepson is a member of the Schenectady police force.
Not that Mr.Stratton needs defending of his words, after all he did put himself in his current position---but, I think he was using the 'new guys' as the lambs for the attempted scourging of the PBA and the likes----????
I think he would have been better of saying what he meant and meaning what he wanted to say.......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
I had a flashback from the recommendation by Schenectady Inner City Ministry director Phil Grigsby to consolidate Schenectady police services into a countywide department.
Long ago, I wrote several columns suggesting and then lobbying for merger of city and town PDs with the Sheriff's Department. The cost savings/efficiency idea didn't budge politicians clearly concerned over suffering election time retribution from police unions. At a City Council meeting last week, Grigsby said, "It may be time to give serious consideration to police consolidation." Not going to happen. Just take a look at the following similar issue: Officials at the local level spent the last dozen or so years fumbling with creation of countywide police dispatch and prisoner booking operations. Mayor Brian Stratton even made implementation of the money-saver changes a 2003 campaign promise. These two functions are simple, yet the elected people still can't get the job done because of politics. You can forget the much more difficult task of switching to a countywide police department.
Vice squad under review Activities of 4 officers scrutinized for dining, working out while on duty
By PAUL NELSON, Staff writer First published: Wednesday, January 30, 2008
SCHENECTADY -- Four vice squad officers are the target of a department probe into allegations they spent time working out at a local gym and dining at a restaurant when they were supposed to be on duty, according to several law enforcement sources. Two of those at the center of the probe include Investigator Christopher Cowell, who retired Saturday, and Officer Terry Cowper, who is expected to retire next month, according to the state comptroller's office, which confirmed both had submitted their retirement papers.
Officers John "J.P." Maloney and Sean Daley also are being investigated, according to a source who requested anonymity. The four were identified after the city hired a private investigator, who over the span of at least a week observed the officers dining out at a Colonie restaurant and putting in time at the gym while on the clock, sources familiar with the internal probe say. The four are past or present members of what is now called the special investigations unit, formerly called the vice squad. Neither Public Safety Commissioner Wayne Bennett nor Mayor Brian U. Stratton returned calls seeking comment Tuesday. The allegations are just the latest blemish for the department and comes against the backdrop of a state attorney general's office criminal probe of five suspended city officers who allegedly used excessive force against a drunken-driving suspect in early December. It was unclear Tuesday what -- if any charges -- the four face. But Cowper and Cowell likely won't face any disciplinary action since they have technically retired. The fate of the other two officers will depend on the findings of the internal investigation, sources said, adding that criminal charges are unlikely. Three are on the job. Cowell retired effective Jan. 26 after 20 years on the force, while Cowper's last day on the job after 21 years will be Feb. 23. Maloney and Daley, however, could be demoted to patrol duty and risk losing the overtime that special unit members get investigating prostitution and drugs. The officers -- all with a 2007 base salary of $53,939 -- bulked up their gross pay with overtime, with Cowper collecting $93,774 total, according to financial data released by the city Tuesday. Cowper and Daley did not return phone calls Tuesday. The other two officers could not be reached for comment. A county grand jury report released in November offered a damning portrait of laxity on the part of police brass that allowed the vice squad members to manage themselves. That document was a postscript to the imprisonment of vice squad officer Jeffrey Curtis, who was convicted of stealing narcotics evidence to feed his own drug habit. In the past five years, the department that has seen the arrest of seven officers. At least five have been sent to jail. City officials have blamed the Police Benevolent Association for wielding too much power. PBA President Robert Hamilton had no comment when asked about the probe Tuesday. Nelson can be reached at 454-5347 or by e-mail at pnelson@timesunion.com.
We are writing to correct misinformation in the Jan. 23 Gazette. Contrary to what was reported, all three of us were present for the vast majority of the public comment portion of the Jan. 22 Public Safety Committee meeting concerning the Schenectady Police Department. Specifically, we were able to hear from six of the eight community members who chose to speak, and we were glad to receive all their insights for the future of the department. While we would have preferred to stay for all of the public comments at the Public Safety Committee meeting, three of us were required to leave because several other citizens had previously been scheduled to appear before the council’s Finance Committee at 5:30 p.m., and those citizens had already been kept waiting. We have since reviewed the notes taken from the comments of the remaining two speakers at the Public Safety Committee meeting that we were not able to hear in person. We wish to thank all of those citizens who came to address the council’s various committees on all of the issues before us that evening, and we wish to assure the public that the concerns raised at the Public Safety Committee meeting will continue to be heard by all of us on the city council. PEGGY KING Schenectady The writer is council president; the letter was also signed by Councilmen Mark Blanchfi eld and Tom Della Sala.
Schenectady police union chief worked only 4 days as cop in 2007 Thursday, January 31, 2008 By Kathleen Moore (Contact) Gazette Reporter
[an error occurred while processing this directive] SCHENECTADY — The head of the city's police union appears to have spent just four days in uniform last year, taking off 225 days to file grievances, argue over disciplinary measures and negotiate a new contract for his officers. The number of days off surprised even Police Benevolent Association President Robert Hamilton, who said he believed he’d worked as a department lieutenant for about 12 days last year. “It’s probably around 12, but what’s the difference?” he said. “It’s not a big difference, but I know offhand four is not correct.” He drew a full year’s pay from the city despite working for the union all year. He also cashed in on accrued overtime from previous years, bringing his $65,000 base salary to $91,600. City workers are paid for 260 days of work each year, but police can take an unlimited number of days off for union business. Hamilton took 225 union days last year, according to city records. He also gets 28 vacation days and three personal days, and took no sick days, leaving him with four regular working days. The attendance figures were provided to The Daily Gazette in response to a Freedom of Information request. Hamilton acknowledged that the public might view his union days as excessive, but said residents don’t understand how much work he does as union president. “I don’t get days off, that’s what nobody gets,” he said. “I work 365 days a year. It never stops. 2007 was busier than any year yet.” Hamilton does not hold the record for the most union days taken in one year by one officer. That record appears to be held by former Police Benevolent Association President Anthony Brown, who claimed 245 days for union business in 2003. He not only took off every day that he was scheduled to work, but also said he had to complete union business on at least 10 vacation days. In 2004, Brown reported for police duty far more often, taking just 75 days for union business. At the end of that year, Hamilton took over as president. Hamilton started by taking off 190 days for union business, working as a police officer for 39 days in 2005. Last year, he reported for duty on just 10 occasions. The department had about 17 vacancies during the year, and Mayor Brian U. Stratton has criticized Hamilton for taking so much time off when the department is understaffed. All but one of those vacancies have now been filled.
Gee, did he ever have to take a 'sick day' at any point during that 24/7 job? I don't care what the reason is....it is a total abuse of the system. But ya know what? I don't blame HIM! Even though I would have hoped that someone in that position would have known better, I blame the powers to be that allowed this abuse in their contract.
Hamilton didn't break any laws. It was allowed in his contract. He just abused it miserably!!! This is a contract issue. And the powers to be in all municipalities better start taking control of these unions!!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Number of bad apples at Sch’dy PD appears to be growing
In recent weeks, there have been many opinions stated about the Schenectady Police Department. There has been a report from the grand jury, and the city council’s public safety committee has had three meetings to try to get this city department on the right track. To Mayor Stratton’s credit, he brought in Wayne Bennett as commissioner, a person with no connections to the police department. Stratton also has made public statements condemning any “business as usual” tactics used by some of our officers. It is my opinion that the mayor was absolutely correct in telling our new recruits that any non-policy nonsense by them will not be tolerated. Since the swearing in of these officers is, for whatever reason, a public ceremony, Mayor Stratton had every right to tell them just what is expected of them as new hires in the department at that ceremony. It’s his responsibility to oversee this department, and he would be negligent if he did anything else. We keep hearing about the “few bad apples.” Unfortunately in recent years, this department had several officers sent to prison and several more resign in disgrace. There also has been missing money, evidence and at least one blown undercover gambling operation bust. Lastly, let us not forget the saddest of all incidents — an officer taking his own life. This culture has to be fragmented and cast to the wind, and I believe that Stratton and Bennett are on the right track to accomplish this. Schenectadians should not only support the police department, as suggested by some, but also the mayor, city council and public safety commissioner to complete the difficult mission of improving this department. When using the metaphor, “a few bad apples,” please remember the complete phrase — “A few bad apples spoil the whole barrel.” VINCE RIGGI Schenectady
Carl Strock THE VIEW FROM HERE Misconduct by cops? Deep secret Carl Strock can be reached at 395-3085 or by e-mail at carlstrock@dailygazette.com.
Here we have a situation to contemplate. My friends at the Times Union reported last week that four members of the Schenectady Police Department’s vice squad are under investigation for allegedly frittering away work hours at a gym and a restaurant in Colonie. They said the city, presumably meaning Public Safety Commissioner Wayne Bennett, had actually hired a private investigator to tail the officers and that one of those officers just retired, supposedly as a result of being found out. The Times Union named the officers. Very well, is the story true? Readers of this newspaper would love to know, and they have been calling to inquire. Some of the more conspiratorial-minded among them think we at the Gazette might be party to a cover-up. But the truth is simpler, ladies and gentlemen. We don’t know. And the reason we don’t know is that no one in authority will say anything. And the reason no one in authority will say anything is that the law, at least as the city’s labor lawyer interprets it, doesn’t allow them to say anything. How can that be? How can Mayor Brian Stratton embark on a very public crusade to clean up the police department and then be barred from telling the people of Schenectady what he’s doing? Barred even from confirming or denying a news story. How can Wayne Bennett, lured out of state police retirement to come to Schenectady as public safety commissioner and clean house, be similarly barred? Isn’t that absurd? “Correct,” Commissioner Bennett agreed when I put the question to him. “According to legal counsel, I can’t say anything.” Which is more than Mayor Stratton replied, and more than legal counsel, Michael Smith of the Albany law firm of Hiscock & Barclay, replied. They replied not at all. The problem in large part is Section 50-a of the state Civil Rights Law, which was adopted in 1976, two years after the Freedom of Information Law, if you would like an example of the power of police unions and of the servility of our senators and assemblymen in relation to them. The Freedom of Information Law opened most public records to public inspection. Section 50-a, inserted not into the Freedom of Information Law, where it might be noticed, but into the Civil Rights Law, where it might not, exempted the personnel records of police and firefighters. In 1981 the records of jail and prison guards were added. Most people don’t know about it. We didn’t know about it ourselves when, in 1997, we filed a freedomof-information request with the city of Schenectady to get the names of the cops who had entertained themselves during a bus ride by throwing eggs out the windows at passing cars. After a two-year fight, we lost. The Court of Appeals ruled that Section 50-a prevailed. “Documents pertaining to misconduct or rules violations … are the very sort of record which … was intended to be kept confidential,” the court declared. No doubt the court was right — that was the intention, pusillanimously consented to by the Legislature. (Nor have things changed much since 1976.) If a cop has been found guilty of misconduct and disciplined, you can’t find out about it unless it becomes public in some other way, like through a criminal proceeding. Then of course it’s open, as the charges against a cop for stealing drugs were open last year. But if it’s just an internal matter, it’s secret. How about those five Schenectady cops who were suspended with pay in December for allegedly beating up a drunk driver they had al- ready handcuffed? How come that was publicly acknowledged? Because suspension with pay is not discipline, Bennett told me. It’s simply an administrative action. But I peruse Section 50-a, and I peruse the Court of Appeals eggthrowing decision, and I see nothing that differentiates one kind of action from another. I would like to ask distinguished counsel about that, but distinguished counsel doesn’t reply. I would like to ask the distinguished mayor also — in fact, I did ask the distinguished mayor, via e-mail, how he hopes to inspire public confidence in the police department if he is barred from telling the public what he is doing, and he didn’t reply either. I believe distinguished counsel is wrong, if he indeed gave such advice. Yes, personnel records are confidential, but there is nothing I’m aware of to prevent the mayor or the public safety commissioner from confirming the mere fact that they conducted an investigation, or that they hired a private investigator for the purpose, or that they found some officers (unnamed) to be cheating, or that they took disciplinary action (unspecified), all of which I asked and all of which I was denied. I think it’s ridiculous, and I think it goes beyond what the law requires. Never mind the insult of the law in the first place, that we are forbidden to see the records of our own most power-invested employees. There’s nothing we can do about that short of electing legislators who will be immune to pressure groups, and lots of luck with that. But anyway, if you want to know why this newspaper, and me in particular, haven’t given you the juicy facts about vice-squad cops spending their working hours at gyms and sports bars, that’s why. Somebody, I guess, tipped off my friends at the Times Union but didn’t tip me off. All I can do at this point is make an appeal: If you know the facts, give me a call. As for the substance of the case, if Commissioner Bennett did indeed hire a private investigator to tail vice squad officers and see how they were spending their time, my hat is off to him. I have often said privately there would be no way to check on the honesty of Schenectady cops short of following them around one-onone, which I thought would be impossible. They can fill out false reports, they can pretend to respond to calls when they don’t really respond to them, and since they all belong to the same club, the PBA, there is nobody to blow the whistle. But since most private investigators are former cops from one agency or another, and since Wayne Bennett is the former superintendent of the state police, he would probably have no trouble picking up the phone and finding a sleuth he could trust. Probably someone from out of town who wouldn’t be recognized. I don’t know if he did that, but if he did, good for him. Isn’t it interesting that we are not allowed to know? Now I repeat my appeal: If you know the facts, please call.
It would seem that when it comes to cops, firefighters, jail guards, and corrections officers there's a don't ask don't tell policy to protect the guilty.
SCHENECTADY Suits filed against city relate to police BY STEVEN COOK Gazette Reporter Reach Gazette reporter Steven Cook at 395-3122 or scook@dailygazette.net.
Two notices of claim have been filed seeking damages against the city for city police actions, one related to a police chase, the other related to an arrest. Paul Blair of Woodland Drive, Schenectady, filed his notice of claim in January, two months after he was slammed into by a teenage driver fleeing from city police and state police. Margarita Lopez, 16, smashed into Blair’s car in Colonie, at routes 5 and 155 on Nov. 10 at the end of a high-speed chase out of Schenectady. The 68-year-old Blair was taken to the hospital suffering from a broken ankle, police said then. Lopez, of Becker Street, remains held on multiple charges related to the chase. Two officers were also injured in the pursuit. The chase began after she allegedly failed to stop for police after running a red light in Schenectady. Blair was listed as represented by the firm Anderson, Moschetti & Taffany in Latham. Representatives of the firm did not return calls for comment. In the other case, Roger Harris of Glenwood Boulevard fi led a claim alleging false arrest. A misdemeanor assault charge against Harris, however, remains pending in City Court. Harris, 58, was arrested Sept. 28, accused of hitting a man outside MacArthur’s Pub on State Street. Harris was then a corrections officer on probationary status at the Schenectady County Jail; he was fired after the arrest by Schenectady County Sheriff Harry Buffardi. Asked last week what effect favorable outcomes for Harris in the criminal case and the potential civil case would have, Buffardi said they would have none. Harris, who has maintained his innocence, had no listed attorney Friday. He could not be reached for comment. City Corporation Counsel John Van Norden said it is standard procedure to refer claims to the city’s insurance carrier. He noted the city received 128 claims in 2007.
SCHENECTADY Police cameras stall reviews Civilian board meets roadblock BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter
The Civilian Police Review Board still can’t resolve many complaints because the video cameras in the officers’ cars aren’t working, leaving the board with no impartial witnesses in the “he said, she said” complaints, board Chairman A.C. “Budd” Mazurek told the Schenectady City Council on Monday. Early last year, Mazurek tried to resolve that problem by hiring an investigator, who would find witnesses and collect statements from people reluctant to speak to police. But the police union has stopped his new investigator from doing any investigating, he said in Monday’s annual report to the council. “His original job description was to assist the police department … finding witnesses, knocking on doors. That was put into limbo,” Mazurek said. Corporation Counsel L. John Van Norden said the Police Benevolent Association threatened to file a grievance over the issue, charging that the investigator would take union work from union members. The police contracts allows officers in the Professional Standards unit to investigate their colleagues themselves. “You can’t take bargaining work away from the bargaining unit,” Van Norden said. Thus the investigator can’t get involved in any case that involves potential discipline of an officer, he said. The investigator could gather witnesses in cases where the complainant said the officer did everything right, but that the procedures used should be changed. “I can’t give you any examples because I don’t think it’s ever happened,” Van Norden said. “It’s not easy. It’s if someone complains the procedure the officer followed is a problem.” The investigator has instead been running a public relations campaign, telling neighborhood groups how to file a complaint and offering assistance if residents need help filling out the form. But Van Norden said even that effort has been questioned by the police union. “They’re already complaining that he went over to the Schenectady County jail to present the complaint documents to an inmate at the jail,” Van Norden said. Van Norden said the response he sent back to the union was, “Too bad.” Councilman Joseph Allen wasn’t pleased to hear that the investigator’s work had been stopped. “It seems all one-sided. The PBA can do what it wants and we can’t do anything,” he said. “We need to sue somebody.” Council members also discussed possible solutions to the camera problem. Public Safety Commissioner Wayne Bennett said he told every officer that they must immediately report any malfunctions, “or face the consequences.” He listens to the radio traffi c and has heard many legitimate malfunction reports, he added. “They were being used so much they weren’t fully charged,” he said. “They are old. There are problems with sound quality. There have been valid mechanical issues.” Assistant Chief Jack Falvo met last week with vendors for a new camera system, but Bennett said he’s not yet sure what to buy. The newest equipment hasn’t been on the road long enough to prove its reliability, but the department is looking for something better than what it has, he said. He acknowledged that when cameras turn off mid-shift, it creates the appearance of deliberate action. But he said officers are not routinely turning off their cameras to avoid being recorded. “I don’t believe that’s the case at all,” he said. The review board has been fighting with the police department over the cameras for years. A year ago, the board was told that police would not allow anyone to view the videos produced by the cameras mounted in police cars. Later, they learned that evidence was simply not available. However, one thing has improved. In 2006, the board could not figure out whether the offi cer was at fault in at least 75 percent of the cases. Now it’s down to 43 percent, Mazurek said. Mazurek said the board also saw a significant increase in video and audio evidence after reporting the problem to Bennett. “The commissioner has been working very hard to enforce that policy. Great strides have been made,” Mazurek said. “There’s no real reason why audio and video equipment should not be working in these vehicles.” He said the lack of working cameras hurts the department. “That just fosters additional suspicion,” he said. He also asked the council to allow complainants and police officers to present their sides to the review board, which he said is done at the Albany police review board. The Schenectady board likes the idea and is looking into it, he said. But he might meet difficulties there. The Schenectady Police Department blacks out the names and other identifying details of every complaint, a measure that would be made futile if the offi cers involved had to come to the board in person to make their case.
Logged
