New Haven Independent

Posted by: FairHavenRes | August 20, 2007 5:28 PM

Gee, thanks guys. How much did this cost (time and money)?

Posted by: Esbe | August 20, 2007 5:31 PM

The PERF draft report repeated what citizens from Dixwell to Beaver Hills and Edgewood have been saying for months: The public has lost confidence in community policing, and in the department's ability to investigate or hold itself accountable.

Yep, that's exactly what just about everyone in town has been saying for a few years now. What every commenter on this site has been saying. Now, is anyone to be held accountable for this disaster? Will Smuts stop disagreeing with the citizens who have been making these same points?

Ortiz, at least, is agreeing with the report, which politely concludes that his tenure as Chief has been a disaster. Full agreement might suggest resignation. Even worse is the police union, which is basically announcing that they will fight implementation of the report. Recall that the union fought New Haven's original 1990's community policing program, although most of the individual officers did a great job of implementing it in the end.

Posted by: Taxed To Death | August 20, 2007 6:33 PM

We paid $130K for this report?????? None of it is new, all of it is known and any manager worth their salt could have drafted it.

Much of this report includes best practices of other departments around the country. The question is why dont we have any best practices after all these years? Ortiz grew up in this department. Smuts manages this department on behalf of taxpayers -- both should have known better.

We spend more than $30 million a year on the police department - A $130,000 report confirms we're not getting much bang for the buck.

Off with their heads = start with Smuts and move on down the line of command until you find somebody with integrity, smarts, dedication and an idea of how to run a department. This is a failure of command. Period.

Posted by: joshua jones | August 20, 2007 7:18 PM

Sad story. The mayor said he 100% with Ortiz. It looks like the only way to get community policing back is to vote DeStefano out.

Posted by: Joe | August 21, 2007 11:49 AM

Taxed to Death: Smuts has held the job for about six months, and you're going to hold him responsible for all the police department's problems? Give me a break.

Posted by: darnell | August 21, 2007 12:05 PM

Smuts is a smart guy with integrity, and will do a good job implementing the parts of the reports he is allowed to implement. The guy has been on the job for year, give him a break.

Chief Ortiz is the right guy for the job. He been on the job for what, 5 or 6 years? It will take a lot longer for him to change a culture that predates him for many decades. I'm sure that he is happy that this report gives him the ammunition to make some needed changes. The police union will probably be his biggest obstacle.

I only hope that implementing these recommendations doesn't cost us taxpayers any extra money. Do it within the budgets alloted. Please.

Good luck to those two guys.

Posted by: Taxed To Death | August 21, 2007 12:30 PM

Yes I would. Failure of command does not happen overnight. It is systemic. If Smuts is qualified for the job, one would have had to assume he reviewed the troops, looked over the books, got to know the department, it's brass and backgrounds and begun to ask questions and review the policies that government that department. That's what new leadership normally does. This is not a $5K department - it's budget is over $30 MILLION! The size and mission should have dictated Smuts' attention and time management.

But, if you really want to start at where the command failure began -- look to the Mayor's Office. It goes directly there and works its way down.

Joe: You want to protect Smuts, fine. The fundamental question is how could a police department, any city department be in the shape this one is? After all these years, after all the money, the training...to have such juvenile, undeveloped policies and procedures where cops are running around making up their own rules??? Come on....give me a break.

Posted by: Hey Mr Smuts! | August 21, 2007 12:32 PM

Hi Mr. Smuts -- Instead of pointing to your "ID card" pin at community policing press conferences we have put on, to prove you are progressive, why don't you just do it again?

Now it is OUR turn to point at the ID card pin on your lapel and say -- you proved to us you could do it, now do it again, with the PD. Bring the best leaders out front. Get rid of this culture and its golden rule that average intelligence is king, along with back patting, covering up abuses, looking tough, giving lip service to activists who actually LIVE in these districts. Please, please, get these guys outta here.

They are constantly looking to overworked volunteers to clean up their messes instead of keeping up their end of this partnership as the community is doing. It is compromising, inappropriate and a disgrace.

Posted by: Joji | August 21, 2007 12:53 PM

Taxed to Death- Your failure to understand how local government works is shocking. and calling for Smuts's head is sorta like calling for your head if I appoint the head of something tomorrow and the very next day, a decade old problem emerges - "Must be Taxed to Death's fault, off with his head." You are a crank. As another reader pointed out in another thread, you should go back to your other online pursuits.

Posted by: Been Called Worse | August 21, 2007 3:10 PM

Quite a candid report. And yes, it is clearly apparent that there is mismanagement at One Union. It extends prior to Smuts, prior to Ortiz even. It is only now, after all the scandals, that it is *glaringly* obvious.

Some of the issues addressed in the report were lingering from back in Pastore's tenure. The clear definitions on policy, procedure and accountability in this report leave little room for interpretation on where the department is lacking.

If there recommendations are implemented properly, it should be a tipping point towards a change of departmental priorities. The recommendations for the narcotics unit and internal affairs departments are very much doable if the proper management is in place to guide the efforts.

I'm certain there will be a *ton* of resistance from officers about the suggestion to civilians communications, crime scene processing and (some) internal affairs functions. A sworn officer answering to *any* civilian is Simply Unheard Of. But the report makes good sense, I can think of atleast 12 desk jobs, administrative for the most part, filled by officers who could be out in the community.