Panel OK’s Hike For Chief’s Salary

by Melissa Bailey | February 14, 2008 8:18 AM | | Comments (3)

How can New Haven convince a top-notch candidate to uproot, move to New Haven, steer a police department out of corruption scandal muck, all for a job that’s guaranteed for only two years? A panel of aldermen agreed, as a first step, to sweeten the salary pot.

New Haven’s outgoing police chief, Cisco Ortiz, currently makes $108,000 per year. His salary range is capped at $115,000. To make the job “market competitive” as the city undergoes a national search for Ortiz’s replacement, the administration proposed creating a new range for the chief’s salary: $100,000 to $160,000.

After some disagreement at its meeting Wednesday night, the aldermanic Finance Committee voted 7 to 1 to approve that new salary range.

“We’re looking for someone to come in and remake the department,” argued aldermanic president Carl Goldfield. “We’re looking for someone extraordinary.” A new salary range might outweigh the downsides of the job, Goldfield argued. Those downsides include: Moving, perhaps across the country, to New Haven; settling down inside New Haven lines; taking Connecticut POST classes if necessary for out-of-staters; and only being guaranteed employment for two years.

Two years?

That’s right, testified Chief Administrative Officer Rob Smuts (pictured). Ortiz’s term ends in Feb 2010. (He’s leaving this year to take a security post at Yale’s new western campus.) The new chief will fill out Ortiz’s term, but won’t be guaranteed reappointment, said Smuts.

Why? It’s against city charter to fire a chief without cause, but there’s a legal “gray area” as to whether lack of reappointment would be considered termination, Smuts explained. So the city can guarantee only two years.

To show the new salary range is “market competitive,” Smuts rattled off a list of other towns chief salaries: Hartford’s at $145,000; Bridgeport at $118,000; Providence $152,000; Stamford $114,000.

Lowell, Massachusetts, population 103,000, pays its chief $133,000.

The national search is being done by the Police Executive Research Forum, a group of policing experts the city hired to take a fresh look at the police department in the wake of an ongoing corruption scandal. PERF recommended the city raise its salary range to attract a top-notch candidate, Smuts said.

A report by the US Department of Justice put the average chief’s salary for cities of New Haven’s size at $95,000 to $123,000 in 2003. Adjusted at a 3 percent increase per year, that puts New Haven’s current salary below the bottom of that range.

Some at the aldermanic table thought raising New Haven’s range to reach $160,000 was going too far.

Hill Alderman Jorge Perez (pictured) proposed a range of $100,000 to $150,000 instead, arguing the city could come back to raise the cap if need be. That would “give us the opportunity to see how the chief is performing,” Perez reasoned, and see whether a raise is warranted.

Alderman Alex Rhodeen (pictured at the top of this story) agreed with Perez’s proposal, arguing the shift to 160G to 150G wouldn’t “make or break” a deal.

Goldfield balked at the idea - “Why bring it back for 10,000 bucks?” he asked. “Go do the negotiation. I believe they’ll negotiate as hard as they can. I don’t see the necessity to come back. We’re just tying hands. It doesn’t make sense to me to tie hands.”

Perez’s 150G amendment died in stalemate, in a 4-4 vote with one abstention.

One member of the public, budget watchdog Ken Joyner, showed up to the hearing to testify. He called the requirements — a four-year college degree and five years of command experience in a New Haven-sized town — too low. Taxpayers would have a tough time coughing up $160,000 for a chief with only those baseline qualifications, he argued.

Westville Alderwoman Ina Silverman responded the city is trying merely to “cast a wide net,” and will still have high expectations of its candidates.

Others at the table took issue with the city’s job description, calling it incomplete. Downtown Alderwoman Bitsie Clark said she trusts the city’s headhunters, PERF, to explain the job once candidates get past the screening point.

PERF is due to send a short list of candidates back to the city in March, Smuts said. So far, no one from the New Haven police department has applied, he said.







Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: Ken Joyner | February 14, 2008 10:15 AM

I will add to my testimony that I felt New Haven taxpayers would support a raise for this position, but that $160.000 is more than a 40% increase and excessive when measured against the salary paid our two previous Chiefs both of whom contributed mightily against great obstacles, and the average New Haven taxpayer's ability to constantly pay for such increases.

In August of 2007, just six months ago, this same committee and full board approved a 16% salary range increase for all executive staff, however, the Chiefs position was not a consideration for increase.

Today the city finds it necessary, in order to attract the best nation-wide candidate, to throw more money at a problem which really demands a candidate with a combination of education and experience that more closely matches the salary increase being offered.

At the same time the city needs to require goals and bench marks be set as a performance requirement. The Perf report makes recommendations for internal change, but does not set bench marks for dealing with the ingrained issues in communities like the Hill, Fairhaven, Dixwell and especially NewHaville.

Instead of increasing the requirements, Perf and the city have chosen to hold the requirements at or below the status quo and use salary alone as the bait. That approach does not guarantee "a best candidate" will emerge when you do not demonstrate, "up front", your expectations.

What was learned here is that in matters such as choosing and paying Executive city employees, some alderman, the press and myself have expressed the need for broader citizen participation in budget financial matters in which you are being asked to pay.

Posted by: Common Sense | February 14, 2008 9:43 PM


Rob Smuts states: "It's against city charter to fire a chief without cause, but there's a legal "gray area" as to whether lack of reappointment would be considered termination, Smuts explained. So the city can guarantee only two years."

Of course lack of reappointment is termination unless a deal is made for another position as some type of consultant or other position then the Chief can put in his/her retirement papers prior to the end of the four year term. It's been done!

The new proposed Chief's salary along with the addition of two more Assistant Chief's (do we need four?) in the Police Department is going to inpact the 2008-09 budget. Hold on to your hats and watch the mill rate take an upward hike. Will the Board of Aldermen have the will to take control of spending and listen to their constituents?

Posted by: citysavior [TypeKey Profile Page] | February 16, 2008 9:11 AM

PERF is due to send a short list of candidates back to the city in March, Smuts said. So far, no one from the New Haven police department has applied, he said.
how long will it take the city brain trust to figure out that at over 3000.00 for two years with no promise of reappointment that the canidates are going to be carpet baggers!! No one from with in has applied? does that tell you that may be the good internal candidtes see whats going on and refuse to apply for a job that has no power to bring progressive change with out Mayors office calling the shots. Watch out for the next years .we all may have to sell our homes and move due to the free spending .You got to think that if during the Daniel's era that pastore didn't take apart the management structure the city department might be in better shape.

Sorry, Comments are closed for this entry

Sections

Neighborhood News

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links


Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

Buy New Haven Independent Stuff

News Feed

Powered by
Movable Type 3.35