New Haven Independent

Posted by: East Rocker | May 15, 2008 1:34 PM

Wait a second. I think I'm missing something here. If we have a new chief, why is it that he has to finish 1.5 years of the last guy's contract? Isn't that contract done and over with now that Chief Ortiz is gone? Why don't they just offer this guy a four year contract? This seems like a no brainer! Please, somebody tell me if I am misunderstanding something here...

Posted by: Exiled Italian Shill | May 15, 2008 1:49 PM

Want a good Chief of Police then do two things:

1. Raise the pay range. The Board of Aldermen already raised the range to most likely make the next Chief the highest salaried city employee, but when so many other well qualified Chiefs from same sized cities are paid $150-$200K a cap of $160K makes them unlikely candidates to move to New Haven; and

2. Change the Charter. Give the Police Chief the right to live in the City OR any contiguous town to New Haven (i.e. Hamden, East Haven, West Haven or North Haven).

Posted by: Your Tax Dollars at Work | May 15, 2008 2:23 PM

Why did we not offer this extremely qualified candidate a 4 year contract?

Posted by: Paul Bass | May 15, 2008 2:24 PM

Tax $$$ & East Rocker:

The charter apparently gives the city no choice. There was a charter revision in 1993 that revised several rules for hiring a police chief. One of the rules was that there were four-year terms set in stone in the calendar. City Hall's Rob Smuts told me he thinks that's becuase the charter revisers wanted to give new mayors the chance to appoint new chiefs. I agree, bad rule.

Posted by: Your Tax Dollars at Work | May 15, 2008 2:43 PM

It's time to appoint a new Charter Revision Commission with an open-ended mandate to revise the Charter!

Posted by: Rob Smuts | May 15, 2008 2:55 PM

Sec. 57. General requirements concerning department heads; appointments, terms.
(a) Except as otherwise provided by state law or this charter, all heads of departments and bureaus shall be appointed by the mayor for terms of four years, and may not be removed from office during their terms except for cause, which shall not be political. Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section or as otherwise provided by state law, after July 1, 1993, the terms of all present department and bureau heads whose appointments are subject to the four-year limitation shall end on January 31, 1994, or on such later date when their successors have been appointed and qualified, and the new terms of all such department and bureau heads appointed thereafter shall commence on February 1, 1994 and on February 1 of every fourth year thereafter. In the event of a vacancy in the office of any such department or bureau head, a successor may be appointed for the balance of the four-year term, except that during the last two months of the term of a mayor who has not been reelected to office, the mayor may not appoint any department or bureau head except on an acting basis for a temporary period ending not later than the succeeding January 31. All department and bureau heads shall serve until their successors have been appointed and qualified.

Posted by: facChek | May 15, 2008 2:59 PM

The reason given by the city in order to justify raising the police Chiefs salary by 50K, to a max of $160:
Smuts,
"Because he or she would have to live in the city and accept the balance of the four year contract and we need to attract the best possible candidate".
Granted one should'nt have anything to do with the other, but Cisco accepted the job on those same terms, however, his salary only increased from $100 to $108K.

Hmmm........

Posted by: East Rocker | May 15, 2008 3:04 PM

Thanks, Paul. That's the missing piece of information that I needed. What an incredibly short-sighted rule.

Anyone know how difficult it is to revise the charter? Can it be done out of cycle - i.e. at times other than the regular 10 year revisions??? We might not find a chief from out of the department with this provision weighing us down. (Assuming out of the department is really the best way to go - which is not something I am commenting on here.)

Posted by: Sean Matteson | May 15, 2008 4:25 PM

Mr./Ms. East Rocker:

Yes the Charter could be revised outside of the normal timeline. It would be safe to estimate that Charter revision would be close to a 2-year process.

Hope this helps.

Posted by: In The Hood | May 15, 2008 4:31 PM

Okay..he's not taking the job! Move on..who else is out there?

The crime situation in New Haven is becoming more and more frightening and has some realistic semblance to the fictional setting in Octavia Butler's "Parable of the Sower"

Posted by: Your Tax Dollars at Work | May 15, 2008 5:15 PM

Rob quoted from the existing charter. Here's a quote from Sec. 7-188 of the Connecticut General Statutes. (a part of Chapter 99 of the General Statutes which is a roadmap as to how to amend the City Charter).

(a) Any municipality, in addition to such powers as it has under the provisions of the general statutes or any special act, shall have the power to (1) adopt and amend a charter which shall be its organic law and shall supersede any existing charter, including amendments thereto, and all special acts inconsistent with such charter or amendments, which charter or amended charter may include the provisions of any special act concerning the municipality but which shall not otherwise be inconsistent with the Constitution or general statutes, provided nothing in this section shall be construed to provide that any special act relative to any municipality is repealed solely because such special act is not included in the charter or amended charter; (2) amend a home rule ordinance which has been adopted prior to October 1, 1982, which revised home rule ordinance shall not be inconsistent with the Constitution or the general statutes; and (3) repeal any such home rule ordinance by adopting a charter, provided the rights or benefits granted to any individual under any municipal retirement or pension system shall not be diminished or eliminated.

(b) Any action pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall be initiated by a resolution adopted by a two-thirds vote of the entire membership of the appointing authority of such municipality, or by petition filed with the clerk of such municipality for submission to the appointing authority and signed by not less than ten per cent of the electors of such municipality, as determined by its last-completed registry list; provided, in the case of a consolidated town and city having a town clerk and a city clerk, such petition shall be filed with the city clerk.

Posted by: TrueBlueCT | May 15, 2008 5:46 PM

Personally, I think DeStefano has a great shot at joining the Obama administration. I wonder if that possibility factored into Pawlina's decision-making?

Posted by: Your Tax Dollars at Work | May 15, 2008 6:57 PM

Obama loss is New Haven's gain!

Posted by: confused | May 15, 2008 8:17 PM

what am i missing here....i understand that he is only being offered a 1.5 contract because the existing contract has to be lived out. but if he is great and new haven wants him, why can't the mayor commit to reappointing him for another 4 years when this 1.5 years are up? can someone explain?

Posted by: tired of it | May 15, 2008 8:36 PM

How about just telling the soon to be new police chief, after this 18 months, I as the mayor will give you another 2, 3 or 4 year contract. Oh and one more thing, I as the mayor will keep my nose out of the business of the police department, and you have the right to make your choices for Asst.Chiefs.
But seriously, Destefano will never, ever keep his nose out of it. He is a large part of the problem at the New Haven PD. He is the Mayor and not a police officer, unlike his father. You can not run a police department in an attempt to get votes.

Posted by: david streever | May 15, 2008 9:57 PM

Here is what new haven needs to do.

Fine/tow/fire the cop who parks illegally on Nicol every day of the week. Right at Nicol & cottage.

The reason that sign is there saying "No parking" is because you are blocking the line of sight of vehicles coming onto Nicol--and bicyclists. It's rude, it's lazy, and it's a disgrace.

Posted by: William Doriss | May 16, 2008 6:49 AM

While Mr. Pawlina may be a good choice for police chief, it's certainly asking too much for him, at age 49, to return from paradise to one of the worst hellholes in Ct. for a measley $160,000. Even on Cape Cod, Chat-ham is the cat's meow.

He probably walks to work, and goes fishing or boating at the end of the day. In other words, on Cape, he need not take his work home with him, or get woken up in the middle of the night too often. I agree with EIS above, perhaps the city should up the ante to $260,000. That might get his attention. What's a quarter of a million amongst friends? New Haven deserves the best.

But then again, maybe not. Good luck!

Posted by: Bundler | May 16, 2008 7:00 AM

The Register reports that "the Administration couldn't do anything to change the language of the Charter". Of course DeStefano did have this power in the past! He appointed a portion of the Charter review committee, worked with them for a year or more... a few years back. Was changing this crazy contract requirement part of the proposed Charter revisions? If not why not? That was the administration's opportunity and Chief of Police hiring and contracting should be high profile enough to have been reviewed. Of course, arrogance set in and the Mayor insisted that all Charter changes be considered as one ballot question. In probably the strongest voter decision in my time in New Haven, we determined that the powergrabs by the Mayor outweighed the Charter revisions that were beneficial to the people, and in voting the all or nothing package down, told him to stuff it. DeStefano blew two years work on a process that can only happen every ten years because he thought he could twist the voters arms the way he does the Alderman. Ha! Now this process will be coming up again in a couple of years. Let's see if they are smarter and more respectful of the Citizens next time.

Posted by: untruebluect | May 16, 2008 8:33 AM

Absolutely not. Obama oes not have DeStefano lined up for an administration post. He has his eye on a far better man, Henry Fernandez.

Posted by: Charlie | May 16, 2008 3:00 PM

Bundler: Thank you for reminding everyone why charter revision failed last time. DeStefano wanted a 4 year term and wanted to ram it down the throats of voters, who rightfully rejected it.

As for Obama taking people with him: please win and take them all! In the end, New Haven will be better off without them.