The Police Chief Decision: After the Gavel Fell

COMMENTARY
Beyond the short preceding piece about the Common Council rejecting Pat McMahon as Police Chief, I don't feel impartial enough on the topic to write even a relatively objective news piece about the meeting in council chambers tonight.  I lost my cool.  Here's what happened after the gavel to adjourn came down.  


The following contains language that may not be suitable to all readers.

I was seething, I know, when I approached Councilman Ron Klattenburg and said that I noticed he had read his entire speech rejecting McMahon.

"When did you write that?" I asked him.

"This morning,"  he said.

"So you mean that you had already made your mind up this morning, before all these people came before the Council to support McMahon,"  I asked.

"Ulp," Klattenburg replied.  "I made up most of my mind before the meeting."

I turned to ask Councilman Streeto to ask a question, and Klattenburg called to me.

"Wait, I've got more to..." he said.

"I've heard everything I need to hear from you," I said.  "You guys make me ashamed to be a Democrat."

To Jim Streeto, I owe an apology.  My seething had turned to rage by the time I caught him.  Sorry Jim.

"So you don't think the Acting Chief was qualified?" I said.

"He's qualified," Streeto replied.

"So why didn't you vote to accept him?"  I asked.

"I didn't have all the information about the process,"  he said.

"That's bullshit," I replied.  "Bullshit."

He was brave enough to come over to try to offer more insight into his reasoning, but as I shoved computer and camera into my bag, I wasn't having any more of it.

"The problem is that we weren't able to know all we needed to know to make a decision," Streeto said.

"Jim, grow a backbone," I said.  "Think for yourself.  Stop thinking like a group...like them."

 I was shouting and pointing to his now-fleeing Democratic colleagues. 

"And why doesn't anyone ever complain about the Republican voting as a block."

Because, Jim, there aren't enough Republican votes to swing any resolution.

"You're a smart guy.  Think for yourself," I spat.  "You've all got your heads up each other's asses and you can't see the light anymore."

"Well, I actually heard some negative stuff about McMahon," Streeto said.

However, he never officially said anything negative about McMahon in the public record, sticking with his party's talking points about a "faulty process."  In fact, with the exception of Gerry Daley who cited McMahon's previous employment record, and his decision about deploying officers at the Board of Education building, none of the Democratic council members offered any criticism of McMahon, but instead cited a selection process that was either illegal, inappropriate or distasteful in some way.

Streeto followed me out to the lobby.

"It was chickenshit Jim," I said to the departing Streeto.  "Chickenshit."

(And it was chickenshit, but I apologize again Jim, for letting my temper get the better of me.  That was something I should have said in a more thoughtful, constructive way. But I was angry.  And here's why.)

The simple fact is this.  The Democratic Common Council members voted as a block to reject McMahon's bid to become Police Chief.  I can't guess at their precise motivation, because they spoke in unified malarkey about their concerns.  But it's obvious that politics are more important to that particular group than the needs of the community.

Their statements, all drawn from the same well of arguments, were likely from a script dreamed up in Democratic caucus.  It began with former mayoral candidate Dan Drew who was the lone member of the public who stood and spoke against McMahon's nomination.

About a dozen community members spoke passionately in favor of McMahon.

Drew talked about a what he called a faulty process.

"It was not an honest process," Drew said. "The nomination was rigged from day one."

Following Drew was a procession of community members, and community leaders who praised McMahon for his connection to their segment of the community.  They spoke of McMahon's involvement, and of the pride that was apparent in the way he did his job.  Most of the speakers were Democrats.  Most have an intimate connection to the community - Bob Spenser of the YMCA, Izzi Greenberg of NEAT, Jen Alexander from Kidcity, Amy Waterman at teacher at Macdonough, Lucy McMillan who lives downtown and works for Gilead, Cheryl Sprague from the Rushford Center, Middletown Fire Chief Gary Oulette and developer Peter Harding.

But when the Common Council began to question Mayor Sebastian Giuliano and Middletown personnel director Deb Milardo, it was clear that the Democrats were out for blood, and they were going to use technicalities to stop an appointment that was not of their making.

And when the questions to the chief began, it was clear that the Democrats were trying to find some toehold from which they could springboard their rejection.  They asked about his creation of sargeant positions without the Council's permission.  They asked about his negotiations of a new work schedule.  They asked about his residency (though these same Council members crafted a special ordinance when it was their candidate, Brymer, who needed permission to live outside of the city).

When the Democratic councilors began to gather their justifications to reject, it was clear that the Kool-Aid had been consumed.  They cited the same reasons over and over.  Invalid process.  Legal residency.

Streeto began with reasoning that was at once convoluted and meaningless.  He spun a spectacularly complex argument that was a web of endless sentences and flimsy non-reasons.  He began the chant of the all the Democrats to follow that "the process was flawed."  The chief is qualified, they all said.  He's a good man, they flattered.  He's established deep community connections, they admitted.  But the process by which he was selected was flawed.  Meaning, of course, that Republican Mayor Sebastian Giuliano chose McMahon, and the Democrats were not about to vote for a chief selected by a Republican.   Streeto was followed by Klattenburg who echoed the same nonsense, who was followed by Serra and Daley in similar fashion.

None had a legitimate reason not to select McMahon, except that he was Republican Mayor Sebastian Giuliano's candidate.

Republican Council members Deb Kleckowski and Phil Pessina called the reasoning of their Democratic colleagues shameful, and said that the decision that the council was making was embarrassing.

"You all complain about process," Pessina said.  "I don't know how you could have vetted anyone more than we have Acting Chief McMahon.  Your vote is a disrespect to the men and women who patrol our streets."

Pessina ended by apologizing to McMahon.

In the four years I've attended Council meetings, I have never been more appalled.  I witnessed a group of so-called adults so enthralled with their own sense of authority that they were willing to bring harm to the best interests of the community to preserve their own sense of control.

Shame on you all.

I can only hope that the members of the community who value McMahon's service and involvement understand that the only way to bring about change is in the voting booth.