Mike...go talk to some real cops.

Who wrote the letter from the Police Union, since as far as I know there is no new President yet.

The Town of Wareham needs a Police Chief that has been picked from many sources after an exam has been asked for and taken by those who qualify, including Wareham cops.

Try to avoid talking about issues you have no knowledge of. I was just there in Wareham., I bet I talked to more cops in two hours than you have since you have lived in Wareham.

I enjoy your posts.

=============================================
Dan O'Connell wrote:

I was just there in Wareham., I bet I talked to more cops in two hours than you have since you have lived in Wareham.
=============================================

Consulting, Dan?

=============================================
Dan O'Connell wrote:

Try to avoid talking about issues you have no knowledge of.
=============================================

Words to live by, Dan.  Next time you are up, might I suggest you take that up with the Wareham Police Union.

It would seem that the Wareham Police Union disagrees with Dan O'Connell's assessment. They voted unanimously in support of Chief Stanley.A Wareham Police Officer read a letter of support to the Board of Selectmen tonight.

Close.

It was not a unanimous vote.

Let's see where the rank and file cops stand when issues are presented that affect them directly.

====================================
Dan O'Connel wrote:

"It was not a unanimous vote."
====================================

Sigh...

====================================
Jaime Rebhan reported for Wareham Week:
(emphasis added)

Wareham's two new Selectmen came face-to-face with lingering town challenges Tuesday at the first meeting of the Board since the April 6 election. New board members Steve Holmes and Cara Winslow heard police voice support for interim Police Chief Richard Stanley, received advice from outgoing Selectman John Cronan, and discussed economic development.

Selectmen Jane Donahue and Walter Cruz were unanimously voted to become the Board's new chair and clerk, respectively.

More than a dozen police department personnel filled the room - and some of the hallway - in support of Chief Stanley. Officer Stephen Kearney said during the "citizens participation" portion of the meeting that the police department was "operating in spite of having no leadership" before Stanley was hired. Under the direction of Stanley, "We have a better trained, better equipped, and more professional department," he said.

Members of the police union met Tuesday morning and took a unanimous vote of confidence in the chief, Kearney said.

More: http://wareham-ma.villagesoup.com/news/story/new-selectmen-face-familiar-town-challenges/1242
====================================

Less than half of the union members were present at the meeting. A vote was taken, two abstained...the majority voted in favor of the letter.

What is the definition of unanimous?

Mr.O'Connell, why don't you want Chief Stanley as a full time Chief in Wareham? You are living in Florida. Why does this concern you?

Ellen (and other's) give it a break...Dan has every right to voice his opinions, and he's done much more in, and for, Wareham, than any of you. No problem (for you) being led around by the nose by Mr. Slager, who lives in Halifax, has no office in Wareham, and probably never heard of Wareham before..hmmm, I don't know..let's say 1999..Since you have no problem jumping to conclusion's based on "un-named sources" from the "Halifax Hack"..let me share something I received from someone "in the know":

"Just to let everyone know. 11 officers voted against the chief and the others that voted for him where in a room all together and pressured to vote yes.  If they would have had a private ballot box he would not have even got half the men.  The ones that showed up at town hall all are either on the promotional list or have been given special assignments, dogs, or promised positions in the future.  The union president who spoke who happens to have his captains license has already been asked to take over as harbor master.  This is the same officer who was fired and received a 6 month suspension from civil service on appeal for stealing and setting up another officer of the crime a few years back."

Believe it, don't believe it..who cares? You've shown a pattern of not being willing to accept the truth, and only "seeing what you want to see"

...See ya at TM (I will post a copy of this post on the "REAL" Observer website).

Dave, I asked a simple, civil, respectful question of Mr. Dan O'Connell. I guess I'm not sure why you are so upset. There were more then 11 police officers at the BOS meeting. How do you know so many details? I wasn't aware that you were a Wareham Police Officer and  a member of the Wareham Police Union. The person "in the know" shoud be speaking for himself/herself with regards to leadership at the WPD.How dare anyone attack the sincerity of the officers that expressed their support of Chief Stanley in a very public way.

Attacking my credibility or bringing up issues that don't pertain to the question I posed to Mr. O'Connell does not foster open dialogue. I didn't attack you, why attack me? Why the need to answer for Mr. O'Connell?

Whatever Ellen..Tell it to Slager, or Mikey..or anyone else on Sunday night.

*...I DO NOT have first hand knowledge to substantiate the claims made in the quote I posted above..but reason to believe the source is "reliable"..I make NO judgement of the officer's who attended last Tuesday's BoS Mtg. in support of iChief Stanley..if they support him, that's their choice..I only wish to show that (contrary to "reports") not everyone in town is ready to name ALL of Wareham's "recent" hires as the "second coming"..PS

Dave, I'm not entirely sure why you would include 'unsubstantiated' claims in your post. Allegations of impropriety against the WPD Union and Union President  is a very serious matter. Questioning the integrity and motivation of the Police Officers who attended the BOS meeting is also a serious matter.

I , for one, was very proud of the WPD men and women who stood up and made their voices heard in support of Chief Stanley. Why try to tear it down?

I find it incredible how a handful of people have such a hard time accepting how much support Chief Stanley has, not only among the public but among his own police officers.  Where on earth is the downside to having that kind of support for a town official?  Why try to make something out of nothing?

Pspan, forgive me if I'm not persuaded by the hearsay you reported.  We could all post 'friend of a friend' stories.  Personally, I am much more pursuaded by those who showed up in uniform to give their full throated support.  It's called standing up, Pspan!  And about a dozen did.
 
Dan you asked, "What is the definition of unanimous?". The bottom line is that in virtually any organization not every member can be present for a vote.  That is what things like "quorum" and "proxies" are in place for.  If there is a lack of any objection, then the vote is considered unanaimous.  It really is that simple.

Look, here is the deal.

The current president of the Police Union, Officer Stephen Kearney, spoke on behalf of his organization's unanimous support of Chief Stanley.  No objections, then and now.

The previous president of the Wareham Police Union, Georgee Dionne, also expressed his full throated support of of Chief Stanley.  It is he who I quoted in my original Blog article.  As a Florida resident, I wouldn't expect you to know this, but you may or may not recall that not too long ago Mr. Dionne's name was attached to a letter from the Wareham Police Union which conveyed a vote of no confidence in the Board of Selectmen at the time.  It was noted that this was by a "substantial majority" (32-7). 

Now think about that for a moment.

Here was a man (and a police union) at profound political odds with the the former selectmen for a whole host of what I will agree are legitimate issue.  Add to that, these are the exact same selectmen who supported hiring Stanley part time.

Now if Mr. Dionne was able to look past the politics of this issue and support Chielf Stanley on his MERIT for what he brings to the Wareham community and his fellow officers, then I think we all can.

Indeed this is one issue where I think all of the "sides" should be finding common ground on. But again, I am scratching my head as to why anyone, especiallly a Florida blogger, would take issue with it at all.

The only folks I could see having a problem are either disgruntled officers (for whatever reason??) or a close family member or friend of one.

Dan, how many officers did you met with during your brief stay here.

I don't wish to beat a dead horse here.  I find myself in good company with the views of the past and present police union on this matter.  If you still disagree, then I really don't know what else to say.

Enjoy the weekend.

Mike Flaherty

Mike

I have a question for you. Do you think it is a good idea to hire someone like Stanley who will be retiring in a couple of years? Shouldn’t we be looking for someone more long term? As part of his contract will we be paying his health insurance when he retires? From what the TA has said in the past health insurance is about $10,000 per year per employee. Are we going to have to buy up and be reasponsible for all his vacation time, sick days, personnel days that he hasn't used for all the years he has worked in Andover?

===========================================
Mavis Wrote:

Do you think it is a good idea to hire someone like Stanley who will be retiring in a couple of years? Shouldn’t we be looking for someone more long term?
===========================================

Hi Mavis,

Do I infer correctly that you would be supportive of Chief Stnaley if you knew he was going to stay here longer?  I would like him to stay for a long while too.

===========================================
Mavis Wrote:

Are we going to have to buy up and be reasponsible for all his vacation time, sick days, personnel days that he hasn't used for all the years he has worked in Andover?
===========================================

It is interesting that you chose to focus on the costs associated with hiring the Chief.

One could argue that there are a lot of costs associated with not hiring Chief Stanley too.

For example...

================================================
Excerpt:

Interim Police Chief Rick Stanley provided selectmen with a new set of policies and procedures for the police department while informing the board that he intends to have department state certified by the end of the year.

"Many of you felt disenchanted that there were no policies and procedures (for Wareham police officers)," Stanley told the board. "I went back to research that and you were absolutely correct."

Stanley said his biggest concern was the liability the town could face without clear and concise written policies and procedures.

"We were exposed," Stanley said, referring to practices previously employed by officers acting without established guidelines.

More: http://www.thewarehamobserver.com/news.php?viewStory=631
================================================

But I try not to dwell on the negative, Mavis.

Personally, I prefer to take the glass-half-full approach on this.

Look at it this way.  Maybe Chief Stanley will decide to delay his retirement.  In which case, the town will continue to benefit from his great experience and proven results. Wouldn't that be great, Mavis?

On the other hand, if he does retire in a couple of years, then that opens the door for someone else to take his place, as Dan O'Connell continues to insist is needed - for whatever reason??

Either way that's Win/Win.

Oh, and I think that Mr. O'Connell can rest assured that Chief Stanley is grooming a few good men to pick up where he leaves off.  I know I do.

Best,
Mike Flaherty

Mike:

Chief Stanley is "grooming" two officers who were previously disciplined severely for conduct many would consider highly inappropriate of an officer of the law. Officer Kearney is one, just use Google, read for yourself. I know how much you enjoy getting to the bottom of things.

On another note, I like the Chief, but I do not think he is a good fit for a permanent full time Chief and I will tell you why.

1. We should make promotional opportunities available in-house before we look beyond our own force. It is demoralizing and demeaning to send a message that no one on the force is "good enough" to lead the Department.

2. The Chief came with the specific understanding that this was a short term assignment possibly up to a year. Most consultants who do this type of work, "bridging" a gap do not stay on full time and I believe there is probably a good reason for that.

3. The Chief spends too much money, yes he does. Fault former Chief Joyce all you want but he never spent his whole budget. Yes, we need things but everything in moderation!

4. We can't afford him. He make over 130k in North Andover, we pay our new TA 101k. Sorry, but the Police Chief should not make more then the TA. Why would Stanley go backwards. Not to mention all those overpaid Department Heads of which Joyce once was!

5. (Finally) I believe that in a job of this importance we should have several qualified individuals to choose from. Taking that away is a disservice to the community. How do we know what is out there if we never look?

Frogsrule,

You bring up some legitimate concerns.  Your points are taken.

We will just have to agree to disagree on the importance of bringing Chief Stanley on full time (and the value of his work here), even if only for a few years.

Respectfully,
Mike Flahertry

P.S.
To be clear, I have never "faulted former Chief Joyce".

Mike   I’m not sure how I feel about Stanley. Of course I focus on the cost associated with hiring Stanley it would be foolish not to look at the whole picture when you’re hiring someone for such an important position.

I do have some concerns. Although Stanley got a grant for the new police cars I think he went about it the wrong way. We need new police cars but I would have preferred that he and the TA went before town meeting explained the grant, what it would pay for, and than ASKED town meeting for approval, for the rest of the money. I’m not sure I like the idea of him circumventing town meeting.

The second item is the elephant in the room that no one is taking about. I’m sure you have heard the rumors or read on the other blogs of the accusations made against Stanley in a recent arrest. I don’t know if these rumors are true or not. I do not feel comfortable hiring Stanley until all of those accusations made against him are FULLY investigated.

The rumor is out there, people are talking about it. I think it is important for the TA to publicly say that he knows of the rumor, he has fully investigated the allegations and found them to be untrue  I think Chief Stanley should make a public statement denying the accusations. I’m disappointed that the TA and Chief Stanley are keeping silent on this issue. The silence is deafening.

It seems that our vocal snowbird is determined to keep Wareham on the downward skid that it has been riding to its doom. My personal feeling would be for the selectmen to choose a person to be chief with whom the ranck and file are comfortable working with.