Turn down heat in police vs. council debate

New London has the opportunity to improve the relationship between its police officers and the community they are sworn to protect and serve.

The City Council, responding to the people who elected them and the urgency of the moment, wants to make sure that police treat those they interact with fairly and impartially, and that officers will be held accountable for any misconduct, including prejudicial misconduct.

The police want acknowledgment of the difficult role they play in trying to keep the city safe and enforcing state law. They too want to be treated fairly and do not want to be judged, and lumped together, with officers who acted wrongly in other jurisdictions.

Councilors and officers alike would like to see less crime, with young people given opportunities that steer them away from the wrong elements that get them in trouble. Everyone recognizes that wrongful actions tied to mental illness and substance abuse are better addressed as the health issues they are, and not become matters for the police and the criminal-justice system.

These goals are not mutually exclusive, but unfortunately in this city too much energy is being exerted to divide rather than unite, to make it us against them.

As stated in a prior editorial, we feel the council needlessly antagonized the New London Police Department’s officers by voting 6-1 to repeal an 80-officer minimum ordinance that had been on the books for several years. The standard has been aspirational. There are 73 officers. Dumping the goal of 80 was a symbolic gesture, a bow to the defund police crowd. It achieved nothing except hard feelings.

Now a group of citizens have filed a petition challenging it, which will likely lead to a referendum on whether to restore the ordinance. That debate will only deepen divisions.

But while we disagreed with that policy decision, the response of the police union and its president, Todd Lynch, is absolutely inappropriate and self-defeating if the goal is to win community support. The union website carries the photos of the six councilors, beneath a highly inflammatory photo that has nothing to do with the councilors or, we suspect, New London. In the photo protesters carry a banner reading, “F--- Police.”

Using the Local 724 Police Union website to attack what the union leadership sees as its critics — to try to inflame passions — has become a troubling matter.

Mayor Michael Passero formed a 12-person Public Safety Review Committee after the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin. Black Lives Matter protests have led the country to confront the uncomfortable reality that Black citizens, and other people of color, are more likely to be questioned by police and more likely to have those interactions end badly, and sometimes fatally.

In its report released in January, that committee found the union’s use of the website to attack critics “as threatening in nature.”

“It will be impossible for police to develop a trusting relationship with the community if this kind of behavior continues and becomes endemic to police culture in New London,” states the report.

Unfortunately, the behavior continues.

Recently six members of the Police Community Relations Committee resigned, citing the “cyberbullying” on the union website. Indeed, a recent review of the website found a reference ridiculing a member of the Police Community Relations Committee — among those who resigned.

The union has a First Amendment right to use its website in this manner. It has not overtly threatened anyone. But, if officers want to build good will, the union should voluntarily stop doing it. Voicing areas of disagreement is one thing, purposely antagonizing and bullying is another.

There is a chance for real progress. The advisory committee recommends the city form a Civilian Police Review Board, which would have the ability to assess alleged police misconduct in way the existing community relations committee is not authorized to do. It also called for regular officer evaluations, which shockingly are not now mandated.

Because these reforms would affect “working conditions,” they are subject to negotiations with the union.

Also, Passero’s proposed budget includes funding to better deal with police encounters driven by mental health issues and adds a new position to work toward greater “diversity, equity and inclusion” in hiring and policy decisions.

These are tough, emotional issues. There will be disagreements. But the emphasis, on both sides, needs to shift to solutions and away from scoring points and settling grievances.