After vote, a city divided
Fallout from fight over police chief will last
STAMFORD — A twomonth battle over who should be the next police chief leaves damage in its wake.
There are rifts now over race and trust that may not be forgotten soon.
They became apparent during a special meeting of the Board of Representatives Monday night, when Mayor David Martin’s choice for chief was defeated. After the vote, a quarter of the 40 board members walked out, skipping the monthly meeting that followed.
Reasons for the hard feelings became clear before the vote, when representatives typically try to persuade colleagues to see things their way.
“To my fellow Democrats I want to say people come out every year in November to vote Row A for Democrats for issues like this,” said Rep. Nina Sherwood, D8. “They believe that when they pull the trigger to vote on Row A for Democrats, we would not support something like this.”
The “this” was the nomination of Deputy Chief Chris Murtha of Maryland’s Prince George’s County Police Department, who drew fire because he and fellow commanders were named in a civil lawsuit and Department of Justice complaint in which black and Latino officers allege they were discriminated against in decisions over promotions, assignments, transfers and disciplinary actions.
A federal judge last month dropped Murtha from the suit, but Sherwood and other opponents said he would come to Stamford under a cloud of questions.
But that was not the only motivation some had for voting against Murtha. Among other reasons, some opponents want another candidate, Stamford Assistant Chief Jim Matheny, to get the job.
What people want
Sherwood noted that the board’s meeting room Monday was crowded with citizens, many wearing lightblue Tshirts printed with a message to representatives to vote “no” on Murtha. The shirts were handed out for free before the vote, as a billboard truck with the same message circled the government center. A group called Voice of the People — Stamford was behind that and a halfpage newspaper advertisement that ran the previous day.
“Ninetyeight percent of everything that comes before us, we pass … and the public doesn’t come out. But when they do, it is our job to listen to them,” Sherwood said. “This is about the people.”
Rep. Jonathan Jacobson, D12, wanted to know which “people,” and took issue with Sherwood’s representation of their will.
“The overwhelming majority of those constituents who reached out to me in favor of Murtha were Democrats,” Jacobson said.
Indeed, among the pack of lightblue shirts Monday night two women stood together holding handprinted signs. One read, “Misleading information about Chief Chris Murtha has been widely circulated in Stamford.” The other said, “Stamford needs to be open to new people and new ideas!”
Rep. Bob Lion, D19, spoke to the “people” point.
“No one owns the people. We all work for the people,” Lion said. “We can never say we speak for all the people. No one gets all the people to agree with them.”
‘Loudest voices’
Sherwood also said Democrats “should not violate the people’s trust,” sparking a comment from Rep. David Watkins, R1.
“Trust is fragile and can be manipulated by those who wish it to be shaken,” Watkins said.
That’s some of what went on with the Murtha vote, Lion said.
“This is about the loudest voices … blurring the truth, casting doubt on the process and fostering mistrust in the facts,” he said. “We’ve all gotten letters that suggest overtones of … the Ku Klux Klan and other hate groups. Racism is being brought up to scuttle this nomination, but that racism is not coming from Prince George’s County.”
Cries of racism overrode facts, said Jacobson, an attorney. The Maryland suit contains only allegations, a judge dismissed Murtha from the suit, and a reading of the DOJ complaint revealed it is “substantially similar if not one in the same” as the suit, Jacobson said.
“We as a board are defendants in two lawsuits right now. It’s alleged that we violated the law and it identifies an individual representative, saying that representative lied on the record on this board, which led to unlawful results,” he said. “Does that mean that we as a board should not have the power to pass laws or that the representative is in fact a liar? Of course not. That’s absurd.”
Guilt and innocence
Rep. Susan Nabel, D20, said she was voting for Murtha because a rejection would be “based on an accusation that has been proved baseless, on hearsay, and a trend to place blame on the basis of typecasting and circumstance.”
“Do we still operate on the assumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty?” Nabel asked.
The vote — 15 yes, 23 no, and one abstention — illustrated the fissures. It did not fall solidly along party, district or racial lines.
“This really is a sad day for our city. We are so divided. Many of us really feel hurt inside that we live here and we feel so divided,” said Rep. Bradley Michelson, R1.
The funded protest and the pressure from some Democrats to block the nomination was an effort to get the chief they want, Michelson said.
“This is a political takedown, just as this same group of people has tried to do again and again with the wellintentioned administration that is leading our city. And frankly I’m tired of it,” Michelson said.
A similar observation came from outside City Hall.
Resident Kathleen Lewton said in an email that the opposition effort “hijacked” city government.
“Perhaps they can just dictate their specific choice and we can dispense with a search firm and a search committee and board members who represent the rest of the citizenry, and dispense with the mayor, too,” Lewton said.
Concern of racism
The conflict will stick around, Rep. J.R. McMullen, R18, told his colleagues.
“It’s somewhat naïve to think that a vote against Murtha will make the divisiveness that brought up issues of racism … go away. Unfortunately that genie has been let out of the bag,” McMullen said. “Calling people racist for political gain or to make political points has gone way too far. … The people who chose to bring that out against this candidate have opened that up here in Stamford. I think that’s just a damn shame.”
After the meeting Rep. Jeffrey Stella, D9, a retired New York Police Department detective who voted against the nomination, said he regrets that Murtha was dragged through the mud, but concerns about racial bias are legitimate.
“It seems like some people were willing to give the benefit of the doubt to Murtha but not to the black and Latino officers who filed the suit,” Stella said.
He understands why opponents bought the Tshirts, billboard truck and newspaper advertisement, Stella said.
“It’s tough to go up against an administration,” he said.
The effort may have been effective, he said.
“It could have swayed people if they looked out on a sea of lightblue shirts when they were voting,” he said. “It’s what people do in New York City, but it was kind of shocking to see it here.”