Letter to the Editor: Council Member McGinty Rebuts Council Members Gilmartin and Woods

The submitted by Hightstown Borough council members Skye Gilmartin and Lynne Woods is grandstanding without substance. The real question is why they sought to stonewall and delay the council vote past Sept. 1, when the current police chief will retire. The new ordinance mandates that a civilian director (not a chief) will head the police department as of that date. Police chiefs tend to remain in that position until retirement (with rare and complicated exceptions); a police director can be removed at any time.

I distributed publicly the text of the 15 reasons underlying why I support a civilian director, and why that would serve the interests of both our residents and our police. I read out the statement at the Aug. 1 council meeting and responded at three separate council meetings (July 18, Aug. 1 and 15) to all questions raised by the public and by other council members. The dissenting council members have had similar opportunity. They seem yet to have figured out their questions.

Ms. Gilmartin was a member of the council police committee charged with addressing issues which included staffing and overtime costs. She knows full well that the key reason why the council has lacked answers on the police financing issues has been because council members have been denied meaningful access to police scheduling and overtime records. I have been effectively denied such access by these very same council members. I think it is terrific that the Republicans on council have expressed their support (finally) that financial records of the police department shall be made available for council analysis and review. I have offered my services for that review for many months. Thank you, fellow council members, for finally giving your wholehearted support to this effort. With police overtime for this year already running at 15 percent (or more) above where we stood at this point last year, it is high time for that thorough review to be conducted.

Council members Gilmartin and Woods have expressed wonder that the ordinance charges the council, as the statutory “appropriate authority,” with responsibility for overseeing police discipline. This is not new text. Indeed, this has been in our borough code for over a decade. This does not establish new procedure; it highlights neglected procedure. These council members apparently want to lessen the council’s already attenuated oversight of the police department. I can only express my disbelief at this as a delaying tactic.

As for council member Bibens, she objected that the vote should be moved to accommodate her personal schedule, even though the meeting schedule was established and broadcast to the public last January. Notably, Ms. Bibens submitted a single-page written statement that did not contain a single substantive criticism or
suggestion about the proposed ordinance, but which repeated (twice) her endorsement of having a police director replace the chief.

Every council member has the opportunity and the ability to submit text of proposed ordinances for full council review. Ordinances may be enacted by majority vote after public consideration at two meetings, with a public hearing conducted. The council followed that procedure scrupulously in enacting the new police ordinance. If these three council members wish to submit any ordinance -- anew or amended -- they may do so at any time, and the full council would surely be ready and willing to consider their substantive research and input. This delaying tactic, however, demeaned the council. It is time for council members to step up and do the work, and to stop lamenting how “the first year in this position is a learning experience.” If the work is too difficult to comprehend, or the meeting schedule too onerous to accommodate, better to step aside than to grandstand and delay.

-- Isabel McGinty

Isabel McGinty is a Hightstown Borough Council Member.