Tuesday, September 15, 2015

City council crybabies

SO THE QUINCY City Council has some aldermen who aren't happy with being "lectured" or "attacked" by our chief of police.

Read the Whig story here.

My take? Wah, wah, wah. Some of our aldermen are crybabies who fail to see the big picture. Our chief isn't happy with four officers being cut from his staff. He's trying to get them back. Our city council and especially our mayor are concerned with fiscal bottom lines. So guess which side wins?

Chief Rob Copley has always been media smart and maintained relationships with aldermen. But he is obviously getting tired of having less officers. The recent spate of gun violence has bolstered his pleas.

I'm not sure how much longer the chief has left to serve. He's done a very good job for a long time. Perhaps he feels he has little to lose now, and doesn't really care if he ticks off aldermen.

Good for him.

A few years ago I forgot to duck and I got assigned to cover a city council meeting. One of the aldermen, and he's still on the council, asked Chief Copley to step up patrols on a busy street because he was getting complaints of speeding.

After the meeting, the alderman came up to Copley and said, "Thanks, chief. Appreciate it. But please tell your officers to not write tickets - just issue warnings."

That's not the way it works, Mr. Alderman. You can't act like you are taking charge, then back off.

So here's your warning, city council - our chief is trying to do his best for his department and our city. I'd listen to him and put the hankies away if he is blunt. By now, it's about the only way he's going to get through to you.

And if you think he doesn't need more officers, and our city is just fine the way it is, so be it. Election time is always around the corner.


  1. I love Chief Copley and I think he's an absolute boon to this community. I respect the work he does and continues to do, and I whole-heartedly agree that we should make sure we have the staffing needed to keep our officers from getting burned out on the job.

    That said, I'm not a huge fan of the way he's going about this current push. He's working to take advantage of a perceived - but not actual - public risk (the recent shootings have ALL been known-subjects, even the 12-year-old, though the claim is he wasn't the target). Having more boots on the ground is always going to be beneficial in some ways, but it won't stop these things from happening. But don't take my word for it, there's a expert on the subject that addressed this issue about 3 weeks ago:

    “I can’t say that if we had a cop on every corner that it would have stopped what happened (Tuesday),” Copley said.

    I support the Chief in getting more officers. But I don't like trying to capitalize on a fear that's being fed by social media when even the Chief himself has said it's no guarantee of anything.

    1. I like your reasoning. I have the feeling that Rob is trying to capitalize on the fear just so he CAN get the police officers he needs. Maybe not just more "boots on the ground" but really being short staffed is not good all around.

    2. Yeah, fear shouldn't be used BUT do you think the council would listen if he said I need more officers?? What's the first thing the community in that area say after a shooting? We need more patrol. Obviously they didn't listen regardless. The concil and mayor don't care about anybody but themselves. They are too busy lighting the bridge and hoarding the cities money for a "rainy day". Sorry but I don't buy the mayor and councils BS, he's completely worthless to this city.

  2. So Alderman Farha said the new impound fee is a tax on the poor. Now does that mean only the poor get arrested or the police ONLY arrest the poor? Well Alderman, law abiding citizens wont have to pay the fee (not a tax)

    Time for the council to get back on board with public safety. Search the record on this mayor and several council members and you will find they have never backed public safety.