By Gretchen Webster

WESTPORT — After heated discussion over the role of the town’s police chief to discipline police officers, and the power of a community board to oversee investigations of the police, the Representative Town Meeting’s Ordinance Committee voted unanimously Wednesday night to approve the language of an ordinance to establish a Civilian Police Review Board.

Two years in the making, the new ordinance is scheduled for review by the RTM’s Public Protection Committee on Sept. 8 and then for a vote Sept. 14 by the full RTM.

Chief: Disciplining officers ‘hardest part of his job’

During the committee’s online meeting, Police Chief Foti Koskinas defended his right to discipline police officers, which he said is a core responsibility – although a difficult one – of his position. “The hardest part of this job is that if you side one way it feels like a betrayal of the community, if you side the other way, it feels like a betrayal of the officer,” the chief said.

Twice during the meeting RTM member Kristan Hamlin, District 4, said that she is concerned that a police chief might “go to lunch” with an officer under investigation before making a decision, or could make an unfair decision because of a personal relationship with an officer the chief considers “a good officer.” 

Hamlin cited the case of a female relative of hers who was sexually assaulted in the military and whose attacker was not brought to justice immediately because the man’s supervising officer “said he was a good officer,” she said.

“That doesn’t happen – as far as I’ve been told – in Westport,” commented RTM member Stephen Shackelford, District 8.

Infamous ‘Hash Brown’ citation prompts call for ordinance

Hamlin was serving as proxy for Westport resident Jason Stiber, the original petitioner for an ordinance to create a Civilian Police Review Board. 

Stiber was issued a citation by Westport police in 2018 for distracted driving for using his cell phone while driving, He claimed, however, that he was eating a hash brown instead. 

First found guilty of the violation, he appealed and won the case after lengthy litigation in an incident that garnered national attention. Stiber did not attend Wednesday’s virtual meeting because of illness in his family.

The Civilian Police Review Board Ordinance calls for the proposed panel to “review, investigate and have jurisdiction over all citizen complaints against WPD officers,” with the assistance of the Westport Police Department, the draft of the ordinance states.

“The Review Board shall have the power to issue subpoenas to compel witness attendance before the Review Board and to require the production of records it deems relevant to any matter under investigation or in question,” according to the proposal. The ordinance also gives the power to participate in hiring decisions for officers of the Police Department to the civilian board.

Who gets to investigate complaints against cops?

The panel’s right to subpoena was a topic of contention, as was the role of the CPRB in the investigation of a complainant’s charge made against a police officer. 

The committee discussed whether the CPRB should be in complete charge of the investigation, or have partial oversight of a probe along with police investigators. 

Chief Koskinas told the committee that it is crucial for police officials to be involved from the very beginning in an investigation. 

“I still have a very hard time with this … the most important part of the investigation is the initial interview,” Koskinas said. In order for that interview to be done fairly, it must be conducted by an investigator who knows policies and procedures, he said. 

One option he recommended was that an outside professional agency, and not the CPRB, be brought in to conduct interviews and lead the investigation “from start to finish.” The CPRB could then review the findings of the outside agency in the case.

Currently, the police chief uses a matrix in disciplinary procedures within his department, Koskinas said. “It’s a very thorough matrix,” the chief said and the department went through a lengthy and costly process to establish the matrix. “If we’re going to use a matrix, the board should use it also,” he said.

Assistant Town Attorney Eileen Lavigne Flug noted the proposed ordinance could not take disciplinary authority away from the chief of police. “The charter provides that the chief is in charge of discipline,” she said. “An ordinance cannot overrule a charter.” 

Should TEAM play a role?

Another topic of lengthy discussion was the role that Westport TEAM (Together Effectively Achieving Multiculturalism) would have in the CPRB, and whether a TEAM member should be made an official member of the board. Some committee members had concerns on who would appoint a TEAM member to the board and whether TEAM could appoint an outside person if no member of TEAM was interested in serving on the CPRB.

After several hours of discussing various aspects of the ordinance, RTM member Peter Gold, District 5, said the Ordinance Committee’s job was not to debate individual points of the proposal, but only the wording. The final decision on approval of the ordinance “is up to Public Protection Committee and whole RTM itself. It’s not for us to decide if it’s good or bad, just to determine if it’s ready,” Gold said. 

RTM committee member Seth Braunstein, District 6, agreed. “I was about to get sucked into this discussion – I do not believe that this is the appropriate forum,” he said.

Petitioners find Marpe panel lacking

In June 2020, a Civilian Review Panel to oversee similar issues was set up by First Selectman Jim Marpe, who appointed as members Selectwomen Jennifer Tooker and Melissa Kane and TEAM Westport Chair Harold Bailey Jr. 

Although the panel was supposed to have five members, including “two members of the Westport electorate,” according to the panel’s mission statement, the additional two members were never appointed.

The proposal for the ordinance-established board was brought before the RTM committees by a petition signed by more than 20 local voters. The petitioners’ effort was primarily motivated by concerns about limitations in the appointed panel’s authority, as well as its members’ potential conflicts of interest.