Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Town Resources
  • Agendas & Minutes
  • Forms, Documents & Permits
  • Pay Bill Online
  • GIS/Maps
  • Contacts Directory
  • Subscribe to News
  • Live Stream and Recorded Video
  • Charter & Ordinances
  • Employment Opportunities
  • RFPs / Legal Notices
  • 250th Anniversary
  • Casino Development Agreement
 
January 14, 2009 Meeting Minutes
EAST WINDSOR POLICE COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING:  January 14, 2009
East Windsor Town Hall Meeting Room
1.      CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE:
Prior to the start of the meeting, Chairman Nelson requested a moment of silence for former Police Commissioner and Retired Lieutenant Steve Knibloe, who recently passed away.
Meeting was called to order at 7:00pm by Chairman Nelson.  All commissioners were present as well as Chief of Police Edward DeMarco and Captain Roger Hart.

2.      ADDED AGENDA ITEMS:
Commissioner Sinsigallo requested the following added agenda item:  
Under #9, New Business:   c) Officer Recognition

3.      PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES:
The minutes from December 10, 2008 regular meeting were reviewed by all commission members.   MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to accept the regular meeting minutes of 12/10/08, as presented.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.  
VOTE IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman     ABSTAIN: Sauerhoefer (absent 12/10/08 meeting)
ALL VOTING IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.

4.      BUDGET AND EXPENDITURES:
A)  Police Department – Monthly Billing: MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to accept        the monthly billing, dated January 7, 2009 in the amount of $ 10,074.56.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.
DISCUSSION:  Chairman Nelson inquired about vendor “Marie Bliss”.  Captain Hart explained that she is the MRT recertification instructor.  Chairman Nelson also inquired about a couple of line items that do not match up with the treasurer’s monthly report (% spent) – specifically office supplies and food supplies for prisoners.  Captain Hart explained that the department issues open purchase orders and those PO’s count as an encumbrance on that account even though that money has not yet been spent.  These open PO’s prevent having to issue a new PO for each order (i.e. office supplies).  Although it makes it appear it is expended, it is not.  Chief DeMarco stated that the department will now include the treasurer’s monthly report in its monthly packet to the police commissioners.  Chief DeMarco did inform the commission that at the February meeting the department will be requesting added appropriations.  
VOTE IN FAVOR:    Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer     
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.
B)  Police Department – Financial Statement:  MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to accept the monthly financial statement, dated January 8, 2009.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.  
VOTING IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.
C)  Police Commission – Monthly Billing:  MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to accept the monthly billing, dated December 31, 2008, in the amount of $ 126.19.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.  
VOTING IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.
D)  Police Commission – Financial Statement:  MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to accept monthly financial statement dated December 31, 2008, as presented.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.  
VOTING IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.
E)  Animal Control – Monthly Billing:  MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to approve monthly billing, dated January 8, 2009, in the amount of $ 58.08.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.  
VOTING IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.
F)  Animal Control – Financial Statement:  MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to approve the monthly financial statement dated January 8, 2009, as presented.   SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.  
VOTING IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.
G)  Legal Billing:  All commissioners were given copies.

    5.  PUBLIC INPUT #1 – Comments and Discussion (5 minute maximum per subject):
No public input at this time.

    6.  UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Chairman Nelson responded to resident, Bertha Shamansky in a letter dated 12/12/08, regarding her inquiry on a spay/neuter program for the town.  The letter included a copy of Dr. Tracy Powell’s information regarding the program and its cost to the town.
        

      7.  TRAFFIC AUTHORITY:
A)  State of CT, State Traffic Commission letter dated 12/29/08 acknowledging receipt of Chief DeMarco’s letter (12/8/08) regarding Mahoney Road speed limit reduction request.  STC# 046-0812-01
B)  Letter dated 1/5/09 received from resident, Joel Parkyn (17 Kreyssig Rd, Broad Brook).  Letter requesting that Kreyssig Road be designated a “not a through street” due to high-volume and fast-moving traffic.  Chief DeMarco commented that this issue would involve a coordinated effort between both Enfield and East Windsor.  Commissioner Sherman commented that this issue regarding Kreyssig Rd was a discussion addressed in the past.  Captain Hart informed the commission that there is no regulatory relative to “no through traffic” recognized in the State of CT.   There are streets designated as “no through trucks”, however this is very difficult to get placed on a road today – it was done years ago.  Chairman Nelson requested that Captain Hart look into the issue a little further so that the commission can respond to the resident.  Chief DeMarco commented that he believes it is not an area of high volatility.  Commissioner Sherman stated that the farm located on Kreyssig Rd was what may have created some of the problems, previously.  Chairman will inform resident, via letter, that issue is being looked into.  Assigned as Traffic Authority # 009-01.  

     8.  PUBLIC INPUT #2 – Comments only – NO DISCUSSION:
No public input at this time

9.      NEW BUSINESS:
A)  Title Change
Chairman Nelson asked Chief DeMarco to explain the need to change the current title of Captain Hart from Captain to Deputy Chief of Police.  Chief DeMarco stated that the change in title would not impact anything with regards to salary, benefits or additional personnel.  The purpose is to match the title with the Captain’s current work and salary.  Commissioner Devanney commented that the last line of the amendment is perhaps the most important clause:  “this amendment does not change or impact the Deputy’s responsibility, benefits, salary, length of agreement or any other provisions.”  Chief DeMarco reiterated that this title change is only a working title change.  
MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to enter into an agreement with Captain Hart to change title to Deputy Chief of Police.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.
VOTING IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.

B)      2009 Vehicle Maintenance Bid opening (To be awarded at a later date, after being reviewed.
Chairman Nelson opened the Vehicle Maintenance bids that have been received.  Commissioner Sinsigallo asked Chief DeMarco if part of the bid requirement was to include copies of certifications.  Chief DeMarco stated that certifications are looked at/verified, but not required to be submitted with bid.  The following companies (in no particular order) submitted Vehicle Maintenance bids for review:
1.      Cusson Automotive, South Windsor
2.      Bosco’s Automotive, Enfield
3.      Bobby G’s Service, Windsor Locks
4.      Ray Seraphin Ford, Rockville
5.      Midford Motors, South Windsor
6.      Don’s Autocare Center LLC, East Windsor
Commissioners will review all bids at a special meeting scheduled for Wednesday, January 21, 2009 at 7:00pm, at the Police Station.  Special meeting to be posted with the Town Clerk.  

C)      Officer Recognition (added agenda item)
Commissioner Sinsigallo presented the idea of gathering a history of the police department in order to recognize those officers and past Chiefs who have served our community.  Commissioner Sinsigallo requested to gather information on all officers who have served the community and have since passed.  Commissioner Sinsigallo would gather information on dates served and dates that the individuals departed/passed.   
MOTION made by Commissioner Sherman to give Commissioner Sinsigallo the authority to research officer history/information.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.
VOTING IN FAVOR:   Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.

  10.  EXECUTIVE SESSION:
        A)  Legal and Personnel Update:
MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to go into executive session for legal and personnel update to include the Chief and the Captain (7:35pm).  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.  ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.  
              Executive Session closed at 8:17pm
MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to reinstate Officer Barracato to the East Windsor Police Department.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.
              VOTING IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
              ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.

        B)  Grievance 08-08:
     Grievant chose to have an open session.  
      Sergeant Mike Hannaford, Secretary of East Windsor Police Union Local 3583, represented         Officer Bruce Everitt for the grievance.  Sergeant Hannaford distributed a letter to all commissioners, dated 1/14/09, stating the grievant’s position.  Commissioners, as well as the Chief and Deputy Chief, reviewed the letter.
     Deputy Chief Hart referenced the letter from the Chief to the Union President, Matthew Carl (12/30/09).  Deputy Chief reviewed contents on letter and detailing the facts surrounding the deposition.  Deputy Chief Hart stated that the grievant’s deposition was conducted at his personal attorney’s office in Hartford.   Deputy Chief Hart reiterated that the reason for Officer Everitt’s deposition was because the town’s attorney was deposing him relative to Officer Everitt’s federal lawsuit against the town.  To this date, the police department has not seen any subpoena relative to this.  This deposition is a requirement as part of the civil process and was generated by him (Officer Everitt).  The Union’s position refers to a violation of the collective bargaining agreement (Article IX, section 6).  Deputy Chief Hart read Article IX, Section 6 of the bargaining agreement to the commission calling attention to the language: “…required in his/her capacity as a member of the East Windsor Police Department….”  Deputy Chief Hart states that Officer Everitt was not required to be at the deposition in his official capacity – he was required to be there because he filed a federal lawsuit against the town.  In addition, it was pointed out that Officer Everitt left his town duties at 9:30am to attend his deposition when in fact it was his wife’s deposition scheduled for that morning (12/16/09).  His wife’s deposition was from 10:22am to 12:30pm.  Officer Everitt was deposed at 1:26pm to 4:09pm.  Deputy Chief Hart stated that Officer Everitt put in for overtime that day, saying he was on the clock until 5:30pm that evening (even though the deposition ended shortly after 4:00pm that day).
In an effort to resolve this matter, the Chief and Deputy Chief met with the Union President, Matt Carl to discuss this issue – asking what the Union’s position is on this issue.  The department’s goal was to avoid any grievance step.  The Union said that they had conversations with Officer Everitt, prior to 12/16/09, stating that any business he had relative to this civil case he had to take the time as personal leave.  Officer Everitt still chose to leave his patrol function and his patrol car and took his personal vehicle into Hartford.  
Chief DeMarco reiterated that, although the deposition was for the town’s attorney, it was a necessary component of him being a plaintiff in his own civil matter – not as a member of the East Windsor Police Department.      
Chief DeMarco commented that, although Sgt. Andrusko granted Officer Everitt permission to leave for the deposition, it is important to recognize that the sergeant is only able to make a decision based on the information that was given to him at that time.  Sgt Andrusko was told at 9:30am (12/16/09) that Officer Everitt had to leave the building for the deposition.   The sergeant was left with no other decision and was unaware that the deposition did not begin until later.
Deputy Chief Hart quoted from the Union’s 1/14/09 letter:  “The deposition was not an action he created and the purpose was in defense of the town”.  Deputy Chief Hart argued that the deposition is a process involved in a civil action and as a plaintiff, Officer Everitt was deposed.  He was deposed because he is a plaintiff in a civil action suit against the town.  Deputy Chief reiterated that the department wanted to settle this early on and asked Officer Everitt to identify the leave that he would like to take relative to this issue, as it is personal business that he was on.  Officer Everitt did not choose personal leave for that day.  No disciplinary action or written reprimand was taken.  Officer Everitt’s overtime for that day was denied and the department paid him for a vacation that day plus overtime rate for the 1 ½ hours before he left at 9:30 that morning.
Deputy Chief Hart added that if Officer Everitt’s deposition time was changed to a later time, he should have returned to town if he was “on the clock”.  
Sergeant Hannaford responded that Officer Everitt did what he felt was in compliance with what was requested of him from the attorney that morning.  Sergeant Hannaford commented that, if the town attorney directs an officer to give a deposition for the town - with no notice, on a work day - and there is no ability to change the time or take vacation time, Officer Everitt should be entitled to the leave time.  Sgt. Hannaford commented that maybe it was an error on the town attorney’s part for demanding something so quickly without time to make proper arrangements to schedule the deposition on a day off.      
Deputy Chief Hart commented that the issue at hand is that the plaintiff was well aware of the depositions being scheduled.  In fact, Officer Everitt’s attorney made an attempt to block the depositions by filing the motions through the court and subsequently was denied by the judge.  
Chief DeMarco reminded the commission that there were several hours before his deposition and Officer Everitt did not return to town to work.
Sgt. Hannaford commented that he did not intend to infer that Officer Everitt had no prior knowledge of the deposition.  Officer Everitt received notice that morning that they wanted to do the deposition that day.  It was stated that Officer Everitt was given a 10:00 start time.  
Officer Everitt commented that in the past he has used his vacation time for anything involved in this.  Officer Everitt stated that no time slots were given to him and had no prior warning – only that he would need to do a deposition.  
Commissioner Devanney asked Sgt. Hannaford about the fact that Officer Everitt was not summoned in his capacity as an East Windsor Police Officer.
Sgt. Hannaford responded by stating that it is the town’s attorney who summoned Officer Everitt in defense of the town and he is a police officer.  Sgt. Hannaford reiterated that Officer Everitt was there in the capacity of a police officer due to the fact he was called by the town’s attorney.  
Commissioner Sinsigallo asked if it is common practice to be called on such short notice for a deposition.  Chief DeMarco reminded the commission that there was ample notice – reminding them of the legal battle that took place earlier to block the deposition.  Chief DeMarco stated that the day and time were set and a federal action was filed in an attempt to block the deposition.  The block failed and the scheduled deposition was to move forward.
Commissioner Sinsigallo questioned Officer Everitt – did you file the suit?  Officer Everitt responded that his wife did.  Commissioner Sinsigallo asked – why do you feel we should be paying you to defend yourself?  Officer Everitt responded that everything revolves around an incident where he was acting as a police officer, was injured, was given 7 days suspension and has lead up to this point.  
Commissioner Sauerhoefer asked Officer Everitt if he was appearing (at court) as a witness or as a plaintiff.  Officer Everitt responded that he was appearing as a witness.  Sgt. Hannaford stated Officer Everitt was a witness to his wife’s (plaintiff’s) case.   Commissioner Sauerhoefer asked if Officer Everitt was representing himself or the town.  Sgt. Hannaford said that he was a witness to the complaint that his wife had filed.  Officer Everitt stated that the deposition questions were both personal and work related business.  Chief DeMarco reiterated that the deposition was directly related to a federal civil lawsuit that Officer Everitt personally brought on himself.  
Deputy Chief asked if the Union is stating that Officer Everitt is not a plaintiff in the case.  Deputy Chief has a document verifying that the officer says he is a plaintiff.  Sgt. Hannaford responded that yes, he is a plaintiff (co-plaintiff).  
Commissioner Devanney asked how Officer Everitt was summoned.  Officer Everitt stated he received a phone call from his wife’s attorney’s office that morning.  He states he could not schedule a day off with short notice because the town attorney was adamant that he be there that morning.   He told the sergeant and asked what he should do.  Officer Everitt states that the sergeant told him that “you have to do what you have to do”.
Commissioner Devanney questioned Officer Everitt as to why he did not return to work if his deposition wasn’t until 1:00pm.  Officer Everitt responded that he had no clue what was going to go on – he knew that would it would go all day and didn’t believe that the private duty vehicle was available.  Officer Everitt states he was not done until later than 4:09pm, as the town claims – the deposition would tell.
Chairman Nelson referenced document from the (dated 12/23/08) US District Court/District of CT regarding the deposition that addresses the plaintiffs in the case as “Bruce Everitt ET all plaintiff…plaintiffs Bruce and Kathleen Everitt”.  Chairman Nelson confirmed with Officer Everitt that this letter refers to the case that is presented tonight and also that both he and his wife are named as plaintiffs in the case.  Officer Everitt agreed.
MOTION made by Commissioner Sinsigallo to go into Executive Session (8:49pm) for discussion.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.
VOTE IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.
Executive session closed at 8:57pm.  
Sergeant Hannaford states that, on behalf of the Union and Officer Everitt, they will retract the grievance (08-08).  Sgt. Hannaford will present the grievant’s retraction to the police commission, in writing.

  11.  COMMUNICATIONS:
Enclosed in the commissioner’s packets were the following letters:
1.      Letter received from East Windsor Police Union President, Matthew Carl, dated 12/31/08 regarding grievance 08-07.  Letter of response from Chairman Nelson, dated 1/2/09.
2.      Letter received from Hesketh, dated 12/23/08, regarding file # 07169 – Proposed Retail Development, Route 140 East Windsor
3.      Letter received from State of CT, State Traffic Commission, dated 1/8/09 regarding STC# 046-0809-01.
4.      Letters received from State of CT, State Traffic Commission, dated 1/8/09 and 1/12/09 regarding STC# 046-0812-02

12.     MONTHLY REPORTS:
A)      Chief of Police-
i.      Commissioner Devanney, on behalf of the Police Commission, congratulated Chief DeMarco on his recent state certification.
ii.     Commissioner Sherman inquired about an update on the Metro Services Agreement.  Chief DeMarco states that it did pass unanimously.
iii.    Commissioner Devanney inquired about an updated organizational chart.  Chief DeMarco stated that it needs to be updated and it will soon.  
B)      Commission Members-
None at this time.


13.  ADJOURNMENT:
Commissioner Sinsigallo made a MOTION to adjourn the regular meeting at 9:03pm.  SECONDED by Commissioner Devanney.  
VOTED IN FAVOR:  Sinsigallo/Devanney/Sherman/Sauerhoefer       
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.

Respectfully submitted,
Christine Pellegrini
EWPC Recording Secretary