Ruling may spur cases across state
By Lisa Fleisher, Globe Correspondent | June 10, 2005
Newton police officers won the latest battle yesterday in the fight to retain control over traffic tickets, after an appeals court ruled that the city could not require officers to issue tickets instead of warnings. The ruling could affect similar disputes across the state, including in Cambridge, where officers are fighting for control over ticketing policies.
''We're thrilled," said Jay Babcock, president of the Newton Police Association, which filed the suit in 2003. ''It allows my
membership to still use the flexibility of discretion."
According to the ruling, the case hinged on the meaning of the word ''may"
in a section of Massachusetts law, which states: ''the officer may issue a
written warning or may cite the violator for a civil motor vehicle
infraction."
The city argued that the law merely gave the officer permission to write
tickets and warnings, while the union said the law gave the officer
discretion in issuing a ticket vs. a warning.
Alan J. McDonald, the union's lawyer, said one of the purposes of the law is to block towns from using tickets to generate revenue.
The dispute began in 2002, when then-Chief Jose M. Cordero, a retired New York City police inspector who often clashed with Newton officers over his tactics, ordered officers to issue tickets rather than warnings for certain infractions at dangerous intersections.
After about a year, officers sued to stop the practice. Superior Court
Justice Leila R. Kern sided with the union, and the city filed an appeal
last summer.
Cordero, who left last year to become director of the East Orange, N.J.,
Police Department, said yesterday that the spirit of the order -- to make
the city safer -- was overlooked in favor of maintaining the status quo.
About 90 percent of the time, officers issued warnings rather than fines, he said.
''I clearly disagree with the ruling, but I think it's really immaterial,
because the idea behind this entire order was not only misinterpreted but
was intentionally misrepresented," he said. ''Unfortunately, you have those
in the Police Department and union people who believe officers should do the least they can for the money they get paid."
Cordero called the argument for officer discretion ''silly."
''We are accountable to the people we serve," he said. ''Officers do have
discretion, and do have discretion in police work, but that discretion must
be tempered by common sense."
But Babcock argued that officers used common sense in issuing tickets.
''If you have someone who barely rolls through a stop sign, you're not going to give them a $100 ticket," Babcock said.
Babcock hailed the ruling, and said it was the last major trace of Cordero's
contentious time at the helm. Officers were rankled when Cordero began
making sweeping changes to the department, using the statistics-based
CompStat to target problem areas. While crime plunged, officers and
community members scorned what they viewed as a big-city approach to
policing, rather than a community-based one.
Closely watching the Newton case was the Cambridge Police Patrol Officers Association, which is charging that Cambridge is demanding a one-for-one quota of tickets to warnings, threatening discipline if the unwritten policy is ignored.
''If officers don't give out 'X' amount of citations, and at least half of
them fines, they are threatened with certain disciplinary actions, or they
cannot bid on where they want to work," said Stephen Killion, the Cambridge union president.
''If you ask them how many they want, they will not tell you. Still, if you
do not produce, you face their wrath," he said
Killion said he knows of 45 officers who face disciplinary action if they do
not increase their output.
But Cambridge police spokesman Frank Pasquarello said that not all officers are unhappy with the policy, known as balanced enforcement.
''If you talk to some members, they don't have a complaint," he said. ''We
don't always have a balanced happiness."
There is no litigation regarding the Cambridge policy.
But, McDonald, who also represents the Cambridge union, said, ''If they
confirm that that is the policy and the city is unwilling to change it,
there will be."
