Franklin Lakes Weighs In

By The Franklin Lakes Journal

Published: August 13, 2010

Franklin Lakes new arrangement with retiring Police Chief Conklin is unique to Franklin Lakes, but not to other municipalities in New Jersey.

The new arrangement, considered temporary, involves the re-hiring of Chief Conklin six months after his retirement to act as the borough’s Director of Public Safety. The purpose is purely budgetary as his part-time position would have a salary of less than half of a new police chief. The proposal has evoked some controversy with Mayor DeNicola refusing to sign off claiming greater public debate on the issues could have resulted in more savings and a long term solution to rising police costs.

The small town of Pennington, NJ already employs a director of public safety rather than a police chief, and the town of Lambertville, NJ also does not have a police chief for its force. Other towns have debated and or temporarily created a director of public safety similar to the Franklin Lakes situation.

Edison NJ, back in 2008, temporarily had a similar position which evoked public debate and raised important questions as to the effectiveness of this solution as a remedy to budget woes. The same concerns were expressed in Rutherford, NJ as the governing body there debated the pros and cons of a police chief versus a director of public safety.

The difference between the two positions is one of civilian authority and police authority. NJ law defines the position of director of public safety as an administrative position lacking in police powers. While most people would assume that this would prevent the director of public safety from making actual arrests or directing an investigation, it is actually more expansive.

A 1999 Appellate Court decision, PBA vs. North Brunswick, determined that a police director is vested with the same administrative authority as a chief of police regarding day-to-day operations of a department but that this authority ends where police powers begin. A police director cannot review police reports or confidential files, cannot be involved in disciplinary hearings, cannot supervise crime scenes, lead criminal investigations, use emergency vehicles or police radios.

These restrictions are what has led to a lawsuit in East Brunswick, NJ where the Police Benevolent Association Local 145 and the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 98 recently sued to stop their director of public safety, a retired law enforcement officer, from engaging in police activity. The suit includes accusations that the director of public safety directed and/or conducted internal affairs investigations; disseminated confidential internal affairs records; directed/interfered with crime scenes; and reviewed criminal investigation reports and criminal history records. The suit also seeks to stop Roberson from possessing and displaying an East Brunswick police badge and possessing and operating a fully equipped unmarked police.

The township attorney in East Brunswick believes that their director of public safety has not overstepped his bounds and has not violated any laws in the course of performing his duties, stating “The law permits municipalities to employ a civilian as a police director or public safety director, and that’s what the township does here.”

While the debate of a police chief over a public safety director is still contentious in many parts of NJ, in smaller towns such as Lambertville and Pennington it has been implemented. The impending trial regarding the East Brunswick situation should clarify for municipalities the pros and cons in what many see as a measure that can lead to budget reductions.

Additional Reading

http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2010/06/in_mercer_towns_wide_range_in.html

http://ems.gmnews.com/news/2008-01-16/front_page/002.html

http://www.ahherald.com/news/2002/1219/kb_police_director.htm

http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/Police-unions-sue-East-Brunswick-over-public-safety-director-duties