Mayor Adrian O. Mapp is urging city support of proposed state legislation allowing municipalities to increase a residency requirement for police and fire personnel from one year to five years.
The City Council will consider a resolution to that end at tonight's agenda-fixing sess, 7:30 p.m. in Municipal Court. If moved to the regular meeting agenda, it will be up for a vote on July 20.
The resolution's goal is to "begin to resolve the heightened tensions" in police/community relations seen in communities across the nation and to foster a "deeper connection" between police and firefighters and those they serve. The resolution names Ferguson, New York, Baltimore and Charleston as places where incidents have "elevated the discourse surrounding police and community relations."
The state bills are A4265 and S2783.
On July 2, the New Jersey Fraternal Order of Police and the Professional Firefighters Association of New Jersey held a press conference urging Gov. Chris Christie to veto the legislation and predicted a negative impact on recruitment if it becomes law.
In exchanges on the Reddit web site, some commenters argued against the residency requirement, citing instances where housing might be unaffordable on a police officer's pay or a school district might not be desirable.
Both police and fire personnel must pass tests and receive training before active service. The city presently requires a one-year residency. After that, it is up to an officer or firefighter whether or not to live in the city. Considerations may include family safety, where a spouse works or perceived animosity toward police.
--Bernice
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Does current state law actually require one-year residency PRIOR to appointment? It doesn't, though our resolution says that's the case. This should be fixed before the resolution is voted on. The legislation in question permits a municipality to impose a 5-year residency requirement, beginning 6-months after employment commences. Although we all want our police and fire departments to be responsive to our needs, respect the community, and increase the likelihood employees will spend their income in town, a 5-year residency requirement may not have the desired result. Instead it may unwittingly limit the pool of talent available to staff our police and fire divisions with qualified personnel. Is there any research available that shows otherwise, or points one way or the other? In any event, it would be optional for a town to go to five years, and not a strict requirement of the State.
ReplyDeleteAsk any policeman, and they would prefer to not live in the city where they live. They are professionals and will do their job no matter what their address. However, I have been told by countless officers that they are never off the job. Whether they are in the grocery store, mowing their lawn, taking kids to school, people are always asking them about the happenings of the city. They say it is stressful, tiring, and never allows them the down time they need.
ReplyDeleteI would suggest that the council think about that, and members of the public should ensure that they are considerate of our police when they are off duty.