Hail to the chief
In a Common Council discussion, Police Chief Mike Koval gave in to his intensely protective commitment to his department and, under duress, made some immoderate remarks. Bill Lueders alleges he berated the alders, even made some cry (“Chief Koval Must Go,” 6/16/2016).
But does Koval really qualify as a bully? Does he even have the power to bully? Lueders mentioned, almost in passing, that Richard Williams — one of Koval’s predecessors — “was a lousy chief.” Williams was the most outrageously inadequate chief Madison ever had, and that is a broad and daring statement. He used to fly out of town the day before our annual Halloween riot, I mean party. About the best you could say about Williams was that since he seldom showed up for his job, he did less harm than he could have. Now, how long did we put up with him? Ten years. If the Police and Fire Commission were cool for a decade with this malingering incompetent, I really don’t see why they’d dump hard-working, committed Koval because there were a couple occasions when he should have buttoned his lip.
As to claims that he made the alders cry, you would think that after everything they’ve gone through from Mayor Soglin they would have toughened up.
Margaret Benbow (via email)
Bill Lueders’ opinion piece was shallow and offensive. Koval is far from alone in his disdain for the Common Council plan to shovel $400,000 to a consultant to examine the generally well-regarded police department. Rather than addressing the issue, Lueders resorted to character assassination, pegging Koval as a “petulant bully...hothead with a badge and gun.” Kudos to Koval for passionately defending his department and venturing the wrath of “Lieutenant Lueders of the PC police.”
Terry Farley (via email)
Many may be unaware that Koval’s behavior in this latest incident is part of a consistent pattern, dating to when he first assumed the position of chief, including repeated eruptions, unprofessional behavior, threatening statements and false or misleading public statements, all of which are clear violations of MPD and city of Madison policies.
At his first community meeting, approximately three days after he became chief, Koval blew up at me when I asked a polite question. (I asked what specific reforms he planned to implement, and noted that the per capita rate of fatal officer-involved shootings was substantially higher for MPD than NYPD.) I was neither loud nor rude in manner. His eruption at me elicited such pushback from the audience, including other officers present, that Koval was reduced to making a lame joke that he might only remain chief for a few more days.
In sharing his disgust for democratic political process with MPD officers, as he has, he is dangerous. His behavior is exacerbating an “us versus them” mentality within MPD, and is negatively impacting perceptions of acceptable behavior and attitudes among MPD officers.
Gregory Gelembiuk (via email)
I have lived in the city of Madison for 20 years, and can count on one hand how many times the city council members have voted for anything to actually reduce my taxes. I finally had the chance to retire last week, but I guess I’ll be looking for another job somewhere, as I’ll need more money to pay for things like the “extra” $350,000 for crap like this.
Chief Koval, you have been running your department in a very positive way; keep it up. For the alders that “actually cried” at the meeting, maybe you should shed a few tears for the majority of the citizens you have shafted with your votes through the years — you have done us few favors.
David Hoyt (via email)
Bill Lueders’ “Chief Koval Must Go” column is an example of just what he accuses Chief Koval of being: thin-skinned and hostile to perceived slights. Even if the description of Chief Koval’s conduct is accurate, asking for his dismissal on those grounds is half-preposterous and half-malicious. His column is impulsive, excessive and over the top, as is his summary condemnation of an honest, dedicated, hardworking police chief with decades of honorable service.
Moses Altsech (via email)
Clarification
The Police Policy Manual cited in last week’s opinion column has been replaced by a Code of Conduct that contains similar language. The rule against “overbearing, repressive or tyrannical conduct” is gone, but there remains an admonition against “actions that bring disrespect upon the department or members of the community.”