2 weeks Ago
Why all the drawn-out suspense? That’s probably what Leominster taxpayers want to know, considering the black hole of information surrounding the imminent “retirement” of its police chief. Mayor Dean Mazzarella announced Tuesday that Police Chief Aaron Kennedy will retire on Oct. 1, following a long, unexplained absence, amid allegations of discriminatory remarks attributed to the chief.
The mayor appointed Kennedy police chief in 2020, and according to city records, Kennedy was the highest paid city employee in 2023, earning $232,494. While confirming the retirement, Mazzarella declined to divulge the chief’s reason for doing so. The mayor said that Capts.
Ryan Malatos and John Fraher are currently in charge of the department on a temporary basis. It marked Mazzarella’s first morsel of public information about the situation, after previously claiming that it was a “personnel matter,” despite pressure from several news outlets, individuals and organizations to be more forthcoming. The newspaper, citing an anonymous source, said Kennedy was sent home by Mazzarella seven weeks ago, pending an investigation, allegedly as a result of another complaint being lodged against the police chief.
“Eighteen people have testified, it’s concerning,” longtime City Councilor Claire Freda stated on Monday about Kennedy’s alleged lengthy history of making off-color comments. A Sept. 11 letter addressed to Mazzarella, signed by three local union presidents, called the mayor out for being silent about the pressing issue and brought up some compelling questions.
“We are writing to express our dismay with the extended, unexplained absence of Chief Aaron F. Kennedy from his role leading the Leominster Police Department and his responsibilities to this community,” the letter stated. “.
..Additionally, we are surprised and disappointed with the lack of information and transparency coming from City Hall with regard to Chief Kennedy’s status.
What are the city’s current expectations for his presence at police headquarters? Is the chief currently on leave? Is he expected to carry out his duties as chief from his home?” The letter also mentioned that a collective bargaining process between the unions and the city “has been halted by the chief’s unavailability” and came after two of the police unions – patrolmen and supervisors – passed a vote of no confidence against Kennedy at their last meeting. “We are a great city, we have great things happening, but people are just so frustrated,” said Freda, who is currently a city councilor-at-large. Freda brought up the fact that Kennedy had been absent for a long period of time without any explanation at the tail end of the Aug.
26 City Council meeting. She requested that Mazzarella make a public statement about Kennedy’s ongoing absence, which the public has been clamoring for, fueled by speculation and rumors on social media. Last week Freda said she was disappointed that Mazzarella had remained tight-lipped, saying “the city deserves to know.
” “People need to feel safe,” she said of the Police Department being without a police chief for so long. “People should be concerned, and it should be public information. Emergencies can happen quickly, like the flood, murders, and residents need to know they are safe and that someone is in charge.
Thankfully we have two great captains and lieutenants.” In reaction to Freda’s statement, Mazzarella emphasized the two captains’ experience with the department. Mazzarella also disputed the claim that Leominster residents were concerned about their safety.
“I’m out in the community every day,” Mazzarella told the Telegram & Gazette newspaper. “Not one person has told me that they’re worried about their safety. “If the chief is on vacation, there’s going to be someone running the department.
“Nobody needs to be concerned.” However, the mayor’s reticence on this issue led to the pent-up concerns that many residents and other stakeholders harbored during this lengthy information blackout. We all understand that in personnel matters, the person involved should be entitled to a degree of privacy during ongoing deliberations on the matter.
But it appears that for almost two months, the mayor assumed that describing the police chief’s absence as a “personnel matter” was all that was required of him. In hindsight, we believe that was a short-sighted decision. The city’s taxpayers, who’ll end up paying the chief’s salary for the several weeks he was off the job, deserve better than what the mayor delivered.
A few general updates during this extended period of time – like announcing who was in charge of the Police Department’s daily operation – likely would have satisfied a questioning public, if not an inquiring press..
