ALTAMONT — During the recent public hearing about Altamont’s proposed police-reform plan, village Chief Todd Pucci said his department had made changes to 20 of its policies.

“Some were minor changes; some were major changes,” Pucci said. All had met the governor’s mandates, but “fortunately, we haven’t had a lot of the problems that other departments have had,” Pucci said, “so a lot of [the changes that needed to be made] did not apply to us but you can’t predict the future, so we went through it, as if it did.”

Villagers must have agreed with Pucci because, save for one resident in attendance who spoke during the hearing— and the 77 Altamontonians who responded to an online survey with written comments having little to do with police reform — the only other people at the March 4 virtual hearing were committee members and Mayor Kerry Dineen.

The village has a population of 1,720, according to the 2010 federal census. In addition to the village police, Altamont is served by Guilderland Police, the Albany County Sheriff’s Office, and State Police.

The statewide police reforms pushed by Governor Andrew Cuomo were in response to the May 2020 death of George Floyd, a Black man, who died after a white Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for over nine minutes. 

The stated purpose of the Altamont reform plan “is to foster trust, fairness, and legitimacy within the Altamont community.” And, although they may be state-mandated, said Trustee John Scally on March 4, the reforms are also an opportunity to be “proactive” and make “positive changes to the village of Altamont Police Department.”

The Altamont Police Reform Committee has nine members. 

Pucci said his department had made changes to 20 of its policies and met all the governor’s mandates, like banning the use of chokeholds and increasing training, de-escalation training in particular.

Among the other policies changed by the department, Pucci said, were ones associated with field-training; employee observations, to allow for “more direct observation; more evaluation of younger recruits; and “we changed our hiring practices” to match the village’s Equal Opportunity employment statute; in addition to banning the use of chokeholds.

Survey results

After five-and-a-half-minutes of reform discussion, the committee pivoted to an online survey and was walked through its results for the remainder of the hearing. The survey, Scally said, was an opportunity for the public to “give us real feedback on what our community needs and what the police department needs to meet the needs of our community.”

Among the questions or comments residents were asked to agree or not agree with in one varying form or another, were: “How satisfied are you with the Altamont Police Department?” Scally said. “As you can see, we have a large portion of the population that’s pretty satisfied.”

Scally then noted there were also residents who were “very satisfied” with the department, yet there were other villagers who felt “neutral,” but only a handful were “very dissatisfied.” Scally then went on to read more survey results to very likely the only people in all of Altamont who will ever fully read the reform plan.

Other survey questions or comments in search of a response were:

— The Altamont Police Department Officers do a good job.

— When was the last time you had to contact the Altamont Police Department, and, if the answer was yes: Was your reason for contacting the Altamont Police Department resolved in a professional manner?

— The Altamont Police Department’s diversity is reflective of the community.

— The Altamont Police Officers are held accountable for their actions.

— Altamont Police Officers are responsive to our community needs.

— Other comments or suggestions for the Altamont Police Department?

The committee took the opportunity to tick through a number of the comments left by survey participants, of whom there were 77.

Out of approximately 27 comments given to the survey, two could possibly be characterized as tangentially having anything to do with the broader reforms being taken up by the department. 

“Looking forward to hearing more about the review committee and how the public can become involved in a discussion about racial justice and policing, what is happening, and where there are opportunities for growth and improvement,” wrote one commenter.

The reform committee meetings prior to the March 4 hearing were posted to YouTube only after it was brought to the village’s attention that the recordings were not available to the public. 

Another survey-taker said, “I haven’t had any interactions with the police department, except this summer when I  participated in a BLM march in town. I was very impressed with the courtesy and the  professionalism of the village police. It was a fraught time and I felt like the police were going out of their way to act with courtesy and professionalism.”

The remaining opinions, broadly and generally speaking, were the customary praise of police, bewilderment at the department’s very existence, or complaints that not enough was being done about issues in the village. 

There were “two occasions,” wrote one respondent, when “we called the Altamont police, no one answered.”

Scally then used one of the criticisms levied against the department by other survey respondents to explain why the writer likely couldn’t get hold of Altamont police: No one is in the station to answer the phones most of the day because typically, with the exception being when Pucci, the department’s only full-time employee, is working, there’s just one officer on duty at any given time of day, and he or she is out on patrol.

Pucci also noted that, as an entirely part-time police force of 10 officers other than himself, the village gets its own department for 16 hours a day for what it costs Guilderland to pay to full-time officers. The chief’s proposed budget for 2021-22 is just under $187,000.

Another resident wrote that, after getting into an accident near their home at 7:15 in the morning, they had to call the Guilderland police because the “Altamont police were not on duty yet.”

There are no village police patrolling Altamont between 11 p.m. and 8 a.m.; those calls are typically handled by the Guilderland Police Department, or the Albany County Sheriff’s Office, or, on occasion, by the New York State Police, who operate out of a Willow Street substation in Guilderland Center.

Pucci said the village police department’s answering machine tells callers, “If this is an emergency, please hang up and dial 9-1-1 or, if it’s a non-emergency, contact the Guilderland dispatch and it gives the phone number — they have to hear that before they leave us a message.”

Scally then continued to read through comments, noting his agreement with opinions generally favorable to the department — he read, “We take great comfort in having the Altamont Police Department. PLEASE don’t take them  away!” and responded, “I feel those sentiments” — and weighing in to offer a counter to commenters who raised concerns about issues in the village.

One survey respondent who had “several quality-of-life issues that have yet to be addressed satisfactorily,” brought up speeding through the village.

Scally’s response, “I’ve seen [police] drive up and down Altamont Boulevard, so I know that you guys are doing your best to see if there’s any speeding.”

Scally continued to read through the resident’s concern with speeding along Altamont Boulevard about which he or she had called Altamont and Guilderland police many times, noting, “I’ve seen no increase of patrols, no speed limit signs put up,” which the writer had seen done elsewhere. “Also, it is the same people routinely doing 50-60 mph in the 30-mph zone. If I recognize them, surely the police would too if they were there on a regular basis.”  

Scally said to Pucci, “So I think that you probably have seen if there’s any regular occurrences with speeding, [and] I’m sure you take the time to address that.”

Scally is not facing any competition this Tuesday in his bid for re-election.