Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident presents resolution urging mayor to pursue removal of police chief; council outlines civil-service process
Summary
A resident introduced RL25-124 asking the mayor to initiate removal of the City of Binghamton chief of police. Council members and staff described the ongoing administrative-leave status, an independent investigation and limits of council authority under civil service rules.
At a Lehi City Council work session on July 28, a resident introduced RL25-124, a resolution asking the mayor to initiate removal proceedings for the City of Binghamton’s chief of police. The resolution was presented by resident Aloni Porter, who cited an online video and an earlier January 2023 investigative finding as prompting the request.
Porter told the council the resolution is meant “to try to figure out a way to maybe convince or help initiate a process with the mayor,” and listed alleged leadership failures including “failure to intervene” and “failure to follow arrest procedures.” Porter also read a list of behaviors she described as examples of abusive leadership and said the actions supported consideration of formal removal.
A council speaker confirmed the incident referenced occurred on July 18 and said Chief Sekowsky was placed on administrative leave on July 20. The speaker said the city has retained an independent investigator and that the civil-service process is governed by Chapter 124 of the city code and state law. “We have confirmed that the final report will be made public,” the speaker said, and added that if misconduct is identified charges should be brought swiftly but that the authority to bring charges or impose disciplinary action rests with the mayor. The speaker also said the chief retains rights under civil service to a hearing or appeal.
Other council members spoke in support of holding the process to account but said the investigation limits public disclosure. One council member said they were “deeply disturbed by what I saw” and echoed calls for accountability while acknowledging the open investigation constrained what the council could discuss publicly.
No formal vote on RL25-124 was recorded during the work session and council members did not take action to expedite the matter. Council members indicated they want residents’ views on the record and encouraged public comment while the independent investigation proceeds.
The resolution and the council’s discussion emphasized process limits: the city’s civil-service rules and state law set specific procedures; the mayor has final disciplinary authority; and an independent report — targeted to be completed in roughly 30 days but subject to outside variables — will be released publicly once available.
For now, council members said, the city has initiated the investigatory steps (placing the chief on administrative leave and retaining an outside investigator) and will await that report before any formal charges or disciplinary actions are pursued.
