PLUMSTED – In a vote of three to two (one being his own) Township Committeeman Dominick Cuozzo avoided being censured by the rest of the governing body.
Censure is just a formal statement denouncing a public official’s behavior.
Mayor Robert Bowen introduced an ordinance to censure Cuozzo based on a verbal exchange between Cuozzo and members of the police department.
Members of the Bible Baptist Church – which Cuozzo serves as pastor of – were going door to door on April 23 on Ivins Drive. Police were alerted by a resident of that neighborhood who witnessed a group of young people exiting a small bus and knocking on homes there in an effort to promote church services.
Police explained to them that this constituted solicitation and asked them if they had a permit. They said yes but could not produce one. They stated they had not knocked on any doors that had a “no knock” sticker on them.
The officers also explained that even with a permit, the ordinance stipulated that on Sundays, even religious groups could not solicit during certain hours and they were in violation of that. Committeeman Cuozzo arrived, showing the permit and stating that the group wasn’t soliciting and that the ordinance was in conflict with a Supreme Court ruling.
Police body camera footage at the scene shows Cuozzo telling the officers, “I don’t appreciate you hassling our guys. We have a permit to do what we are doing. We are inviting people to church. There is nothing wrong with what we are doing. In fact, there is no time frame in doing what we are doing.”
“What you are talking about is soliciting. We do not solicit,” Cuozzo said. He told the police he came to the scene after being informed of the police response, “I felt like making sure that the police did not hassle us. That is why I talked to the chief about it. I said here is what I don’t want to do, I don’t want you guys confused that we are soliciting.”
He added, “I filled out the permit so you guys would know so we wouldn’t have moments like this but now we won’t have it again, right? Perfect. Nice to see you guys. Please excuse us we are going to continue.”
Cuozzo was then told by the officers that if the group did continue, they would be in violation of the ordinance to which the Committeeman responded, “there will be no citing. You are not going to cite us. You are not going to do that alright. You guys are going to exit.”
“You are not our boss. You are not going to tell us what to do,” the officer responded. Committeeman Cuozzo replied, “Actually, I am your boss.” He added that the police sergeant that the officers were in touch with about the matter also needed to “back off.”
This exchange from the body cameras was quoted in the resolution calling for his censure. Chief Earl Meroney repeated what he said last month which was that his officers did what they were supposed to do. He stressed to the Committee that the ordinance needed to be changed as it was not in compliance with federal law but that it still had to be enforced as it was written at the time. An ordinance was approved to revise the prior one during the June meeting.
Meroney came up to the podium twice to reiterate that Cuozzo’s involvement and commentary had escalated the situation to what he said would have been a 10-minute response and became a 45-minute exchange.
“I’ve been a police officer in Plumsted for 22 years and have responded to numerous solicitation cases and not one time did I ever have anybody, not even a church, give me a hard time. As I said last month, my officers were enforcing the ordinance that this Committee had in place,” Meroney said.
The chief asked Cuozzo, “if it was an issue, it should have been changed whenever you got elected if you knew it was a violation then. Why wasn’t it changed so that my guys wouldn’t be put into that spot?”
“Now because we have an issue and my guys were put in a bad spot the ordinance is being changed,” the chief added.
Township Attorney Jean Cipriani explained the censure was whether there was a violation of the ethics law “in the manner that the committeeman interacted with the police.”
Committeeman Leonard Grilletto, who voted no, said he reviewed the video and questioned the officer in charge. “I don’t feel Committeeman Cuozzo was threatening this man’s job at all. That is my opinion on it.”
Chief Meroney told Grilletto “the video is clear as day that Committeeman Cuozzo comes up and says “actually I am your boss and you are going to step aside and we are going to continue. My guys said no, as per the ordinance.”
“The young men (from the church) were about to leave. There was no reason for you to come on the scene. If that was me at the scene seven years ago, I would have asked you to leave. A phone call was made (to Cuozzo) and it spiraled out of control,” the chief told Cuozzo.
Mayor Bowen said, “unless it is an extraordinary situation, we always support our police. I think it was clear from the video that the committeeman was using his position to have the police leave and have the organization continue their activities and to me you can’t do that.”
“You can’t send your police out and say we will have your back, probably. I think you either have their back or you don’t. I concur with the recommendation that it is a violation of the local government ethics law. I support it and I feel this is something that is indefensible,” the mayor said.
Committeeman Michael Hammerstone said he watched the video. “This is a tough one because the officers, who I support to the end, they were called out on an ordinance that was outdated so they were protecting an ordinance that was outdated. I believe it was the officers doing their job and Committeeman/Pastor Cuozzo was doing his job protecting his people who were out there canvassing the area.”
“Maybe emotions got the best of people when they were on scene and it snowballed into something it didn’t have to, something that was easily resolved but unfortunately it wasn’t and here we are,” Hammerstone added. He voted against the censure.
“We ask the police to enforce the law as it is. We don’t ask them to interpret Supreme Court cases or the law, I think they stated the ordinance as it was and that is what we ask them to do,” the mayor responded. He voted yes.
Deputy Mayor Herb Marinari said, “I feel that this is clear. I concur with the chief that you are only there to enforce not interpret the law. I vote yes.”
“All I was trying to do was explain what we were doing. I told the officers we are going to go on forward and if you believe we have broken the law, then you need to cite us. I said it several times. Listen to the body cam footage,” Cuozzo said.
Chief Meroney corrected him. “You said we actually are going to continue and our supervisor said no and you said our sergeant should back off and I actually am your boss. That was what was on the body cam.”
“The quote in the resolution is, you are not going to cite us. You are not going to do that,” Mayor Bowen noted.
“You were going to continue on with three houses left. All this for three houses,” Chief Meroney added. “You could have said, ‘Chief we have a problem with the ordinance can we discuss this tomorrow morning.’”
Cuozzo disagreed with Hammerstone saying the ordinance was outdated and emotions were running high. “The ordinance is vague. I didn’t lose my cool at all. I don’t think any emotions were high.” He also called the censure resolution “a politically motivated attempt to discredit me.”
“It was misunderstanding of what the First Amendment says and I attempted to explain. I’ll say it loud and clear, this is a political hit job,” Cuozzo added.
Resident Alfred Mancuso asked why Cuozzo, the accused, was allowed to vote on the matter to which Cipriani explained that regulations regarding censure do allow for the subject of the resolution to vote.
Nicole Cuozzo read a statement in support of her husband. “It is unfortunate that he has been demonized so that others can feel better about themselves. I wrote all of this out of my own volition without him even knowing it.”
Resident Carol Reed said to Cuozzo, “you are disrespectful to our mayor.”
Past Controversy
Previously, Cuozzo faced censure in March when 53 residents made a request to the governing body that were each reviewed by Township Attorney Jean Cipriani.
The attorney found the complaints included in the requests to be outside of the committeeman’s role as a public official. She advised the Committee to take no action on those requests in April.
Cuozzo is also the subject of a recall petition by residents. If enough valid signatures are collected, a recall will take place during the general election in November. Those who administrate the Recall Dominick Cuozzo Facebook page posted the body camera footage to that site.
