Newburyport officials are undermining the public's right to open government by refusing to let them know whether those on the public payroll are meeting performance and ethical standards. Beyond that, they are probably breaking the state's public records law.

It has been several weeks since Newburyport Police Sgt. Thomas Cappelluzzo was suspended for three days for conduct unbecoming of an officer. But Mayor John Moak, on the advice of the city's law firm, Kopelman and Paige, is refusing to say what Cappelluzzo did, other than that there was "personal business being done on city time."

The mayor also said with the suspension served, "we feel it is behind us."

No, it is not - not as long as the public doesn't know what the "personal business" was.

Ethically and legally, the matter ought to be public. It is crucial that residents of a community feel that they can trust their police. The cloaking of an incident like this undermines trust in the entire department. Cappelluzzo is no rank-and-file officer. He is one of the highest ranking members of the department. He is the evening shift officer, is in charge of firearm licensing and once served as acting marshal.

The Daily News has appealled the city's denial, because we believe the city's refusal is based on very shaky legal grounds. The city's refusal completely ignores an important court ruling that opened up such documents to public scrutiny. And the arguments made by the city's lawfirm are the same arguments that the state has shot down in similar cases.

The state Supervisor of Records Alan Cote, in a 2004 advisory, wrote that the courts have drawn a distinction between ordinary personnel records and the records of internal affairs investigations. That advisory was held up as recently as last month, when Gloucester was ordered to hand over internal investigation records to the Gloucester Daily Times.

Cote quoted Appellate Judge Joseph A. Grasso Jr., who said the internal affairs process is meant to "foster the public's trust and confidence in the integrity of the police department, its employees and its processes for investigating complaints because the department has the integrity to discipline itself."

Grasso added, "It would be odd, indeed, to shield from the light of public scrutiny as 'personnel (file) or information' the workings and determinations of a process whose quintessential purpose is to inspire public confidence."

Not only odd but destructive of the bond of trust necessary for a police department to function effectively in a community. Police, who are given enormous powers over citizens, should be held to a higher standard of conduct than the average citizen.

Whatever Cappelluzzo did, the public should be allowed to draw its own conclusions, because what he did was on city time.