It had seemed, for a time, that the controversy surrounding the Cranston Police Department for the better part of two years had largely subsided.

Col. Michael Winquist, the new chief of police, has rightfully won plaudits from virtually all corners of the community for his leadership of the department. This week, a new contract between the city and International Brotherhood of Police Officers Local 301 won the unanimous backing of the City Council, with police personnel and elected officials sharing a joint round of applause after the vote.

Even the case of Capt. Stephen Antonucci – who ordered the overnight parking ticket blitz in the November 2013 episode widely known as “Ticketgate” – appeared at last settled, even as many questioned the terms of a deal that will allow him to retire with pension eligibility next year.

But if the events of the last several days are any indication, the controversy is nowhere near finished. It may, in fact, just truly be getting started.

In the wake of “Ticketgate,” Mayor Allan Fung asked Rhode Island State Police to undertake a three-part mission –temporarily lead the Cranston department on a day-to-day basis; investigate the ticketing; and conduct a broader assessment of operations and personnel matters.

The first two components of that charge have long been complete. The third, however, has been lingering, unresolved, for months. Frustrated citizens and council members have often questioned when the report would be complete, and whether it would be made public. Many engaged in whispered speculation over what the document would say.

Last week, those questions and whispers gave way to a firestorm, as State Police Col. Steven O’Donnell delivered to Fung and City Council President John Lanni a letter announcing the report has been completed. The contents of that letter are now public, and the potential implications are enormous.

O’Donnell’s letter includes several scathing passages directed at the Fung’s decisions and conduct, alleging “secretive” and “political” interference in the Cranston department on the part of the mayor and his administration. It speaks of the “extraordinary relationship” between the mayor, former Col. Marco Palombo and the former union president Antonucci, of the deep-seated factionalism within the department, and of the impact these dynamics had on morale. It also points, explicitly and implicitly, to strained relations between the administration and state police.

Fung, who had been publicly silent through the weekend, was front-and-center at the start Monday’s council meeting, acknowledging the need to “look in the mirror” and pledging to “do better.” He said, though, that the issues that have dogged the department are decades old, and that he has already – through the hiring of Winquist and other steps – begun to effectively address the situation.

That did little to placate most members of the council. Lanni was the most stinging in his criticism, saying he is “embarrassed” for the mayor. In remarks echoed by others, Ward 1 Councilman Steven Stycos called for the public release of the full state police assessment report – now in Fung’s possession – and for the mayor to answer questions from the council and the public in an open session.

How the situation develops from this point is unclear. The administration and some council members have noted that concerns over private information that may be included in the report – such as officers’ personnel or medical records – must be addressed before the full document is made public. Fung said he has asked the attorney general’s office to vet the document for public release.

Politics are also very much at play, with a mayoral election looming in 2016. Fung, likely hoping to mount another bid for governor in the future, appears poised to seek a new term at City Hall. Several Democrats – including Cranston Democratic City Committee Chairman Michael Sepe – also seem set to enter the race. The police saga may well prove the dominant issue of the campaign, and the rhetorical outlines of that debate began to take shape on Monday and days preceding.

The mayor called a special closed session of the council on Wednesday, and while the proceedings will not be public, a fuller picture will likely emerge after that gathering.

Several council members made it clear they expect access to the full assessment report, and if that does not occur, their calls for the document will only grow louder. If full access is provided, some questions will be answered, while others will almost certainly emerge.

More than any other word, “transparency” most frequently echoed through Council Chambers on Monday. The mayor, the council members, other officials, and citizens all spoke of their commitment to, or desire for, openness.

Transparency is an ideal government should always strive toward. In this instance, it is especially vital, given the need to ensure the community has trust in its leadership.

While acknowledging the validity of concerns over individuals’ privacy, we call for those issues – to whatever degree they exist – to be promptly addressed, and for the state police assessment report to be released, publicly, as soon as possible.