CIVIL SERVICE STUDY COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
~~
3rd Meeting
September 1, 2009 @ 7:00 PM
Town Hall, 1196 Main Street
Members Present: Sheila Bachant, Cynthia Bazinet, Al Ferron, Anthony Gribbons, James Jumonville, Otto Lies
Members Absent: Carmelo Bazzano
Staff: Johannah Adams, Computer Project Coordinator - Police Department
Also Present: Chief George Sherrill, Holden Police Department
_________________________________________________________________________
Called to Order: 7:00 PM
• Chief Sherrill gave an overview of how the Civil Service ("CS") system works for the Holden Police Department:
> CS initially founded to keep favoritism and politics out of policing.
> Our point of contact at CS is an Administrative Assistant assigned to Holden.
> Most of the interaction between the Chief and CS is to request exams and lists.
> CS has worked well, administering all exams, etc., at no cost to the Town, for 5 decades.
> Although the exam/list process takes time, questions are answered quickly; response has been good.
> Crucial issue to consider is how the services would be replaced (i.e. private consulting firm).
> CS adapts very well to modern government and issues; books for exams are current, etc.
> Exam score is based on written test (80%) and experience/education (20%).
> Recently, "Assessment Centers" (role playing, scenarios) have been added and can be built into the selection process by CS communities if desired.
> Resident preference results in applicants who really know the schools, local issues, residents, etc.
> The basic Police Officer exam is given every 2 years, with the format changing each time.
> Everything - exams, promotional exams, lists, disciplinary and bypass appeals, etc., are all dealt with by CS in Boston at no cost to the Town.
• A. Gribbons asked Chief Sherrill to review preferences; Chief explained that Holden chooses residency preference; other preferences are set by CS. The list is ranked by CS before sending it.
• Chief Sherrill estimated that our typical officer CS list has 10-15 Holden residents on it. Entry level pay for an academy trained officer in Holden is about $35-40K annually (full-time).
• O. Lies asked if system works the same for Chief's position; Chief Sherrill answered that when position will be open, Town Manager ("TM") decides to opt for exam to be "open" to all in State who have taken exam or "closed" (open only to those at HPD who have taken the exam). Other ranks (i.e. Sergeant, Lieutenant) always closed. For closed Chief's exam, >4 ranking officers must take exam; if not, it is open to patrolmen.
• Other points made by Chief Sherrill:
> CS requires 15-mile residence radius, but TM can specify must be Holden resident.
> Within the Town, Chief can be non-CS while other police positions remain CS.
> The TM is the appointing authority for all police positions below Chief; the Chief recommends which applicants to hire or employees to promote to the TM for his decision.
• A. Gribbons asked Chief Sherrill what the negatives of CS are. The Chief said sometimes there are administrative issues; the system can work slowly; staffing cuts, etc., but overall it has worked well.
• O. Lies asked how it works if the TM opens the Chief's exam. Chief Sherrill explained that it must be a new exam, open to all who wish to take it, and the scores are good for 2 years after certification. With internal promotional exams, this can create frustration when a list expires prior to an opening. Acting Sergeant, Lieutenant, etc. can be appointed prior to exam, in emergency situations.
• A. Gribbons asked the Chief to describe the Chief's exam. The Chief said it is similar to the Bar Exam, there are 5-6 books to study, MGLs, etc. Takes 1-2 years of study, questions are frequently appealed. List comes back in order but without the score printed. Chief must be out of top 3.
• A. Gribbons asked about CS re: employees. Chief said officers are protected by CS; Chief can suspend someone for 3-5 days, then elevated to TM. Suspensions can be appealed to CS. Bypasses can also be appealed; all of HPD's bypasses have been upheld. CS arbitrator is very reasonable when needed, but most issues are settled via union or in-house.
• A very important consideration is: What would the Town replace CS with if it were eliminated? There are private companies that administer tests, do background checks, etc., obviously at cost to the Town.
• A. Gribbons suggests an Open Forum format with other Chief's at a future meeting; J. Jumonville said e-mail survey would be another way to gather info/list of pros and cons of CS. A. Gribbons will look into this.
• A. Gribbons handed out a sampling of newspaper articles about CS with regard to Police Chief's positions.
• A. Ferron pointed out that TM is appointing authority per charter, asked could this be changed to the Board of Selectmen? J. Jumonville noted that charter changes must be legislated by State - a lengthy process.
• J. Jumonville moved to accept minutes of 8/24/09 meeting; A. Gribbons seconded; Yes-5, No-0, Abstain-0.
• A. Gribbons summarized that the choices the Town has are:
1. Take Chief out of CS [must be voted on by Town Meeting]
2. Leave Chief in CS but close exam to HPD employees [TM's option]
3. Leave Chief in CS as "open & competitive" for all who take exam. [TM's option]
• O. Lies pointed out that Chief of Police is only management position in Town which is CS; also requests that J. Jumonville double-check that the Committee is only studying the Chief's position (not all of HPD).
• A. Gribbons stated that the Police Dept. should be kept separate and autonomous due to the power it holds; should not be politically influenced, should be kept outside of realm of political appointees. Officers must be able to exercise balance and objectivity without worrying about their job due to politics; should be no need to act in a "politically safe" manner when it comes to law enforcement. Currently, the TM can only remove a police officer via CS with a compelling reason. CS provides dual protection, for the Town and the Chief, from outside influence.
• A. Ferron pointed out that CS rules also protect employees, as the Chief must follow those rules.
• A. Gribbons stated CS Chiefs have no contract; Town does not have to worry about buyout provisions, etc.
• Discussion about other states, where Chiefs are elected, and the politics involved.
• O. Lies clarified that the Committee had agreed to present alternatives as opposed to making a recommendation to Town Meeting; A. Ferron suggested that the Committee present pros and cons of each alternative to Town Meeting; J. Jumonville reiterated that it only needs to go to Town Meeting to take positions out of CS.
_________________________________________________________________________
Next Meeting: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 @ 7:00 PM, Selectmen's Room
Adjourned: 8:25 PM
| 
