To: Lynnfield Board of Selectmen and the Citizens of Lynnfield
From: Lynnfield Police Officers and Sergeants
Date: September 28, 2009
Re: Opposition to Elimination of Lynnfield Police Chief Position from Civil Service
Two weeks ago, a consulting firm hired by the Board of Selectmen issued a report on the operational and administrative practices within the Lynnfield Police Department and also gave an opinion regarding the future Civil Service status of the next Police Chief. This particular firm is in the business of conducting assessment centers for hiring police personnel. It should be known, however, that prior to his Lynnfield contract, the consultant had never before been asked to evaluate a police department on the question of whether to remove a Police Chief position from Civil Service. We
say this at the outset not to unnecessarily criticize the consultant, but rather to distinguish his experience with assessment centers from his lack of any particular expertise on the Civil Service question.
Policies and Procedures/Accreditation
The bulk of the report contains recommendations on improving and adding to the Department’s policies and procedures. As the consultant stated at the last Selectmen’s meeting, Chief Dunn has already begun the process of implementing many of those recommendations. It has been suggested that active participation in the Massachusetts State Accreditation Program is an important step for the future development of the Lynnfield Police Department. From speaking with other police departments involved with accreditation, we have been told that there are considerable costs and time commitments to the process.
Nevertheless, we want to reassure the Board and the citizens of Lynnfield that we fully support the pursuit of certification under that program. We have a great deal of police experience to offer on many of the subjects covered by accreditation and we are all committed to improving the Lynnfield Police Department in whatever way possible.
Accreditation and Civil Service
While it is clear that participation in the accreditation process has the potential to make the Department operate better, it is important to recognize that State Accreditation has nothing to do with Civil Service coverage. The Town can implement every one of the consultant’s recommendations on policies and procedures with a Civil Service Police Chief in charge.
The fundamental purpose of Civil Service is to remove bias and politics from personnel decisions. In the case of a Police Chief, Civil Service strives to accomplish this objective by setting forth clear rules, procedures and objectives for promotion, discipline and termination for that position. Civil Service law, embedded in Massachusetts Laws chapter 31, is administered by the Human Resources Department (HRD) of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. HRD is responsible for guaranteeing that Police Chief candidates are appointed and promoted by accepted merit standards and principles. HRD conducts the
promotional examinations, ranks candidates from the results of professionally developed tests, and provides lists of qualified candidates for promotion. If Civil Service is not utilized, the municipality absorbs all of these duties and the related budget expenses.
Civil Service Examinations and Assessment Centers.
Civil Service standardized examinations have been legally evaluated to pass all possible court discrimination and bias tests. In addition to the standardized exam, the Town can request HRD to utilize its Assessment Center which becomes part of the calculation of each candidate’s final Civil Service score. HRD’s Assessment Center is “a series of exercises designed to test how well a candidate would perform in a job, using simulations and role players to replicate real, on-the-job situations.” Each set of exercises is tailored to fit the specific community’s needs. Qualities of
individual candidates which cannot be measured using the multiple choice written exam (such as leadership, decision-making, interpersonal skills and planning and administration) are evaluated by HRD’s Assessment Center. The consultant has recommended that the Town utilize an assessment center to select the next Police Chief whether or not the position is removed from Civil Service. The major advantage of HRD’s Assessment Center is that it will cost the Town absolutely nothing as compared to thousands of dollars for one to be conducted outside of Civil Service by someone such as the consultant. We agree with the consultant’s recommendation for an assessment center and urge that the Town make such a request to Civil Service. Attached is information on HRD’s Regional Assessment Center Initiative for last year. A similar announcement for 2010 will be coming out later this year.
Members of the Command Staff Are Uniquely Positioned to Become Police Chief
Not surprisingly, because the consultant’s primary business is conducting assessment centers, almost an entire page of his report extols the virtues of using an assessment center as part of the selection of the next Chief of Police for Lynnfield. As stated by the consultant, the results of the assessment center are considered along with other methods of evaluation, such as “the interview, employment application and background investigation” to “provide a comprehensive overview of the candidates’ abilities, work experience and training” to become Police Chief.
Given the consultant’s expertise with assessment centers, we were shocked to see how he categorically disregarded the value of our command staff without anything close to a comprehensive review of their skills. He first sought to discredit them on the basis of service, experience, rank and education. However, he failed to reveal that his standards are by no means universally accepted by the Massachusetts police community. Moreover, he paid very little attention to the size of Lynnfield and the unique structure of our Police Department as these factors relate to the operational duties of the command staff. We have a Chief, Captain and 4 Sergeants and, as the consultant says, “the current staffing level of patrol officers is
minimally adequate to respond to the current level of calls for service.” Consequently the command staff has had to assume more and more responsibility in the day to day operation of the Department. Simply put, the significance of their responsibilities in Lynnfield cannot be measured just by a calendar.
The three Sergeants do meet or exceed Massachusetts police standards to become Police Chief. By the time an appointment is made, they will have 25, 19 and 17 years of police experience respectively. Two of the Sergeants have a Master’s Degree in Criminal Justice and the other has a Bachelor’s Degree in the same concentration. While none technically hold the rank of Lieutenant, that is not a title available in the Lynnfield Police Department. Instead, our Sergeants in essence fulfill the rank of administrative Lieutenant that exists in other larger police departments.
The consultant went on to reach a judgment of the Sergeants as a group regarding their knowledge, skills, abilities and training necessary to perform the duties of the Police Chief. How was he able to render an opinion of these 3 people with almost 60 years of police experience? We know it was not by an Assessment Center. No task simulations or role playing was conducted, nor was there any involvement of independent subject matter experts that the consultant normally uses in assessment centers. While there might have been some questions and answers, the Sergeants were not asked to complete an employment application or undergo a reference check.
Instead, the consultant spoke with the Sergeants when they got off of their shifts for an hour to an hour and one-half. They were not given time to prepare for these meetings. Nor did they consider the questions as part of a job interview. In fact, the Sergeants were specifically told by the consultant that they were not interviewing for the Police Chief position, but rather just discussing the Department. The consultant’s report repeatedly refers to the Sergeants as “candidates”, but they had no idea they were being evaluated in that manner. As a whole, the process used by
the consultant was as far removed as you can possibly get from the basic merit principles which are protected by Civil Service.
The consultant went one step further to comment on the Sergeants’ limited experience in a variety of managerial tasks. However, after such a cursory discussion with each Sergeant, there simply was not enough time to explore their managerial qualifications. We do know that the Sergeants are fully capable of learning any needed skills. During the last Selectmen’s meeting, the consultant gave high praise to the current command staff, calling them “dedicated,” “intelligent” “committed to the Town” and “doing an admirable job.” On the particular
subject of discipline, he said that “the Sergeants and Captain have done a great job bringing to light issues with officers on what needed to change so issues don’t reoccur.” He further offered an overall opinion that the “best prediction of someone’s future behavior and productivity is what they have done in the past.” This principle of potential success certainly applies to our command staff.
The consultant’s report has been helpful in identifying the need for training – particularly management and supervisory training for the Sergeants. Before, the possibility of extensive training has been financial question for the Town. As noted by the consultant, the current Police Department training budget is a meager $7200. If the Town is able to expand its commitment in this area, that will go a long way to closing any short term perceived gap of training for the Sergeants.
Interim Chief Dunn will be required by law to retire in October, 2010. By all accounts, he is doing an exceptional job. He has expressed full confidence in his command staff and he has given his respected opinion that one of them will make a fine Police Chief. The consultant’s report also identifies many needs regarding policies and procedures, and we are sure Chief Dunn will call upon his Sergeants to assist him in these and other managerial tasks in the coming year.
We strongly believe that the next Police Chief should be appointed through the Civil Service process. Our supervisors are fully qualified, dedicated to the Lynnfield Police Department and knowledgeable about our community. They have served the Town well and by virtue of their service to Lynnfield, they are the most qualified people for the job. They deserve the opportunity to compete against each other for the position of Police Chief. There is absolutely no reason to spend considerable scarce resources of the Town to open up the process to a larger outside pool of candidates when we have available such
dedicated supervisors who have already demonstrated their commitment to the well being of our community.
Lastly, the consultant mentioned a “contentious” relationship between the former Police Chief and certain members of the Board of Selectmen. We all realize that members of the Board of Selectmen will change over time. We also feel it is time for the Town to put any prior disagreements behind it and move on. We urge you not to overreact to the past discord by creating a future hiring arrangement that increases the potential for misuse of politics in the decision making process. Even under Civil Service, the Board may negotiate an employment contract with the new Police Chief which sets forth employment expectations and standards as well as applicable disciplinary measures if the Chief fails to meet those expectations and standards. Attached
is a copy of Massachusetts General Laws chapter 41, § 108O which allows employment contracts for all Police Chiefs in the Commonwealth.
In summary, there is no need to change the present Civil Service status of the Police Chief’s position. The Lynnfield Police Chief currently falls under the so-called “weak” Chief statute (M.G.L. chapter 41, section 97). If the Board utilizes the Civil Service Assessment Center to get the best possible internal candidate, exercises its current authority under chapter 41, section 97 and/or decides to enter into an employment contract with the Chief, there are more than enough safeguards in place to make sure the next Police Chief will be doing the best possible job for the Town.
| 
