Item A - ICMA/PERF Report - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the case, the results may rise to the level of tampering or unduly influencing the investigation. It must be noted the review team had no independent verification of this practice or evidence that it occurred other than these reports during several interviews. Nonetheless, several of the people interviewed reported that they felt intimidated by HR personnel. It was reported that on two occasions, sergeants were directed by Human Resource Services to respond the officers' homes to effect a dismissal from the department. This practice raises serious concerns as to the efficacy of the process and also the role of the police chief in issues internal to his department. Additionally, the pressure on those supervisory officers was deemed excessive and unwarranted. Given the observation that some investigations, in the past, may have suffered from insufficient supervisory review in the areas of conclusions and discipline, there may have been a benefit to external input. This is no longer the case. Given the current police chief's demand for more supervisory and managerial accountability, an increased level of involvement by senior managers in both the investigative and discipline phases of the process is essential. Recommendation No. 53: The department should have a fully staffed IA unit, commanded by a captain. Discussion: Performance related matters and minor policy infractions are best handled by immediate supervisors whenever possible. These tasks are part of supervision. Since more serious matters may even reflect on the officer's supervisor, an unbiased investigation is essential. This typically falls to the IA unit. As funding permits, the unit should be increased to also include a lieutenant, two sergeants, and sufficient clerical assistance to permit timely data entry and maintenance of an early warning system to track complaints 82