HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 9/2/2009 - Police CommissionMcHenry Police Commission
Regular Meeting
September 2, 2009
A Regular Meeting of the City of McHenry Police Commission was called to order by Chairman Haley on
September 2, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. in the McHenry Municipal Center Aldermen’s Conference Room. In
attendance were Police Commissioners Sean Haley and Michael Roberts. Commissioner Ramon Gregorio
was absent. Also in attendance were Police Chief Brogan, Deputy Chief Pechous, Deputy City Clerk
Kunzer, and Certification Manager Wood.
Approve Minutes of 8/5/09 Meeting
Motion by Roberts, seconded by Haley, to approve the minutes of the Police Commission Meeting of
8/5/09 as presented.
Voting Aye: Haley, Roberts.
Voting Nay: None.
Absent: Gregorio.
Motion carried.
Review Applicant Hiring Process
Stanard & Associates testing services:
Deputy Chief Pechous stated the process went very well. The Department is happy with the services
provided by Stanard & Associates.
Chief Brogan noted information was received from Stanard in a very timely manner. He stated the City is
utilizing their services for the Psychiatric Evaluations as well. Chief Brogan also stated Deputy Chief
Jones noted the test has been validated. It is important to note there appear to have been some very
good test-takers in this group of applicants as they scored very high on the written exam.
McHenry Police Commission interview schedule and overall process:
Commissioner Roberts stated his approval of the testing process.
Chairman Haley stated the process went very smoothly. He noted he was initially opposed to splitting
the interview process, but found that it worked exceedingly well. Commissioner Roberts concurred. He
noted it was a valuable component of the process that each member of the interview team was able to
participate in interviewing every candidate.
Chairman Haley stated this would be a good model to follow for future candidate application processes.
Chief Brogan stated he and the Deputy Chiefs are pleased and confident with the results of the process.
He stated it was clear there was a consensus of the team with regard to the final candidate hiring list.
Commissioner Roberts noted the interview results did not vary much between the two interview teams.
Chairman Haley inquired if there was anything in the process which needed to be changed.
Chief Brogan responded the process is fine. He did however express concern, and noted he would seek a
legal opinion on whether the interview teams should be apprised of the candidate’s written exam scores
prior to the oral interview process taking place.
Police Commission
9/2/09
Page 2
Submission of Final Hiring List:
Chairman Haley noted the Final Hiring List was posted on August 26, 2009. He inquired if there had been
any progress made with regard to initiation of the hiring process of the top four candidates.
Deputy Chief Pechous stated all four have passed their background checks. The next step will be the
polygraph tests and psychiatric exams, followed by the medical exams. The State Police Academy begins
on September 20th in Springfield.
Responding to an inquiry, Deputy Chief Pechous noted the Psych test could eliminate a candidate as it is
very subjective. The test depends a lot upon who is giving the test. Deputy Chief Pechous noted the
next four candidates on the list are currently undergoing their background checks. If one or more of the
top four candidates are eliminated due to the Poly or the Psych, the next candidate in line will be ready
to move forward.
Other:
Chief Brogan suggested the interview teams keep their notes from the interview process. All notes
should be retained and locked in the Police Commission files. It was noted that Chief Brogan and
Commissioner Roberts turned in their interview notes at the meeting.
Promotion List Timetable
Chief Brogan stated the testing date is scheduled for November with Stanard & Associates. Deputy Chief
Jones has the exact information. He noted there are four components to the promotion testing and
evaluation:
1. Oral Interviews (45%)
2. Written Test (40%)
3. Years in Service ( 5% - .5 point per year up to 5 points)
4. Chief Merit Points (10% - up to 10 points)
Following discussion, it was determined there will be approximately 25 officers available to test for
promotion. Most likely one or two will decline to take the test. Commissioner Haley stated the
Commission should prepare to interview all 25 or however many opt to take the test.
Chairman Haley noted he thought the process just completed to prepare the list for officer candidates
worked out very well and inquired if the same process could be used for the promotion process. He
particularly questioned whether the Chief and Deputy Chiefs could once again participate in the oral
interviews. Chief Brogan responded he was unsure, particularly as he participates in the Merit point
portion of the process. He stated he would obtain a legal opinion as to his and the Deputy Chiefs’
participation in the oral interviews.
Deputy Clerk Kunzer suggested the Commission interview the candidates independently of the Chief and
Deputy Chiefs. The results of both interview processes could then be merged without results of each
interview panel influencing the other.
Commissioner Roberts stated it is important to make sure the Commission does not send the message
that you can “snow” the Commission and that each officer must do what they need to do in order to be
considered for a promotion. Hence, their day-to-day behavior and responsibilities would be evaluated
by those who witness it on a daily basis. Chairman Haley concurred. He opined that the interview
Police Commission
9/2/09
Page 3
process would be different for the promotions as all candidates would be current officers of the
Department.
Other Business
CALEA Manager Roland Wood addressed the Commission noting certain requirements of the
Commission were necessary in order for the Department to comply with CALEA accreditation. Today he
planned to address documents required to be submitted to him as part of the Hiring Process.
Mr. Wood stated he needs to be advised of any changes to the hiring process and/or amendments to
the Commission Bylaws. He noted the following documents must be submitted to him from the
Commission:
1. A sample letter of rejection sent by the Commission to potential officer candidates;
2. A letter from the Commission certifying that the entry level process for police officers is
administered, evaluated and interpreted in a uniform manner;
3. A letter from the Commission certifying that selection materials are being stored in a secure,
locked environment;
4. A letter from the Commission certifying the results of the polygraph examination are only one of
several methods used to evaluate candidates for the hiring process (i.e., written test, oral
interviews, psych evaluation, background check, etc. are also used);
5. A letter from HR Manager certifying that medical exams and drug screenings are required prior
to employment;
6. A letter from the Commission certifying that candidate has completed a psychological
evaluation;
7. A sample letter from HR Manager offering the position of probationary police officer to a
candidate.
When asked about the date that the above-referenced materials are needed, Mr. Wood responded in a
reasonable period of time.
Chairman Haley inquired if the Commissioners had read an article in today’s edition of the Northwest
Herald citing Richmond Police Commission struggles with hearings currently underway. Chief Brogan
noted the Commissioners could attend a training conference if desired. Conferences are scheduled
periodically and are typically held in Galena.
Brief discussion occurred regarding the Field Training Officer (FTO) process in the City, including how
FTO’s were selected, their responsibilities, etc.
Chairman Haley stated the following items would be included on the Agenda for the October 7th
meeting:
1. Consideration of Minutes of September 2, 2009 regularly scheduled meeting;
2. Discussion in detail regarding the Promotion List timeline;
3. Update: candidates and training status;
4. Other Business
Police Commission
9/2/09
Page 4
Adjournment
Motion by Roberts, seconded by Haley, to adjourn at 4:50 p.m.
Voting Aye: Haley, Roberts.
Voting Nay: None
Absent: Gregorio.
Motion carried.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________________
Kathleen M Kunzer
Deputy City Clerk