|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
  Friday, January 23, 2009 Newport Beach Police Department promotions questioned Barbara Venezia: Anger shows problems aren't just "disgruntled employees." By BARBARA VENEZIA The Orange County Register In April 2008, I wrote an article about the Newport Beach Police Department questioning why cops were leaving Newport for other police departments with fewer benefits, less pay and higher crime rates. Some members of the Newport Beach Police Employees Association (NBPEA) were asking those same questions. Seems morale, not money, was the issue. From what I could gather, some officers felt a general mistrust of how upper management was handling grievances. Those who did complain feared retribution from higher-ups, and possibly being held back from promotions. Fast forward to Dec. 22, when the city's Civil Service Board received a letter from law firm Lackie, Dammeier & McGill on behalf of the Newport Beach Police Management Association (NBPMA) claiming there were "flaws within the promotional process….it appears that the promotional process has allowed individuals to exert greater discretion than is warranted, thus marginalizing the objectivity necessary for a process designed to foster fairness and merit…" Hmm … wasn't that kinda what the Police Employees Association was claiming back in April? So on Jan. 5, in an unprecedented move, members of the Police Management Association board of directors (Pres. Lt. Steve Shulman, V.P. Capt. Tom Gazsi, Secretary Sgt. Evan Sailor and board member Sgt. John Hougan) appeared at the Civil Service Board hearing requesting an independent investigation. Working with City Attorney Dave Hunt, they asked the board to approve an investigation and they'd come back to them in February with recommendations on an independent hearing officer. Shulman read a seven-page statement basically saying there have been so many unresolved grievances regarding promotions they couldn't ignore it any longer. Even Shulman, a 17-year veteran, filed one. Grievances are not public. They're handled at the lowest level in the Police Department. Most times resolved within the department, they don't get to the Civil Service Board level. This is huge if you consider police never air dirty laundry in public, let alone police management. The cops were obviously trying to avoid the label of "just disgruntled employees" in taking this approach. You'd think the Civil Service Board would snap to it and greenlight an investigation. For these guys to go public there's something terribly wrong somewhere. Instead there was at least 30 minutes of inane questioning. In listening to the meeting on tape, it was hard to determine if it was the egos of the Civil Service Board members that was getting in their way, or they were just plain dumb. One thing for sure, some felt threatened by the idea of an independent hearing officer, others just couldn't grasp the gravity to move forward quickly. The NBPMA has a hand in picking Civil Service Board candidates. Last year, I was asked to go through the process. Now I knew they weren't picking me; I'm press, and have way too many opinions and really didn't want the job, but I was curious. I interviewed with Sgt. Shulman, nice guy – "At Home on the Range" fan. We both knew I wasn't a serious candidate, but one thing was clear, they were looking for "safe," no "rocking the boat." Thus, the board they have and now must deal with. The Civil Service Board has the power to investigate, so why an independent hearing officer? The cops have to be smart enough to realize no one on this Civil Service Board is going out on any limbs for them. No risk takers here. Seems like someone's hedging their bets. After much ado about nothing, the Civil Service Board did vote to move ahead. At the Feb. 2 meeting, they should select a hearing officer that'll gather information and report back in a few months. At that point, they'll have to make a determination if there's any merit to these claims. Police Chief John Klein wants to get to the bottom of it. He suggested the management association make its grievances and his responses public. He's got nothing to hide and supports an investigation. But what happens if the Civil Service Board finds nothing wrong? That's when this will get really interesting. |
|
||