The Select Board appointed Lt. Soares as police captain last night at the end of our meeting. Congratulations to Lt. Soares and thank you to the other officers who applied. The Select Board will take up the appointment of police lieutenant at our meeting this Thursday morning. Candidates for lieutenant include sargeants Zielinski, Rutch and Faria. With the appointment of Lt. Soares to captain, a second slot for lieutenant is open, I inquired whether the Select Board would make one or two appointments to lieutenant but the number was not decided last night.
The objective is to align the police department command structure ...
with one proposed by Chief Pacheco last year. I included a chart of the new structure in this post
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Congratulations to Lt. Soares
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
25 comments:
Bill
Will DCTV be carrying the thursday morning meeting?
I know Gary Soares, Gary Soares is the real thing. No one screws with Captain Gary Soares. I wish you nothing but the best, but the best was when you were a hands on guy. Now, you'll be stuck behind some desk, working 9 to 5. You're the Man, you made your mother proud.
Congrats to Gary Soares! All of the candidates were excellent last night. It must be difficult to pick one from such a qualified group. We have some top notch police in Dartmouth!
Promotions are based upon civil service tests and other factors which add up to give candidates a score. The top three scorers are presented to the Select Board for appointment. The top scorer must be appointed unless a valid reason for selecting another candidate is given.
Bill,
The above statement is taken from your blog. I'd like to know the valid reason for selecting a candidate who is not the top score. Sergeant Rutch, clearly stated that he is the candidate with the highest score however, the SB unamiously motioned and voted for a candidate with the second highest score. According to civil service rules/laws and the publics right to know, shouldn't the valid reason for this obvious bypass have become public information?
It appears to me, but not nessarily the case, that the select board failed to follow civil service law.
Just for the record, I approve of the selection, but what happened to transparency.
Please responed.
Three of the four candidates are only Sgts. . It only seems right that a Lt. be apointed to Captain.
Annoymous 7:10. This is reading/comprehention 101.
I'm in agreement with the selection. It's the SB violating a civil service rule/law, requiring the appointing authority to provide a valid job related reason for bypassing a candidate with the higher score, that is in question.
The SB member making the motion, failed to inform the candidate with the highest score,the required valid police related reason for the bypass. Civil service law is very clear on this issue.
PART I. ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT
TITLE IV. CIVIL SERVICE, RETIREMENTS AND PENSIONS
CHAPTER 31. CIVIL SERVICE
Chapter 31: Section 8. Promotional appointments in official service within same departmental unit
Section 8. An appointing authority, with the approval of the administrator, may promote an employee in the official service from one title to the next higher title in the same series in the same departmental unit, subject to the following requirements: (a) such employee shall have been employed in such unit in such lower title as a permanent employee for three years or longer immediately preceding the request for approval of such promotion; (b) such employee is the first, second, or third ranking employee in length of service in such departmental unit who is willing to accept the promotion; and (c) such employee shall demonstrate, by the passing of an examination prescribed by the administrator, that he possesses the qualifications and abilities necessary to perform the duties of the higher title; provided that an employee in a departmental unit of a city, town or district who has been employed in such unit in a lower title as a permanent employee for not less than one year next preceding the date of such request may be promoted to the next higher title in the same series if there is no other employee in such lower title or any other lower title in such series who has also been so employed, and if such employee shall demonstrate, by the passing of an examination prescribed by the administrator, that he possesses the qualifications and abilities necessary to perform the duties of such higher title. The relative ranking of titles as next higher or lower shall be determined by the administrator.
In case of promotional appointments of more than one employee, the appointing authority may select from among the same number of employees with the greatest length of service as the number provided in the civil service rules governing appointments to fill more than one vacancy.
The effective date of a promotional appointment made pursuant to this section shall be the date on which the person promoted assumes the duties of the higher title, as certified by the appointing authority, following the approval of the promotion by the administrator.
The provisions of this section may be utilized to make a temporary promotional appointment to fill a temporary vacancy in a permanent position if the administrator is satisfied that such vacancy is likely to become permanent within a reasonable period of time. If a person has received such a promotional appointment, the administrator, upon the request of the appointing authority, may approve such promotional appointment on a permanent basis when the position to which the temporary promotional appointment has been made becomes permanently vacated.
PART I. ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT
TITLE IV. CIVIL SERVICE, RETIREMENTS AND PENSIONS
CHAPTER 31. CIVIL SERVICE
Chapter 31: Section 27. Appointment or promotion; manner of selection
Section 27. Except as provided otherwise by section fifteen, if the administrator certifies from an eligible list the names of three persons who are qualified for and willing to accept appointment, the appointing authority, pursuant to the civil service law and rules, may appoint only from among such persons. If such eligible list contains the names of fewer than three such persons, the appointing authority may appoint from among those persons or may request authorization to make a provisional appointment pursuant to sections twelve, thirteen and fourteen.
If an appointing authority makes an original or promotional appointment from a certification of any qualified person other than the qualified person whose name appears highest, and the person whose name is highest is willing to accept such appointment, the appointing authority shall immediately file with the administrator a written statement of his reasons for appointing the person whose name was not highest. Such an appointment of a person whose name was not highest shall be effective only when such statement of reasons has been received by the administrator. The administrator shall make such statement available for public inspection at the office of the department.
Reading comprehention 101
"reading comprehention / 101" isn't that clever.
I know Gary Soares, Gary Soares is the real thing. No one screws with Captain Gary Soares.
I agree, but Captain Soares will have to operate within the confines of the union contract. If I remember correctly former Captains were sued and LOST/ settled, because they thought they could not be screwed with.
Good luck Gary.
Happy to hear the selectmen appointed Gary Soares. Just got back from vacation. What happened with the lieutenant promotions??
To anonymous, 10:19 P.M. Aug.6th
You sound like a strong union man that can't be screwed with or else. I've met Gary Soares, I know Gary Soares, let me tell you some thing union man, your no Gary Soares. You can't carry his jock strap.
Captain Gary Soares is a captain and no longer a union man, what are they going to do with all this overtime money being spent on sergeants. Lets see. Captain Soares annual salary at 95,000 thousand dollars. His 4-12 shift must be paying 500 dollars per day x 7 days = 3,500 dollars per week. Include ex lieutenant Cotta @ 500 per day x 7 days = 3,500 per week in overtime. This equals 7,000 dollars per week in sergeant overtime. Divide this amount by 6 sergeants = $1,100 dollars per week in overtime. If no appointments are made, this will equal 364,000 thousand dollars per year for sergeants. The union, should push the SB to appoint enough sergeants to stop all this overtime??? Three sergeants are need to stop the over time.
You sound like a strong union man that can't be screwed with or else. I've met Gary Soares, I know Gary Soares, let me tell you some thing union man, your no Gary Soares. You can't carry his jock strap.
First of all, you don't know me so stop making silly assumptions. Second do you dispute the fact that the town settled a lawsuit regarding a former Captain for his "attitude" and demeaning statements towards women and heritage??
If you re-read my post, you will see I agreed that no one screws with Captain Soares. Your personal attacks are a sign that you have some imperfections in your life, so sorry to learn that.
Stick to the topic and avoid personal attacks, they will have much more credence when you grow up and can do that.
To strong union man.
Proper word usage...assumption relates to supposition or something supposed. Imperfection in life is human, for we are all imperfect. I'm guilty as charged.
Now for attacks.
It's not an assumption, that one union leader gained, when supporting the promotions of four sergeants to lieutenants, and allowing lieutenants to work in the absence of sergeants, but denied sergeants to work in the absents of lieutenants.
One of your union members has been accused, and under investigation by the police chief, based on anonymous allegation of wrong doing. This public statement, made in open session/ DCTV by the select board, has not been challenged by the police union. Any strong union/members would never allow this assumption to pass with-out an outward cry, or demand of the unknown anonymous person. Just keep this one thought in mind, by your inaction, gives credence to the anonymous complaint. Him/her today, but you/me tomorrow.
I'm waiting to hear your response, .............
LET'S FACE IT EVERYONE, JOE MICHAUD IS THE GUY WHO CALLS THE SHOTS. HE DECIDES WHO IS QUALIFIED FOR A JOB, NOT THE OTHER ELECTED SB MEMBERS. SHERIFF MICHAUD, CARRIES THE BIG GUNS AND THE OTHER MEMBERS JUST SHAKE THEIR HEADS. JUST LIKE THE HEAD POPERS WE WOULD SEE IN THE BACK OF CARS.WE DON'T NEED NEW SELECTMEN, WE NEED A NEW FORM OF GOVERNMENT. BIG CHANGES COMING TO DARTMOUTH. JOE, YOUR GOING TO LOSE THE ELECTION. STONE AND WATSON, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE, DARTMOUTH VOTED FOR A CHANGE. GILBERT AND CARNEY OUT. STONE AND WATSON IN. WHAT A DISAPPOINTMENT. TRIMBLE, WHERE ARE YOU IN THIS MIX? YOUR THE SILENT TYPE- B PERSONALITY. STAND UP AND BE HEARD. TELL MICHAUD TO RUN THE MEETING, BUT TO STOP CONTROLING THE MEETING.
1:42- I agree the chairman made some inappropiate comments last week. But to squash Trimble, Stone, and Watson is just plain wrong. Politics is what it is in Dartmouth because of blind anonymous posts like yours. Run for office if you think you can do better... Right now you're a ghost throwing daggers at select board members who ran to help this community. I'll back Trimble and company even if you won't.
1:42 Anonymous
ANONYMOUS, IS WHO YOU SIGNED........YOU'RE ANONYMOUS, TELLING ME THAT IM ANONYMOUS, ISN'T THAT LIKE THE KETTLE CALLING THE STOVE BLACK. TALKING ABOUT ANONYMOUS, ISN'T IT WHAT MICHAUD TOLD THE OTHER SELECT BOARD MEMBERS? REMEMBER FOLKS, THIS IS AN ALLEGATION FROM AN UNKNOWN SOURCE. ONE OF THE THREE POLICEMEN INTERVIEWED, IS UNDER INVESTGATION FOR SEVERAL SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS. I'M NOT CHASTISING STONE, WATSON AND TRIMBLE, I'M SIMPLY STATING THAT THEY SHOULD SPEAK UP AND BE HEARD.
.
EXAMPLE: NO MR. CHAIRMAN, WE SHALL NOT INVESTGATE ANONYMOUS ALLEGATIONS, LIKE YOU ACCUSED ME 1:42, WHY INVESTGATE A POLICEMAN ON ANONYMOUS ALLEGATIONS. MAKE YOUR NAME KNOWN. DON'T TELL ME MICHAUD HAS NO IDEA WHO THE ANONYMOUS SOURCE IS. MICHAUD KNOWS HIS SOURCE, EVERYONE KNOWS THE SOURCE, EXCEPT YOU. I DON'T LIKE ANONYMOUS PEOPLE ANYMORE THEN YOU. BUT MICHAUD IS SO WRONG FOR MAKING THAT STATEMENT AND THE SILENT SB MEMBERS, DIDN'T SPEAK A WORD.
Once it was said...what could be stated by another member?? "Excuse me, it is not anonymous, the chair is wrong" ..
what could anyone have said????? Any more confusion at that point would have made the situation worse.
Very simple solution to all this bickering, hire a qualified private investigator independent of the police department, to check the candidates past, good or bad,this has been done before it is a small fee to pay which will assure that people recommended to the appointing authority by the police administration are legitimate. All this bashing of Michaud based on a anonymous letter needs to stop, he is doing the right thing by stopping and investigating the letter what is the rush?? unless you want YOUR RANK NOW. It is not like this town has promoted people to very high ranking positions that had Governors Pardons to get on the job!! Yeah these pardons were obviously buried when the former select board promoted people in the past, and should not be the case this time. Scary to think that when you put your family to sleep in the past, felons were watching over your family!!! If you think for one second Michaud is not aware of past mistakes you are wrong, he may be abrasive but wants to do what is right for the town while he is in charge. The town needs to pay attention to who they promote to positions of power, this is obviously being done as we speak, we also need to remember that Michaud is a excellent Attorney, and a Military Officer, he can smell at rat when its present. Thanks Joe, keep up the GOOD WORK.
I think it is a joke that these bozos on the select board are making these decisions for the police dept. They should give the decision to the chief of police and that's it.
Michaud is a narcissist. He is in love with himself. Wants total control of the SB members. Like the captain of a sailing ship, once at sea he is in total control, of the ship named Dartmouth, and all those on board shall submit to his rules of reason.
At the Monday night meeting, Michaud tells his board members we don't have a need to rush into making the appointment tonight. We should discuss and decide at a later date. Four of the board members chose Cressman, Michaud wanted the candidate that he could control, from Dover N.H. This guy was so laid back .....no I'm not going negative. It was obvious to me, so let the dog sleep.
What I witnessed last night was this....Mike Watson jumped into the fray and took control. Thank you Mr. Watson, I knew you could do it. Soft spoken Bill Trimble made is comments quietly and meaningful. Lara Stone came across as the person who did her home work. I enjoyed listening to her articulate, and the wonderful facial expressions. She is a positive addition to the SB. Composure and great instincts, a woman and a child, is a wonderful sight. Common sense is worth more then a PhD.
“I don't like any one of the candidates,” said Nat. You go girl. I may not have agreed with you, but I respect your truthfulness. I'm happy you settled with Cressman.
To all SB members, I enjoyed your deliberations and the respect shown to those who differed. This is truly democracy at work. Thank you....
Anonymous 10:15am.. PLease post this on the executive administrator post above. Some people there must have been watching a different meeting. Thanks for your post!! You are right on.
John,
As requested, it shall be done.
If you think the police officers investigation is news, you ain't seen nothing. Don't get me wrong, but when you throw manure against a fan, be sure the fan is turned off. Why? Because it will come back and hit you in the face. Some wise person once said, “never pee in the wind.” Why? Because the wind will blow the pee back on you. Pandora's box was opened, and all the ills are thrown into the wind. All because of one panegyric meeting. Pandora's box should have been opened in a closed session. No pun intended.
Why not have SB member Michaud, sit down and have a beer with the candidates for lieutenant. According to an unidentified source, close to the Michaud camp, who wishes to remain anonymous, indicated that SB member Michaud is not willing to have the sit down. The unknown source stated that Michaud can't decide on the location or the type of beer. According to the course, Chief Pacheco has not been contacted. Several phone calls placed to the chief's office for comment, revealed a taped voice command, stating that the chief is out of his office and can not be reached. All emergencies are to be referred to his first in command.
At Monday night SB meeting, watch for the sergeant candidate who smiles at Michaud, and calls him Joe.
Post a Comment